This question implies that one must be either one or the other. People and philosophies are far more complicated than that. A feminist may also be both a humanist and an equalist.
There’s no law that says only one box can be ticked here, and it’s hugely important not to get sucked into thinking that one choice excludes the others. A major reason that most populist debate in the corporate media (and in online forums too) is a pitiful sham is that way too many questions are argued on an either/or basis, instead of acknowledging the probability of a both/and stance. The either/or method of framing a debate is technically referred to as a “false dilemma” [more], and is one example of a logical fallacy.
As to why feminism requires a distinct agenda within the equalist movements? The special and distinct problem of misogyny both oppressing and directly harming women, pure and simple. Unless misogyny is directly addressed and acted against, general equalist activism will not be enough. [FAQs: Does feminism matter? and Isn't feminism just "victim politics"?]
Related Reading:
Introductory:
- Andrea Rubenstein (Official Shrub.com Blog): Why “feminism”?
- Colleen Wainwright (Communicatrix): ¡Feminista!
- Suzanne Reisman (BlogHer) Feminism and Humanism and Progressivism – Oh My!
Clarifying Concepts:
- More on Either/Or and Feminisms:
We’re not either/or thinkers here, but both/and thinkers. I am neither a liberal feminist who supports only attacking power by going after its underpinning through the courts and through legislation nor a radical feminist who wants to address how oppression is lived out in the day-to-day. I’m both. Without focusing on how sexism and heterosexism permeates our very existence, attacks our very way of thinking and our daily existence, it’s far, far easier for people to not care because it’s someone else’s problem. But, as I state firmly in this post, it everyone’s problem.
[Amanda Marcotte, in comments to a Blog Against Heteronormativity post at Pandagon] - Lauren (Faux Real Tho): On Feminism and Attractiveness
Filed under: FAQ, FWW, introductory, privilege, sexism, spot the strawfeminist | Tagged: equalism, feminism, humanism, privilege, sexism, strawfeminist
[...] Why “feminism” and not just “humanism”? or “equalism”? Isn’… [...]
[...] FAQ: Why “feminism” and not just “humanism”? Or “equalism”? Isn… for a related [...]
Updated the Introductory section with a link.
[...] FAQ: Why “feminism” and not just “humanism”? Or “equalism”? Isn… [...]
[...] See also FF101: Why “feminism” and not just “humanism”? Or “equalism”? Is… [...]
[...] progressive; feminism is an integral part of progressivism. (Check the Feminism 101 blog on Feminism and Humanism / Equalism for more on this and other basic feminist ideas, and Melissa’s list of Feminism 101 points at [...]
Another problem I have with non-feminists wondering why we don’t call ourselves “humanist” is that although “humanist” has several meanings, I don’t want to associate myself with those which imply that human beings are sacred, or superior to animals.
the person who asked the question ‘threw around’ the word humanism, not humanist, and the wikipedia entry on humanism defines it clearly related to what the question was about. one’s audience understood what was meant perfectly well.
There is actually a clear distinction made by Wikipedia between the life stance Humanism and the ethical stance humanism. So which one do you mean and understand?