In general, championing equality should be considered a humanist thing to do -- be that equal gender rights, fighting discrimination based on sexuality or race.
Indeed, it would be strange to consider oneself a humanist and not a feminist -- even if feminist is a much more controversial label in some circles.
There aren't as many situation where there is a need for "pushing forward the right of men". One exception might be in terms of (right to) paternity leave -- and that is a typical feminist issue.
In general there are a lot of parallels between gender equality and the civil rights movement. First one identify differences, then one discuss if those differences are justified, and then one tries to change them through various means. One of the many means that are generally argued to be "unfair" is affirmative action or positive discrimination. It's also one of many means that appear to be quite effective.
It's not that long ago prominent people were assassinated for for fighting for equal rights for black people in the US -- and in many countries people are still attacked for championing feminist issues (eg: Afghanistan, India).
That's not even accounting for certain fringe groups in eg: the US with regards to abortion rights -- or the parallels between the July 22 attacks in Norway and the 1989 shootings in Montreal.
Here is a short list where there is inequality between men and women, where the scale tips in the favor of women:
Higher Education. In Sweden, women dominate every area of higher education except engineering.
Job preferences. Women tend to outperform men in the general desirability of occupations, as measured by the Cambridge Social Interaction and Stratification Scale. Unpopular jobs and thankless job (plumbers, janitors, road workers) tend to be men dominated professions. Women’s occupations are healthier, permit greater access to higher status networks, and involve working with better educated people than men’s occupations.
In both of those, we could see feminist trying to fight for equality, yet we don't.
> Higher Education. In Sweden, women dominate every area of higher education except engineering.
I'm not as familiar with Sweden as I am with Norway, but AFAIK there is being work done to increase equality in higher education. As an example we try to increase recruitment of women to computer science, and men to biology.
> Job preferences. Women tend to outperform men in the general desirability of occupations, as measured by the Cambridge Social Interaction and Stratification Scale. Unpopular jobs and thankless job (plumbers, janitors, road workers) tend to be men dominated professions. Women’s occupations are healthier, permit greater access to higher status networks, and involve working with better educated people than men’s occupations.
I'm not familiar with studies supporting the idea that women in general have healthier work than men: In general women are overrepresented as nurses, cleaners and hair dressers[1] -- all of which tend to have a high degree of sick leave.
I would also like to see some citations regarding "access to higher status networks" -- most studies/statistics I'm familiar with suggests that even in rather equal societies, like Norway, women are under-represented in leading roles. Additionally even in traditionally female dominated sectors, like nursing, often men will hold the leading positions.
At any rate, feminst do work for higher female recruitment to construction and other traditionally male dominated professions. To be sure, the motivation isn't "to get women into thankless jobs", or increase their exposure to less healthy working conditions, but rather to promote equal opportunity and choice when it comes to careers.
The "humanist" side of the coin wrt working conditions, is of course to work for all workers to have better working conditions.
I'm a little surprised to see plumbing and road work grouped with cleaning -- but perhaps that can explain why road work is much more expensive in Norway than in Sweden.
[1] Hairdressers tend to stand a lot, often on hard floors, and are also exposed to chemicals that disturbingly harmful. There's recently been more awareness around the stuff used to treat and colour hair -- some of which contain substances that have long since become highly regulated when used in construction.
Indeed, it would be strange to consider oneself a humanist and not a feminist -- even if feminist is a much more controversial label in some circles.
There aren't as many situation where there is a need for "pushing forward the right of men". One exception might be in terms of (right to) paternity leave -- and that is a typical feminist issue.
In general there are a lot of parallels between gender equality and the civil rights movement. First one identify differences, then one discuss if those differences are justified, and then one tries to change them through various means. One of the many means that are generally argued to be "unfair" is affirmative action or positive discrimination. It's also one of many means that appear to be quite effective.
It's not that long ago prominent people were assassinated for for fighting for equal rights for black people in the US -- and in many countries people are still attacked for championing feminist issues (eg: Afghanistan, India).
That's not even accounting for certain fringe groups in eg: the US with regards to abortion rights -- or the parallels between the July 22 attacks in Norway and the 1989 shootings in Montreal.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/03/montreal-massac...