For example, the dictionary definition of atheism is a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. However, many religious people believe that atheism is a conscious rejection of an existing God, a deliberate embracing of evil, and that all atheists are intrinsically amoral or indeed immoral. This understanding is so common that most people who do not believe in a god refuse to self-identify as atheists, and those who do are reviled somewhat less than child molesters.
My point here should be obvious: You're right. If you don't believe in God, you are an atheist. If you think your social rights should be independent of your genitals or gender identity, you are a feminist. But if you don't use the word to describe yourself (and that's forgivable), it's not because it has "baggage"-- it's because hateful organizations and individuals have been attacking the word as a proxy for attacking the concept, and it is working.
I'm not sure what you were hoping to get from that post. I have thought about it. I know people in the US don't identify as atheists because the word has lost its original meaning there. So?
People don't refuse to self-identify as feminists because "hateful organizations and individuals have been attacking the word as a proxy for attacking the concept", they refuse because other self-identified feminists promote hatred and radicalism that most people find objectionable.
Who is being let off of the hook? Radical gender feminists took over feminism and alienated women. What hook are they supposed to be on and how are they being let off?
> Radical gender feminists took over feminism and alienated women.
Bullshit. The third wave took over feminism and included homosexuals, transgender and transexual women, and men. Anyone who feels alienated by feminism is being lied to.
Even now plenty of feminists are hostile towards transgender and transexual women, it wasn't just a second wave thing. And second wave feminists didn't vanish into nothingness, they still exist, and still advocate hatred. Why would you suggest that people who choose not to identify with that are "being lied to"? Who is lying to them, and what is the lie?
As to your "bullshit" claim, why do you believe that radical gender feminists and third wave feminists are mutually exclusive groups? Mainstream third wave feminists are almost exclusively gender feminists, and they actively seek to deny equity feminists their views and their identity as feminists. They call equity feminists "anti-feminists" and "self-hating misogynists".
It might be more accurate to say that mainstream feminists think the idea of "equity feminism" is a made up concept promoted by anti-feminists to try to devalue second- and third-wave feminism.
Sure, you can use their rhetoric if it makes you feel good. It doesn't change the fact that those mainstream feminists who call people whose beliefs align with the dictionary definition of feminism "anti-feminists" are the ones who drove women away from identifying themselves as feminists.
For example, the dictionary definition of atheism is a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. However, many religious people believe that atheism is a conscious rejection of an existing God, a deliberate embracing of evil, and that all atheists are intrinsically amoral or indeed immoral. This understanding is so common that most people who do not believe in a god refuse to self-identify as atheists, and those who do are reviled somewhat less than child molesters.
My point here should be obvious: You're right. If you don't believe in God, you are an atheist. If you think your social rights should be independent of your genitals or gender identity, you are a feminist. But if you don't use the word to describe yourself (and that's forgivable), it's not because it has "baggage"-- it's because hateful organizations and individuals have been attacking the word as a proxy for attacking the concept, and it is working.
We don't have to let them off the hook for this.