From the Scathing Reviews Department: Feminism, Interrupted | Hacker News Reader

From the Scathing Reviews Department: Feminism, Interrupted

cofault.com

4 pointsnikita_d4 comments

I haven’t read this book, but this quote highlighted by the reviewer is very concerning,

> “feminism means freedom, it means the right to be […] incoherent “, p. 71

My sincere wish is that fifth wave feminism can unshackle itself from bad arguments. Good arguments win you allies, and bad ones make you look unserious to people who could be allies.

While I agree that feminism means freedom (across many dimensions), the justifications for such freedoms are never incoherent because that’s how we’ve developed ways to deal with each other—by making sense.

If anything, incoherency is a tool which may be used to buy time, or confuse a political opponent. But these kinds of games are not fit for truth seeking. I am not putting the burden of truth seeking on just feminists, though—I don’t blame them for coming up with such tactics because their detractors are often nonsensical and illogical.

There are no easy answers because of the sociopolitical baggage such issues carry. Personally, I’d like fifth wave feminism to be defined by Stoicism and Materialism—to me, this is like being like the Sun: your truth is undeniable and fundamental.

Regarding the review of the book: I think I would react similarly to many of the highlighted blurbs from the book.

One problem with feminism as a movement is that it is very broad: it is one thing to be Hillary Clinton and to be able to afford to pay a woman to take care of your kids, it is another thing to be the woman who takes care of Hillary's kids. As a broad population they have the problems of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Logic_of_Collective_Action

probably more than any group other than "workers" or "white people".

An individual may or may not be "incoherent" but a group certainly will be, see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theore...

Feminism is as old as society, so it’s not a movement per se, but a philosophical framework for thinking about gender issues in society. Like any other philosophical framework, it has branches and subsets.

On average when people think Feminism, their frame of reference starts with the suffragette movements, which is how we came up with demarcation of “waves” of different periods in recent Feminist history which are defined by overarching themes.

But Feminism as a philosophy accepts that there is a spectrum of Feminist thought which on one end enables the freedom to be a trad-wife, and on the other end enables the freedom to be a man. Therefore, feminism is not just for women’s freedom, but also for the freedom of men. Its underlying root is to question authority and the status quo. Consequently, it’s in line with Feminist ideology, then, to question Feminism itself (and therefore justify giving up one’s freedom and power to another).

As far as group incoherency is concerned, that’s something which applies to all groups, sadly.

The review is hard to read since, rather than approaching the book as a whole, makes random shots at specific points in the book. To understand the review I'd have to read it side-by-side with the book.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com