Christianity is kind of odd in that the central figure doesn't really demonstrate characteristics we'd think of a masculine. Jesus is a pacifist. He's compassionate. He's a son, not a father. Maybe he represented some kind of shift? Not sure — frank
Looking at, sure. I'm trying (but clearly not doing a good job) to draw distinctions between the data which informs a strategy, and the strategy itself. The risk factors for oppression, and the actual groups oppressed. — Isaac
A term describing disparities shouldn't have a moral stigma, disparities are only immoral if they're wrong or unfair. If sexism is just disparities, what does it mean to be sexist? And isn't it a problem to have a term that describes disparities, which in all the same contexts describes the reason for those disparities being due to a bias against the competence of women? — Judaka
I don't think anyone defines sexism as a set of disparities, do they? — frank
She's learned that the hospital establishment will listen to him. They won't listen to her. It's sexism. — frank
Thank goodness. — Judaka
One is that I think the lack of really caring about one's masculinity is itself a masculine trait. Who are you to tell me what kind of man I am? I can get by on my own without your approval -- like a man. — Moliere
I'll ask again, though -- what is a real man? Or even simply a man? Or a masculine gender identity?
Those aren't laws. They're how we identify and feel — Moliere
The entire reason why this is even a discussion is that the word "man" is written into laws, it's part of social codes, and who qualifies as a man within those contexts is relevant for transgender people.
Or will you pretend that you're unconcerned about the ramifications of the answers? Would you define masculinity in a way that promotes behaviours you don't want? — Judaka
A measurement isn't always a good measurement, and it's particularly difficult to tease out what a good measurement is with respect to oppression because history is not repeatable in the same way that other experiments are. "Oppression" has no units, after all. It's a story. Further I'd say your measurements are good at assessing an individual's circumstances, but that the individual isn't always an appropriate place for understanding group dynamics -- so the metrics of oppression you list won't capture all of what a group faces. It's a part of the story, and important to check up on because hey maybe one day the world really will be different and our metrics will display that, but not the whole — Moliere
What these political philosophies are doing are not enforcements of a law or a principle for individuals, nor laying out some universal truth, but rather binding people together in spite of differences that seem important. Intersectionality isn't a scientific law as much as it is an organizer's tool which has already been proven. — Moliere
to be effective you have to understand what people really care about. The international poor just isn't that big of a rallying cry, I'd hazard that's because in our particular social system we've erected a public/private property distinction. While it's certainly true that if Helen Mirren cared about the plight of the poor she'd act differently, the fact is that not only does she not care -- most human beings don't either, but not because we're callous, but because this is how we're trained to be with our private money, and people really believe they "earned" it. — Moliere
Patriarchy -- the rule of men -- is still quite common. And healthier gender identities -- ones not obsessed with maintaining power at home or at work -- will undermine that. — Moliere
Then is any claim to oppression deniable? On any grounds? — Isaac
This is neither inevitable, nor was it always the case. I agree that there's a barrier to cross here, but you're writing a thread a masculinity. Is that not also embedded? why not take the same "'twas ever thus" resigned attitude when it comes to feminism, or race, or homophobia? If we can fight against those entrenched cultural values, then why are you advocating we just accept this one? — Isaac
I don't see any evidence of that. The working class seem more divided now than they've ever been, the left wing has been effectively neutered by it's own internal divisions. the rift in the American working class between the white working men and the 'identity politics' groups is basically responsible for the surge in populism (with the liberal response to covid and trans issues just deepening that divide). In my country the rift between anti-semitism and support for Palestine has effectively killed off left wing opposition with differences over trans issues between traditional feminists and modern views mopping up any remaining unity there might have been.
The world, particularly the left, is at each other's throats. Ukraine, covid, trans,... not a single big issue has been tackled recently without dividing into two warring camps with division enforced with an iron fist (or as 'iron' as lefty politics gets, anyway). I've been in left wing politics for three decades, fighting pernicious taxation, racism, environmental destruction, etc...the usual. I took a different position on covid - I was regularly called a 'murderer' (right here on this site, with absolutely no consequence). I took a different position on Ukraine - I've been listed as a war crimes collaborator, friends have had far worse. I took a different position on trans issues - I'm a bigot, again, others I know have had worse. This is all in the last three of four years, after over thirty previous years of left-wing activism with nothing of the sort happening (despite some absolutely tempestuous disagreements).
So unless you've got something to hold against that impression, I'm not buying this story that these new forms of identity politics unite. Not from where I'm standing. If they do, they unite by simply crushing dissent. — Isaac
But not according to your principle above. You seem to see patriarchy as something entrenched but resolvable and private property sacredness as something entrenched but not resolvable. I'm not sure why — Isaac
Aren't they all deniable on any grounds? — Moliere
In this age pictures of the suffering are utilized primarily to manipulate us. Someone is making a buck somewhere with the images of the suffering -- be it state departments, NGO's, or private charities. — Moliere
the proof of intersectionality, that capital and patriarchy interlink, is in the fights which won by overcoming barriers. — Moliere
Again, its odd that you can say this so blithely about children, but not see exactly the same with women (and trans, and people of colour, and the disabled, etc). If images of suffering can be abused to make a buck, then what does that tell us about the campaign for trans acceptance, for example (worth about a million dollars per unit to the pharmaceuticals for a lifetime of hormone therapy)? Are you equally prepared to water down their message with such words of caution? — Isaac
If you can point to a single example where any of these campaigns have helped the poor be less poor, I'm all ears, otherwise it sounds like wishful thinking at best, apologetics at worst. — Isaac
The recent campaigns for women's rights has benefited mostly middle class women (less sexual harassment at work, higher pay). Its done fuck all for Afghan women whose lives have deteriorated thanks to the fickle warmongering of the US.
The campaign for trans rights have benefited middle class Westerners, who now can express themselves with less fear of reprisal. Trans Yemeni's aren't any less hungry though.
The recent crap about white privilege has maybe improved job prospects and education opportunities for middle class people of colour. It's done fuck all for the massive 'people of colour' community in Sudan who still find themselves on the brink of starvation.
If you can point to a single example where any of these campaigns have helped the poor be less poor, I'm all ears, otherwise it sounds like wishful thinking at best, apologetics at worst. — Isaac
That's not my callousness
...
Surely you are acquainted with the attitude I've laid out from your time as an activist? — Moliere
Women and trans people are included in the working class and proletariat. — Moliere
any workplace organizing I've done frequently runs into problems of both gender and race. So in practical terms it's required if one wants to do something about class, such as form a union or pull off a strike, because these identities will be utilized to divide your group otherwise. — Moliere
The reason the left is weak isn't because we're different. It's because thems who own are good at divide-and-conquer. — Moliere
What to do about it given the attitudes of most people, though? — Moliere
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.