|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: what is feminism? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
We have been having a discussion regarding what feminism is; insular academic criticism or mainstream social activist movement.
Some of us acknowledge that there are, in fact, these two spheres of feminism, but others are insisting that the obscure academic feminist criticism found in women's studies classes defines all feminism. I propose that the modern face of mainstream feminism would be the National Organization for Women. Here are their basic aims: About | National Organization for Women
The National Organization for Women (NOW) is the largest organization of feminist activists in the United States. NOW has 500,000 contributing members and 550 chapters in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Since its founding in 1966, NOW's goal has been to take action to bring about equality for all women. NOW works to eliminate discrimination and harassment in the workplace, schools, the justice system, and all other sectors of society; secure abortion, birth control and reproductive rights for all women; end all forms of violence against women; eradicate racism, sexism and homophobia; and promote equality and justice in our society. The following are their list of issues thay confront:
* Abortion Rights / Reproductive Issues * Affirmative Action * Constitutional Equality * Disability Rights * Economic Equity * Family * Fighting the Right * Global Feminism * Health * Judicial Nominations * Legislation * Lesbian Rights * Marriage Equality * Media Activism * Working for Peace * Racial and Ethnic Diversity * Title IX * Violence Against Women * Welfare * Women-Friendly Workplace * Women in the Military * Young Feminism My question to those claiming that academic feminist literary criticism, or feminist ecology, etc, are feminism and no differing view, no matter if it calls itself feminist, can be called feminist is; what kind of movement is NOW? IS it a faminist movement? Even though they call themselves feminist, are they really not, according to you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: What is your definition of "mainstream", then? To me, "mainstream" means that a feminist's name is pretty recognizable by people who are not active in the movement, who's books are widely read, who's faces get on TV sometimes. People like Gloria Steinem, Naomi Wolf, Susan Faludi, and possibly even Dr. Deborah Tannen would be mainstream feminists as I am using the word. You seem to be using the word "mainstream" in a very different way than I am. You seem to be using it to mean "prominent people withing the fringe philospohical academic field of feminist literary criticism." Those people can be as prominent in their little rarified atmosphere as they want, but what they do is mainly meaningless to anyone but themselves.
quote: No, it's not really like that at all. You are trying to tell us what the "true" face of feminism really is, and I disagree. You have simply asserted that your definition of what feminism is is the correct one, and dismissed anyone who hasn't taken some class, but you also say there are many kinds of feminism. Which is it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No, I heard you just fine. What I am trying to tell you is that, even if these people exist, and they decide this among themselves in their own little rarified world, nobody, including me, cares what they think but them. I think you and arach have bought into the myth, that these women's studies people apaarently did a good job of convincing you was true, that they represent "real" feminism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: See, I don't get why you are saying that, since the kind of feminism you describe isn't anything like what I have ever identified as women's rights/political social activist movement feminism. So, what is your evidence that the political feminist activist women's rights movement is being overshadowed or surplanted by the academic literary criticism feminism? I mean, who are these people who are taking over?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
OK, I'll write it with better syntax.
What I am trying to tell you is that, even if these people exist, and they decide that they are the "true face of feminism" among themselves in their own little rarified world, nobody, including me, cares what they think but them. You an arach took a women's studies class. The people who taught it were academic feminists who deal in literary and social criticism at the philosophical level. Those people, who mainly write for each other in their insular academic world and have little effect upon the social activist or political arenas, have somehow convinced you both that their obscure views represent "real" feminism. They have also convinced both of you that their views are the "mainstream", prominent views among all feminists, and that the political and social activist, equal rights-style of feminism is dead or all but gone. Just because those people told you this doesn't make it true. Where is the evidence that their views are making any inroads into the hearts and minds of the general populace, especially those who believe in gender equality?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Oh, yes? Hey, isn't schrafinator a feminist? Shraf, do you think all science and mathematics are masculine and thus flawed? Yes, I am a feminist, but no, I don't think that all science and mathematics are masculine and therefore flawed. I think that is a stupid view. Hey, Crash, aren't you a feminist? Do you think that all science and mathematics are masuline and therefore flawed? Oh, and look what I found after a quick google on "girls math science feminist": The main page is an organization called Feminist Majority Foundation, and within that is a pro-choice group called Feminist Campus. Page not found – Feminist Campus
Association for Women in Science AWIS is the Association for Women in Science. We are a non-profit association which works to promote women's activities in all scientific fields, from mentoring to scholarships to job listings. AWIS has over 5,000 members in fields spanning the life and physical sciences, mathematics, social science, and engineering. Over 50% of AWIS members have doctorates in their respective fields, and hold positions at all levels of industry, academia, and government. As part of its efforts to promote the entrance and advancement of women in science, AWIS has a long-standing commitment to fostering the careers of women science professionals. At the national level, AWIS publishes a variety of materials to inform girls and women about science programs and women's issues, including the bimonthly AWIS Magazine. The organization serves as a voice for women in science by helping to shape national policy through Congressional testimony and by participating in a variety of national coalitions. Why, I thought that feminists thought math and science were bad and masculine? Why would these feminists be promoting science and math to women and girls? I'm so confused.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
From a "Mother Jones" interview with Gloria Steinem.
I think this says it all. Italics added by me. Gloria – Mother Jones Q: From a distance, a fair bit of academic feminist writing and argument seems pretty near impenetrable. A: Yeah, but that's stupid. Nobody cares about them. That's careerism. These poor women in academia have to talk this silly language that nobody can understand in order to be accepted, they think. If I read the word "problematize" one more time, I'm going to vomit. If I hear people talking about "feminist praxis"--I mean, it's practice, say practice. But I recognize the fact that we have this ridiculous system of tenure, that the whole thrust of academia is one that values education, in my opinion, in inverse ratio to its usefulness--and what you write in inverse relationship to its understandability. So I think the answer to it is to look with some compassion at the situation in which the women who are writing this gobbledygook find themselves and to say, "How can we solve this?" Well, one way we can solve it is to get a better exchange going between activism and academia, so that the academics are putting their glorious intellectual powers to work on researching real problems. But I don't see any point in blaming feminism--which is essentially a populist movement--for what filters through in an academic setting we don't control. This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-27-2004 09:24 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Yes, and as I and others have been saying all along, and she explained in the interview, academic feminism is mainly useless in the real world. Weren't you claiming that academic feminism was "taking over" and was "widespread" throughout the culture, or something similar?
quote: They do? Can you show me some evidence of that?
quote: What the fuck are you talking about? Gloria Steinem was a major, major leader in the feminist movement in the 70's and for decades after. She has always pushed for women to recognize and address the patriarchy in their lives. And why "ought she" overthrow men? She likes men. She just doesn't like patriarchy, but she sees men as victims of it just as women are. Social conditioning puts us in these strict gender roles that are completely arbitrary. Haven't you been saying something similar? Anyway, the point of my quoting her was to show you that there is a large difference between the populist movement feminism and literary criticisam academic feminism, and that the former doesn't give a crap about the latter. Also, the latter doesn't have much bearing on most people's life, but the former does. This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-29-2005 08:37 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Would these be academic feminists, intheir ivory towers on campus, far removed from politics and the real world, populist feminism? Or, would they be the feminists who welcome the numerous male volunteers at the battered women's shelter I volunteer at?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Then they are stupid and nobody with half a brain or interest in practical application will ever pay much attention to them.
...like I have been saying all along.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
But I repeat, so what?
I liken academic feminism to the art world; great and powerful within their own little realms, but having little impact upon the majority of the real world. They have made themselves largely irrelevant to most people who aren't in that world. A big hero of mine is Allan Sokal, who hoaxed a prominent academic journal of social criticism:
brilliant hoax This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-29-2005 11:00 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: What makes you think that academic feminist literaty criticism will eventually invade popular culture to any great extent, especially considering the great divide between the populist movement and the academic world? Indeed, I think we have seen the populist stripe of feminism having a much, much greater influence upon the general culture comparatively. It the hard-knock world of popular entertainment, esoteric, incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo navel gazing will be ignored fasster than you can say "Wow, what a cool explosion". You now seem to be backing WAY off from your original assertion that academic feminism was spreading like a cancer over the land. Now you say that it will "eventually" entirely invade popular culture. Do you now agree that it currently has little to no influence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Well, I've asked to be shown this influence outside of academia, but I don't think I've been shown much of anything. And anyway, this is, as I beat this dead horse, a very long way from what you originally claimed.
quote: Fair enough, I stand corrected.
quote: But a great effect upon the greater popular culture? Especially an effect with far-reaching, profound or at least noticeable effects on many people's every day lives? Eh, I just don't see it.
quote: I think the fact that such areas of study exist is influential, as this implies that the subject is considered worthy of study. However, any area of study is accepted by the popular culture in direct proportion to it's relevance to everyday people's lives. I just don't see the current sort of scademic feminism having much impact upon everyday people's lives, since these people tend to write for each other rather than try to work for any real change. In addition, the humanitues are prone to navel gazing as they do not have to test their ideas against any objective reality or show their usefulness or practicality.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
So, do you think that Jon Stuart Mill's book is similar to anything written by current academic feminists?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2199 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Actually, academic science does have quite a lot to do with medicine, in that basic research into Biological phenomena leads to greater understanding of them and that will lead to better therapies, drugs, and procedures. Can you show me where academic feminist ideas are similarly absorbed into the mainstream populist feminist movement? I doubt you can, simply because I am part of that movement and I had never heard of "feminist ecology" before you mentioned it. This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-29-2005 06:35 PM
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024