As if there is agreement that "sexist" jokes (or people telling them) are antifeminist.

Among feminists there is. Heck, there's science: "exposure to sexist humor can lead to toleration of hostile feelings and discrimination against women" http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071106083038.ht...

The only people trying to argue "lighten up" are anti-feminists.

See, that link should be nearer the top of this thread. That's food for thought right there.

On the other hand, "The only people trying to argue "lighten up" are anti-feminists" is a nasty false generalisation -- it ignores apath-feminists (damn, that doesn't work nearly as well as 'apatheists'); those who are thinking "can't we all just get along?", with absolutely no motive to stymie feminism; those who've never done the research, who think feminism's all well-and-good, but tell themselves they're too busy worrying about other things; exactly the sort of people who would find that article insightful, and who might be pushed toward feminism by it.

I fear you risk scaring them off by lumping them in with 'anti-feminists' and its implications of misogyny, and may taint that link by association.

The trouble is that the default setting, the do-nothing, don't-care follow-the-norm setting, is anti-feminist. It's the "double standard" in dating. It's women as decoration. It's compulsory sexuality. It's misogynist porn. And, as here, it's sexist jokes. This is why feminism says we live in a patriarchy still.

I see where you're coming from, and agree wholly, when I put a feminist hat on. The thing is, when I then put an 'indiffeminist' (thanks zem) hat on, I feel like you're throwing insults, saying "Oh, you're not a feminist activist? Then you're a misogynist pig."

I think it boils down to the technical meaning in feminist theory of 'anti-feminist' (anything that holds back feminism) not really matching up with what the layperson seeing the word for the first time would take it to mean -- 'anti-feminist' intuitively sounds like it only applies to active, concious opposition to the ideals of feminism; misogyny, denial of female autonomy, Rush Limbaugh, that kinda thing. Laypeople may not think to also consider apathy that unwittingly enables the sexist status quo as part of anti-feminism.

I'm definitely not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying you risk alienating your target audience by... well, to be flippant, by using big fancy words they may not understand ;)

"indiffeminists"

Now that, I like. I'm going to remember that one for future conversations.

I just wanted to point out that being anti-feminist does not necessarily mean anti woman or anti womans rights.

I do agree that sexist jokes are a bad thing and not only when done against woman.

I'd accept that from a womanist who feels white women's feminism has failed her, or a lesbian or trans woman fed up of being ostracised, or a poor woman annoyed at middle-class feminism's priorities.

But most groups who say "I'm not anti woman, just anti feminism" are flat out patriarchal, whether the flavour is religious or "men's rights", it's the same garbage.

And I won't accept it from a man at all.

>But most groups who say "I'm not anti woman, just anti feminism" are flat out patriarchal, whether the flavour is religious or "men's rights", it's the same garbage.

Unfortunately my perception is similar to yours. I have seen enough nut case traditionalists and misogyny to not want to get involved with mans rights movement. Traditionalist ideology hurts MRM and I feel they are shooting themselves on the foot by allowing this sort of thing.

This is why I can't see my self associating with MRM or Feminists. Both groups can be pretty extreme although both have some (in my opinion) good goals like womans rights to choose & legal paternal surrender.

Thank you for your comment.

edit: I must say that I have seen MRM people against traditional patriarchy. Their idea is that a patriarchy does not allow men to be free.

Yeah, patriarchy does hurt men. Gender policing, compulsory sexuality, enforced emotional shallowness, the breadwinner/nurturer split and its side effects in family law, even the classic apologia for the the glass ceiling uses the fact that women demand work/life balance - implying men can be overworked. But I can't see the MRM having an easy time admitting that while patriarchy does hurt men, it hurts women worse.

If they admitted that, they'd be feminists.

To clarify, I was referring to the technical people working in the porn industry, not the performers per se.

Are you saying that porn only objectify woman?

I see the sexual objectification concept often used as a way to demonise natural human sexual attraction. If man and woman ignored physical appearance and resourcefulness we would probably be extinct by now.