Feminism

make me :DD(ok)

He phrased it badly, but his point is valid. Do you seriously believe that there do not exist any moderate muslims?

Immigration is one of the less retarded part of feminism.

My point is that your ideology is a joke and will be met with ridicule should you choose to profess your utterly retarded opinions here.

Doesn't make difference to me if their loyality lies with Islam. You know full that the radical part can convince the "moderates" to it's will. Also the last thing you guys need is feminism, because you already appear weak enough.

this is the same retarded logic that was used against Catholics.

I may have plenty of disagreements with feminism, but just as many disagreements with anyone who operates under such essentially logic as you.

Well, let's deport all religious people because clearly their judgment is clouded to such an extent that they can easily be swayed by extremists.

I guess this is as good as an idpol thread as any, but what do you do when someone says:
or

well i've been here since it was a pockety spinoff GG board, dunno bout you champ.

Did you somehow miss the quotation marks? Do you not keep up with Syria at all?

welp, kek wills it. Kek will deport kekists?

Bourgeois lefties everywhere

Agree

...

based mods

lmao

this

You can't demonstrate it regardless because feminists in left wing political groups are playing chess. They know exactly how to make it impossible to criticize them without committing social suicide.

They have never given a fuck about women's rights, they're just opportunists.

What a crappy drawing.

Reminder that standing up for women's rights as workers and human beings has always been a core socialist struggle and that we should not let bourgeois "feminists" completely recuperate this issue into being meaningless pro-capitalist idpol garbage.

I never encountered that.

>b-but that's not Marxist feminism!
It's almost like feminism is a bourgeois ideology.

What is Marxist feminism and why do we need it?

kek

not fun when all you wanted was to discuss high politics instead of appropriate social etiquette. considered chancing my hand at getting a committee position by pleading autism and asking for a quota, but i had no real investment in any of the parties and might have ended up having to do work.

the worst thing is that basically none of the women are on the left of the party, so it basically becomes an inbuilt centrist bloc. (The kind of people who think capitalism is flawless, we just can't let the other party run it.)
There's something quite amusing about having special policies to aid the power of the majority of the population and university-group in being heard.

BASED MODS

To answer both questions, the "battle of the sexes" is a cultural spook that helps porky at the expense of all the proletariat.

Marxist feminism studies how capitalist superstructure divides people by gender, creates gender identities, plays them out against each other and utilizes them. It's pretty good

But we don't need feminism to tell us that. We already know that capitalism divides people by arbitrary properties. If they start dividing people based on eye color, will we need a whole area of study devoted to this?

user your shitposting on Holla Forums does not qualify as a study of capitalism

no need to get triggered over a field of study being called marxist feminism

Nice strawman, but you still haven't justified feminism's existence as its own thing apart from Marxism.

What would "justify" it's existence? And why should it be justified? It's just a term to describe a Marxist analysis regarding topics frequently discussed within feminist circles.

And does anyone have that image listing marxist feminist literature, among other things Engels Origin of the State, Private property and the family?

Because it's a poisonous ideology that distracts from class conflict.

And those topics are usually pretty stupid. And you're also lying because a Marxist analysis would put material conditions first together with class struggle. Feminism at no point does this. It always puts gender first.

What have you read about Marxist feminism, liberal? Know what you're talking about or kill yourself.

i really want reddit to leave

Contratulation, you just made marxist-feminist analysis. You can now accept that it's a field of thinking that exist and go on with your life.

I'm not going to read anything until you tell me why the fuck I should. It seems every time I ask about this people can't make an argument and resort to the "read x author" meme. Either make an argument or admit that you can't.

You're fucking retarded.

Hello.

When people say they're feminists, they just mean they think females deserve equal treatment to men. They're not saying they want male genocide and want to cut off your wiener. Keep your spaghetti in your pocket, it's not a big deal.

First-wave best-wave, all other waves are idpol trash

I believe that and I'm not a feminist. Why is it that feminists always end up going with intersectionality? I'm also not a racist, but you wouldn't call me an anti-racist. I'm just not a fucking racist. So maybe not being a sexist is just that and isn't its own ideology.

Listen… as long as they aren't bourgeois intersectional feminists the F word shouldn't be too much of an issue.

Kill yourself

Only an issue if it's the shit tier kind. Best thing to do is to argue from the non-shit tier kind of feminism, like pic related.

Y'all need to go out more

Can you show me a feminist that puts class struggle first and doesn't believe in muh patriarchy or intersectionality?

And when SocDem of the week says he's a socialist, he means worker ownership and control of the means of production, distribution and exchange.

marx thought patriarchy was a material reality and part of capitalism, obviously women aren't legally or practically slaves of their husbands, but the aftereffects of this situation still exist culturally and ideologically everywhere and frankly, you are completely blind to the world around you and as everyone can see here yo uare making a complete fool out of yourself for seriously thinking that women don't have specific issues that need to be addressed. If it were for people like you women in leftist groups would still be sexually harassed, like they used to, without anybody speaking up about it because "its not class conflict".

Nobody said they don't have issues, but Marx didn't say that all men oppress all women, and if the material conditions have changed from his time, then you can't well claim that women are still slaves to the husband. His "community of women" has already been achieved. So no, we have no need for feminism, and you still didn't answer my question.

Here you go, faggot. Now kindly off yourself already.

EXACTLY THIS, I get that some people who identify as 'feminist' are weird, but feminists are not like that by default

Idpol as fuck.

I'll be honest I'm kinda starting to like feminism. I think much of my problem was with libfem because they always focus on words and attitudes and never anything really structural (the closest they come is with the wage gap but their understanding of it is trash because they keep looking for discrimination that defies the laws of capitalism rather than discrimination that is fully a part of the capitalist system). Maybe the UK parties are trash feminists, but you shouldn't turn away from learning about how gender works in a capitalist mode of production.

I'll take the feminists thank you very much.

But is my boy Ocalan wrong tho

Ah, but which sect(s) of feminism do you like? For example, there are Dianic sects which you probably wouldn't much appreciate, just as you might not feel fellowship with members of other Christian sects.

Yes. The west already has equality and still capitalism remains. Stop being a stupid fucking idiot and let go of feminism. It's only holding you back.

Which is it, fag?

Equality for women, retard. Women can be just as porky as any man and just as poor. By his own standards, his shit doesn't work.

Or, wait, did you just skip over the parts of OG Marxist lit where Engels talked about the origin of the family and Marx about bourgeois marriage?

And did you skip history where that is no longer the situation we live in today?

Wow! It's almost as if Ocalan was talking about women's equality AND freedom. Guess what prole women have none of in capitalism? I'll give you two guesses.

Women that don't have freedom in capitalism don't live that way because they're women. They live that way because they're proles. This focus on women is misguided. As for equality, they are just as fucked as the male proles, so unless you're going to focus on class, then I don't see how you can achieve true equality.

...

Ocalan was focusing on class you dumbfuck. Also, you know he's from Islamic fascist Turkey right? Where women are INCREDIBLY oppressed?

No, by his own statements he wasn't.

Nobody says they're not, but equality of the sexes isn't the measure by which we achieve socialism. By his own standard, the west has achieved his goals, and yet we still have capitalism here. This means he is wrong and that equality of the sexes does not lead to the liberation of the proletariat. One thing is for sure, however, that we in the west have no need for any brand of feminism. It has nothing to offer as we already take equality of the sexes as a given. Anything other than that is just idpol.

I'll be honest I don't know much about feminism yet. I still have to read a shit-ton of Marxist shit, philosophy and theology, so sadly it's a ways away on my to-read list. I'm just kinda starting to realize that most of my fears from my 'rational' phase are unfounded.

I wonder why user maybe you should read a fucking book then?