3 ms·

> At a quick glance, a lot of the intersectional feminist/activist modes of thought seem to be the polar opposites of what eg. cognitive behavioral therapy Wha

> At a quick glance, a lot of the intersectional feminist/activist modes of thought seem to be the polar opposites of what eg. cognitive behavioral therapy What a non sequitur. Why would feminism and stoicism have any incompatibilities?

MandieD 4y ago
For me, they're absolutely complementary. If I'm the only thing I can really control, how can I do so without the right to make my own decisions beyond whether or not to accept a marriage proposal? Before feminism, married women were legally children, at least in the parts of the world I've lived in (US and Germany). In the state I live in, Bavaria, my husband could have prevented me from getting a driver's license or working up until about 1970. A woman fighting against feminism is a woman fighting against responsibility for herself.
soundnote 4y ago
I literally gave one example in the post you quoted. The intersectional types are vehemently against owning your emotional responses in the way stoicism advocates, and instead actively encourage finding more and more ever more minute things that might be rationalized to be a slight against themselves. On a deeper level, stoicism acknowledges and is built on the idea that not everything in the world is changeable, while the intersectional mode of thought is exactly the opposite.
- 8note 4y ago
  Stoicism makes no sense in that case? How can you own your emotions if you are unchangeable? A stoic would consider the world as perfect as it is if it is unchangeable. Everyone is a stoic in that case, including the intersectionist types
- 7952 4y ago
  Activisim is a more masculine way of thinking. Stoicism more feminine. As society changes these different modes of thinking get more and more mixed up and seperated from preassigned roles. That could be quite a positive thing. I think we benefit from both. Sometimes passion and anger is needed to change your life and the situation. And sometimes you need to just accept the world as it is. And in something like race/sexism we need a little bit of both. Prejudice is bad, but not all prejudiced people are bad. We should be able to identify it, address it and move on without it being a big taboo that gets people in lots of trouble.
  - soundnote 4y ago
    Uh, have you looked at the demographics of intersectional activists and of people preaching stoicism lately?
- galdosdi 4y ago
  Oh, I guess to be honest I thought your example was so stupid I didn't feel the need to respond. Now that you reply this way, I admit maybe I am just totally confused as to what you mean. Why would there be any conflict between "I should try to not let shit get to me" and "Also, I should campaign for there to be less shit around to get to me"? Those are just two different ways to deal with having shit, and one in no way impedes the other. Am I misunderstanding your claim? > The intersectional types are vehemently against owning your emotional responses in the way stoicism advocates

MandieD 4y ago

For me, they're absolutely complementary. If I'm the only thing I can really control, how can I do so without the right to make my own decisions beyond whether or not to accept a marriage proposal? Before feminism, married women were legally children, at least in the parts of the world I've lived in (US and Germany). In the state I live in, Bavaria, my husband could have prevented me from getting a driver's license or working up until about 1970. A woman fighting against feminism is a woman fighting against responsibility for herself.

soundnote 4y ago

I literally gave one example in the post you quoted. The intersectional types are vehemently against owning your emotional responses in the way stoicism advocates, and instead actively encourage finding more and more ever more minute things that might be rationalized to be a slight against themselves. On a deeper level, stoicism acknowledges and is built on the idea that not everything in the world is changeable, while the intersectional mode of thought is exactly the opposite.

8note 4y ago
Stoicism makes no sense in that case? How can you own your emotions if you are unchangeable? A stoic would consider the world as perfect as it is if it is unchangeable. Everyone is a stoic in that case, including the intersectionist types
7952 4y ago
Activisim is a more masculine way of thinking. Stoicism more feminine. As society changes these different modes of thinking get more and more mixed up and seperated from preassigned roles. That could be quite a positive thing. I think we benefit from both. Sometimes passion and anger is needed to change your life and the situation. And sometimes you need to just accept the world as it is. And in something like race/sexism we need a little bit of both. Prejudice is bad, but not all prejudiced people are bad. We should be able to identify it, address it and move on without it being a big taboo that gets people in lots of trouble.
- soundnote 4y ago
  Uh, have you looked at the demographics of intersectional activists and of people preaching stoicism lately?
galdosdi 4y ago
Oh, I guess to be honest I thought your example was so stupid I didn't feel the need to respond. Now that you reply this way, I admit maybe I am just totally confused as to what you mean. Why would there be any conflict between "I should try to not let shit get to me" and "Also, I should campaign for there to be less shit around to get to me"? Those are just two different ways to deal with having shit, and one in no way impedes the other. Am I misunderstanding your claim? > The intersectional types are vehemently against owning your emotional responses in the way stoicism advocates