Discussion » Questions » Humor and Jokes » What is feminism, and does it collide with freedom of sexual expression in public?

What is feminism, and does it collide with freedom of sexual expression in public?

Julia Hartley-Brewer‏ made a tweet apparently provoked by Emma Watson for her appearance in Vanity Fair. Fair or unfair?




Emma Watson made some comments back about the tweets and her view on feminism about giving women choice, when she took part in a press conference...



What's your take on this?

Posted - March 6, 2017

Responses


  • There are two parts to your question.

    Feminism is hard to define because it means different things to different people. At one extreme you have the Femen who are hard-core protesters who use shock-tactics to try to get what they want. At the other end you have the part-time feminists who fly the flag only when it suits them. Perhaps the most effective feminists are those placed at different positions along that very long line who work determinedly to improve women's rights.

    I remember how badly women were treated in the 1940s and 1950s. They were considered to be second-rate citizens and, in many ways, inferior to men. Maybe characters like "Rosie the Riveter" helped to draw attention to the hypocrisy of the situation but there was a screaming need for somebody to stand up and do something. The impetus began in the 1970s and although there's still some distance to travel, women have come a long way. 

    Not all women want to be feminists and I've hard angry protests from some. Yet those same women would not turn their backs on the advances feminism has made.
    ~*~

    The second part: does feminism collide with sexual expression in public? I don't think so. Good manners determine how much sexual expression is appropriate in public.

    P.S. I'd like to express my appreciation to Randy D for lending me those two tildes I used for a break. 
      March 6, 2017 2:51 AM MST
    2

  • 17261
    Hmm. Feminism is all about equal rights. Groups have been taking patent on it, and try to turn it into a lot else. I've heard the anti feminism by women too. To my believes it's rooted as an antipathy against the most extremist movements that have tried to take patent on the word feminism

    Feminism however, is quite simple... It's all about equal rights and opportunities, something no one in our modern societies should be against. Unless, of course they believe there are two species with men being superior towards women.



    Women are still treated badly around the world, and recently (last couples of years) we have seen setbacks in some of our most modernized democracies. Politicians, as our guidance and role models are making sexist remarks.

    As for the second part of your reply, I fully agree. 

    P.S. Psst, I won' tell him. As for the asterisk, I handed it back to the mods to make use of when censoring our bad wordings at times. ;-)
      March 6, 2017 3:14 AM MST
    3

  • Whew!
      March 6, 2017 3:43 AM MST
    2

  • 17261
    ;-)
      March 6, 2017 3:49 AM MST
    1

  • 739
    What about those feminist women in New York, who have won the legal right to go around topless, because the men can. They see it as having equal rights to men, rather than a form of sexual expression.
      March 6, 2017 3:42 AM MST
    1

  • 17261
    I'd say what they did accomplish, was more like having a gender specific rule/law banned/removed. I don't see it as a because men have the right, we should too. Personally I see it as equal rights, no matter gender. Why, first place make a gender specific law about going topless? Either we can go topless, or we can't.
      March 6, 2017 3:54 AM MST
    2

  • 739
    You must agree that women's breasts are not looked at in the same way as men's. There is a risk of a whole smutty discussion starting up here. Maybe I should drop the whole thing.
      March 6, 2017 3:57 AM MST
    2

  • 17261
    Your choice. And no, they don't look alike in most cases. However, since when have we based our laws on looks? Should red-heads go with their hair covered, whereas anyone else is free to show their hair? Sexualization of the female breasts is defined by society, and kept as such because of the status of forbidden fruit. We had such discussion recently inside another question here. Personally I wouldn't just go around topless everywhere. I'd be influenced by the surroundings, I believe most men are too, before they drop their shirts, no? Besides, the male chest can be made as sexual in posing as any female, it's all about your target group. IMO.
      March 6, 2017 4:04 AM MST
    1

  • 739
    Gotta try to phrase this carefully, in case it upsets the AM censors. Is sexualisation of the female breasts only defined by society? As I understand it, it is an accepted fact that females become more sexually responsive when their breasts are handled. Whereas the male chest does not really do a lot in that sense.
    I don't think I have even tried to answer your original question. I went off on something of a tangent.
    What is feminism?
    Women having equal rights to men. That it is about women is inherent in the use of the word feminism.
    Does it collide with freedom of sexual expression in public? Two part answer.
    1 Why should feminism collide with sexual expression? Does being feminist suggest that a woman is somehow less capable of sexual feelings?
    2 But you talk about sexual expression IN PUBLIC, and has there ever been freedom to express oneself sexually in the public arena? Society tends to, typically, frown on such things.
      March 6, 2017 4:30 AM MST
    1

  • 17261
    One last small comment for the sexualization thing and the male breast in comparison with the female. I've heard there are men who react very positively on breast and nipple stimulation. I don't think that's a gender specific thing neither. In fact I have met women who did not like their nipples or breasts fondled. 

    As for your remarks on feminism...
    1. I agree.
    2. Emma Watson was criticized for appearing in that Vanity Fair article, told she was a hypocrite because of it.
      March 6, 2017 4:43 AM MST
    0

  • 739
    Sapph, all I can say in response to that is, my breasts and nipples have never had the slightest scrap of sensitivity. I can't speak for other men, and I certainly can't speak for women. (Blushes bright crimson after such a personal revelation.)
      March 6, 2017 4:48 AM MST
    1

  • 17261
    Is okay. I do recall nails on chest and reactions, from back then when I still was bisexual. Better not go deeper into details. We are in the family room. :-)
      March 6, 2017 4:56 AM MST
    0

  • 5835
    Your definitions don't count because a lot of people don't care what the definition is. They will die shouting some slogan and they don't even know what they are saying.

    It's religious: the whole country is possessed by a spirit of bonkers.
      March 6, 2017 5:26 AM MST
    0

  • 17261
    It's not my definition, it's given by dictionaries...

    feminism
    /ˈfɛmɪnɪz(ə)m/
    noun
    the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.

    It's up to us when listening, not to fall into any traps. It goes back on you, if you give them that power over your mind. For some it will be the easiest though, and also the most convenient as there will be no expression left for equality of the sexes. Hmm. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 6, 2017 3:54 PM MST
      March 6, 2017 6:20 AM MST
    2

  • 5835
    Nobody reads dictionaries. And I will discuss equal rights when a male gets paid to almost expose his chest as Emma Watson did.

    We have to live in reality. The female bears the babies and the male feeds and protects them. The notion of equality is silly.
      March 7, 2017 8:14 AM MST
    0

  • 17261
    SMH.
      March 7, 2017 9:21 AM MST
    0

  • 16725
    Given than men can go bare chested without raising an eyebrow, Emma could have expressed feminism by going topless entirely. From what I recall, "bra burning" was considered the height of feminist expression once upon a time. Free The Nipple is a feminist organisation.
    It's a storm in a teacup, driven by a flat-chested shrew who equates feminism with misandry. Germaine Greer did feminism no favours, she's not a feminist, she's a femocrat who doesn't believe that men should have the right to vote. Or possess testicles.
      March 6, 2017 6:39 AM MST
    0

  • 17261
    Feminism is about equal rights, and thereby not on the expense of men. Emma did not make her photo session to express feminism. I'd say it's what this is about. Can she speak about feminism and at the same time expose herself in Vanity Fair during an interview given in connection with her latest acting role? Apparently one at least thinks she can't. Hmm.

    I find the way describing women fighting (whether we agree or disagree with their opinion) as driven by a flat-chested shrew is part of the challenges we still face in today's society. It seems to me to be remarks that doesn't benefit any, not those you describe, nor yourself. Sorry, I do simply find it out of line. Make your points, but don't make it a question about flat chest and testicles. It belongs way back in history and shouldn't be repeated. 
      March 6, 2017 6:53 AM MST
    2

  • 16725
    Actually I saw the attack as a rampant case of tall poppy syndrome. "Here are my tits, it annoys me because I don't have any." Do feminists have to be unattractive? Is it anti-feminist to embrace one's body? The only thing that could have inspired this bitter, unwarranted rant is the green-eyed monster. Envy, sticking out in lumps.
    Had Ms Watson recently given birth and breastfed her child in public, it's highly likely that the same attacks would have surfaced. Again driven by jealousy. The world has GOT to stop sexualising breasts!
      March 6, 2017 7:05 AM MST
    0

  • 17261
    Agree with that last remark. Btw, Julia Hartley-Brewer does have breasts that no way can be characterized as flat chested. Just saying. I think we need to get away from that very simplistic approach that anyone making such remarks is doing them because she has less herself. There will be motives, and they might be different, maybe Julia Hartley-Brewer needs more publicity, and by spinning off on Emma Watson like this she does get it.  This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 6, 2017 3:56 PM MST
      March 6, 2017 7:06 AM MST
    2

  • I support the literal definition of feminism that you find in a dictionary. I run into some conflicts with what a select few people ( both men and women, for and against) choose to define it as in their heads.   That's true for many movements.
      March 6, 2017 7:23 AM MST
    2

  • 17261
    Agreed. It muddles everything, and it's not helping any cause. It only keeps things at a status quo. :-/
      March 6, 2017 7:39 AM MST
    1

  • 6124
    Feminism has nothing to do with sexuality or sexual expression IMO.  It does have to do with equal rights under the law, equal pay, equal opportunity.  What bothers me the most about Hartley-Brewer's tweet is that she felt the need to belittle and criticize another woman in a very spiteful and hateful way over something she KNOWS is a problem within her industry.  For the life of me I don't understand women who feel the need to attack other women rather than support them.  The only thing I can come up with is jealousy and/or the need for attention.
      March 6, 2017 4:18 PM MST
    3

  • 17261
    Spin off seems an opportunity she might have been going after. It's rather interesting to follow her tweet and responses, especially some of those (more sincere and serious ones) she did not respond back on. In my point of view she did just make herself look like a hypocrite. Ironically. Meh.
      March 6, 2017 4:27 PM MST
    2