you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

I think intersectional feminism had a great shot at lighting issues that different types of folk encounter. Somehow socioeconomic status was disregarded and focus was put mainly on race, sex and sexuality. Which is why poor, white, straight men felt were left out and quite understandably so. It wasn’t a problem with intersectional feminism though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago

    Somehow socioeconomic status was disregarded and focus was put mainly on race, sex and sexuality.

    I mean it's not that big of a mystery when considering the American higher education system. Feminist education being dominated by professors from Ivy League universities made it inevitable that it would be learned through the lens of liberal economics.

    Though that's not really an excuse for self proposed leftist to conflate all aspects of feminism with "blue hair, hate men" that's so common nowadays.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I don't really understand why kyriarchy isn't talked about more by feminists. I think kyriarchy does a much better job of conceptualizing modern systems of oppression vs patriarchy. Multi-dimensional (kyriarchy) vs one dimensional (patriarchy).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment