3 ms·

> I could not help but gravitate towards the comment on that article where nervous chauvinists wring their fingers over the fact that perhaps I can't help but

by Goladus 11y ago

> I could not help but gravitate towards the comment on that article where nervous chauvinists wring their fingers over the fact that perhaps I can't help but wonder whether your enthusiastic posturing about these nameless villains is remotely accurate.

danharaj 11y ago
"Feminism as a religion, Mozart had a sister therfore she had to be brighter. It's in the air, everybody will love that, and who cares about this woman having had no talent..."
- AnthonyMouse 11y ago
  Your quote doesn't live up to your straw man. The quote is essentially pointing out a specific bias and making the point that fabricating a counterfactual will take the bias of the fabricator because you can make things turn out however you like when you're rewriting history. Her talent is speculation based on kind words by family members. Claiming that she had "no talent" presumably goes too far the other way, but the point being made has merit even if the delivery is overly exaggerated. Notably absent is any claim that women in the 18th century were treated other than terribly. It is possible and indeed highly likely both that women were treated unfairly and also that Wolfgang's sister would not have rivaled him as a composer, as there are only a small handful of people living or dead who ever have.
  - danharaj 11y ago
    I think you refuse to see how polemical that quote is. If it weren't such a contentious topic, people would not be comparing it to the dogma of religion. Finding an article unconvincing warrants a shrug or some skepticism, not invective against some bogeyman of a feminist cult. It's not disagreeing, it's how the disagreement is expressed. But please, go ahead and vehemently defend people who immediately resort to contempt when the idea that a woman was overlooked by history appears.
    - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
      > It's not disagreeing, it's how the disagreement is expressed. Putting aside that that was not your original complaint, why are you then engaging in the behavior you're objecting to? It doesn't help anything to become the zealot your antagonists are expecting. The conundrum of modern feminism is that 20th century feminists got nearly everything they wanted. What remains is the hard, subtle, detail-oriented work that doesn't lend itself to sound bites or sloganeering. But there are people with no patients for that kind of work who would rather stall progress by fighting against men rather than for equality. And those people provoke the reactions you're objecting to by conditioning men to expect to be accused of things they haven't done and blamed for things that happened before they were born.

by Goladus 11y ago

danharaj 11y ago

"Feminism as a religion, Mozart had a sister therfore she had to be brighter. It's in the air, everybody will love that, and who cares about this woman having had no talent..."

AnthonyMouse 11y ago
Your quote doesn't live up to your straw man. The quote is essentially pointing out a specific bias and making the point that fabricating a counterfactual will take the bias of the fabricator because you can make things turn out however you like when you're rewriting history. Her talent is speculation based on kind words by family members. Claiming that she had "no talent" presumably goes too far the other way, but the point being made has merit even if the delivery is overly exaggerated. Notably absent is any claim that women in the 18th century were treated other than terribly. It is possible and indeed highly likely both that women were treated unfairly and also that Wolfgang's sister would not have rivaled him as a composer, as there are only a small handful of people living or dead who ever have.
- danharaj 11y ago
  I think you refuse to see how polemical that quote is. If it weren't such a contentious topic, people would not be comparing it to the dogma of religion. Finding an article unconvincing warrants a shrug or some skepticism, not invective against some bogeyman of a feminist cult. It's not disagreeing, it's how the disagreement is expressed. But please, go ahead and vehemently defend people who immediately resort to contempt when the idea that a woman was overlooked by history appears.
  - AnthonyMouse 11y ago
    > It's not disagreeing, it's how the disagreement is expressed. Putting aside that that was not your original complaint, why are you then engaging in the behavior you're objecting to? It doesn't help anything to become the zealot your antagonists are expecting. The conundrum of modern feminism is that 20th century feminists got nearly everything they wanted. What remains is the hard, subtle, detail-oriented work that doesn't lend itself to sound bites or sloganeering. But there are people with no patients for that kind of work who would rather stall progress by fighting against men rather than for equality. And those people provoke the reactions you're objecting to by conditioning men to expect to be accused of things they haven't done and blamed for things that happened before they were born.