Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Feminism is too big and capacious a concept to speak of as a tool for destroying society.
Feminism as a movement for women's rights is still in demand on the planet and will continue to be in demand until women are equated with men in the laws of all countries around the world.
But as with any global idea, feminism is stratified into various currents, some of which are quite schizophrenic. Do these movements destroy society?�
I don't think. The society is much more stable than it seems. And given that sociologists note a decrease in aggression in this very society, I think it will somehow survive the existence of radicals of all stripes.
Just like any tool can become a murder weapon, even a fork.
And feminists and other “self-harmed” turned out to be the perfect material for creating “fifth columns”. If earlier it was necessary to find a leader (like Navalny), create a party, persuade them to somehow fight, now this is not required at all! Now at the head of thousands of fat women screaming on every corner and the more they are told “stupid fools do not talk nonsense” the more they happily carry it realizing impunity. Feminism is no different from Nazism or fascism. Those, too, were initially for justice and rights and for all good things.
In general, femo tolerasts are now supported by a standard penny from abroad through funds or by sponsoring the release of books and traveling around the world. Plus, politicians in the West have long realized that this is a grateful biomass and if they lick it, they will run to vote for you.
Well, banal interracial marriages have generated a lot of mutants mestizos who also need kudato to join.
The only way to deal with this social epidemic is as with a normal epidemic: isolation of carriers and prohibition of infection of others. Feminism should be recognized as an anti-human, anti-moral religion and banned. Along the way, women's questions and answers on women's websites about personal relationships should be banned and responsibility for harmful advice should be introduced if there is no psychologist's license. And then some fools ask for advice and others happily give it.
PS and yes, I know that Q is the refuge of these very femok, tolerasts, and so on, so they will zaminusuyut and “normal” people (or who consider themselves such) will proudly pass by because they did not like the random word and thereby silently podlerzhat femok with their stupid laziness ( yes, yes, yes I'm talking about you reading the text now, go on)
This transformation of feminism is a special case of this process. So, there is a certain problem in society: gender discrimination (as in this case), domestic violence, homophobia, racism, etc. At some point in society there are people who loudly declare: no, this is not possible. Gradually, they gain supporters, the press, politicians, and the state are drawn to the issue – and you see, if the problem is not solved, then it has lost its sharpness. It seems that everything is fine, you can celebrate the victory and disperse. But how many people managed to make this fight their profession! Social activists organize actions and draw attention to the problem (and not disinterestedly for a long time – there are all sorts of funds there), journalists write opuses (for a fee), politicians earn political points and votes, whole departments with bloated staff, decent salaries and without the risk of getting a bullet function in law enforcement, supervisory and social bodies. And what do you want all these people to do? Go to the factory? In extreme cases, of course, it is possible, but there is a better option: continue to do what you love, inflating “discrimination” from every fly, or “inventing” where it never existed.
So he crossed, like any current with a break from his ideological and ideological base. And the base there was Marxism or liberalism. Initially, feminism emerged in two directions – within the framework of Marxism as a socialist feminism-the struggle for equal rights of women and men and their joint struggle against capitalist oppression, and as a liberal feminism – the struggle of mainly middle-class women for electoral and property rights. Then in the twentieth century, after the emergence of the USSR and in the course of achieving certain equality, socialist feminism became an integral part of Soviet ideology and gradually began to be replaced by an egalitarian approach (egalitarianism) against the background of the expansion of women's rights in the USSR. And in the West, with the achievements of liberal feminism in the 60s and 70s, a second wave of feminism emerged-radical feminism. Radical feminism was essentially a compromise between socialist and liberal feminism, which gave rise to the so-called “patriarchal domination theory”, which stated that capitalism oppresses women only in the sense that women are ruled by “white men”. In this regard, feminists revised Marx's theory of formations and considered the history of class formations as simply a system of patriarchal oppression, where the forms changed, and the class of oppressors (men) remained the same. A biologizing approach was superimposed on this (men in radical feminism are considered aggressive and violent by nature), some feminists even wrote that “in a patriarchal society, any heterosexual sexual act between a man and a woman is essentially rape, even if it was committed voluntarily, by mutual consent.” Within the framework of radical feminism of the second wave, a number of quite normal measures were implemented – for example, protecting women from sexual blackmail in the workplace, protecting victims of prostitution, pornography, and sex trafficking, protecting women who were raped by soldiers of the aggressor armies in hot spots (in particular, it was radical feminists who made public the fact that there were underground brothels for NATO soldiers in the former Yugoslavia, where women For making this fact public, a feminist US citizen was arrested, and a UN representative (a minor official who was involved in the investigation)was arrested. The UN, under pressure from the United States, was forced to demote him and ban him from public speaking. Radical feminists were also engaged in the fight against pedophilia (both female and male, by the way, here they did not distinguish). The most significant action of radical feminists was an appeal to the US Congress (in the late 80s-early 2000s). 90's) with the facts of violent involvement of minors in pornography, as well as the facts of violent treatment of women (rape on the set of porn films, etc.). US Congressmen considered this issue at the commission and gave the following answer:”First, these women deserve their fate, secondly, this is a legal business, and we are in favor of market freedom.” After that, the US elite took (obviously) a number of measures. A number of “popular new books” have been published by recognized feminist scholars who have criticized the second wave theories, pointing out their negative aspects. This is how the third wave (intersectional feminism) emerged. Intersectional feminism came up with its own theory of oppression, according to which there is a network of oppressed minorities who are all oppressed by the patriarchal majority to varying degrees, so the maximum of oppression should be expected at “intersections” (“intersections”), where, for example, double or triple oppression occurs, since a person belongs to several oppressed groups at once. It looks beautiful, but in reality intersectionism immediately turned the movement for women's equality into a struggle for equality of “all minorities”, that is, gays, lesbians, women, transgender people and so on. Radical feminists opposed this and were “branded” with universal contempt. Gradually, the movement of radical feminism in developed countries either died out, moving into socialist feminism (as close to itself), or is trying to raise the topic of oppression and patriarchy, but no longer strictly following the original theories, but increasingly moving into biologization, focusing on the “male gaze”,” objectification of women ” and other postmodern paradigms in general. As a result, “queer feminism” and “postmodern feminism” have emerged, which generally call for abandoning common sense. Against the background of the collapse of feminism into a number of competing groups, even “sex-positive feminism” emerged, which recognized body-positive, prostitution, pornography, and so on as useful and correct. In general, the circle is closed. In isolation from the theory of Marxism, feminism, through biologization, reached sociologizing theories about “the harm of men as men “and”let's find out which minority is more oppressed”. At the same time, such feminists are not engaged in the struggle for the rights of working women, but are engaged exclusively in the protection of privileged women's groups in the middle and upper class of society. In general, the only normal feminism today is socialist feminism, the rest of feminism has mostly either degraded to banal human rights protection (without making any demands), or makes demands mainly for men of high status (the so-called cancel – culture – “culture of cancellation”).
Feminism-from the word femina-woman, that is, it is a movement that fights with a woman and her role in society and the family.
Feminists believe that the female model of behavior is imposed by men, so feminists try to look and behave like men…
Don't ask why they do this, like so many other post-modern phenomena, feminism is all made up of ridiculous absurdities.
Who are the feminists feuding with? Who, and most importantly, why, do they hate?
This is the main enemy of the entire global neoliberal project and feminism as an integral part of it. It is not surprising that with feminists, such a man has polar views on absolutely everything. He stands for what feminists hate:
He is against what feminists openly or covertly promote:
To distort and drown out the voice of these men, infected ladies resort to two standard techniques: distortion of facts and hysteria. Terms with a pronounced negative connotation are used:
“In every man there is a tyrant who cannot imagine his life without the oppression of women. They want to drive women back into slavery. Deprive us of our freedom, make us work for them.”
The final text and its semantic variations are repeated an infinite number of times. All according to Goebbels.
The gravediggers of feminism have already flooded Europe and are being overseen by Angela Merkel and her henchmen, Ursula von der Leyen and others.History has known many attempts to establish matriarchy, and all of them were blown away as soon as they bored men. Don't remember the culture in South America, which is a pity. There they found a lot of female skeletons with injuries. It wasn't an enemy raid, and the bones weren't damaged. That is, the patriarchal revolution.
And the Czechs have a legend on this topic.; “Amazons of the Czech Republic”. Feminists without a sense of measure will not stop.