" What does feminism mean to you?"

Nothing: it divides and conquers.

That's not Boston! That's Brookline! Killer B lied to us!!!

Glad she didn't ask me, though. I wouldn't have been able to come up with a cohesive answer.

True, it is Brookline, but somehow I think that would have confused people even more ;)

Not gonna lie, 'Streets of Boston' sounds infinitely more impressive than, 'Streets of Brookline.'

Though Coolidge Corner kicks all kinds of ass.

And outbound service on the C-line is free :D

What does feminism mean to me?

In the third world; liberation of women, ignoring of men.

In the first world or western cultures; stagnation of humanism an obstacle to unity, general corruption, hatred of men and double standards!

I always wonder how so many people on both sides of the issue completely miss the fundamental tenant of feminism, which is equality. Not superiority. Equality.

It is about equality, fundamentally, but if you research it a bit that gets blurry.

We judge these things by the leaders and prominent writers; some of which don’t have equal out looks at all, Catherine McKinnon, Mary Koss, Valerie Solanas,Eve Ensler to name a very few, some of it is just the media creating the misandristic "girl power thang", and creating a confusing anti-male form of “popfeminism�, yes those “harmless� anti-male shirts and greeting cards, commercials, music videos, tv shows, movies really opened a lot of young guys eyes, its hard to ignore.

It also gets a little scary when you have feminists in power in Sweden that planned on a “man tax� (because all of those penises are guilty for the 2% of violent men.) http://feministing.com/archives/004197.html
Or Canadian feminists in power that planned on labeling any MRA a hatemonger(therfore jailable), or spending tax dollars to dismiss MRA claims boys need help in education and health (they do) those hate mongers! http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/s/s-misc/stevenson062303.htm http://tinyurl.com/cl93u

For “modern� (American/first world/western) feminism to push for “women only� in areas where women are doing better like education, justice, family, health, choice, violence protection, in this day and age, in a very gender equal climate and claim equality? This wont just be funny to me forever, more people will catch on.

Ifeminsm seams to be very refreshingly equal and honest, not too familiar with it though, I can see feminists here like to slag the feminists at the IWF.
http://feministing.com/archives/004911.html#comments

All that infighting makes a bad impression as well.

Ayla, Probably because the fundamental tenet often tends to be conspicuously absent.

Can view clip now.

If feminism is redefining gender identity; what exactly makes feminism an authority on the definition of gender?

Should not humanity be included in this definition that defines all of humanity?

Iknow"fundamentally" it does include men and all that. But in reality a feminist redefinition of gender is a enforced definition of gender for non feminists is it not?

Where is progression? I see only reversal of ignorance?

"Should not humanity be included in this definition that defines all of humanity?"

Exactly! Unfortunately when one points out, in countries where women suffer most ... that perhaps, men suffer equally (by degree), this point of view is frowned upon by some.

And I still feel that too many issues fall under the all-encompassing umbrella of "feminism" merely to prop-up the so called "Western" point of view. Highlighting inequities which abound across the board in every facet of society ... if one suggests it need not be thus, and in fact is not in some other countries ... one is trounced for expressing the very ideal that is aspired to.

The problems that exist in America are too vast, too deeply entrenched and until you can all come together with a common goal, your government will continue to play political chess with your lives. So instead of looking without ... one needs to look within and ditch the hype, cut-out self-congratulatory crap and turn the lie into a truth.

The point I hoped would come out of this (because yes, there will be more) is that every woman has to define this for herself, just as every man does as well. But our own interpretations--at least in theory--would not be so divisive that we could not still put them together. Instead of judging anyone's opinion as wrong, maybe we could figure out how to work them all together. That seems progressive to me.

I went to the Feministing party on Friday (you people missed OUT!) and I was surrounded by a lot of varied types of feminists (both men and women) and activists. We were all radically different, but we came together for a common reason. I felt good about my time in NYC because even if we all weren't totally similar, we could hold together for an important reason. That ought to be out focus.

Nottrue...Often, yes. Always, no. Besides, someone who calls themselves something, but isn't, doesn't become that thing by proclaiming it to be true. I could go around telling people my hair is blue but it doesn't make it so.