K
Kaninchen
Guest
Even more awesome.
- Status
D
Dale_M
Guest
I’m puzzled by the phrase “feminist philosophy” because it seems to mean more than feminist theory. Can anyone summarize exactly what is the subject matter of feminist philosophy?
That said, I think it is unfair to blame feminism for the misogyny in rap music. Certainly feminists have decried it, and I am not aware of any rap artists who write such lyrics under the inspiration of feminist ideas.
One of the problems with discussing feminism here at CAF is that many of the members lump all varieties of feminism and all feminist thinkers/authors together, despite their many differences and disagreements. I think you find that many feminists are disapproving of the sexualizing of girls and women. Indeed, many were feminists have been and are anti-pornography crusaders, vocal opponents of sex-trafficking and prostitution, and critics of what one feminist termed “the Hottie Mystique.”
That said, I think it is unfair to blame feminism for the misogyny in rap music. Certainly feminists have decried it, and I am not aware of any rap artists who write such lyrics under the inspiration of feminist ideas.
K
kozlosap
Guest
57 year old woman and sure don’t think I’ve been “sexually objectified” any more than the young men in Jockey commercials. I go to work everyday and have loads of female and male friends. I put my daughter through a Jesuit university and law school. Just how have I been objectified? I don’t listen to rap, view porn, but I did watch Sex in the City. Like someone else mentioned —“put on your big-girl panties and get on with living”!
A
AdriannaJean
Guest
As I said in the above post, women are equal to men. That’s easy to prove philosophically. I can think just as well as a man, thank you very much. The situation you’re describing is a critique of male chauvinism, and a good one. I am not a male chauvinist. I fear you’re missing my point though, my point was to wonder why feminism has a place in PHILOSOPHY, not in the world in general. I find my thoughts to be very in-line with those of the original suffragists. Women are people equal to men, and that is exactly the reason why I think that feminist philosophy (not feminism itself, feminist philosophy as in a section of the philosophy department in your average university) should not exist because it implies that women do not have the ability to contribute to real philosophy (metaphysics etc.) so they need to make up a special category for us so that we can compete with the boys. We can compete with the boys, or at least the ones of us that stop whining and actually do something about it.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?
I
In_Spiration
Guest
Meanwhile, men are sorta wondering when this empowering social experiment is going to run out of gas, and when ya’ll will perhaps return some of that passionate effort into complementing us again.
I
inocente
Guest
Yes and no. Historically feminism gave a name to a set of movements that went on to establish equal rights. Burn Your Bra, Black Is Beautiful, Good As You, and even (at a stretch) Turn On Tune In Drop Out are rallying cries which give a center to a reaction against a cultural status quo. In each case the aim is to provide a focus point to change thinking, including underlying philosophies, but the movement becomes counter-productive once the desired changes have been achieved since it then artificially refers to a now meaningless divide.
Whether feminists have now achieved their legitimate aims I can’t say as I’m a boy and my wife may see this.
E
edwest2
Guest
Feminist philosophy as it is generally portrayed by the media is the creation of a Marxist style victim class and men are the eternal enemies. And, in some case, women should be men or at least behave like men.
It is a distortion of the true God-given femininity of all women. Go to the web site of the National Organization for Women and see what they stand for. Abortion is a big priority. Betty Friedan, author The Feminine Mystique, called the family: “a comfortable concentration camp.” Gloria Steinem, co-founder of Ms. Magazine (and yes, that’s where that word comes from), said: “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”
Recently, an article about Detroit businesswomen decried the fact that they hadn’t taken over the male-dominated business world yet. Equality is one thing, taking over another.
“Women’s Studies” is a means to psychologically separate men from women. True feminism would be concerned about solving problems.
Peace,
Ed
E
edwest2
Guest
There is no relationship between Feminist Philosophy and Christian Philosophy.
Peace,
Ed
A
AdriannaJean
Guest
I’m sorry but I don’t see what, exactly, in my post you were responding to…Yes and no. Historically feminism gave a name to a set of movements that went on to establish equal rights. Burn Your Bra, Black Is Beautiful, Good As You, and even (at a stretch) Turn On Tune In Drop Out are rallying cries which give a center to a reaction against a cultural status quo. In each case the aim is to provide a focus point to change thinking, including underlying philosophies, but the movement becomes counter-productive once the desired changes have been achieved since it then artificially refers to a now meaningless divide.
Whether feminists have now achieved their legitimate aims I can’t say as I’m a boy and my wife may see this.
B
Betterave
Guest
I’m no expert on this, but maybe you are off-base because you’re asking the wrong question. I think the question you might ask is: What do feminists have to gain from philosophy? And obviously that points to an answer to the question: Why is there feminist philosophy in my philosophy department? To be fair, feminist philosophers are obviously convinced that they have something genuinely different and philosophically valuable to offer from their feminine perspective (personally I’ve never been able to see what that is). But in any case, feminists do have a clear enough political agenda, and they often seem to want to promote it aggressively and by hook or by crook. They are into forming power alliances, which seems anti-philosophical, but that doesn’t bother them, because they reject the ‘masculine’ paradigm of objective argument that informs the classical conception of philosophy. (I read an excerpt from a book by Cressida Heyes once that talked about the raw political objectives and strategies of feminist philosophy in a completely shameless way and it shocked me - I hope I’m not generalizing too much based on that experience.)
You might want to get hold of a book by Christina Hoff Sommers, Who Stole Feminism?, to get some more perspective on the problem.
amazon.com/Who-Stole-Feminism-Women-Betrayed/dp/0684801566
B
Betterave
Guest
Or if you want something funny (LOL-funny), there’s Mike Adams:
His book (I haven’t read it):
amazon.com/Feminists-Say-Darndest-Things-Politically/dp/1595230424/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199302383&sr=1-6
Or a sample article:
townhall.com/columnists/MikeAdams/2005/11/29/hunting_for_feminist_scholars
His book (I haven’t read it):
amazon.com/Feminists-Say-Darndest-Things-Politically/dp/1595230424/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199302383&sr=1-6
Or a sample article:
townhall.com/columnists/MikeAdams/2005/11/29/hunting_for_feminist_scholars
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
There is Philosophy, which is universal to all who which to embrace it.
There is no preference or limitations given to male or female in Philosophy.
Maybe there is a confusion about Philosophy and Theology.
There is no preference or limitations given to male or female in Philosophy.
Maybe there is a confusion about Philosophy and Theology.
I
inocente
Guest
You said “Ok, yes we’re equal to men” but feminism was a necessary movement to force that change.I’m sorry but I don’t see what, exactly, in my post you were responding to…
It is important to remember that 1950 is only five years into a campaign to encourage women to return to home and hearth, leaving the jobs they had taken on as part of the war effort. As one telling example, consider Adlai Stevenson’s 1955 address to the Smith College graduating class urging these educated women not to define themselves by a profession but to participate in politics through the role of wife and mother. While McCarthyism rooted out political subversion, science and the media worked to instill proper gender roles. A 1956 Life magazine published interviews with five male psychiatrists who argued that female ambition was the root of mental illness in wives, emotional upsets in husbands, and homosexuality in boys. - plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-approaches/
Feminism then has a legitimate basis, whether or not we personally agree (from the same article):
*
The ‘difference’ of feminist philosophical scholarship as it has developed in the U.S. proceeds not from a unique method but from the premise that gender is an important lens for analysis. Feminist philosophers in the U.S. and beyond have shown that taking gender seriously provides new insights in all the areas of philosophical scholarship: history of philosophy, epistemology, ethics, philosophy of science, aesthetics, social and political philosophy, metaphysics, etc.*
However, once their point is made, extreme feminists serve only to detract from their cause (along with Betterave’s fine example I remember one who ignored the dictates of aerodynamics by saying that male missile designers have something else in mind when they talk about thrust
). At some point feminists must consign their label to history or just be silly.As another example, although hardly a philosophical movement, take LGBT rights in Spain. Before 1995, the gay rights movement had a purpose, whether or not we agree with that purpose. Then the law was changed (civil union, equal rights), the majority of the population agreeing. LGBTs still have marches, only now they call them celebrations instead of protests. The movement gave identity to a sub-culture and their protests helped bring about a change in the status quo, while now their “celebration” marches work against that cause by continuing to highlight and hang onto the very differences they wanted to have done with. What starts as a necessary one-shop overreaction becomes a mill-stone once the sought for victory has been won.
A
AdriannaJean
Guest
I think a lot of people have misunderstood my intent. I am not criticizing feminism (though its more modern form does have a lot of strikes against it). In many ways I could be considered a feminist. My critique is not of feminism’s place in the world or its contribution to it, but of its place in philosophy. Why does one have to be a “feminist philosopher”? Male philosophers are not “malist philosophers.” Why can’t we just be philosophers who also happen to be women. By calling ourselves “feminist philosophers,” it seems to me that we are drawing unnecessary attention to the fact that we’re female and it almost carries this implication that we expect to be taken more seriously than our male counterparts because we’re “feminists,” which would be ridiculously anti-philosophical.
It seems nice and pretty to say that, but all looking through the ‘lens’ of gender has done is to give women the opportunity to say “Well, I can’t argue with your logic but I don’t want to have to agree with you so I can now just pull the 'I’m a woman and I think differently and your way of thinking and philosophizing is just a part of your masculine agenda to overtake and control” card and now I don’t have to agree with you." I would like to say I’ve come across an example of positive feminist philosophy, where looking through the gender lens has actually lead to progress somewhere (whether it be in metaphysics, ethics etc.) instead of just tearing a different philosophy down.
I
inocente
Guest
I understood your intent, you explained it well, and pretty much agree with everything you’ve said. But although I’ve not read much feminist philosophy, I do have sympathies for example with their stand-point theories (a subordinate group must create their own understanding to fight against conformance to the dominant group’s stereotyping).
Yet a lot of feminism seems grounded in postmodernism, which is inherently a little flaccid and negative anyway. Do you know of any feminists who are post-postmodernist (or whatever it’s now called and if there is such a beast)?
J
John21652
Guest
It’s high time women started to see through the sham that is called feminist philosophy. A few other threads have sprung up on issues closely allied to this topic and the evidence is starting to mount that feminism as a philosophy is deeply flawed at best and a complete sham at worst. This thread Feminism:what’s wrong with it and this one, Couple abort twin boys because they want a girl cover some of the ground associated with what feminist philosophy is and is not.
I, for one, do not see feminism as a philosophy because it is based on assumptions about human nature and men and woman which either haven’t been thoroughly tested, or are grossly wrong in fact. Feminism is a mish mash of psuedo-intellectual philosophying about the human condition, using tools of a discredited philosophy, Marxism and the tools of literary and social Deconstruction which have given academic enquiry a terrible name because of the totally subjective discourses which the method has given rise to. Not to mention the good amount of revolutionary zeal with which feminist thinking was infected with in the 1960s and 1970s! A reading of the works of the leaders of feminist "philosophy shows this to be true. The result is a great divide between men and woman and a denigration of what it is to be female.
AdriannaJean starts her post with the statement that she thinks “…women are equal to men…”. The notion that women are equal to men has been one of the foundational beliefs of feminism for a long time. If that is the case, then reference to a feminist philosophy is tautological and a contradiction of that belief. That is, of course, if AdriannaJean’s belief is true.
W
Warrenton
Guest
If you are off base, it is here.
The assumption is that society takes anything seriously, let alone men or women.
I would argue that it does not take anything at all seriously.
That is why feminism as an “ism” has failed.
It is saying, in essence: “We women want to fail as badly as men and women together, or at least as badly as men alone.”
Have you ever seen the old Monty Python skit of the “twit olympics?” The winner is the twit who kills himself first.
Take, for example, Margaret Thatcher. How is a success to have someone who merely continued the beggaring of her country be the PM, just because of her gender? The feminist success is in actuality a failure.
As they used to say, the game simply is not worth the candle.
Unless, like Lenin, you just bring it down to fear and violence, and label those realities “power.” Thatcher was a feminist success because she had the power to inflict fear and pain on others, to a greater degree than other women.
Where lead the paths of Glory?
W
Warrenton
Guest
The thing is, looking at anything from a different point of view leads to…a different view.
This is interesting, but it is hardly philosophy.
Only people in such a dark age as this could mistake it for that.
J
JHow
Guest
What do you mean by “pseudo-lesbianism”? Pretending to be a lesbian? Being a lesbian for ideological reasons (“I don’t like men, so I guess I’ll be lesbian.”)?
Not questioning that there is such a thing, just not a term I heard yet.
W
Warrenton
Guest
Good Heavens!
- Status