|
new phone who dis posted:The original academic aspects of feminism are great. The modern ones are an ever-encroaching system of unprovable dogma that seem designed to seep into every minor facet of life in the most insufferable way possible while being buttressed by the most raw tribalism imaginable. Can you outline some specific ideas you think are good, and some that you think are bad?
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 02:50 |
|
|
new phone who dis posted:The original academic aspects of feminism are great. The modern ones are an ever-encroaching system of unprovable dogma that seem designed to seep into every minor facet of life in the most insufferable way possible while being buttressed by the most raw tribalism imaginable. My original assertion stands. Modern feminism is a loving complex beast and your lack of interest in it, beyond being offended, is really showing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:24
|
|
|
That's not quite true, there's no easy dividing line between new=bad and old=good, even older feminism had its share of batshit stuff (see: scum manifesto). It still doesn't invalidate everything else, you just have to be willing to separate the wheat from the chaff. It's frustrating when you have super-defensive peeps like boner confessor, but feminism is a movement and an evolving ideology, both necessary and desirable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Can you outline some specific ideas you think are good, and some that you think are bad? Well, it's gone back and forth previously on this topic but I think equality of opportunity is great but complaining about equality of outcome can be bad, especially in the modern context. There shouldn't be any barriers for women to pursue whatever career they want or higher education. However, the idea that 50/50 in every employment position is the only acceptable outcome when women clearly choose on their own to go into fields that prevent that outcome is bad. Especially when the explanation for that fact veers into conspiracy theory territory and robs the very women you're trying to speak for of their own agency. At that point it's no longer about attaining equality, but assuring hegemony and total adherence to an ideology regardless of the wants and desires of the people the ideology claims to represent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
Equality of outcome = equality of opportunity, because women are just as capable as men for almost every profession. But that's not what the data shows, so there's clearly some problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:30
|
|
|
rudatron posted:That's not quite true, there's no easy dividing line between new=bad and old=good, even older feminism had its share of batshit stuff (see: scum manifesto). It still doesn't invalidate everything else, you just have to be willing to separate the wheat from the chaff. At a base level all I really want is people who are willing to live the life they want to enforce on other people. This goes for Christians, feminists, whoever. I don't think being critical of hypocrisy and tribalism in certain popular segments of any of those ideologies should be construed as a wholesale rejection of the underlying principles. One of the glaring flaws of modern feminism is that they precisely cannot and will not separate the wheat from the chaff for whatever reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:32
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:Well, it's gone back and forth previously on this topic but I think equality of opportunity is great but complaining about equality of outcome can be bad, especially in the modern context. There shouldn't be any barriers for women to pursue whatever career they want or higher education. However, the idea that 50/50 in every employment position is the only acceptable outcome when women clearly choose on their own to go into fields that prevent that outcome is bad. Especially when the explanation for that fact veers into conspiracy theory territory and robs the very women you're trying to speak for of their own agency. At that point it's no longer about attaining equality, but assuring hegemony and total adherence to an ideology regardless of the wants and desires of the people the ideology claims to represent. That bit I said about you having no interest in anything but the pseudo-academia poo poo that you're already determined to hate? This right here is what I'm getting at. Other posters have answered these assertions in loving detail but this post indicates you're not reading the replies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Equality of outcome = equality of opportunity, because women are just as capable as men for almost every profession. But that's not what the data shows, so there's clearly some problem. No it doesn''t. Humans are not robots. Equality of opportunity does not result in a magical 50/50 stat split on everything because humans aren't easily measurable commodities that fall into their supposed mathematical place. If we were, COmmunism would have triumphed long ago and that's why I use it as an analogy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:Well, it's gone back and forth previously on this topic but I think equality of opportunity is great but complaining about equality of outcome can be bad, especially in the modern context. There shouldn't be any barriers for women to pursue whatever career they want or higher education. However, the idea that 50/50 in every employment position is the only acceptable outcome when women clearly choose on their own to go into fields that prevent that outcome is bad. Especially when the explanation for that fact veers into conspiracy theory territory and robs the very women you're trying to speak for of their own agency. At that point it's no longer about attaining equality, but assuring hegemony and total adherence to an ideology regardless of the wants and desires of the people the ideology claims to represent. So like you don't have any specific theories to point to, got it. Have you ever actually read any feminist theory? Pretty conservative to lust for a return for the past without understanding literally anything. Equality of opportunity is both incredibly nebulous and utterly meaningless if you don't have substantive societal reform. Also, quotas are good, and the only person robbing women of their agency is you. How much choice does a woman or man when patriachal society has socialized them in a sexist manner? Ps. An ideology that views women and men as both being loving people, jesus loving christ, is a good thing, and not so much an ideology as basic human decency, hth
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:33
|
|
|
Somfin posted:That bit I said about you having no interest in anything but the pseudo-academia poo poo that you're already determined to hate? I read every single one, I just didn't agree with them. It veers too far into pseudo-religious dogma and cult-like behavior. You're asked to take shitloads of unprovable things on faith because the ideology demands you to. It's much less an educational experience than one of indoctrination.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:35
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:It veers too far into pseudo-religious dogma and cult-like behavior. But enough about you and gamergate
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:36
|
|
|
stone cold posted:So like you don't have any specific theories to point to, got it. Have you ever actually read any feminist theory? Pretty conservative to lust for a return for the past without understanding literally anything. You sound like a person yelling at me to read the bible more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:I read every single one, I just didn't agree with them. It veers too far into pseudo-religious dogma and cult-like behavior. You're asked to take shitloads of unprovable things on faith because the ideology demands you to. It's much less an educational experience than one of indoctrination. And did you expect them to be that way before you read them?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
i really doubt the guy who seeks out anti-feminist conspiracy theories on reddit has sacked up and plowed through any actual feminist writings yall thats what we in the industry call "a lie"
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:40
|
|
|
stone cold posted:So like you don't have any specific theories to point to, got it. Have you ever actually read any feminist theory? Pretty conservative to lust for a return for the past without understanding literally anything. To put it another way, modern feminist theory needs to be able to survive debate outside of an environment where you take all the tenets of modern feminist theory as givens to begin the argument.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:You sound like a person yelling at me to read the bible more. All I asked is for you to cite specific feminist theories you thought were good and bad; you didn't. This is like coming into a calculus class, and every single session you raise your hand and ask the professor to spend twenty minutes on the times tables.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:To put it another way, modern feminist theory needs to be able to survive debate outside of an environment where you take all the tenets of modern feminist theory as givens to begin the argument. "I'd like to debate the merits of a Diffie-Hellman key exchange...." You: "well what if I do a cipher where I swap out all the a's with s's"
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:43
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:No it doesn''t. Humans are not robots. Equality of opportunity does not result in a magical 50/50 stat split on everything because humans aren't easily measurable commodities that fall into their supposed mathematical place. If we were, COmmunism would have triumphed long ago and that's why I use it as an analogy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
I've always thought that "equality of opportunity" would require a monumental shift to society at least on par with "equality of outcome." Like okay, we want everyone to have the same opportunities in life? Better make sure all schools are equal! All families must have comparable time off and ability to raise their kids! All access to mental healthcare had better be equal as well; how equal are the opportunities of someone with bipolar disorder and someone without? Hell we'd better just go whole hog and all children are shipped off to government child rearing centers at birth to ensure that their formative years are identical. Once you turn 18 and are released with your mandated Brand of Adulthood on the back of your palm it's up to you to meet that equality of outcome! Wait. What thread is this again? Oh yeah, that's right. My dick and balls are adequately sized and I can sit on public transportation without taking up three seats.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
rudatron posted:People don't have to be robots to, in aggregate, have predictable behavior. Statistics would be useless in sociology, psychology and political theory if this were not the case. If some subset of a population has a much greater than chance pertubation from the mean, they're has to be one or a set of causative factors. This is true, but defaulting to "the devil" or "patriarchy" are both equally empty reasons when a multitude of other answers can just as easily fill the void.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:This is true, but defaulting to "the devil" or "patriarchy" are both equally empty reasons when a multitude of other answers can just as easily fill the void. Do you have any actual theories you like or dislikes?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
Great Metal Jesus posted:I've always thought that "equality of opportunity" would require a monumental shift to society at least on par with "equality of outcome." Like okay, we want everyone to have the same opportunities in life? Better make sure all schools are equal! All families must have comparable time off and ability to raise their kids! All access to mental healthcare had better be equal as well; how equal are the opportunities of someone with bipolar disorder and someone without? Hell we'd better just go whole hog and all children are shipped off to government child rearing centers at birth to ensure that their formative years are identical. Once you turn 18 and are released with your mandated Brand of Adulthood on the back of your palm it's up to you to meet that equality of outcome! You're hitting the nail on the head here, my friend. The answer isn't in shallow identity politics that divide us, it's in uniting and striving for the basic things everyone needs to live to be distributed in an equitable fashion. Or, we could complain about the way dudes sit on empty buses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Do you have any actual theories you like or dislikes? Gravity is a great one, has never failed me. I never had a proponent of gravity beating me over the head with it while they were floating around immune to it's effects in front of me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
Great Metal Jesus posted:I've always thought that "equality of opportunity" would require a monumental shift to society at least on par with "equality of outcome." Like okay, we want everyone to have the same opportunities in life? Better make sure all schools are equal! All families must have comparable time off and ability to raise their kids! All access to mental healthcare had better be equal as well; how equal are the opportunities of someone with bipolar disorder and someone without? This all sounds unironically good, so
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:Gravity is a great one, has never failed me. I never had a proponent of gravity beating me over the head with it while they were floating around immune to it's effects in front of me. So you're gonna sit and kvetch about how modern feminism sucks and old academic feminism was great, but you can't enumerate why? You sound exactly like white republicans who love to hate on BLM while citing MLK Jr at them
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
stone cold posted:This all sounds unironically good, so Well at least we finally agree on something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:The answer isn't in shallow identity politics that divide us ...says the guy who has a disturbing, pathological disgust with feminism
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:This is true, but defaulting to "the devil" or "patriarchy" are both equally empty reasons when a multitude of other answers can just as easily fill the void.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:58
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:Well at least we finally agree on something. So how exactly would you mandate educational reform, given your immense lust for screeching about quotas
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:58
|
|
|
stone cold posted:This all sounds unironically good, so Oh yeah, I'm actually for that part. It's somewhere after that that the fever I'm pretty sure I'm coming down with started to take me. It was meant more as a rebuttal to the idea that equality of opportunity is easier than equality of outcome; I think both would enormous challenges and efforts to implement either would end up looking fairly similar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
stone cold posted:So how exactly would you mandate educational reform, given your immense lust for screeching about quotas Education along gender lines has largely been fixed as much as it can in the current cash-based system. More women are already earning degrees than men and getting more educational financial aid to boot. It's no longer a matter of education unless we get real serious and decide that it's time to stop putting people into debt for it and shutting poor people out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 07:00
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Okay, but we also know that gender norms exist, and they have a measurable impact on behavior, even if they're not actually true - there's been a study done which, by telling one group of women that 'women do badly' on that test, and not telling your control group that, the control group will actually perform much better. We also know that studies done to try and prove biological determinism have usually failed, or use dubious methodology, that's later overturned. This is the placebo effect, not the patriarchy. Also, I'm not co-signing on biological determinism, but you don't have to do so to account for the fact that groups of people sometimes make different choices and it's not always because of your chosen ideology.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 07:02
|
|
|
I have to go. I have to go meet some people who hate my unfuckable rear end out in public at a place of merriment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 07:04
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:I have to go. I have to go meet some people who hate my unfuckable rear end out in public at a place of merriment. Don't come back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 07:11
|
|
|
Skippy Granola posted:That's a sticky one though - what really constitutes someone's best interests? This dumb thread is moving fast, but you may be missing the point that people are surprised a woman would vote for trump (not necessarily that they didn't vote for Hillary), because he hates and demeans women. Plus the whole access to healthcare, equal rights thing that makes voting republican contradictory to your self interests, unless you're a very rich woman I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 08:02
|
|
|
I have gigantic balls and an above average penis. My rear end is normal sized. I am able to sit on bus seats with my legs basically closed. Lol at trying to justify people being douchebags cuz of some lame excuse about testicles tho lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 08:06
|
|
|
new phone who dis (and others I guess), who is in effect worse for society today, contemporary feminists or contemporary anti-feminists?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 10:46
|
|
|
Raldikuk posted:I have gigantic balls and an above average penis. My rear end is normal sized. I am able to sit on bus seats with my legs basically closed. Lol at trying to justify people being douchebags cuz of some lame excuse about testicles tho lol You Might get your dick and balls squeezed to gently caress if you cross them legs, But largely i agree. Rude s.o.b's on the train putting their legs and stuff everywhere
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 10:59
|
|
|
The size of my dick + balls prevents people moving in front of me, and takes up seating space on the opposite side of the bus, for seats facing the center, but the people either side of me are fine. How will feminism help me cope with my monster dong?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 02:50 |
|
|
rudatron posted:Rude s.o.b's on the train putting their dick and balls everywhere
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 12:29
|
|