Yes. Not explicitly but in effect, yes. Also, anti-racist goals were sexist. The argument is that when people spoke of 'women' they meant white women and when they spoke of 'blacks' they meant men. The unique problems of black women were getting missed.
-
-
Yes. I broke down her foundational essays here: http://helenpluckroseblogs.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/extract-from-essay-of-mine-which-breaks.html … Obviously a lot more to it than that but both of them - 1989 & 1991 - are available online if you want to look deeper.
-
I had no idea my mild disagreement with Eliezer would turn into such an interesting thread.
-
Well, I'm delighted. Often you lose the will to live when I get into fine details of feminist theory and threaten to talk to me about free will. ;-)
-
Someday, we should get deep into the fine details on free will in Dms or something.
-
*runs away*
-
Honestly, I can't remember what our differences of opinion were on free will. I bet we'd agree if I explained them better though lol.
-
We don't disagree. You just find it much more interesting than I do and had a tendency to explain it to me quite a lot! XD
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Why? What was her reasoning?
-
Nice “steel manning “ of Chrenshaw’s worldview. You last paragraph has me wanting more from you on your critique of her thesis. Do I need to read the whole paper for that?
-
Its still in scrappy note form. It's 10,000 words and I don't know what I'd do with it. I look at those five aims.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.