Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[MalkuthSamanera1]

I suggest a feminist philosophy forum (for discussions involving men and women).

Feminism is a huge and significant movement with significant underlying intellectual arguments around how one half of the human race treats the other half...and there are implications for EVERY branch of philosophy.

Please can we see this?

(Has no woman suggested this?! let alone me as a man!)

[Creekside Muse]

Thank you, Malkuthsamanera1, for your suggestion.

I'm a newcomer to Online Philosophy Club, and so regretfully reply to this post almost a year after its debut. Perhaps my reply will go the way of socks in the laundry (as it seems this post has), but I persist because I would love to explore feminist philosophy beyond my limited exposure to some of its concepts during graduate study at Cal State L.A.

My work there focused on a flaw in Rawls' ideal/non-ideal theory distinction that excludes minorities and marginalized groups from the original contract. This focus naturally includes (a) the subjugation of women through social hierarchies and gender presuppositions that favor men and (b) the exclusion of the private sphere--the structure of the family, especially where its premises revert from contract to patriarchy--from the original contract. It was through my exposure to the strong feminist faction in the CSULA Department of Philosophy that I became interested in the subject--but only after I was already submerged in the details of my own thesis in political philosophy, which resulted in my missing out on a lot of that really interesting and broadly applicable conversation.

Feminist philosophy strongly overlaps with other philosophies; thus, a forum devoted to feminist theory would open not only an engaging conversation between feminists, but also between feminists and those who are interested in political, ethical, and legal philosophies. While feminist concepts could be subsumed into other forums, that perspective is probably often overlooked (isn't that the whole point?); whereas, a separate forum would likely spur interest in the point of view that exists at the intersection between feminist philosophy and political, ethical, and legal philosophy and inject our mutual interests and explorations with a unique perspective.

Just weighing in...

[MalkuthSamanera1]

Hello, I am so glad that you have responded in this way, and so disappointed that no-one else has replied. I'm not sure where to go from here. Perhaps a different /seperate / new website.

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

I agree that feminism is a huge and significant movement with significant underlying intellectual arguments. However, I am not sure that we can make a separate forum for every or even a portion of significant movements. These ideas the fall under the category of feminism can each be discussed in the branch of philosophy any given discussion come up, such as morality, or politics, or art. The problem is not with feminism per se, but with the principle of creating new forums that if enacted fairly would lead to countless forums. I'm still open to more feedback about this matter, though.

[MalkuthSamanera1]

Thanks Scott.

I disagree with you that feminism can be compared to 'significant movements' in general on an equal basis.

Feminism (or some branches of it) seeks to directly address perceived -but very serious and well substantiated-inequalities as experienced by billions of people worldwide. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but I cannot see that other 'significant movements' carry quite so much...significance!

Secondly, as Creekside Muse pointed out, feminist threads will precisely NOT be addressed to a fair degree in the forums in general, precisely because of the dominance -sometimes extremely subtle- of male perspectives in academia.

'Isn't that the whole point?' to quote Creekside Muse above.

[Creekside Muse]

Scott:

I understand your position about multiple forums and defer to your experience running the board--I will try to interject into other discussions what little I know about feminist perspectives on their subjects.

The larger concern, however, is that, while the insights of feminist philosophy tend to offer important information about moral and social philosophies such as law, ethics, and politics, there is little understanding of its theoretical framework and, as a result, even less application of its valuable contributions. A broader understanding of feminist philosophy in its own right, which is best obtained from within feminist philosophical discussion--rather than an interjection of the feminist perspective into other philosophies--will better highlight overlooked problems, introduce solid insights, and, most importantly, enable those interested in law, politics, and ethics to put feminist philosophy to better use as a tool for exploring otherwise intractable problems in their areas of interest. Thus, a better understanding of feminist philosophy and more widespread application of its contributions, in my opinion, are the primary reasons for introducing a separate forum from which its insights can radiate outward.

Because I would like to have a conversation about feminist philosophy, I have tried to respond to two messages left for me by MalkuthSamanera1, but cannot seem to do so. Am I too new to the board to have earned that privilege, or just too inexperienced to figure out how to do it?

MalkuthSamanera1:

Rather than an email discussion between the two of us, perhaps a continuance of this thread would be more productive in expanding the conversation to include other perspectives--especially because I still have a lot to learn and would like to hear other views. One of the things I'm trying to understand is the idea that gender is a socially constructed concept. I'd like to explore the ways in which gender is culturally constructed and how those constructs interfere with a fuller understanding of human rights, justice, and morality.

Disclaimer: My busy schedule will likely reduce the speed at which you would like our discussions to proceed--please forgive me. --April

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

Creekside Muse, new users (those with less than 5 on-topic posts) cannot send PMs and will have their posts on the forum held for moderation.

Again, the issue I have is the way the navigation works now is that there is different categories for branches of philosophy (e.g. politics, metaphysics) not for philosophies (e.g. anarchism, communism, idealism, realism, objectivism, etc.), with the main idea of the site being that anyone representing any given philosophy (or more accurately representing their own philosophy whether it can be clearly categorized as matching a commonly known philosophy such as feminism or objectivism or philosophical realism or physicalism) can argue those beliefs in topics others post as they come up or by creating their own new topics.

I'm still open to hearing your further ideas on the matter, getting more feedback and opinions, and considering the issue more myself.

For now, might I suggest simply starting topics about the feminist issues or arguing feminist points that you wish to discuss.

[MalkuthSamanera1]

Thanks April and Scott.

I agree with Creekside Muse's assessment of need for seperate feminist forum and again reassert that feminism should be given more weight than most 'isms'.

I too would like to explore intersection of social construction of gender, and feminism.

I too am very busy so whenever is fine.

There is a Thai Boxing ladyboy who has to work extra hard to beat her male opponents who don't want to be beaten by a woman. She has to fight men because even post-op. Thai law does not recognise her as a woman -but forgive me Scott this is the kind of content suitable for a PM.

[Spiral Out]

To be fair to all members, if we are to create a Feminism forum then we'll need to create a Masculism forum as well. But why stop there? I can think of numerous other forums that could be created in order to focus on various specific Human attributes.

[MalkuthSamanera1]

In what sense is feminism about a 'human attribute?' There are indeed movements to discern masculinity in society as defined apart from patriarchy, and how this 'true' masculinity may be inhibited by both patriarchy and feminism. However, historically speaking we can observe that these movements are not as significant as feminist movements. Counter-feminist arguments would of course be included in a feminism forum.

[Creekside Muse]

Hello Spiral Out, nice to meet you! Just to set the record straight, feminism does not focus on human attributes, male or female, but, rather, on unexamined social, political, and legal constructs. In fact, you have a misunderstanding of feminism that is one of the reasons I favor a separate forum. There exist constructs that most of us embrace without being aware that we are doing so, simply because we have never examined the uncritical reasoning, self-interested motivation, and political and legal maneuvering that is part of their structure--we simply, blindly, accept them without thought or criticism. These constructs are difficult to isolate because they are part of the social fabric and because they support a power structure that is clearly lopsided—but not just for women. Unfortunately, the effect of unexamined social constructs negatively impacts one-half of society's members, females. However, it also negatively impacts many other disenfranchised and marginalized groups, half of which are men. "Feminism," thus, is a misnomer that inaccurately paints a picture of weak, whiney, complaining women who don't know how to compete in a man's world. I, myself, shrank from this image for many years. It was through a formal introduction to feminist philosophy that I began to appreciate its theoretical framework and, more importantly, to see the way feminist philosophy clarifies and isolates serious social, political, and legal cracks in our concepts of justice and morality. Here’s an interesting example that caught my attention a few years ago: Degraffenreid v. General Motors. Kimberly Crenshaw, professor of law at UCLA School of Law and Columbia Law School wrote this up in 1989. It’s an old case, but it clearly illustrates a gap in our understanding of justice as it is understood from a legal viewpoint. The plaintiff was a black woman. The court refused to consider her claim of sex discrimination because, in fact, General Motors was able to prove that they regularly hired women, albeit only white women. Neither did the court consider her claim of racial discrimination, because General Motors was able to prove that they regularly hired blacks, albeit only black men. The ability to identify the “blind intersection” between race and gender that derailed justice in the above example did not arise from social, political, or legal philosophies about justice because the structure of these philosophies embraces the very construct that blinds them. Thus, without the unique perspective and framework of feminist philosophy, the court was unable to even recognize the existence of a problem. It took a lawyer intimately acquainted with feminist philosophy to isolate and articulate it. My argument is this: a feminist perspective on social, political, and legal philosophy is not enough. Such perspective grows out of the framework of feminist philosophy; without the discussion, argument, and critical examination of social constructs that arises out of a feminist philosophy forum (here or elsewhere), the perspective withers and dies. At that point, it will not just be women and marginalized groups who are negatively affected— social, political, and legal philosophies, themselves, will continue to suffer an internal injustice that, as the plaintiff in Degraffenreid discovered, they can neither isolate nor articulate from their own narrowed perspective.

Respectfully, April

[Spiral Out]

Definition of - Feminism: the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.

A better term and definition - Gender Equality: the advocacy of rights equal to both sexes relative to all forms of interaction.

The term "feminism" is an inherently divisive term. It seeks to place greater emphasis on the feminine. It places unequal bias toward one "side" of a concept that seeks equality. If it is gender equality that is the main focus, then why not a "Gender Concepts" forum instead of a "Feminism" forum?

Why not open a dialogue equally between both sexes under the banner of a term that does not create a segregation and does not seek to place "one above the other" in terms of the focus or the subject?

I am all for gender "equality" (clear definition required), but to attempt to do so under a heading so divisive would seem counterproductive to me.

[Creekside Muse]

Thank you for your comments, Spiral Out. I understand your position; but, before I move on to some other subject in another forum, I would like to explore the male perspective a little further if you don't mind continuing: what are some unfair advantages that women in our society enjoy that tip the scales in their favor and what kinds of changes would be likely to even things out?

[MalkuthSamanera1]

Spiral Out, I don't find your reasoning to be convincing. Feminism's title is appropriate to the historical truth of a proportional lack of women and female perspectives in positions and decisions of political, social and economic influence, globally, since the birth of organised agriculture at least (this isn't quite the place to discuss why). Perhaps the term 'feminism' is only divisive for people who do not understand it? Of course there are extreme branches, but for me the main thrust of feminism liberates both men and women. The name is simply appropriate to a clearly observable power imbalance in global society. If you disagree that such an imbalance exists, that is another matter.

[Spiral Out]

...what are some unfair advantages that women in our society enjoy that tip the scales in their favor and what kinds of changes would be likely to even things out?

I'm not quite sure why you are asking this question. I think that women do have some "advantages" given them by virtue of their generally viewed "weaker" status. Although I think that those "advantages" are of a double-standard type of regard, I wouldn't necessarily classify them technically as specific advantages, as in the type of advantage considered by the feminist mindset.

There is no social recoil to uplifting those seen as generally "weak", "minority", "underprivileged", "disadvantaged" or otherwise not viewed as the "controlling segment" of society. However, when considering equality, we would be required to remove all of these labels and there would be required equal consideration for all people. I don't think that society is ready for such concepts.

What is the "advantage" to labeling the forum "Feminist" as opposed to "Gender Concepts"? Is it not biased enough toward the feminist mindset? What type of "equality" is to be gained from the specificity of the feminist terminology? Do you think that feminist perspectives can only be achieved within a forum that possesses such a label?

Do you think there should also be an "LGBT" forum as well? How about a forum specifically for pedophiles? What purpose would that serve?

Anyone can voice an opinion or perspective, whether it be a feminist or gay opinion or perspective, in any of the other forums without the need of a specialized forum that caters to a specific subset of members. Why would those people need their "own room", so to speak?

We could fractionalize these concepts into a thousand different categories if we were to be fair and in the name of "equality", but when you get down to the very heart of what that "equality" stands for then these separations and labels should evaporate.

Equality sees no boundaries or differences, at least the type of boundaries or differences (labels) being highlighted by the feminist or LGBT movements.

In short, instituting a specific forum for the purposes of furthering an agenda is not what the focus of the agenda seeks!

>>>

...proportional lack of women and female perspectives in positions and decisions of political, social and economic influence, globally...

That is not relevant to the discussion on this site as that is not the case here in these forums. All perspectives are welcome and if someone of a feminist or LGBT mindset wants to voice an opinion or perspective relative to that mindset then they may do so freely. What is stopping them?

Why does it require a specific forum in order for a feminist view to be heard? The truth is that it doesn't. If nobody is voicing a feminist perspective then that is of their own will and responsibility.

Perhaps the term 'feminism' is only divisive for people who do not understand it?

I dont think so. It's inherently divisive in that it singles out one particular group of people and places them in a separate class from everyone else. You're either a feminist or you're not. It conjures a "you're either with us or against us" type of mentality. This can be witnessed in the topics considering the LGBT community where any criticism is viewed and reviled as "homophobic hate-speech". Similarly, if one is critical of the feminist perspective, in any regard, one will most likely be unfairly labelled a "mysogynist" or "chauvinist".

Why provide a specific place for such potential intolerance to take up permanent residence?

Of course there are extreme branches, but for me the main thrust of feminism liberates both men and women.

And those extreme branches would find their way to that safe haven and establish a "closed society", in my opinion. Imagine a forum specifically for pedophiles and their perspectives. What is the difference? (and before your head explodes - no, I am not equating feminists to pedophiles)

The name is simply appropriate to a clearly observable power imbalance in global society.

The name clearly seeks to promote a specific agenda for a specific subset of society. That's the reality of it. You're getting hung up on the label instead of the function of the idea.

Do you think that feminists are being specifically denied the opportunity to voice their opinions and perspectives simply because there is no "feminist" forum?

Why not a "Gender Concepts" forum as opposed to "Feminist" forum? I think we all know that the key function of the "feminist" label is to further a specific agenda through the application of reverse discrimination.

That is my opinion. Again, I am not against the concept of "equality", I am resistive to the subversive activist ploys utilized to get to that point.