Skip to main content

View Diary: The coming war on women (362 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks for telling us, once again, (6+ / 0-)

    that women's rights don't matter, and that somehow our issues are just distractions.

    It's always nice to see a walking, talking, typing part of the problem.

    How about you start "stopping fascism" by hauling your sanctimonious butt over to an abortion clinic and standing off the fascist creeps who try to prevent women from terminating their pregnancies?

    Not your speed? Didn't think so.


    •  This is not what I said. (0+ / 0-)

      But the rights of women must be of a kind with the rights of everyone.

      When you assert a political gender essentialism, you are reinforcing the contrived, political categories of the oppressor.  YOu are doing the work of the other side.

      Said categories are not politically neutral.  They are tools for control.  Including the lame "boy's vs. girls" stance of much of this discussion.

      When we reify dumbass rightwing categories (even from the most ostensibly progressive motives) we reinforce dumbass, rightwing reality.

      The oppression of women is a political issue, not gender issue.  To assert/demand otherwise is to do the oppressors work.

      Please don't feed the security state.

      •  Thanks for the patronizing lecture (6+ / 0-)

        But I'm pretty sure I understand the nature of the struggle for women's rights at least as well as you do.  "Women" is not a "dumbass rightwing category."  It would be nice if it were, because that would mean that I could count on progressive guys to be free of sexism, but unfortunately I can't.

        It's clear you don't have a very good understanding of gender, because if you did you couldn't make statement like "the oppression of women is a political issue, not a gender one." In fact, statements like that would seem laughable.  You might not realize it, but you're pretty good at doing the oppressor's work yourself. I suggest that a more sophisticated, more knowledgeable stance would serve you better. It might teach you not to enter a discussion about women's rights by throwing open the saloon door and saying, "Howdy -- you're all idiots and lamers," and expect to be well-received.

        •  I did an entire book on this (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mamamedusa, hepshiba

          The sorry relationship between Marxist socialism and the other leftist movements, including feminism, racism, heterosexism, environmentalism and nationalism.

          The title is "Hegemony and Counter-Hegemony", and it can be found at Amazon.  If you want to read it all for free, go here:

        •  You're mistating my position. (0+ / 0-)

          And offering baseless gender-essential attacks.

          The idea that we're engaged in some kind of gender essential struggle is a rightwing political frame.  Of enduring value.  To the right.

          That's what I'm saying and what I'm meaning.

          Please don't feed the security state.

          •  I think you'd do well (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Themistoclea, mamamedusa

            to read the section on Feminism from Lenny Flank's book -- link posted above.

            By the way, "gender-essential" is itself a right wing frame.  It's the right that makes the distinction between "gender feminists" and "equity feminists." There are a lot of excellent books addressing the limitations of socialist theory when it comes to addressing gender and race, including the link above. I think you might benefit from reading them. At the very least, you might understand why your stance is offensive and unproductive in an environment in which women are discussing limitations on their rights.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site