I'm a cishet white dude seeking an introduction to intersectional feminism, where should I start Veeky Forums?

lol, if you are actually a man don't follow this shit. go read this post in another thread if you want to know why (even though if you don't get this intuitively you are probably already lost).

i am not saying it's not ok for some individual men to be feminine if they want to follow that advice, but it's not a good for men as a group or for humanity as a whole. so no, most men don't need feminism. some may need it as a last resort if their only alternative is to kill themselves. choose wisely.

does intersectional feminism mean anything complex? i thought it just means that your life may suck for more than 1 reason. is there more meat to the concept or is that all?

>tfw used to be a reactionary but moved on, now hate the white race and support feminism 100%
inb4 butthurt /pol/tards try to refute this

pfft that post is right about its criticism about reddit but seem to think Veeky Forums is somehow better without actually proving it.

Intersectionality is a concept that emerged from Black Feminist Thought. The experience of black women cannot by reduced to the sum of the woman experience and the black experience, when black woman experience gendered oppression this oppression is racialized. It's all about searching for the root causes of injustice and unfairness in our society. how does dominant society shape one's ideas and limit people? Why shouldn't women be in positions of power? why shouldn't men be allowed to wear dresses? All in all, it is a really interesting subject, but Veeky Forums unfairly dismisses it.

>pro choice panel
>hearts
kek

>anti-racist
>mudslime

>implying you can be racist towards a religion

>being willfully ignorant regarding the nature of supremacy and racialisation.

Why has the hijab become a feminist symbol?

i don't know, i can understand feminism where women want to be dudes, but i don't get this kind of feminism where they basically want to remove all structures and without structures all the multiplicity of identities would flourish. but at the same time the goodies that are produced by the current structures would still be kept, how? is this second step that i don't get.

like this kind of theories and feminism is only able to flourish in a very specific context, of ulta-capitalist and wealthy countries, with very sheltered colleges/organizations that are given a lot of freedoms and very little responsibility.

seems very bourgeois to me, and i don't see how that multiplicity won't be devoured as soon as there's some pressure for results and an ideology with a clear path is put forward that swipes away all the other fragile identities.

>why can't we have breakfast for dinner?
>why do I need shoes and a shirt to get service?

It's not about searching for the root cause of injustice in society it's about cramming society into your limited ideas of class warfare and power dynamics to justify your inherent resentment. Concepts such as merit don't really exist in this epistemology, being only considered as a tool to legitimize the privileged.

Being black in USA is one of the most privileged positions to be in, not only materially, but due to globalism also culturally (you have access to influencing millions with your ideas, does that mean according to your own epistemology that you are actually the dominant class when taken to a global scale? If so, shut the fuck up, you retarded, mouthbreathing, nigger is not racist.)

Any sort of system of knowledge that lays the ills of the world on broad overarching concepts such as "culture" ore "history" is suspect, since the way you can extrapolate narratives from these subjects is incredibly vast.

>inb4 baited

I like how everything can be discussed on Veeky Forums, except some of it can't. I think the concept of intersectionality is useful, as far as I understood it, though the bitter truth is that I am not fat positive, not in favour of body modification and honestly I am a classist.

I think however that instead of being fat negative we should be negative of certain food habits, as there are plenty of people who eat bad without getting fat by it.

I am not trans inclusive in the sense that I think that body modification is wrong. That applies to hormone treatment and plastic surgery. I cannot give a good rationalization for it, but I feel as if it is cheating. For people who do not feel they are their biological sex I think the concept of a two spirit as practised by Indians is more progressive.

My class hatred is directed to the middle class and new money. I hold a rather reactionary view in which I think the equalisation in some forms was bad. I have to interact with people with who have no aspirations at all "to live the good life" to use a lame phrase. When I say I loathe new money it is more so that I'm repulsed by the wasteful lifestyle which isn't even restricted to new money by the way, even old money has people like that, and so do other classes.

With these kind of ideas I am not welcome in any political communiy so I'm sort of glad we can have this discussion.

imo intersectionality doesn't go far enough in its attacks on the ideology of meritocracy, ultimately reinforcing the reigning order of things. Intersectionalists are fixated on a liberal notion of 'fairness', their goal is a 'fair' society in which all people have access to 'equal opportunities'. However, they never really critique the form of the society itself: they complain about the 'unfairness' of the game but yet insist we keep playing it. 'social progress' is institutionalized and made synonymous with individual advancement within the corporate ladder, media and academia. That's what Deleuze meant when he talked about the society of control. Identity is now something to be managed and micromanaged, the objective is not liberation but management. Conservatives misunderstand the nature of modern capitalism, the time of rugged self made entrepreneurs is past and definitely not coming back. The management of social capital is the key to post industrial capitalism.

I think its very class based as well. Either your country has the structures, economy, and education to implement these ideas or your country doesn't. There are no completely blank societies where you can implement feminist ideals from the ground up but instead it must always be implemented from the wealthy elite down through society. Feminism certainly isn't a unified movement as there are many fractured ideologies which battle, support, and dismiss each other. However, mainstream feminism is certainly a class based movement and unless communist-like vanguard proletariat feminism catches on to the popular movement then it will remain a bourgeois movement.

It's profoundly unhealthy for the individual and society for women and their allies to spread the lie that there is anything more fulfilling for a woman than being subservient to a man and staying home to raise his children. Nothing will ever change this basic sociobiological fact.

it is worth thinking about but many modern feminist ideas amount to little more than victim olympics and social anarchy.
this is only sustainable as long as the west remains the capital of the world. How long does it last before our structures collapse?

>'social progress' is institutionalized and made synonymous with individual advancement within the corporate ladder, media and academia.
I think that's insightful.
So can you explain what in your view would be social progress? A restructure of society itself I'm assuming? It might be stupid questions but I want some discussion.

>brown woman will become part of the system
oh no

i think part of the problem is that there's a huge part of the population that has never built anything with their hands, or created anything real.

they have lived for too long on the information economy and believe that ideas can be conjured from thin air from their perspective, without acknowledging the whole lot of work and suffering that there's behind everything we give from granted. from that phenomenological point of view it's very easy to decide that you can tear down all the structures that form our society because they are oppressive and at the same time keep the fruits of the society because you have never experienced the manual work that there's behind anything as simple as a manufactured table, a piece of food, or even something "abstract" like a functional nuclear family.

>asking a site that's vehemently misogynistic about feminism
Okay.

On the very slim chance you're being sincere:
Andrea Dworkin (though she's more radical than many of the most leftist contemporary feminists) and Bell Hooks are very good starts.

>On the very slim chance you're being sincere
I don't think OP is,
But I am interested but I need to ask: do they argue in clear language?
I cannot bother with the kind of language that is used by certain continental philosophy, I don't have the time for it

>Andrea Dworkin
any books? a google search brings up mostly shitty drama around her life

>Bell Hooks
same with this one, i only get articles about some drama between her and beyoncé

I think most modern feminism argues equality with marxists methods but on the basis of Enlightment ideals.

As long as you can't extrapolate social needs out of human beings there is no liberation outside of a system based on social capital.
The ideal of the self made entrepreneur seems alive and well since the management of social capital seems to be a skill in itself on which you can base a concept of "meritocracy".

Yes, I'll second reading Dworkin to get to the root ideology of contemporary feminism. No one better illustrates how anti-human and anti-woman this strain of thought is. If her vision of women's liberation were to come to fruition, it would be a reign of totalitarian horror ending in the extinction of the race.

>cishet

kys

reminder that this video from The Onion exists:
youtube.com/watch?v=lpzVc7s-_e8

by castrating yourself

>That quote

Unless you're reading this to learn your opponents strategy, you have to be a serious masochist to read this shit. The tragic failure of these texts is that they're written by women -- so prepare for huge fucking tedium and boredom. They do not care about the read at all they're basically information and exposition dumps written by a highly ideological robot

I don't know user, what you said sounds like an exposition dump written by a highly ideological robot as well.

Because you're angry

The average feminist, not feminist author, but just supporter of the concept believes basically:
a. women have been historically oppressed
b. there is no longer a reasonable justification for many of the traditional roles for women since the industrialization of the west
c. women should now no longer have the same identity of caretaker / homemaker and are equally competent members of the workforce so
d. should get paid more money (wage gap meme)

Intersectionality steams from (a) as it's apparent that women were not the only oppressed group, but how much the average person cares about marxist inspired revolution with a IdPol flavor is very small and basically just results in them voting in favor of affirmative action and then giving up on the issue

Exactly, so unless you want to read an entire book like that, don't bother.

Yes, but that's barely a paragraph. Can you imagine idiots reading entire volumes of "feminist" nonsense? It's nothing but the subversive venom of women who lost in the mating game pissing in the pool of the genetically desirable.

what's the endgoal of this pic? what does inclusion mean? is that developed somewhere?

Great idea! Let's double the labor pool and then raise wages for the least productive workers!

I was a woman once

>emotionally mature

What the fuck does this even mean?

i don't know, but now that you mention it, it's a typical tactic that intersectional intergalactic communists to attack the masculinity of their critics, which is kind of funny, because the implication is that men should be tougher than that and don't be intimidated by women's silly games

If your issue is that the avg. woman chooses professions that are less productive than that of the avg. man, consider women in STEM and the trades your allies
You'll find little success in forcing half the population back out of the workforce to raise children that don't exist and nobody wants

Does hooks actually offer anything interesting? Everything I've seen from her is pretty bland.

I was a human once
But things changed
I'm no longer human

>So can you explain what in your view would be social progress?

An end to the dictatorship of the political economy, of which the economy of social capital is only an outgrow. The singleminded focus on individualistic 'success' within the established structures of the market provides with a very narrow vision of what human life can be.

It's worth noting that the new wave of social liberalism started in the Obama era, after the mortgage crisis dashed the black middle class' hopes for economic advancement. progress moved on to the realm of the spectacle. Intersectionalism merged with middle class ideology and became just another way to enforce middle class mores. ie. You should eat your vegetables because children in Africa are starving. An useful tool for keeping downwardly mobile middle class whites in line. Or perhaps not so useful. Who knows what's next?

Pop Psych mindfuckery is an american tradition with a long and storied past. Schools and corporations use tools derived from ESALEN and Werner Erhardt to fuck with you constantly. Wonder where that emphasis on and ritualised displays of 'authentic' emotion comes from?

>intersectional intergalactic communists

genealogy of morals

>raise children that don't exist and nobody wants
>nobody wants
>import people from traditional cultures instead of having babbies
sounds like a wonderful solution, except when you fail to inculcate your intersectional ideology to the newly imported humans that now compose our society so we get a nice, functional traditional society instead of the self-destructive status quo. everybody wins.

I'm married with children. Deprogramming my wife of her liberal feminist indoctrination was one of the greatest challenges of my life, and now she's never felt more fulfilled than living her role as a loving, nurturing mother and sexually submissive wife.

Most of her friends are childless and past the point of viably having children. Seeing them go through this realization has been both educational and rewarding. They are miserable, plagued by addictions and/or mental illnesses, a few are outright suicidal. I seriously believe the female mind and body are programmed to self destruct if they pass childbearing age without producing offspring. I just need to do the research.

>narrow vision of what human life can be

riiiiiiiight, and what is the full picture?
even under communist rule, social capital is gained by the fervent adherence to the party's ideology. you can't escape self interest.

yep, even anarchistic open assemblies are basically the tyranny of the charismatic and extroverted.

even that is being optimistic and expecting it to be so transparent and open, more probably it would be the tyranny of those that play manipulative social games on the shadows.

>riiiiiiiight, and what is the full picture?

building a phalanstery, dedicating oneself to the construction of situations, bringing harmony to the universe, resuscitating the dead... etc. etc.

Has a liberal ever addressed this problem? I've always wondered.

Almost all political works are like that

pics or it didn't happened

>cishet
why

>where should I start
Harriet Beecher Stowe

what the fuck does intersectional mean. it sounds like furniture. please don't tell me this is the hot new way of saying 'diverse' because 1. that never made sense and 2. you are too SJW-bullied to say black/white/asian/latino/whatever.

I'm not a /pol/ person, or alt-right, or wp. I'm an old liberal Democrat. And you people are losing your goddamn minds.

no, because all these progressive ideologies are the most western-centric currents of thought ever created, which is quite ironic.

they know how to hide it, but as soon as you scratch the surface it becomes clear that they place western white men as the true universal subjects with agency. in this worldview minorities have no agency, and thus no guilt nor responsibility. they just form part of the blob of their groups, while western white men have to take responsibility and address the issue.

which i can understand why they do it strategically, the problem will be if at some point western white men are actually dethroned, if the group that takes over afterwards can be manipulated in the same way. at this point it seems that group could be islamic men, and everything indicates that they will not be manipulated by those tools.

i'm not /pol/ and i don't think this will actually happen. but if this progressive ideology were to run its course that seems to me to only logical conclusion. once you remove the group the personifies all the guild that fuels your ideology you are left with a vacuum and nothing else.

>what the fuck does intersectional mean
okay so i looked it up. it literally means systems of oppression, which is what i assumed. people using it as a first term for self-identification is fucking retarded. if i wasn't /pol/-tier before i'll be there in a few years at this rate.

>intersectionality
>not superior european roundabouts

aesthetic, but looks like a nightmare to drive

they want your job and they want your penis (severed and wrapped with a nice bow)

it's not so bad after your first few times around

basically like rape

Hispanic/Chicano/Latin(x) already consider themselves white but mixed with the indigenous americans, and follow a mixture of Catholic and Marxist ideas, not very different from the average modern american w/ northern European heritage (aside from latin americans actually having some historic claim to the land)
There's little risk of America being dethroned by a islamic group, and the 'reconquistas' assimilate well (seeing as their states are already republics with similar history to the US, but spanish rather than anglo)

Good luck in Europe though, hope you guys stop world warring yourself

that sounds gay af

also all the things you mention, for them to exist, you need a system a values in which people advance in accordance to the fulfillment of that paradise. once such a system is established people will start selecting mates based on that system (you also need new generations to perpetuate that system). once mate competition starts individuality is sure to appear.

you can't escape human nature, dingus. we are governed by external forces and all the naive empathy and intense rationalization of human labour is not really worth that much compared to the reason why we do things.

Welcome the rising fire

latin americans assimilate relatively well to US culture as they share most of their cultural heritage with it and self interested persuits of success do the rest (which is why their family came here in the first place)
At the end of the day you just have a browner group of people calling themselves liberals and pushing the same ideas, which is fine by us, I get a qt chicano gf

if you're importing a working class it's on the foundation of the promise of a better future for their children, and the cycle is able to perpetuate itself through generally shared values and definition of what a 'good future' might look like

europe is more fucked but that's your fault for choosing a starting area without two major oceans and any natural oil

Okay, let's pretend that Mexicans are just a type of brown American and that they're going to assimilate. What happens when their birthrates fall? You'll have to import even more third world immigrants.

Like what happens when Maria decides to get her master's degree instead of having eight of Pedro's kids?

not him but: the cycle repeats. there is always a need for an underclass. witness the previous waves of immigrants in america. our future is uncertain however because robots/AI.

Can't wait till Mexicans assimilate enough to start the next wave of the cycle. Then they'll be true Americans.

>interested in reading bell hooks
>"White supremacist capitalist patriarchy"

>intersectional
implying not being a woman means you need a prefix to make you a feminist
>cishet white male
Stop with the identity politics
This is why, despite being a hardcore liberal, I hate the left

Oh please. Masculinity doesn't mean "no emotions". What a pitifully inept view of it.

It seems to me like the concept of "intersectionality" has been totally weaponized by minority activists so that they can co-opt the larger umbrella of feminism to push for particularist racial shit. Just attach yourself to any kind of leftist activist movement, start spouting shit about race nonstop and when someone says you're off topic pull the "intersectionality" card.

Yeah good post. What a crock of bullshit.

I wish the truly lost people that spout this deconstructionist nonsense would stop and think.

They have no end goal.

You've replaced all the straight white males. Great. Now you have the same issues of preferential hiding etc, just in reverse.

What is the end goal of the six-billion-genders-died-intersectional-queer-black-muslim crowd?

What would their society look like?

It's the indulgence of straight white men that allow this to proliferate. Obviously in any sort of struggle, white men will win against other groups if they are trying. Instead many white men voluntarily subject themselves to degradation.

What even is the issue?

In a Turkish society in the Ottoman empire, you're the most privileged person if you're a Turkish Ottoman because you're the fucking majority.

It's basic history and basic social economics. What is the deal?

Should we treat the minority with respect? Duh. Should we be as heroic as we can? Absolutely.

Not to mention Im not against helping out minorities in shitty situations (blacks in urban situations) but you have to attack the root of the problem. This is not the answer...

if you're serious user im sorry because you are not going to get what you're looking for (obvious at this point). Id certainly be interested in any hypothetical recs. do some diving around in goodreads, thats how I got started on a lot of good literature about colonialist impacts and environmentalism (fiction and nonfiction)

We need to decolonize science.

>Hispanic/Chicano/Latin(x) already consider themselves white but mixed with the indigenous americans,
even if it's not islam that takes over with latinos it's still the same result but less extreme.

you will basically get white dudes that carry none of the white guilt, so you won't be able to manipulate them into pander to minorities or women and will get a nice, functioning traditional society that forgets about all intersectional bullshit and treats minorities like shit.

Deconstruction doesn't have an end goal because it's a process inherent to the text.

i'd say that for the current ideology to work you need white guilt. latinos have no white guilt so intersectional ideology will crumble as soon as whitey is not the majority.

when latinos start voting their true ideas instead of their short term interests the left will probably have to change a lot and become more traditional or die.

That's fine though, perpetuating liberalism, not intersectionalism, was what we were speaking about
You'll always have an underclass though, in this case it'll be native identifying women allied with traditional economically motivated marxists against business minded liberal Latino Americans

ah, monsieur, you are interested in feminism, monsieur "intersectional feminism" monsieur.

we will have to sit down for this one, please, i beg you, ungirdle yourself and remove your penis, for i cannot talk to you man to man on this question, but we must speak as eunuchs, and, of course Jews, for George Soros, the author of the Elders of the protocols of Zion, created the Hebraic original of intersectional before Peggy McIntosh had learnt not to shave the hair under her armpits in order to virtue signal on college campuses to severely ambitious, ideologically and intellectualy serious, middle class cunts. now, don't get me wrong, monsieur. i am as identitarian as the next homose - as the next man, monsieur, i mean, the next eunuch, monsieur, for to even discuss this, my penis has instinctively conditioned itself through necrosis and mortification, to become a vagina, so that i may express, monsieur, my identity, to you - to all of you - now, monsieur and mes gays, that i am now - pray tell friend - trans + shift key + the star thing. now, you understand my homosexuality puts me at such a place of oppression on the Hierarchy of the great chain of slave morality, that i may now begin to speak to you unreservedly, seriously, one Gay Unto Another, who does not believe Race Is Real. now, all of this, then, by way of preface, let us - let us fall to, like men in arms, like neo-homosexual yellow journalists, buzzfeed entrepreneur acephobic queersexual aliens.

to truly understand any stand of feminism, even the strand which sits, like a Phallic Signifier, at the core of Really Existing Online SJW and Call Out Culture, one has to go, like Bentley, monsieur, like Wilamowitz, monsieur, yes, like all the great classical philologists, to the pierian fount. what is that, monsieur? what is the source? why, monsieur, the answer is simple. not a myriad of blue stockings in the nineteenth century, their confluence with working class women and their own contingents, unions, halls, RABBLES - i mean, excuse me, monsieur, their circles - no. there is no material history here, monsieur, no grand chain of influence and dysfluence, of Bloomian anxiety, rather, there is a single source, invisible, demonic, and deeply at odds with racial science: a lonely figure in european history, a people who one may mythologically figure as a kind of parasite, a creature that lives off the crumbs of others, worshipping defiantly the old religion and its monolithic god-protector. you know exactly who i mean, monsieur, and i don't need to say any more. i have said enough, monsieur. you all know - you all KNOW - of what, of whom, of that. but, enough, monsieur. you may gain a sufficient knowledge of the "surface" expression of this figure, whom i may not name, through its Hydra-like expression in social degenerates who call themselves intersectional feminists, whose one goal, monsieur, is of course the destruction of western civilisation, defended heroically by gamers.

tl;dr

it's super easy

Start with cutting your dick off and becoming a transwymyn.

>dilation, look it up
since i found out about it, it makes me feel bad about all post op trannies and i hope they would have just kept their penises and dressed like girls :(

Men dull their emotional instincts because society itself is incompatible with a man's inherent need to dominate. A man who doesn't sublimate his will, at least in public, is subject to being killed or ostracized. Raping and pillaging is what a society that doesn't ask men to dull their emotional instincts devolves to.

>that quote
Why do women think that men deep down are exactly like they are? We're not all sensitive poets who get beaten into violent conformity. Deep down men are violent and vicious. If you want to see what an emotionally uncrippled man looks like, see Genghis Khan.