Cancel Culture or Free Speech

Doodledog

*I wonder why you regard "some feminism" or "privileged women" has to be a snide comment.*
Probably because of the tactics described in my post above, and the superior attitude of most of your posts.

Which is probably a way of saying I can't argue with what you say so I'm going to take offence at the way you say it.
Some feminism refers to different sorts of feminism. As I said feminism is not a united movement. As for who I am referring to how would I know? I know VS is an intersectional feminist but she may not be radical.
And as I said I am in some ways privileged.

I wonder why you regard "some feminism" or "privileged women" has to be a snide comment.
Probably because of the tactics described in my post above, and the superior attitude of most of your posts.

I usually name the people I’m addressing, but some whizz off straight to report.

Yes, I know what you mean. But saying 'some people' do X, when everyone knows who it is who does X is still a personal comment, isn't it? Just as thinly veiled digs are still digs.

I am more in favour of honesty - if someone wants to have a go at me, I'd much rather it were above board and honest. That way I can reply without accusations of 'taking things personally'. I see the 'some people' strategy as cowardly when used in a passive aggressive way.

As a simple description (as in the 'some people like bananas' example) it is entirely different, of course. And everyone can see that, I'm sure.

Doodledog

Perfectly capable, thanks. I'm not taking the 'some feminism' or 'privileged women' digs as personal. Just as snide and unnecessary in what is meant to be a discussion.

You put forward a micro study about one refuge, carried out with 23 residents and 40odd staff, as though it were research project that could be used as evidence. It is an interesting case study, and I am not criticising it, or suggesting anything at all about patriarchy, authoritarian bodies or deciding who attends what.

Yes I realise it is a different way of doing things. That's why it's called radical feminism.

Another sarky comment. You just can't help it, can you? (and I thought you were an Intersectional Feminist, not a RadFem?)

I wonder why you regard "some feminism" or "privileged women" has to be a snide comment. Feminism is not a single united movement and some women are privileged. I would include myself as privileged. Taking offence and trying to dismiss the comments in such a way is simply avoiding the issue.
As for intersectional feminism. I'm probably more intersectionalist than radical these days but I still think radical ideas have value and need to be aired and discussed. Sadly trying to do so on GN just results in accusations of getting at people. Which given the title of the thread is pretty funny.

Doodledog
There’s at least one post per day with this sort of comment on it.
Some people on these threads don't understand that not behaving in the way I want them to makes them phobic/unkind/right wing is a different matter. It is clearly referring to an unspecified person/people from a particular group. It's not brave enough to name them and risk being challenged, but makes a (usually snide) dig anyway.

Chances are, they don’t acknowledge that’s what they’re doing.
I usually name the people I’m addressing, but some whizz off straight to report.

It's ok, I got my point across successfully

So bananas have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion which is what I thought.

Sanity (breath a sigh)

VioletSky

I've never understood what is wrong with "some people"

I just take it to be an unknown amount of people who do or don't like (insert thing)

Some people like bananas
I don't like bananas (unless they are in cake)
Some other people don't like bananas

Fairly obviously, some people like bananas is one thing - non-judgemental and not casting aspersions.

Some people on these threads don't understand that not behaving in the way I want them to makes them phobic/unkind/right wing is a different matter. It is clearly referring to an unspecified person/people from a particular group. It's not brave enough to name them and risk being challenged, but makes a (usually snide) dig anyway.

Smileless2012

I don't always understand your posts VS but often find them amusing. I'd ask what bananas have to do with this discussion but don't suppose you'll answer.

Why wouldn't I?

I asked a question and gave an example how I use a term

That's all

I don't always understand your posts VS but often find them amusing. I'd ask what bananas have to do with this discussion but don't suppose you'll answer.

VioletSky

I'm not an activist

I'm pro women and pro trans but not an activist

But you can’t answer questions about what you claim.

I'm not an activist

I'm pro women and pro trans but not an activist

VS you seem to be an expert on everything with opinions to match, one thing for sure you do have all the answers. It must be very hard to live with.
Personally I’m sick to the teeth with activists, at the races, yesterday animal rights never mind the danger they inflict on horses and riders, trans activists, be as you are and get on with it for heavens sake, it all makes life difficult for everyone else. Wouldn’t employ an activist if they worked for nothing, all that angst.

I've never understood what is wrong with "some people"

I just take it to be an unknown amount of people who do or don't like (insert thing)

Some people like bananas
I don't like bananas (unless they are in cake)
Some other people don't like bananas

Perfectly capable, thanks. I'm not taking the 'some feminism' or 'privileged women' digs as personal. Just as snide and unnecessary in what is meant to be a discussion.

You put forward a micro study about one refuge, carried out with 23 residents and 40odd staff, as though it were research project that could be used as evidence. It is an interesting case study, and I am not criticising it, or suggesting anything at all about patriarchy, authoritarian bodies or deciding who attends what.

Yes I realise it is a different way of doing things. That's why it's called radical feminism.

Another sarky comment. You just can't help it, can you? (and I thought you were an Intersectional Feminist, not a RadFem?)

Doodledog

Please cut the snide digs? 'Some feminism'? 'privileged women'? It is really difficult to engage with your posts when they are mostly just unfounded jibes.

Yes, it is presenting the views of those people (ie a case study) but in what way are they a representative sample? How has it been tested to see whether a similar study of a different refuge would produce similar results? Or whether a study of the same one, with a different 23 residents would show the same results?

I'm not criticising it as a case study - simply pointing out that it couldn't be used as a basis for policy-making because of the small scale nature of its remit.

Doodledog do you really need to take things so personally? Are you not capable of having a discussion about abstraction. Yes there are women who only seek to replace male patriarchy with female power. They are for the most part white middle class women who have been raised in privilege. Their view therefore is that only the people in charge and not the system needs to be changed. There are also radical feminist thinkers who recognise patriarchal systems for what they are and seek to abandon them.

In many cases that means stopping creating rules which are passed down to people from authoritarian bodies and creating communities which express their own ideas and create their own rules. In which case individual groups would decide who attended. And case studies such as this one would become of paramount importance.

Yes I realise it is a different way of doing things. That's why it's called radical feminism.

Thanks for reposting my post VS.

You choose to interpret my posts the way you chose to interpret them.

## You also choose not to answer my posts asking about things you have said, not things I’ve invented, making it look as if you can’t answer. Who knows?

I read your post response Re: Best not get into an I know better than you spat.

VS No attempt to do that or there is another card I would have played lol

as you saying that you had a card to prove you know more than anyone else.

Putting lol after it doesn’t make it a joke.
If that isn’t what you meant, what were you implying?
(See ##)

I agree with Doodledog that that is more of a case study representing the views of a small group of women.

I certainly wouldn't think that any woman needing support due to being a victim of domestic violence and/or sexual abuse, is a privileged one, or that those running these facilities who are usually victims themselves, are privileged either.

Please cut the snide digs? 'Some feminism'? 'privileged women'? It is really difficult to engage with your posts when they are mostly just unfounded jibes.

Yes, it is presenting the views of those people (ie a case study) but in what way are they a representative sample? How has it been tested to see whether a similar study of a different refuge would produce similar results? Or whether a study of the same one, with a different 23 residents would show the same results?

I'm not criticising it as a case study - simply pointing out that it couldn't be used as a basis for policy-making because of the small scale nature of its remit.

Doodledog

That's more of a case study than research that can be extrapolated to represent the views of women generally, though.

You've shared it at least once before, and it's interesting, but not something that could ever be used as the basis for policy making.

Of course it isn't because it's presenting the views of the people using the service and god forbid they should be taken into account.
Sometimes I realise that some feminism doesn't seek to change how things are done and just wants to replace patriarchal systems with systems run by privileged women. (and we should all be aware of the harm they can do)

Have fun.

Smileless2012

Thank you VS. Yes, I am asking you questions and am not assigning thoughts to you or using anything against you.

I know

And we will have to leave it there, I'm going out

Thank you VS. Yes, I am asking you questions and am not assigning thoughts to you or using anything against you.

I quoted examples of what I meant Smileless

You did not feature in the quoted examples

You are questioning me about it and I am answering