So, I get this a lot from some of the more sane woke crowd. They'll admit that there's a problem with how the Rammstein situation is being handled, but because they're woke, they dont like to admit that maybe, gee, the problem with this is DUE to those ideas. Meanwhile, I have a different approach to things. Ya know how I left conservatism? I left because I recognized that it wasnt just the implementation of the ideas were bad, I recognized that the ideas were bad and the reason why they were doing things poorly. And recognizing this, I shifted my entire ideological and political perspective to a more logically coherent ideology in which I get to exactly where I want to get to with my ideas. And this involves a lot of nuance, a custom ideology i myself made for myself, and a lot of rejection and weaving around a lot of bad ideas. So at this point, I have this logically coherent worldview where I can largely end up just avoiding the pitfalls of other worldviews, and going from there.
I also never really internalized SJW politics. I kinda understood the theory, had limited sympathy and understanding for them, but largely considered my politics separate from them. They never were major influencers in my politics. And as time went on, I just found myself fighting these guys as they stood in conflict with my own ideas, ideology, and moral compass, so I developed a rather negative opinion of them. ANd I would say that this is one of those things where I would say, yes, the ideas themselves are bad. That's one of the reason I never made them a huge part of my politics in the first place.
Don't get me wrong, not all feminism is to blame for the rammstein situation, and despite myself distancing myself from modern feminism and refusing to call myself one, I do have views that based on political quizzes I've taken, align with liberal feminism more than anything else. But liberal feminism is older feminism based on like equal rights under the law and stuff, and isn't as sophisticated as the newer waves of feminism in approaching issues outside of that.
But that's also where we diverge. I reject these newer brands of feminism as they end up having very problematic implications, and often go into misandry. And as someone who sees this, I feel like I'm fully qualified in pointing out the problems with modern feminism and Rammstein.
Let's start with the original accuser. The original accuser (Shelby Lynn, I discussed her previously) has very weak and shaky accusations. She wasn't touched, she claims she was drugged/spiked to bypass consent, and she couldnt prove it. Even worse, as time went on conflicting narratives started coming out as well as video evidence of her acting in a way inconsistent with being spiked (she just seemed hyper annoying and drunk).And honestly, as time went on, I found it very difficult for me to continue to accept her accusations.
But modern feminism DEMANDED it. Because modern feminism requires you "believe all women" citing the massive amount of cases that go unresolved on sexual assault (ie, failure to bring evidence to prove guilt), the low likelihood of false accusations, and the fact that women often go unbelieved despite this stuff happening to them. Like, okay, but false accusations do happen, and the longer this goes on, the more it seems like this is one. And I'm willing to admit that being an intellectually honest person, but this weird brand of modern feminism? No way.
Modern feminism also creates all kinds of problems with the situation despite nothing going on. Modern feminism is what claims there's a power imbalance between a man and a woman in such situations in the first place. Even more so when you consider the age gap, till's status and fame, his wealth, etc. THey portray till as an "old rich white man" "preying" on these young delicate wallflower of women. They are the ones that claim that women can't properly consent due to such power differentials. They also claim that the idea that the band has a row zero concept where young women can have sex with till is some sort of sexual exploitation of women, and not just mutually consensual acts. They're the ones who start talking about how women's brains don't properly develop until 25 or older, and that we should treat them like children. They're the ones who also tend to start having problems with till's behavior in the first place. They become sexual puritans, not believing till should have sex with young women at all, and start developing the same weird "anti objectification" mentalities as the weirdo anti porn feminist crowd. As such, this weird sexually authoritarian mindset that is going around on the left is a product of this modern feminism. These are all political ideas. These ideas are all influenced by political theory. And applying a different theory to the situation gets a different outlook, which is why I have come to a different conclusion.
TLDR, these are all ideas that can be traced back to modern fourth wave feminism.
Not even getting into "metoo" where the primary means of litigating this issue isnt in court, but through social media, with other women coming forward with stories. The "metoo" movement literally encourages that, while also encouraging people to accept these stories uncritically, and to demonize the alleged abuser. That's modern feminism's fault. It's endemic to the thought process. You have these ideas, and when these ideas are put into practice, you get this. The whole rammstein situation and the controversy regarding it are literally due to the thought processes endemic to modern feminism. You cannot separate the two. Perhaps you can apply a different variation of the idea, but it would probably be like liberal feminism like i technically believe. Any of the new stuff from the past 30 years (third wave) or even the last 10 (fourth wave) is where you get the brainrot that leads to these movements.
Same thing with the desire not to pursue this in the court of law, where it belongs, but through social media and direct action, including possibly harmful action toward band members themselves. Also their fans. Because this form of modern feminism understands that this issue wont be resolved to their satisfaction through the courts, so they believe in engaging in screaming loudly on social media and cancel culture. Again, these are just the logical implications of their thought processes. it isn't the implementation of the ideas, it's the ideas themselves.
As such, I feel perfectly justified in criticizing modern feminism in this context. Maybe not ALL feminism is like this, but most forms worth their salt are old enough where you can comfortably hold those ideas without really being considered one. I mean, equal rights is kind of the default position msot hold. It's only in question among the far right. It;s the rational centrist default position i feel like any reasonable person in a modern society would accept. To me, conservative traditionalist ideas based on gender roles are really weird, and so are the extremists on the far left who believe in more radical forms of feminism.
So, I really dont even feel uncomfortable throwing "feminism" under the bus, since most who would use that word are people who REALLY REALLY like the idea. It's like socialism. I might not consider myself a socialist, but am i open to ideas like market socialism? yes. I just dont emphasize them to the point that i openly consider myself a "socialist" and dont believe my dedication to such causes is worth applying the label to myself. Same with feminism. I might be okay with some feminist ideas, but I dont feel comfortable calling myself such because of all of the crazy connotations associated with it.
When I often criticize either of those ideas, most long time readers would know that I mostly criticize extremists, while accepting or at least being open to moderate versions of the ideas in question with the most harmful elements stripped out of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment