Christian Feminist Socialist hipster vs Libertarian Atheist MRA

[TNF]

I'm sorry to have poorly represented the degree of consideration you put into your views on this.

I understand said views better now and no longer think that they are retrograde, although I'd still rather you didn't use the rhetoric to communicate them that you do a lot of the time.

No harm done. Unfortunately an Internet forum doesn't typically lend well to allowing one to flesh out one's position on a particular issue, given the time involved with doing so and a general lack of nuance that pervades this particular forum.

Likewise, I'll be the first to admit that the rhetoric I often choose to utilize in such instances is imprecise, which is something I need to work on. I'll do my best to improve upon that in the future.

[Figueira]

I can sympathize a little more with your views now (I even agree with some of your points) but I don't see why your definition of "feminism" is any better than the usual one.

[Oakvale]

I am an MRA and a Libertarian, but I can't in good conscience vote for an atheist. Tough choice.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Modern feminism puts a lot of emphasis on intersectionality, so it does take into account class (as well as race). As for which kind of inequality is more "fundamental", it doesn't matter much in practical terms.

[TNF]

Modern feminism puts a lot of emphasis on intersectionality, so it does take into account class (as well as race). As for which kind of inequality is more "fundamental", it doesn't matter much in practical terms.

It does matter, because you the subjugation of women is predicated on the division of human beings into classes. Without class society, you wouldn't have male chauvinism and the subjugation and super-exploitation of women.

Also, intersectionality is fundamentally incorrect in that it proceeds from a standpoint that social class is an oppressed 'identity' much like that of women or blacks or [insert identity here]. While there is certainly class prejudice (and I would obviously not deny this, having been on occasion referred to as 'trailer trash,' 'white trash', etc.), working class people are not discriminated against in the same way as blacks or women (i.e. because of their class position), and thus that does not define how the working class as a social category comes into being or exists (in opposition to the other classes in society). The entire identity as such is predicated on the relationship of the person in question to production, the necessary ingredient for figuring out where one stands in the class society in which he or she resides.  

[afleitch]

Modern feminism puts a lot of emphasis on intersectionality, so it does take into account class (as well as race). As for which kind of inequality is more "fundamental", it doesn't matter much in practical terms.

It does matter, because you the subjugation of women is predicated on the division of human beings into classes. Without class society, you wouldn't have male chauvinism and the subjugation and super-exploitation of women.

Also, intersectionality is fundamentally incorrect in that it proceeds from a standpoint that social class is an oppressed 'identity' much like that of women or blacks or [insert identity here]. While there is certainly class prejudice (and I would obviously not deny this, having been on occasion referred to as 'trailer trash,' 'white trash', etc.), working class people are not discriminated against in the same way as blacks or women (i.e. because of their class position), and thus that does not define how the working class as a social category comes into being or exists (in opposition to the other classes in society). The entire identity as such is predicated on the relationship of the person in question to production, the necessary ingredient for figuring out where one stands in the class society in which he or she resides.  

Class is based on labour and wealth, with labour and wealth being based on power (exercising power or exerting labour through physical attributes) Power flows from the powerful which if you wind it right the way back biologically has been male. Man's power over women on the basis that men are physically stronger, penetrate women and are not subject to pregnancy or other reproductive 'constraints' pre-exists the collectivisation of any one or any thing. It pre-exists communities and any forms of socialisation rooted as it is in our genetic inheritance as mammals.

Isn't basing response on class not in fact, 'usurping' the role that sex/gender has had in establishing these power structures?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Maybe this is a British thing, but class to me represents something just as immutable as race. Working-class people can get as rich as they want, just as Middle-class and upper-class people can become utterly destitute but one can never ever "change classes". At best, their children and grandchildren will be a different class, especially if they marry into a different social class.

And indeed the social discrimination from having a working-class accent is still pernicious and common-place. My mother, for example, painstakingly trained out her, err,  "unsophisticated" West Country accent in favour of a more neutral London tone. Working-class people are viciously belittled in the media as negligent mothers, violent "chavs", angry yobbos, amoral hoodies and dependent on welfare. That is even among urban egalitarians who would condemn such stereotyping when applied to race or whatever.

[TNF]

Modern feminism puts a lot of emphasis on intersectionality, so it does take into account class (as well as race). As for which kind of inequality is more "fundamental", it doesn't matter much in practical terms.

It does matter, because you the subjugation of women is predicated on the division of human beings into classes. Without class society, you wouldn't have male chauvinism and the subjugation and super-exploitation of women.

Also, intersectionality is fundamentally incorrect in that it proceeds from a standpoint that social class is an oppressed 'identity' much like that of women or blacks or [insert identity here]. While there is certainly class prejudice (and I would obviously not deny this, having been on occasion referred to as 'trailer trash,' 'white trash', etc.), working class people are not discriminated against in the same way as blacks or women (i.e. because of their class position), and thus that does not define how the working class as a social category comes into being or exists (in opposition to the other classes in society). The entire identity as such is predicated on the relationship of the person in question to production, the necessary ingredient for figuring out where one stands in the class society in which he or she resides.  

Class is based on labour and wealth, with labour and wealth being based on power (exercising power or exerting labour through physical attributes) Power flows from the powerful which if you wind it right the way back biologically has been male. Man's power over women on the basis that men are physically stronger, penetrate women and are not subject to pregnancy or other reproductive 'constraints' pre-exists the collectivisation of any one or any thing. It pre-exists communities and any forms of socialisation rooted as it is in our genetic inheritance as mammals.

Isn't basing response on class not in fact, 'usurping' the role that sex/gender has had in establishing these power structures?

No, because the primitive division of labor between men and women was not as hard and fast as that which arose with the establishment of permanent, agriculture-based human settlements. Sure, human society has, up until this point, had some degree of division on account of sex, going back to pre-class societies. But even before their rise, these were not the rigid social proscriptions that now define what it means to be male or female. These societies were far more egalitarian than what came later. I would posit that class is fundamental here in that even though biological sex roles existed before class society, their accessory (gender roles as we know them) are the direct product of the need of class society to designate subsections of society for the purpose of exploiting them, from whence oppression arises. The subjugation of women produces sexism, not the other way around.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think a good deal of the first part of what you describe here stems from the rigid, feudal past of the UK, in comparison to the U.S. we're we never went through that initial stage of feudal development. That, combined of course with a far less degree of class consciousness here as opposed to the European nations, where of course the contradictions of capitalism have been more fully exposed by trade unions and socialist and communist parties.

As to your second point, I am in total agreement. I do not deny that class prejudice exists. I have myself experienced it first hand, as I pointed out above. The U.S. Media (especially it's liberal variant, which is less inclined to take a preachy, judgmental tone when it comes to black Americans or other working class groups that aren't a) white or b) southern) acts in much the same way toward working class people. There's a good documentary on this called Class Dismissed that I strongly recommend on the subject.