Spleen Central

Welcome to Spleen Central -- a place to discuss spleen, and other unassailable parts of the human body. Do you have a body part of note that you'd like to share with the world? Most people do, so give it a go!

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

Groups of people who refuse to accept the obvious, #2

#2: Feminists.

First, a little exercise in semantics. The suffix -ism, when applied to a concept, implies that this concept is being exalted, to the detriment of other, similar, concepts.
Thus, "racism" technically does not refer to denigrating certain races, but rather to advocating other races (the net result is, of course, the same). Witness communism, socialism, post-modernism... You get the idea.
The same principle applies to feminism -- it is advocating the supremacy of females, at the expense of males. Now, I've got a certain friend who would have you believe that I'm talking poop... That the literal meaning of the suffix "-ism" is to be discarded for what the public generally understand the phrase "feminism" to mean.
That argument might carry water (and I mean might), if the fervent feminists themselves weren't so insistent upon violating this principle. To illustrate with an example -- last night I was in the Humanities and Social Sciences building of my local university. A flyer on a noticeboard was advocating a "Womyn's Film Night". The flyer began by stating that only (approximately) six of the top two-hundred-and-fifty-grossing films of all time had been directed by women.
They intended, in their charmingly ineffectual way, to remedy this situation by hosting a film night where the fare was going to be exclusively films directed by women.
What? Sorry? Equality, you say? Nothing of the sort! This is just as bad as any (perceived) injustice delivered upon women. The aim of a film night should be to show meritorious films -- not films simply directed by women (or men, for that matter).
Of course, I am not expecting most people to believe me on this. "We've got scores to settle!" they shall cry, thrusting extended index fingers with chipped fingernails into the air. "You bastard men have had it good for so long, and now we're going to redress the balance."
A few points, darlings:
(1) If that's truly what you believe, whatever your motivation, then the literal definition of "feminism" holds -- you are promoting females at the expense of males. Fine, if that's what you want to do, but drop any pretence of equality.
(2) This is a very flimsy way of going about things. Allow me to demonstrate with example, using the technique of reductio ad absurdum:
(1) Many Jewish people were killed by the Nazis.
(2) The Jewish people have a right to exact revenge.
(3) It is proper that Jewish people kill Germans.
Preposterous, you say? Statement (3) couldn't possibly follow on from (1) and (2)? Well, yes, that's kind of the point. Same deal with the "womyn" and their film night.
Just pointing a few things out, that's all.

4 Comments:

  • At 9:44 am, Blogger Jac(kie) said…

    your argument is the same,old tired one that those around you (i.e. us) have heard about a billion times before (and we're the only people you would actually expect an answer from). It's just wasting time going over the same grounds. Bring on some new, interesting arguments and may be we'll think about responding with an intelligent rebuttal.

    As it is, FUCKING SHUT UP! You're provoking people for no good reason. Does this really make you feel better? If you don't shut up, I'm going to publish all of your inflammatory anti-femminist comments on the Humanities news board and put your phone number and address next to it.

    THEN you'll have a tough time on your hand, trying to convince them not to lynch you and cut off your bits. (I KNOW you're gonna say that the fact the femminist would consider doing that is proof of your point, but i'm sure if you're dead, it won't really matter) And no, i don't actually think they'll do that, but still, they'll go after you in some way or another and it won't be pleasant.

     
  • At 9:57 am, Blogger Kieren said…

    The fact that an argument is "tired" or the "same" in no way makes the point invalid. The argument that the square of the hypoteneuse of a right-angled triangle is the sum of the squares of the other two sides is going on two thousand years old now. Is that somehow less correct because of its age? I don't quite see what you're trying to say here.

    The difference, of course, between Pythagoras and myself is that Pythagoras's arguments have become accepted. Once my arguments infiltrate the general public, I'd be happy to cease from re-stating them (although, again, it won't make them any less correct).

    As for it being inflammatory -- is it? Is it a provocation? I don't think so. This is, simply, the way it is. The logic in what I said is sound, and can be mathematically demonstrated as such. Why should it take a novel argument to elicit a rebuttal from you? The logic in *that* statement, Jackie, is suspect.

    Posting these comments on a feminist noticeboard would, I guess, cause a little bit of trouble, but only because I'd wager that the "womyn" were lacking in the faculties of logical analysis. There should be no room for feeling in this debate.

    You've got to understand -- I'm not even really having a go at the truthfulness of the individual statements. My problem is more the flawed logic that is linking them together.

    For example, if I were to say that:
    (1) All humans can fly.
    (2) I am a human.
    Therefore, I can fly.

    Logically, this argument is sound. The problem, of course, is the validity of the propositions.

    As per the feminists, my first wish is that they'd get their logical underpinnings in order, and *then* we can begin to argue the merits of the composite propositions.

    I get the distinct feeling that I'm being misunderstood here.

     
  • At 10:52 am, Blogger Jac(kie) said…

    No, you're just being ignored.

    I wasn't even trying to come back with any sort of argument, but merely saying that yo're being very annoying.

     
  • At 10:36 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Your argument is rudimentary and childish. Firstly, I take offense to the condescending references to women collectively such as "darlings" in your post. This sort of vernacular often creeps into male discourse when referring to women and feminism, and it's disgraceful. Seemingly, men find it hard to hard to engage in a discussion of feminism without resorting to patronising references to women's sexuality, appearance, stereotyped character etc.

    Secondly, your reasoning re the movie night is ridiculous. As a white man, who the fuck are you to decide who can and can't organise a night dedicated to films (or anything else) which aren't also made by white men. No one said a thing about 'equality'. People aren't equal. Look at any community on any scale. Equality is a meaningless word which is used to pacify deeper questions of human nature. I am a feminist, but I am fighting for 'equal rights' for women, unless in literal and specific instances like pay, right to vote etc. What I am fighting for are safe places for women, community building for women etc etc etc.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home