tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-294858717729936108.post1937669494108185309..comments2023-07-18T15:39:41.072+02:00Comments on Remix IT to the Streets: Why all liberals are feminists by defaultSargothhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14889992594644216887noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-294858717729936108.post-71957905951563669552014-01-10T18:43:31.880+01:002014-01-10T18:43:31.880+01:00Yes, I did. Apparantly I'm bad att clicking bu...Yes, I did. Apparantly I'm bad att clicking buttons. Clearly this is not my natural environment and probably not my natural lifetime.<br /><br />Anyway, I really enjoyed you post. It's too bad that most liberals are bad at being liberal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-294858717729936108.post-82945628025972137852014-01-10T18:19:56.852+01:002014-01-10T18:19:56.852+01:00I intentionally left the definition of feminism bl...I intentionally left the definition of feminism blank, as I see this more as a process than as an algorithm. If you stick with it long enough, you'll end up doing some form of feminism. Not a predetermined kind of feminism, but a feminism nevertheless.<br /><br />(I imagine you wrote this as a question to vikke064 above, so I'll shut up from this point on and let hir answer. Just thought I'd reiterate this point for clarity.)Sargothhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14889992594644216887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-294858717729936108.post-6317034468931127882014-01-10T18:08:47.951+01:002014-01-10T18:08:47.951+01:00You have to be careful in which direction you read...You have to be careful in which direction you read this post. What it's saying is this: if you're liberal, you'll have to become a feminist of some sort in order to remain a liberal. By virtue of the core principles of liberalism. It does not, however, say that all feminists have to become liberals. The arrow only ever points in one direction, as it were.<br /><br />Now, the demand that all citizens receive equal protection from violence is a radical one. It is not enough to simply draft legislation that states that everyone is equal before the law - it is very possible to have nominally equal laws that produce unequal results. To ensure the rights of everyone, more than words have to be changed.<br /><br />It's very hard to conceive of this not moving in a feminist direction, in some way, shape or form. (One might, if one defines feminism as "KILL ALL MEN, THEN BURN THEIR CORPSES", but let's remain serious.) It has to move into feminist territory to do what it sets out to do, and once that snowball gets rolling, it's not likely to stop.<br /><br />It's a process.Sargothhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14889992594644216887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-294858717729936108.post-43054345171204498082014-01-10T18:08:06.909+01:002014-01-10T18:08:06.909+01:00How about defining feminism as the process which r...How about defining feminism as the process which recognizes that there exists a difference and that strives to eliminate it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-294858717729936108.post-15065219208610208862014-01-10T17:39:27.084+01:002014-01-10T17:39:27.084+01:00What does feminism have to do with it? For the rea...What does feminism have to do with it? For the reasoning to be relevant you also need to define feminism. I would not recognise a description of feminism that only demanded that all citizens must be given the same protection by the state.vikke064https://www.blogger.com/profile/04353331176328082835noreply@blogger.com