they made an exception because her grandfather murdered an unarmed native
Reminds me I never did find out what the ‘Blood and Teeth’ thing was about, just that someone got it tattooed on the side of their head
Can confirm, nobody likes me bc I am morally superior to everyone
The best part is making even more people hate you when six months later you post your takes that they suddenly agree with and go "I told you so"
She’s my least favorite democrat. She’s just so goddamn awful and I know there are lots of blue dogs but her lack of sincerity and RACIST history seriously disturb the shit out of me.
At least with Bloomberg we got to watch him blow hundreds of millions of his own fortune while remaining completely unwanted
yes to both, bloomberg is pretty bad though. hes a republican though to be honest. as much as pete sucks he doesn't suck up as much air in "progressive" circles
Warren was a Regan republican in the 90's, she never moved any of her opinions, the dems moved right and she's now comfortable rebranding as more woke.
bad article. it couldnt have been an all-white sorority, it included a native american
why are white women treated as a minority when historically they've been against racial integration?
Feminism is a basically petite-bourgeois social movement working to achieve political and social rights for its base. There's of course been some radical elements and writers that attempt integrate the experiences of working-class indigenous and black women, and more recently trans women, but those are also voices that don't get a platform in bourgeois institutions.
Those works also create contradictions in the movement, since white women can be the oppressors of black women and so on. If that's the case, then how can there be any sort of feminist solidarity? Can a migrant farmworker living in temp housing that lacks running water have solidarity with the white farm owner on the basis of their gender? Working through that would lead to a critique of capitalism, which of course is not something that the petite bourgeois would want, so best to just ignore it - cause its pussy hat time.
I mean if libs co-opt BLM does that make black lives matter less? Feminism is a long-term project for deconstructing the patriarchy, its temporary co-option in media by white suburbanites in the United States doesn't reduce its validity. That's precisely what they're trying to do by co-opting it, and it sounds like you're falling for it. All feminism is by definition radical as long as there is a patriarchy. If it doesn't meet that test, then what you're talking about is libs in a Halloween costume.
That's quite a BS interpretation of what I wrote. Or you have a poor grasp of the history of feminism in the United States.
Feminism has largely been a project of the white petite bourgeois throughout its modern history - from the suffragettes to the second wave feminism of NOW and Gloria Steinham and the "intersectional" third wave feminism that grew out of the academy beginning in the 1980s. It's not a "co-option" by the media. The fact that half of the news anchors on TV are women is a direct product of the feminist movement. White suburbanite women haven't coopted feminism - they have had real gains because of feminism. They can hold professional jobs, divorce their shitty husbands, be more sexually active, etc. because of the feminist movement.
Is this a problem?
No. lol. Where did you get that?
I don’t understand what you’re saying.
It sounds like you're used to seeing anti-feminist chud screed all over the internet. Can't blame you. I'm attempting to critique the modern feminist movement as inherently limited because of class contradictions - not a dumb chud argument, but a Marxist one.
equal pay and women being able to work post-marriage kinda seems like a big deal to me, for women of all races
Those things would be a big deal - if you could realistically achieve them under capitalism.
When you see discussion about achieving equal pay come up, its usually in the context of a push for an updated version of equal pay legislation coming up in Congress. Yet, historically it is labor unions which have been most successful in achieving equality of pay regardless of gender, not legislation from the bourgeois state.
Let's drop the "equal pay for equal work" thing too, since that's a bourgeois construct used to defend the vast differences in pay between types of work. A lot of the work that women engage in is social work - either as caregivers to family and friends informally or as caregivers formally in jobs such as home health aides. If your goal is simply "equal pay for equal work" you'll still have jobs which have historically been performed by women which is either unpaid or paid very little compared to the tremendous social benefit that the work provides. No equal pay legislation is going to touch that.
Also the creation of women’s shelters for women fleeing domestic violence, and marital rape being recognised as criminal.
Again, good things. But even with the modicum of social protections offered today, women are still forced to stay in abusive relationships because of their financial circumstances - they can't make rent on their own or need health insurance. The experience of a woman from Highland Park leaving an abusive relationship is very different from the experience of a woman in east Houston leaving an abusive relationship. To actually make sure all women have the ability to enter and leave relationships free of economic demand, you would at least need a robust welfare state.
Are these not things that help all women?
Now here's the main point. My answer is no, at least not in equal measure. Especially if you account for the experiences of trans women, who often lack the same legal protections afforded to cis women.
I feel like I could go on for a while but I'm really repeating the arguments of others at this point. If you want a more fleshed out argument, there are great writers who will explain this much better than I can. Specifically Alexandra Kollontai. Haymarket released a copy of selected works that's pretty good a few years ago. Might even find it on libgen.
Disgusting that this headline is erasing her native american ancestry :pouting face:
I am suprised no one has gone through A) her Federalist Society speeches B) Her lectures and/or curriculum at Penn State (I know those were bad I imagine UT and UH were too).
"With Warren as VP, Biden will finally be able to win over the..."
checks notes
"...racist sorority sister demographic."
