roseweird posted:

i don't remember reading about video games in the female eunuch or dialectic of sex

I remember reading it in this thread though.

Lessons posted:

roseweird posted:

gyrofry posted:

roseweird posted:

but feminism is for everyone

most undialectical

is your communist posture anything but a position from which to snipe at feminists as "liberals"


'Liberal' doesnt mean anything on this forum, its just something people say when you dont agree with holocaust denial or whatever.

Me: Faggot.

Liberal: Wtf...

Me: Cunt.

Liberal: WTF.

Me: Tranny.

Liberal: You're a bigot!

Me: Haha, as a matter of fact--and this may surprise you--but even though I said those things, I actually have more progressive beliefs than you. For instance, the so-called "holodomor",

aerdil posted:

wait a fuckin second. is this thread implying roseweird is a gender other than male?

The only female quality spazzy frankenstein can imitate is being really boring to talk to.

roseweird posted:

i'm with you and thinking about your post on proletarian feminism, i agree with you in principle but the main stream feminist intellectual tradition already identifies capital as enemy, so i think maybe too much is made of the distinction and it is not necessary to qualify support of feminism in any way, good feminisms, bad feminisms. but then i am still not well read in marxist or marxist-feminist thought, still have to read the books you recommended last time

the clear distinction between proletarian and the petty-bourgeois feminism that inundates mainstream feminist intellectual traditions (do not take this as a condemnation of feminism as a uniquely petty-bourgeois intellectual tradition, it of course isn't but it does not exist outside of the society of class antagonisms that systematically exclude or otherwise marginalize proletarian perspectives) is that while petty-bourgeois feminist theory may frequently and correctly criticize aspects of the capitalist system it is not capable of proposing concrete, systemic solutions to overthrow it. this not to say that the contributions of the conventional feminist intellectual traditions are not valuable, these obviously can offer a lot in clarifying the material considerations of women in relationship to patriarchal-capitalist society, dismissing this as "bad" feminism is pointless and stifling ourselves by ignoring broad swathes of important social theory is dangerous. but the distinction still exists and if that abolishment of the capitalist class system is necessary for the abolishment of the patriarchy then it is only proletarian feminism, feminism that proposes concrete paths towards the abolishment of this system, that can have a leading role in the liberation of women

bonus : here is a collection of essays from silvia federici also here is women's liberation in china by claudie broyelle that i think would be coole if u read.

Lykourgos posted:

I work latest 8:30am until shit is done. I lead/supervise 2-3 young prosecutors for their first juries.

I was off for two weeks though for family medical problems and my car was totaled today driving back to Chicago so I start Tuesday again. Because of budgetary/staffing issues since 2010 I still have personal time work so I will likely do that Monday.

So do you just not sleep a lot of the time? I basically have to take some speed if that happens to me.

swirlsofhistory posted:

palafox posted:

swirlsofhistory posted:

I've had to read some of this feminist technoscience dung in the past (Sandra Harding is the only name that I recall), and it's a big reason why I find feminist thinking is so much more offensive than anything it has actually done. It's a paragon of nonsensical theory babble – and that's saying something since there's a lot of competition in the humanities these days. While there's usually nothing wrong with using technical terms, using a slew of technical terms that seem to have hidden flexibility, or only derive meaning from other technical terms in the same work, is a recipe for conjuring these silly theories and ensuing 'problems' from what are straightforward, everyday activities where one ever had to consider ontologies or the realism of agents.



newish developments in the clinical consensus on chronic pain in both psychology and neuroscience owe a lot to theories of subjectivity and are affected by feminist-influenced thinking, so it sounds like you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. i don't know anything about "feminist technoscience" as a field besides it having an awful name though. that said, if you go Full Sokal in my fibromyalgic sewing circle/ womyn's liberation reading group you'll trigger at least a few of us, which i would consider both oppressive and othering

A lot of psychology and some neuroscience rest on conceptual nonsense to begin with. Not saying these supposed developments in the study of chronic pain are too, because I’m not familiar with them, but it’s plausible that a feminist or poststructuralist brand of confusion could be thrown into the mix and get followers.

Also, I disagree with Sokal almost as much as the feminists.

well, i'm not necessarily disagreeing with the first sentence, but you should do the reading here. the field is in the sort of nebulous interdisciplinary area that characterizes both empirical philosophy of mind & research on consciousness. MIT press recently-ish put out 4 books about pain, all of which are worth reading (unlike some of their other books on consciousness).

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/feeling-pain-and-being-pain
http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/pain
http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/myth-pain
http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/understanding-pain-0

i especially like the last two.
it's interesting that empirical philosophy of mind in general has a definite gender disparity in terms of who's publishing, but in pain studies things are just about equitable. almost as though all those feminist things about the body being the site of (capitalist) patriarchal oppression might have something to them . . .