But the point is it took continual pointing this out for you to acknowledge it.
No it didn't. I've acknowledged it all through the thread, and even talked about some of the causes, such as toxic masculinity.
I provided support for example of how males from primary level to University are disadvantaged compared to women and its getting worse.
And yet they still have more professional success, higher earning, more social status, and so on. So what does that say about how women fare, if we outperform boys in early education and still end up behind?
Compared to women males suffer more suicide, homelssness, prison, addiction ect worse than women.
And yet when we talk about the causes of those things, we're told that we're being ideological and political, or some such thing.
Well part of changing this is changing the ideological basis for measuring equality. So long as we measure equality by identity then we will continue to have these problems.
Well, I guess if you stop comparing women to men, you can pretend that there's no gender inequality, but that won't make it true. Nor will it give us the knowledge we need to tackle the underlying causes.
Second if that is the case then that is wrong as we need to listen to peoples experiences. But also experience alone is not always the measure of reality aned thats not saying your experience is unreal.
We need to listen, but your experience isn't the measure of reality. There's that broken irony meter again.
Yes of course but deon't you think that because you may be in a position where you are going to come into contact with women who have experienced descrimination an oppression and because of that 'you will see more women with those problems' which is not a true representation of whats out there.
Why would the broad cross-section of the community with which I come into contact, not be representative?
See theres that black and white thinking again which twists things back to gendered power games.
It's black and white thinking to point out that sometimes assertiveness is required in order to be heard?
Rather than admit that perhaps Feminism does have a limited view of men which is evdienced by the fact that most people are turning off ideologies like Feminism but not equality itself you choose to turn it into mens fault again.
I didn't say anything about it being anyone's fault. But I'm not inclined to be quiet just because some people don't like hearing the truth.
Ok so we have two different realities happening here. One is your personal experience and one is the experience of women generally. Though your experience may be similar to other women and that these experiences can then point to a more wide spread attitude towards women is true. But we have to remember that this alone is not the measure of reality outside the individual or group and society. I think both realities can be true at the same time. Sometimes its more a case of womens experiences exposing the reality of whats going on.
But we also measure that against other factors to support this and its not just based on unsupported assumptions. Sometimes its a misrepresentation when we factor in everything in. The point is we edon't just go along because people say so, we need to check things. Afterall humans are supceptible to bias and attributing things that are not necessarily the case. I could give you many examples of this if you want.
But I want to make clear I am not dismissing your experiences.
You say you're not dismissing my experiences, after two paragraphs of explaining why you see them as "not the measure of reality," "unsupported assumptions," "misrepresentation," "bias and attributing things that are not necessarily the case."
Surely even you can see that this is highly dismissive?
I am not saying that individuality should replace any effort to stop descrimination and oppression by minmizing sections of society that have been denied equality.
Is that not a main thrust of your argument? Because if not, you've really not made your point clear at all.
I am saying that the view today through identity politics wipes out individuality altogther. I am saying Feminism and other identity based ideologies that hyper exentuate idenity between people contribute to dividing society and causing descrimination in the first place.
Well, I simply can't agree. If we can't associate in groups, identify our problems, and advocate for solutions, we can't make any progress on the issues which operate at a bigger-than-individual level.
I am saying the idea that the individual is utmost has been lost which was the original idea that was promoted by the West,
If it's been lost - or somewhat muted - it's because it was inadequate to dealing with the kinds of problems we are currently wrestling with. If you only see individuals, you cannot acknowledge trends across populations or groups.
Well I think we are doing a lot and womens equality has improved a lot. They are dominating education and certain industries and this will continue even to the point where males are suffering disadvantage. There are laws against such practices now. But I agree more can be done. I just don't agree with the current ideology about how this can be done as it ends up creating more inequality.
I asked what you are prepared to do. This is not an answer to that question.
People are calling for a change in how we can address inequality which I think would solve most of the problem like what I mentioned with the importance of the individual and even as far as upholding the idea that we are made in Gods image which is the ultimate Truth for equality.
And what practical action would come from that, which would improve the situation of women? Practical action. To make a real difference.
Your missing the point again. Its not about not identifying bad treatment of groups. Its about divideing society into groups based on that bad treatment according to all percieved bad treatment and differences in equality being because of one identity group over another.
I'm not missing the point; I'm highlighting the point. If the bad treatment of a particular group were not there, there would be no need to advocate for that group. But the bad treatment is there, and therefore so is the need to advocate. If you want to see identity group based politics wither, then address the needs of those groups.
You only have to go back to the original civil rights movement which began by the Church by the way which was not about identity politics.
How was it not about identity politics? It was about rights for particular identity groups!
The fact is evdeience in that instead of things becoming more equal we now not only have cultural wars between race but now between sex, a growing list of genders where even the LGBTIQ+ identities are waring among themselves as well as wars between a growing life of any identity such as weight, size, ethnicity, class, lifestyle ect ect.
Even I will admit that things are, generally, on a trend to becoming more equal. So our social and political analysis is becoming more sophisticated and nuanced. Not necessarily seeing this as a major issue.
