Nina Hartley - Not What I Would Expect

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Justin Bonaparte on August 28, 2010 at 10:51pm

Great article, thanks for the link!

Permalink Reply by Stephen Moore on August 29, 2010 at 3:36am

Nina Hartley is great. I've known about her activism for a few years now, so I find it surprising when others just discover what she's about — "How could you not have known! You mean it's not common knowledge!?"

Permalink Reply by John D on August 29, 2010 at 11:14am

Yea. I guess it is not common knowledge. I was surprised. I am pretty well informed most of the time. I think most people don't like to talk about porn openly. All I ever hear about in the mainstream media is "sex addition" and "porn addition"... neither of which are really additions. The media doesn't want to make it sound like a sex worker is "normal".

Permalink Reply by The Nerd on August 29, 2010 at 11:53pm

Ooo, I didn't realize she was atheist!

I'm also saddened by how she thinks all radical feminists hate men. That's like saying all atheists hate religion. Some hate men and some hate religion, but lets not speak for the rest of us.

Permalink Reply by Stephen Moore on August 30, 2010 at 1:30am

Nina does identify as feminist, though. Her critique (valid or not) is with radical feminism, where she sees herself as being a liberal feminist.

That's like saying all atheists hate religion.

Not quite. More like all New Atheists hate religion. It's the sub-set Nina is referring to, not the set.

Permalink Reply by The Nerd on August 30, 2010 at 6:58am

Do all New Atheists hate religion? I thought that was anti-theists, who actually say they hate religion.

Permalink Reply by Stephen Moore on August 30, 2010 at 8:10am

No. But then that's part of the point I was making, and why I chose to use New Atheists rather than anti-theists. It is one of the critiques made against New Atheists, whether it is valid or not.

My example was to draw the parallel through analogy of sets and sub-sets together with concepts that inform valid and non-valid critiques.

Permalink Reply by Rob van Senten on August 30, 2010 at 6:36am

how she thinks all radical feminists hate men

It all depends on what is considered to be "radical feminism".

lets not speak for the rest of us.

Isn't it annoying when a "label" that you prescribe to gets hijacked by others with different views?

From personal experience (anecdotal evidence) I do know of a lot of men-hating so called radical feminists that are in my opinion a disgrace to the label of feminists. I wouldn't like to be grouped with these "radical feminists" either.

Permalink Reply by The Nerd on August 30, 2010 at 7:01am

It all depends on what is considered to be "radical feminism".

Oh, Wikipedia: "The term radical in radical feminism (from Latin rādīx, rādīc-, root) is used as an adjective meaning of or pertaining to the root or going to the root. Radical feminists locate the root cause of women's oppression in patriarchal gender relations, as opposed to legal systems (liberal feminism) or class conflict (socialist feminism and Marxist feminism)." Me, I happen to think they're all correct to a degree. There being so many different cultures and situations, I hesitate to pick a one-size-fits-all explanation of why women get the shaft so frequently.

Permalink Reply by Rob van Senten on August 30, 2010 at 7:55am

The problem in my opinion is not that the definitions are ill defined, it's that some people are not aware of these definitions and their implications. A person that sees men (in general) as the cause of the oppression of women might not even understand what a patriarchal gender relation is. That might not stop him/her from claiming the label of "radical feminist" though.

Me, I happen to think they're all correct to a degree.

Like any complicated issue, there is more than one cause and more than one solution.

I hesitate to pick a one-size-fits-all explanation of why women get the shaft so frequently.

Understandable, it's too complicated an issue to have only one explanation, it's a myriad of social, biological, cultural and religious rules, expectations, laws and what not.

Permalink Reply by Jason Spicer on August 30, 2010 at 12:18pm

Rob, I agree. I've never heard those definitions, and I'm reasonably well-informed. I strongly suspect that 95%+ simply think of "radical" as "over-the-top" or "rabid". If the nuance of your position lies in a Latin etymology at odds with the everyday use of a term, you've lost your argument before you open your mouth. I'm pretty sure that most people define "radical feminism" as "The She-Woman Man-Haters Club". The problem now is that asswipes like Rush Limbaugh are tarring all feminists as members of that club.

Permalink Reply by Rob van Senten on August 30, 2010 at 3:16pm

Even if you would have heard them, people are too diverse in their interpretations and understanding of (common) knowledge. It's quite common to misinterpret terminology which can cause havoc in a debate or discussion.

Therefor, when people ask questions, I try not to be offended and think that they are trying to pigeonhole me because they oppose my opinion, I try to think and answer the question.

..."radical" as "over-the-top" or "rabid".

To be honest, I though that "radical feminism" is about the complete rejection of all male authority. Simply said that women should not in any way be subservient to males, ever.

The problem now is that asswipes like Rush Limbaugh are tarring all feminists as members of that club.

So? Who cares about that dude?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page