3 ms·

I don't think the take on feminism in this article is particularly good. The author discusses feminism as "a memeplex that provides a bunch of pattern-matching

I don't think the take on feminism in this article is particularly good. The author discusses feminism as "a memeplex that provides a bunch of pattern-matching opportunities where a man is in the wrong and a woman is in the right", but feminism is about analysing the power dynamic between the _classes_ of 'man' and 'woman'. Any system of class-based power analysis can be abused by supposed adherents to attack _individuals_ in a given class, but that doesn't mean that the system isn't itself valuable as a critique of power dynamic that exists between the classes.

vorpalhex 6y ago
Unless the system is actually open to inverting the power relationship, then it's just pattern matching and isn't anything more powerful than a slightly fancier way of saying "X > Y". Everything else is window dressing and post-hoc vindication. Or to put this another way, there are people in my orbit who feel perfectly comfortable spouting "Men are the worst!" and "all men are stupid!", but would be extremely upset with you if you swapped the gender in those statements.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
strken 6y ago
I don't have particularly strong opinions on feminism, but it's many things to many people. You've listed two of those things, but both seem like good characterisations of different aspects. I don't think he's criticising the academic aspect that analyses the power dynamic between men and women, I think he's criticising the everyday aspect that caused a woman to feel so offended when he asked her out that she cut off all contact with him and then told his friends he was being a jerk. Him choosing that specific aspect might itself be a weak man.
nyolfen 6y ago
>but feminism is about analysing the power dynamic between the _classes_ of 'man' and 'woman'. Any system of class-based power analysis can be abused by supposed adherents to attack _individuals_ in a given class, but that doesn't mean that the system isn't itself valuable as a critique of power dynamic that exists between the classes. the author has popularized another term for this -- motte & bailey doctrine: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-motte/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-bri...

vorpalhex 6y ago

Unless the system is actually open to inverting the power relationship, then it's just pattern matching and isn't anything more powerful than a slightly fancier way of saying "X > Y". Everything else is window dressing and post-hoc vindication. Or to put this another way, there are people in my orbit who feel perfectly comfortable spouting "Men are the worst!" and "all men are stupid!", but would be extremely upset with you if you swapped the gender in those statements.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

strken 6y ago

I don't have particularly strong opinions on feminism, but it's many things to many people. You've listed two of those things, but both seem like good characterisations of different aspects. I don't think he's criticising the academic aspect that analyses the power dynamic between men and women, I think he's criticising the everyday aspect that caused a woman to feel so offended when he asked her out that she cut off all contact with him and then told his friends he was being a jerk. Him choosing that specific aspect might itself be a weak man.

nyolfen 6y ago

>but feminism is about analysing the power dynamic between the _classes_ of 'man' and 'woman'. Any system of class-based power analysis can be abused by supposed adherents to attack _individuals_ in a given class, but that doesn't mean that the system isn't itself valuable as a critique of power dynamic that exists between the classes. the author has popularized another term for this -- motte & bailey doctrine: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-motte/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-bri...