Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 187 (click to see context) from:
* '''Privilege:''' The advantages (relative to disadvantages) one has when navigating through life. All the things about you that might make your life a little easier than the lives of other people in your social group. Examples include: protection from racism, protection from sexism, protection from religious discrimination, protection from homophobia, protection from classism, etc. When somebody tells you to "check your privilege", they're reminding you to recognize where you're coming from. For example, the popular feminist perception is that if you're straight and white, your experience differs from that of queer women of color; for instance, you can walk down street and kiss the person you love without getting yelled at, ''and'' not get yelled at to go back to your home country. The hardest part of this to understand is that privilege is context-sensitive; just because you enjoy certain advantages in one context, that doesn't mean you're not disadvantaged in others (an example is the treatment of Caucasians in South Africa). People who haven't figured this out -- which can range from disenfranchised blue-collar workers in rural America to non-white feminist women -- often use their contextual disadvantages to claim global disadvantages, or ignore the legitimate suffering of certain people because those people are privileged in other ways. A poor, hard-working white man might be offended at being called "privileged" because, as opposed to someone who's IdleRich, he has to put up with all kinds of crap -- while missing that there's still more kinds of crap he doesn't even have to ''know about'' because he's not black or a woman. BothSidesHaveAPoint, and the fact that privilege is so deeply contextual -- and, more importantly, that aforementioned context is often overlooked -- can make it ''very'' difficult to discuss.
to:
* '''Privilege:''' The advantages (relative to disadvantages) one has when navigating through life. All the things about you that might make your life a little easier than the lives of other people in your social group. Examples include: protection from racism, protection from sexism, protection from religious discrimination, protection from homophobia, protection from classism, etc. When somebody tells you to "check your privilege", they're reminding you to recognize where you're coming from. For example, the popular feminist perception is that if you're straight and white, your experience differs from that of queer women of color; for instance, you can walk down the street and kiss the person you love without getting yelled at, ''and'' not get yelled at to go back to your home country. The hardest part of this to understand is that privilege is context-sensitive; just because you enjoy certain advantages in one context, that doesn't mean you're not disadvantaged in others (an example is the treatment of Caucasians in South Africa). People who haven't figured this out -- which can range from disenfranchised blue-collar workers in rural America to non-white feminist women -- often use their contextual disadvantages to claim global disadvantages, or ignore the legitimate suffering of certain people because those people are privileged in other ways. A poor, hard-working white man might be offended at being called "privileged" because, as opposed to someone who's IdleRich, he has to put up with all kinds of crap -- while missing that there's still more kinds of crap he doesn't even have to ''know about'' because he's not black or a woman. BothSidesHaveAPoint, and the fact that privilege is so deeply contextual -- and, more importantly, that that aforementioned context is often overlooked -- can make it ''very'' difficult to discuss.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Index wick removal
Changed line(s) 103,104 (click to see context) from:
There are places and times in which feminists ''can'' come across as a sort of StopHavingFunGuy: you're going about your day, making a joke about some AcceptableTargets, and suddenly a feminist says, "Hey, that's not actually funny." To a truly intersectional feminist, there ''are'' no AcceptableTargets, which says positive things about their mentality but sure makes it hard to crack jokes.
to:
There are places and times in which feminists ''can'' come across as a sort of StopHavingFunGuy: you're going about your day, making a joke about some AcceptableTargets, acceptable targets, and suddenly a feminist says, "Hey, that's not actually funny." To a truly intersectional feminist, there ''are'' no AcceptableTargets, acceptable targets to mock, which says positive things about their mentality but sure makes it hard to crack jokes.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Love You And Everyone is no longer a trope
Changed line(s) 103,104 (click to see context) from:
There are places and times in which feminists ''can'' come across as a sort of StopHavingFunGuy: you're going about your day, making a joke about some AcceptableTargets, and suddenly a feminist says, "Hey, that's not actually funny." To a truly intersectional feminist, there ''are'' no AcceptableTargets, which says positive things about their "LoveYouAndEverybody" mentality but sure makes it hard to crack jokes.
to:
There are places and times in which feminists ''can'' come across as a sort of StopHavingFunGuy: you're going about your day, making a joke about some AcceptableTargets, and suddenly a feminist says, "Hey, that's not actually funny." To a truly intersectional feminist, there ''are'' no AcceptableTargets, which says positive things about their "LoveYouAndEverybody" mentality but sure makes it hard to crack jokes.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
There's also the fact that patriarchy sees "rights" and "privileges" as a zero-sum game, one in which any gain on the part of one party is balanced by loss on the part of the other. In other words, anything a woman can do, a man ''can't'' do, and giving too many rights to women means UpsettingTheBalance. This is InsaneTrollLogic at best, since it's empirically false. Women and men can ''both'' have jobs; women and men can ''both'' vote; women and men can ''both'' have sexual agency. But, if you're in denial of that basic reality, then naturally you'll resist any voice which attempts to take things from men and give them to women. (And, to be sure, if rights ''were'' a zero-sum game, that would be a valid point. It's just that they're... not.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Changed line(s) 89,90 (click to see context) from:
However, this logic is bound up in what Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} calls [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy kyriarchy]], the overall idea that every society must involve ''persecution''. Both patriarchy and matriarchy are subtropes of kyriarchy. It is true that most societies in human history have been kyriarchies, but it does not follow that all societies ''must'' be kyriarchies. ''This'' is the ThirdOption feminism actually strives for: the opposite of kyriarchy ''and'' patriarchy '''''and''''' matriarchy all at once, a {{utopia}} where ''nobody'' is oppressed.
to:
However, this logic is bound up in what Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} Website/{{Wikipedia}} calls [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy kyriarchy]], the overall idea that every society must involve ''persecution''. Both patriarchy and matriarchy are subtropes of kyriarchy. It is true that most societies in human history have been kyriarchies, but it does not follow that all societies ''must'' be kyriarchies. ''This'' is the ThirdOption feminism actually strives for: the opposite of kyriarchy ''and'' patriarchy '''''and''''' matriarchy all at once, a {{utopia}} where ''nobody'' is oppressed.
