GirlChat #736262

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

manbot (reply),

Posted by Human on Tuesday, September 29 2020 at 11:08:59AM
In reply to core feminism posted by manbot on Monday, September 28 2020 at 7:42:50PM

'If feminism (including as defined by you) is so ill-defined you can't be consistent within a small number of posts, why speak about it at all, not to mention defend it from reasonable criticism, as you have done?'

I'm interested to know how you think I'm defining feminism. I haven't defended it from 'reasonable criticism'. I defended it from those who called it 'the world's most dangerous terrorist movement', or from those who believed 'feminism', in its entirety, is the sole reason for our oppression. I have studied many different feminists, and some I mainly agree with, and some I mainly disagree with (sometime profoundly). You could also point to where I'm being inconsistent, so I can correct myself.

If you believe females should be allowed to vote, have equal education, have rights in their marriages, hold political positions, have rights over their bodies (something thus far denied to little girls) etc. (any reasonable person believes these things), then you are, on some minimal level, a feminist. In my opinion, feminism's next 'wave' should be a rejection of the current trend, and should focus on the autonomy of the female child, as a means of creating a truly liberated adult. A second sexual revolution is also on the horizon.

'Feminists, claiming to be GLers or BLers, are not exactly rare.'

No, they are not 'claiming' to be CLers, they are CLers, who also happen to believe in female autonomy.

'The issue lies in what we might call core feminism - the idea that feminists, traditionally old jealous women, should be in control of the sexual market.'

I wouldn't call this 'core feminism' at all. At the core of the women's struggle, was the belief that they were oppressed by men, and that they should thus fight for the liberation of the female.

'Does the feminist hostility, relevant to your defense, go away when you fallaciously introduce non-feminist hostility?'

No, because my sole point is that feminism is not the sole cause of our problems. If you are into your fallacies, then I'm sure you know that to invalidate someone's critique due to the presence of a fallacy is a fallacy in itself. Anyone can play the fallacy game.

Sure, there is feminist hostility, and non-feminist hostility, and also feminist non-hostility, and non-feminist non-hostility. Even one 'good' feminist invalidates the assertion that all of feminism is the enemy.

Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)

Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?