Revisiting Feminism: INFJ (or other type) perspectives

[La Sagna]

Is the goal of feminism to instill ideals into the people and culture, or to create a counter culture that alienates the people its is meant to help? I think it has succeeded at both things to varying degrees. I think many of the ideals are now a part of the culture and what wasn't absorbed is just left over nonsense.

Good points. I'm not sure that everything that should be absorbed has been fully absorbed yet but a lot of it has in this part of the world and there is a lot of nonsense that should just go away.

 

[the]

I wonder sometimes if feminism is negotiating with society by demanding extreme and rediculous things like "lets castrate all cis scum!" And then dialing it back to "okay I guess we can accept equal pay for equal work."

 

[muir]

I feel that we have let misogynists and misandrists win by letting them define what feminism is and making us feel like it is a bad word.

I don't want to let them win!

I know it's just semantics and in a way it probably makes no difference wether I call myself a feminist are not, but I just feel that it's a matter of principle.

The only people 'winning' are the central bankers and their minions

Its time to wake up from the spell

 

[barbad0s]

I think the most important thing is to understand one another, and to understand ourselves.

With so much complexity in this biological and sociological issue, coupled with perhaps a lot of unreliable "statistics" floating around, this is the only thing that I feel I can say for certain, and as a society we have hardly just begun trying in this regard. The open dialogue has hardly just begun for the laypeople in our world.

 

[muir]

I think the most important thing is to understand one another, and to understand ourselves.

With so much complexity in this biological and sociological issue, coupled with perhaps a lot of unreliable "statistics" floating around, this is the only thing that I feel I can say for certain, and as a society we have hardly just begun trying in this regard. The open dialogue has hardly just begun for the laypeople in our world.

The problem is still the same it has been for a long time now

How do we balance our individual freedoms with our responsibilities to our wider community?

I think the golden rule is a good one: do to others as you would have them do to you

So if men want to have a say in the running of their community then they should also recognise that women have that right as well and visa versa

If men want greater personal freedoms then they should recognise that women have that right as well and vis versa

The areas where things become complicated are in things like property and in child rearing; personally i think the answer to that is to place everything except small personal items under common ownership

Child rearing could also be handled completely differently if property rights were abolished because people wouldn't need to work all the time

People need to start thinking what sort of arrangement would work for them which doesn't impose on others and then do that....live it

How many so called 'feminists' have got married when marriage has its roots in property rights?

There's a lot of people who talk the talk but don't walk the walk

if people want the world to be different then they need to behave differently

But if they cast off the influence of property rights they should also cast off all forms of power over them and reject centralised power otherwise they will just build themselves a new prison

If a woman perceives the traditional view of her husband as head of the family as oppressive because it is a centralised form of power then she should also recognise that the government and corporations are ALSO centralised forms of power and therefore as an extension to freeing herself from 'patriarchal' effects she should also logically free herself from the patriarchy of government and corporations

but how many so called 'feminists' are also anarchists?

 

[La Sagna]

The problem is still the same it has been for a long time now

How do we balance our individual freedoms with our responsibilities to our wider community?

I think the golden rule is a good one: do to others as you would have them do to you

So if men want to have a say in the running of their community then they should also recognise that women have that right as well and visa versa

If men want greater personal freedoms then they should recognise that women have that right as well and vis versa

The areas where things become complicated are in things like property and in child rearing; personally i think the answer to that is to place everything except small personal items under common ownership

Child rearing could also be handled completely differently if property rights were abolished because people wouldn't need to work all the time

People need to start thinking what sort of arrangement would work for them which doesn't impose on others and then do that....live it

How many so called 'feminists' have got married when marriage has its roots in property rights?

There's a lot of people who talk the talk but don't walk the walk

if people want the world to be different then they need to behave differently

But if they cast off the influence of property rights they should also cast off all forms of power over them and reject centralised power otherwise they will just build themselves a new prison

If a woman perceives the traditional view of her husband as head of the family as oppressive because it is a centralised form of power then she should also recognise that the government and corporations are ALSO centralised forms of power and therefore as an extension to freeing herself from 'patriarchal' effects she should also logically free herself from the patriarchy of government and corporations

but how many so called 'feminists' are also anarchists?

The first part I completely agree with but wouldn't it be crazy for women to want anarchy? Anarchy leads to the "law of the jungle" and women would definitely not be at the top of the "food chain". Unfortunately a strong judicial system and enforcement of the laws is necessary for women to be protected.

Show me anywhere in the world where the people have risen against their government and women haven't been victimized in the lawlessness of the moment. Some people will take this as proof that women will never be equal, and in a sense they are right, but the fact that we are physically and sexually vulnerable doesn't mean we shouldn't be equal, it just means that we need the support of the majority of men to be able to have equal rights.

Give me a decent democratic government anytime over anarchy. I'm not crazy about our current government and would love to see them replaced but I know I'm better off with them in power than with no government.

 

[muir]

The first part I completely agree with but wouldn't it be crazy for women to want anarchy? Anarchy leads to the "law of the jungle" and women would definitely not be at the top of the "food chain". Unfortunately a strong judicial system and enforcement of the laws is necessary for women to be protected.

I think youre equating anarchy with chaos

Anarchy doesn't mean that there is no structure it just means that power is exercised from the bottom of society upwards instead of from the top down

Anarchy is the perfect system for women because it is non coercive.....no one can be made to do anything they don't want to do

Also everyone has a say...consensus democracy...so women and men would have equal clout

Show me anywhere in the world where the people have risen against their government and women haven't been victimized in the lawlessness of the moment. Some people will take this as proof that women will never be equal, and in a sense they are right, but the fact that we are physically and sexually vulnerable doesn't mean we shouldn't be equal, it just means that we need the support of the majority of men to be able to have equal rights.

3 historical examples of anarchists taking power off the government where women weren't victimised would be: the paris commune, the anarchists in the spanish civil war and the zapatistas

If society breaks down in the sense you mean (chaos) then both sexes get victimised

Give me a decent democratic government anytime over anarchy. I'm not crazy about our current government and would love to see them replaced but I know I'm better off with them in power than with no government.

You're cherry picking your forms of centralised control

Just as a corrupt man can oppress you a corrupt government can oppress you as well. But if the means of production are held in common ownership by every man, woman and child and if everything is decided at local level by regular peoples assemblies/workers councils and at a regional/national level by instantly revocable delegates then you would have a constant say in every decision of your community

The swiss are split up into cantons and they have regualr votes on things which mean that they are more directly involved in the shaping of their communities

I'm talking about even more democracy than that!

For a modern example of anarchistic success in an otherwise economic wasteland then check out the town of marinaleda in spain where the national economy is struggling: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/marinaleda-spanish-communist-village-utopia

 

[the]

The first part I completely agree with but wouldn't it be crazy for women to want anarchy? Anarchy leads to the "law of the jungle" and women would definitely not be at the top of the "food chain". Unfortunately a strong judicial system and enforcement of the laws is necessary for women to be protected.

Show me anywhere in the world where the people have risen against their government and women haven't been victimized in the lawlessness of the moment. Some people will take this as proof that women will never be equal, and in a sense they are right, but the fact that we are physically and sexually vulnerable doesn't mean we shouldn't be equal, it just means that we need the support of the majority of men to be able to have equal rights.

Give me a decent democratic government anytime over anarchy. I'm not crazy about our current government and would love to see them replaced but I know I'm better off with them in power than with no government.

Women are being victimized right now, you have no idea how an anarchistic society would affect those rates of victimization. I guess you could keep trying the same old same old to fix things. Women and men are never victims under democratic rule after all lol.

 

[La Sagna]

Women are being victimized right now, you have no idea how an anarchistic society would affect those rates of victimization. I guess you could keep trying the same old same old to fix things. Women and men are never victims under democratic rule after all lol.

You have no idea what an anarchist society would do to the rates of victimization either. I'm making an educated guess from the evidence of how women are treated where the central government and the laws are weak. I guess you have a better opinion of the goodness of 'all mankind' than I do. I'm not sure what you think would happen to the people who victimize other people in a world with a government and laws, would they all of a sudden all dissapear or become converted to being decent people in an anarchist state? That seems highly unlikely to me.

 

[the]

You have no idea what an anarchist society would do to the rates of victimization either. I'm making an educated guess from the evidence of how women are treated where the central government and the laws are weak. I guess you have a better opinion of the goodness of 'all mankind' than I do. I'm not sure what you think would happen to the people who victimize other people in a world with a government and laws, would they all of a sudden all dissapear or become converted to being decent people in an anarchist state? That seems highly unlikely to me.

We have laws now and they aren't stopping anyone. I'm making an educated guess based on how women are treated where the community is strong. It is substantially more effective than a strong central government. Afterall its not like obama is sending in the troops to stop rape.

 

[La Sagna]

I think youre equating anarchy with chaos

Anarchy doesn't mean that there is no structure it just means that power is exercised from the bottom of society upwards instead of from the top down

Anarchy is the perfect system for women because it is non coercive.....no one can be made to do anything they don't want to do

Also everyone has a say...consensus democracy...so women and men would have equal clout



3 historical examples of anarchists taking power off the government where women weren't victimised would be: the paris commune, the anarchists in the spanish civil war and the zapatistas

If society breaks down in the sense you mean (chaos) then both sexes get victimised



You're cherry picking your forms of centralised control

Just as a corrupt man can oppress you a corrupt government can oppress you as well. But if the means of production are held in common ownership by every man, woman and child and if everything is decided at local level by regular peoples assemblies/workers councils and at a regional/national level by instantly revocable delegates then you would have a constant say in every decision of your community

The swiss are split up into cantons and they have regualr votes on things which mean that they are more directly involved in the shaping of their communities

I'm talking about even more democracy than that!

For a modern example of anarchistic success in an otherwise economic wasteland then check out the town of marinaleda in spain where the national economy is struggling: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/marinaleda-spanish-communist-village-utopia

You have a very utopian idea of what anarchy would be like. I do not trust people enough to believe that everything would be all love and roses in an anarchist state.

I really enjoy the writings of Karl Marx, but communism works only in small groups of like-minded people, which is wonderful, but in the general population there are too many people who will take advantage of situations and other people to try to get ahead.

I know a lot of people and although there are many people I probably could trust to do the 'right thing' in general, there are a great many that I know would take advantage of other people for their own personal gains and to obtain power over others.

I believe in unions as a way to protect workers rights but I know of a number of unions who have ended up with corrupt people in positions of power and their interest wasn't in doing the best for the union members as a whole but how to use their position for personal gain and as a power trip. My feeling is that it doesn't matter what you call your idea of how society should be organized there will always be people on power trips who will use their wits to control others.

I personally admire Nordic Social Democracy and believe that they have the best system at present.

 

[La Sagna]

We have laws now and they aren't stopping anyone.

So people don't get arrested and go to jail where you are? It may not stop many of them from doing it the first time but we can stop them from doing it a second time.

I'm making an educated guess based on how women are treated where the community is strong.

Example?

 

[the]

So people don't get arrested and go to jail where you are? It may not stop many of them from doing it the first time but we can stop them from doing it a second time.

Rape happens in prison, or haven't You heard?

 

[La Sagna]

Rape happens in prison, or haven't You heard?

Then you need a strong prison system of rules and oversight so it doesn't happen, not anarchy.

 

[the]

Then you need a strong prison system of rules and oversight so it doesn't happen, not anarchy.

yeah more and more rules and then put people you wouldn't trust without rules in charge of enforcing the rules.

 

[La Sagna]

[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION] [MENTION=731]the[/MENTION]
I propose a social experiment. Let's put all the anarchists together on a deserted island and watch what happens.

 

[the]

[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION] [MENTION=731]the[/MENTION]
I propose a social experiment. Let's put all the anarchists together on a deserted island and watch what happens.

The western hemispehere is just one big island. We'll take it

 

[muir]

You have a very utopian idea of what anarchy would be like. I do not trust people enough to believe that everything would be all love and roses in an anarchist state.

No i don't have a 'utopian' view

If you look at the article i posted about marinaleda it is not presenting a paradise. What it is presenting though is a stable community that grew out of abject poverty. A community without a housing bubble and without unemployment in a country that is rife with unemployement

The take home pay of each person is not great but is still better than many and individuals can also pursue their own private enterprises

I don't think that there is such a thing as paradise on earth....what is paradise anyway? is it sitting around on chaise-longes being fed grapes by a beautiful woman? Sure that might be nice for a while but would i ever long for anything more...because as soon as i did i wouldn;t be in paradise anymore

This reality is always going to require some form of effort but the question is how do we manage resources in a way that is least oppressive to us? How do we structure things in a way that offer us the greatest degree of personal freedoms whilst balancing those agsint our responsibilities to the community?

I think now with the internet and the technology we have we are in a good position to share resources well over distance and to take some of the burden of work off us and onto technology

Under the current system technology is used to control us because we are being farmed. We are the cattle under the current system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A

Under an anarchist society we can be the farmers with NO ONE above us.....the only restraint we might feel would be a sense of our responsibility to the community; but if everyone was employed (to share the work) and if we used tecnology to help us (rather than to spy on us or control us) then we could all work less then we work now

This would free up more time to be creative or to be with friends or family, read a book, tend your garden or whatever your ideal form of enjoyment is

There would be no debts, bills or taxes to stress you out. You provide some of your time as a contribution to the requirements of the community and you receive back what you need

That's not a utopia as you are still required to contribute but it is a drastic improvement on wage slavery where your life stops feeling like your own (because it isn't...you're being farmed)

But besides...what kind of life would it be without some purpose anyway? Anarchist communism gives people the meaning and purpose of being a part of somethign which they have a stake in as a fully involved member as well as any satisfaction they derive from their own past times

I really enjoy the writings of Karl Marx, but communism works only in small groups of like-minded people, which is wonderful, but in the general population there are too many people who will take advantage of situations and other people to try to get ahead.

The paris commune worked and that was city wide

The internet allows a means of coordinating effort over large population clusters...it just needs organisation

What usually makes people strive to get ahead is scarcity and the competition that breeds; if resources are being shared that need to compete isn't there in the same way

I know a lot of people and although there are many people I probably could trust to do the 'right thing' in general, there are a great many that I know would take advantage of other people for their own personal gains and to obtain power over others.

They wouldn't have the means to gain power over anyone else as everyone would have equal say

Its under the capitalist system that people can accumulate money and therefore power and then exploit others. capitalism doesn't reward the most compassionate...usually quite the opposite!

I believe in unions as a way to protect workers rights but I know of a number of unions who have ended up with corrupt people in positions of power and their interest wasn't in doing the best for the union members as a whole but how to use their position for personal gain and as a power trip. My feeling is that it doesn't matter what you call your idea of how society should be organized there will always be people on power trips who will use their wits to control others.

The unions are a component of the current system. They are capitalist....they aren't seeking to change the system....they are just trying to get a better deal here and there within the system...so of course they will breed the usual behaviour of a capitalist culture

I personally admire Nordic Social Democracy and believe that they have the best system at present.

The danish claim to be the happiest people in the world that's true but they also take a lot of anti-depressants so things aren't perfect there

if you want my opinion about what is going wrong it is that the wealth is shared well which leads to a large and prosperous middle class but its one that then becomes an aspirant class and by aspirant i mean they measure themselves against the middle classes of other countries; so they want the perfect life

They are aspiring to the perfect life as dictated to them by the capitalist controlled media; but the perfect capitalist life is a sanitised, materialistic, souless one where people have everything they need but with no sense of community so they expend their energies on petty sqabbles instead like a drama filled soap opera

I think a lot of the aspirant swedish middle class are now aspiring to certain role models for example the characters in the Svensson Svensson soap opera. In the UK we have a trashy braindead but titilating series called 'footballers wives' which many people seem to aspire to

I think this culture of trying to clone oneself to a created ideal which lacks substance and isn't about doing anything productive creates an inauthentic population hiding behind masks who then end up taking anti-depressants because after ticking al the boxes they find that they still feel empty inside because they lack meaning and purpose and they lack a sense of community

Peoples assemblies were used successfully in the occupy movement: http://www.peoplesassemblies.org/

 

[muir]

@muir @the
I propose a social experiment. Let's put all the anarchists together on a deserted island and watch what happens.

Sounds great i would love to try this...but what you will find increasingly is that the land is being bought up by hedge funds, asset management corporations and other financial folks

otherwise find me a fertile island and sign me up!

 

[bamf]

I want to go to anarchist sleep-away camp on a deserted island! Pick me! Pick me!