Weeping Sore Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 Does defending the patriarchy count as self-defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 Does defending the patriarchy count as self-defense? Yes, but you can't say it like THAT... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Crashing Waves Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 The patriarchy is a myth, just like science and depression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karaddin Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 And you guys think feminists like me are the ones with a problem with our sense of humour, wtf is that supposed to be other than boring and dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Of House Hill Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 And you guys think feminists like me are the ones with a problem with our sense of humour, wtf is that supposed to be other than boring and dumb. This is one of those times I really miss the 'like' button. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna Stark Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Hah, it may be time to have a discussion on prejudices against feminists. I can probably participate some time in 2016 with current work and family situation, but still. It's a discussion worth having. I wonder if I can pretend to be at a conference for a few days.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deleted01 Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Here's a link to my latest article, which some of you may find interesting. It's in response to another article, posted in my old university paper. The original article, full of misconceptions and just utter bollocks, was disturbing and frustrating. While I still feel under-qualified to write in depth about these issues, I couldn't resist this time. http://www.readwave.com/feminism-is-confused-because-you-keep-confusing-it_s68641 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Crashing Waves Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 And what is feminism? My definition doesn't seem to be much different to that of the standard definition, though I know there are others here who are more than qualified to put me straight. Feminism is the idea that women and men are equals, which you'd have to be a caveman not to agree with. I think the conflict starts when the notion that both genders are the same is put forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Castel,So...if I have a party I can now call the police to do my searching for me as a private property owner (real police, not campus police-I have no idea what's going on there)? When am I entitled to do this? 5 people? Ten? If I own a business? If I can pick up the phone? When can the police refuse me? And is this just limited to carry permits?No. But you could certainly call the police to remove someone from your property who refuses to leave and is carrying a firearm or who refuses to tell you if they are carrying a firearm.TP,Wow. I'm quite surprised the State would require a school to allow firearms on campus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna Stark Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Feminism is the idea that women and men are equals, which you'd have to be a caveman not to agree with. I think the conflict starts when the notion that both genders are the same is put forward.Which hasn't been put forward seriously by a lot of feminists as far as I know. It seems like a misunderstanding of constructivism to me. Even for someone really sold on gender as performance, that just doesn't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Crashing Waves Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 As far as you know. The feminist tag has been spread too thin and means different things to different people. I can understand why certain people, men and women, are a bit hostile towards the term at this point. The true cause of it has been diluted. I'm not trying to start shit. I'm in full support of the movement I'm just offering feedback on what I see and hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna Stark Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 As far as I know yes, and as far as the feminists I've read know too. Feminism is an academic subject after all, and even if I don't have a degree in it, I've read my fair share of both academic and popular texts in the area. I am fairly well acquainted with the waves, trends and main schools of thought. I have a fairly good understanding of essentialism vs constructivism.Nowhere is the point that genders are the same. For essentialists the exact opposite is true. For a constructivist the entire statement lacks meaning, and for us more Serano inclined third-wavers, nobody is trying to claim gender is the same since that is both a silly thing to claim as well as a very probable terminology confusion.Still, no school of feminist thought I know claims to support this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Crashing Waves Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Well, you're referring to a very educated and thoughtful minded part of the crowd. You're turning a blind eye towards the dumbasses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrackerNeil Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Well, you're referring to a very educated and thoughtful minded part of the crowd. You're turning a blind eye towards the dumbasses. So feminism is defined by the stupidest people who espouse it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Crashing Waves Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Not necessarily, but the stupidest people are often the loudest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna Stark Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Not necessarily, but the stupidest people are often the loudest. Which ones are you referring to in particular? Because most feminists I know of who have published texts are not particularly stupid at all. I mean are you thinking Judith Butler? Simone de Beauvoir? Betty Friedan? Mary Wollstonecraft? Julia Serano? Lucy Stone? bell hooks? Audre Lorde? Andrea Dworkin? These, and many more, are extremely influential feminists. There seems to be some sort of odd ideas floating around the feminism is organised by secret mobs in some dark corners of the world, while really a lot of the very influential works are first and foremost academic, or political (which is very common among especially first wave feminists - these women wrote very political texts). In other words: to claim that feminism is "too waterered down", that it doesn't mean anything, or that the people who have been most influential are the stupidest is complete and utter ignorance. The only recipe to counter that is to sit down and get informed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted October 17, 2014 Author Share Posted October 17, 2014 Here's a link to my latest article, which some of you may find interesting. It's in response to another article, posted in my old university paper. The original article, full of misconceptions and just utter bollocks, was disturbing and frustrating. While I still feel under-qualified to write in depth about these issues, I couldn't resist this time. http://www.readwave.com/feminism-is-confused-because-you-keep-confusing-it_s68641 I'm glad you spoke up against an article that is so wrong (based on your quotes of that article). I hope it gets circulated to the same audience who has been exposed to the original article. The only item I would make a suggestion of is your attempt to classify feminists who might say that looking at women's naked picture is equivalent to raping women with their eyes are typically considered "radical feminists." I get what you're trying to say, but the term "radical" has a specific meaning in the context of feminism as it is the name for one strain of feminism. Also, I think it comes across a little but as throwing one group of feminists under the bus. There are actually some legitimate arguments to be made about violation of a woman's space through ogling and leering. I think a better way to phrase that might be to say that while it is more than likely that some feminists will support that claim, the claim itself is often taken out of context and misunderstood by the people criticizing it. Or, perhaps, to present that it's not necessary to agree with ALL the variants within feminism to agree with the central message of equality, just like one doesn't have to agree with all the court rulings to support fairness in criminal proceedings. But otherwise, keep up the good work and make your voice heard! :) ETA: Ser Scot: You're surprised? I'm not. The only surprise is that it's Utah and not Arizona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
First of the First Men Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 As far as I know yes, and as far as the feminists I've read know too. Feminism is an academic subject after all, and even if I don't have a degree in it, I've read my fair share of both academic and popular texts in the area. I am fairly well acquainted with the waves, trends and main schools of thought. I have a fairly good understanding of essentialism vs constructivism.Nowhere is the point that genders are the same. For essentialists the exact opposite is true. For a constructivist the entire statement lacks meaning, and for us more Serano inclined third-wavers, nobody is trying to claim gender is the same since that is both a silly thing to claim as well as a very probable terminology confusion.Still, no school of feminist thought I know claims to support this. I think what Cold Crashing Waves means is simply what you call the constructivist point of view, i. e. not "genders are the same" but "sexes are the same", sex being the biological term and gender the cultural one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna Stark Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I think what Cold Crashing Waves means is simply what you call the constructivist point of view, i. e. not "genders are the same" but "sexes are the same", sex being the biological term and gender the cultural one. No. That is not what it means at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lily Valley Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Zabzie, I'm late to the party here on your same sex school question. In New Orleans, the best schools are Catholic. All but one of the Catholic high schools is same sex. Most of the elementary schools are co-ed but there are one or 2 all girls schools. The tradition here is to keep the kids together until either middle or high school. At that time parents have a pretty good selection of the "type" of single aex school they'd like. There are 5 high achools for boys and 7 for girls. All of the high schools have at least one parner school that shares after school activities and regular mixers. By that time the kids have a pretty good coed social network anyway. Each school has a different focus and style that can accomodate most children. Several of these schools have been delivering a classical education for over 100 years. My biggest regret was not moving my son to a boys school in 5th grade. The particular school was completely designed for active, competitve boys. Kids were encouraged to argue instead of punished for it through active debate. They are encouraged to move around the room and ask questions through lab-based science courses. They were encouraged to run around through an intense and well funded sports program. In addition, each high schooler mentored a middle schooler after completing training on leadership and mentoring. It was considered a privelege and a mark of transition for the older boys. Would have been perfect for my son. Hell on a quiet studious child. Go with the best school for your daughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.