My main political issue is workers rights.
I believe the main nemeses to workers rights is the exploitation of labor by capitalism practiced to its nth degree. I see major retailers as the #1 target on my hit list. All down the supply chain they exploit workers and demand this through their buying power and market share.
Walmart (Asda for you) is the biggest of the big. And it is their business model that others need to consider if they wish to compete.
Now, I'd love to see them all fall and emerge in their place the "mom and pop" store.
Even though I think that Target, Hobby Lobby, Staples, etc should all fall I concentrate my efforts on Walmart. They, to me, are an appropriate first step. Watch them fall and see labor rise, IMHO.
So I snipe. I make correlations between their customers and fat people, short-sided people and lazy, etc. small steps. I try to convince one person at a time, through shame or reasoned debate not to shop there.
If that first step is ever accomplished I will move on to Target for instance.
Every step I toppling the system is ok. Therefore I support feminism because I am anti status quo.
I don't support any isms because they always lean towards one demographic. I will never accept anyone being superior or more important than any other. EVER. No matter how dumb, ugly, smart, or good looking someone may be. No matter what strengths or weaknesses anyone has, EVERYONE is just as important as the next, and deserves the exact same respect and privilege as the person to their left and right.
I will never think any other way. I believe in PURE equality, and I always will. In my mind, if anyone challenges this, they are selfish, and a tyrant to be defeated as soon as possible.
I get where you are coming from, but, sometimes the -ism is needed to make the change of perspective seen.
When my mother married, at 28 ffs, she had to get permission of her parents.
Married women were not seen as legal persons when it came to buying and selling till late in the fifties of last century.
A woman who married and who had a job paid by the government was likely to get unemployed the moment she said yes to her husband. My grandmother was an exception, she got to teach, even after tying the knot. Even more exceptional, she got to teach after getting a child. 1934 the rules were made tighter, so, all married women in jobs payed by the government got sacked. And she got sacked too. In some areas in the Netherlands that rule stayed till 1969.
Feminism was a change of perspective. Not looking at the status quo as right, but looking at it from another POV. In that it was not that different from other liberation movements. And, POV's of feminists differed a lot.
In the late seventies and early eighties, feminists questioned the disability culture in my country, noticing how lots of doctors filed way more women as disabled than men, after having had an illness. Lots of doctors still were believing in the culture of women belonging at home, and men earning the money.
In the Netherlands, feminism led to joint custody as a default setting, when a divorce is happening. In other countries it did not.
There are feminists who want to struggle for the rights of women, till the time it is good enough, and then stop. There are feminists who think women are a better kind of people. And there are plenty of other directions in feminism. In autism groups you see similar things happening. Some groups just want to have their own voices heard, and not being decided upon without being heard. Others go for supremacy. All human faults can be found in every group of society.
Feminism, gay movements, labour movements, all kinds of liberation movements made people look different at law, religion, society. And, those different POV's did change things. It's not about being PC, it is about having and claiming rights. And, having and claiming duties that come with those rights. Of course there are always morons trying to have it the convenient way, wanting rights without the plights. But those people suck, no matter what they claim to be.
