Zaryi wrote:
I really was going to stay out of this, but I want to address this and your last post. You realize there are different branches of feminist theory and she's really not representitve of the movement of whole/the mainstream? I'm so tired of people dismissing feminism because of a few extreme examples.
The fact that there are "different branches of feminist theory" proves one salient truth about the whole mess: it's an ideology of whims...in just the same way libertarianism is a philosophy of ignorance.
Feminists can't agree on what they want because their only common ground is that they want stuff.
By way of comparison to other ideological movements: are there different branches of communist theory, or democratic theory, or religious theory? Yes, but they have something in common that feminists don't have in common, which is a set of basic beliefs and principles. So, what feminists have, instead of that, is "cynical idealism". Whims.
Zaryi wrote:
Seriously, it's as bad as dismissing the Civil Rights movement because of Militant Black Groups, or Islam because of institutions like the Taliban. (ps:
this is probably closer to her ideology)
Your analogy is correct, but interpreted correctly, it proves feminism a sham.
All the movements you named have their bad apples. But all those movements you named, also achieved their legitimate objectives a long time ago.
Every progressive movement has its hardcore. When the movement achieves its objectives, and becomes institutionalized, that hardcore meanders further into bureacratism and radicalism in an effort to stay relevant. The Black Panthers, or the Iranian religious police, or the Chinese Communist Party, or the various hijinks Christians have put on over the years, are excellent examples of this.
Radicalism can make itself appealing to mainstream society only through demagoguery. Appeal to the lowest common denominator: you can have it all, for free, and all your problems are someone else's fault. That's what feminism has done, just like every other radical movement that has succeeded in going mainstream: Nazism, the Christian Coalition, Ron Paul, libertarianism, etc.
Feminism does evil in this world because the movement has outlived its usefulness and sunk into radicalism and demagoguery in an effort to stay relevant. Since the movement is obsolete and exists only for cynical reasons, there are no good feminists left.
Zaryi wrote:
Quote:
I really don't get feminism. I mean I understand what it is, but I don't get it. I guess because what would truly make me happy would be to be a housewife and mother for the rest of my life. That's not really cohesive with feminist ideals, from what I've gathered.
Most feminists (myself included) would be 100% okay with this and would fully support this. Feminism is about giving women the *choice* to pursue a career with equal viability that a man might have, or raise children, or WHATEVER.
This sounds reasonable, but it isn't.
1. Women can't pursue a career with equal viability because they get pregnant and have periods. And they aren't as proficient with most work-related skills as men...women are physically weaker, they are significantly inferior in math and critical thinking, they are not as tough or aggressive as men, they tend to react emotionally where men react logically.
This is why I say feminism is a product of the free market. The free market is a sham because of human nature, people aren't going to just accept life's inherent unfairness sitting down, they're going to organize to fight it...previously, that 'organization' meant the social mores of men working and women keeping house, but when the country bought into this "anything goes" garbage, obviously, human nature reared its head, women tried to even the odds and now there's feminism.
Now maybe you want to say you want equality of opportunity. Feminists don't want equality of opportunity, they want equality of outcomes. You can't talk about "some" feminists etc because what defines the movement is not what people say but what it does. Show me the feminist who supports Selective Service for women, or who opposes alimony. That feminist just doesn't exist.
2. The choices of individual women don't take place in a vacuum. A two-paycheck household has an absolute advantage over a one-paycheck household. This is a major cause of inflation in American society. Now even if some other woman would prefer to stay home, she can't, because higher prices, driven by the higher earning power of two-paycheck households, make that option non-viable.
And you can't pretend that any significant number of women can be both competitive in the workplace and fully on-the-ball with children and home. Time is limited, and something's got to give. Does the child have a "choice" in this equation? Who pays the social costs incurred by women who decide to work at the cost of their child's care?
3. The equality you speak of is fundamentally unequal because men don't have those same options no matter how much feminists like to pretend they could or should. A woman can always choose to be a housewife, a man can't make that same choice period, the reason being the differences in sexual and human economy driven by the biological differences between the sexes. Woman decides to work, puts man out of job - you can't tell that man to now become a housemaker, a choice the woman had all along...
This is why feminism is a radical ideology, in the same sense libertarianism and communism are - it's a willful denial of how the world actually works, substituting ideology for common sense. It's no coincidence that "feminist scholars" produce mountains of self-citing "research" to try to blabber their way around the realities of life that are obvious to everyone else.
Zaryi wrote:
YES THERE ARE ISSUES WITH THE SYSTEM, AND YES MEN GET THE SHORT END OF THE STICK IN SOME INSTANCES, BUT SERIOUSLY. We haven't even been able to vote for 100 years. Jesus christ.
Mayo already hard-countered this point, and really, that you even made it (in caps!) is enough to show feminism for the sham it is.
Zaryi wrote:
inb4 Aestu "refutes" my entire post by calling me brainwashed/stupid/etc
And I didn't. What now? What have you to say for yourself? You were wrong, sup?