Do you see the flaw in that logic?
Now, you say you're a feminist. Dictionary says feminism is about equality. That automatically means you're for equality, right?
I'm a feminist. Women should suck my D for equality. I guess that's feminism.
ʛ ɨ ŋ ʛ ε я
You got it, you didn't magically become an actual wizard just because you said you were one. And what else didn't happen? The meaning of the word Wizard didn't change to "a regular ol' Yahoo user" because of how you used it.
Now you can change the definition of what a feminist is, but if you're going to use it in an argument, you have to specify what that means exactly since you could end up disagreeing on the new meaning even with someone who agrees that the standard definition is wrong.
And it can't mean "anyone who calls them self a feminist", because not only would that be a nonsensical definition, but you'd be grouping people together with contradicting views, since that would also include people who still fit the standard definition and use the word properly. You'd have to give actual feminists a new word, which, in time, or immediately, can also be used improperly.
But regardless, you're right that calling yourself something doesn't automatically mean you're that thing, but just because people call themselves something, doesn't mean they're NOT that thing either, which is what is often trying to be argued in this section. There's always questions targeted towards feminists that assume I support something, usually atrocious, that I simply don't. And then someone tries to argue with me about something I don't even disagree with them on, because of their definition of feminist that I don't use. Now this is fun for me but it gets the people arguing with me pretty much no where at all. There is a reason language has been standardized.
WWGSD
"Feminists, I say I'm a wizard. Dictionary says that a wizard has magical powers. I guess that means I have magical powers.?
Do you see the flaw in that logic? "
They do see the flaw, because the "logic" doesn't harmonize with their emotions when it comes to self-proclaimed magical beings.
Fusion
I bet all the anti-wizards are only going to use lies and logical fallacies against you, because they're really wizard haters who are afraid to compete with wizards on an equal playing field.
Wizard - any man who has magical powers.
Puяse
I agree the dictionary is pretty nonsensical to use as a source of truth or analysis; but then again, this also means we should hold anti-feminism, MRA, MGTOW, etc., to the same standard as feminism -- this also means we should suspend all definitions, if we want to be consistent. This is not occurring. In fact, its common to dismantle feminism then replace it with "egalitarianism" because of the definitional context that follows it. Which, just looks like hypocrisy in the making.
I'll look directly at the persons, actions, etc., as a means of judgment. Thus far, I've only seen misogynist anti-feminists from GS'. Quite a few of them have made good points, it's a shame they can't disassociate emotions, biases, and women from their arguments. An example is the question; too reactive/reactionary for me to take seriously.
Anonymous
YOU'RE A WIZARD HARRY