Bad, Feminism, and Huh: WE HAVEA NOTRUE SCOTSMAN FOUL
 PLAYER ATTEMPTED TOCOUNTER
 REFUTATION WITH RHETORIC
 atlip.com
<p><a href="http://ineedfeminismbecuz.tumblr.com/post/124366255960/but-those-arent-real-feminists-yes-yes-they" class="tumblr_blog">ineedfeminismbecuz</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p>“But those aren’t real feminists!” <br/>
Yes. Yes they are.<br/>
Allow me to present the dictionary definition that is so often spoken of on tumblr:</p>

<p>fem·i·nism<br/>
ˈfeməˌnizəm/<br/>
noun<br/>
the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.</p>

<p>Huh. That’s weird. It looks like the definition is not “literally equality”. I’ve been lied to! But I digress. Anyway, if that’s what defines a feminist, then anyone who advocates women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men is a feminist. That’s it. That’s the only requirement. Being concerned for men’s rights really isn’t a necessity for being a feminist. You just need to seek equality with men, whatever that would mean for you. </p>

Now I have a few problems with that, the biggest one being the fact that acknowledging men’s needs or fighting for men’s rights simply is not included in the definition of feminism. In fact, seeking equality with men assumes that men have all the rights they could ever possibly want and thus need no one to fight for them. Feminism does not, at its core, fight for men. Now if only there was some sort of ideology that fought for all genders equally. Something that fought for people in general rather than needing to specify gender and subsequently make another gender seem as though they had all their rights taken care of… Something like… Hmmmm… Oh!

<p>Egalitarianism
<br/>noun
<br/>Advocacy of the equality of all people, especially in political, social, and economic life.</p>

<p>There we go.
There is a word for “literally equality” and it’s egalitarianism, not feminism. The definition of egalitarianism necessitates fighting for all rights, the definition of feminism does not.</p>

<p>Now you may be saying “Hey! Feminists fight for men’s rights too!” And you’d be right, at least partially. Some people who identify as feminists do fight for men’s rights, but that is the perfect segue into my discussion about the No true Scotsman fallacy.</p>
<p>From a Wikipedia summary:</p>

<p>“No true Scotsman is an informal fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim (“no Scotsman would do such a thing”), rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule (“no true Scotsman would do such a thing”).” 

</p><p>This is why you can’t just shrug your shoulders at “crazy feminists” who don’t fight for men’s rights by saying they aren’t “real feminists” or “true” feminists if you will. As long as they fulfill that rather short list of requirements listed above, they are true feminists, even if you don’t like or agree with them. Fighting for men’s rights simply isn’t part of the necessary equation.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, egalitarianism *is* by definition the advocacy of rights for all. Do you not like the term egalitarianism because somebody who called themselves egalitarian wasn’t fair to women? Well it can be truly said that they were not true egalitarians, since they don’t adhere to the very definition of the word which does, unlike feminism, require equal advocacy.</p>

So when somebody tells you they’re an egalitarian rather than a feminist, don’t act so shocked and offended and try to shoot them down by saying that feminism “literally means equality” and that the people they’ve had bad experiences with “aren’t real feminists” because they are, whether you like it or not.</blockquote>

ineedfeminismbecuz:

“But those aren’t real feminists!”
Yes. Yes they are.
Allow me to present the dictionary definition that is so often spoken of on tumblr:

fem·i·nism
ˈfeməˌnizəm/
noun
the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.

Huh. That’s weird. It looks like the definition is not “literally equality”. I’ve been lied to! But I digress. Anyway, if that’s what defines a feminist, then anyone who advocates women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men is a feminist. That’s it. That’s the only requirement. Being concerned for men’s rights really isn’t a necessity for being a feminist. You just need to seek equality with men, whatever that would mean for you.

Now I have a few problems with that, the biggest one being the fact that acknowledging men’s needs or fighting for men’s rights simply is not included in the definition of feminism. In fact, seeking equality with men assumes that men have all the rights they could ever possibly want and thus need no one to fight for them. Feminism does not, at its core, fight for men. Now if only there was some sort of ideology that fought for all genders equally. Something that fought for people in general rather than needing to specify gender and subsequently make another gender seem as though they had all their rights taken care of… Something like… Hmmmm… Oh!

Egalitarianism
noun
Advocacy of the equality of all people, especially in political, social, and economic life.

There we go. There is a word for “literally equality” and it’s egalitarianism, not feminism. The definition of egalitarianism necessitates fighting for all rights, the definition of feminism does not.

Now you may be saying “Hey! Feminists fight for men’s rights too!” And you’d be right, at least partially. Some people who identify as feminists do fight for men’s rights, but that is the perfect segue into my discussion about the No true Scotsman fallacy.

From a Wikipedia summary:

“No true Scotsman is an informal fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim (“no Scotsman would do such a thing”), rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule (“no true Scotsman would do such a thing”).”

This is why you can’t just shrug your shoulders at “crazy feminists” who don’t fight for men’s rights by saying they aren’t “real feminists” or “true” feminists if you will. As long as they fulfill that rather short list of requirements listed above, they are true feminists, even if you don’t like or agree with them. Fighting for men’s rights simply isn’t part of the necessary equation.

Meanwhile, egalitarianism *is* by definition the advocacy of rights for all. Do you not like the term egalitarianism because somebody who called themselves egalitarian wasn’t fair to women? Well it can be truly said that they were not true egalitarians, since they don’t adhere to the very definition of the word which does, unlike feminism, require equal advocacy.

So when somebody tells you they’re an egalitarian rather than a feminist, don’t act so shocked and offended and try to shoot them down by saying that feminism “literally means equality” and that the people they’ve had bad experiences with “aren’t real feminists” because they are, whether you like it or not.

Bad
Bad
Feminism
Feminism
huh
huh
Life
Life
Taken
Taken
True
True
tumblr
tumblr
weird
weird
wikipedia
wikipedia
Blog
Blog
Definition
Definition
Dictionary
Dictionary
Http
Http
Mean
Mean
Women
Women
Word
Word
Ideology
Ideology
Necessity
Necessity
Fight
Fight
A Necessity
A Necessity
All The
All The
Been
Been
another
another
gender
gender
yes
yes
definition of
definition of
player
player
act
act
com
com
class
class
who
who
can
can
list
list
one
one
down
down
case
case
defines
defines
core
core
may
may
don
don
fighting
fighting
means
means
why
why
will
will
feminist
feminist
fair
fair
them
them
all
all
the original
the original
make
make
they
they
thing
thing
ad hoc
ad hoc
you
you
real
real
now
now
general
general
post
post
what
what
for
for
rhetoric
rhetoric
noun
noun
social
social
reference
reference
term
term
economic
economic
href
href
advocacy
advocacy
yes yes
yes yes
this
this
really
really
shocked
shocked
political
political
list of
list of
like
like
men
men
right
right
this is
this is
people
people
why you
why you
do you
do you
well
well
such
such
shrug
shrug
necessary
necessary
perfect
perfect
present
present
just
just
digress
digress
whatever
whatever
though
though
then
then
because
because
offended
offended
if only
if only
concerned
concerned
foul
foul
those
those
meanwhile
meanwhile
anyone
anyone
lied
lied
saying
saying
i digress
i digress
egalitarian
egalitarian
somebody
somebody
their
their
faced
faced
ever
ever
egalitarianism
egalitarianism
objective
objective
thus
thus
fallacy
fallacy
allow
allow
claim
claim
a feminist
a feminist
equality
equality
were
were
hoc
hoc
rather
rather
adhere
adhere
segue
segue
there
there
subsequently
subsequently
too
too
fact
fact
fem
fem
no
 no
called
 called
care
 care
something
 something
need
 need
want
 want
agree
 agree
problems
 problems
said
 said
anyway
 anyway
others
 others
shoot
 shoot
short
 short
there is
 there is
on tumblr
 on tumblr
discussion
 discussion
tumblr blog
 tumblr blog
taken care of
 taken care of
Seek
Seek
Shoulders
Shoulders
Not True
Not True
Universal
Universal
And
And
Summary
Summary
Equation
Equation
Feminists
Feminists
When
When
You Like It
You Like It
Simply
Simply
That
That
Try
Try
Looks Like
Looks Like
But
But
Not
Not
Hmmmm
Hmmmm
For You
For You
Original
Original
This Is Why
This Is Why
The
The
The Word
The Word
Long
Long
People In
People In
I Have A
I Have A
From
From
The No
The No
The Perfect
The Perfect
Your
Your
I Have
I Have
Rights
Rights
Its
Its
Part
Part
Needs
Needs
Genders
Genders
All Genders
All Genders
No True Scotsman
No True Scotsman
But I Digress
But I Digress
Few
Few
Especially
Especially
Very
Very
Without
Without
The Fact That
The Fact That
Looks
Looks
At Least
At Least
Possibly
Possibly
Does Not
Does Not
Was
Was
With
With
Rule
Rule
Are
Are
Have
Have
Identify
Identify
If You
If You
The Definition
The Definition
Had
Had
And That
And That
Dictionary Definition
Dictionary Definition
But That
But That
A Href
A Href
Which
Which
Only
Only
About
About
Does
Does
Truly
Truly
Tumblr Com
Tumblr Com
Since
Since
Often
Often
Being
Being
The Definition Of
The Definition Of
The People
The People
If You Don
If You Don
Some People
Some People
Experiences
Experiences
Equal
Equal
Than
Than
Needing
Needing
Acknowledging
Acknowledging
Seem
Seem
Themselves
Themselves
No One
No One
Subject
Subject
Even
Even
Denying
Denying
Some
Some
Seeking
Seeking
Biggest
Biggest
Above
Above
Could
Could
Fought
Fought
Fulfill
Fulfill
Whether
Whether
A Few
A Few
A Word
A Word
Informal
Informal
Retain
Retain
Scotsman
Scotsman
Sort
Sort
About The
About The
And You
And You
Any
Any
Assertion
Assertion
Being A
Being A
But I
But I
Definition Of The Word
Definition Of The Word
Have A
Have A
Have All The
Have All The
Identify As
Identify As
In The
In The
Into
Into
Is A
Is A
Is Not
Is Not
Lied To
Lied To
Like It Or Not
Like It Or Not
May Be
May Be
Me To
Me To
Not Included
Not Included
Digressive
Digressive
Coffee
Coffee
otter
otter
dis
dis
SpongeBob
SpongeBob
hug
hug
Need Dis Otter
Need Dis Otter
Funny
Funny
don
don
cat
cat
funny memes
funny memes

WE HAVEA NOTRUE SCOTSMAN FOUL PLAYER ATTEMPTED TOCOUNTER REFUTATION WITH RHETORIC atlipcom <p><a href=httpineedfeminismbecuztumblrcompost124366255960but-those-arent-real-feminists-yes-yes-they class=tumblr_blog>ineedfeminismbecuz<a><p> <blockquote><p>“But those aren’t real feminists!” <br> Yes Yes they are<br> Allow me to present the dictionary definition that is so often spoken of on tumblr<p> <p>fem·i·nism<br> ˈfeməˌnizəm<br> noun<br> the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political social and economic equality to men<p> <p>Huh That’s weird It looks like the definition is not “literally equality” I’ve been lied to! But I digress Anyway if that’s what defines a feminist then anyone who advocates women’s rights on the grounds of political social and economic equality to men is a feminist That’s it That’s the only requirement Being concerned for men’s rights really isn’t a necessity for being a feminist You just need to seek equality with men whatever that would mean for you <p> Now I have a few problems with that the biggest one being the fact that acknowledging men’s needs or fighting for men’s rights simply is not included in the definition of feminism In fact seeking equality with men assumes that men have all the rights they could ever possibly want and thus need no one to fight for them Feminism does not at its core fight for men Now if only there was some sort of ideology that fought for all genders equally Something that fought for people in general rather than needing to specify gender and subsequently make another gender seem as though they had all their rights taken care of… Something like… Hmmmm… Oh! <p>Egalitarianism <br>noun <br>Advocacy of the equality of all people especially in political social and economic life<p> <p>There we go There is a word for “literally equality” and it’s egalitarianism not feminism The definition of egalitarianism necessitates fighting for all rights the definition of feminism does not<p> <p>Now you may be saying “Hey! Feminists fight for men’s rights too!” And you’d be right at least partially Some people who identify as feminists do fight for men’s rights but that is the perfect segue into my discussion about the No true Scotsman fallacy<p> <p>From a Wikipedia summary<p> <p>“No true Scotsman is an informal fallacy an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim “no Scotsman would do such a thing” rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric without reference to any specific objective rule “no true Scotsman would do such a thing”” <p><p>This is why you can’t just shrug your shoulders at “crazy feminists” who don’t fight for men’s rights by saying they aren’t “real feminists” or “true” feminists if you will As long as they fulfill that rather short list of requirements listed above they are true feminists even if you don’t like or agree with them Fighting for men’s rights simply isn’t part of the necessary equation<p> <p>Meanwhile egalitarianism *is* by definition the advocacy of rights for all Do you not like the term egalitarianism because somebody who called themselves egalitarian wasn’t fair to women? Well it can be truly said that they were not true egalitarians since they don’t adhere to the very definition of the word which does unlike feminism require equal advocacy<p> So when somebody tells you they’re an egalitarian rather than a feminist don’t act so shocked and offended and try to shoot them down by saying that feminism “literally means equality” and that the people they’ve had bad experiences with “aren’t real feminists” because they are whether you like it or not<blockquote> Meme

found @ 24 likes ON 2018-06-07 22:54:24 BY ME.ME

source: tumblr