Shailene Woodley: Why I’m Not a Feminist (Time Magazine)

[big_dog]

Shailene Woodley has previously been quoted on the importance of movies’ empowering messages for women. So TIME decided to ask the star of the upcoming The Fault in Our Stars about her views on feminism. TIME: You’ve talked about before—with Divergent specifically, too—about being conscious of the kind of messages that you’re sending to young female fans when you’re taking on roles. Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Shailene Woodley: No because I love men, and I think the idea of ‘raise women to power, take the men away from the power’ is never going to work out because you need balance. With myself, I’m very in touch with my masculine side. And I’m 50 percent feminine and 50 percent masculine, same as I think a lot of us are. And I think that is important to note. And also I think that if men went down and women rose to power, that wouldn’t work either.. We have to have a fine balance.

My biggest thing is really sisterhood more than feminism. I don’t know how we as women expect men to respect us because we don’t even seem to respect each other. There’s so much jealousy, so much comparison and envy. And “This girl did this to me and that girl did that to me.” And it’s just so silly and heartbreaking in a way.

It’s really neat to see: there’s that new Judd Apatow [sic] movie coming out, The Other Woman, and that looks really good because I think it’s really neat that it shows women coming together and supporting each other and creating a sisterhood of support for one another versus hating each other for something that somebody else created. TIME: So even though what they’re coming together for is to bring down a man… SW: Yeah, but they create a sisterhood. And he did something wrong, and they’re, you know. They’re going to go after him for it. I think it’s great.
http://time.com/#87967/shailene-woodley-feminism-fault-in-our-stars/

[1000words]

1. Mmmmmmm ...

[etherealtruth]

2. Time has definitely jumped the shark

[el_bryanto]

4. Well yes . . .but sometime in the 80s I would have said

Maybe even earlier.

Bryant

[etherealtruth]

7. Very true ....

I stand corrected

[1StrongBlackMan]

65. Between this ...

and the "white guy ain't gonna apologize for my privilege" OP ... yea, shark been jumped.

But it does attract clicks and eyeballs ... so that's probably the method to the madne$$.

[Skidmore]

115. Indeed. Having the same thoughts myself. nt

[etherealtruth]

117. Those were my first thoughts

There seems to be a lot of pandering to the racist , sexist crowds by a lot of folk lately.

No doubt, if it generates traffic ... the ideas, no matter how repugnant or imbecilic, are "worth" expressing.

[JackRiddler]

89. Time was always propaganda.

Henry Luce, the anti-communist blowhard who invented the call for "The American Century," hello!

[eridani]

3. That horseshit title has appreared millions of times since 1968

They never give up.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. bahahaha.

[cyberswede]

6. Someone doesn't know what "feminist" means, apparently.

I hope she receives lots of edifying mail in response.

[mattclearing]

95. This was my interpretation as well. n/t

[randys1]

129. ding ding ding

The powers in this country hate Women...they distrust them, they could not get laid when they were younger unless they used mommy and daddy's money to pay for it, and they now will do whatever is necessary to keep them down.

A strong Woman like Ellen or Michelle or Oprah just pisses them off more.

[Adrahil]

8. Goddammit... Why do rags like Time publish someone who doesn't SHIT about a subject...

It's fucking maddening. I read that drivel, and it's preposterous.

[big_dog]

11. shes going to be Mary Jane Watson in Spiderman 3

[Adrahil]

16. So maybe they can have Kin fucking Kardashian..

post a column on Keynesian economics.

[Throd]

37. Kanyean Economics.

[Adrahil]

130. I see what you did there.... LOL NT

[BainsBane]

80. So fucking what?

Why should anyone give a shit what some self-hating Hollywood starlet thinks?

[Dorian Gray]

121. She's still

a child. She's growing. While I think she's mistaken, I think your harsh words for her are a problem, as well.

[BainsBane]

189. Well, to be fair

I'm far less concerned about what she says than how some here have decided to use it as a club against feminism. Yes, she is young and likely spent more time trying to get into the movies than getting an education (just a guess based on her age). If she stays in Hollywood, she will be forced to figure it out as she ages; the place is not kind to women over a certain age. What I was really pissed off at last night when I made that post, however, was how this statement is being used by those who oppose feminism and "all isms" in order to promote their privileged worldview where they and only people who look and think like them have a right to raise issues in public. If a person isn't, white, male, and/ or hostile to views of everyone else, they insist their speech is illegitimate, be it about issues of racism, sexism, or anything else.

[Dorian Gray]

197. I don't disagree with you on any of that

I just hate to see her attacked when she's young and still figuring stuff out. I've evolved a LOT in the last twenty years. I'm sure she will, too. And in her industry, she'll face a LOT of misogyny. I don't envy that.

[BainsBane]

198. Fair point

and you are right that I should not have misdirected my anger. I apologize.

[Bjorn Against]

194. No, she was going to be in Amazing Spider-Man 2, but her role was cut out of the movie

They filmed her in the role, but then cut her before release. They have not announced an actress for Spider-Man 3 but I doubt it will be Woodley considering they decided to drop her from the second one.

She was on the TV show Secret Life of the American Teenager, which I have had the misfortune of having to watch on more than one occassion and it was an awful show with horrible acting. While the new Spider-Man does have some major issues with the script, the acting in it is actually great for the most part. Woodley can not act and she would look pretty pathetic next to people like Andrew Garfield and Sally Field, they were wise to cut her from the movie.

[nomorenomore08]

9. Just like with the Princeton kid's essay, this is one person's dumbass opinion.

But apparently someone somewhere thinks this inane bullshit is a worthwhile read.

[Dawson Leery]

10. She is ignorant. Feminism means equality.

She says she believes in equality yet denounces the feminist movement. "We have to have a fine balance"
Equality IS balance!

[Auggie]

36. She's 22 and still has a lot to learn

[Luminous Animal]

12. What an idiot.

[ladyVet]

13. Is it bad that I'm just going to rolly my eyes and not see any of her movies? nt

[AverageJoe90]

14. I don't think she's a bad person or nothing, but, TBH, she ultimately doesn't understand..........

What feminism is all about. It's not about taking men's "privileges" away! It's about empowering women and bringing them up to the level of men. In other words, it's aboutequality.

[Gormy Cuss]

15. Does TIME have a new feature, "Clueless People Speak Out?"

She thinks that feminism is about taking all the power from men rather than getting a fair share of it? That sisterhood is antithetical to feminism?

I think that my head is exploding.

[JackRiddler]

90. That would be the history of TIME.

[JaneyVee]

17. Nope. That's not at all what feminism is about.

[Starry Messenger]

18. When I was 23 years old, I was stupid too.

[Skittles]

38. I was never THAT stupid

[Solly Mack]

49. What you said.

[davidn3600]

19. Only 1/5th of Americans consider themselves a "feminist"

When people hear the word "feminist," they don't think of an equal rights supporter...they think of Valerie Solanas or Andrea Dworkin. They think of a stereotypical "bra-burning" radical who hates men.

If you walk up to average people on the street and ask them if they are a feminist...most will say no. If you then ask those same people if they support equal rights between men and women...most will say yes.

Only one-fifth of Americans identify as feminists, according to a new HuffPost/YouGov poll. But the vast majority fit the basic definition of the word.

According to the survey, just 20 percent of Americans -- including 23 percent of women and 16 percent of men -- consider themselves feminists. Another 8 percent consider themselves anti-feminists, while 63 percent said they are neither.

Broken down by party, 32 percent of Democrats, 19 percent of independents and only 5 percent of Republicans said they are feminists.

But asked if they believe that "men and women should be social, political, and economic equals," 82 percent of the survey respondents said they did, and just 9 percent said they did not. Equal percentages of men and women said they agreed with that statement, along with 87 percent of Democrats, 81 percent of independents and 76 percent of Republicans.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html

[LeftyMom]

21. That's because people like you lie about what feminism is.

[bettyellen]

23. BOOM. exactly.

[cyberswede]

30. Right on.

[Comrade Grumpy]

39. I think that is a rude, abusive, cheapjack response.

I alerted on it. We'll see if the community agrees.

[LeftyMom]

54. Well it's been half an hour and the post is still there, so apparently they didn't.

Nice try though.

[Comrade Grumpy]

61. I hope it at least got you to consider your posting style.

There was actually some substance to that post that could have been discussed. But no...

[LeftyMom]

63. Feel free to lecture somebody who is interested in your opinion.

I'd hate to see you waste perfectly good bandwidth typing your thoughts at me.

[AgingAmerican]

107. Thank you for your...

positive contributions to this thread! If only more Dem's had your attitude, this would be a much nicer place!

[Squinch]

66. But it's the truth.

[Comrade Grumpy]

92. Results of the alert on this post:

But first, note that I claimed my alert. I think that is the proper thing to do, and I think it should be DU policy.

Anonymous alerting lends itself to abuse. I was alerted on twice today, got one post hidden that totally surprised me and I think with little justification, and now there's been a second rather frivolous alert. This one failed.

In both cases, the anonymous alerter used the alert to launch attacks on me mischaracterizing past posts of mine. I doubt I'm the only one this has happened to. I think that is low behavior. And the anonymous alerting system encourages it.

And I wouldn't even have known about this is not for a little birdie because, I guess, the system doesn't do that.

Anyway, here's the results. I think juror #2 is spot on:


> AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
> Mail Message
> On Mon May 5, 2014, 09:15 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
>
> I hope it at least got you to consider your posting style.
> http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4913764
>
> REASON FOR ALERT
>
> This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
>
> ALERTER'S COMMENTS
>
> Rudely telling another DUer to "consider your posting style." I'm OK with the sentence in the body, but the subject line is off the rails. Funny thing is: Grumpy accused LeftyMom of making a "rude, abusive, cheapjack response" only to go on and make one of Grumpy's own! LOL.
>
> PS: This user had a post hidden earlier today because of misogynistic content. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024912283#post2
>
> I'm sensing a pattern here.
>
> You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon May 5, 2014, 09:22 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
>
> Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: No explanation given
> Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: Looks like you're trying really hard to get a second hide for this poster so that he's put on review. I'm not going in on your witch hunt. This post is perfectly fine and you're abusing the alert system. You should be ashamed and I think you owe DU an apology,
> Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: No explanation given
> Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: Doesn't seem disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top or in appropriate to me.
> Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
> Explanation: No explanation given
> Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: Not seeing it.
> Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
> Explanation: I don't understand why this was alerted.
>
> Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[CreekDog]

110. i'm glad you're against rude and abusive posts

though, i would encourage you to be against them no matter who the poster is.

[RobinA]

177. Da Nile

not just a river in Egypt. Still.

[The Straight Story]

137. Or maybe because the people representing it

Don't do a good job in the communication department.

[TDale313]

151. Absolutely true. n/t

[bettyellen]

22. because people repeat asinine talking points about feminsts being sex negative and focus on a nutbag

like that mentally ill Solanas, who no mainstream feminist ever took seriously.

Some people PREFER to focus on bullshit 24/7 in order to muddy the waters.

[davidn3600]

35. Unfortunately, the radicals tend to define a group

No one says it's right to think that, but that's how psychology works. People that scream the loudest and are the most obnoxious tend to define the group.

In any case, I dont know why you get so caught up in labels. If what this actress said is everything feminism stands for then what's the big deal? If someone says they are a "egalitarian," or a "humanist," you view it as an insult. Why? What does it matter what someone calls themselves if they believe in what you agree with? For one reason or another, she isn't comfortable with that label of being a feminist. And most Americans feel the same way. But that doesn't change what people believe.

[nomorenomore08]

85. Because unnecessary shyness and hesitance around the "label" implies it's somehow a bad thing.

I don't claim the label of feminist for myself - in large part because I'm male - but I wouldn't discourage anyone of either sex from identifying as such.

[davidn3600]

97. Not necessarily

Bernie Sanders doesn't officially identify as a "Democrat." Does the fact that he won't call himself a "Democrat" mean that he must automatically be a "Republican" or that he favors the Republican party?

Same type of thing here. Just because someone doesn't call themselves a "feminist" doesn't mean they are a misogynist nor does it mean they are against equality. They just don't want to be put into a particular category and always subjected to a litmus test.

[nomorenomore08]

100. That might be how they see it. But I still think explicitly distancing oneself from "that word"

is unnecessary and, in some cases, even a little silly.

[bettyellen]

98. only if you are an idiot do one off radicals define groups that are not radical.

a Fox news watching idiot.

[Luminous Animal]

163. Hmmm... Just as radical nutbag christians define ALL of christianity and all Italians are mobsters?

[Squinch]

178. Yes. Yes exactly.

I find these nut job googlies disconcertingly useful in these threads. And they seem to be becoming more so.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

158. Someone needs to update the scoreboard....

....on the "Solanas is a genius/nutbar" boxscore. It changes from month to month around here.

[Starry Messenger]

29. "they think of Valerie Solanas or Andrea Dworkin"

I doubt anyone except feminist-hating MRAs know the names of those two women, outside of a small pocket of academics and historians.

[Skittles]

40. CORRECT

and now one of them is schooling us on what feminism means

[Comrade Grumpy]

41. ...and feminists.

[cyberswede]

42. There are plenty of feminists who have never heard of either Solanas or Dworkin

...for instance, my mother and 4 sisters. I never heard of them until the last couple years or so.

[Comrade Grumpy]

58. Some of us are old enough to remember them.

[1000words]

60. Zing!

[cyberswede]

70. Huh?

I don't get it. I'm sure my mother is older than you are.

[Starry Messenger]

44. Derp.

[Comrade Grumpy]

59. Gastrointestinal problems?

[Gormy Cuss]

69. But not your average American.

The poll didn't ask about feminists by name. You added that interpretation.

[gollygee]

135. I never heard of them until I heard people complain about how horrible they were

here at DU.

[Comrade Grumpy]

187. Ditto for the dreaded MRA types.

I still wouldn't even know they existed except for the efforts of some posters here. But then, I don't go digging into the dark corners of the Internet looking for stuff to be outraged about.

[redqueen]

190. Dark corners of the net... like Salon, Boston Magazine, the SPLC...

I'd post excerpts from these but there's no point really.

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/2012/08/angry-men-feminist-agenda/

http://www.salon.com/2009/11/05/mens_rights/

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/myths-of-the-manosphere-lying-about-women

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/misogyny-the-sites

[Comrade Grumpy]

193. Like I said, I never heard of those MRA types except here.

I find it difficult to imagine they represent much of anything except sad dweebs in their moms' basements. And yes, their angry little web sites are dark corners of the internet as far as I'm concerned.

I admit I haven't read every issue of Boston Magazine or every post on Salon or browsed every hate group listed with SPLC. I'll take you word for it that they're out there. I have better things to do than worry about them. And you probably do, too, although they make a nice windmill to charge at.

[redqueen]

203. You don't care about the danger they pose to women - I get it.

From the links you won't deign to read (cause it only effects women, amirite bro?)

...

But the movement’s bizarre fringe is nothing new, as Joyce reminds us in an in-depth Double X article. What’s really frightening is the impact men’s rights activists (MRAs) are having on mainstream politics. As more reasonable-sounding leaders and organizations emerge, groups arguing “that false (domestic abuse) allegations are rampant, that a feminist-run court system fraudulently separates innocent fathers from children, that battered women’s shelters are running a racket that funnels federal dollars to feminists, that domestic-violence laws give cover to cagey mail-order brides seeking Green Cards, and finally, that men are victims of an unrecognized epidemic of violence at the hands of abusive wives” are facing unprecedented success. Joyce reports that a group called RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting) claims responsibility for blocking four federal domestic violence bills. And with the help of organizations like Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, MRAs are beginning to find a place under conservatism’s big, reactionary tent.

The more moderate men’s rights movement also features some high-profile “converts.” Joyce introduces us to Glenn Sacks, a popular fathers’ rights radio host and writer who she describes as “a former feminist and abortion-clinic defender.” Dismissive of the Bernard Chapins of the world, he’s working toward the comparatively modest goals of increasing shared custody and lightening divorced dads’ child-support obligations during the recession.
...

Attack of the 50-Foot Feminist Agenda

Angry, radical men’s groups believe males are being victimized by out-of-control judges and politicians. They’re wrong and they’re dangerous and they need to be stopped.

...

Aptaker’s story underscores a disturbing trend: Men’s rights groups, convinced that men are the biggest victims of modern society, have been busy attacking, defunding, and repealing laws that have been very effective at protecting women and lowering rates of domestic violence. And rather than just ranting and raving on the Internet, these men have been pulling political levers to change both state and federal laws. That they’ve done so with remarkable success ought to make everyone very, very scared.

...

[LadyHawkAZ]

101. You should join some of the ciswomen's-only spaces on Facebook

You'd be surprised.

[Starry Messenger]

114. I don't think I will.

I consider those hate groups.

[LadyHawkAZ]

116. They are hate groups

[Brickbat]

20. "No because I love men..."

So do feminists. Feminism can free men as well.

[anneboleyn]

53. and men can be feminists. Shailene is young with a lot of dumb ideas.

[JI7]

24. she sounds really stupid ,

[McCamy Taylor]

25. ...because I'm in a magazine that still has a feature about what female actors wear.

[McCamy Taylor]

26. ...because I'm in an industry that tosses women aside before they turn 30.

[McCamy Taylor]

27. ...because my manager/studio head told me I'm not a feminist.

[McCamy Taylor]

28. ..because it won't help the box office of my latest film.

[McCamy Taylor]

31. ....because feminists can't, you know, use words like "neat" and "neat" and "really neat."

[SheilaT]

32. If she believes in equal pay for equal work, she's a feminist.

If she thinks women should vote, she's a feminist.
If she thinks women should be able to go to college, she's a feminist.

I so HATE the idiot women who will coyly claim not to be a feminist and then act as if all the things that are connected to feminism have nothing to do with it.

Oh, and feminism has nothing to do with hating men.

[woolldog]

142. That's not being a feminist.

That's being normal.

There's a generation gap here. Feminism doesn't mean the same thing to the younger generation as it does to the older boomers (DU skews pretty old).

[SheilaT]

147. It should be normal, and maybe the younger generation thinks it's normal,

but they need to learn just a little history and understand that all those things are inextricably linked to feminism. Ignorance of the past is no excuse.

And to equate feminism with hating men is beyond ignorance of history, it's willful ignorance of the past. It's rather like saying black people were much better off under slavery, because at least they had a roof over their heads and food to eat, never mind the forced separation of families or the occasional whippings here and there.

[WhiteTara]

33. I thought that was sisterhood was what

feminism is all about. But then, I'm old and I was just there, so no matter.

[1000words]

34. In the end, she is trying to be a positive role model for other young women

Misguided as she may be, it's unfortunate she's been called an idiot numerous times, and summarily dismissed... by feminists.

[cyberswede]

43. Well, if she wants to be a positive role model...

she should probably attempt to actually know what she's talking about.

[redqueen]

46. Do you think being a feminist means never saying anything mean about any woman ever?

And since she's spreading the misogynistic "feminists hate men and feminism means matriarchy!" propaganda, she is failing hard at being a positive role model.

[seabeyond]

55. she is promoting 1000 words.... lol. of course he embraces her messages and feels the need to

stand up for her. now... when it comes to standing up for any number of women, that are not promoting a particular agenda. then ... well???

[Squinch]

67. If she is trying to be a positive role model for other young women, she is failing miserably.

And there is nothing unfortunate about summarily dismissing someone spewing nonsense about a subject on which she is obviously and completely ignorant.

[Kali]

84. dismissing idiots is a good thing

because giving them credibility and attention just encourages more idiocy

idiots are a lot like trolls, in fact they often are one and the same

[sabrina 1]

93. And then they wonder why so many people do not identify with the word. A young woman

states HER opinion, an opinion she is entitled to assuming we actually mean it when we say it's about equality and choices, and right here on this forum, like so many others she is attacked, insulted, demeaned and I didn't count the number of epithets that were used to describe her.

I'm sure if she were to read this thread, it would convince her that her opinion is correct.

I wish her well, she will learn fast what many women have, that in certain circles it's best to 'shut up and be quiet' unless you agree 100%.

Hopefully she will meet feminists who are willing to listen to her and discuss her opinions. Who knows, an amazing thing might happen if rather than being attacked, she meets people who do not instantly go into attack mode, she might learn something about why women need to be vigilant about their rights, not just here, but Globally.

[1000words]

94. Madam ...

Nice to know my point was not completely lost.

[wickerwoman]

104. "[I'm not a feminist because] I like men...."

isn't an "opinion". It's an ignorant, factually incorrect statement that perpetuates harmful, dismissive stereotypes about women.

It betrays the fact that she knows absolutely not the first thing about the topic she is talking about in a national news magazine.

I don't think it's an inappropriate request that she "shut up and be quiet" on topics she clearly knows absolutely nothing about.
Recognising when you do need to "shut up and be quiet" so that you can actually learn something is a big part of earning a seat at the grown ups table where you are entitled to have your (informed, factually correct) opinion and to express it in a news magazine.

[sabrina 1]

128. So the way to inform someone who is ignorant of a topic to tell them to 'shut up and be quiet'.

Well, I think that is what I said regarding why so few people identify with the word 'feminist'. .

My method of informing people who are ignorant about a subject is to engage them in a conversation about it and provide them with facts. That generally works with most people. And I see opportunity in someone who has access to an audience larger than my own eg. Being kind to such a person who has apparently gotten the idea that 'feminists hate men' and explaining to her that this is not true and why and exposing her to women who can reassure her that she has been misinformed, is far more likely to lower those numbers who don't identify with feminists, than telling them to shut up an sit down.

What a lost opportunity. If someone tells YOU to 'shut up and sit down because you are ignorant, without even trying to engage you at all, what would YOU think of such people?

I can't imagine why all those people are getting the same ideas she has.

I'm thrilled to see that an overwhelming number of people support equal rights for women and it doesn't concern me what title we give to that majority. It is the ISSUE that matters.

[wickerwoman]

159. No, but the sentiment is the same.

As I'm never going to have the opportunity to directly address this person and neither, probably is anyone in this thread, we are never going to be able to sit down with one-to-one and gently explain to them that they have no idea what they are talking about and that they are perpetuating harmful stereotypes about women who fought their asses off to secure basic rights for them.

I think the fault lies with the news magazine in giving a platform to someone who is clearly completely ignorant about the topic they are discussing and then never calling them on it. I'm sure there are four year olds who think peas are poisonous. Giving them an op ed in the New York Times doesn't make it either true or a valid opinion for adults to sit around discussing. That four year old should be metaphorically shut up in the sense that he shouldn't be given the column inches to perpetuate dangerous nonsense.

And "feminists hate men" is dangerous nonsense because it encourages people both to ignore them and to overlook their contributions over the last forty years. It perpetuates a dismissive attitude towards women generally- that they are shrill and hysterical and that their fight for equality it motivated by a desire to take something away from men.

It's not good enough to say "well, more people support equal rights for women than did in the 1950s so I think we're done here and bugger who did the work the get us here". There is still work to do. And lying about the people doing that work is both ungrateful and counterproductive.

[Luminous Animal]

165. +1

[Kali]

186. I really don't like the stupid +1 thingy

but...+!!!!!

well put, thanks!

[Luminous Animal]

175. I also want to talk with her about her idiot ideas of the health benefits of eating clay and

sunbathing her vagina.

Could you send me her contact info?

http://www.today.com/health/eating-clay-sunning-ladyparts-shailene-woodleys-divergent-opinions-health-beauty-2D79412260

[bettyellen]

102. Feminists tend to call out idiocy whether it is a man or a woman spewing it

[RobinA]

199. Feminists

spout just as many idiocies as any other group.

[struggle4progress]

45. Well, maybe I'm just a prejudiced old white guy, but whenever I hear a woman say

I'm not a feminist, I immediately suspect she's an airhead, and I stop expecting her to say much that I might find interesting

For over forty years now, I've heard various women tell me they're not feminists, as if the news would somehow charm me, but I have yet to find it charming

However, I'm proud that I usually manage not to reply, "Ah! So you are what, then? A bimbette?"

[redqueen]

47. She is young and ignorant.

For decades people shyed away from calling themselves liberals because of rightwing propaganda.

It is misogynistic propaganda which causes people to shy away from that label now, but things are changing.

[1000words]

48. Yes.

You are prejudiced.

[struggle4progress]

51. I really can't understand why people wouldn't want to stand up for equal treatment,

including equal pay and equal rights

[1000words]

56. So your response is to treat them unequally?

[Squinch]

68. This makes no sense.

[cyberswede]

71. Treat who unequally? People who demonstrate ignorance?

Why would anyone give equal weight to the statements of someone who doesn't even know what they're talking about?

Not sure what you're asking.

[1000words]

72. Re-examine what was written:

"I immediately suspect she's an airhead, and I stop expecting her to say much that I might find interesting."

A general dismissal, all because a woman has identified herself as not being a "feminist."
You don't see an issue with that?

[cyberswede]

73. That's not treating someone unequally...

that's adjusting one's expectations based on what that person has said about themselves.

I apply a similar general dismissal when a person identifies themselves as a Republican.

[1000words]

74. And it's unfortunate you do so.

Being an open-minded progressive, and all.

[cyberswede]

75. Yes, I grieve over that on long winter evenings.

[1000words]

77. Ah ... the smilie.

I guess we are done. Good evening.

[cyberswede]

79. Well...you know what a picture's worth

[seabeyond]

81. Bah ha ha ha ha. Clever you. Nt

[msanthrope]

134. Nice. nt

[BainsBane]

83. Oh, so when you said you had a bunch of feminists on ignore

were you acknowledging that you don't treat people equally or live up to the standards of "open-minded" progressivism you criticize Cyberswede for failing short of? I see a number of people who don't live up to core Democratic principals, but Cyberswede is most certainly not among them.

[Sissyk]

86. Here.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

On Tue May 6, 2014, 02:38 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

And it's unfortunate you do so.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4914020

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

"open minded progressive" is a right-wing insult in most contexts, including this one

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 6, 2014, 02:42 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Don't be ridiculous.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Tough call but this person is mocking most DUers' opinions of rethugs, which I share.
This is one of those catch 22 situations.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Wha??? Someone is hoping the late night crowd will hide over nothing it seems. There is nothing against CS with this post.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: yawn...
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: knock off the personal insults please. And read the Tos

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Comrade Grumpy]

148. This place has a real issue with bogus alerts. And it's obvious what direction they're coming from.

It stinks of dogmatism, intolerance, and authoritarianism.

[LanternWaste]

166. As opposed to your credibility...?

" further erodes what little credibility "the posse" has left..."

As opposed to your credibility...?

[Kali]

191. this is not to you - it is for the post you are replying to

[cyberswede]

169. Who sent that alert?

...and how do you know?

[Comrade Grumpy]

192. I don't know, and I think that's a problem for DU. I think alerts should have names attached.

On those rare occasions where I have actually alerted on something, I own it. I respond to the post in question saying I've alerted and why. I think that's fair.

I think anonymous alerting is open to abuse, both by the act of alerting itself on something you don't like or agree with but that doesn't violate DU norms and by the feature of allowing anonymous alerters to slander their targets in the body of their alerts.

If we're not going to do away with anonymous alerts, the targets of them should at least be notified that they are being targeted.

[cyberswede]

195. Well, the admins can see all alerters and jurors.

And they have their reasons for preferring anonymity. They have banned people for serial alerting, and they have banned jurors for egregious jury comments. So, if they feel there's a problem, they can act.

That said, you implied that you had an idea of who alerted on that post, but I see you were just speculating.

It wasn't me, fwiw. The post didn't bother me enough merit an alert.

[Comrade Grumpy]

200. I had no particular poster in mind. More like a certain self-righteous faction.

To be fair, I think there's a lot of bullshit alerting going on on all sides.

[Squinch]

123. Let's get this straight: you think that, in order to be open minded and progressive, one needs to

listen to any factually incorrect nonsense that anyone decides to throw at you?

And yet you don't need to listen to the opinions being forwarded here that this woman is ignorant and has no understanding about what feminism is?

But we need to listen to Republicans?

But you are choosing not to listen to Democrats who post here?

You seem to be revealing something about yourself. Is there something more you wanted to say?

[bettyellen]

152. Yes, apparently we should not comment when we hear RW sexist drivel here...

Or else we're intolerant.
Fuck that, I am intolerant towards RW idiocy, especially here where it should be laughed off the board instead of treated with deference.
This kid is spewing indefensible sexist stereotypes. Not sure why any posters here think there wouldn't be push back on a liberal site. Or claim liberal ideas were "authoritarian". What a fucking mockery of liberalism.

[Squinch]

155. AND, don't forget this one: We must be open to what Republicans tell us.

But as to why posters think there won't be push back on a liberal site, I think this liberal site is liberally seeded with non-liberals, and there is little here that stops them from spreading teabaggery.

Did you catch this one that equates feminism with hate speech: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4914477

I alerted. It stayed.

Not much liberalism, really.

[bettyellen]

156. I love how they gasp in shock when people comment on RW bullshit, LOL....

They don't seem to actually understand what tolerance is- and are actually intolerant of progressive ideas on this forum. Interesting.

[nomorenomore08]

87. It's largely thanks to the efforts of 19th and 20th-century feminists that we've moved away *at all*

from a purely patriarchal system. Giving women the right to vote, or the option of a career, was considered, practically within living memory, a radical and even dangerous idea. The 19th Amendment passed in 1920, and my paternal grandmother who died in 2001 was born just one year after that.

So when a young woman vehemently distances herself from the concept of feminism, I have to wonder if she knows her history and/or WTF she's talking about.

[LittleBlue]

50. Unfortunately the brand has been tarnished by radfems

The word "feminist" is so toxic that young women, like her, have equated it with man-hating.

It's a shame for mainstream feminists.

Not to mention the fact that ideological "isms" are losing among young people. Catholicism, Protestantism, communism, capitalism, and yes feminism, hardened ideologies with structured beliefs and groups just don't appeal to them.

[seabeyond]

57. ya. cause fox, limbaugh and littleblue says so???? rollin eyes. really, just call us feminazis.

[LittleBlue]

62. Because polls say so

and she says so. And frankly young people say so.

The only people I see clinging hard to these tribal isms like feminism are the oldest generations.

[BainsBane]

78. Certainly some people work hard to see the majority of the population remain subordinate

because they oppose equality. That doesn't mean there is anything acceptable about their POV. Bigotry is alive and well in America, and in fact has seen a resurgence in recent years. We witness that all the time. Opposition to feminism is a lot like racism. Some will continue to resist competing on an equal playing field because deep down they know they aren't up to it.

Views on unions are at an all time low too. Since you have decided public opinion polls determine what is right, that must extend to unions too. And when polls again favor the GOP, will you be voting Republican? Or are these polls you reference simply an excuse?

The woman referenced in the OP is clearly a misogynist. She has been raised to hate women, and some men actively cultivate and support such views because they share them. Those same men tend to resent people of color as well. It is very rare to see an African American man whine about feminism, and data shows that MRAs are even whiter than the GOP. That is the province of the perpetually entitled who feel their entitlement is natural and justified. They are angry at the world, at women and people of color in particular, because their whiteness and maleness hasn't resulted in everything they think they deserve.

[1000words]

91. Someone will be taking a short time out.

Again.

[BainsBane]

96. So what ever happened to . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4913747

and http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4914020 ?

Or does that magnanimous commitment to equality only extend to those who denounce feminism?

[LittleBlue]

99. I thought about alerting

but passed.

If you're reading this, sea, don't blame me.

[1000words]

103. Oh, the alerts are flying ...

Apparently, I upset someone up thread. Just missed the 0-7 shut-out.

[Bobbie Jo]

125. Indeed.

Mission accomplished?

[sheshe2]

108. LOL!

I was on my way to bed and got called for jury~



On Tue May 6, 2014, 01:54 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

ya. cause fox, limbaugh and littleblue says so???? rollin eyes. really, just call us feminazis.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4913749

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Compares the poster to Limbaugh and Fox News. I know we don't have moderators any more but when we did they used to remove posts like this all the time. The jury system may work differently but I still hold out hope for civility, hence this alert.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 6, 2014, 02:20 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Baloney.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If LittleBlue hadn't used the phrase "radfems", I might agree with the alerter.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Once more a thread that got dirty...this post fit right in
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: You are joking? Correct. This is your alerted post!

"ya. cause fox, limbaugh and littleblue says so???? rollin eyes. really, just call us feminazis."are you serious!??!

The person who sent the alert wrote: Compares the poster to Limbaugh and Fox News. I know we don't have moderators any more but when we did they used to remove posts like this all the time. The jury system may work differently but I still hold out hope for civility, hence this alert.

No seabeyond did not compare the poster to Limp and Faux. Try reading it again and stop wasting the juries time.


Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[chervilant]

141. Well, how interesting...

So, a DUer can come into this thread and throw around vile terms like "radfems," and YOU get your post hidden. That's rich.

(I have updated my IL accordingly...)

[LadyHawkAZ]

88. They're loud and hateful and nasty

and so, like all extremists, they hog the publicity. They aren't feminists. Actual feminists work for equality, not hate and division.

[LittleBlue]

105. Yes, I believe that

In fact the actress said she chooses strong female leads because she believes in female empowerment, so she obviously believes in some of the bedrock feminist ideas.

It is interesting to note that the first attack against her is "Limbaugh". Just by googling her name one can find that she doesn't believe in monogamy, so obviously she's not part of the conservative religious Limpballs crowd. Of course her actual beliefs don't seem to matter, the fact that she wants to empower women doesn't matter, she's automatically a winger because she rejects a label.

[LadyHawkAZ]

109. A lot of the younger generation who say the same thing she did

also identify strongly with the core feminist ideals, if you present them without the label. I identify as feminist and have all my life, and even I'm starting to wonder if it's too corrupted a label to save. The extremist movements and the publicity they have gotten have done us no favors.

"Librul media" at its finest.

[BainsBane]

111. You denounced all isms

which I took to mean concern about racism, sexism, and all forms of bigotry. Naturally you have to reduce it all to sex because what else could possibly matter? Equal pay for equal work, an end to rape culture and hate crimes, and end to discrimination in employment, and a racist death penalty and penal system that disproportionately targets African Americans, or marriage equal for LGBT citizens. Those are all "isms" that you insist reasonable people have "moved away from." No, reasonable people have not. Some white men and their female allies who can't be bothered to concern themselves with the lives of anyone but themselves have moved away from it. For people who care about the society they live in, sexism, racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, and anti-Semitism are still issues of great concern.

There is a resurgence in bigotry and denial is key to its maintenance. We saw a very clear demonstration of that with the recently banned Vashta Neranda. He began by insisting that he had never seen social messaging teaching women to cater to male egos and concluded by wishing for Seabeyond to be raped and killed. Both positions exist on a continuum of sexism and misogyny. In some ways, denial is worse because it refuses to even allow the issue of inequality to be addressed. That someone who makes such denials also manifested intense hatred for women was not surprising to me. Both attitudes are part in parcel of maintaining privilege of men and subordination of women.

The fact is, you wouldn't give a shit about this woman if she hadn't denounced feminism. I seriously doubt anyone here knows anything else about her, and certainly not her views on monogamy. Nor can I think of a reason why anyone would give a shit. The argument here was in opposition to feminism. For you to try to distract your hostility toward "isms" with some appeal to sexual liberty is weak. Even if libertinism were the same as liberalism, which it is not, it is not the subject of this thread. Her position is right-wing because to denounce feminism is to oppose human equality. That she defends herself as valuable by saying she is 50 percent male shows that she has internalized misogyny, which is indeed sad. I get that guys of a certain political persuasion prefer women who keep themselves to fields like entertainment and pornography that compete with men in no way, but the fact is the world is full of highly-educated and accomplished women. They are in those positions because of the "isms" you so malign. Unfortunately, too many Americans are ignorant of the history of their own nation to understand something so basic, and that clearly includes this starlet and those who share her views.

That you denounce "isms" while using an avatar of MLK is particularly I can't even begin to fathom what that is about.

[BainsBane]

106. What one speaks out against speaks volumes

as does what one doesn't, such as threats of rape and death against a feminist. That poster above denounced all feminism as well as other "isms," which means concerns about racism and other forms of bigotry. His statement was not simply against a particular person or handful of women you have decided to dislike. Yet you regularly choose to speak out against other women and reinforce posts like the one above condemning all "isms." I don't know if you share that person's disdain for movements addressing racism, sexism, and other forms of bigotry, or if personal animus means more to you than principal. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter because the action is the same. We are what we do, and you have made your values perfectly clear.

"Loud": because women are to be seen and not heard. How is one even loud on a message board? What a concept. It really is awful when women believe they have a right to speak their mind without first seeking approval from men (and I hesitate to use that term because the vast majority of men on this site have made clear they stand in support of the feminists you so dislike. http://www.democraticunderground.com/125538236
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024522226
There are a few men and women who see the world differently from most liberals, as is their right, but they are far from representative of liberals, progressives, the Democratic Party or the American public more broadly. Amazingly, most people don't think women have a responsibility to be quiet. Imagine that.)

[davidn3600]

112. Um...forgive me but I don't see any men here telling Shailene to keep her mouth shut

...it's feminists and mainly women who are insulting her.

And to suggest she's a misogynist? Really? Is that why she mainly picks only strong female empowering roles? Do you even know the movie she was just in?

[LadyHawkAZ]

113. The attack was against me personally, not the actress

[BainsBane]

118. I didn't tell her to keep her mouth shut

I said I don't give a fuck what she thinks. Is there some reason I should? Is she some towering intellect who has developed a new theory of human social relations? I think not. No, I never heard of her, and I certainly am not going to take your word for what constitutes an empowering role for a woman. I think it unlikely I would ever be inclined to see whatever crap action film like Spiderman she appears in. Few of those actress are around for more than a couple of years anyway due to the nature of Hollywood. She will likely learn what sexism is as she ages and they no longer cast her in films. Regardless, when a woman defends her value by claiming she is fifty percent male, it is clear that she sees something wrong with being a woman, as the rest of her comments likewise demonstrate. Internalized misogyny is common. All women struggle with it to some extent or another. Some, however, don't question the messages that devalue themselves and other women and instead repeat them, as she does in the article above. The behavior she describes among women (is only true of some women but I would imagine it is more prevalent in Hollywood) is the result of sexism and misogyny. If she spent time in another environment, among educated feminists, for example, she would likely experience much less of the kind of behavior she describes.

I already noted in a post above that some men are particularly enamored of starlets and porn stars. They entertain men and don't compete with them on any level, certainly not economically. They however do not hold similarly favorable views toward women who are educated and succeed in professional careers. Those women they resent, call elitist, and argue against their invocation of equal opportunity laws made possible through the Civil Rights Act of 1964. There are always members of subaltern groups complicit in their own disempowerment, whether it be someone like Clarence Thomas, Phyllis Schafly or some Hollywood twit who devotes her fifteen minutes of fame to speaking out against equality and women as a whole. I don't like bigots, in whatever form they take. To oppose feminism is to oppose human equality, and I see no reason to tolerate anyone with those values.

As to my original point, what one speaks out against reveals their values. You show yourself to be more disturbed by my failure to honor someone who denounces feminism and the very value of women than the threats of rape and death against Seabeyond. I am not surprised.

[LeftOfWest]

120. Idiots equate it with man hating

my right wing tea dragging neighbor thinks like that.

[redqueen]

132. THIS

And there are people here telling us to be open minded about these teabagger/misogynistic opinions.

[redqueen]

132. delete

dupe

[gollygee]

136. Only by people intentionally creating anti-feminist propaganda

You only see anti-feminists who are trying to create anti-feminist propaganda talk about rad-fems like that's all of feminism.

[chervilant]

140. Just WHO has made the word "feminist" so toxic?!?

Really, little, you might want to research the backlash against feminism to understand WHY it is perceived so negatively. Those who are most threatened have squealed the loudest (e.g., Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and their ilk).

And, btw, the term "radfems" is a condescending, disrespectful slam towards those of us who've worked very hard to encourage gender equality and an end to the codified patriarchal power imbalance that is damaging to all.

Just FYI, I'm not sure I buy your assertion that ideological 'isms' are "losing among young people." Do you have anything that substantiates your claim, other than the fact that you said it?

[opiate69]

146. "the term "radfems" is a condescending, disrespectful slam"

http://radicalhubarchives.wordpress.com



http://radfemuk.com/index.html

Oh noes.. I disagreed with you... lemme guess, you have reading suggestions for me, amirite?

[cyberswede]

170. It is when it's bandied about directed at DU feminists.

But you know that.

[opiate69]

171. If it quacks like a duckie....

Anyway...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1382043

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11392394

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=32286

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=16314

[cyberswede]

173. And calling someone a duck isn't an insult...

unless it's used intentionally as such.

See, there's really nothing nefarious or threatening about radical feminism...

Radical feminism is a "current"[1] within feminism that focuses on the theory of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships based on an assumption of "male supremacy"[1] used to oppress women.

https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Radical_feminism.html

Radical feminism is a branch of feminism distinguished by its study of patriarchy as an end in itself rather than a secondary aspect of some larger system. Contrary to what the name may suggest to some people it is generally not just insane or hateful feminism.

The term is also used as a snarl word for any feminist or feminist idea that threatens the user's sense of what women should be and do, oftentimes ideas that are not radical at all.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Radical_feminism

...yet it is used here frequently as a "condescending, disrespectful slam."

---
Edit: I see you edited while I was typing. LOL. Sorta proves my point.

[opiate69]

176. I'll try to remember that...

the next time somebody starts blathering about "MRA" like an untreated Tourette's patient. In any case, not sure how pointing out that calling people what they proudly call themselves is supposed to be "condescending" and "disrespectful." Unless, of course, they realize that that particular umbrella encompasses a whole host of really offensive bigots as well. And in that case, if you lay down with dogs....

[Luminous Animal]

182. The word "liberal" is meant as a prejoritive when used by the right wing

When Limbaugh and his ilk call me a liberal, it is meant as an insult and I know his intent is to insult.

[opiate69]

184. Maybe for you. Me? I wear the title proudly. Regardless of who tries to hang me with it.

[Luminous Animal]

185. I didn't say that I take it as an insult. I said it is meant as an insult.

[cyberswede]

188. Do any DUers proudly call themselves MRAs?

If not, then I don't understand your comparison.

The Christianity umbrella also encompasses a whole host of really offensive bigots, yet most Christians aren't colored with that brush for lying down with those dogs...

The condescending and disrespectful intent behind the use of "radfems" on DU is clear.

[BainsBane]

202. Calling names

is what one does when they aren't prepared to discuss ideas.

[chervilant]

179. Yawn...

I'll not waste my time, tyvm.

[opiate69]

180. Awww...

The type of person who would throw around homophobic slurs doesn't want to engage in a discussion about her claim that a very popular, self-descriptive term is somehow a slur?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=38154

(for the expected jury, yes, she did... )

My boss had a confab

with the owner of our company (they're butt buddies),

Just to be clear... anybody who would casually toss around such an offensive slur on a progressive website such as this has neither the moral nor intellectual authority to disparage other people for using a term which many women (including members here) loudly and proudly self-identify with.

[chervilant]

181. Gosh...

Are you cyber-stalking me? Until this post, I considered your contributions too sophomoric to warrant updating my IL. I'll fix that right now.

[opiate69]

183. Stalking? Heavens no.

I just tend to remember when people get away with posting really foul shit.

[BainsBane]

201. That is certainly how you use it

In fact, I had never even heard of the term before you insisted I took my ideas from some "radfem playbook." When I asked you which ideas I advanced that were so extreme, you came up empty.

[seabeyond]

52. two choices in your Ops. hypersexualize women or diss femininists.... nt

[alp227]

76. Pfffft. Shailene is full of shit on this one.

... I love men, and I think the idea of ‘raise women to power, take the men away from the power’ is never going to work out because you need balance.

Does this ignorant fool even know what feminism is? First there was Kristen Dunst now this moron. (Woops, Woodley didn't star in Pretty Little Liars but rather in another ABC Family show, Secret Life of the American Teenager. Given the plotlines of that show like teen pregnancy etc., you'd think Woodley would've opened her eyes SOME way.) "Liberal" Hollywood my fucking rear end.

By the way, this statement puts her in company with racists who believe that "anti racist is a code word for anti white" for the belief that it's a BAD THING that equality comes at the cost of the dominant group's power.

[Dawson Leery]

164. You're last line is true.

"By the way, this statement puts her in company with racists who believe that "anti racist is a code word for anti white" for the belief that it's a BAD THING that equality comes at the cost of the dominant group's power."

[Ash_F]

82. Pffft what does she know?

Time: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

Shailene Woodley: No because I love men

[LeftOfWest]

119. She is an ignorant childish idiot.

"I love men"

uh huh....

[Blue_Adept]

122. Another topic with feminism at its core, another topic filled with a lot of hate.

It's no wonder that as the younger crowd grows up a bit and starts exploring politics online that they end up avoiding the label as much as they do.

Hell, how many Democrats don't even label themselves as that anymore? A small but growing number have moved to just the progressive label in order to distance because of various things.

My daughter is growing up with a lot of feminist ideals - passed down to her by me, her father - but she flatly rejects the label because of things like responses in this thread.

Labels are useful for classification, but when applied to people it just gets way too sticky.

[PassingFair]

150. And my two daughters are proud feminists

Who will state it emphatically and not be afraid that someone will misinterpret the word.

[Squinch]

124. Gosh. Big dog, the poster who gave us boobs in space, is trying to show us the evils of feminism.

Shocked. Shocked I tell you.

[gollygee]

138. LOL

[Tuesday Afternoon]

143. Boom!

hidden agenda no more.

[bettyellen]

167. Interesting! Have to wonder how hating on democratic priciples and liberal ideas

Such as support of feminism is actually a point of contention for some here.

Hate to tell them that ship has sailed without them. We are approaching parity in education, and the rest will follow in our life times.

The Dem party would be no where at all without women. And they are starting to wake up to that fact. Sad only for those who are married to the "good old days".

[get the red out]

126. But she has the wrong idea of Feminism

She is saying she isn't something that she describes erroneously. It's like she uses the Fox News definition of Feminism.

[CBGLuthier]

127. Who?

Oh, she is an actress and that is why her opinion is vital and important for the world to know. She talks like every word was written for her by a big ass PR machine designed to sell one product, SHAILENE WOODLEY in super sized boxes.


Oh yeah that magic word UPCOMING. Press Release bullshit.

[chrisa]

131. Does it matter how she feels about feminists? It's a label.

There are liberals who 'hate Liberals,' too. Imo, actions speak louder than words. While she is ignorant of feminism, if she is a positive influence to others by promoting the concepts of feminism, no harm no foul.

[mercuryblues]

139. When you

redefine feminism as she did, not many women would support feminism either.

Instead of researching and reading, she took some MRA type of definition to replace the actual term.

It is about raising women to equality, not lowering men to a subservient class. It is about changing a system that degrades men if they are not the bread winner. It is about breaking a system that allows judges the comfort to say a child is responsible for their rape. Whether or not the child is male or female.

[GoCubsGo]

144. Who the hell is Shailene Woodley?

I never even heard of this ignorant, little twit. Who is she, and why is she so important that she gets to spew her misguided views in Time Magazine?

[SoCalDem]

145. Same here.. I have NO idea who she is, or why I should care what she thinks

I know that magazines have to write things about people who find themselves suddenly-famous, but I sure wish they would not ask these very young people things they have not even had the time to learn about.

Right wingers long ago took over "official language" and we let them

Instead of feminism, a mpore appropriate term would have been "female equality".

Most things that end in "ism" have a negative connotation, and we should have never allowed that term to define such an important thing.

We do it all the time, we settle for being "pro choice" while we allow the right to assign "pro life" as their agenda.. We should have fought like crazy to force their agenda as being anti-choice..

[raccoon]

149. How? Aside from challenging people on an individual basis, how can we do that? nt

[Squinch]

172. Me either. I am tempted to respond with, "There is a lady named Gloria

in Newark, and another one named Eloise in Lubbock who disagree with her, so there!"

That's about the level of discourse that we have going on.

[Endgames]

153. What an idiot.

And why does that old rag TIME think this is worthwhile??

[4Q2u2]

154. Next Up

Shailene Woodley states that she is not a futurist because she loves driving on roads and believes flying cars will not be practical.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

160. She's a poor woman's Jennifer Lawrence

I've read some of her nutty beliefs on a bunch of stuff, and it was dumb enough to me to decide to ignore her from here on out.

[hamsterjill]

161. She's entitled to her opinion, naive and ill-informed as it is.

Honestly, this sounds like the rantings of some young, naive actress trying to get some press.

Oh, wait...

[loyalsister]

162. This is what a feminist looks like

[jmowreader]

168. Isn't Shailene Woodley...like, twelve?

Okay, she's 22...but seriously, who gives a shit about Shailene Woodley's opinion on anything but consumer products?

[Iris]

196. who are you Shailene and should I care