RedAppleGP wrote:I think I over worded it, my bad. Caught in the heat of the moment you know what I'm saying?
Point taken.brimstoneSalad wrote:This is the danger of politics. Rhetoric shuts down the portions of the brain responsible for critical thinking; iirc, on FMRI you can see them go dark with reduced activity.
RedAppleGP wrote:And I know what I know true Scotsman is, & I don't really see how I'm making one here. I'm just saying, in this particular situation, someone who is complaining about men sitting in a weird position on the subway, is not a feminist at all, or rather someone who's just complaining about something so idiotic. Also a women who believe they deserve better rights than a man or what not are not feminists because they don't believe in equal rights. Maybe I'm missing something, I don't know.
A situation is a no true scotsman when the claim can not be clearly demonstrated (this could apply to any other fallacy for that matter). Feminists are interested in the rights for both men and women. In gender equality, you can focus on the rights of both, and that's what femisists are, for lack of a better word, clearly attempting to accoplish. A person that is advocating only the rights of one gender isn't a feminist. I'm pretty sure we got different definitions of the word "feminist".brimstoneSalad wrote: Is a Christian who bombs an abortion clinic not a Christian?
Is a Muslim who hijacks and plane not a Muslim?
Is a Vegan who commits arson not a Vegan?
Is an Atheist who promotes religion and hates atheism not an Atheist?
Like I said, we got different definitons of the word "feminist". But we can make words mean whatever we want them to mean, since we are the ones who concieved them in the first place. I guess you can call a woman who is advocating woman's rights to be a feminist, but you gotta remember that there are movments out there attempting to find are hoping to achieve equality for both genders. Focusing on the rights of only one of.. wait.. ooooooooooooooooooooooooooh I see what you're saying. Women are attempting to achieve rights for themselves, and yes, they can be considered feminist. I never said that they can't only focus on their rights.brimstoneSalad wrote:At what point do we get to define people for them, based on what we think they should be doing? At what point do we get to deny them title to an identity they openly claim, because we don't think they represent that identity properly?
Oh. i'm pretty sure I confused "obtaining social equality" with "advocating rights if both men and women". Okokokokok I realized my screwup.RedAppleGP wrote:If you pay attention to feminist movements, they don't only focus on womens rights, they believe that men and women deserve equal rights.
So if you made any sense of this, tell me what you think.