The NationStates Feminist Thread II

[Costa Fierro]

Intersectionality as a whole is ridiculous. It's unproductive and applies terms that are inapplicable in the West in the case of women, because women in the West do not face cruel, unjust or unreasonable restrictions, impositions and restraints.

Ok, Radical Feminism is not Third Wave Feminism.

Actually, it is. Radical feminism has existed long before the waves of feminism were properly defined, but the fact that once radical beliefs and ideas are now mainstream discourse (at least academically) tied in with the rise of a wave of new feminists is indicative that radical feminism and Third Wave feminism are largely the same thing.

[New Edom]

I'm a man. I've been a stay at home dad before though I am not now.

But that's not the point. The point is that she, and now you, and others seem to frequently gloss over points that are made in response to claims you have made which are clearly intended to state why people should support particular feminist policies or ideological approaches to policy making. Why waste our time?

For me, personally, it's containment.

People might take their absolutely insane anti-science sexist views as being somehow related to reality if we weren't around to debunk them.

Yes, that makes a great deal of sense. However really all that is protecting the views of their approach is the media and academics to be blunt. Without journalists and many academics saying that any opposition is misogynistic they would find that they were adrift.

So we have an actually fair series of conversations in this thread that actually make headway about how much closer to balance domestic abuse is than thought, how studies of exactly why outcomes are not the same as startring points in areas of gender roles and so on...and then in come some poeple acting like these conversations never happened. Suddenly it's all back to patriarchy theory and how women should run the world. Then when their information is challenged back suddenly they are 'too busy'.

[New Edom]

I'm a man. I've been a stay at home dad before though I am not now.

But that's not the point. The point is that she, and now you, and others seem to frequently gloss over points that are made in response to claims you have made which are clearly intended to state why people should support particular feminist policies or ideological approaches to policy making. Why waste our time?

You are wasting your own time by doing so. I know some things are bs, with feminism. Want me to list any? So dont tell us that we waste you time, if you do not want your time to be wasted then why did you 'attack' (cant think of a better word or a synonym for it) us?

It's not an attack, it's a challenge to how many feminists appear to conduct discussions. If you don't like the challenge, you have choices. You can try to ignore me, you can demonstrate more devotion to seeing the disagreement through to something reasonable that perhaps finds common ground, or you can of course continue to complain that I'm being unfair. What I don't think you can do is demosntrate that you're taking these discussions seriously when you follow Chessmistress' recent model of not responding to serious questions.

I have a lot of respect for Chessmistress...as an opponent. I think she's smart enough to know which questions she wants to answer and which will draw disagreements and debates down a path that she prefers to actually analyzing her position with research based questions. She knows what she wants and how to get it.

[GabrieIa]

Intersectionality as a whole is ridiculous. It's unproductive and applies terms that are inapplicable in the West in the case of women, because women in the West do not face cruel, unjust or unreasonable restrictions, impositions and restraints.

Ok, Radical Feminism is not Third Wave Feminism.

Actually, it is. Radical feminism has existed long before the waves of feminism were properly defined, but the fact that once radical beliefs and ideas are now mainstream discourse (at least academically) tied in with the rise of a wave of new feminists is indicative that radical feminism and Third Wave feminism are largely the same thing.

Not there is a difference between Radical Third Wave Feminism and Radical Feminism as a whole. No they are not. Radical feminists are less inclusive. Intersectional Feminism now the Third Wave

[GabrieIa]

You are wasting your own time by doing so. I know some things are bs, with feminism. Want me to list any? So dont tell us that we waste you time, if you do not want your time to be wasted then why did you 'attack' (cant think of a better word or a synonym for it) us?

It's not an attack, it's a challenge to how many feminists appear to conduct discussions. If you don't like the challenge, you have choices. You can try to ignore me, you can demonstrate more devotion to seeing the disagreement through to something reasonable that perhaps finds common ground, or you can of course continue to complain that I'm being unfair. What I don't think you can do is demosntrate that you're taking these discussions seriously when you follow Chessmistress' recent model of not responding to serious questions.

I have a lot of respect for Chessmistress...as an opponent. I think she's smart enough to know which questions she wants to answer and which will draw disagreements and debates down a path that she prefers to actually analyzing her position with research based questions. She knows what she wants and how to get it.

Did you read the parentheses? I dont think so.

[Costa Fierro]

Not there is a difference between Radical Third Wave Feminism and Radical Feminism as a whole. No they are not. Radical feminists are less inclusive. Intersectional Feminism now the Third Wave

It's the same thing. Intersectionality isn't inclusive because people spend more time fighting about who is most "oppressed" and spend more time trying to take the "privilege" away from the less oppressed. They have no time for the problems that others have or the bigger picture as a whole.

[GabrieIa]

Not there is a difference between Radical Third Wave Feminism and Radical Feminism as a whole. No they are not. Radical feminists are less inclusive. Intersectional Feminism now the Third Wave

It's the same thing. Intersectionality isn't inclusive because people spend more time fighting about who is most "oppressed" and spend more time trying to take the "privilege" away from the less oppressed. They have no time for the problems that others have or the bigger picture as a whole.

Boi! Intersectionality is more inclusive than Radical feminism.

[Costa Fierro]

It's the same thing. Intersectionality isn't inclusive because people spend more time fighting about who is most "oppressed" and spend more time trying to take the "privilege" away from the less oppressed. They have no time for the problems that others have or the bigger picture as a whole.

Boi! Intersectionality is more inclusive than Radical feminism.

No, intersectionality is just intellectual hair splitting. All it does is just convince people that they're the most oppressed due to x amount of physical and economic characteristics. It doesn't promote inclusiveness because whoever the least oppressed person is doesn't get any word in because they have "privilege".

[GabrieIa]

Boi! Intersectionality is more inclusive than Radical feminism.

No, intersectionality is just intellectual hair splitting. All it does is just convince people that they're the most oppressed due to x amount of physical and economic characteristics. It doesn't promote inclusiveness because whoever the least oppressed person is doesn't get any word in because they have "privilege".

No that is wrong. Intersectionalists dont only focus on women. Radical Feminists do. Thus it is more inclusive

[New Edom]

It's not an attack, it's a challenge to how many feminists appear to conduct discussions. If you don't like the challenge, you have choices. You can try to ignore me, you can demonstrate more devotion to seeing the disagreement through to something reasonable that perhaps finds common ground, or you can of course continue to complain that I'm being unfair. What I don't think you can do is demosntrate that you're taking these discussions seriously when you follow Chessmistress' recent model of not responding to serious questions.

I have a lot of respect for Chessmistress...as an opponent. I think she's smart enough to know which questions she wants to answer and which will draw disagreements and debates down a path that she prefers to actually analyzing her position with research based questions. She knows what she wants and how to get it.

Did you read the parentheses? I dont think so.

Look: I want you to respond to questions and responses to what you post and not just start new conversations later, especially if you're reminded. If you can do that, fine.

[GabrieIa]

Did you read the parentheses? I dont think so.

Look: I want you to respond to questions and responses to what you post and not just start new conversations later, especially if you're reminded. If you can do that, fine.

Yes, but you said that it was an attack when at the time i could not think of the word, but it was similar to attack.

[New Edom]

Look: I want you to respond to questions and responses to what you post and not just start new conversations later, especially if you're reminded. If you can do that, fine.

Yes, but you said that it was an attack when at the time i could not think of the word, but it was similar to attack.

You used the word attack, I did not. I don't see any point in prolonging this. If there's a habit of ignoring posts even after reminders I will assume it will happen again.

[GabrieIa]

Yes, but you said that it was an attack when at the time i could not think of the word, but it was similar to attack.

You used the word attack, I did not. I don't see any point in prolonging this. If there's a habit of ignoring posts even after reminders I will assume it will happen again.

I did use that word, but i did not intend that word

[New Edom]

You used the word attack, I did not. I don't see any point in prolonging this. If there's a habit of ignoring posts even after reminders I will assume it will happen again.

I did use that word, but i did not intend that word

Fair enough.

So why do you think women make better leaders than men? What proof do you have that that is or could be true?

[GabrieIa]

I did use that word, but i did not intend that word

Fair enough.

So why do you think women make better leaders than men? What proof do you have that that is or could be true?

Hmm, science is on my side with this. For one they have more compassion, they care more about the people. Now dont tell me the exceptions because there are some

[The Grene Knyght]

Fair enough.

So why do you think women make better leaders than men? What proof do you have that that is or could be true?

Hmm, science is on my side with this. For one they have more compassion, they care more about the people. Now dont tell me the exceptions because there are some

As I said before, gender essentialism wrapped in feminist rhetoric is the most hypocritical form of sexism.

[GabrieIa]

Hmm, science is on my side with this. For one they have more compassion, they care more about the people. Now dont tell me the exceptions because there are some

As I said before, gender essentialism wrapped in feminist rhetoric is the most hypocritical form of sexism.

Did i ever say is was a gender abolitionist? I dont think so.

[Galloism]

Fair enough.

So why do you think women make better leaders than men? What proof do you have that that is or could be true?

Hmm, science is on my side with this. For one they have more compassion, they care more about the people. Now dont tell me the exceptions because there are some

Let's suppose I accept this unsourced opinion as true. Keeping in mind the premise that men and women are equal, what areas as important as those are men inherently superior to women?

[GabrieIa]

Hmm, science is on my side with this. For one they have more compassion, they care more about the people. Now dont tell me the exceptions because there are some

Let's suppose I accept this unsourced opinion as true. Keeping in mind the premise that men and women are equal, what areas as important as those are men inherently superior to women?

Raw strength. The ability to know where something is, like a ring somewhere in your house. There are some more, but they are more based on survival not social ideas and the sorts

[Galloism]

Let's suppose I accept this unsourced opinion as true. Keeping in mind the premise that men and women are equal, what areas as important as those are men inherently superior to women?

Raw strength. The ability to know where something is, like a ring somewhere in your house. There are some more, but they are more based on survival not social ideas and the sorts

Are those things 'as important' as the aforementioned compassion?

[GabrieIa]

Raw strength. The ability to know where something is, like a ring somewhere in your house. There are some more, but they are more based on survival not social ideas and the sorts

Are those things 'as important' as the aforementioned compassion?

For Modern Western Society not as much.

[New Edom]

Fair enough.

So why do you think women make better leaders than men? What proof do you have that that is or could be true?

Hmm, science is on my side with this. For one they have more compassion, they care more about the people. Now dont tell me the exceptions because there are some

Can you provide any proof for this? What are some examples of women caring more about the people?

[Hittanryan]

Fair enough.

So why do you think women make better leaders than men? What proof do you have that that is or could be true?

Hmm, science is on my side with this. For one they have more compassion, they care more about the people. Now dont tell me the exceptions because there are some

What is your source for that?

[The Grene Knyght]

As I said before, gender essentialism wrapped in feminist rhetoric is the most hypocritical form of sexism.

Did i ever say is was a gender abolitionist? I dont think so.

as far as I'm aware, gender abolitionism and essentialism aren't related. In fact, they're fairly close to opposites, if all my definitions are in order.

[Galloism]

Are those things 'as important' as the aforementioned compassion?

For Modern Western Society not as much.

So what other things make up for those?

Keep in mind: the premise is that men and women are equal