What do you mean. Can you give an example.
I mean that you worry about the impact of change on people who didn't want change, but there doesn't seem to be any concern about the impact of lack of change on people who do want change. The wounding that can be done to them through long years of hope deferred. (Proverbs 13:12 comes to mind).
Yes I agree part of the problem is relating those bad behaviours with mascullinity perse when without determining the facts. It stereotypes males by ideologues not clarifying this.
No, that's not what I meant.
An example would be, say, for example, we have a cultural norm that men repress their emotions (men don't cry, mustn't show vulnerability, that kind of thing). That's not actually healthy; it's not good for men (or the people around them). In that sense it's not authentic masculinity. But as long as that cultural norm persists, (that men "should" be this way, that this is what masculinity should be), there's a problem (for which we've come up with the handy label, toxic masculinity).
Well the obvious ones are gender, race, sex which ideologues elevate above all else for some reason. So for example differences in say work is determined as being the result of oppression which ignores all other factors. If we were to acknowledge these other influences rather than turn a blind eye I think we woulde have a better basis to make the right sort of changes.
For example the idea that because there are less women in certain fields like STEM is because of oppression is a narrow view that misses important factors in how we should order society not necessarily to achieve equal outcomes but in tailoring more specific support. By acknowledging that there are other factors takes the pressure off trying to force more women into a field they may not really want. Or it may identify why women find it harder to get into certain fields.
But assuming its only one cause (oppression) is like assuming God is the cause. It stops people investigating things because the cause is already assumed.
Im sorry, in all that apologetic for the status quo, I missed you identifying an actual strategy for improving anything.
Also, we were discussing causes for problems such as misogyny and the normalisation of violence, but you seem to have lost sight of those as real problems.
(And as someone who has a background in STEM, there absolutely are barriers for women).
But have you also noticed that today most people do want to talk about these issues, in fact conservative/traditionalist are eager to talk.
Umm, no. I have not noticed this at all. Conservatives and traditionalists are more likely to try to shut down honest naming of problems and experiences, saying that to name these things at all is "divisive" (for example).
Psychology and Sociology are my research fields in academia.
Excellent. So what form is your research taking? Book, journal article, thesis? I take it that "in academia" means it will be something along these lines?
Its fact and commmon knowledge and I am surprised you are not aware of this.
Skeptical of the polemical claims being made, rather than unaware.
Oh ok. I am disabled so I do have some experience of disadvantage. But I don't blame the system. I think the system is pretty accommodating really.
I asked, specifically, about whether you had experienced obstacles, hostility or denial of something based on your race. If you haven't, you may not appreciate the extent to which for many people, this is something they live with, every day. If you've found the system "pretty accommodating," then let me tell you that not every person does.
But what ideologues do is blame everything on the system, tear down the very system that has given them the Right and opportunity to be able to express their grievances.
Or at the very least, want to adapt the system enough to make it more just?
Some carry on like theres still this evil oppressive monster when there is not.
Yes. For many of us, yes, there really is. I don't know that I'd use the word "monster" but I face consistent disadvantage as a woman. Other people face consistent disadvantage on the basis of race. Others on the basis of social class (lack of money or access to social capital). This is many people's lived reality, right now. It hasn't all been solved or gone away.
Only that some of these things may be due to other reasons besides systematic oppression or whites especially males actively seeting out to oppress.
So the people who have looked me in the eye and said things like, "women don't belong in science," "it's not appropriate for a young woman to do this job," or kicked me out of college for being pregnant, they were lying about their reasons and gender had nothing to do with it?
Come on. This is what I meant about gaslighting. This kind of discrimination happens all the time.
So why just gendeer ande race is the deminant identities ideologues choose to make their case. Thats because they are easier to politicise abd make personal.
Well, I'd say others have a degree of prominence as well (the disability community significant among them). But it's not a matter of
making these things personal. They are deeply personal. They cut to the core of what it is to be a human person in our society, and whether we're afforded the dignity and the agency that should come with that, or not.
The personal, as they say,
is political.
