You (plural) haven’t covered them: you’ve dismissed them and/or attempted to justify them, and/or claimed they don’t exist.
The point is to show that feminism is not for equality; it’s for women.
If feminism was for equality, you all would give a shit. You don’t.
OK. Let’s assume for the sake of the argument that women have been “historically oppressed”.
It’s almost 2016. Which legal and social institutions oppress women today?
There’s this one too, of course. ‘Myself and my friends aren’t extremists’. ‘You’re talking about a fringe’. All of that tosh, unsupported and largely irrelevant. Let’s suppose that everyone here is ‘Not That Sort of Feminist’ (that nobody’s just saying so as an exercise in unaccountability, for example). Bravo. By all means be proud of that, and of your place here at SDMB. Which I only stumbled on by chance, never having once seen, heard or read of it in relation to feminism. So there’s no mainstream here, though there may be a benign backwater. Mainstream feminism is out there, active and unequally seeking ‘equality’ (for a given meaning of ‘meaning’…)
And how does ‘I and…yes, him, he’s said so, and her, I know, and look, other posters too’ relate to a discussion of feminism? ‘Only feminists can say what feminism is (and only we can tell you when we don’t need you to do as you’re told anymore. Read your memos!)’ doesn’t sound like an equality movement - it sounds like a priesthood. A cult of victimisation, offerings via patreon (with an eye to state sponsorship).
Rape is one of the most serious crimes a person can commit. In my state, the punishment ranges from 20 years to life in prison. Not too long ago, people were executed for rape.
So far as I can tell, “rape culture” is about redefining rape to include things like drunk sex, and sex a woman later regrets. That trivializes rape.
And this is why both sides are always talking past each other in these threads. There’s so much bullshit that grants rotten women a pass on in this society. If they can manipulate feminist doctrine to get it: “I’m oppressed!” they will. If they can fall back on the compensatory privileges from the patriarchy: “I’m a delicate little flower” they will. They’ll switch gears without a thought, because it’s not about adhering to one set of convictions,. it’s all about getting what they want no matter what, just like any rotten person does.
I’d like to address this as a case-by case thing, just as when minorities play the race card: this is NOT an indictment of an entire race or sex, nor their struggle: it’s one bad individual and we need to shut his or her shit down. But that’s easier said than done.
I do have to criticize feminists because, so many times, you won’t hear* “I am a feminist and is an abuse of feminism,”* but there will always be a chorus of *“Oh you go girl!” *so in answer to **QuickSilver **, with respect: feminists may not have the responsibility to correct this, but they do have the most credibility to do so. If they please would. Not according to my biased sensitivities, but a reasonable person would expect that to happen at least once in a while, you’d think?
What’s up with that? The “don’t air dirty laundry” doctrine?
Feminism is for both. I understand we disagree what feminism is, and this is unlikely to be bridged. But considering that most of the feminists I know and read about are much closer to my version than to yours, we’re not going to stop calling ourselves feminists.
Do you have anything to say to these feminists, like me, who are confident in our feminism that’s very different from your version of feminism, aside from “you’re not real feminists”?
Do you mean the women that are incapacitated to the point that they are unable to understand that they are having sex that you were talking about earlier?
Excluded middle much? Factoring in non-merit criteria doesn’t mean merit doesn’t count. And it doesn’t mean the only goal of higher education is to help the underclass.
This statement makes no sense if you’re looking at net gains. If diversity admissions result in the matriculation of more men than would have otherwise occurred, then it is inarguable that it collectively helps them a lot.
And honestly, if someone ends us not *getting into school at all *because they were “displaced by a diversity candidate” then they obviously aren’t trying very hard and thus, are probably not a very competitive student.
But it’s not illegal, so what are you talking about? Men are gaining entry into college with grades and test scores that their female counterparts (whites or otherwise) are not. Many white men persist in ignoring this reality because it causes a bunch of cognitive dissonance, but I don’t know how much longer heads can stay in the sand here. According to the article I cited earlier, AA for men has been going on for years and yet consistently white men portray AA as something that is anti-white male.
I’m not incredulous, actually. I understand perfectly well why white men might be relunctant to acknowledge that they benefit from the same very initiatives they have long derided as unfair and discriminatory. Human psychology being what it is, this is to be expected. But it is fascinating to watch the cognitive dissonance play out.
So I’m curious. Do you want colleges to stop giving admission points to men in the interest of diversity? If this stopped happening and campuses became overwhelmingly female overnight, would you be okay with this trend? Or should we be concerned about how this might effect social stability? I’m thinking of all those suicidal middle aged whites we are talking about in another thread.
Or you could just tell me what your response would be. I mean, if I wrong in my conclusions, surely you can do a better job than this in telling me why.
MIT is close to 50% women now. It’s something they’ve worked hard at for some time. They have special dorms for women, and a special admissions program.
And frankly, if I were in charge of MIT, I’d want the student body to as close to 50/50 as possible. MIT doesn’t make it’s admissions decisions easily accessible (or at least I couldn’t find them), but according to at least one source, a female applicant is about two and half times as likely to get in: “in 2011 the acceptance rate for women was 26% and for men was 10%.”
And frankly, if I was in charge of MIT, I’d do the same thing. Not because I’m pro-affirmative action, but because I’d be pro-MIT: MIT is a better school if the student body has an approximate 1:1 ratio. It’s a better school both for women and for men, but especially for men. And if you’re looking to draw the best applicants possible, you want a school where there are women, because most high school boys want to go to a college where there are women for them to meet.
I assume that what’s true for MIT is true for other schools as well.
I suspect that’s why women’s colleges have consortiums with other schools: because the girls and women who go to those schools want a chance to meet guys and men.
A school that’s 65% women and 35% men (like the one in your link) might be a great school to go to if you’re a guy; probably not so great if you’re a woman.
If you were a (heterosexual) HS student, and you’re looking at which college to go to, do you really want to go to a school where girls outnumber guys 2:1?
Yes, colleges that historically have been predominantly male try their best to entice female students for the sake of diversity. My own alma mater (Ga Tech) does the same.
But the cite I provided shows that when you look at colleges as a group, admitting more males is of greater concern. So you see men getting in with less stellar qualifications than women. MIT and Ga Tech are outliers.
So doesn’t this undermine your argument that feminism has caused society to ignore the educational well-being of males? Feminism has helped society understand the importance of gender diversity, and encourages us to challenge the status quo. Without it, MIT would still be a sausage fest–a prospect you yourself find undesirable.
A hell of a lot fewer than almost 1916, but the following possibilities come to mind:
Resume discrimination (doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211286109)
Mandatory ultrasound laws
Penalizing women for negotiating higher salaries (doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.001)
Unequal childcare allocation when both parents work (and unequal opportunity; right or wrong, fathers may not have the same leave options as mothers)
Your thesis that men are the “best applicants” for MIT does not appear to be supported by fact.
But leaving that aside for the moment, your assumption that male students are incapable of thinking about anything but getting laid is quite demeaning to men, and young men in particular. Why you would so contemptuously perpetuate such a harmful stereotype is beyond me.
Very well. Let’s try to remedy that.
Could not agree more. Rotten people will game whatever system they can use to their advantage.
Also completely agree. Easier said than done and far too little is said or done about these individual cases. For my part, I try to call out bullshit whenever I smell it. I’ve no doubt you do as well. What else can be done to encourage this sort of calling out of b.s.?
It’s completely understandable that you would expect this to happen and of course calling a spade a spade is the right thing to do. But the cynic in me wonders if human nature prohibits this from occuring with the frequency and volume that it ought to. In other words, is it fair to single out feminists for the failing of humanity in general? Additionally, I would ask you this: Is it aggression rather than stupidy that causes more people to be carried with the flow of whatever socio-political trend du jour? I’d argue most people (feminists included) are intellectually lazy and it’s the latter, not the former.
I agree.
Feminists, not so much:
Robin Morgan: “I feel that man-hating is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.”
Mary Daly: “If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males.”
Sally Miller Gearhart: “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.”
Andrea Dworkin: “All personal, psychological, social, and institutionalized domination on this earth can be traced back to its source: the phallic identities of men”
Over and over we call you out on the blatant logical fallacy that your entire world is based on.
Over and over, you just keep doing it.
You are clearly not here to prove anything, just to make yourself feel good.
As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position.
As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position.
As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position.
As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly con… Wait! Is she calling all men dicks?!
Happy?..
I’ll second all this.
Tell me this, Jack, would you be equally as likely to go around telling atheists what their policies, beliefs and leaders are while at once dismissing their thoughts on the matter?
Just wondering because it seems that your prefered form of argument is to presume that you already know the answer while implying that everyone else is lying to you about their’s.
Thirded.
(With one exception: I agree with Morgan’s underlying thesis that “the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” I disagree with her misandric application of it.)
Ah, abuse. Not very original abuse, mind, which is a tad disappointing coming from someone claiming to be a professional wordsmith.
And perhaps someday you’ll succeed.
Any chance of demonstrating it?
I am truly honored to have been judged worthy.
I don’t speak for all “feminists”, but I find it hard to believe your stated predilection for “treating everyone around with me with compassion and generosity” when the evidence at hand suggests a more frequently-realized predilection for talking down to everyone in this thread, and particularly women.
How amusing to be accused of leaping to the wrong conclusion while watching you do that very thing three times in rapid succession.
Thank you for the doughnut. I know just where I can stuff it.