Male feminism classic
Ok I listened to Lavery on Woman’s Hour. I’m relieved: Emma Barnett didn’t let him get away with much. It starts at 17:25 in case you want to listen.
20:10 Lavery: “I think what we’re really talking about is do we think the category ‘woman’ designates a class of biological being, or do we think that it’s a political category whose meaning can change over time. I think reasonable people can take different perspectives on that question, but historically speaking the people who have taken the position that it is a biologically essential category have tended to be on the side of patriarchy, and those who have claimed that it is a political category that has been deployed to oppress a class of people have been feminists. In the UK at the moment those terms are contested, the terms of the contest are a little confusing.”
That’s just nonsense. It’s not the case that “historically” feminists thought “woman” was a political category as opposed to a biological one. Of course they didn’t, because there weren’t men like Lavery running around saying they get to be women too.
At 32:12 Emma asks “Do you not understand or perhaps sympathize as to why they think of that [the strength advantage and unfairness in sport] as proof that there is such a thing as the female body?”
Lavery: “Well again I’m not for a moment contesting that there is such a thing as a female body – you know, you’re asking me if I can sympathize with a position I’ve told you I don’t agree with, so I guess my answer is yes, I can understand why people would hold the view that there was a naturally occurring organic type, after all that is what patriarchy tells us every day, and it is a very difficult view to get your head out of.”
Emma: “Are you saying that every woman who believes that is effectively having their mind warped by patriarchy?”
Lavery: “Uh I wouldn’t use that phrase, I think that it is difficult to think one’s way out of structures that one is informed of frequently.”
He starts to waffle on but Emma interrupts him: “But the irony is obviously some of those people are very much feminists and have thought [of] nothing but about patriarchy and how to think their ways out of those structures and still come to the conclusion that the male body retains an advantage over the female body.”
Score!
At around 34:25 Lavery says it’s “a profound historical novelty” for feminists to think women are “a naturally occurring type” i.e. people with female bodies. “I do not think you could find a single feminist who would take that view prior to Caitlyn Jenner appearing on the front cover of Vanity Fair.”
Classic narcissistic man setting feminist women straight on what feminism is.
Until 2019 nobody thought that a chair was a physical object to sit upon; they all thought that it was a philosophical concept that could change over time, and could be a galaxy, a giraffe, or a saline solution. #TrueFacts
Guess he hasn’t read any feminist material, then. The only reason he finds this phenomenon occurring after the appearance of Jenner on Vanity Fair is that prior to that, the idea that a man could literally be a woman would have been considered nonsense by most.
The profound historical novelty is the nonsense that men can be women. Even when you looked at two spirit, they recognized that they were something other than men or women (but not NBs, because that sort of nonsense is even less historical).
As a feminist, I have always accepted the sexual dimorphism of our species, while believing it was not a proper reason to (1) oppress women; (2) wear high heels; (3) color everything pink; or (4) think women could have a penis. We are, and always have been gender critical, not sex stupid.
GW – you mean, I can sit in my chair? I’ve been using it as a planter! And sitting on my coffee pot. What do you suppose the proper use for that might be?
The proper use of the coffee pot? It’s hard to answer that question, you see, because coffee is fluid and constantly in flux.
Are you questioning how sincere Thomas is?
Is that comment meant for a different post?
Where has he been for the last 10,000 years? Of COURSE women have known since forever that we are “a naturally occurring type” of human being. Women know the reason for our oppression, by the other “naturally occurring type” of human being, i.e., men. Sheesh. What a maroon.
GW @1
Checkmate, TERFs.
https://i.redd.it/6hguo4ryy6c51.jpg
Ha, came in here to express my astonishment at what everyone else here is expressing their astonishment at. What a ridiculous statement.
Feminism was always about fighting against the abridgement of rights perpetrated against the female sex. When referring to this group, the feminists used the words routinely ‘women’ and ‘girls’. Obviously then those words refer to sex, but even if we assume those words refer to some nebulous political class, it is a class that was created by that differential treatment… on the basis of sex.
For some, history is just so much boring stuff.
Just so much boring old stuff.