I love the guardian, but this quote could well have come form the heady, book-version of Love Actually. Or how about an off the cuff jabber from Jane Fonda in a 1978 Elle interview? Or how about a couple of stoned teens in the woods? that sounds about right.

and you get to embrace lots of smart, educated, progressive women who are really, really hot. and so grateful to meet a man who understands.

Do you think there is really anyone here reading this who is not an advocate of the base-layer 'feminism' described here. Are there really a whole lot of salon readers who have any problem with households with two working parents? For that matter, is there a percentage of such people who are National Review subscribers who have serious doubts regarding this? I'll tell you : not many. This is an Alan Alda, 1980 quotation... perhaps the quote of the day when 'Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore' was released.

I embrace feminism for selfless reasons. I want what is best for humans - and women make up most of that category. It's a no-brainer for me. If it happens to benefit men - I'll call it collateral gains.

As for wrasltin' grizzlies and doing groutwork.... I prefer playing baseball, fixing things and throwing steel (I've heard women call it lifting weights)... but to each their own.

Keep bringing the good stuff tcf. You seem like Ghandi (or his female equivalent) compared to those jezebel 'women' Hepola wrote about.

It's not a new idea whatsoever, but I guess with most people getting their information about feminism from the popular press instead of doing their own reading and investigating of the feminist writers regarding gender in general, it may need more public exposure.

If more men were to actually read and think about these ideas - great. Some have, Michael Kimmel has written extensively on it from a male's perspective.

But in answer to the question as posed:

They can if they want!

That's what I've long wanted to know. How many times have I heard things like 'Feminism is the notion that women are people too.' I think not. Its name belies that. Feminism is simply another special interest, this one designed to advance women's causes; it just happens to be advancing the majority's cause in America, since women are the numeric majority. Younger women are sensibly rejecting the polarization, and thank the gods for that.

I support egalitarianism. (For example, I think it's pretty disgraceful what a small percentage of our elected leaders are female. I think Title IX was a necessary step that paid vast dividends.) I don't support feminism any more than I support white supremacy, black power, masculism, or any other movement that has no stopping point--that has no point at which it can rest easy and be satisfied. I don't support polarizing groups that divide us. I've known a lot of men who had no respect for women, but I've known a lot of women that had no respect for men. A lot of them professed feminism. They were just as foolish as the men who couldn't see the great things males and females can accomplish when we move forward in mutual respect and teamwork.

One cannot repeat 'men are pigs' any time one wants, then proclaim that one is not bigoted, any more than one can call women 'ho's' and 'bitches' and claim that's not bigoted.

Since when does adopting traditionally-feminine gender roles mean that a male agrees with the idea of feminism? Isn't feminism the idea that women are entitled to be able to do anything a man can do for equal recognition, respect, and pay and that women should have control over their own lives and bodies? Just because a guy likes to cook and does his share of the housework, that doesn't mean that he is a feminist. Maybe he just likes to cook, or that he can't stand his wife's cooking.

Let's not confuse the issue. I think its important that men (and women) understand exactly what is meant when someone proclaims to be a feminist.

... that I'm amazed and a little saddened that anyone still needs to say it. (Judging from the letters this story has already collected, clearly it still needs to be said.) Real feminism, as opposed to the man-hating stereotype which exists primarily in the fevered brains of right-wingers, is about freedom; freedom for some means freedom for all, and when some of us are not free, none of us are free. Those who oppose equality on the basis of sex, race, religion, etc. because they think their own group will benefit from inequality never seem to realize that they are binding themselves in chains of their own making, just as surely as they seek to bind others.

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

Heinlein - one of the few Naval Academy graduates of his age who was a feminist. He married a strong woman as well. Go figure.

I've had this quote framed on my desk for over twenty years.

i'm just venturing a guess here, but maybe it's that before feminist movements, there was no concept of egalitarianism. egalitarianism is basically a result of feminism.

"Feminism is simply another special interest, this one designed to advance women's causes; it just happens to be advancing the majority's cause in America, since women are the numeric majority."

Women are the numeric majority, but they are relatively a powerless numeric majority (for example as you noted yourself, there are so few women in leadership positions in politics). They are also not a numeric majority in many poorer countries, where their numbers are less due to female infanticide, unequal care, etc. I don't think its exactly correct to analogize feminism with white supremacy because feminists are not seeking supremacy, they seek equality (except for a few people who I think are off their rockers and do seek supremacy). Before feminism, men weren't trying to make sure that things were egalitarian, anywhere in the world. So, it wasn't till feminists started making some noise that a concept of egalitarianism started to take hold. You say you accept egalitarianism but not feminism but it sounds to me like you support both; its just that you have a bit of a misunderstanding about what feminism is.