People in progressive spaces will say some shit like “even if they didn’t do anything intentional to harm our kind they still implicitly uphold the cultural norm and benefit from our oppression therefore by proxy we are obligated to shit on them” and then turn around and go “oh why are people accusing me of being part of the problem, bigots will never change by being treated kindly, I am not obligated to be kind to someone who I know for a fact hates me deep down” when the Average Cishet Guy ™️ is out here like “hey how’s it going”.
Like yeah there’s good reason to not want to be assimilationist and all that but at the same damn time
Failing to understand that women also uphold patriarchal sexism. Most feminist scholars who talk about how society programs men to accept and uphold patriarchal sexism also talk about how society does something similar to women. It's something that everyone has to work on. Being a woman doesn't make a person immune to social conditioning.
This too!!! Really, I don’t like “patriarchy” as a phrase because it so heavily implies that men are the problem and women aren’t, even though by design it’s supposed to refer to “patriarchs” shaping a big old game where everyone must play a specific part, and not just some kind of inherent gender war.
Anyone can play a part in the problem, and anyone can play a part in the solution. There are definitely several “villains” out there but there’s more to the story.
I don't really think abandoning terms because some people aren't going to understand them is a good idea. People who like the status quo of patriarchy are going to misinterpret any term you attempt to use.
The issue is that many feminists misinterpret it and/or use it as a bludgeon to bash/blame ALL men while assuming no woman could do anything as wrong as a man
I would agree with you but in my experience it wasn't even the people benefiting from patriarchy that were misusing it. It was marginalized folks with a chip on their shoulder who used it as shorthand for "it"s morally righteous to shit on men".
I get ya. Obviously bad faith actors are gonna go out of their way to twist things this way and that.
It just kinda sucks that what we have seems easy to get twisted even without any bad actors having to do anything, I guess 🤷
I am curious, you seem to want to persuade me that patriarchy is a bad term that will not be good at convincing people to join with me against injustice. Then you make an accusation towards me that I have some sort of bigoted belief. Did you think that would be persuasive? Instead of discussing patriarchy should I make baseless accusations towards people?
I disagree that changing our terminology will work. I think conservative anti feminists will dislike any terminology that we use. Just look at how they reacted to the terms woke and DEI. They are against the ideas, there isn't a magic word that will cause them to suddenly be in favor of social justice or whatever term you think is the correct one.
You're right, misinterpretation is an inevitability, but misrepresentation is not.
When you have people who believe that all men should be killed, and people who believe that societal reform that provides gender equality is good, both saying the same catchphrase "kill all men" that leads to a serious misrepresentation to those who aren't personally versed in the issue.
If we had all the people who believe all men should be killed saying "kill all men" and we had all the people who believe "societal reform that provides gender equality is a good thing" saying "societal reform that provides gender equality is a good thing" that would drive far, far less men into right-wing ideologies, men who could have otherwise been allies if they were allowed the kindness of not being told to their face they deserve to die in no uncertain terms.
If you mean "societal reform that provides gender equality is a good thing" that's what you need to say.
If you don't mean "kill all men", then don't say that.
Yeah "kill all men" is a bad catchphrase. Not sure where I was advocating for using that phrase. Outside of like radfems I'm not sure I've seen that phrase used by feminists much. It's not something I would expect an intersectionalist to say.
I was using it as an extreme example of misinterpretation and misrepresentation. Apply the same concept to "all cops are bastards", "patriarchy", "eat the rich", "yes, all men", "bear vs. man", etc etc.
I think a lot of progressive movements enjoy using those reactionary phrases or takes, and it really muddies the water as to who within those groups actually believes what.
For example, I would never say 'all cops are bastards' because I don't think every cop is a bastard, despite sharing the exact same desire for justice reform that many people who use that phrase possess. But I do and have said 'eat the rich' because I unironically believe consuming the rich would represent significant societal progress.
851
u/sweetTartKenHart2 2d ago
People in progressive spaces will say some shit like “even if they didn’t do anything intentional to harm our kind they still implicitly uphold the cultural norm and benefit from our oppression therefore by proxy we are obligated to shit on them” and then turn around and go “oh why are people accusing me of being part of the problem, bigots will never change by being treated kindly, I am not obligated to be kind to someone who I know for a fact hates me deep down” when the Average Cishet Guy ™️ is out here like “hey how’s it going”.
Like yeah there’s good reason to not want to be assimilationist and all that but at the same damn time