Feminist "Philosophy"

[AngryAtheist8]

LOL! You obviously don’t know what the word ‘essentially’ means. (Hint: it’s not a synonym for ‘intellectually.’)

Betterave these insults are not up to the new standard.

You have already proved that you can do better. You can use creativity and different words in your insults, you don’t have to just use the old junk.

Don’t fall back onto your old lazy habits, BE a better troll.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Excuse me. This isn’t 4th grade recess. Please address the topic and not each other.

I am not sure that Betterave can. From what I have seen of him on this forum, this is his normal behavior.

I am just playing with the trolls on their level, while still occasionally using reason to point out their BS and obvious untruths. Unfortunately reason has virtually no effect on trolls, and even pointing out an obvious lie often has little effect.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Unpleasant, but he deserved a little tit for tat, a little reality check. I was responding to him effectively calling Stove and, by implication, InSpiration stupid.

I did not accuse; I pointed out that he obviously didn’t read the article in question. If you read what he wrote then read Stove’s article, that should be perfectly obvious. And obviously this was a claim about his argument - what on Earth do you think it was about? Ridiculous!

I did read Stove’s article.

But you said nothing specific about the article.

Just more insults, unsupported by sources, reason, or evidence of any sort.

I will continue to call you a troll until you stop acting like one.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Maybe your comments are delightful lunacy, simplistic inanity, bigoted buffoonery? Where’s the substance? (Name-calling isn’t substance; your resorting to scandalized name-calling precisely confirms Stove’s thesis, whether you notice it or not.)

Do you have any self-awareness at all?

Read the highlighted words, then read your previous sentence.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I wish someone would respond to my critique of feminism, seeing as it actually contains CONTENT and not mindless, unChristian name-calling. I feel left out!

I predicted that this thread would become consumed by In Spiration and his nonsense.

What was the original topic again?

 

[larkin31]

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!

Did you read any of these feminist philosophical writings? What do they say?

 

[HCF]

Sorry - I thought I’d give a little bit more context as to why I posted that link. I was in a rush earlier and didn’t have time to edit my post.

I think that reinforcing the false notion that women are intellectually and physically weak leads to the sort of exploitation that the PDF document I posted touches on.

For the purpose of illustrating my point, let’s assume that women ARE intellectually weaker than men, but that their intellectual inferiority does not make them any less equal. This notion leads to the unfair and immoral exploitation of women, particularly in the work force where women (as a whole) are STILL paid less than men for the exact same work. Feminism will not “go away” as long as inequalities such as this persist in our society.

So even if the IDEA of women as intellectually inferior does not in and of itself equate inequality, the application of the notion in society leads to gross inequalities.

I agree, great posts.

Even if, in general, women were not as proficient in math as men, that does not mean that women are less intelligent - that would simply mean that women are not naturally inclined to math. Moreover, we cannot forget that while men are said to be more capable in math than women, it is also said that women are more capable in verbal skills than men. Thus if there is any sort of “inferiority” going on, one can argue that women are inferior to men in one intellectual category and men are inferior to women in another intellectual category. Of course, I personally prefer using words such as “natural inclination” and “capability” to “inferiority” because “inferiority” is more or less subjective - “inferiority” depends on what intellectual capabilities your society values, really.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I agree, great posts.

Even if, in general, women were not as proficient in math as men, that does not mean that women are less intelligent - that would simply mean that women are not naturally inclined to math. Moreover, we cannot forget that while men are said to be more capable in math than women, it is also said that women are more capable in verbal skills than men.

I believe that people like Stove (and for that matter In Spiration) would say that superior verbal skills are not a sign of intelligence.

Although I personally disagree.

Things like rhetoric, debate, and simply communicating your desires clearly in an efficient manner, often require a lot of thought.

 

[larkin31]

I believe that people like Stove (and for that matter In Spiration) would say that superior verbal skills are not a sign of intelligence.

Although I personally disagree.

Things like rhetoric, debate, and simply communicating your desires clearly in an efficient manner, often require a lot of thought.

verbal acuity is just one of several human “intelligences”

 

[AngryAtheist8]

verbal acuity is just one of several human “intelligences”

Perhaps, but its usually assumed that people have one kind of intelligence overall.

 

[larkin31]

Perhaps, but its usually assumed that people have one kind of intelligence overall.

Yeah, and schools and society tend to favor this one, but that is not accurate nor representative of the big picture. I know, I am a teacher. And an English teacher! Some of my most verbal students are pretty darn dumb. This is partly why early reading is NOT an indicator of general intelligence (which really is an empty term) or academic success later in life. Fortunately.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

Yeah, and schools and society tend to favor this one, but that is not accurate nor representative of the big picture. I know, I am a teacher. And an English teacher! Some of my most verbal students are pretty darn dumb. This is partly why early reading is NOT an indicator of general intelligence (which really is an empty term) or academic success later in life. Fortunately.

Being loud is not the same as being well-spoken.

 

[larkin31]

Being loud is not the same as being well-spoken.

Indeed.

 

[bhall0689]

I think this is the most offensive thread I’ve ever encountered on the Catholic forums. Why do the mods allow garbage such as this to persist? These sorts of speculations are not part of Catholic dogma; in fact I think that Catholicism probably negates these speculations of female inferiority as immoral.

 

[larkin31]

I wish someone would respond to my critique of feminism, seeing as it actually contains CONTENT and not mindless, unChristian name-calling. I feel left out!

I tried, and asked you a question.

Can you help us understand what you meant by “feminist philosophy”? I see no reason why the idea of such a branch of scholarship is false unless you actually explain (show) how the scholarship is false. What does it amount to? Did you actually study it for a while? How does it differ from feminist theory? (without the word “philosophy” in it)

 

[larkin31]

Of course I can only give a very surface-level analysis of these things since I do not hold a degree in sociology or gender studies, but there are all sorts of sociological implications that certainly do come into play. I DO think that gender is constructed by society, and gender shifts to fill different roles as society changes.

Really, all I’m trying to throw on the table is that making blanket statements such as ‘women are less intelligent than men’ contributes to the gross inequalities that women experience in society and the workforce. As a strong, educated, thinking woman I also find such a statement terribly short-sighted and offensive, although that probably doesn’t mean anything. It’s just as offensive as saying ‘black people are stupider than white people.’ Bigoted language reinforces negative stereotypes and seeks to oppress, not unite, which strikes me as unChristian.

I guess someone could say, ‘Well, one exception does not negate a rule,’ but every single female professor and student I have encountered in my educational career also seems to negate it.

Also, I think the attacks on the older female who was in opposition to the idea of male intellectual superiority were uncalled for. She said that she was a 50 year-old woman, and I think she deserves respect, at least the same amount of respect, Betterave, that you replied to my posts with. After all, I’m only 21 and not Catholic, and even I think that we should always address our elders with respect. I’m not saying you shouldn’t disagree with her, but the name-calling is disgusting.

Well put. All of it.

 

[larkin31]

I think this is the most offensive thread I’ve ever encountered on the Catholic forums. Why do the mods allow garbage such as this to persist? These sorts of speculations are not part of Catholic dogma; in fact I think that Catholicism probably negates these speculations of female inferiority as immoral.

I’ve encountered worse here, but this is among the worst. Dismaying, really.

 

[larkin31]

Hello all. I’ve methodically trudged through all 11 pages of this thread, and I find everyone’s comments very interesting. I don’t plan on getting embroiled in this thread simply because it has divulged into name-calling. I get called enough names in real life, and I don’t have the time to respond to the insults of a faceless forum member.

First of all, at least where I attend college, gender studies is a part of the Sociology department, not the Philosophy department. Sociology is the study of human behavior, particularly the study of the origins, organization, institutions, and development of human society.

Central to the topic of gender studies is the differentiation between what it means to be MALE/FEMALE, and what it means to be MASCULINE/FEMININE. A person’s sex is static and determined by nature, masculine and feminine qualities are fluid and crafted through socialization.

Gender studies does NOT deny that there are differences between men and women, but what it does assert is that most of these differences are due to different socialization of the masculine/feminine, and have nothing to do with what it actually means to be male or female.

On a side note, no one has ever denied in my gender studies classes that men are generally stronger and more athletic than women. This is a difference that is determined by sex, though, NOT gender.

My point is, is that many of the perceived “differences” between men and women are not so much catalyzed by their physical sex, but by the different ways that society initiates men/women into adulthood.

I wanted to leave this link for anyone that would like to look over it: The Male Privilege Checklist
Readings like this are what true “feminism” is all about.

Frankly, I think the assertion that men are intellectually superior to women is a load of BS. 90% of my professors in college were female, the majority holding doctorates in their field. Women also tended to be more actively involved in my classes, and therefore their comments during discussion/lecture outshone the mens’. Finally, more females are enrolled in college nowadays than men. The new generation is awash with educated, thinking, reading females - out with the old, in with the new!

I’ll quote it to put it in view again. See if that helps.

I agree with everything that you have written here.

 

[bhall0689]

I’ll try to elaborate a bit more. As I stated in my first post, I have never taken a Feminist “Philosophy” class because the Gender Studies department was considered a subset of the Sociology department, not the Philosophy department. In my classes we did not so much discuss feminist philosophies as examine the difference between sex and gender, and deconstruct what it means to be masculine and feminine in society (particularly in high school, one of the most interesting places to observe the gender-shaping phenomena).

Think about how “feminine” and “masculine” qualities are emphasized from the very first moments a baby is born - pink for girls, blue for boys. As children grow up, there is a certain type of toys they are expected to play with - although it is often socially acceptable for young girls to cross this norm (ie, play athletic sports, play with toy cars and trucks), parents are often concerned when young boys cross this norm (ie, like to play with Barbies, play dress-up in girls’ clothing). I recently saw a thread in the parenting forum in which a mother was concerned about her little boy’s desire to play dress up in girls’ clothing. Many posters encouraged her to stop the behavior. So, from this young age, men are taught that there are definite boundaries that as a male, you do not cross.

Girls experience their own initiation into femininity, although usually not until the onset of puberty when girls start to receive messages about how they are to act and look, especially the acceptable way to act and look around guys. Girls form cliques just as guys form cliques, and these cliques create an expected member identity that each part of the group conforms to through dress, language, and action. Basically, this is the way I understand gender and how it IS actually shaped by the society we grow up in. If anyone would like some good reading suggestions, I can send you in the direction of some really, really excellent Gender Studies readings.

I am neither a Gender Studies major nor minor; I am an English Writing major. I did take 3 Gender Studies classes in the Sociology department, but my training stops there. I’ve tried to summarize my basic understandings that I garnered from those classes, but of course the actual studies and essays I read were much more eloquent and convincing.

I hope you all have an excellent day, and do remember that we are all brothers and sisters who are called to be peaceful and treat one another with respect.

Much love.

 

[larkin31]

bhall, I recommend you stay away from the other feminism threads at CA if you are hoping to see anything different there.