Why do feminists use Marxist pseudo-science/rhetoric to shame non-feminist women?

Question

The notion of "false consciousness" was used by Marxists to explain why the workers didn't all become good little Communists and support their tyranny. Such people were headed for "re-education" or "liquidation".

Do feminists who use such loaded rhetoric realize its origins? Do that have that little respect for non-feminist women? And do they realize it plays right into the hands of those who equate feminism with Communism?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhdZaUEKeqFe13IOFTHBiejsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071018184627AAIbyh5&show=7#profile-info-5c907c92a6c7447ccb431133ac7208abaa

Does feminism really want to associate itself with one of the greatest evils of the last century?

Oh, Patois! Yes, since I disagree, I must never have read Das Kapital, Critique of the Gotha Project, Communist Manifesto, or any other works of Marxism! You caught me. I've also never read Gramsci, Lukacs. Marcuse, or Althusser. In fact, I don't even know who they are.

I am SO busted!

I never said Labor Unions were evil. I said MARXISM is evil. But nice non sequitur. You're oh so clever!

Carrie, "internalized oppression" is just more of the same rhetoric used by would-be tyrants who come as liberators and believe that people must be forced to be free.

It's at best condescending and paternalistic, at worst totalitarian!

It's a handy thing for people who think they know what's best for everyone else, whenever they discover that people freely choose to do things they don't support.

"Oh, I would never do that? Why would anyone do that? Oh, you're oppressed and you don't even know it!"

Rio, I haven't really seen you bashing non-feminists or attacking the validity of their choices, so this isn't directed at you. It's directed at those who have been saying how non-feminist women are all less attractive, inadequate, and have internalized oppression.

So much for respecting WOMEN!

BTW, Patois, I am a Keynesian. I am not at all opposed to the welfare state. But Marxism is a pseudo-science, whose economic theories are considered nonsense by most economists, whose theory of history has failed repeatedly, and whose practical implementation has yielded mass murder surpassing the Nazis.

Don't smear labor unions with that crap.

RoVale, people also forget the Holocaust. Your point?

And China is moving from a Communist Totalitarian state to a Capitalist Totalitarian state. Same stench, even if corporate interests care more about a vast untapped market than about human rights.

Franzia
No. Only feminists are conscious of everything. All the rest are dupes who feminists must lead to enlightenment!

Answer 1

You really want to give feminism the benefit of the doubt, don't you? When they spout Communist rhetoric, they are being quite true to the movement. It's obvious from so many of the arguments made by feminists that they aren't fighting for equal opportunities, they want equal results. Isn't that what Communism is in its sheerest simplicity? Everyone gets the same, regardless of their personal sacrifice or lack thereof.

Answer 2

I'm sorry but the arguments about Marxism and communism don't have near the impact they did some 40 to 50 years ago. Besides, in this day and age, the US's biggest trading partner is good old communist China, which uses child and slave labor to make cheaply made, poorly designed goods for the US market. In fact, this country is so important to us that recently, a Mattel executive actually apologized to that country for the recent scandals involving their toys. That executive should have been apologizing to the American people instead for taking jobs away from them so they could save a few bucks and pushing overpriced junk on them that they don't need and likely will soon discard anyway because they are so shoddy.

Answer 3

That's nice. Wow, you must know everything in the world about not only economic theory, but Women's Studies, psychology, psychoanalysis, world history, sociology, Marx, Engels, Gramsci, Lukacs, Marcuse, Althusser, and rhetoric!

You're right, though. The simple fact that people are born into and surrounded by a culture from which they can never escape doesn't mean they ever just absorb parts of the culture unquestioningly or even unconsciously. Nah. That doesn't happen at all. The average person is perpetually and eternally conscious and aware of what her behaviors mean, why she's doing them, where she learned them and from whom and why, the assumptions behind them, and their histories. Additionally, no one has an interest in keeping people ignorant of their own inequality and of others' unfair advantages.

Answer 4

You should try to read Marx and Engels someday when you are older and have learned more about the government and economy of the U.S. Many feeble-minded people prone to knee-jerk responses fell hook - line - and -sinker for the propaganda that there is something "evil" about unions, worker's rights and the advantages of socialism. You should probably read some also on how much we have benefited from socialism in the U.S. We are, after all, when the delusions are set aside, a state-capitalist nation. Risks are socialized (paid for by the taxpayer) but profits are privatized (and extracted by the plutocracy). See the Savings & Loan scandal, New Orleans after Katrina and Chrysler for more information. The middle class and poor majority creates the wealth of a small minority.

Answer 5

Mention Marx. It's one of the few ways to make a feminist smile.

Answer 6

If women don't internalize their own oppression, please explain why the whole stereotype of women hating other women has a grain of truth to it.

I don't know how relevant it is to use that idea in terms of being a "non-feminist" and a feminist, but I think it's useful when we think about reasons why women participate in beauty pageants or in Maxim-esque amateur "modelling" (as in, "send us pics of your t!ts and we will judge them!"), and why women can be cruel or suspicious or jealous of each other in ways that men aren't.

BTW, Marx was about so, so, so much more than communism, but I'm sure you already know that. :)

Answer 7

Apparently not, since you're the only one who seems to care about its origins. Only Marxist feminists want to associate feminism with Marxism, as indicated in the name. I myself prefer to keep away from anything remotely Communist. (Although it must be said that Marx had some good ideas about society, if not economics.)

Anyway, let's stop to think about how the term is being used. Explain to me why a woman wouldn't want to be on equal footing with men.

Answer 8

oh the marx brothers are very funny...i happen to like harpo the most...


but really i prefer red skelton myself...

:D

( yes i know of who marx is...ive just never bothered to care about reading about him)

ooh reow....3 thumbs down..it does look like i have struck a nerve..i wonder who among....oh well....i just simply dont care. i mean some ppl just cannot take a joke..

Answer 9

Oh I just love that term internalized oppression. See it goes like this: Feminist A says to Feminist B: "Now when those anti-feminist start fighting us we're going to use this new term we learned in class today; internal oppression; that'll get them for sure." See, feminists just hate it when we fight back. The point is we are supposed to be afraid of our shadows. Funny that. You have to excues me I have to go and have a good laugh on this one (HA HA HA HEE HEE HEE WHOO HOO) wiping away the tears. Please don't get me started on that woman hater thing - they always pull that. You know I wonder who really is being brainwashed.

Answer 10

Socialism is nothing more than entitlement--"I'm entitled to this, give it to me," instead of actually working for it.

Feminism is based on communism. The two go hand-in-hand. Betty Friedan was a communist. Hillary Clinton is a Marxist.