4 ms·

Any position premised on "feminists" — or any other group — being a monolithic entity one can hand-wave about as suits one's narratives should be immediately, a

by rosser 8y ago

Any position premised on "feminists" — or any other group — being a monolithic entity one can hand-wave about as suits one's narratives should be immediately, and extremely, suspect.

staticautomatic 8y ago
I don't necessarily agree that it should be automatically treated with suspicion, but it does always warrant further inspection. One of the biggest problems with discussions about contemporary feminism is that it's often unclear who is being talked about when one talks about "feminists." Accordingly, vague invocations of "feminists" or "feminism" may not be deliberate but instead suffer merely from erroneously insufficient specificity.
- rosser 8y ago
  > ...but it does always warrant further inspection. That's what I mean by suspicion: scrutiny, not dismissal. What, e.g., are the narratives in play, that enable someone to speak that casually, yet confidently, about a thing they're prima facie demonstrating a flawed understanding of?
- beat 8y ago
  Alternately, the "erroneously insufficient specificity" might be quite deliberate, if not explicitly considered. Blanket attacks on "feminists" often have origins other than mere academic inquiry.
tenaciousDaniel 8y ago
So long as ^that premise is applied across the board, I agree. Since it follows that feminism is not merely the belief that women are equal to men.
- rosser 8y ago
  Then you (the general "you") need to take that concern up with people who profess those positions, and not throw it in the face of everyone who professes feminism of any kind. I'm a "women are people too" feminist. I really have no interest in being your whipping boy regarding "man-hating bull-dykes" or whatever such bullshit. It's not accurate. It's not interesting. It's not even novel. And yet, near-enough every time this stuff comes up, someone expects me to defend a position I neither hold, nor agree with. Is it any wonder these kinds of stories get flagged off the front page?
- staticautomatic 8y ago
  I think this would more accurately be phrased as "feminism may not merely be the belief that women are equal to men." In any event, "equal to" remains awfully vague.

by rosser 8y ago

Any position premised on "feminists" — or any other group — being a monolithic entity one can hand-wave about as suits one's narratives should be immediately, and extremely, suspect.

staticautomatic 8y ago

I don't necessarily agree that it should be automatically treated with suspicion, but it does always warrant further inspection. One of the biggest problems with discussions about contemporary feminism is that it's often unclear who is being talked about when one talks about "feminists." Accordingly, vague invocations of "feminists" or "feminism" may not be deliberate but instead suffer merely from erroneously insufficient specificity.

rosser 8y ago
> ...but it does always warrant further inspection. That's what I mean by suspicion: scrutiny, not dismissal. What, e.g., are the narratives in play, that enable someone to speak that casually, yet confidently, about a thing they're prima facie demonstrating a flawed understanding of?
beat 8y ago
Alternately, the "erroneously insufficient specificity" might be quite deliberate, if not explicitly considered. Blanket attacks on "feminists" often have origins other than mere academic inquiry.

tenaciousDaniel 8y ago

So long as ^that premise is applied across the board, I agree. Since it follows that feminism is not merely the belief that women are equal to men.

rosser 8y ago
Then you (the general "you") need to take that concern up with people who profess those positions, and not throw it in the face of everyone who professes feminism of any kind. I'm a "women are people too" feminist. I really have no interest in being your whipping boy regarding "man-hating bull-dykes" or whatever such bullshit. It's not accurate. It's not interesting. It's not even novel. And yet, near-enough every time this stuff comes up, someone expects me to defend a position I neither hold, nor agree with. Is it any wonder these kinds of stories get flagged off the front page?
staticautomatic 8y ago
I think this would more accurately be phrased as "feminism may not merely be the belief that women are equal to men." In any event, "equal to" remains awfully vague.