With all due respect, though, while we are both entitled to our own differing opinions on the topic, I don't really believe that they are equally informed and therefore equally as "valid" or "useful" of an opinion. The "agree to disagree" line of thinking typically results in no effort to bridge difference or learn more about the merits of the other position. It is non-productive as a model of discussion.Exhuminator wrote:Perhaps. Or perhaps you refuse to consider my point of view, simply because it conflicts with your own.dsheinem wrote:That's fine, but you clearly weren't working from a framework where you could understand why she may be making the self-presentation choices she does and still not be considered a hypocrite.Well, I think you're making some significant generalizations there, but it's your opinion, so fair enough. Now I could counter all this with my own arguments with sources, and explain why I think you're wrong. You of course would not agree, and all we'd ultimately succeed in doing, is further derailing this poor thread. All while totally failing to convince the other that either is incorrect, because we are both supremely stubborn individuals. The clear crux here is you and I have different interpretations of what feminism should be.dsheinem wrote:The "makeup is a tool of the patriarchy" camp of this "debate" by the way is pretty much dead and gone, and most feminists are able to (OMG!) reconcile looking good and fighting for equality.
So let's just skip the further arguing part and agree to disagree.
Thread; please continue on original course of intent.
For example, I might have an opinion on what VCS game looks like it would have been the hardest to program and find some sources about general principles of programming for the system to suport my claim, but my point of view would be significantly inferior to someone who actually studied the history of game development on the system, who has conducted interviews with creators, read extensively on the ins and outs of working with the various boards in the system, etc.. Both people would be entitled to their point of view, but one would be an expert opinion and couched in more than cherry-picked research.
That is to say that I've studied feminist philosophy, activist movement history, gender and media, etc. I've encountered and grappled with the arguments you are presenting (often many times) and am critiquing them not merely from a place of "well, I have this other idea" but from one of prolonged engagement with and careful consideration of competing points of view. That's why I tend not to "agree to disagree" in most instances around certain subjects: the person who is trying to sit at the status quo of their current worldview is too often doing so out of a disinterest in learning more and understanding better the complexities of and political implications for their position.
