Not all men

[AskBasil]

Interesting article here

for everyone, i bloody love you lot

And larry I would, sorry to repeat myself but it's a long thread, go back to Dr King's speech in this context.

It is highly effective rhetoric because it is also couched in the language of class analysis.

LG, would you look at the UN report I linked to earlier and consider whether it would actually be clearer if they put 'some' in front of 'women' and 'men'. I think it would make the report less comprehensible.

I'm still enjoying the Bill and Ted moment so bogus to you, Larry, it's actually anti-intellectual to fail to recognise context in the generation of meaning but thanks for filling my bingo card

Yay! FloraFox I am asserting my right as a women to not fuck off.

Buffy,

So 'blacks mug people and frighten me' or 'Jews are fraudsters' are both fine if someone had suffered those crimes from members of those groups? And challenging it is denying people the words to express their experience or victim blaming?

Like that sounds totally RAD(fem) man!

I feel all loverly, thanks Flora, you can fuck off yourself.

LG, none of what you are saying relates to the arguments put forward. It just looks like you want to make a whole load of racist comments.

Buffy,

It is not linguistic gymnastics to challenge the concept that men are the only 'class' (and I am highly dubious men could rationally be classified as such) who can be called criminals under the guise of 'class analysis'. Substitute any other class and it suddenly seems far uglier.

Larry, you're getting it all completely backwards and clearly need to take a bit of a backwards step so that you don't totally lose the run of yourself. I don't know how better to explain it. OK [sigh] let me try.

"A black man mugged me"
"Not all black men are muggers"
"Actually that's kind of a good point because I just looked it up and statistically speaking they're not."
"Oh, but I was making a really racist point there, why won't you enable me?"
"Because actually it turns out I was operating out of prejudice and casually promulgated false data".

You can't have that conversation about male-on-female violence and discrimination, though I wish we could!

Buffy, THE FEMINIST CHURCH OF BILL AND TED IS NOW IN SESSION.

Oh FFS another one coming on and twisting the power structures round to make it seem everyone is working off a level playing field. You don't use class analysis against the ones who are oppressed. How fucking hard is that to understand. You use class analysis to highlight the structural inequalities maintained by those who oppress.

And the racism on this thread continues to be startling. Thanks OutsSelf and chibi for your patience.

thanks Outs I am about to fuck off but I'll be sure to fuck back on again later or tomoz.

Larry, RTFT and some basic linguistic theory

It is altogether different to equate the use of men in class analysis than any already structurally disadvantaged group. Because even if I called them all sorts of dreadful names and I have nothing I could say could add to, cultivate or establish their structural oppression as a class. Do not play dumb about the so-called universal category which is men, against which all other kind of identites are contrasted (or Othered) then fucking opt out of that category only and explicitly when someone is underscoring it's privileges.

See, Bill and Ted are always relevant. [wise]

I wonder what happened to AskBasil. I don't think she was expecting to spawn this huge thread.