3 ms·

It's certainly the case that many feminists do not apply the reasoning in the FAQ. I should have been clearer that by "contemporary feminists" I meant "adherent

by Joeboy 14y ago

It's certainly the case that many feminists do not apply the reasoning in the FAQ. I should have been clearer that by "contemporary feminists" I meant "adherents to more recent feminist thought" rather than "feminists who are currently alive" ("third-wave feminists" was the context of the conversation). The relevance is that one of the words in the draft Django code of conduct means significantly different things to different people, which is undoubtedly true, although I'm not particularly lobbying to change it.

dalke 14y ago
Being "nice" and being "professional" also mean significantly different things to different people, so it's not like that's the only word.
- Joeboy 14y ago
  I don't think people would disagree about the definitions of those words. Edit: and, to be honest, I don't care that much. It is a fact that a significant number of feminists hold that sexism can only be directed by men towards women. That is really all I wanted to say. I don't particularly want to argue about whether they're right, or what implications this has.
  - dalke 14y ago
    Fair enough. Most of my recent readings have been in the founding of civil rights law in the 1960s, so pre-second wave(?). Problem is, I can't make that fit into the 1st/2nd/3rd wave view. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-wave_feminism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-wave_feminism says the movement started in the early 1960s, and that first wave ended when women were enfranchised in the early 1900s. But the Civil Rights act of 1963 had decades of work behind it. The National Woman's Party, which was the militant branch of the Suffrage Movement, started pushing for the Equal Rights Amendment in 1923 and "the Republican Party endorsed the ERA in its 1940 platform, and the Democratic Party followed suit in 1944." (Quoting from http://www.jofreeman.com/lawandpolicy/titlevii.htm http://www.jofreeman.com/lawandpolicy/titlevii.htm ). The Equal Pay Act also has its roots in the 1800s. It feels then like 40 years of work towards gender equality in the workplace - including the inroads made during WWII by seeing that women can definitely hold jobs in industry - are ignored by the three-wave view of history, and that the successes of that ignored era are claimed solely as 2nd wave victories. In any case, that's neither here nor there. It's idle musing that I wrote down so it's easier to come to mind next time I talk with someone who can tell me about the history of feminism.

by Joeboy 14y ago

dalke 14y ago

Being "nice" and being "professional" also mean significantly different things to different people, so it's not like that's the only word.

Joeboy 14y ago
I don't think people would disagree about the definitions of those words. Edit: and, to be honest, I don't care that much. It is a fact that a significant number of feminists hold that sexism can only be directed by men towards women. That is really all I wanted to say. I don't particularly want to argue about whether they're right, or what implications this has.
- dalke 14y ago
  Fair enough. Most of my recent readings have been in the founding of civil rights law in the 1960s, so pre-second wave(?). Problem is, I can't make that fit into the 1st/2nd/3rd wave view. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-wave_feminism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-wave_feminism says the movement started in the early 1960s, and that first wave ended when women were enfranchised in the early 1900s. But the Civil Rights act of 1963 had decades of work behind it. The National Woman's Party, which was the militant branch of the Suffrage Movement, started pushing for the Equal Rights Amendment in 1923 and "the Republican Party endorsed the ERA in its 1940 platform, and the Democratic Party followed suit in 1944." (Quoting from http://www.jofreeman.com/lawandpolicy/titlevii.htm http://www.jofreeman.com/lawandpolicy/titlevii.htm ). The Equal Pay Act also has its roots in the 1800s. It feels then like 40 years of work towards gender equality in the workplace - including the inroads made during WWII by seeing that women can definitely hold jobs in industry - are ignored by the three-wave view of history, and that the successes of that ignored era are claimed solely as 2nd wave victories. In any case, that's neither here nor there. It's idle musing that I wrote down so it's easier to come to mind next time I talk with someone who can tell me about the history of feminism.