3 ms·
One thing that no one seems to address in these discussions (of which at least one appears every week) is how will feminism actually solve these problems? Actu
by vezzy-fnord 12y ago
One thing that no one seems to address in these discussions (of which at least one appears every week) is how will feminism actually solve these problems?
Actually, I'd like to address this paragraph:
Feminism is not a dirty word. Feminism is the radical notion that women are people, and that we want to be treated as equals. Don’t let someone else pretend otherwise out of their own misguided notions.
The author(s) repeat a very common cliche, and insist on this as the one true definition of feminism. Yet in reality, feminism is splintered, divided into many schools, disagrees on fundamental issues (sex-positivity versus sex-negativity and transgender inclusion versus transgender exclusion, most notably) and is not a coherent movement. The same applies for virtually all ideologies.
Some will repeat that quote, some will say "gender equality", others will go for "women's liberation", "abolition of X concept considered problematic", "separatism" or a variety of other reasons.
Which school do we adopt? Why? How will it change things? Is feminism really that seamless of an ideology that it is the one true way to fix things?
- kevingadd 12y agoDo you have a better solution to propose, then?
- stefantalpalaru 12y agoReplace ideology with logic.
- pgeorgi 12y agoI'd propose to be more careful when throwing "feminism" in the ring - it really is an umbrella term, and it makes it so much harder to discuss things because so much time is wasted looking for where the goal posts reside today. One potential downside is that deconstructing the umbrella also removes that feeling of speaking for a huge majority. I'd consider that a feature because it's a misleading notion.
- detcader 12y agoIndeed. A good post on the shared properties and differences of feminisms: https://culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/shared-girlhood-red-herrings-and-the-creation-of-the-third-wave/ https://culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/share... All women are different, but all women experienced girlhood, and experience male violence. Sadly most in the HN crowd don't have the proper familiarity to understand that kind of nuance.
- detcader 12y ago"sex-positivity versus sex-negativity and transgender inclusion versus transgender exclusion" Presenting a biased view to an audience new to a subject is dishonest. You're using selected terms to groom the readers to the side with the "schools of thought" you agree with. I could use the terms "neoliberalism verses class analysis and genderism verses gender criticism" and we'd still be referring to the same things. Of course, I would never use those terms at HN in the way you used yours, because I value real discourse. Your central point is of course correct: "feminism" is an umbrella term (heck that's the first sentence on the Wikipedia page). Using ignorance of that fact as an opportunity to propagandize is shameful.
- FD3SA 12y agoHe's giving "feminism" far more respect than it's due. Empirically, it is a baseless ideology on par with Astrology, but far more sinister because of its political and economic consequences. In the real world, the study of human behavior resides within the realm of evolutionary biology, with a focus on evolutionary psychology. The empirical principles that govern human behavior are fascinating and complex, but are well understood within the coherent framework of evolutionary biology. "Feminism", and all of its post-modern counterparts are pseudo-intellectual nonsense promulgated by fanatics. But don't take my word for it, here's just one expert's opinion [1]. 1. http://edge.org/memberbio/helena_cronin http://edge.org/memberbio/helena_cronin
- detcader 12y agoYou're incorrect. Except maybe about postmodernism being pseudo-intellectual nonsense, in which case you would be correct only by accident.