Comments on: Against the high cult of retreat

By: Emmy

Emmy — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 20:01:29 +0000

“They”, Matt? Are you referring to two Steinem and Weisstein, or every woman on the planet? That is a lot of individuals he appears to speak for.

Muslims probably have more opportunities than ever before, so they should just shut up and be happy, right?

By: kathy lowen

kathy lowen — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:19:15 +0000

Come to think about it, Weisstein and the rest of the angry, attention-seeking “gender-oriented” feminists that Paglia describes, basically fit the classic symptoms of clinical Narcissism… with all the need for control, entitlement, grandiosity, specialness, and absence of any accountability or empathy that implies. And as typical with most narcissists, they also seem to be a pretty literal and hyper-defensive bunch (oh, and humorless too)! Which is probably to be expected, when it’s always “all about ME!” ;-p

By: Maria

Maria — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 01:31:01 +0000

uh, what? I do not understand Mat’s comment… just because things are better doesn’t mean they’re fixed. Sorry feminists are such a buzzkill at your privilege party, it’s not really their job to entertain you.

the thing I love most here is “Science (as opposed to the scientific establishment) will entertain hypothesis generated in any way: mystical, intuitive, experiential. It only asks us to make sure that our observations and replicable and our theories have some reasonable relation to other things we know to be true about the subject under study, that is to objective reality…” I think a lot of people miss the difference between the establishment and science (or lots of other things) itself.

By: Clarisse Thorn

Clarisse Thorn — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 08:27:01 +0000

Feminism typically rejects science as a useful approach? That’s … quite some language to describe what feminism actually does, which is question the way science and the scientific method are often revered over other ways of learning and knowing.

Also, the idea that objectivity is such a simple/stalemated concept that it’s not even worth thinking about is … a bit much? Last I checked, many of those “simple” or “stalemated” debates are debated a lot precisely because they are worthy debates to have.

But good for Weisstein for doing the work she does.

By: Mat

Mat — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:03:51 +0000

With such unpleasant scolds like Weisstein (and also pretty humorless for a self-described “comedian”), no wonder the majority of young women have now come to reject being labeled as a “feminist”!

Camille Paglia & Christina Hoff Sommers seem to have a much more enlightened (and less self-absorbed) take on gender equality. They distinguish between “equity” feminists, who want for women what you want for everyone: fair treatment, no discrimination…. and “gender” feminists, like Steinem and Weisstein, who prefer to blame a “sex-gender system” and “patriarchal hegemony”.

Or as Paglia puts it, “it’s so silly. It has no basis in American reality. No women have ever had more opportunities, more freedom, and more equality than contemporary American women. And at that moment the movement becomes more bitter and more angry. Why are they so angry?”

http://www.menweb.org/paglsomm.htm

By: sshaver

sshaver — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 03:30:27 +0000

“The theories are pitiful.” I love that! It should be printed on t-shirts to keep all “experts” humble.

By: Against the high cult of retreat « Mind Hacks | Secularity (under construction)

Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:30:56 +0000

[...] Against the high cult of retreat « Mind Hacks. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. By Colin Mackay • Tagged feminism, society 0 [...]

By: Emmy

Emmy — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:44:27 +0000

The post illustrates nicely why activism and science should be kept seperate most of the time.

I don’t know when current scientific method came into existence, nor when brain scans became widely used in neuroscience. But the studies I’ve seen from the 30s and40s share hardly any resemblance to current studies. What’s more, behavioral science seems notoriously difficult to interpret.

I was reminded of a study that the media and commenters tore apart while interpreting. But they forgot that the study was simply a game of numbers. (Counting words).

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/26/science/26tier.html