#Feminism

Discuss the news, current events, politics, etc.

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Brenden » 11 March 2015, 13:10

There are different generations of feminism, each one tackling a different problem.

The latest, having not many problems left thanks to the success of their forebears, seems to be locked into an unending war with "mens' rights" straw men.
ImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 6491
+1s received: 1400
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby xyz72 » 11 March 2015, 13:13

Ethan wrote:
xyz72 wrote:
Ethan wrote:
xyz72 wrote:#FEMINISM? That's not how the English language works.



If you have nothing interesting to post on this thread, then just shut the heck up....

So why do you have 27 posts, then?



Because I post relevant posts unlike you, and I am not that active on the forums...Are those 1897 posts you made relevant enough or are they just spam?


:rofl:
xyz72
 
Posts: 3923
+1s received: 30
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:50
Country: Germany (de)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Mod » 12 March 2015, 00:05

Brenden wrote:There are different generations of feminism, each one tackling a different problem.

The latest, having not many problems left thanks to the success of their forebears, seems to be locked into an unending war with "mens' rights" straw men.


From another forum:

Apple Cider wrote:First wave feminism was women's suffrage (so turn of the century), second wave was women's liberation in the 60s-70s (so think porn wars, birth control, civils rights stuff) and third wave is everything from 90s onwards, which is a lot of including much more complex ideological concerns like trans women (2nd wave was notoriously transmisogynistic) and including more women of color (though womanism has always existed due to feminism being very white-centered in many parts).


[Reveal] Spoiler: "Discussion cont."
tberton wrote:It's also worth noting that those terms and time periods are necessarily simplified shorthand, connected to specific movements and places. "First wave feminism" was by no means the first time women argued for their rights and "third wave feminism" is a notoriously loose construction, since there's a ton of complexity in current feminist discourse. I think some people even argue that we're really more in a "fourth wave" right now.


itsamoose wrote:So am I right in assuming the difference is just the time period, or were the movements different somehow? Certainly I imagine the specifics/goals were different, but it seems like each new wave is really just a broadening of the goals rather than a deviation from them. Maybe I'm putting too much emphasis on the actual description, but I've heard a number of people reference the waves as if they were some distinct thing, i.e. First wave was suffrage, second wave was workplace equality, etc, the way that say the civil rights movement in the U.S., while ongoing, refers to a specific time period and set of goals.


Merus wrote:I think it's more of a differentiation. The panel talked about 'rebranding', actually; they pointed out that suffragette was a term of derision, as was 'women's libbers', so rebranding feminism takes away some of its cultural power to avoid the structural backlash that'll happen no matter what you call it. Tara Moss noted that when she performs talks about feminism, she gets few hands from her audience from people identifying as feminist, but most of the room agrees with feminism's goals. Anita Sarkeesian put forward the notion that just privately agreeing with the importance of women's rights isn't really enough. Advocacy is needed, and that appears to be the sticking point.


Which I think is a fair summary of what feminism has been and where its at now.




Interesting discussion here.



Edit: Of all the things to respond to.
Last edited by Mod on 12 March 2015, 10:36, edited 1 time in total.
Money can't buy happiness; but we'll sell it to you anyway.
Mod
 
Posts: 3157
+1s received: 149
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:26

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Brenden » 12 March 2015, 01:02

I think we're several years into the fourth wave.
ImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 6491
+1s received: 1400
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby MilkyWay » 13 March 2015, 07:10

I think most people I know are ex-feminists now. We still have the same views (that some would say are feminist views, like supporting equality), but we've learned that issues aren't necessary just felt by one gender.

I think feminism has been really successful in generating awareness for women's issues and putting western society in a position where we are now trying to tackle them.

I do not believe feminism has done anything significant to support men, and I do not believe feminism is about everyone's equality. It's about equality in the sense it wants to help women in areas they are put at a disadvantage, which is fair enough. It is not about men's rights, and people shouldn't think it is.

Men's issues are serious, and it's a shame our society largely sees men as disposable providers (if you can't provide for your family, then you're essentially useless. It's an idea that has remained throughout history, while the role of women has changed thanks to feminism - which is a good thing for women and society). It's frustrating that many outspoken feminists use their platform to make sweeping statements about men as a class, even though there have been studies that say men share less in common identity-wise with their gender than they do with things that aren't relative to them (for example, the suggestion is that men are *generally* predisposed to supporting women's rights than they are of their own - and in fact go as far as to dismiss their own issues).

I don't really agree with patriarchy theory, since it basically contradicts itself (we have feminists that claim men suffer because of the patriarchy, which doesn't make sense since the patriarchy is a supposed system that is to benefit men and oppress women) when feminist figures try to argue that men suffer under 'patriarchy' as well. It also doesn't really take into account really important historical and sociological differences throughout history - such as why women didn't have the right to vote and assumptions that men set up a system where they maliciously gave power to themselves to dominate women (A main reason why women didn't have the vote was because they were not expected to serve in the army. Most men didn't actually get the vote until it was decided that if your life was going to be put at risk to fight for your country, you deserved to elect the leaders/representatives you fought for. Some people see this as -- historically -- the responsibility behind the vote - fyi I'm not trying to justify women not having the vote).

Critics of feminism have argued that feminist figures demand for changes that benefit women without really giving them power or responsibility - and in some cases shift the responsibility onto men, thus actually putting men at a disadvantage (see: politics surrounding relationships, childbirth, and where the husband in a heterosexual relationship loses his right to not have a child after sexual intercourse --- side note: the issue regarding child birth should be less of a problem in the near future since 'the pill' for men is being developed, thus giving men more power and responsibility over their own bodies AND the right to choose when/if they have a child by using their own contraception besides condoms).

I can't really get excited about the men's rights movement or feminism because each of them have a branch of politics associated with them and in my opinion, neither of them have given the answer/solution everyone on this planet needs.
I just love milk.
User avatar
MilkyWay
 
Posts: 16
Joined: 20 February 2015, 04:04
Country: Australia (au)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 16 March 2015, 07:42

Mod wrote:Interesting discussion here.



Edit: Of all the things to respond to.

Anita Sarkeesian? Eww. She's a complete fraud.

___

I found this both hilarious and sad.

Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 7433
+1s received: 1517
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Quoewlh » 16 March 2015, 08:25

Mod wrote:


Image
Quoewlh
 
Posts: 203
+1s received: 4
Joined: 3 March 2015, 16:21
Country: Netherlands (nl)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Ciniselli » 16 March 2015, 09:11

Anita Sarkeesian is indeed an extremely dubious standard bearer for feminism, but I'd be suspicous about trusting the opinion of someone who does not know what the word "neoliberal" means.

I found this both hilarious and sad.


Christina Sommers is awesome :). Who Stole Feminism? is really worth a read for anyone interested in this subject.
Nonsense, I have not yet begun to defile myself.
User avatar
Ciniselli
 
Posts: 311
+1s received: 3
Joined: 8 March 2015, 16:17
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Mod » 18 March 2015, 11:07

poolerboy0077 wrote:Anita Sarkeesian? Eww. She's a complete fraud.

___

I found this both hilarious and sad.




Here's a hipster having fun with one of that woman's videos.



As to that other guy I don't think a bad faith rambly video almost solely of personal attacks does this thread or your argument any credit.
Money can't buy happiness; but we'll sell it to you anyway.
Mod
 
Posts: 3157
+1s received: 149
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:26

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 18 March 2015, 16:37

Mod wrote:Here's a hipster having fun with one of that woman's videos.



It's hard to find it humorous with the amount of eyerolls it induces.
Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 7433
+1s received: 1517
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Brenden » 18 March 2015, 16:49

I'm confused. This American Enterprise Institute woman... do you find her eyeroll-inducing, hilarious, etc or the feminist things she's rebutting?
ImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 6491
+1s received: 1400
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Mod » 18 March 2015, 23:23

I find her at least within the context of that original video to be eye rolling and sigh inducing.

[Reveal] Spoiler: In relation to these specific videos..
I think that in an industry environment that has over the past decade been described by data of varying levels of legitimatecy as "Bigger than Hollywood" its embarrassing that we can't really reach the same amount of variation of film that Hollywood produces while big film studios still have problems with representation.
Quentin Tarantino (I think) once compared an environment of only big budget action films to be similar to a chemist selling only viagra and horse tranquilizer.
I find it strange that nearly twenty years later with gaming previously being celebrated as a recognised art form that the backlash response to art style critics is to say that games are just products and that they're the way they are because of the players that buy the games. Despite the increasingly risk averse, exploitative way that big studios conduct themselves in.
Whether these people attempt to de-construct the nature of an industry that routinely declares certain genres (adventure games, classic RPGs) to be dead while mishandling the few 'niche' genres they do still put out (Dungeon Keeper, Sim City) or whether they simply hold their hands up and say that "truly there are no players left for those markets" 1 remains to be seen ;)

To put it more bluntly saying "well duh its what people want" seems disingenuous/tone deaf in an environment where that's said all the time and is repeatedly trumped when people attempt to address deficiencies in gaming by making games that are different from the established norm.

The ultimate irony is that consumer arguments against niche games in this current environment comes across as the Borg Collective decrying niche indie developers for attempting to become their own Borg Collective. Despite the fact that being niche indie developers likely means that they will exist in an environment of diversity and that diversity can include Borg C. games if it wants to be.
Borg gamer arguments imply that domination of one sort is harmful but that they are fine with styles of domination that suit them.
The underlying problems just seem magnified now that people are talking about women or 'female perspective' 2 games in this environment rather than adventure games or traditional RTS.

That AAA publishers are now being looked at uncritically because they support the Borgs in these debates is also a great source of embarrassment given how often Borgers have hated AAA for previous arguments that didn't revolve around women (butchering Mass Effect endings, shitting on Sim City, etc.). What has AAA suddenly become a paragon of virtue simply because it can't be bothered putting female player models in their games or having male players be anything but brown haired thirty somethings? AAA is looking out for itself, the more people fight against trying things differently the less effort they have to put into their games and the more profit they can wring out. But fuck, watch out for those women and hipster liberals they're like totally everything wrong in gaming. Lets just ignore that gaming has been kinda shitty for a while now and those hipsters and women aren't exactly the ones calling the shots behind those decisions.

1. Despite overwhelming success in crowd funded projects when the forerunners of these genres announce a return to those games -any Double Fine or InXile game- or when traditional publishing done right leads to big success -Cities: Skylines.

2. A complete misnomer really, you don't have to be a chick to enjoy weird niche games and you don't have to be queer or 'hipster' -something proven to me when I see how many hardcore comp. (CS:Go, NS2, anything which involves skill and shooting in multiplayer) gamers play games described that way- but its an USvsTHEM narrative that can be swallowed easily by the converted.


While I'm here here's an interesting article that examines issues related to feminism and identity. Specifically it relates to the ability for members of an establishment to co-opt "oppression" as a metaphor because talk of oppression has become unmoored from actual harm.

It Eats Everything.
Money can't buy happiness; but we'll sell it to you anyway.
Mod
 
Posts: 3157
+1s received: 149
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:26

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Fellonme » 19 March 2015, 11:46

Good video about the true nature of feminism and why it has a tendency to make stuff up, while being misandrist at the same time.



Socialism, of course, being the ideology that has closest ties with mass murder(even more so than hideous Islam) and continues to destroy lives and economies all over the world.
User avatar
Fellonme
 
Posts: 18
Joined: 11 August 2013, 23:39

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Burns » 19 March 2015, 20:28

Fellonme wrote:Good video about the true nature of feminism and why it has a tendency to make stuff up, while being misandrist at the same time.



Socialism, of course, being the ideology that has closest ties with mass murder(even more so than hideous Islam) and continues to destroy lives and economies all over the world.


What on earth...

All I will say is that you and that quack of a blogger from the fucking reactionary National Review are why the US is ranked worse than virtually every democratic-socialist country in categories relating to well being of our people. Socialism and fascism aren't the same thing, but the right-wing and moronic of the US are becoming increasing difficult to distinguish. I'm no fan of feminism myself, but you are the reason that everyone who doesn't identify as a feminist is labeled a misogynist just like everyone who identifies as feminist is labeled a feminazi. The discussion gets bogged down by extremist lunatics like yourself so I invite you to please have a seat at the kids table with the feminazis, and let the grown ups have a meaningful conversation.
User avatar
Burns
 
Posts: 122
+1s received: 14
Joined: 11 February 2013, 23:58
Country: United States (us)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby MilkyWay » 20 March 2015, 02:24

Karen Straughan is amazing, but it makes me uncomfortable when people think they can just shaft feminism off as 'socialism in disguise' - because that would be just like me saying the MRM is libertarianism (which might I add can be equally dreadful to totalitarian socialist regimes).

My eyes roll with the power of a thousand suns when people make silly, unhelpful political statements that don't serve much of a purpose than to spread misinformation.

edit: I might also add that Socialism has been involved with some of the worst and some of the best cases involving human rights, living standards, employment, etc. It's just such a broad ideology that it's going to differ depending on what culture, country, or aspects you personally subscribe to -- Just like how Australian democracy is different to American democracy.
I just love milk.
User avatar
MilkyWay
 
Posts: 16
Joined: 20 February 2015, 04:04
Country: Australia (au)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Ciniselli » 20 March 2015, 05:17

I do question the extent of Karen Straughan's understanding of feminism, as her engagement with it does seem to be quite limited. In particular, the idea that it is necessarily socialism (gasp), and then to go on as if that would necessarily be a criticism even if it were true.... yeah, I don't think it follows.

The only real entry requirement for calling yourself a feminist is some kind of belief that a women's movement of some form is needed in the contemporary world. This works if only because someone who doesn't think that can pretty reliably be said to not be a feminist.

Once you have that basic common ground, the truth is that feminism breaks down on far, far, far more divisions than simply "waves" or generations. Feminists even of the same generation extensively disagree on what it means for someone to be "objectified", and whether that is necessarily a bad thing - an issue which was right at the heart of the sex wars and is still ongoing. They disagree on how they think power functions in society and what the best ways to challenge it are (just as historians and political scientists do, indeed you will find feminists discussing this broadly along the lines of their disciplinary background). They disagree on the relationship between women's rights and other civil rights causes. They disagree on just about everything people can disagree on. Hence why criticising "feminism" as if it is one party or group of people is akin to nailing jelly to a wall.

(and while we're at it, the same applies even moreso to socialism. So conflating the two together as Straughan does imho does not have a great amount of validity.)

The kind of feminism largely being criticised in this thread - the familiar ones who talk about "privilege" and proudly spout endless jargon - are feminists who describe themselves as "intersectional." Intersectionality, put very simply, is the idea that all forms of minority oppression are basically the same. Either that they directly related by common ideas and institutions ("white heteropatriarchy" being the standard culprit) or just that they function in exactly the same way. So when you talk about manifestations of racism, the same will automatically apply to transphobia, or misogyny etc.

My tone probably conveys my skepticism about this, but there are some ideas mixed up in it which have merit. Before you can even go into that however, you have to take into account that it has effectively become a meme. The endless jargon and "problematization" of words that normal people can understand have become like badges of honour for people to wear, and show how "in" and "aware" they are. Even the original ideas - which have enough problems on their own - have become hysterical and often venomous funhouse distortions popularized by people like Anita Sarkeesian and the tumblratti. Someone on this forum recently posted an excellent blog on "critique drift" which pretty much describes how this ends up happening:

http://fredrikdeboer.com/2015/03/10/critique-drift/
Nonsense, I have not yet begun to defile myself.
User avatar
Ciniselli
 
Posts: 311
+1s received: 3
Joined: 8 March 2015, 16:17
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Fellonme » 20 March 2015, 10:26

worse than virtually every democratic-socialist country in categories relating to well being of our people. Socialism and fascism aren't the same thing, but the right-wing and moronic of the US are becoming increasing difficult to distinguish.


Socialism, like fascism, communism, democracy are aspects of statism. They are all the same cancers of collectivism.

Statism is based on tax theft under the threat of kidnapping or death, it is no coincidence that it is the biggest cause of unnatural death -



which is why it is inherently immoral, why it disrupts the free market - the only path to prosperity for the greatest number of people, why it cements poverty through welfare programs, why it destroys jobs through unions and licensing.

I really urge you to stop thinking in these simplistic, cartoonish terms of left/right/conservative/progressive and delve into the heart of the matter-




Every ruination of society, every economic deprivation we see in the world right now(especially in Europe, from Venezuela, Argentina, Japan, Greece to Belgium and France) is caused by statism, or to be more precise to its cancer - neosocialism.

Fortunately, it should collapse soon as it is unsustainable due to communist central banking(literally one of the main pillars of communism and the cause of WWI, which then caused the WWII).
User avatar
Fellonme
 
Posts: 18
Joined: 11 August 2013, 23:39

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby Ciniselli » 26 March 2015, 19:01

So after someone sent a tweet to the NUS women's campaign asking that people refrain from clapping because it... "triggers anxiety"... it became a thing that some people started using jazzhands instead as a way of "showing solidarity." Wut.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... s-anxiety/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/32032291
Nonsense, I have not yet begun to defile myself.
User avatar
Ciniselli
 
Posts: 311
+1s received: 3
Joined: 8 March 2015, 16:17
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby waffles » 26 March 2015, 23:52

actually jazz hands is they way deaf people clap :p

EDIT: while i do not think that a jazz hand has the same effect at the end of a speech, it's a very nice way to appreciate something in a non intrusive way so the speaker can go on without those annoying fuckers who clap all the time. Actually that's something to put in the pet peeves question in my introducion topic :p
Image
User avatar
waffles
 
Posts: 306
+1s received: 1
Joined: 12 February 2015, 20:26
Location: Belgium
Country: Belgium (be)

Re: #Feminism

Unread postby xyz72 » 27 March 2015, 09:54

First "Ban Bossy" and now jazz hands because clapping triggers anxiety? Yeah...because painting women as fragile little flowers that cannot cope with everyday things is advancing feminism...
xyz72
 
Posts: 3923
+1s received: 30
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:50
Country: Germany (de)

PreviousNext

Recently active
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 7 guests