Mmm, there are still gender stratifications within class, as well as class stratifications within gender. The existence of the Epstein class is a class issue; the misogyny of that class is a gender issue; the structural prevention of women to enter that class is both a class issue and a gender issue. And I’m not even getting into race. Like, Oprah dropping nudes is going to be taken differently than Kendal Kardashian, but both are still billionaires, and both would face more blowback than Epstein’s friends within the same eschelon of the owning class.
Sure but class inequality is what exacerbates gender inequality. Under capitalism anyone who is working class is forced to sell their labor to survive. Women are inherently disadvantaged here because their labor is required for social reproduction. Even assuming an equal distribution of housework and raising kids women have to do the unpaid work of pregnancy, childbirth, nursing, etc. Capitalists will therefore discount the value of a women’s labor regardless of her individual capabilities or productive output. As a result women are often forced to depend on the men in their lives for financial stability.
Conservatives are hell bent on normalizing this unnatural inequality between the sexes because doing so protects the underlying class inequality between owners and workers. This is what helps to create a sexist culture that even wealthy women have to endure. However, a woman who can live off of the growth of her investments is not facing the full weight of gender inequality that a working class woman must contend with. She does not have to deal with the threat of homelessness, hunger, and poverty that keeps many working class women dependent on men. Her financial stability is already assured because of her class position and the exploitation of the working class. That gives her far more freedoms than even most working class men.
The obvious solution to the problem is to upend capitalism which is what reinforces class. That creates the possibility of actually valuing reproductive labor and giving universal financial independence to all women. If you just try to address gender inequality alone without upending capitalism you won’t be able to succeed. Even if somehow you did, the vast majority of inequality would remain because most inequality can be explained by class alone. So while its true that gender and class issues are interrelated, abolishing class creates the conditions necessary to abolish gender inequality.
If you just try to address gender inequality alone without upending capitalism you won’t be able to succeed.
This but in reverse! If you just try to crush capitalism without eradicating gender inequality you will probably fail. If the working class isn’t even united and equal between its genders how could you muster the strength to abolish the upper class?
There’s a difference between rejecting sexism within a movement and trying to abolish gender inequality. I agree that the former is important for building solidarity. However the latter is likely impossible under capitalism.
Gender is still a problem as you move up in class. A rich woman will have more protections than a poor woman, but not as much protection as a rich man.
Yeah, maybe I misunderstood the reference. I guess there’s a bit of a joke in there? It’s not really where my thinking is at for the discussion, but probably there is another conversation the have there fo sure.
Ignoring gender inequality in favor of focusing on class solidarity even though they are inextricably tied. Chavez did it to the point of raping many women and girls.
Would it not be reasonable to think he ignored gender equality because of his values towards women?
But you’re right, they are tied together, as are all the other cultural class divisions rooted back to the core issue of economic class. That is the problem to solve, not to the exclusion of others, but because the other problems also must be solved.
If you listen to the victims they say they didn’t want to speak out and undermine the movement. So at the very least the victims were encouraged to ignore gender issues and soley focus on class issues. Something to consider. I could not care less what the pedophile valued.
I think there is something to be done about finding the means to screen out psychopaths from getting into positions of power. It’s a whole other issue to tackle and exists regardless of most ideological positions.
This one is an issue of class, not gender.
Mmm, there are still gender stratifications within class, as well as class stratifications within gender. The existence of the Epstein class is a class issue; the misogyny of that class is a gender issue; the structural prevention of women to enter that class is both a class issue and a gender issue. And I’m not even getting into race. Like, Oprah dropping nudes is going to be taken differently than Kendal Kardashian, but both are still billionaires, and both would face more blowback than Epstein’s friends within the same eschelon of the owning class.
Yeah, agree. Im just talking about the issue as it applies to meme. There absolutely is room for both things
Not entirely? Like class is important but the fact is that women get punished more often for having their sex lives leaked than predatory men do.
You mean kim?
Ghislaine is sitting in prison, if a nice cushy prison.
Epstein didn’t kill himself.
Gender and class issues are intertwined.
Sure but class inequality is what exacerbates gender inequality. Under capitalism anyone who is working class is forced to sell their labor to survive. Women are inherently disadvantaged here because their labor is required for social reproduction. Even assuming an equal distribution of housework and raising kids women have to do the unpaid work of pregnancy, childbirth, nursing, etc. Capitalists will therefore discount the value of a women’s labor regardless of her individual capabilities or productive output. As a result women are often forced to depend on the men in their lives for financial stability.
Conservatives are hell bent on normalizing this unnatural inequality between the sexes because doing so protects the underlying class inequality between owners and workers. This is what helps to create a sexist culture that even wealthy women have to endure. However, a woman who can live off of the growth of her investments is not facing the full weight of gender inequality that a working class woman must contend with. She does not have to deal with the threat of homelessness, hunger, and poverty that keeps many working class women dependent on men. Her financial stability is already assured because of her class position and the exploitation of the working class. That gives her far more freedoms than even most working class men.
The obvious solution to the problem is to upend capitalism which is what reinforces class. That creates the possibility of actually valuing reproductive labor and giving universal financial independence to all women. If you just try to address gender inequality alone without upending capitalism you won’t be able to succeed. Even if somehow you did, the vast majority of inequality would remain because most inequality can be explained by class alone. So while its true that gender and class issues are interrelated, abolishing class creates the conditions necessary to abolish gender inequality.
This but in reverse! If you just try to crush capitalism without eradicating gender inequality you will probably fail. If the working class isn’t even united and equal between its genders how could you muster the strength to abolish the upper class?
There’s a difference between rejecting sexism within a movement and trying to abolish gender inequality. I agree that the former is important for building solidarity. However the latter is likely impossible under capitalism.
Idk sort of agree, systemically.
If you are of high enough class, gender aint a problem.
Either way, its the class that I have a problem with regardless whether one gender or another.
I promise I wont discriminate here, believe me.
Gender is still a problem as you move up in class. A rich woman will have more protections than a poor woman, but not as much protection as a rich man.
Depends who’s richer
Take a wild fucking guess what gender the majority of the upper class is.
You can be pedantic all you want, but gender and class are not separate issues.
You’re not making an argument that I don’t understand or have an opposing view for.
Im saying its of secondary importance. And if you want an equal proportion of B$ out there, I still want them all at the bottom of the ocean.
Okay Cesar Chavez
Just stopping by to drop off some ad hominem?
Probably referencing Chavez’ tendency to rape and sexually assault even his allies in the fight for class solidarity.
Yeah, maybe I misunderstood the reference. I guess there’s a bit of a joke in there? It’s not really where my thinking is at for the discussion, but probably there is another conversation the have there fo sure.
Ignoring gender inequality in favor of focusing on class solidarity even though they are inextricably tied. Chavez did it to the point of raping many women and girls.
Horrible.
Would it not be reasonable to think he ignored gender equality because of his values towards women?
But you’re right, they are tied together, as are all the other cultural class divisions rooted back to the core issue of economic class. That is the problem to solve, not to the exclusion of others, but because the other problems also must be solved.
If you listen to the victims they say they didn’t want to speak out and undermine the movement. So at the very least the victims were encouraged to ignore gender issues and soley focus on class issues. Something to consider. I could not care less what the pedophile valued.
I think there is something to be done about finding the means to screen out psychopaths from getting into positions of power. It’s a whole other issue to tackle and exists regardless of most ideological positions.
I don’t think you know what that word means
in adressing the implication it’s appropriate.
Oh well as long as it’s appropriate