Feminism

[Abraxium]

I have a question for a broad audience, that is, anyone who follows feminist ideas. (Broad ideology too with lots of interpretations)

What I notice very often from outspoken promoters of the movement, regardless of what their interpretation is, is the inability to successfully illustrate their ideas with aid of theoretical concepts to a wider audience. By this I don't mean that diluting the ideas will serve to the movement's benefit, moreso that the listener would feel at a disadvantage when they get the perception that playing by your rulebook won't in any way benefit them, let alone worth starting a debate over when there is a perceived accusatory tone against them. For the sake of analogy ; A person has posted an ad for selling their car, it's been up for quite some time and no serious offers have been made yet. You are in the market for just the type and have saved up money for its current asking price of 7500. You call the seller and agree to meet, once there you are adequately pleased with the car's condition and mileage. The two of you haggle back and forth without a mutual agreement, finally, you say ; "Ok, let's flip a coin. I shall buy it from you for 6500 for tails or his lowest asking price for heads." The seller rejects your offer, why would he go so low if there is nothing in it for him? There is however a hidden pro to this deal, he is able to get rid of his car which until now has proved unsellable for such a long time. He also does not need to tax and insure the car for the year. Similarly, I feel that a lot of people who reject the movement feel that they have nothing to gain from admitting to the existence of something like male privilege. They do, in as that the macho culture will eventually disappear by popular understanding, allowing more men to be themselves and avoid the social stigma placed upon them should they not follow it. It should be noted that this isn't exclusively upheld by males but also females with a warped view of what a real man should be like. Some opposing debaters might dismiss this out of hand by the fact that women are not forced into military service, et cetera.

My question is ultimately, what is your opinion of gaining followers of the movement? Arguing in a way that is more palatable to a larger group of people, regardless of demographics, with less focus placed on theoretical concepts and according to the opposition "blaming", which might allow for a more gradual shift in thinking? Or staying as is and hope that promoters of the movement will gain political roles and are able to further their ideas from there?

 

[AmateurHetman]

Sort of relevant:

US Women's equal pay claim dismissed

The US women's football team's bid for equal pay is dismissed by a court, with the judge rejecting the players' claims that they were underpaid.

www.bbc.com

Well, that backfired ?

After the equal pay claim was dismissed, striker Megan Rapinoe, who won the Golden Ball and Golden Boot at last year's World Cup, tweeted: "We will never stop fighting for equality."

So although the women's team was paid $34.1 million in salary and game bonuses between 2010 and 2018 as opposed to $26.4 million paid to the men... but they're still not being paid equally?
It seems their initial complaint was the fact the men's team seem to be paid a higher base salary and higher bonus for wins and ties.

Sport and entertainment aren't worth criticising with regards to pay equality imo. The salaries are based on performance and popularity, so nobody is paid equally. All these cases are the rich complaining about not being slightly richer.

 

[Flin Flon]

@Abraxium I think you've already said it. The best approach must be a consequentialist one. The fact of the matter of living in an interdependent society is that you won't bring about change without sufficient support. Seems to me, you always have to make egoistical arguments if you want to be effective, meaning that you can't assume an accusatory tone unless it furthers your goal. Usually, it doesn't (but it depends on the scenario). I think part of your question is: ''Is there an (effective) egoistical argument (or style of rhetoric) to be made against obstructing general improvement of wellbeing at the cost of individual wellbeing?''. For me, the answer is consistency in the application of the notion of justice. Relationships are transactional. If you want to erode justice by only selectively grating it, then whoever is not being extended any does not have to adhere to it (because he/she isn't extended any). And also, like you've said, it really is to the benefit of all to extend 'rights' to everyone, because now everyone is upholding it. Meaning that its erosion is much harder because it's existence is in everyone's interest.

But the guttural feeling you must feel when you are being subjected to (what you perceive as) injustice complicates things. It feels ****ty to tell people to chill when they're being disadvantaged and now they also have to be the bigger, more rational person in the conversation in explaining how they're disadvantaged and how to correct it. I am 100% in favour of treating people as just regular people with all our biases, presumptions and the feelings that we are conditioned with. But the problem is that these 18-year-olds that advocate the loudest (which I assume you're referring to?) are also just people with their own biases, presumptions and feelings and I don't know how realistic it is to expect them to be the better persons.

 

[kurczak]

Imagine complaining you don't get enough millions for representing your country

 

[Flin Flon]

Gotta say, doesn't really help the cause.

 

[Abraxium]

@Flin Flon Thank you for the response. I didn't mean to come across as me feeling at a disadvantage, as I believe that such privilege exists. I was referring to males that don't adhere to feminist ideas, which in contrast I do. Despite being outside of the norm for sexuality (bisexual), I have almost always felt included. I'm not such a fervent promoter as others when it comes to feminism or LGBTQ rights, I rarely partake in parades or the likes but I make sure to always voice my opinion and support when needed. It might also be as I live in a country that prides itself on equal rights for all, but I recognise issues facing both movements. That I have the opportunity to not care about it is not something everyone can take for granted, and it might also hint upon the aforementioned privilege.

 

[Flin Flon]

Aaah ok. Wasn't referring to anyone in particular (''you'' was a hypothetical person); I was thinking of a situation with more severe friction between movements. If it wasn't clear, I'm an annoying SJW. ''Eroding justice'' was in reference to women not being given the same rights in full. But you're probably right -- we shouldn't look at everything in such a combative way.

(I have a problem, I'm arguing with bots on reddit at this point.)

 

[Abraxium]

What?! No! I thought I fully understood you but now when you said that I doubt my existence as a human!

And if someone is wondering why I don't promote the ideas as much as I could, I don't care much for sectarianism within said communities.

 

[Flin Flon]

Yeah, my mom who sometimes feels like a marginalized Muslim in Europe, assigns a lot of value to that characteristic (of being a Muslim), and will respond more fervently when she feels that part of her is being threatened somehow. I think similarily, LGBTQ folks will sometimes come out a bit harder because it's cathartic to give the world a middle finger to something that was previously thought of as something that you had to be embarrassed for. You don't have to care for those things when no one cares that you're Muslim or LGBTQ, like you've said. Which is why the least threatened people are usually the coolest debaters.

I like this conversation a lot because every comfortably effeminate man I've met has always been ****ing zen and likeable as hell (biases at work here). And the stigma around effeminate men sucks and keeps guys from reaching their potential, the way I see it (biases at work). Even calling it effeminate carries negative connotations or a form of identitarianism which we should stop obsessing about.

 

[Jhessail]

What I notice very often from outspoken promoters of the movement, regardless of what their interpretation is, is the inability to successfully illustrate their ideas with aid of theoretical concepts to a wider audience

So if I understand your extremely tortured example correctly, you're claiming that "outspoken promoters" of feminism cannot illustrate their ideas successfully? Am I correctly interpreting you?

 

[Zombie Warrior]

They need better pencils. I'm telling everyone since the start of this debate, you cannot illustrate your ideas with old and short pencils!

 

[Abraxium]

So if I understand your extremely tortured example correctly, you're claiming that "outspoken promoters" of feminism cannot illustrate their ideas successfully? Am I correctly interpreting you?

Does being struck with the figurative stick hurt you?

Spoiler: For the literal record

That was a rhetorical question

 

[Adorno]

Random thought: Reparations for women. Has anyone suggested this? It's a popular and relevant topic in regards to slavery.
But women have systematically been kept away from buying property (effectively being property themselves),
as well as education, and running businesses, and being held out of positions of power etc. - a million times etc.
Even into the 20th. century they couldn't vote in countries that had been democracies for 50-150 years. (Not to mention the crazy Swiss).

Many of the arguments for reparations for slavery are similar to the conditions of women.
Is it too absurd, or just the right amount?

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

I have seen it debated in some university circles but haven't seen in proposed by a politician. I realised we effectively(though not nominally) practice it in Turkey. Turkish men are conscripted to the military and you can shorten your mandatory military service(6 months) to 28 days if you pay 35k liras(5k usd). Assuming the state spends equal amount for both genders than it's a transfer of wealth from men to women.

 

[kurczak]

Is it too absurd, or just the right amount?

Just the right amount.

 

[Vermillion_Hawk]

I have seen it debated in some university circles but haven't seen in proposed by a politician. I realised we effectively(though not nominally) practice it in Turkey. Turkish men are conscripted to the military and you can shorten your mandatory military service(6 months) to 28 days if you pay 35k liras(5k usd). Assuming the state spends equal amount for both genders than it's a transfer of wealth from men to women.

Ah yes, Turkey, a shining beacon of gender equality.

 

[Kentucky 『 ＨＥＩＧＵＩ 』 James]

Random thought: Reparations for women. Has anyone suggested this? It's a popular and relevant topic in regards to slavery.
But women have systematically been kept away from buying property (effectively being property themselves),
as well as education, and running businesses, and being held out of positions of power etc. - a million times etc.
Even into the 20th. century they couldn't vote in countries that had been democracies for 50-150 years. (Not to mention the crazy Swiss).

Many of the arguments for reparations for slavery are similar to the conditions of women.
Is it too absurd, or just the right amount?

Reparations for black americans isn't an idea that just came out of nowhere, ever since slavery was formally abolished in the USA there were plans to redistribute land to black people which were eventually repealed, and they never recovered economically. There is a very reasonable case for redistributing wealth to at partially redress this generational imbalance.

Women on the other hand were subject to a much more convoluted and uneven form of oppression which was obviously not generational. If women could reproduce asexually and lived in ghettoes (sounds like a 1950s B movie), there would be a case here, but since most women live with men, it's hard to justify a redistribution on the same scale.

 

[Antonis]

Well. Imagine giving money to all groups, species, followers of a religion or ideology that have been wronged or are being/have been oppressed and/or systematically exterminated. All the money and gold deposits of this galaxy would not suffice. It's good and moral, in theory, but I cannot see it done practically, however wrong that may sound.

 

[Calradianın bilgesi]

Re:jacob
Ye one advantage women and gays have over racial minorities is that men inevitably beget women and gays but whites do not inevitably beget racial minorities. So gays and women easily inherit what their parents had.

 

[Antonis]

Blessed are the gays, for they shall inherit the Earth.