3 ms·

There isn't a 'single' status quo, but if you question and/or debate the existence or definition of certain articles of feminist faith such as 'patriarchy' or '

There isn't a 'single' status quo, but if you question and/or debate the existence or definition of certain articles of feminist faith such as 'patriarchy' or 'rape culture' or various statistics about the relative status of women versus men, watch out.

king_jester 13y ago
> debate the existence or definition of certain articles of feminist faith such as 'patriarchy' or 'rape culture' This is not a debate in good faith. If you come to the table with no previous knowledge about anything and demand to be heard, why should people waste time with bringing you up to speed? The vast majority of the times this happens it ends up in moving the goal posts.
- theorique 13y ago
  I'm certainly not suggesting that a person go in completely uninformed, nor that he use misguided or misogynist arguments. But it's completely suitable to refute statistics or conclusions if one has done the appropriate reading - both feminist texts and texts criticizing feminism - and come to different conclusions.
  - king_jester 13y ago
    I totally agree. However trying to argue that patriarchy or rape culture doesn't exist would imply that someone doesn't have a even a basic understanding of written feminist works as they go over this in various criticism very often.
- __--__ 13y ago
  Why is this debate not in good faith? Because they disagree with you? Assuming they have no previous knowledge about anything solely because they disagree with you is arrogant and lazy. Don't engage in an exchange of ideas, just paint them as stupid and ignorant and move on, firm in your unchallenged convictions. This point of view you harbor is WHY there can be no debate in good faith.
zem 13y ago
that's like going to a scientific conference and "debating" climate change. there are lots of things that sound questionable and/or debatable simply because you don't know enough about them.
epsylon 13y ago
I'm not debating the existence of extreme opinions among people who label themselves as feminists. I'm just saying that feminists come in all shapes and colors, and, lo and behold, there are a wide range of opinions among them, and (unsurprisingly) many of these opinions are contradictory, just like in any other group of people sharing some basic ideas. I'm also saying that you should not base your opinion of social movement around the views of a kernel of extremists. Specifically, if you think that, as soon as someone introduces herself as a feminist, you think that she will stand by extreme opinions and that your differences are irreconcilable, and therefore is not worth talking to, then perhaps you should try to review your judgements. And I'm also saying that there is a problem with gender equality in our modern societies. Even if you disagree with the methods and propaganda of extremist groups, you should recognize that there is a big problem. And the easiest way to eradicate those extreme opinions is to eradicate the problem that gives a voice to these groups.

king_jester 13y ago

> debate the existence or definition of certain articles of feminist faith such as 'patriarchy' or 'rape culture' This is not a debate in good faith. If you come to the table with no previous knowledge about anything and demand to be heard, why should people waste time with bringing you up to speed? The vast majority of the times this happens it ends up in moving the goal posts.

theorique 13y ago
I'm certainly not suggesting that a person go in completely uninformed, nor that he use misguided or misogynist arguments. But it's completely suitable to refute statistics or conclusions if one has done the appropriate reading - both feminist texts and texts criticizing feminism - and come to different conclusions.
- king_jester 13y ago
  I totally agree. However trying to argue that patriarchy or rape culture doesn't exist would imply that someone doesn't have a even a basic understanding of written feminist works as they go over this in various criticism very often.
__--__ 13y ago
Why is this debate not in good faith? Because they disagree with you? Assuming they have no previous knowledge about anything solely because they disagree with you is arrogant and lazy. Don't engage in an exchange of ideas, just paint them as stupid and ignorant and move on, firm in your unchallenged convictions. This point of view you harbor is WHY there can be no debate in good faith.

zem 13y ago

that's like going to a scientific conference and "debating" climate change. there are lots of things that sound questionable and/or debatable simply because you don't know enough about them.

epsylon 13y ago

I'm not debating the existence of extreme opinions among people who label themselves as feminists. I'm just saying that feminists come in all shapes and colors, and, lo and behold, there are a wide range of opinions among them, and (unsurprisingly) many of these opinions are contradictory, just like in any other group of people sharing some basic ideas. I'm also saying that you should not base your opinion of social movement around the views of a kernel of extremists. Specifically, if you think that, as soon as someone introduces herself as a feminist, you think that she will stand by extreme opinions and that your differences are irreconcilable, and therefore is not worth talking to, then perhaps you should try to review your judgements. And I'm also saying that there is a problem with gender equality in our modern societies. Even if you disagree with the methods and propaganda of extremist groups, you should recognize that there is a big problem. And the easiest way to eradicate those extreme opinions is to eradicate the problem that gives a voice to these groups.