Cath Elliott on: Can Men Be Feminists?

In a continuing conversation on the state of masculinity and male roles in our society, here’s a great post from the Guardian’s Comment is free… on whether men can be feminists. At a certain point, you have to wonder how much we really want to get caught up in semantics of what is feminist, pro-feminist, feminist allied, partners in the patriarchal struggle, etc. To my mind, men can definitely work toward the feminist cause, and can provide a vital perspective by querying the way their own roles have been constructed within our society, and ideas on how to counteract this. I think Cath Elliott reaches some great conclusions in the following:

Can men be feminists?

Many feminists welcome men’s championship of the cause, but there’s much debate over their entitlement to call themselves feminists

Cath Elliott

April 23, 2008 10:00 AM

In the book Feminism is for Everybody, bell hooks defines feminism as “a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression”, while the Oxford English Dictionary defines it as “the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of sexual equality.” You’ll get no argument from me on either of these interpretations; they’re straightforward, non-controversial, and best of all, inclusive. Ignore all the confusing sub-divisions like Marxist feminism, radical feminism and anarcha-feminism, and the arguments about whether we’re experiencing the third-wave or whether we’re in a state of post- feminism, and feminism really can be summed up this concisely. What’s even more exciting is that if we went by either one of these definitions we’d probably be hard pushed to find someone who wasn’t prepared to declare themselves a feminist.

For the rest of the article, visit here.