Feminism Thread

[Acevalefor]

I didn't see it that way, but now that you pointed it out, I can see how the people who were offended would have taken it that way. Just another way for them to take offense to everything people say. I cannot take people like that seriously. So, I see a strong, successful female in the national spotlight and have decided that she can think whatever she wants about privilege because she has not been the subject of female oppression. She also does not necessarily have to represent other people or be a role model.

[hey]

I agree. The issue with Kalie is that she enjoys it and wants it, but was still attacked by feminists who want to force her to not want to be a housewife.

Nah, there's nothing wrong with being a housewife. The problem was that she spoke as if there was no need for feminism, because equality has more or less been achieved already. That is what upset people.

[Acevalefor]

Nah, there's nothing wrong with being a housewife. The problem was that she spoke as if there was no need for feminism, because equality has more or less been achieved already. That is what upset people.

She said she has no use for feminism in her life. In other words, it doesn't matter to her. She is just going to focus on what she wants to do and her career/life and let others fight whatever fight they want to fight. I understand that. In the same vein, I will not take a stand against religion because I think it's pointless. People will believe whatever they want to believe and I am not going to stop them. So I will live my life and let the evangelists fight their fight for God. Understand?

[Koul]

Nah, there's nothing wrong with being a housewife. The problem was that she spoke as if there was no need for feminism, because equality has more or less been achieved already. That is what upset people.

The problem you speak of is only there if you think it's there. A shitload of other people read the same article and didn't see that or read into that way. The people that are freaking out have broken Rage-Meters. It seems like it's stuck on 11.

[hey]

She said she has no use for feminism in her life. In other words, it doesn't matter to her. She is just going to focus on what she wants to do and her career/life and let others fight whatever fight they want to fight. I understand that. In the same vein, I will not take a stand against religion because I think it's pointless. People will believe whatever they want to believe and I am not going to stop them. So I will live my life and let the evangelists fight their fight for God. Understand?

I don't think that comparison makes any sense. Feminism is about fighting against harmful behavior, and trying to create a better world for women to live in. It's okay if someone doesn't want to fight for that cause, but to suggest it is useless because women are already treated equally is just ridiculous. That argument is harmful. If she just said "I'm a privileged wealthy actress so i don't need to worry about it." then it wouldn't be a problem, at least as far as i see. That's not helpful to the cause, but it's not harmful either. I certainly could never expect everyone, or even just all women to fight for feminism, but fighting against it is a problem.

[Tyrath]

Nah, there's nothing wrong with being a housewife. The problem was that she spoke as if there was no need for feminism, because equality has more or less been achieved already. That is what upset people.

Her full comments:

It's not really something I think about. Things are different now, and I know a lot of the work that paved the way for women happened before I was around ... I was never that feminist girl demanding equality, but maybe that's because I've never really faced inequality. I cook for [my husband] five nights a week: It makes me feel like a housewife; I love that. I know it sounds old-fashioned, but I like the idea of women taking care of their men. I'm so in control of my work that I like coming home and serving him.

I don't see where she says anything about the need of feminism outside her own life. Unless this isn't the quote people are mad about, I don't see what the issue is in what she said.

[hey]

The problem you speak of is only there if you think it's there. A shitload of other people read the same article and didn't see that or read into that way. The people that are freaking out have broken Rage-Meters. It seems like it's stuck on 11.

No, the problem is there either way, because her words will influence others to think the same way.

[Charismatic]

No, the problem is there either way, because her words will influence others to think the same way.

?_?
Explain yourself.

[hey]

Her full comments:



I don't see where she says anything about the need of feminism outside her own life. Unless this isn't the quote people are mad about, I don't see what the issue is in what she said.

Right here

Things are different now, and I know a lot of the work that paved the way for women happened before I was around

[hey]

?_?
Explain yourself.

She is suggesting the goals of feminism have already been accomplished, and so there's not much need for it anymore, but that's not true.

[Tyrath]

Right here

I don't see the issue. She doesn't say the work is done, nor does she say that she is where she is without that work being done. She is not suggesting the goals of feminism have been accomplished, you're just taking her words to mean that. When really it was simply a response to whether or not she is a feminist. And the answer was no, because she is content with where she is because of the work that has been done by feminism. And she is not required to not be content with it.

Nothing in any of that says that feminists shouldn't keep doing their work or that things are already equal for everyone.

[Charismatic]

She is suggesting the goals of feminism have already been accomplished, and so there's not much need for it anymore, but that's not true.

You're reading too far into this.
What she's saying is feminism has come far enough for her to not feel a need for it in her life. This does not necessarily mean that there is no need for people to strive for equality at all.

She simply does not feel a personal stake in the fight because she is privileged enough to not feel any negative effects and therefore is not compelled to identify as feminist. That is all that she said.

[NynJa]

I certainly could never expect everyone, or even just all women to fight for feminism, but fighting against it is a problem.

And at what point did Kaley do anything remotely close to this?

[Koul]

No, the problem is there either way, because her words will influence others to think the same way.

Mmm. No. Disagree.

see everyone elses posts. I'll echo what I and others have said and that you read into it the way you wanted to read into it to trigger yourself.

[Acevalefor]

And at what point did Kaley do anything remotely close to this?

I think she was referring to me somehow since her response was to me. I am still not sure how letting the feminists fight their fight and staying out of it myself is fighting against them though.

[Koul]

I think she was referring to me somehow since her response was to me. I am still not sure how letting the feminists fight their fight and staying out of it myself is fighting against them though.

something something if you're not with us, you're against us something something?

If I was ever famous and I got asked this type of question, I would just respond with like Pineapple or Hiccup and let the readers fill in the blanks with their minds because that's what will happen anyways. As we can see.

[hey]

I think she was referring to me somehow since her response was to me. I am still not sure how letting the feminists fight their fight and staying out of it myself is fighting against them though.

No, staying out of it isn't fighting against it. Implying that it's not important is though. Which, okay, i can see that maybe it's not so clear whether or not she intended to imply that. At the very least it should have been worded more carefully if she didn't.

[Tymon]

Perhaps it's your opinion that what she said is problematic and undermines the goals of feminism. While I disagree, that is your opinion, and judging by the response, it's one shared by many others, though I myself expect that the vast majority of them are echoing a hivemind opinion without actually forming one of their own.

But that's where it ends. It's an opinion. Taking it further is thought policing; undermining other's opinions as incorrect or misguided. An opinion can only be factually incorrect. If there are no facts involved, and it is purely subjective, then it is an infallible statement. It can be disagreed with, but it cannot be proven right it wrong. Period.

[Mazmaz]

Right here

Pretty much this. I'm assuming people who read that and don't get the fact that when she says "things are different now" she means "we're equal now". It's like you people can't read between the lines.

Her whole housewife spiel combined with that statement just made her look like a caricature which is what people made fun of.

[hey]

Perhaps it's your opinion that what she said is problematic and undermines the goals of feminism. While I disagree, that is your opinion, and judging by the response, it's one shared by many others, though I myself expect that the vast majority of them are echoing a hivemind opinion without actually forming one of their own.

But that's where it ends. It's an opinion. Taking it further is thought policing; undermining other's opinions as incorrect or misguided. An opinion can only be factually incorrect. If there are no facts involved, and it is purely subjective, then it is an infallible statement. It can be disagreed with, but it cannot be proven right it wrong. Period.

But we aren't talking about her thoughts. She said them out loud, and thousands/millions of people read her thoughts. We are talking about her words. I see no problem with policing someone's words or actions.