Now listen here, feminism...

[Yuri Bezmenov]

I challenge you to find a 1st wave feminist fighting for the right to work in a coal mine or Carnegie Steel Mill.

Apparently none of them did? Whats the point of challenging?

To show that 1st wave feminism was driven by the privilege and entitlement of upper class white women. They only had their own interests in mind and not the interests of women in general.

[Genesis]

I challenge you to find a 1st wave feminist fighting for the right to work in a coal mine or Carnegie Steel Mill.

Apparently none of them did? Whats the point of challenging?

To show that 1st wave feminism was driven by the privilege and entitlement of upper class white women. They only had their own interests in mind and not the interests of women in general.

So you're saying that Upper-Class White women do not care about their counterparts in places like Cambodia, Saudi Arabia, etc?

[Yuri Bezmenov]

I challenge you to find a 1st wave feminist fighting for the right to work in a coal mine or Carnegie Steel Mill.

Apparently none of them did? Whats the point of challenging?

To show that 1st wave feminism was driven by the privilege and entitlement of upper class white women. They only had their own interests in mind and not the interests of women in general.

So you're saying that Upper-Class White women do not care about their counterparts in places like Cambodia, Saudi Arabia, etc?

Apparently they didn't back then. I am, after all talking about 1st wave feminism. That began like over 100 years ago.

[Genesis]

I challenge you to find a 1st wave feminist fighting for the right to work in a coal mine or Carnegie Steel Mill.

Apparently none of them did? Whats the point of challenging?

To show that 1st wave feminism was driven by the privilege and entitlement of upper class white women. They only had their own interests in mind and not the interests of women in general.

So you're saying that Upper-Class White women do not care about their counterparts in places like Cambodia, Saudi Arabia, etc?

Apparently they didn't back then. I am, after all talking about 1st wave feminism. That began like over 100 years ago.

I see....

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Now here's a feminist I could find some common ground with, Susan Faludi. She makes sense...  sometimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiffed:_The_Betrayal_of_the_American_Man

[odeon]

I challenge you to find a 1st wave feminist fighting for the right to work in a coal mine or Carnegie Steel Mill.

Apparently none of them did? Whats the point of challenging?

To show that 1st wave feminism was driven by the privilege and entitlement of upper class white women. They only had their own interests in mind and not the interests of women in general.

Fighting for the right to work in a coal mine equals interests of women in general?

That first wave, as I recall, focussed on voting rights, employment rights, education, etc.

[Genesis]

['andersom']

I challenge you to find a 1st wave feminist fighting for the right to work in a coal mine or Carnegie Steel Mill.

Apparently none of them did? Whats the point of challenging?

To show that 1st wave feminism was driven by the privilege and entitlement of upper class white women. They only had their own interests in mind and not the interests of women in general.

Fighting for the right to work in a coal mine equals interests of women in general?

That first wave, as I recall, focussed on voting rights, employment rights, education, etc.

The first wave was elitist. No doubt about that. Voting rights equal for women and men, but not joining forces with the people wanting to expand voting rights to all men, not only the elite. So, yes first wave was as elitist as the social group of people they were part of.

There was no need to fight for the right to do heavy labour for women though. There were women in factories and mines. Not everywhere, but they were there. And in some places it was no exception at all. 

[Pyraxis]

It's always been a reality. Awiddershit was trying to claim there was no punishment in western society for rape and that's just not true.

I don't see where she claimed that.

1st wave feminism exacerbated racism and poverty because it was mostly rich white women leading the movement. Their ticket to freedom (a prestigious, high paying job) came at the expense of poor, dark skinned women who had to take care of their children for them and do all the chores.

I challenge you to find a 1st wave feminist fighting for the right to work in a coal mine or Carnegie Steel Mill. 

Still saying so what? If rich white women were the only ones with enough spare energy to start a movement, that doesn't take from the validity of the movement. Sure, things needed to get better for a whole lot of groups, including male workers who were being exploited in the mines. But in-fighting between oppressed groups is stupid and ineffectual. In fact it's exactly what the people in power hope for. The rats will be so busy scrabbling for the crumbs they won't go after the root of the problem.

There's a difference between trying to help people who still need it, and trying to drag down people who've had some success. I see you doing a whole lot of the latter and not much of the former.

[RageBeoulve]

It was a poor analogy, but I agree with scrap. The concept of equality is exactly that. Until Feminism and all other social justice movements at present are willing to part with their precious rings of power (exceptions for their demographic) and truly shoot for an egalitarian society with universal principles, I really don't see the point.

Unless that is the goal, social justice is just a bunch of bitching and politicking. Simplification > Complication when it comes to any kind of a system. There is no way out of that. There just isn't.

[Jack]

It's always been a reality. Awiddershit was trying to claim there was no punishment in western society for rape and that's just not true.

I don't see where she claimed that.

feminism came from a time when a man could beat or rape a woman with impunity (read history).

[Pyraxis]

Sometimes punishments are selectively enforced.

[Jack]

Not sure what that implies.

[Pyraxis]

It implies that "with impunity" doesn't mean "no punishments whatsoever", but "exemption from an existing punishment".

[Jack]

It implies that "with impunity" doesn't mean "no punishments whatsoever", but "exemption from an existing punishment".

My understanding of the definition is otherwise. Though wont claim to know how awiddershinlife intended it, but can understand why scrapheap read it that way.