6 ms·

When someone says they believe in equality, why do you then say they have an issue with women?

by Wintamute 13y ago

arrrg 13y ago
I'm just guessing, but I would say maybe completely bonkers bullshit like "feminist status quo"?!
- overgard 13y ago
  If we accept that there's such a thing as feminism, it would make sense that it would have a current status quo. The argument would be if you agree with their definition of the status quo or not.
  - shadowfox 13y ago
    I think the parent is also implying that there is perhaps no particular status quo with respect to the entire feminist movement(s)
  - king_jester 13y ago
    > If we accept that there's such a thing as feminism, it would make sense that it would have a current status quo. This doesn't make sense. Most movements that are composed of many different groups with different interests never reach a status quo. Mass movements are rare and usually are not as mass as they are made out to be. Acting like feminism is a monolith and that all feminists act or think a certain way is one of the most common stereotype out there.
    - hnal943 13y ago
      You're confusing "status quo" with "consensus".
  - hacker789 13y ago
    Modern western feminism certainly has widely accepted dogma, but there are exist bitter battles between competing factions. That being said, the largest factions don't exactly cover all sides of an issue, to put it mildly, so the existence of factions doesn't make anything better. For example, the argument over transsexuals (mentioned by @rmc) has two main factions within modern western feminism: 1. "Transsexual women aren't real women; they're just men who are co-opting the brutal oppression real western women face, drowning out real women's voices." 2. "If you feel that you are a woman, then you are a woman. You do not need to present yourself as a woman, you do not need to be a woman every day, and you do not need to chose between being a man and being a woman at any given moment—you can be both. Anyone who questions your womanhood is a misogynist, because they are oppressively forcing their definition of womanhood onto a woman."
- bilbo0s 13y ago
  Guys... Would it be ok if we could discuss this without the profanity?
  - Wintamute 13y ago
    Absolutely not. People are totally free to write and talk however they want to. Your conceptions about profanity are subjective and personal, don't try and impose them on others. If people are using hate speech, or being discriminatory, that's different, but colourful language harms no-one except those intent on being offended for no good reason. A more rewarding path would be to respond to the content of what is written, rather than the tone.
jusben1369 13y ago
Sentence 1) I'm a victim. I'm oppressed by women who won't allow me to express my opinion because it differs from theirs. I believe in equality so I guess I'm implying they don't. Sentence 2) I'm uncomfortable talking about this so I'll try and say let's not talk about it at all and just focus on some abstract technology discussion. 3) We're doomed. You can't solve the problem. It's just the way it is so leave it the way it is. (I kind of like the status quo even though I was just objecting to a status quo mentality)
- overgard 13y ago
  He didn't say he was a victim, he said he wasn't willing to converse on terms that he didn't like. That's simply exercising a choice in what sort of conversation is worth your time.
- gizmo686 13y ago
  Sentence 1 speaks only about the "women in tech" movement. The fact that "women in tech" self selects a mostly women population does not mean that commenting on it is commenting on women. Sentence 2 is again speaking specifically about "women in tech" event, not about talking about the subject. Sentence 3, is admittedly a defeatist attitude. However if there is nothing we can do about it, then why should we waste our time talking about it. In this case it is more of, if the people who are heavilly invested in this have not come up with something we can do about it yet, why should I waste my time unless I want to be a major activist. And, based on point 1, the movement is already hostile to what I have to say, so forget about it. Admitadly, I am probably projecting my own thoughts on sentence 3.
  - 3pt14159 13y ago
    Your projections are completely accurate. The only thing I would add is that my own fiancee is a woman in tech (she's a frontend developer), so it isn't like I'm hostile to women in tech or anything.
- fosap 13y ago
  Sentence 1: If you disagree with something you get nothing but ridicule and insults. You just proved that point. Sorry, some people are just not worth arguing with, for example people with that discussion style, like you and most feminist. Or most fans of homeopathy. Or most jehovah's witnesses. Or other esoteric world views, preferably with a very strong in-group/out-group mentality. Case closed.
tokenrove 13y ago
It's a typical stance taken by people ignorant of the grievances of a minority or oppressed group. It's like saying, "I believe all the problems here are simple and solved except for trivial exceptions". "I believe in equality" is an easy stance to take without doing any research.

When someone says they believe in equality, why do you then say they have an issue with women?

arrrg 13y ago

I'm just guessing, but I would say maybe completely bonkers bullshit like "feminist status quo"?!

overgard 13y ago
If we accept that there's such a thing as feminism, it would make sense that it would have a current status quo. The argument would be if you agree with their definition of the status quo or not.
- shadowfox 13y ago
  I think the parent is also implying that there is perhaps no particular status quo with respect to the entire feminist movement(s)
- king_jester 13y ago
  > If we accept that there's such a thing as feminism, it would make sense that it would have a current status quo. This doesn't make sense. Most movements that are composed of many different groups with different interests never reach a status quo. Mass movements are rare and usually are not as mass as they are made out to be. Acting like feminism is a monolith and that all feminists act or think a certain way is one of the most common stereotype out there.
  - hnal943 13y ago
    You're confusing "status quo" with "consensus".
- hacker789 13y ago
  Modern western feminism certainly has widely accepted dogma, but there are exist bitter battles between competing factions. That being said, the largest factions don't exactly cover all sides of an issue, to put it mildly, so the existence of factions doesn't make anything better. For example, the argument over transsexuals (mentioned by @rmc) has two main factions within modern western feminism: 1. "Transsexual women aren't real women; they're just men who are co-opting the brutal oppression real western women face, drowning out real women's voices." 2. "If you feel that you are a woman, then you are a woman. You do not need to present yourself as a woman, you do not need to be a woman every day, and you do not need to chose between being a man and being a woman at any given moment—you can be both. Anyone who questions your womanhood is a misogynist, because they are oppressively forcing their definition of womanhood onto a woman."
bilbo0s 13y ago
Guys... Would it be ok if we could discuss this without the profanity?
- Wintamute 13y ago
  Absolutely not. People are totally free to write and talk however they want to. Your conceptions about profanity are subjective and personal, don't try and impose them on others. If people are using hate speech, or being discriminatory, that's different, but colourful language harms no-one except those intent on being offended for no good reason. A more rewarding path would be to respond to the content of what is written, rather than the tone.

jusben1369 13y ago

Sentence 1) I'm a victim. I'm oppressed by women who won't allow me to express my opinion because it differs from theirs. I believe in equality so I guess I'm implying they don't. Sentence 2) I'm uncomfortable talking about this so I'll try and say let's not talk about it at all and just focus on some abstract technology discussion. 3) We're doomed. You can't solve the problem. It's just the way it is so leave it the way it is. (I kind of like the status quo even though I was just objecting to a status quo mentality)

overgard 13y ago
He didn't say he was a victim, he said he wasn't willing to converse on terms that he didn't like. That's simply exercising a choice in what sort of conversation is worth your time.
gizmo686 13y ago
Sentence 1 speaks only about the "women in tech" movement. The fact that "women in tech" self selects a mostly women population does not mean that commenting on it is commenting on women. Sentence 2 is again speaking specifically about "women in tech" event, not about talking about the subject. Sentence 3, is admittedly a defeatist attitude. However if there is nothing we can do about it, then why should we waste our time talking about it. In this case it is more of, if the people who are heavilly invested in this have not come up with something we can do about it yet, why should I waste my time unless I want to be a major activist. And, based on point 1, the movement is already hostile to what I have to say, so forget about it. Admitadly, I am probably projecting my own thoughts on sentence 3.
- 3pt14159 13y ago
  Your projections are completely accurate. The only thing I would add is that my own fiancee is a woman in tech (she's a frontend developer), so it isn't like I'm hostile to women in tech or anything.
fosap 13y ago
Sentence 1: If you disagree with something you get nothing but ridicule and insults. You just proved that point. Sorry, some people are just not worth arguing with, for example people with that discussion style, like you and most feminist. Or most fans of homeopathy. Or most jehovah's witnesses. Or other esoteric world views, preferably with a very strong in-group/out-group mentality. Case closed.

tokenrove 13y ago

It's a typical stance taken by people ignorant of the grievances of a minority or oppressed group. It's like saying, "I believe all the problems here are simple and solved except for trivial exceptions". "I believe in equality" is an easy stance to take without doing any research.