The Social Purity of Feminism
What wave are we up to now, and are you confused about what Feminists want?
What is pure Feminism these days?
There probably isn’t a single answer but rather a range of ideological voices laying claim to the banner, and you’re welcome to carry the banner, if you’re on our side or you’re anti-male or if your campaign can co-exist without offending our general principles, this last one being the sucker punch for the naive young man, or an invitation to any other Johnny whatever you’ve become lately.
And they defend their territory – I’ve written before about the fear of individual women to have a voice and the hostility toward women who dare to speak against the sisterhood.
In some respects Feminism, as organised as it is, is loosing its purity to the radical fantasies of a few questionable authors and political mouthpieces as the older more defined leaders are writing their memoirs – that’s probably loose canon teritory for any ideology, and some Feminists have been fast to recognise this and express such concerns.
Purity was the essence of the campaign in the late 1800s when women pursued greater economic freedom and political involvement.
Oddly enough ‘the purity’ of this campaign referred to a single moral standard for both sexes, including chastity before and fidelity within marriage. So, 150 years later, we’re talking about a different set of demands.
The primary complaint of the then leading voices was drunkenness and Feminism called on men to adhere to the higher moral and social standards that women routinely adopted. It was the battle waged against the liquor industry that saw other countries lag behind in franchise development.
So, the feral tides of the past, are now the ones that our modern feminists demand the right to participate in, rather than oppose. The sisters of this time certainly didn’t start out with a campaign against marriage and gender cooperation in families.
Perhaps too many are sitting back waiting for the point of stupidity to define itself.
How long might that take?
Some of us may not live long enough to know.
Life’s a bitch, and then you die.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/17/apparently-dangerous-let-loose-innocent-students-news/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
A good example of an attack on a female academic who steps outside the acceptable boundaries of the sisterhood and one of their quaint little latter day organizations.
Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 8:12 am
#1,,,reading the above link I wondered if the new ‘THINK for all Society’ that calls itself intersectionalism will drop the feministic banner altogether as they surge on, afterall they speak for the ones inbetween or the undecided ones, as the Downunder says, the Johnny what ever you’ve become lately.
Certainly this academic feminist has been left gobsmacked by her exclusion.
One thing seems apparent, the waves they come and they seem to be coming with changing tide.
Comment by mama — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 8:51 am
..from purity to muddy waters, I am confused, Jo Williams, apparent feminist? or old guard feminist?…
a quote ” #MeToo fancies itself as revolutionary, but it taps into a well-established narrative of predatory men and vulnerable women. Each new contribution reinforces an already existing assumption that sexual violence against women is prevalent on campus, in the workplace and in the home. These general claims are rarely substantiated and often overstated, but the #MeToo movement needs no proof of female suffering beyond its own existence.”
From this article…
https://www.spiked-online.com/2018/07/06/sex-after-metoo/21514/#.W0IHu9VKjX4
Comment by mama — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 9:28 am
Jo Williams, like other female academics writes somewhat opaquely, sometimes I think to create the ambiguous position, but more in her case to stay onside with the Feminist clique.
Perhaps in other academic fields females can write from a more objective position or distance.
It is perhaps a question only they can answer as to whether this is an inclination, comfomity, or otherwise.
My take on this is that women have become too involved in communication with other females rather than society, and in the position these women hold it is society and the next generation they are addressing.
That, as opposed to the clique that regard men as a lower form of life that doesn’t need to be taken into consideration.
They are communication issues that are yet to be addressed in any form of social equality.
[Dr Joanna Williams is Head of Education and Culture at Policy Exchange and Associate Editor of Spiked.
Author of Women v Feminism: Why we all need liberating from the Gender Wars]
Comment by Downunder — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 9:58 am
I can not help but like her,,, #She too has been hijacked… oh god, another victim,, but that is the thing, She Will Not Be Called a Victim and neither will Men,… Peoples of the seventies Unite!.
Comment by mama — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 10:35 am
Victims Mama?
Prisoners of Apathy.
Comment by Downunder — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 10:42 am
Who are the Apathetics?
Comment by mama — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 10:57 am
Most often described here as those yet to be given cause for concern.
Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 11:11 am
Right, except to say, although I was aware of the current unequal times we are now living in, It did not hit me until I was hit in the face with it.
Was I apathetic, I was just doin what a human has a right to and that was livin ma life.
It is the individuals who are takin the easy way and jus takin and not givin a shit bout no one else. Yet by some friggin miracle they are the nicest people of the world in the worlds they tend to frequent.
Comment by mama — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 11:45 am
I do not know if I am right but surely democracy was meant to have a commonsense heart.
Comment by mama — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 12:06 pm
@2 I don’t see Big IF (Intersectional Feminism) as a think for all society.
It’s still based on core values so more likely more self indulgent and the consequential effects more dramatic.
Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 2:03 pm
I understand the siege feeling.
But broader society is not so stupid as the extremists among us, on any side. It is really important that we keep our finger on the pulse of our broad society.
I was touched by this article:
https://blog.heartsupport.com/a-letter-to-my-daughter-about-young-men-2bab2fca4971
Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 2:29 pm
That was lovely indeed Murray.
When we humans feel vulnerable we do things, dangerous, out of character, stupid, careless, unkind.
It makes you think that the race is in for a lot of turmoil to come given the apparent rise in vulnerabilities.
Or is this all a farce and the push for the likes of counsellors in every school is just more box ticking.
Comment by mama — Wed 21st November 2018 @ 3:01 pm
@12 Yeah yeah most men are jackals and it will take a long time to find an honourable man.
Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Fri 23rd November 2018 @ 9:38 am
@3: Quite a good article, highlighting problems with defining harassment subjectively according to whether it was wanted by the woman, and with trying to achieve the impossible task of obtaining consent in any reliable way, among other good thinking.
Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Fri 23rd November 2018 @ 9:58 am
#14,,MOMA,,Yeah, after I wrote that post I thought back to the other week where I heard an EXPERT talk about how women have a choice and they of course will choose a mate, sorry for that, I meant to say Man, that will earn more or the same MONEY as herself…did not seem like she was eluding to there being any HONOUR involved.
Comment by mama — Fri 23rd November 2018 @ 9:59 am
#15.MOMA, Yes, and I had to laugh at the opening paragraph/exert?, where the young couple were using phone apps to guide them through the to do or not to do, but then realised?, these apps are probably already in use and this was non-fiction?????
Comment by mama — Fri 23rd November 2018 @ 10:06 am
“what Feminists want”?
Easy…no standards of behaviour at all for women and men to be constrained to the behaviour of nineteenth century gentlemen.
Comment by gwallan — Fri 23rd November 2018 @ 10:43 am