HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » Men's Group (Group) » I'm not a Lada Gaga fan, ...

Sat Mar 2, 2013, 09:15 PM

I'm not a Lada Gaga fan, but this is a rather interesting interview clip

I think depending on the interview, she has both denied to be a feminist and also claimed to be one, or at least a "new-age" feminist (3rd wave?).

Evidently many feminists were inflamed over the interview because she associates feminism with being anti-man or anti-sex.

13 replies, 2730 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 13 replies Author Time Post
Reply I'm not a Lada Gaga fan, but this is a rather interesting interview clip (Original post)
Major Nikon Mar 2013 OP
ZombieHorde Mar 2013 #1
Major Nikon Mar 2013 #2
ZombieHorde Mar 2013 #3
Major Nikon Mar 2013 #4
Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #5
Behind the Aegis Mar 2013 #7
lumberjack_jeff Mar 2013 #8
Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #9
lumberjack_jeff Mar 2013 #11
Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #13
Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #10
Major Nikon Mar 2013 #12
Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #6

Response to Major Nikon (Original post)

Sat Mar 2, 2013, 09:24 PM

1. Feminism has the same "problem" as many religions.

There is more than one faction. Anti-male and anti-sex feminist writings can be found, but that doesn't mean all types of feminism is anti-male and anti-sex.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #1)

Sat Mar 2, 2013, 09:43 PM

2. Of that, I'm sure

But the ones who are anti-male and anti-sex seem to be the most vocal, so I'm just not sure how much good they are doing their cause when many in the younger generation associate all of feminism that way. There are quite a few prominent (or at least famous) women who have publicly stated that they are NOT feminists. With as much criticism as Katy Perry and others get from certain types of feminists, it's not hard to see why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #2)

Sat Mar 2, 2013, 09:53 PM

3. A lot of feminist argumentation is not labeled "feminist."

For example, I don't think Sandra Fluke labeled her contraception arguments as "feminism," she just argued a feminist position without the label. Birth control has been an important feminist issue for a long time, but the label "feminist" doesn't really matter compared to the goals of feminism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #3)

Sat Mar 2, 2013, 09:59 PM

4. The RW has done a pretty good job of demonizing feminism

I'm just not sure if some of them haven't helped in that regard. When you have women like Gaga and Perry effectively denouncing the feminist label even though they may support the goals of feminism, it's not hard to see how they might have an image problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombieHorde (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 05:12 AM

5. So here's the deal; and this is the EXACT same logical fail that comes up around religion and DU.

Okay, let's take Creationism, or Fundamentalist Christians, like Pat Robertson... Obviously, all Christians are not Creationists, nor are they all Pat Robertson. Not all Christians agree with Pat Robertson. Lots of Christians accept science and the truth of Evolution.

If someone tries to conflate all Christians, particularly progressive Christians, with Pat Robertson, they're in the wrong. If someone tries to imply that "Christians" all think the Earth is 6,000 years old and Jesus rode a dinosaur, they're wrong.

But here's where the logical fail comes in;

I've seen some Christians on DU repeatedly remind us (rightly) of the above- all Christians are not creationists. All Christians are not Fundamentalists.

Yet then they turn around, in a situation where Fundamentalists are being criticized, or creationism is being ridiculed, and they say "STOP ATTACKING CHRISTIANS WITH YOUR ANTI-CHRISTIAN CHRISTIAN ATTACKING!!!"

See the problem?

We have the EXACT same situation with certain ideological sub-factions of "Feminism"; Not all Feminists agree with Andrea Dworkin that "men must give up their precious erections". Not all Feminists think Catherine MacKinnon was right to pal up with Ed Meese against free expression. In fact, most don't. I don't, and I (still) consider myself a "Feminist", even though some have told me I can't.



If someone criticizes the writings you reference above, or point out that "Twisty" has ideas about consent (namely, that consensual sex between men and women doesn't exist) which are fucking noxious and only serve to muddy what should be clear messaging around rape; or if they make fun of Solanas or Dworkin or their defenders....

you see where this is going. They are accused of "ATTACKING FEMINISTS" and hating women and all manner of nasty-sounding gibberish.


No, the folks in question are a small minority who do NOT speak for ALL Feminists or women-in-general. That's the whole point. But they desperately want to assert that they do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 05:18 AM

7. What an incredibly fantastic response!

Put that in your sig line!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #5)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:10 AM

8. Here's the problem.

 

Unlike Pat Robertson theology, there are hundreds of colleges teaching women's studies. And every student who majors in women's studies at every university graduates sounding pretty much the same. All of them are proficient at saying things like "patriarchy" while being wholly unable to reconcile the concept with laws like the violence against women act.

The most accomplished, accredited pros at feminist rhetoric sound like the caricatures of whom you speak, while the amateurs and nonprofessionals have a much more nuanced view. This raises the question; is it unfair to paint feminism with the brush chosen by their professionals?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:17 PM

9. I don't really know; my exposure to what constituted Womens Studies on college campuses dates back

to the 80s.

I'm not familiar with what's presented nowadays, whether it incorporates the 3rd wave, intersectionality, the pushback against what was perceived as sex-negativism, etc. etc.

It wouldn't surprise me if the 2nd wavers have a monopoly on those department head positions, but like all things, time will probably change that.

Off the subject, good to see you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #9)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 08:14 PM

11. Thanks, I needed a break.

 

... During which I resolved to tell you how fully awesome you are as first order of business upon returning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #11)

Tue Mar 5, 2013, 12:47 AM

13. right back at ya, brother.

one "Khaki Scout" to another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:22 PM

10. also, in line with that, there seems to be an attitude among elements of the 2nd wave which,

despite the fact that there are all these different "Feminisms", wants to claim exclusive and exclusionary rights to the label.

And on one hand, they complain that young women distance themselves from the label, they complain that the label is (wrongly?) perceived as non-inclusive and representing all these things... and yet, at least among themselves, they never hesitate to complain endlessly about the "funfems" who supposedly enable Patriarchy by wearing sexy clothes or performing oral sex on men or all the rest. And they of course claim the right to "critique" (i.e. criticize) other women who fall short ideologically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #5)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 08:27 PM

12. Here's the really great part

They get to tag you with attacking feminists, yet they get to disown those same feminists when it suits them. Meanwhile if you take a sex-positive position on any issue, you're a "MRA" (used as a pejorative), or sexist even though quite a few prominent feminists are in the same camp.

Heads they win, tails you lose. Not a bad gig if you can convince enough people of it I suppose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 05:16 AM

6. I bet.

but, then, the world moves on. That's the bottom line.

It's never going to be 1974 again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread