Feminist "Philosophy"

[AdriannaJean]

Ok, so tell me if I’m way off base here.

I’m a philosophy student and I’m a female. I believe women are equal to men but don’t ascribe to modern feminist hokum. The very fact that feminist “philosophy” exists as a discipline drives me absolutely nuts! To me, it’s almost like saying “Hey, we want to play too but since we can’t actually contribute to metaphysics or ethics or epistemology we want you to make up a type that we can do!” It’s doing the exact opposite of what feminism ought to stand for. The way that we should be making society take us seriously is by actually showing that we are capable of working and thinking on par with a man, not this “philosophical special olympics” BS that we call “feminist philosophy.”

What does feminism have to do with philosophy anyhow? Ok, yes we’re equal to men. That’s really about it. Why do we feel the need to whine and moan until they make something special up for us? If you can’t contribute to real philosophy, go join the womens studies department and leave it up to those of us that wear big girl panties!

 

[James924]

Ok, so tell me if I’m way off base here.

I’m a philosophy student and I’m a female. I believe women are equal to men but don’t ascribe to modern feminist hokum. The very fact that feminist “philosophy” exists as a discipline drives me absolutely nuts! To me, it’s almost like saying “Hey, we want to play too but since we can’t actually contribute to metaphysics or ethics or epistemology we want you to make up a type that we can do!” It’s doing the exact opposite of what feminism ought to stand for. The way that we should be making society take us seriously is by actually showing that we are capable of working and thinking on par with a man, not this “philosophical special olympics” BS that we call “feminist philosophy.”

What does feminism have to do with philosophy anyhow? Ok, yes we’re equal to men. That’s really about it. Why do we feel the need to whine and moan until they make something special up for us? If you can’t contribute to real philosophy, go join the womens studies department and leave it up to those of us that wear big girl panties!

You can apply that same logic to the military. Right now a woman only has to do about half as many push-ups and sit-ups as me on a PT test. Obviously women don’t tend to have the same amount of strength in these areas as men…but isn’t that the whole point…that you’re not supposed to acknowledge that? The logic was “anything you can do, I can do better (or equal)” so why the difference in standards?

Just an interesting thought.

 

[Scoobyshme]

Ok, so tell me if I’m way off base here.

I’m a philosophy student and I’m a female. I believe women are equal to men but don’t ascribe to modern feminist hokum. The very fact that feminist “philosophy” exists as a discipline drives me absolutely nuts! To me, it’s almost like saying “Hey, we want to play too but since we can’t actually contribute to metaphysics or ethics or epistemology we want you to make up a type that we can do!” It’s doing the exact opposite of what feminism ought to stand for. The way that we should be making society take us seriously is by actually showing that we are capable of working and thinking on par with a man, not this “philosophical special olympics” BS that we call “feminist philosophy.”

What does feminism have to do with philosophy anyhow? Ok, yes we’re equal to men. That’s really about it. Why do we feel the need to whine and moan until they make something special up for us? If you can’t contribute to real philosophy, go join the womens studies department and leave it up to those of us that wear big girl panties!

Men and women are equal in dignity, but not the same. Feminist “philosophy” tries to sell the lie that there is no difference between men and women. The truth is that there is a world of difference. Not just physically, but mentally, emotionally, and even spiritually!

Jesus said of Satan that he was a liar and a murderer from the beginning. Radical feminism in our age was begun by Satan, let there be no doubt. Through this “instrument,” he convinces women they have a “right” to murder their unborn children, and to tell God, “No! I will not serve!” when it comes to having children (artificial birth control). Not only do these things kill innocent human beings, but it kills the life of God in their souls, and this is his ultimate goal. His first tactic is to convince us that he doesn’t exist. Satan loves to work in the shadows, not the light. His favorite color is “gray.” (He wants us to deny that there is such a thing as objective truth. He wants us to say everything is more or less in a “gray area.” That way, he has room to operate!)

 

[James924]

Men and women are equal in dignity, but not the same. Feminist “philosophy” tries to sell the lie that there is no difference between men and women. The truth is that there is a world of difference. Not just physically, but mentally, emotionally, and even spiritually!

Jesus said of Satan that he was a liar and a murderer from the beginning. Radical feminism in our age was begun by Satan, let there be no doubt. Through this “instrument,” he convinces women they have a “right” to murder their unborn children, and to tell God, “No! I will not serve!” when it comes to having children (artificial birth control). Not only do these things kill innocent human beings, but it kills the life of God in their souls, and this is his ultimate goal. His first tactic is to convince us that he doesn’t exist. Satan loves to work in the shadows, not the light. His favorite color is “gray.” (He wants us to deny that there is such a thing as objective truth. He wants us to say everything is more or less in a “gray area.” That way, he has room to operate!)

Amen.

It always amazes me that feminist women today can look back on the feminist movement with pride while we can plainly see its fruits in the way our culture has turned women into sexual objects like never before (pornography, sex in the city, the disrespect to women in rap music, etc). Do they really consider that a victory?

SOMEBODY definitely scored a great victory, and it definitely was not women.

 

[Barbkw]

Radical feminism of my adulthood was anti-male, anti-children, and anti-marriage in mentality and perspective.

That philosophy lead to female chauvinism and psuedo-lesbianism.

 

[Hastrman]

I would just like to thank the OP for using the phrase “big girl pants” in reference to feminism.

I thought I was the only one.

 

[dusty_david]

What does feminism have to do with philosophy anyhow? Ok, yes we’re equal to men. That’s really about it. Why do we feel the need to whine and moan until they make something special up for us? If you can’t contribute to real philosophy, go join the womens studies department and leave it up to those of us that wear big girl panties!

Maybe the Muslims have a point about keeping females covered up, uneducated, and dependent on their male relatives to leave the house. Perhaps they think there is only one thing that’s important about a woman and it sure isn’t her brains.

BTW: ever seen a pregnant woman beat up? The funny thing is that she keeps protecting her belly even if her husband is kicking her face. Doesn’t make sense, does it. Why protect her belly? She’ll have black eyes the next day. If or when the cops show up, the husband can tell the officers that he is the head of his family and everything is fine.That’s all the cops need to hear. Off they go. In the good old days, that’s what happened. A man’s home was his castle. And his family is his property. Including and especially his wife. Saw this up close and personal.

Also, guess happens to those big girl panties when, I don’t know, 1, 3, 5, or 8 men want to see the contents of your big girl panties and you don’t have a man to defend you. What good is your word against all these men? How would a court know you’re not just putting out because you like violent group sex? It’s a their word against your’s. And you’re just a woman.

Feminists. What do they know. Maybe you should talk to men then. Try the sons of battered single moms. Or brothers of sisters beaten up.

Yeah the law is the only thing protecting you against male muscle. Be glad those feminists fought to make you legally a real person – not just a cow only good for one thing. Unless that’s what you want to be?

 

[Hastrman]

What does feminism have to do with philosophy anyhow? Ok, yes we’re equal to men. That’s really about it. Why do we feel the need to whine and moan until they make something special up for us? If you can’t contribute to real philosophy, go join the womens studies department and leave it up to those of us that wear big girl panties!

Maybe the Muslims have a point about keeping females covered up, uneducated, and dependent on their male relatives to leave the house. Perhaps they think there is only one thing that’s important about a woman and it sure isn’t her brains.

BTW: ever seen a pregnant woman beat up? The funny thing is that she keeps protecting her belly even if her husband is kicking her face. Doesn’t make sense, does it. Why protect her belly? She’ll have black eyes the next day. If or when the cops show up, the husband can tell the officers that he is the head of his family and everything is fine.That’s all the cops need to hear. Off they go. In the good old days, that’s what happened. A man’s home was his castle. And his family is his property. Including and especially his wife. Saw this up close and personal.

Also, guess happens to those big girl panties when, I don’t know, 1, 3, 5, or 8 men want to see the contents of your big girl panties and you don’t have a man to defend you. What good is your word against all these men? How would a court know you’re not just putting out because you like violent group sex? It’s a their word against your’s. And you’re just a woman.

Feminists. What do they know. Maybe you should talk to men then. Try the sons of battered single moms. Or brothers of sisters beaten up.

Yeah the law is the only thing protecting you against male muscle. Be glad those feminists fought to make you legally a real person – not just a cow only good for one thing. Unless that’s what you want to be?

Ahahah. You don’t actually know what feminism is, do you? What year do you think this is?

I will leave to one side the fact that women had all the rights and protections you mention in Europe between the 11th and 14th centuries—it was the Renaissance and Enlightenment that took them away.

Academic feminism is a Marxist class-war narrative, that has actually covered up for rapists (Bill Clinton, google “Juanita Broadderick”) and discussed the gang rape of its opponents (Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin). Why?

Because some animals are more equal than others.

Modern academic feminism follows Simone Beauvoir, whose relationship with her lover fits all the abuse you have just described. Oh, except he forced her to get abortions so he never got a chance to beat her up while she was pregnant.

And you are merely asserting the classic Marxist narrative: See the strike breakers! Ignore the gulag! Never mind that it is modern feminism that drastically reduced alimony payments, and modern feminism that made it possible for men to charge women with abuse, and modern feminism that deliberately dismantled the hundreds of years of societal machinery that protected women. Every single crime against women now is more common than when the feminists began their work; but that doesn’t fit the narrative. All the statisticians are suffering from false consciousness.

Your horror stories about not believing rape victims do not actually match the facts, by the bye—and men who killed a man even accused of raping a female acquaintance used to be let off. I live in Arizona, we’ve got precedent. I recall a case where a man slapped a saloon floozy, not a respectable woman, and was lynched. I know, I know, false consciousness, right?

Oh and PS, men in traditional Western societies, even after the Renaissance took away so many of women’s rights, were expected to kill men who abused their sisters or daughters. You know that stereotype of the Italian brother-in-law who cheerfully tells his sister’s husband, “If you ever hurt her…” and trails off ominously? Yeah, that was real.

PPS, “Guns” are another protection against male muscle, but I’m sure you oppose their private ownership.

 

[Kaninchen]

Why would ‘Feminist Philosophy’ be less valid than ‘Christian Philosophy’?

 

[colmcille1]

Why would ‘Feminist Philosophy’ be less valid than ‘Christian Philosophy’?

Hi Kaninchen.
I suppose one could reasonably ask: how many adherents of “feminist philosophy” are there in the world?
God Bless,
Colmcille.

 

[Kaninchen]

Hi Kaninchen.
I suppose one could reasonably ask: how many adherents of “feminist philosophy” are there in the world?
God Bless,
Colmcille.

In what way ‘reasonably’?

 

[Hastrman]

Why would ‘Feminist Philosophy’ be less valid than ‘Christian Philosophy’?

Because Christianity is not a purely Marxist enterprise, where truth may be subordinated to the class struggle. Academic feminism is (for “class” read “sex”).

 

[Kaninchen]

Because Christianity is not a purely Marxist enterprise, where truth may be subordinated to the class struggle. Academic feminism is (for “class” read “sex”).

Which rather presupposes that ‘Feminist Philosophy’ is merely what you say it is; that, even if it is what you say it is, it is therefore ‘invalid’; and that one couldn’t find a form of words that would invalidate ‘Christian Philosophy’ on the same ‘I don’t like it therefore it is invalid’ basis.

 

[Hastrman]

Which rather presupposes that ‘Feminist Philosophy’ is merely what you say it is; that, even if it is what you say it is, it is therefore ‘invalid’; and that one couldn’t find a form of words that would invalidate ‘Christian Philosophy’ on the same ‘I don’t like it therefore it is invalid’ basis.

Who the hell do you think you’re talking to? I would kill myself in front of my own mother before I would ever prostitute reason to something as fickle as my personal preferences.

It is not disputable that the narrative of academic feminism incorporates the Marxist narrative. It is not disputable that the Marxist narrative involves the subordination of all, including truth, to the class struggle. And it is not disputable that any philosophy that subordinates truth to anything other than reality is not a valid philosophy.

Certainly there are things that might be characterized as “feminist philosophy” that are perfectly valid; so too are their movements one might call “national socialism” that are perfectly valid. But in academia one would be getting the perspective of academic feminism, just as in Germany in the 30s and 40s national Socialism means damn Nazis.

This “oh but I can think of a bunch of little dialectical objections to what you say” thing is, I’m sure, very amusing—but most people outgrow it by the time they turn 17.

 

[Kaninchen]

Who the hell do you think you’re talking to?

I would kill myself in front of my own mother before I would ever prostitute reason to something as fickle as my personal preferences.

A drama teacher perhaps?

It is not disputable that the narrative of academic feminism incorporates the Marxist narrative. It is not disputable that the Marxist narrative involves the subordination of all, including truth, to the class struggle. And it is not disputable that any philosophy that subordinates truth to anything other than reality is not a valid philosophy.

Do your declamations amount to an establishment of criteria of valid/invalid?

 

[Hastrman]

A drama teacher perhaps?

You think I’m kidding? How sad, that you can’t think of anything that could make you find life unlivable—as for instance that you had sold the only thing, reason, that makes experience intelligible.

Do your declamations amount to an establishment of criteria of valid/invalid?

I’m sorry, does philosophy exist? Is there such a thing as reason? Is there such a thing as logic? Can we, or can we not, determine that an argument is invalid? I was not aware there was much dispute about the fact that a given set of arguments are invalid, for instance ad hominem (of which I see you are quite the aficionado!) or generalization from the self.

Marxism’s characterization of all reasoning as deriving from class interest is one giant ad hominem. Therefore, not valid.

 

[Kaninchen]

You think I’m kidding? How sad, that you can’t think of anything that could make you find life unlivable—as for instance that you had sold the only thing, reason, that makes experience intelligible.

Love the dramatics.

I’m sorry, does philosophy exist? Is there such a thing as reason? Is there such a thing as logic? Can we, or can we not, determine that an argument is invalid? I was not aware there was much dispute about the fact that a given set of arguments are invalid, for instance ad hominem (of which I see you are quite the aficionado!) or generalization from the self.

Marxism’s characterization of all reasoning as deriving from class interest is one giant ad hominem. Therefore, not valid.

The thing is all this flowery language doesn’t amount to establishing criteria of valid/invalid in the cases of ‘Feminst’ or ‘Christian’ Philosophies.

 

[Hastrman]

Love the dramatics.

An expression of sincere feeling about the only thing in the universe that matters, truth: why it must be drama!

Yeah, I was 17 once too. Why don’t you grow the hell up? Nobody here is impressed by your nihilistic act.

The thing is all this flowery language doesn’t amount to establishing criteria of valid/invalid in the cases of ‘Feminst’ or ‘Christian’ Philosophies.

Sigh.

For the what, fifth? time, feminist academia uses the Marxist narrative of the class war applied to gender roles. Read Beauvoir. Read…hell…any of the leaders of feminist theory of the last thirty years or so. It’s by the book class-war narrative. Are you really concerned, seriously, to deny that? Or are you an eight-year-old child, and you think the most fun thing in the world whenever someone tries to explain something is to say, “No it’s not”, no matter what they say?

Next I suppose you’ll start posting the same thing I post, like an eight year old repeating everything an adult says.

It interprets all critique of feminism as arising from “patriarchy”—that is, from class interest. Therefore it is not valid, it is an ad hominem fallacy.

Do Christians respond to all criticism of Christian theology with “you only say that because you’re a Jew” or “you only say that because you’re a pagan”? No they do not. Therefore Christian philosophy is valid.

If you continue to be challenged by this (to my mind rather staggeringly obvious) concept, maybe you should look into getting your college tuition refunded.

 

[Kaninchen]

An expression of sincere feeling about the only thing in the universe that matters, truth: why it must be drama!

Yeah, I was 17 once too. Why don’t you grow the hell up? Nobody here is impressed by your nihilistic act.

Sigh.

For the what, fifth? time, feminist academia uses the Marxist narrative of the class war applied to gender roles. Read Beauvoir. Read…hell…any of the leaders of feminist theory of the last thirty years or so. It’s by the book class-war narrative. Are you really concerned, seriously, to deny that? Or are you an eight-year-old child, and you think the most fun thing in the world whenever someone tries to explain something is to say, “No it’s not”, no matter what they say?

Next I suppose you’ll start posting the same thing I post, like an eight year old repeating everything an adult says.

It interprets all critique of feminism as arising from “patriarchy”—that is, from class interest. Therefore it is not valid, it is an ad hominem fallacy.

Do Christians respond to all criticism of Christian theology with “you only say that because you’re a Jew” or “you only say that because you’re a pagan”? No they do not. Therefore Christian philosophy is valid.

If you continue to be challenged by this (to my mind rather staggeringly obvious) concept, maybe you should look into getting your college tuition refunded.

Awesome.

 

[Hastrman]

Awesome.

I’ll try this.

Shove it, troll.

Clear enough?

Good.