right. i'm talking about feminism as a political or governmental program, though, not ivory tower scholarly theory. my point is that most of the third-wave program is beyond the purview of 'governance', which is kind of the point- making it third-wave, and not second-wave. hence the irrelevance of equal rights feminism as a political platform (mission accomplished). the media is how the political program is communicated, and they still harp on about equal rights. so i would say that modern feminism could be called 'evil' insofar as it is a vehicle for extracting privilege (or a nice issue to WHITE KNIGHT about)
Yeah I see your point; my problem isn't really with the misuse of feminism on a political front, I think the complaints are valid. It's more to do with the categorisation of these actions as 'modern feminism'.
No it's not it's about freedom of individuality and not being driven into some narrow definition of what it is to be a woman. The "third wave" is essentially a response to the growing prevalence of second wave feminists who were telling women that they were bad feminists if they wanted to be a stay at home mum, primary school teacher or nurse.
That's a part of it too. I should have covered that.
that's quite a shallow interpretation of third wave feminism. the reaction against second wave feminists was really inspired by the cultural turn/rise of post-modernism/post-structuralism in academia (flowing on to feminist theory) that challenged essentialist/progressive/grand narratives of womanhood. it wasn't just because second wave feminists were totalitarians.
Oh my god shutup.
sorry i thought we were having a serious discussion
Let me know when you begin.
wait for it
Isn't that what feminists want though? Wasn't that the end-game all along?
i meant irrelevant in a bad way, as in yahoo
fair enough, take it as a general question then
I was expecting this response and I think we might be dealing too much in absolutes here
sounds like something a rape culturalist would say