what's more ironic that doctor mosatafa barghtouti's wife is founder for Palestinian women's right movement and he also is a member of this org with their 2 daughters
7:55 For those who don't know, there was an important indigenous feminist and activist from Honduras named Berta Cáceres. Berta Cáceres was an internationally renowned figure fighting against destructive mining projects then supported by the coup government which Hillary Clinton backed. Cáceres was assassinated exactly eight years ago today (March 3rd), by a death squad sent to silence her. The identities of some members of the death squad have since been revealed, and they had received training by the United States' School of the Americas (with a notorious legacy connected to many atrocities in the global south). Before her death, Cáceres had spoken publicly about US, and in particular Hillary Clinton's, involvement in the undemocratic coup and subsequent military regime in Honduras. The video footage of this interview can still be found on YT for those interested. Berta Cáceres: presente.
Thank you. You really cannot have feminism if you live in a genocidal empire. Ditto for pretending you ahve a choice between two political parties when you have inverted fascism. RIP Berta.
I too believe South Americans have no agency and it is simply the School of the Americas and Hilary Clinton that made the bad men commit murder, not the Desarrollos Energeticos SA (DESA) and its mercenaries.
In the 2000s The Onion had a news-article about how South-East Asia's first genocidal female warlord was good news for feminism because it demonstrated women could be just a powerhungry, ruthless and cruel as men. I'm not the first person who's pointed out they are finding it more and more difficult to satirize reality nowadays as more and more of their articles from the past become reality.
@@johnwright9372 H. Clinton is a just a part of the worse, there wouldn’t be no corrupt politician like Trump without corrupt politicians like Clinton, Biden and Pelosi... but if you want to be their slave, be their slave by voting for them.
In the US, 50 years ago, the Republican Party was the party of bougie intellectuals. When Reagan started his crusade against higher education in 1980, corporate America corrupted the educational system, slipping into the administration under the guise of "diversity and inclusion," and now, the bougie intellectuals are mainly Democrats. This is why liberalism has become a joke.
@@lifelearner3067Or maybe instead of blaming european fascism and its continued import into the US, europeans can take some time to consider why their populations who welcomed nazi collaborators into civil service with open arms keep rejecting genuine liberalism.
I used to be a staunch pacifist- not just for myself but ideologically. violence is never the answer, I told myself. So many of the points that you made regarding the necessity of violence in the face of oppression were reflective of exactly what pulled me out of that mindset. At this point, it seems passivity is a marker of a deeper, more insidious type of violence. It only serves to keep us in these cycles of oppression and further shift the overton window on what is acceptable.
Lmfao you were never a pacifist. Non-violent resistance is how both Indians and black people in the US achieved two of the most historically significant and successful acts of protest in history. INB4 “DER WUZ VILENS DOE” Wrong, there was an insignificant amount and you would be massively coping to win the argument.
My relationship with pacifism has shifted over the years. When I was younger, I would have said the same: violence is never the answer. But you're right that passivity does not equal peace, that it allows the violence to go unquestioned. The BLM slogan "No justice, no peace" - there is no true peace with true justice - really helped change my view. I would argue that killing a nazi, for example, is an act of radical pacifism. It is an act of violence, sure, but an act of violence in the pursuit of justice and peace, an act of violence to prevent further violence
Great summarizations you’re right on point reminds of this book I’ve been getting into recently called “how nonviolence protects the state” it was written by an anarchist but the book is still good there an audible version online too def recommend
This is exactly what I've been saying for years. Nobody really wants to dismantle the deathmachine, they just want their turn to run it (insert self-interested group with compelling argument for change here) the deathmachine needs to be dismantled permanently. A gun is designed for one thing. Painting it pink doesn't change its function or purpose
If you think that disarming the world is the answer you are sorely mistaken. Guns have been around for a thousand years now and they are not going away. You can't uninvent missiles, fighter jets, tanks and all the rest. Remember that Simpsons episode where Lisa wishes for world peace and the world gets rid of all their weapons, only to be invaded by Kodos and Kang with a stick. The same principle applies. If you get rid of all weapons, any country can now build back the deathmachine as you call it and rule. Once something is invented, specifically something as significant as weapons, it is virtually impossible to get rid of. I would be surprised if you could come up with only one such example.
When you talked about men's violence, essentialism, and civilizational feminism I was like... "Wait, I did not think about that before". It feels so good when a video pushes me like that. Nice job, Alice!
This reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend over the outrage caused by Margot Robbie and Greta Gerwig not getting nominated for the Oscars. I think many women online took this opportunity to say that somehow it was anti feminist that Margot didnt get nominated even though its was a female category and every one else who got picked over her are women too. Hell it was a huge step - first nomination for a native american woman. In the conversation we had we named this phenomena 'white feminism' but I think I like 'bourgeois feminism' more. I will use that from now.
@@myas.6485 my apologies if I was wrong but I did see multiple headlines stating she was the first Native American woman to be nominated in the best actress category. Perhaps the article was wrong.
The rage about the Barbie nomination was more about that Ken was nominated while Margot wasn’t. I don’t think it’d have been as upsetting if neither Ken nor Barbie got nominated
@@MA-ou2dk Ryan's nomination has NOTHING to do with Margot's nomination though. Margot didnt get nominated but instead of her, another woman did. Ryan is not competing in the same category lmao. Thats like saying Christopher Nolan shoudnt have been nominated for Director and instead should have been nominated for Best Actor...
@@MA-ou2dk Ok, and my issue is the fact that people are treating it like a big feminist issue when America Ferrera got nominated. Margot Robbie was great, but she has a million other oscar worthy films, why tf are you bitches so pressed about this
I loved this video and especially that you included the interview with Mustafa Barghouti because when I was watching the interview, it made me so mad. She was basically using feminism as a shield for her blatant racism. Also, in this interview you could clearly see what many name "white feminism" and the hiearchy of opression: A white woman might be opressed by a white man, yet she can be the opressor of a black man. That was so incredibly obvious as well as her bigotry.
White women always still upper than oriental men. Because oriental have THIS brownness. I even think brownness is worst than blackness or yellowness. Nobody can earn against White and both Native American and Aborigines Australian well aware of that.
I think she was totally unprofessional and out of line, but I really don’t see why people label it as racist. Barghouti refuses to condemn Hamas and has previously called terrorists who murdered and mutilated women, “brave fighters”. The same Hamas, which is the proxy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, one of the biggest silencers and oppressors of women currently in the world. Anyone who is aware of his previous statements and watched more than that little clip, knows that it was an attack on his character and political stances, not on his race. People can’t be called out for their oppressive beliefs, simply because they’re people of color? That sounds racist to me.
Alice jumped to a conclusion that does not follow from the premises. She never said it was because of the culture, she just said he is not used to letting women talk...
I mean, from context alone it seemed clear what she meant. All the more if you know anything about JHB. Alice was right, I think. Either way, she's not a journalist.
@@lofidandy2189Also, she'll have had hundreds of guests from 'the other side' on her show who will have infuriated her by having the audacity to try and share their opinion. Has she ever said the same thing to others?
@@Matt-km7yk it's not just that simply from her racist generalisation, she brought up gender for no reason and stereotyped him as a Middle Eastern man that he does not let women talk and the way she said was quite in fact racist. This common stereotype has been used for so many years and then is used to censor their voices and make their issue 'less important'.
The Trope of "women are not violent" or this subconscious idea that woman are Delicate and incapable of violating other beings is so bad also because a lot of the domestic violence toward childres is framed as "just some firm hand for a bad child" and " a mother always know what's best for her child" the fact that woman are aways the ones who get the kids afther the divorce, a lot of bad parenting that a lot of times is not reported from the childs because of fear and a large etc of violence that is trivialized and normalized, of course, this is a consequence of the patriarchy and the infantilization of women, this still in people's mind, the "awww come one, she is just a girl, she can not hurt you" or "your mom beat you? Pfffff moms always hit softly, you are crying over nothing" still
Or is this trope actually a by product of shifting the blame for those women's disgusting behavior to some nebulous patriarchy rather than holding them personally accountable? Framing men as the perpetual perpetrators and women as victims without agency?
Women are usually violent to weaker human being... who can not protest... so they apparently are only victims but they we are not... we are sometimes victims and some other carnefici... like men (and even animals) are... tired this victim attitude...
Violence aside (my mom objectively hit me less times and less hard than my dad ever did), mothers can psychologically WRECK you, gaslight you, manipulate you, and emotionally abuse you, which at least in my case did far worse lasting damage to who I became than being hit (not to say that hitting children is not fucking horrific as well).
To suggest that women always get the children is just plain incorrect. It might be true in the majority of cases, but it is, nevertheless, far from always the case.
While I loved the Barbie movie, the way the fans reacted towards other female nominees was unacceptable. Most of them haven't even watched KOTFM, PL, PT or Anatomy of a Fall. Stories about a woman regaining her humanity, reconciliation with a past friend, and a *literal genocide*.They completely ignored Triet's nomination, as the first non-american woman, and they also didn't campaign at all for Celine Song. It's clear their feminism is very exclusive. Margot wouldn't have been my choice even if there was a 6th nomination, it'd be either Greta or Portman.
I think the answer is less malicious and simple and you said it at the beginning of the post: everyone saw Barbie. Of course they want a film that they actually saw and liked to be nominated. If they saw all the other films, they might think differently. But those films weren't marketed towards general audiences in the same way. The other nominated films are more serious, more adult, and didn't have the expensive ad campaign. Most of us don't follow movies that closely, we're likely to miss the lower budget films with limited distribution.
@@cbpd89I find too many people view these issues either a very malicious and conspiracy minded framework .. on all sides I see an obsession with gender and race and just plain hysteria .. it’s tiring trying to wade through it and it’s everywhere
@@brianmeen2158 There have been a grand total of two non-white Best Actress winners in near a century while Emma Stone is on her way to having two all for herself at 35, but yeah, it's just a wild conspiracy by people obsessed with gender and race to point out the blatant bias. Sure.
Bourgeois feminism also tends to seek, rather than gender equality for all, to make bourgeois women equal partners in neo-colonial oppression over the global south. This aim to be partners in oppression of others further lends itself toward the neoliberal tendency toward facism to protect itself from revolutionary change.
Fascism IS revolutionary change. Not all revolution is good, most of it is bad. Some bourgeois might make a profit, but fascism is an expression of working class populism.
@@greyfells2829 One thing I don't understand is how people in the West today can openly claim to be communists, which is just as bad as fascists. But if you said you are a fascist you would get cancelled.
I enjoyed the video. I learned so many things that i don’t know the terms of!! Civilisational feminism and bourgeois feminism, nice!! Thanks. This is a huge issue in developing countries (I am Indonesian) who receives donor help from western countries for gender equality programs, and a lot of times the complexity of Indonesia’s culture on feminism is oversimplified and unfairly labeled as completely uncivilized and anti-progressive. What they dont realize is they miss a lot of very unique and complex feminism values within the Indonesian culture, which may be masked by the recent Islamic influence (which, again, the patriarchy that comes with islamic influence is not innately islamic but rather a result of multiple other factors). I noted the books you mentioned and I will be reading into them.
@@Diana-kn8oc I'm not a muslim but grew up in a muslim community/extended family and I think leaders like to misconstrue conservative Islamic views because of capitalism, classism, outside intervention too etc sure some parts of abrahamic religions including Judaism, Christianity and Islam promote patriarchal systems (which is also again not inherently tied into that religion but instead socio-economic factors within the context of older societies where the religion stemmed from) but these non religious ideals tie into it too, it's much easier for western bourgeoise/ liberals to point to a religion and ignore all this ofc
Loved that you added Julia’s video. The video MADE ME SOOOO ANGRY! Coming at a men where the tenderness, the vulnerability, the courage and love of Arab men are on full display - this debased use of feminist rhetoric to dehumanise them - is the worst kind of hypocrisy.
That’s right. We’re seeing incredible tenderness and care - think of Motaz, Grandpa Khaled, and many, many more. Yet they are hidden by mainstream press.
I just feel this highlights the dangers of generalizing, essentializing, and seeing problems as one-note. Also, there is too much focus on fixing people versus fixing systems and problems.
The left is fine with essentializing and generalizing, they just want it to be targeted at specific groups and not others in the name of their cockamamie inverted oppression pyramid. Get lost with it, I'd definitely vote even Meloni before I'll ever swallow that utter hypocritical, sanctimonious, backwards trash of an ideology. The left has worked very hard to earn the animosity. Good luck with jihadists as their only "friends". 🙄
i enjoyed the video and i’m grateful you touched upon this topic, but i wanted to mention that intersectionality unfortunately is not any less bourgeois than neoliberal feminism. Intersectional feminism is tolerated quite well by capitalism and capitalist media because it helps achieve an important bourgeois goal: dividing the oppressed, making it harder for the oppressed to solidarize and unify the struggle (and only united we have power). I don’t think there’s any other feminism at the moment apart from marxist feminism which was not coopted by the ruling class, as sad as it is
I think it is painted that way by capitalist media/mainstream liberal ideas but the core of intersectionality recognises how coming together as an oppressed class cannot happen if different discriminated factors in an individual are not supported/validated by said collective. Def agree that marxist feminism remains the most pure very comforting to know the bourgeoisie are too scared/stupid to gentrify that lol
Some of these sound very similar to the White folks who told angry African-Americans that "We get you're angry, but don't destroy property". There's a definite resistance in the West to noting the class issues underlying much of the rage because easier to blame it all on "hysterical women" or "angry minorities" than to recognize the system is set up to screw over large segments of the population. Excellent video, Alice!
MLKs quote about the „White moderate“ always comes to mind. People are terrified of any kind of actual systemic change. "First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
Some examples of women actively engaging in visible violence in the face of injustice: Gulab Kaur (Ghadar Party), Mai Bhago (sikh historical figure), Durga Bhabhi (Durga Devi), Phoolan Devi
All the women mujaheedat in the algerian war of independence from the brutal french settler colonial rule that lasted for 132 years, especially Drif, Lakhdari, and Djamila Bouhired. Also Leila khaled a member of the popular front for the Palestinian liberation from israeli settler colonialism. Leila also wrote an autobiography “my people shall live”
Girl I just found your channel and I must say you're spectacular, you're cohesion and fluency of speech are the best I have ever listened to. You may be the first person to make me consider my concepts and previous assumptions carefully and make me want to search and study for more information.
Have you ever seen PhilosophyTube? The woman running it is spectacular too. She makes incredibly points about modern societal problems using dark humour and lots of philosophy. It's great. And it made me also see some really messed up connections in the world. Their video about death is eye opening
the meloni tweet reminded me of a book my grandma got me a couple years ago, good night stories for rebel girls i think it was called. it has little biographies about different inspirational women and thats all good and well when it comes to athletes or artists or scientists, but i had such a hard time with the politicians they included (mainly thatcher and clinton). like all the other biographies it had the "everyone disliked them because they were empowered women taking up space in a male dominated work place" narrative with no other context why people might not like them. they even lied about how margaret thatcher got the nickname iron lady, because then they would have to acknowledge that she was actually very cold and cruel and ruined peoples lives. "do you think margaret thatcher had girl power?" this book says yes.
The girl power question is something that misoginistics use to assosiate women having power as something bad. In reality is a comertial catch phrase for young girls to have confidence and associate themselves with strenght.
Hello. I am Haitian-American living in the U.S. with two family members who live in Paris, France. Thank you for shedding more light on the Naël situation that occurred last year. I have a male cousin who is in 20s and I always wanted to know what he thinks of his country but there is a bit of language barrier so I am fearful of not communicating well. Well done video!
This might literally be the best feminism video I've ever seen on RUclips. It's nuanced thinking like this that's going to help us escape the trap of "wokescolds vs the manosphere" and hopefully make actual progress.
We will never escape the woke vs manosphere arguments though. I find so many terms to be just useless at this point. They are so overused and warped that i don’t even know what folks are talking about half of the time .. I find half of people think the truth is racist or sexist or ‘ist’ of some sort.
The only way forward is together in the equality that was promised. In current state it looks like feminist organizations need to join the KKK on the blacklist, in order to have any chance at all. It's women who need to self-regulate on this one.
@@willieclark2256 No. That’s not nuance. Nuance is approaching a concept or argument with objectivity, without biases, from all perspectives and visions and adding as much context, subtext, details and layers and lectures as possible . For example if you’re gonna talk about Hitler and the Nazis with nuance, you wont demonize them nor make a caricature of them, but explain the reasons why Hitler did what he did, why he was charismatic enough to obtain power, why he was so against the jews, christianity etc. Without talking about him as if he was a demon . We should approach politics and social phenomena in this way , but we wont do that because we want a reaction, a narrative not a nuance and realistic version of the facts.
@@akshayde Yeah, it almost looks like some sort of an operation to discredit many female RUclipsrs, this ville_ guy goes around leaving the exact same comments in their videos (they previously claimed that all those creators were stealing their content, lol), now I can see this new one UTubeTroll account. Now whether it's just a one or two person operation or something more organised, I don't know, but some people definitely get their pants in a twist over intelligent young women presenting their views on RUclips. But hey, at least they give them algorithm engagement with their idiotic comments!
I don't think I ever came across a french person's channel in English, directed towards an international audience. I expected that to do that we'd need to invoke more sources and references from English speaking countries yet you seem to get it working with mainly or only French references... Hé ben bravo Alice!!
Great video A large part of this problem seems to be liberаls' capacity to ignore the all-important difference between coercive controlling viоlеncе and viоlеnt resistance. Side note: A lot of people may be interested to know of Clinton's complicity in sеxual viоlеncе by far-right deаth squads in Colombia and state-sponsored rаpe of prisоners during Mubarak’s final days in Egypt. This was during her time in the state department. To be clear I'm not dunking on Alice for not including an exhaustive list of Clinton's misdeeds, as that would genuinely take days to fully articulate. As Alice said in the video, though Clinton has a reputation among liberals for being a proponent of women’s rights, she has a consistent history of standing against women’s rights in practice.
"A lot of people may be interested to know of Clinton's complicity in sеxual viоlеncе" Her husband Bill kinda seems like an issue in that regard as well. (Only tangentially related, but has the U.S. not had a president get divorced yet? Never realized that until now)
There's no difference between violence to control, and violence to "resist." The victims of resistance are practically never those directly guilty of grievances, just like the victims of control are often not guilty of any meaningful crime. And the "resistors" will very readily become the controllers once they reach any sort of power. It's a false distinction. There's difference between the initiation of violence, and the use of violence in self-defense against an actively violent threat. That's the only meaningful distinction to make.
that's not really true though. There are a whole lot of violent resistors who become peaceful once their grievances are addressed and objectives are achieved, historically.@@hagoryopi2101
@@idontwantahandlethough Regan was divorced, and he legalized no-default divorce in California before most other governors did. Now the Republicans want to criminalize no-fault divorce even though they've always said he was their hero.
My mother always said that people kept voting in Magie Thatcher just because she was a woman adding on the fact that they all hated her fascist policies. She always says, "don't just vote for a woman but vote for a good woman."
@@杨江辞 Argentina went to War with them when the Dictatorship invaded GB territory. She wasn't afraid to protect her country. A good reason to vote for a politician.
@@titotobi-lawal2083 UK became Economically better off from the previous admin, Argentina lost the war, and the Cold War was done. I'm not sure what the issue is.
Idealism vs Materialism. Thanks for helping bring the conversation back to the material conditions that are the primary reason for the oppression of marginalized groups.
But why do you assign it to white race? You know it exists also in countries where the majority of people are white and they do not share liberal or bourgeois "feminism". Dividing everything by race is inappropriate and it is racist itself since it's on its own assigning certain characteristics to the entire race of people regardless of their individual traits.
I think here in the US "white feminism" is very much an accurate description of many of the issues unique to here. I've met plenty lower class feminists who don't recognize when their feminism becomes racist. Bourgeois feminism is definitely also am accurate term, but I do not think it would be accurate to say these two concepts fully overlap.
@@afreaknamedallie1707 I'm referring to the usage of the term "white feminism" when it is about "well to do"-feminists and has nothing to do with racism
It is so refreshing to hear from someone whose arguments are indeed arguments, from a place of reason and information, and not knee-jerk ideological regurgitation. I see here, as with all her video essays, a considered and insightful synthesis, and in Alice the makings of a public intellectual of the best sort. Bravo.
I really love your perspective and wording here. So often I only see either “all men are irredeemable and trying to argue any other point means you hate women” or “we need to stop being so mean to men, there is no pattern to their actions as a result of their socialization and you’re crazy for feeling wary around them” and I feel like you did a really good job validating those of us who ARE wary of men for very good reasons and ALSO questioning this assumption that the girl side of things is inherently better. No more harmful binaries, it’s not all or none. It’s both in different degrees
@@chrisbartolini1508 hmm I mean if it’s because traumatic experiences then yeah that’s understandable but if it’s just from the general demonization of black men and fear mongering around them as a demographic then I’m sorry but your friend’s fears are not valid at all. Obvi I don’t know you or her but I just want to be clear in what I’m encouraging
I agree. It’s so demoralizing to assume that men are all evil no matter what. At the same time, socialization teaches men that acting a certain way is good and acceptable, which unfortunately tends to allow sexism and violence and prohibits softness and kindness. Even if sex does impact your behavior to a certain extent, socialization impacts it SO MUCH MORE.
Not to be essentialist, but I feel like Western Europe has a tendency to this liberal fascism. We’re seeing a rise of politicians that flex their countries liberal tendencies as a cudgel against the oriental other. From Douglas Murray to Geert Wilders, we see xenophobic elements of European politics flaunt progressive values that were hard fought for by the people in their society and saying that they’re “Western Values.” In order for Europe to not fall to very scary racist ideology, they must think past the “civilized” liberalism that they tout so strongly.
fascism is always going to be the end state of liberalism. Just like liberalism failed in the 1930s and eventually led to the rise of fascism, we're seeing neoliberalism fail now and witnessing the rise of neofascism. It's not that west europe has a particular lean to it. Hell, Poland and Hungary and Turkey are a lot closer to it than western europe at the moment. It's just that instead of recognizing the systemic issues with liberalism and coming to the conclusion that we need to replace it with something better, we double down, find scapegoats and make some small sacrifices (like democracy) to preserve the core of liberal values (in the economic sense). Because fascism doesn't actually have any negative consequences for the ruling class.
Fascism is ingrained within liberalism, Adorno and Horkeimer already proved so (and history has proven them right again again) in dialectic of enlightenment
Many have said that Fascism is an inherent foundational aspect of Western consciousness. Their entire identity is built on exclusion and oppression, within over four centuries of exploitation of the global south, this idea therefore makes sense to me. Look at the base differences with how they covered European Ukrainian refugees versus Middle Eastern Syrians. Their notions of being a "garden" to the rest of the world, the others, "jungle" speaks truth about their perceptions and how they apply their so called values. They cannot think past the notions you stated, it and the exceptionalism they feel through it and their history as Europeans, is at the core of their understanding of reality. It cannot be altered, only shattered.
Yes, thats spot on. It also mixes with neocolonialism. These countries might act like they have overcome colonialism, but in their views about other countries, the same attitudes that once led to colonialism prevail: claiming other countries are uncivilsed, have no culture, that western values are better etc. Compared with straight up racism.
As somebody who has been closely connected with Italy in various ways all her life, I have to say that this government is not nearly as bad as some before it or as bad as some people, me included, had feared it would be. She'd doing pretty well, actually imho.
@@laraklemencic9471 idk I live hear I voted for the first time 2 years ago, but my mom says it's one of the worst government she's been under in her lifetime, and she's 55
It’s so visible in even our everyday language. We literally have the terms “mama's boy” and “daddy's girl” which, while sounding extremely similar, represent entirely different expectations. A daddy's girl needs to be protected at all costs, no rogue boy can ever break her heart. A mama's boy is expected to defend the honor of his mother at all costs, and failure to do so is emasculating. Hell, the term "daddy's girl" has even taken a sexual turn in meaning which further exposes that the perception of women/femininity as society developed it to this point is that of ownership at its foundation.
I feel your "mama's boy" definition is slightly missing something. I've rarely seen it used to describe a son "defending the honour of their mother". Far more often it is used to negatively portray a male who has been "molly-coddled" ...and thereby had their "natural manly virtues" of independence and physical courage "corrupted" by the over-protectiveness of their mother... to the degree that they have become"feminized" and increasingly useless in the imagined traditional male social capacity. This was a very very common negative trope as portrayed in popular culture across the middle decades of the twentieth century. There was a great fear regarding the softening and feminisation of male youth within consumer society... With Hitchcock's Psycho being a high point in popular hysteria.
I think the way you described "Mama's boy" & "daddy's girl" is very distorted & is still very inline with how bourgeois feminists see the world, & I think you need to self reflect fast, before you fall for any ideological booby traps like that, since I don't think you get the full context at all, & are just repeating the ills of bourgeois feminism.
Often people (self-proclaimed "left-wing" liberals) tell me the world, or the country, would be better with women in charge, because they're essentially more peaceful, patient, kind, and empathetic than men (I'm Italian, by the way. These people were almost as excited for Meloni's victory as her own supporters, because first female council president guys !!!). I always respond with one sentence: "Maggie. Liz. Giorgia." That shuts them up very quickly.
I always wonder what those kinds of people are even fighting for. If men are innately worse people then women why do they waste effort trying to educate, convince, or even coexist with us? I see many types of activists say the same "inherently bad" thing about countless groups but I can't see the logic in believing a people is lesser than you morally but striving to get enough of their collective approval to make change. Wouldn't it be better to just collect among yourselves and try to be as independent as possible? (I know such things exist but they're niche and thought of as insane even for most within their movement)
@nyshyn307 that is like asking why anyone would riot to take back a city that's under martial law instead of just fleeing into the woods to live on twigs and berries. It is obvious: most resources exist in mainstream society. Trying to be separate would basically mean cutting ourselves off from all that, and even leaving behind resources we helped create and bolstered. Plus, a lot of women are straight.
@Aelffwynn it'd be more like fighting to take back the entire country. The issue I'm describing isn't people who think patriarchy is bad, it's those that think men are entirely on the fact of them being men. If that's the belief someone holds then separation, as much as one could do, would be the only real choice. Otherwise, you're in a state of constantly fighting for gains you don't even believe are sufficient. Ideas of that sort is why some Pro-Black activists believed that black people should never integrate with white people: it wouldn't do anything I'm not saying that's the correct belief but if one is to believe coexistence is impossible because it's a net negative on one party, or those in the position of power are innately bad and that's unchangable, then I can't see how you justify trying to "educate" or "grab power" within their system
Purtroppo molti hanno pensato che la vittoria della Meloni sia stata una conquista femminista. Quanto si sbagliavano... La sinistra italiana è inefficace e praticamente uno specchio della sua controparte liberale sulla sponda opposta a livello di geopolitica, ma non capirò mai cosa porta la gente a votare contro i propri interessi. Conosco persone che per 'dare una lezione' al PD/M5S hanno votato Meloni solo per affossarli. Più ci rifletto e più non capisco.
Women are more productive in the work place, are better drivers, better surgeons, better leaders. I you say "Maggie. Liz. Giorgia." I say "Nicholas II. Hirohito. Nixon."
@@sopronunciareglignocchi7255 where did she miss? Wanna point out exactly what she got wrong or do you just wanna throw insults at her because you disagree with her opinions?
Loved your video and your perspective. It seems obvious after I listen to you saying it, but the idea of "they are actually defending that the population should be submissive" when the liberals say "men are violent, women aren't" while meaning that this is an essential distinction between men and women is an idea that I've never thought about. My focus was always in the narrative of "men are more violent because that's how our society defined men, as essentially violent", because when we usually talk about violence we don't ask if that violence was morally right (like rioting after police brutality). Thank you for giving me a new perspective to think about society and the world. It's the first video of yours that the algorithm gave me, so now I'm a subscriber.
The word problematic is problematic, in that it is usually used to condemn things implicitly, based on emotional tenor, without suggesting the reason why it should be condemned
While I agree using “problematic” without further development of the premise can obscure arguments and hinder discussion, in this video I believe Alice uses the word twice and in both cases the word does not obscure her critique. 1. 2:13 “So the variation of the Overton window means that an opinion that was once deemed problematic can become neutral, acceptable over time.” In this case the use is literally discussing ideas that are not acceptable becoming acceptable so further details of what exactly is problematic are completely not relevant. This is not the use case I’ve described above where I would agree with you. 2. 7:24 “But the way her feminine values are used to sort of downplay violent acts is problematic to me. Here is a list of all the bad things she’s done. So she voted for the Iraq war…” In this case, Alice follows her use of “problematic” immediately with examples, to prove her point that using feminism to describe Clinton as peaceful, good, nonviolent is a shield that obscures her violent acts. Her argument is that we should not accept that this is truly feminism and that to blindly accept all women’s acts as feminism hurts others. Alice says that this is inconsistent with feminist literature. Thus, by following her use of “problematic” with an explanation, I don’t find her use of the word to be harmful or meeting the parameters I outlined above. If you have further critiques, please explain them better with evidence.
Well, if I deem something as 'problematic' it just means that a certain issue raises problems to me (f.e. a contradiction with other statements of the same origin or ethical problems etc.). And if you state these logical or ethical problems in addition to saying "x is problematic" I do not see an issue with using that word. In this case Alice clearly states that the peace-making, caring public image of Hillary Clinton stands in contradiction with her political ideology and actions and therefore raises (logical) problems.
Great video Alice! Here in Argentina we have a "liberal" president with a female vicepresident that its against women´s right and used to visit Videla (the last dictator of Argentina in the 70´) in prison. But somehow for the women that voted them, she is "empowering"....
Je découvre ta chaine et ton travail avec cette video, c'est vraiment passionnant ! Merci pour cette video qui cerne bien tous les enjeux de ce sujet complexe, et pour ton travail de sourcer toutes tes informations, ça m'a donné envie d'aller lire ces articles et livres pour en savoir plus ✨️
I heard a quote somewhere talking about privilege. It was something along the lines of that in every situation people will back on whatever privilege serves them the strongest in a moment. So what I see here are wealthy white women falling back onto their class privilege and white privilege when addressing an issue. Instead of seeing things for what they are, they see it through the lens of preserving white and wealth privilege.
I live in a super wealthy area so I've encountered a lot of that. A lot of those people balk at the idea and say "I'm not doing that! I've never thought that way in my entire life!"... but nobody ever said it was a conscious, deliberate decision. Of course it's not.. it's subtle and built in to the way one perceives the world and the people in it. Most people try to do the right thing when they can; the issue is that privilege can change what constitutes "the right thing", and how one goes about actually _doing_ the right thing to such an extent that it becomes the *wrong* thing. People have a really hard time with self-reflection.. especially well-off people. So many of them fall into the trap of "well I'm doing great, so obviously I must be doing the right thing" despite that making literally zero sense. (that's kinda the thing with lenses, I suppose: if you leave them on your face for long enough, you forget they're even there! Ok tbh I'm really proud of myself for coming up with that on the spot 😂)
There is no such thing as “privilege” get it out your head. Everybody has unique advantages and that’s ok. Most eventually are earned in time and lost if you do not maintain the values that brought you the advantage. What you call “white privilege” in your mind is wealthy people keeping the values that kept them there . why would you logically work against values that bring you wealth.
This is completely pure gold! Thatcher was another example of cruelty for us. Thank you for putting deep content on the internet and cut through this mainstream ideas.
"Do you think [Margaret Thatcher] effectively utilised girl power by funnelling money into illegal paramilitary death squads in Northern Ireland?" - Eric Andre
A meta analysis just came out from The Lancet Public Health showing a direct relationship between poverty and poor mental health and increased major life stress, i feel like this reinforces your points. You should check it out
These 3 books cover this exact topic: The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger The Inner Level: How More Equal Societies Reduce Stress, Restore Sanity and Improve Everyone’s Well-Being The New Human Rights Movement: Reinventing the Economy to End Oppression These are required reading for my policies.
Discovered your channel thanks to this video and the algorithm!! Thank you so much for this video!!!! As a colonial subject of the United States I was told to shut up and not complain about Hillary Clinton’s policies related to Puerto Rico in 2016, before a major hurricane put us on the map. In fact, it has been hard to talk to liberal feminists, even within the academy during the difficult political times of the last few years. It is complicated and I understand their terror (as a brown woman, the few remaining rights have been quickly vanishing). Also, thank you for bringing in intersectionality.
When HIllary ran against Obama, a whole boatload of white folk didn't want to vote for her because of Iraq. Eight years later, a whole boatload of white folk nominated her for president. The American electorate has the memory the size of a guppy.
Fascinating discussion. I learned a lot. I think there is a problem with the notion that masculinity equates to conflict. While I think there is some truth to the notion that men are more inherently conflict driven, it’s a stretch to say conflict happens as result of this phenomenon. Generally speaking, I think conflict arises when diplomacy fails, and that isn’t an issue that can be alleviated by the sex of either party. In other words, diplomacy is not an all encompassing solution. There will always be cases in which diplomacy won’t (or can’t), meet the needs of a given party, and conflict will be the only option for that party. You can’t just throw femininity at that problem, and expect it to resolve for that reason alone.
Meanwhile, women's social hierarchies include and incite some of the most intense and vicious conflicts. It's this onesided perception that needs to be let go of, in order for feminism to become anything other than a movement of hate.
Excellent video, Alice. I was reminded, by your discussion of the different ways in which men and woman are treated in the criminal justice system, of Davis' 'Are Prisons Obsolete?' where she describes how women's crime is pathologized. A couple great quotes: "It is true that men who commit the kinds of transgressions that are regarded as punishable by the state are labeled as social deviants. Nevertheless, masculine criminality has always been deemed more 'normal' than feminine criminality." "While jails and prisons have been dominant institutions for the control of men, mental institutions have served a similar purpose for women. That is, deviant men have been constructed as criminal, while deviant women have been constructed as insane." "Psychiatric drugs continue to be distributed far more extensively to imprisoned women than to their male counterparts." "If male criminals were considered to be public individuals who had simply violated the social contract, female criminals were seen as having transgressed fundamental moral principles of womanhood." She goes on to talk about how many of the proposed and established systems of punishment for women who had committed crimes mirrored domestic labor and were a kind of 'reset' to the supposed womanly duties these women had fallen away from.
Very well spoken. Any time a group goes to extremes it will always lead to a feeling of superiority over the other. This is toxic no matter who is doing it. We are all human.
While it is true that in wars the vast majority of those who participate in it are men in the army, to say that women are left asking for peace while men wage war is to disassociate the participation of women in war, because Women participate indirectly while men participate directly. Also, doesn't this establish a dualism of Women = peaceful versus Men = violent?
1Dime has an outstanding video in which he deconstruct the idea of "centrism". Highly recommended PS: I've always thought that you doing a collab with OliSunVia would be an excellent idea
Agreed. Is there a description on which branch or sect of feminism she'd refer to her thinking as? I'm not familiar with many other creators with takes like these and would love to look into it
@nyshyn307 Since she mentioned Bourgeois and Liberal Feminism and criticizes it, my educational guess of her brand of feminism is something similar to Proletariat/Marxist or Socialist Feminism.
I just found this channel It’s amazing! I love the way you speak about these issues the way you analyze them in such a nuanced way! Keep it up! We need more grey online
Very thought-provoking video. Thank you. I like how everything is so well-explained and called out. My only issue was not going into such a polarizing issue as bourgeois feminism's relationship with the LGBTQ community,in particular,with trans women,where we REALLY see how bourgeois feminism becomes exclusionary, dehumanizing and authoritarian (of course,in the name of what they call "preserving femininity"), although I'm sure that's an entire video in itself
17:07 Nice to see Rani Lakshmibai added to the ranks. Also, the British colonialists used her example to assert colonial masculinity which in turn created a reactionary masculinity.
I don't think that Reeves argues that inequalities are working in reverse nowadays. Rather, his point is that men are suffering because they lack a vision, an example to follow. While women are emancipating themselves and becoming more financially independent, men are stuck with their fathers and grandfathers as role models, meaning that they are unable to "keep up" with this inevitably changing society. I think that he's actually making a huge point in favour of feminism, that is, that even men would benefit from a more equal, less patriarchal society (which he also says explicitly in the book and interviews).
We don't have a patriarchal society. Women are the protected special gender whose authority is almost automatic and who is believed without needing reason.
I have been struggling to make this point in the comments section in a respectful manner as you did, thank you. I truly believe that his work is a strong basis for educating a less violent, more egalitarian and better adapted man that celebrates the achievements of women’s rights. Alice’s points about class and ethnicity really nail it as well, but within the context of mental health and better preparing young men to live in a world where they need to create new models to thrive in, I believe that she misses the point of Reeves’ work.
Indeed, Reeves' suggested solutions are also much more on the progressive end, including letting boys start a year later with school (he lists some pros and cons of the idea), encouraging men to go into teaching and nursing, and investment in male vocational training. Hardly the stuff of matriarchal conspiracy...
Wow this was so insightful. I wonder if there is an additional layer of what I would call "grumpy feminism" that is the counterpart to the incel movement. A group of basically unpolitical persons, that like to label their everyday personal struggles, interpersonal conflicts and self doubts with big words because they like to be heard. Not every conflict with a person of the other gender is sign of the patriarchy. The other person might be actually grumpy to everyone or you are just perceiving it negatively because you are grumpy. I know it sounds like a reduction and its certainly not everyone, but it also happens.
While I genuinely don’t disagree on the existence of people who are exactly as you’ve described, I think there’s still too much generality with your definition for “grumpy feminism”, it doesn’t provide any specificity to how someone would discern these women from those with valid grievances. The definition’s vagueness would make it too easy for another individual’s political illiteracy/ignorance to result in them mislabeling another person’s valid grievance as just another “grumpy feminist”. Additionally, what you’ve described isn’t a counterpart to male incels. I know “Incel” gets thoughtlessly tossed around as a generic insult but the definition of Incel encompasses a very specific view of the world, not just general woe-is-me grumpiness. Incels view themselves as unjustifiably bereaved by women, stemming from a belief that a man should be able to “earn” or be “deserving of” access to women (access to their romantic affection and sexual access to their bodies). An Incel feels entitled to the encroachment of another human being’s (specifically a woman’s) self determination and bodily autonomy. So while Incels have a faulty premise behind their claim to victimisation, it’s based on a real obstruction that comes from the very real very existence of a woman’s self sovereignty. Their issue isn’t that they’ve imagined a nonexistent force standing between them and what they want, it’s that they resent, want to invalidate and overrule the very real thing presently obstructing them. Where as, what you’ve described as “grumpy feminism” involves someone who is misusing if not knowingly weaponising political terminology to give the false veneer of validity to their claim to be a victim to an otherwise nonexistent obstruction.
@@Sanakudou yeah these are valid points. The term could be misused and the comparison to incels is not really fitting. I guess the key indicator is if there is really (how convenient, just referring to objective reality) a bias in someone's perception before labeling them as patriarchal. Stupidity, mistakes or lack of knowledge could be reasons too (and in turn CAN be results of patriarchy, but there needs to be a difference between direct and indirect or involuntary discrimination). The comparison to incels is just in regard to over-representing or widening the divide between the genders instead of referring to a shared humanity and a shared enemy of class oppression.
Both are hurting their proclaimed goal by the way. Both bringing a lot of negative attention that ultimately is counter productive because they present the movement as outside the Overton window
If you think the two are the same, you should also think that poc people who make "white people be like" memes are the same as police violence and white supremacists or your a hypocrite. One is mean, the other KILLS
The funny thing is that trying to educate guys with a model built for women is causing frustrations, and causings a rise in criminality. It is an ironic vicious circle. The better move would have been to hone on the recurrent traits among guys, and aloow them to put them to good use (ex: manual labour, respectful sparring in boxing, etc...). If there is one thing I learned from myself and other guys, is that we predominantly get motivated by competition, fucking around and finding out and using our hands. Men just don't like to play safe and docile for the most part, and a gynocentric school system that doesn't seek to guide men to use their recurrent inner attributes to constructive potential is a recipe for unhinged violence.
@@DmitryFromForestit's useful as an instructive tool. It's only an oversimplification if it can't be expanded upon in pedagogy. Then it's just a simplification, which isn't always bad
@@kerycktotebag8164precisely. Lots of people love to claim things are oversimplified just to dismiss them because they don't like the overarching point being made.
@@punkybrewstar83 I'm sorry, are you suggesting that a female political scientist's critique of the "Overton window" theory would be more valid than mine? Or are you implying that a female political scientist would not speak up and share her critique, even if she believed it was important to do so? Isn't labeling my comment as "mansplaining" a form of sexist ad hominem? Putting aside rhetoric, I believe it is important (and professionally ethical) to warn about the critiques of the "Overton window" theory in the comments, especially when it is not mentioned in the video and there are many enthusiasts who want to learn more about this theory. My main argument, as I have already stated, is that the "Overton window" is an oversimplification of more complex social and political dynamics, and it may lead to incorrect conclusions (as is often the case with oversimplification in science, especially in social science). This is exactly why many conspiracy theorists like to talk about "Overton windows". Please forgive me if anything I have said could have been phrased better.
jubilee is downright terrifying. I can't watch it without absolutely destroying my mental state. The entire time it's just "no.. NO. People cannot be that gullible, can they? OH GOD THEY ARE" over and over and over. I hate it so much lol
Im not gonna pretend like I know anything substantial about feminism or that Im familiar with 100% of what you explained in the video. However, your honest and authentic way of expressing your thoughts and also the intelligent yet careful research you made caught my immediate attention. I have a knack to simplify the discussions that are going on today even though I know it carries more nuance than a surface level assumption. It's intelligent and eloquent people like you that help simple minded people like me to understand the depth behind crucial matters.
This came like a breath of fresh air today. Misogyny and sexism condition women to be accepting of the situation they are given, even if it means denying their needs and feelings. While it’s natural to reject that impulse, this toxic kind of assimilationist feminism seems to just be playing the same game somehow. Like somehow, no option(neither the resurgent second wave feminism you are describing here nor the man-o-sphere) supports the idea that all human autonomy is real and important. Thanks again for voicing these ideas in this context.
I don't think true human autonomy is feasible, maybe a trans-human one. Accepting a societal role comes with benefits and protections, and the female sex needs (and is guaranteed) those more. I cannot conceive of an egalitarian anarchy or similar construct.
So glad this was recommended to me :) And thank you for making a passing reference to Rani Lakshmi Bai... It isn't usual for me to hear foreigners make references to Indian Freedom Fighters.
i got arrested at a sit in at my school for palestine - people like to act like im radical and crazy for it but in my head i'm like "i could be doing so much worse"
You posed a question about the men going into the streets to cause violence and assert dominance, and just before that I thought "Does anyone ever ask us 'power hungry dominance seeking men' why there are times where we are violent?" I'm not a violent man by nature, but there have been times in my life where something happened to me that I became so angry that I punched a wall or broke something. Does that mean deep down I was looking for power and to dominate? Absolutely not. It's sometimes easier to lean into your raw emotions and react viscerally than to rationalize your thoughts and feelings and then reflect on them, especially when we're young and haven't been taught to do anything else. It seems on the surface that a lot of these opinions and books come up with theories without actually talking to men about their experiences and emotions.
In the same situations I've seen women react violently, too. Heck, the scale tends to be much larger than just hurting your hand on a wall once, and often target people around them. Men being more violent than women is a myth. The pattern is different, that's all.
@@sneezyfidodude, is not a myth. Is just you wanting to convince people of that yo make men the "better ones" when all the data point to the contrary. Rape, violent crimes, genocide, warcrimes,domestic violence, anger management, mirder, torture, etc. All crimes tipicaly done by men and rarely by women. Anectodes are not science. Just stories.
Merci beaucoup pour ta vidéo, qui synthétise plein de bouts d’idées que j’avais dans la tête, et qui se relient aussi à mes réflexions sur la pertinence de la binarité des genres dans la société, qui n’est pas seulement pertinente pour les libertés des sexualité mais aussi pour l’égalité et/ou equité entre toustes les humain·e·s. Chaque vidéos sont vraiment super à regarder, bien construites et alimentées de références, pas trop longues, merciiii pour ton contenu !! Ha et super de parler de Léo et son travail hehe
This is so brilliantly set forth. I’m a woman born at very tail end of Baby Boom who mostly hung out with Gen X. Thank you for identifying the Prime Directive that I was handed and, consequently, lived by all my adult life: DO NOT SUBMIT. Right now, I’m feeling the tragedy of loss. I could’ve lived a life that embraced my feminine strengths and traits more than I did. It’s strange how I’m suddenly seeing that my “freedom” was yet an oppression. Again. Still. In another guise. A different flavor.
bonjour! this was a rlly well produced and informative video. as someone w an interest in politics and studying french i think i might have found a new favourite channel
Omg now I understand why I was excluded for some "feminist" groups (clearly bourgeois and neoliberal) because I wasn't soft & feminine (submissive) enough and I didn't though men were like this or that. I understand several things now. There are really many different kind of feminism and true one is not that classist and exclusive. Thanks for this video, it is enlightening. 😊
There’s no such thing as a singular Overton window with social media. People live in their polarized bubbles, with their own Overton window. Algorithms are designed that way to maximize engagement. It’s what caused the disagreement on who won the latest election the US, people on both sides are dissociated from reality. Problem is, there should be more than two sides.
The violent resistance of modern women for a variety of social causes has been vital but completely overlooked historically or seen as insignificant, when it was significant but was showing they were active participaters in society a space reserved for men especially so in the era between enlightenment and universal suffrage
I just found your channel. I really appreciate your videos please keep the good work you’re doing. As an Arab woman I was always appalled by the racist stereotypical view on Arab men. I got my Master degree and established my own company. I am also a mother of 4. I will never be able to achieve where I am now without the support of my family and the tender love and encouragement of them. They try to impose western values on other culture, and no one ever thought that maybe no one asked for it?
Reminder, violent oppression will create violent resistance. Violence may not be the most productive way to resolve issues and will cause significant harm to those even not directly involved in the violence, but violent resistance can't be critiqued while violent oppression is justified. The responsibility and accountability for resolving the violence sits with the oppressor, not the resistance. Rulers propagandize a paradigm where their violence is deemed righteous (both domestically and globally) while the response violence is barbaric. The West routinely does this. Israel's Hasbara (and pro-Israel states/media) and 'law and order' rhetoric and framing are prime examples. That state, a structure controlled by the ruling class, wants a monopoly on violence to maintain status quo. Any other violence is vilified as terrorism, rioting, lawlessness, etc. It places blame for violence on the reaction to injustice and violence, not on the cause of the reaction.
The Center Ground is the interplay point between discussing the advantages and disadvantages of ideas and proposals and thus progressing them. It doesn't move.
Great video, Alice! Though I think these liberal feminists aren't exactly being "gender essentialists." I'm sure they're probably referring to how men are socialized to be violent, not that men are inherently violent due to biology or something like that - it's a foundational belief of feminism. Still, your critique of how they reduce things to just gender is spot on. Love your videos.
Another banger from Alice 🎉 Your videos keep me on my toes and help me to be a better educated person. I'll be picking up a copy of collapse feminism soon for sure!
![[DRAGON BALL LEGENDS REVEALS ＆ STUFF] LEGENDS FESTIVAL 2024 Special Edition Part 1](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mV5bGIswTtQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I will correctly pronounce "neoliberalism" one day. I will correctly pronounce "neoliberalism" one day.
Perhaps also one day reveal neoliberalism for the sh** it is, destructive capitalism is just a slightly better candy wrapper.
Rightly disrespect neoliberalism by never pronouncing it right ✨
I like how you pronounce it tho
I think it’s fine only.
don't you dare
what's more ironic that doctor mosatafa barghtouti's wife is founder for Palestinian women's right movement and he also is a member of this org with their 2 daughters
Divide n conquer while the instigators eat breakfast together. Lol good chess move no?
Look at what they did to the women of Israel on 10/7. Go read the victim testimonies.
@@apocolypse11what?
big surprise that that reporter didnt know what she was talking about
No, we're tired of the let's pretend wokism and covert racism. We are just done. @@apocolypse11
7:55 For those who don't know, there was an important indigenous feminist and activist from Honduras named Berta Cáceres. Berta Cáceres was an internationally renowned figure fighting against destructive mining projects then supported by the coup government which Hillary Clinton backed. Cáceres was assassinated exactly eight years ago today (March 3rd), by a death squad sent to silence her. The identities of some members of the death squad have since been revealed, and they had received training by the United States' School of the Americas (with a notorious legacy connected to many atrocities in the global south). Before her death, Cáceres had spoken publicly about US, and in particular Hillary Clinton's, involvement in the undemocratic coup and subsequent military regime in Honduras. The video footage of this interview can still be found on YT for those interested. Berta Cáceres: presente.
THANK YOU
Thank you. You really cannot have feminism if you live in a genocidal empire. Ditto for pretending you ahve a choice between two political parties when you have inverted fascism. RIP Berta.
That is metal solid piece of fact to so many domination intertwinned : colonial race dictatorial environnement... féminisme
I too believe South Americans have no agency and it is simply the School of the Americas and Hilary Clinton that made the bad men commit murder, not the Desarrollos Energeticos SA (DESA) and its mercenaries.
This is really informative.. thank you. This actually made me hate United States even more.
In the 2000s The Onion had a news-article about how South-East Asia's first genocidal female warlord was good news for feminism because it demonstrated women could be just a powerhungry, ruthless and cruel as men.
I'm not the first person who's pointed out they are finding it more and more difficult to satirize reality nowadays as more and more of their articles from the past become reality.
@@unruffledhomelander Onion is just another news network at this point because reality is just weird
Remember - Onion has a super advanced satelite which allows them to see future. They told us that years ago
@@angelikaskoroszyn8495How would a satelite see the future?
@@unruffledhomelanderAung San Suu Kyi
@@JohanDanielsson8802Do you, like, literally not know what a joke is?
The idea of Hillary Clinton embodying care and selflessness is one of the most absurd things I've heard in a while.
shes a vile person that easily manipulates her followers, corruption at its finest!!!
She definitely only cares for herself and her big donors.😊
@@claudemadrid4950
She definitely cares more for the interests of wealthy men than she does for working class women
I don't like her either, but now see how much worse things can be.
@@johnwright9372 H. Clinton is a just a part of the worse, there wouldn’t be no corrupt politician like Trump without corrupt politicians like Clinton, Biden and Pelosi... but if you want to be their slave, be their slave by voting for them.
Love how you went mask off and called it bourgeois feminism in the latter half of the video lol
SOOOYYYYYYYYYY
In the US, 50 years ago, the Republican Party was the party of bougie intellectuals. When Reagan started his crusade against higher education in 1980, corporate America corrupted the educational system, slipping into the administration under the guise of "diversity and inclusion," and now, the bougie intellectuals are mainly Democrats. This is why liberalism has become a joke.
I wonder when Alice will deconstruct a lot of her own middle class ideology.
All feminism is burgeois working class women don’t have time for that shit
@@lifelearner3067Or maybe instead of blaming european fascism and its continued import into the US, europeans can take some time to consider why their populations who welcomed nazi collaborators into civil service with open arms keep rejecting genuine liberalism.
I used to be a staunch pacifist- not just for myself but ideologically. violence is never the answer, I told myself. So many of the points that you made regarding the necessity of violence in the face of oppression were reflective of exactly what pulled me out of that mindset. At this point, it seems passivity is a marker of a deeper, more insidious type of violence. It only serves to keep us in these cycles of oppression and further shift the overton window on what is acceptable.
Lmfao you were never a pacifist. Non-violent resistance is how both Indians and black people in the US achieved two of the most historically significant and successful acts of protest in history.
INB4 “DER WUZ VILENS DOE”
Wrong, there was an insignificant amount and you would be massively coping to win the argument.
My relationship with pacifism has shifted over the years. When I was younger, I would have said the same: violence is never the answer. But you're right that passivity does not equal peace, that it allows the violence to go unquestioned. The BLM slogan "No justice, no peace" - there is no true peace with true justice - really helped change my view.
I would argue that killing a nazi, for example, is an act of radical pacifism. It is an act of violence, sure, but an act of violence in the pursuit of justice and peace, an act of violence to prevent further violence
@@violet7773 You know you people are psychotic, right?
@@violet7773 lol my comments are being deleted. Leftists are so soft.
Great summarizations you’re right on point reminds of this book I’ve been getting into recently called “how nonviolence protects the state” it was written by an anarchist but the book is still good there an audible version online too def recommend
This is exactly what I've been saying for years. Nobody really wants to dismantle the deathmachine, they just want their turn to run it (insert self-interested group with compelling argument for change here) the deathmachine needs to be dismantled permanently. A gun is designed for one thing. Painting it pink doesn't change its function or purpose
If you think that disarming the world is the answer you are sorely mistaken. Guns have been around for a thousand years now and they are not going away. You can't uninvent missiles, fighter jets, tanks and all the rest. Remember that Simpsons episode where Lisa wishes for world peace and the world gets rid of all their weapons, only to be invaded by Kodos and Kang with a stick. The same principle applies. If you get rid of all weapons, any country can now build back the deathmachine as you call it and rule. Once something is invented, specifically something as significant as weapons, it is virtually impossible to get rid of. I would be surprised if you could come up with only one such example.
you worded that well
Preach King
What are you saying is the death machine?
What the fuck is a “deathmachine”?
Replace every time they say "woman" or "women" with "state" and it all makes sense
When you talked about men's violence, essentialism, and civilizational feminism I was like... "Wait, I did not think about that before". It feels so good when a video pushes me like that. Nice job, Alice!
@UTubeTrollPolice298source?
@UTubeTrollPolice298where?…
Yes I never noticed that before too!!
@UTubeTrollPolice298 sources?
Is this the Tom Morello from RATM?!?
This reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend over the outrage caused by Margot Robbie and Greta Gerwig not getting nominated for the Oscars. I think many women online took this opportunity to say that somehow it was anti feminist that Margot didnt get nominated even though its was a female category and every one else who got picked over her are women too. Hell it was a huge step - first nomination for a native american woman. In the conversation we had we named this phenomena 'white feminism' but I think I like 'bourgeois feminism' more. I will use that from now.
Quick correction, it wasn't the first nomination for a Native American woman, but it was a historic nomination nonetheless :)
@@myas.6485 my apologies if I was wrong but I did see multiple headlines stating she was the first Native American woman to be nominated in the best actress category. Perhaps the article was wrong.
The rage about the Barbie nomination was more about that Ken was nominated while Margot wasn’t. I don’t think it’d have been as upsetting if neither Ken nor Barbie got nominated
@@MA-ou2dk Ryan's nomination has NOTHING to do with Margot's nomination though. Margot didnt get nominated but instead of her, another woman did. Ryan is not competing in the same category lmao. Thats like saying Christopher Nolan shoudnt have been nominated for Director and instead should have been nominated for Best Actor...
@@MA-ou2dk Ok, and my issue is the fact that people are treating it like a big feminist issue when America Ferrera got nominated. Margot Robbie was great, but she has a million other oscar worthy films, why tf are you bitches so pressed about this
You referring mainstream Feminism as "Bourgeois Feminism" instantly got my like.
I loved this video and especially that you included the interview with Mustafa Barghouti because when I was watching the interview, it made me so mad. She was basically using feminism as a shield for her blatant racism. Also, in this interview you could clearly see what many name "white feminism" and the hiearchy of opression: A white woman might be opressed by a white man, yet she can be the opressor of a black man. That was so incredibly obvious as well as her bigotry.
@@Kaylor-yb7zhNot his first time.
True!
White women always still upper than oriental men.
Because oriental have THIS brownness.
I even think brownness is worst than blackness or yellowness.
Nobody can earn against White and both Native American and Aborigines Australian well aware of that.
I think she was totally unprofessional and out of line, but I really don’t see why people label it as racist. Barghouti refuses to condemn Hamas and has previously called terrorists who murdered and mutilated women, “brave fighters”. The same Hamas, which is the proxy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, one of the biggest silencers and oppressors of women currently in the world. Anyone who is aware of his previous statements and watched more than that little clip, knows that it was an attack on his character and political stances, not on his race. People can’t be called out for their oppressive beliefs, simply because they’re people of color? That sounds racist to me.
@@emilyheimanpruzanski8151It was racist regardless of what his views are on the war on his people.
I'd dispute the claim that Julia Hartley Brewer is a journalist
Julia's a journalist in the same way tim pool's a centrist, if your idea of a far leftist is joe biden 🤡
Alice jumped to a conclusion that does not follow from the premises. She never said it was because of the culture, she just said he is not used to letting women talk...
I mean, from context alone it seemed clear what she meant. All the more if you know anything about JHB. Alice was right, I think.
Either way, she's not a journalist.
@@lofidandy2189Also, she'll have had hundreds of guests from 'the other side' on her show who will have infuriated her by having the audacity to try and share their opinion. Has she ever said the same thing to others?
@@Matt-km7yk it's not just that simply from her racist generalisation, she brought up gender for no reason and stereotyped him as a Middle Eastern man that he does not let women talk and the way she said was quite in fact racist. This common stereotype has been used for so many years and then is used to censor their voices and make their issue 'less important'.
The Trope of "women are not violent" or this subconscious idea that woman are Delicate and incapable of violating other beings is so bad also because a lot of the domestic violence toward childres is framed as "just some firm hand for a bad child" and " a mother always know what's best for her child" the fact that woman are aways the ones who get the kids afther the divorce, a lot of bad parenting that a lot of times is not reported from the childs because of fear and a large etc of violence that is trivialized and normalized, of course, this is a consequence of the patriarchy and the infantilization of women, this still in people's mind, the "awww come one, she is just a girl, she can not hurt you" or "your mom beat you? Pfffff moms always hit softly, you are crying over nothing" still
On a per capita basis women are much likely to commit violent acts so the correct statement is women are less violent
Or is this trope actually a by product of shifting the blame for those women's disgusting behavior to some nebulous patriarchy rather than holding them personally accountable? Framing men as the perpetual perpetrators and women as victims without agency?
Women are usually violent to weaker human being... who can not protest... so they apparently are only victims but they we are not... we are sometimes victims and some other carnefici... like men (and even animals) are... tired this victim attitude...
Violence aside (my mom objectively hit me less times and less hard than my dad ever did), mothers can psychologically WRECK you, gaslight you, manipulate you, and emotionally abuse you, which at least in my case did far worse lasting damage to who I became than being hit (not to say that hitting children is not fucking horrific as well).
To suggest that women always get the children is just plain incorrect. It might be true in the majority of cases, but it is, nevertheless, far from always the case.
While I loved the Barbie movie, the way the fans reacted towards other female nominees was unacceptable. Most of them haven't even watched KOTFM, PL, PT or Anatomy of a Fall. Stories about a woman regaining her humanity, reconciliation with a past friend, and a *literal genocide*.They completely ignored Triet's nomination, as the first non-american woman, and they also didn't campaign at all for Celine Song. It's clear their feminism is very exclusive. Margot wouldn't have been my choice even if there was a 6th nomination, it'd be either Greta or Portman.
I think the answer is less malicious and simple and you said it at the beginning of the post: everyone saw Barbie.
Of course they want a film that they actually saw and liked to be nominated. If they saw all the other films, they might think differently.
But those films weren't marketed towards general audiences in the same way. The other nominated films are more serious, more adult, and didn't have the expensive ad campaign. Most of us don't follow movies that closely, we're likely to miss the lower budget films with limited distribution.
@@cbpd89I find too many people view these issues either a very malicious and conspiracy minded framework .. on all sides I see an obsession with gender and race and just plain hysteria .. it’s tiring trying to wade through it and it’s everywhere
@@brianmeen2158 There have been a grand total of two non-white Best Actress winners in near a century while Emma Stone is on her way to having two all for herself at 35, but yeah, it's just a wild conspiracy by people obsessed with gender and race to point out the blatant bias. Sure.
Who cares about Hollywood?
@@cbpd89Reactionary dumb ppl who literally do not know what they're talking about. Sounds like the internet then yeah
Bourgeois feminism also tends to seek, rather than gender equality for all, to make bourgeois women equal partners in neo-colonial oppression over the global south. This aim to be partners in oppression of others further lends itself toward the neoliberal tendency toward facism to protect itself from revolutionary change.
All feminism is bourgeois and fascist.
Looks like I somehow got on the weird side of youtube again 😂
Fascism IS revolutionary change. Not all revolution is good, most of it is bad. Some bourgeois might make a profit, but fascism is an expression of working class populism.
@@greyfells2829 One thing I don't understand is how people in the West today can openly claim to be communists, which is just as bad as fascists. But if you said you are a fascist you would get cancelled.
@@Grievance_Studies_Affair_2018 Communism is not as bad as fascism. Communism is not inherently bad, fascicsm is.
I enjoyed the video. I learned so many things that i don’t know the terms of!! Civilisational feminism and bourgeois feminism, nice!! Thanks. This is a huge issue in developing countries (I am Indonesian) who receives donor help from western countries for gender equality programs, and a lot of times the complexity of Indonesia’s culture on feminism is oversimplified and unfairly labeled as completely uncivilized and anti-progressive. What they dont realize is they miss a lot of very unique and complex feminism values within the Indonesian culture, which may be masked by the recent Islamic influence (which, again, the patriarchy that comes with islamic influence is not innately islamic but rather a result of multiple other factors).
I noted the books you mentioned and I will be reading into them.
like what other factors?
@@Diana-kn8oc I'm not a muslim but grew up in a muslim community/extended family and I think leaders like to misconstrue conservative Islamic views because of capitalism, classism, outside intervention too etc sure some parts of abrahamic religions including Judaism, Christianity and Islam promote patriarchal systems (which is also again not inherently tied into that religion but instead socio-economic factors within the context of older societies where the religion stemmed from) but these non religious ideals tie into it too, it's much easier for western bourgeoise/ liberals to point to a religion and ignore all this ofc
Loved that you added Julia’s video. The video MADE ME SOOOO ANGRY!
Coming at a men where the tenderness, the vulnerability, the courage and love of Arab men are on full display - this debased use of feminist rhetoric to dehumanise them - is the worst kind of hypocrisy.
That’s right. We’re seeing incredible tenderness and care - think of Motaz, Grandpa Khaled, and many, many more. Yet they are hidden by mainstream press.
I agree. JHB may consider herself a feminist, but her racist western chauvinism totally pissed me off
much love from Palestine...
🙏🏽🫶🏽🍉@@AbuSous2000PR
@@AbuSous2000PR❤❤❤
I just feel this highlights the dangers of generalizing, essentializing, and seeing problems as one-note. Also, there is too much focus on fixing people versus fixing systems and problems.
More punishing people than correcting them, even. It's usually more of a hate mob vying for attention via saying the most outrageous thing.
Fixing the person removes liability and duty to change from the authority figures. It's the scapegoat culture on autopilot
The left is fine with essentializing and generalizing, they just want it to be targeted at specific groups and not others in the name of their cockamamie inverted oppression pyramid. Get lost with it, I'd definitely vote even Meloni before I'll ever swallow that utter hypocritical, sanctimonious, backwards trash of an ideology. The left has worked very hard to earn the animosity. Good luck with jihadists as their only "friends". 🙄
i enjoyed the video and i’m grateful you touched upon this topic, but i wanted to mention that intersectionality unfortunately is not any less bourgeois than neoliberal feminism. Intersectional feminism is tolerated quite well by capitalism and capitalist media because it helps achieve an important bourgeois goal: dividing the oppressed, making it harder for the oppressed to solidarize and unify the struggle (and only united we have power). I don’t think there’s any other feminism at the moment apart from marxist feminism which was not coopted by the ruling class, as sad as it is
I think it is painted that way by capitalist media/mainstream liberal ideas but the core of intersectionality recognises how coming together as an oppressed class cannot happen if different discriminated factors in an individual are not supported/validated by said collective. Def agree that marxist feminism remains the most pure very comforting to know the bourgeoisie are too scared/stupid to gentrify that lol
Some of these sound very similar to the White folks who told angry African-Americans that "We get you're angry, but don't destroy property". There's a definite resistance in the West to noting the class issues underlying much of the rage because easier to blame it all on "hysterical women" or "angry minorities" than to recognize the system is set up to screw over large segments of the population. Excellent video, Alice!
MLKs quote about the „White moderate“ always comes to mind. People are terrified of any kind of actual systemic change.
"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
I wouldn’t put that solely on white people. Many black store owners did not want their source of income destroyed for a “cause”
Maybe don’t destroy property
Would you be saying the same thing if minority protestors burned down your house?
@@AlexBrovo Maybe cops stop killing young people.
Some examples of women actively engaging in visible violence in the face of injustice: Gulab Kaur (Ghadar Party), Mai Bhago (sikh historical figure), Durga Bhabhi (Durga Devi), Phoolan Devi
The trung sisters of Vietnam too!
@@malegria9641 have no clue who they are but will def. check them out!
@@malegria9641 and Boudicca
Phoolan Devi is good in my view
All the women mujaheedat in the algerian war of independence from the brutal french settler colonial rule that lasted for 132 years, especially Drif, Lakhdari, and Djamila Bouhired. Also Leila khaled a member of the popular front for the Palestinian liberation from israeli settler colonialism. Leila also wrote an autobiography “my people shall live”
Girl I just found your channel and I must say you're spectacular, you're cohesion and fluency of speech are the best I have ever listened to. You may be the first person to make me consider my concepts and previous assumptions carefully and make me want to search and study for more information.
Have you ever seen PhilosophyTube? The woman running it is spectacular too. She makes incredibly points about modern societal problems using dark humour and lots of philosophy. It's great. And it made me also see some really messed up connections in the world. Their video about death is eye opening
the meloni tweet reminded me of a book my grandma got me a couple years ago, good night stories for rebel girls i think it was called. it has little biographies about different inspirational women and thats all good and well when it comes to athletes or artists or scientists, but i had such a hard time with the politicians they included (mainly thatcher and clinton). like all the other biographies it had the "everyone disliked them because they were empowered women taking up space in a male dominated work place" narrative with no other context why people might not like them. they even lied about how margaret thatcher got the nickname iron lady, because then they would have to acknowledge that she was actually very cold and cruel and ruined peoples lives. "do you think margaret thatcher had girl power?" this book says yes.
Margaret Thatcher, such a badass girlboss 😤
DUDE. . . WAIT. . .WAS THIS THE ONE WITH "Liza the Organiza" ? ? ? ?
"Do you think Margaret Thatcher effectively utilized girl power by funding paramilitary death squads in Northern Ireland?"
The girl power question is something that misoginistics use to assosiate women having power as something bad.
In reality is a comertial catch phrase for young girls to have confidence and associate themselves with strenght.
I WAS THINKING OF THE EXACT SAME THING
Hello. I am Haitian-American living in the U.S. with two family members who live in Paris, France. Thank you for shedding more light on the Naël situation that occurred last year. I have a male cousin who is in 20s and I always wanted to know what he thinks of his country but there is a bit of language barrier so I am fearful of not communicating well. Well done video!
This was fantastic thank you for including all these scholars!
This might literally be the best feminism video I've ever seen on RUclips. It's nuanced thinking like this that's going to help us escape the trap of "wokescolds vs the manosphere" and hopefully make actual progress.
We will never escape the woke vs manosphere arguments though. I find so many terms to be just useless at this point. They are so overused and warped that i don’t even know what folks are talking about half of the time .. I find half of people think the truth is racist or sexist or ‘ist’ of some sort.
The only way forward is together in the equality that was promised.
In current state it looks like feminist organizations need to join the KKK on the blacklist, in order to have any chance at all.
It's women who need to self-regulate on this one.
Nuance? 🤣 she’s contradicting herself all the damn time.
@@kant.68that’s…. What nuance means.
@@willieclark2256
No. That’s not nuance. Nuance is approaching a concept or argument with objectivity, without biases, from all perspectives and visions and adding as much context, subtext, details and layers and lectures as possible . For example if you’re gonna talk about Hitler and the Nazis with nuance, you wont demonize them nor make a caricature of them, but explain the reasons why Hitler did what he did, why he was charismatic enough to obtain power, why he was so against the jews, christianity etc. Without talking about him as if he was a demon . We should approach politics and social phenomena in this way , but we wont do that because we want a reaction, a narrative not a nuance and realistic version of the facts.
I couldn't agree more with how if a woman is violent she is more likely to be reeducated instead of directly punished like men.
Was the data on that filterd for the type of violance?
@UTubeTrollPolice298where did you hear that
@ville__ SEND SEND
@UTubeTrollPolice298 lol i have seen these same colleen comment on other people's videos with the name changed
@@akshayde Yeah, it almost looks like some sort of an operation to discredit many female RUclipsrs, this ville_ guy goes around leaving the exact same comments in their videos (they previously claimed that all those creators were stealing their content, lol), now I can see this new one UTubeTroll account. Now whether it's just a one or two person operation or something more organised, I don't know, but some people definitely get their pants in a twist over intelligent young women presenting their views on RUclips. But hey, at least they give them algorithm engagement with their idiotic comments!
I don't think I ever came across a french person's channel in English, directed towards an international audience. I expected that to do that we'd need to invoke more sources and references from English speaking countries yet you seem to get it working with mainly or only French references... Hé ben bravo Alice!!
Great video
A large part of this problem seems to be liberаls' capacity to ignore the all-important difference between coercive controlling viоlеncе and viоlеnt resistance.
Side note: A lot of people may be interested to know of Clinton's complicity in sеxual viоlеncе by far-right deаth squads in Colombia and state-sponsored rаpe of prisоners during Mubarak’s final days in Egypt. This was during her time in the state department.
To be clear I'm not dunking on Alice for not including an exhaustive list of Clinton's misdeeds, as that would genuinely take days to fully articulate. As Alice said in the video, though Clinton has a reputation among liberals for being a proponent of women’s rights, she has a consistent history of standing against women’s rights in practice.
"A lot of people may be interested to know of Clinton's complicity in sеxual viоlеncе"
Her husband Bill kinda seems like an issue in that regard as well.
(Only tangentially related, but has the U.S. not had a president get divorced yet? Never realized that until now)
There's no difference between violence to control, and violence to "resist." The victims of resistance are practically never those directly guilty of grievances, just like the victims of control are often not guilty of any meaningful crime. And the "resistors" will very readily become the controllers once they reach any sort of power. It's a false distinction.
There's difference between the initiation of violence, and the use of violence in self-defense against an actively violent threat. That's the only meaningful distinction to make.
that's not really true though. There are a whole lot of violent resistors who become peaceful once their grievances are addressed and objectives are achieved, historically.@@hagoryopi2101
Considering how both can be understood as a struggle for dominance over a piece of land or or a people, the distinction is almost academic.
@@idontwantahandlethough Regan was divorced, and he legalized no-default divorce in California before most other governors did. Now the Republicans want to criminalize no-fault divorce even though they've always said he was their hero.
Hillary was also pro plan colombia. Which overwhelmingly affected women worse than men on the war zones
She's pro-war in General. US politicians are deranged
Ah yes, "women most affected".
Let's don't forget what she did in Libya too.
Who is more affected? The overwhelmingly male military fighting abroad, or the women back home? The women, of course!
She was really horny to invade Iran, right after Americans genocided Iraqis
My mother always said that people kept voting in Magie Thatcher just because she was a woman adding on the fact that they all hated her fascist policies. She always says, "don't just vote for a woman but vote for a good woman."
You Mom was confused. People voted for her Policies. Economic Freedom is NOT Fascist.
@@杨江辞 Argentina went to War with them when the Dictatorship invaded GB territory. She wasn't afraid to protect her country. A good reason to vote for a politician.
Fascism is not neoliberalism.
@@OtherDAS yeah and how well did her policies go down in history
@@titotobi-lawal2083 UK became Economically better off from the previous admin, Argentina lost the war, and the Cold War was done. I'm not sure what the issue is.
I think your video shows that class needs to be brought into the conversation again. And why intersectional analyses are key.
Idealism vs Materialism. Thanks for helping bring the conversation back to the material conditions that are the primary reason for the oppression of marginalized groups.
Great video. I had never heard the phrase 'Civilisational Feminism' but it's a very useful term.
I really like your therm Bourgeoisie feminism. It's a lot more fitting to what some US-Americans call "white feminism"
But why do you assign it to white race? You know it exists also in countries where the majority of people are white and they do not share liberal or bourgeois "feminism". Dividing everything by race is inappropriate and it is racist itself since it's on its own assigning certain characteristics to the entire race of people regardless of their individual traits.
I like carceral feminism, cause it highlights how many feminists support the police state.
I think here in the US "white feminism" is very much an accurate description of many of the issues unique to here. I've met plenty lower class feminists who don't recognize when their feminism becomes racist. Bourgeois feminism is definitely also am accurate term, but I do not think it would be accurate to say these two concepts fully overlap.
@@afreaknamedallie1707 I'm referring to the usage of the term "white feminism" when it is about "well to do"-feminists and has nothing to do with racism
@@idnwiw I think you need to rewatch this video to see where it is specifically covered how "well to do" overlaps with racism.
It is so refreshing to hear from someone whose arguments are indeed arguments, from a place of reason and information, and not knee-jerk ideological regurgitation. I see here, as with all her video essays, a considered and insightful synthesis, and in Alice the makings of a public intellectual of the best sort. Bravo.
I really love your perspective and wording here. So often I only see either “all men are irredeemable and trying to argue any other point means you hate women” or “we need to stop being so mean to men, there is no pattern to their actions as a result of their socialization and you’re crazy for feeling wary around them” and I feel like you did a really good job validating those of us who ARE wary of men for very good reasons and ALSO questioning this assumption that the girl side of things is inherently better. No more harmful binaries, it’s not all or none. It’s both in different degrees
Word, I know someone who is wary of black men specifically and your comment made her feel less racist.
@@chrisbartolini1508wtf 🤡
@@chrisbartolini1508 hmm I mean if it’s because traumatic experiences then yeah that’s understandable but if it’s just from the general demonization of black men and fear mongering around them as a demographic then I’m sorry but your friend’s fears are not valid at all. Obvi I don’t know you or her but I just want to be clear in what I’m encouraging
I agree. It’s so demoralizing to assume that men are all evil no matter what. At the same time, socialization teaches men that acting a certain way is good and acceptable, which unfortunately tends to allow sexism and violence and prohibits softness and kindness. Even if sex does impact your behavior to a certain extent, socialization impacts it SO MUCH MORE.
@@zo_mi_di this is not the bullet you wanna bite my dude
Knowing that Gabriel Attal is seemingly popular abroad is something I didn't want to know today.
😂😂
Who?
@@AtheistEveour hot gay snaggletoothed new prime minister
Not SO popular - I've never heard of her! (& Hope not to again 😂)
@@AtheistEve the new french prime Minister, who's a gay man yet very reactionary.
Not to be essentialist, but I feel like Western Europe has a tendency to this liberal fascism. We’re seeing a rise of politicians that flex their countries liberal tendencies as a cudgel against the oriental other. From Douglas Murray to Geert Wilders, we see xenophobic elements of European politics flaunt progressive values that were hard fought for by the people in their society and saying that they’re “Western Values.” In order for Europe to not fall to very scary racist ideology, they must think past the “civilized” liberalism that they tout so strongly.
fascism is always going to be the end state of liberalism. Just like liberalism failed in the 1930s and eventually led to the rise of fascism, we're seeing neoliberalism fail now and witnessing the rise of neofascism. It's not that west europe has a particular lean to it. Hell, Poland and Hungary and Turkey are a lot closer to it than western europe at the moment. It's just that instead of recognizing the systemic issues with liberalism and coming to the conclusion that we need to replace it with something better, we double down, find scapegoats and make some small sacrifices (like democracy) to preserve the core of liberal values (in the economic sense). Because fascism doesn't actually have any negative consequences for the ruling class.
Fascism is ingrained within liberalism, Adorno and Horkeimer already proved so (and history has proven them right again again) in dialectic of enlightenment
Many have said that Fascism is an inherent foundational aspect of Western consciousness. Their entire identity is built on exclusion and oppression, within over four centuries of exploitation of the global south, this idea therefore makes sense to me. Look at the base differences with how they covered European Ukrainian refugees versus Middle Eastern Syrians. Their notions of being a "garden" to the rest of the world, the others, "jungle" speaks truth about their perceptions and how they apply their so called values. They cannot think past the notions you stated, it and the exceptionalism they feel through it and their history as Europeans, is at the core of their understanding of reality. It cannot be altered, only shattered.
Lol typical communist projection@@catStone92
Yes, thats spot on. It also mixes with neocolonialism. These countries might act like they have overcome colonialism, but in their views about other countries, the same attitudes that once led to colonialism prevail: claiming other countries are uncivilsed, have no culture, that western values are better etc. Compared with straight up racism.
I love this channel. It's a great way to de-stress while also hearing about social issues. Your voice and personality is very relaxing.
As an Italian... That intro was... spectacular. I swear I need this government to fall so bad 💀
As somebody who has been closely connected with Italy in various ways all her life, I have to say that this government is not nearly as bad as some before it or as bad as some people, me included, had feared it would be. She'd doing pretty well, actually imho.
@@laraklemencic9471 idk I live hear I voted for the first time 2 years ago, but my mom says it's one of the worst government she's been under in her lifetime, and she's 55
i honestly did not expect that 😭
I love your profile picture!! where is it from?
@@kiwinymph idk from an artist on twitter but I don't remember their user, I'm sorry 😭
It boggles my mind how you were able to cover so much material so clearly in 20 minutes!
Clearly???? Clearly nonsense you mean.
It’s so visible in even our everyday language. We literally have the terms “mama's boy” and “daddy's girl” which, while sounding extremely similar, represent entirely different expectations. A daddy's girl needs to be protected at all costs, no rogue boy can ever break her heart. A mama's boy is expected to defend the honor of his mother at all costs, and failure to do so is emasculating. Hell, the term "daddy's girl" has even taken a sexual turn in meaning which further exposes that the perception of women/femininity as society developed it to this point is that of ownership at its foundation.
It's women calling men daddy stfu
I feel your "mama's boy" definition is slightly missing something. I've rarely seen it used to describe a son "defending the honour of their mother". Far more often it is used to negatively portray a male who has been "molly-coddled" ...and thereby had their "natural manly virtues" of independence and physical courage "corrupted" by the over-protectiveness of their mother... to the degree that they have become"feminized" and increasingly useless in the imagined traditional male social capacity. This was a very very common negative trope as portrayed in popular culture across the middle decades of the twentieth century. There was a great fear regarding the softening and feminisation of male youth within consumer society... With Hitchcock's Psycho being a high point in popular hysteria.
I think the way you described "Mama's boy" & "daddy's girl" is very distorted & is still very inline with how bourgeois feminists see the world, & I think you need to self reflect fast, before you fall for any ideological booby traps like that, since I don't think you get the full context at all, & are just repeating the ills of bourgeois feminism.
Often people (self-proclaimed "left-wing" liberals) tell me the world, or the country, would be better with women in charge, because they're essentially more peaceful, patient, kind, and empathetic than men (I'm Italian, by the way. These people were almost as excited for Meloni's victory as her own supporters, because first female council president guys !!!). I always respond with one sentence: "Maggie. Liz. Giorgia." That shuts them up very quickly.
I always wonder what those kinds of people are even fighting for. If men are innately worse people then women why do they waste effort trying to educate, convince, or even coexist with us? I see many types of activists say the same "inherently bad" thing about countless groups but I can't see the logic in believing a people is lesser than you morally but striving to get enough of their collective approval to make change. Wouldn't it be better to just collect among yourselves and try to be as independent as possible? (I know such things exist but they're niche and thought of as insane even for most within their movement)
@nyshyn307 that is like asking why anyone would riot to take back a city that's under martial law instead of just fleeing into the woods to live on twigs and berries. It is obvious: most resources exist in mainstream society. Trying to be separate would basically mean cutting ourselves off from all that, and even leaving behind resources we helped create and bolstered. Plus, a lot of women are straight.
@Aelffwynn it'd be more like fighting to take back the entire country. The issue I'm describing isn't people who think patriarchy is bad, it's those that think men are entirely on the fact of them being men. If that's the belief someone holds then separation, as much as one could do, would be the only real choice. Otherwise, you're in a state of constantly fighting for gains you don't even believe are sufficient. Ideas of that sort is why some Pro-Black activists believed that black people should never integrate with white people: it wouldn't do anything
I'm not saying that's the correct belief but if one is to believe coexistence is impossible because it's a net negative on one party, or those in the position of power are innately bad and that's unchangable, then I can't see how you justify trying to "educate" or "grab power" within their system
Purtroppo molti hanno pensato che la vittoria della Meloni sia stata una conquista femminista. Quanto si sbagliavano...
La sinistra italiana è inefficace e praticamente uno specchio della sua controparte liberale sulla sponda opposta a livello di geopolitica, ma non capirò mai cosa porta la gente a votare contro i propri interessi. Conosco persone che per 'dare una lezione' al PD/M5S hanno votato Meloni solo per affossarli.
Più ci rifletto e più non capisco.
Women are more productive in the work place, are better drivers, better surgeons, better leaders. I you say "Maggie. Liz. Giorgia." I say "Nicholas II. Hirohito. Nixon."
Classic and common Alice W
You didn't even watch yet
@@BsskhwvshJust finished it. That was a W from Alice if I ever seen one.
@@marcelcjr9313 i haven't watched yet but classic and common alice w
@@marcelcjr9313
She's a brazen pseudo-intellectual. The fact that you think she wins is telling of your intelligence or lack thereof.
@@sopronunciareglignocchi7255
where did she miss? Wanna point out exactly what she got wrong or do you just wanna throw insults at her because you disagree with her opinions?
7:55 as an Iraqi 23yrs old girl , thank you Alice for this segment and many
Loved your video and your perspective.
It seems obvious after I listen to you saying it, but the idea of "they are actually defending that the population should be submissive" when the liberals say "men are violent, women aren't" while meaning that this is an essential distinction between men and women is an idea that I've never thought about.
My focus was always in the narrative of "men are more violent because that's how our society defined men, as essentially violent", because when we usually talk about violence we don't ask if that violence was morally right (like rioting after police brutality).
Thank you for giving me a new perspective to think about society and the world.
It's the first video of yours that the algorithm gave me, so now I'm a subscriber.
The word problematic is problematic, in that it is usually used to condemn things implicitly, based on emotional tenor, without suggesting the reason why it should be condemned
As it's frequently the case (and very practical to avoid deploying solid reasoning) throughout this low quality video.
Basically : "You're on thin ice for reasons I'm pulling out of my arse, buster."
While I agree using “problematic” without further development of the premise can obscure arguments and hinder discussion, in this video I believe Alice uses the word twice and in both cases the word does not obscure her critique.
1. 2:13 “So the variation of the Overton window means that an opinion that was once deemed problematic can become neutral, acceptable over time.” In this case the use is literally discussing ideas that are not acceptable becoming acceptable so further details of what exactly is problematic are completely not relevant. This is not the use case I’ve described above where I would agree with you.
2. 7:24 “But the way her feminine values are used to sort of downplay violent acts is problematic to me. Here is a list of all the bad things she’s done. So she voted for the Iraq war…” In this case, Alice follows her use of “problematic” immediately with examples, to prove her point that using feminism to describe Clinton as peaceful, good, nonviolent is a shield that obscures her violent acts. Her argument is that we should not accept that this is truly feminism and that to blindly accept all women’s acts as feminism hurts others. Alice says that this is inconsistent with feminist literature. Thus, by following her use of “problematic” with an explanation, I don’t find her use of the word to be harmful or meeting the parameters I outlined above.
If you have further critiques, please explain them better with evidence.
Well, if I deem something as 'problematic' it just means that a certain issue raises problems to me (f.e. a contradiction with other statements of the same origin or ethical problems etc.). And if you state these logical or ethical problems in addition to saying "x is problematic" I do not see an issue with using that word. In this case Alice clearly states that the peace-making, caring public image of Hillary Clinton stands in contradiction with her political ideology and actions and therefore raises (logical) problems.
You do realize that the word "usually" is a typical weasel word?
This was such an interesting watch, and you explained a lot of things I've been observing and thinking about perfectly!
Great video Alice! Here in Argentina we have a "liberal" president with a female vicepresident that its against women´s right and used to visit Videla (the last dictator of Argentina in the 70´) in prison. But somehow for the women that voted them, she is "empowering"....
This was so informative and thoughtful and important. Thank you so much.
Thank you 💖
Je découvre ta chaine et ton travail avec cette video, c'est vraiment passionnant ! Merci pour cette video qui cerne bien tous les enjeux de ce sujet complexe, et pour ton travail de sourcer toutes tes informations, ça m'a donné envie d'aller lire ces articles et livres pour en savoir plus ✨️
I heard a quote somewhere talking about privilege. It was something along the lines of that in every situation people will back on whatever privilege serves them the strongest in a moment. So what I see here are wealthy white women falling back onto their class privilege and white privilege when addressing an issue. Instead of seeing things for what they are, they see it through the lens of preserving white and wealth privilege.
I live in a super wealthy area so I've encountered a lot of that. A lot of those people balk at the idea and say "I'm not doing that! I've never thought that way in my entire life!"... but nobody ever said it was a conscious, deliberate decision. Of course it's not.. it's subtle and built in to the way one perceives the world and the people in it. Most people try to do the right thing when they can; the issue is that privilege can change what constitutes "the right thing", and how one goes about actually _doing_ the right thing to such an extent that it becomes the *wrong* thing. People have a really hard time with self-reflection.. especially well-off people. So many of them fall into the trap of "well I'm doing great, so obviously I must be doing the right thing" despite that making literally zero sense.
(that's kinda the thing with lenses, I suppose: if you leave them on your face for long enough, you forget they're even there! Ok tbh I'm really proud of myself for coming up with that on the spot 😂)
There is no such thing as “privilege” get it out your head. Everybody has unique advantages and that’s ok. Most eventually are earned in time and lost if you do not maintain the values that brought you the advantage.
What you call “white privilege” in your mind is wealthy people keeping the values that kept them there . why would you logically work against values that bring you wealth.
Obviously female privilege
This is completely pure gold! Thatcher was another example of cruelty for us. Thank you for putting deep content on the internet and cut through this mainstream ideas.
"Do you think [Margaret Thatcher] effectively utilised girl power by funnelling money into illegal paramilitary death squads in Northern Ireland?" - Eric Andre
This is the best video I’ve seen in a long time. Bravo!! 🤍
Hello Alice! love your sense of humour ! and beyond blessed to have you critically discuss timely topics!
A meta analysis just came out from The Lancet Public Health showing a direct relationship between poverty and poor mental health and increased major life stress, i feel like this reinforces your points. You should check it out
These 3 books cover this exact topic:
The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger
The Inner Level: How More Equal Societies Reduce Stress, Restore Sanity and Improve Everyone’s Well-Being
The New Human Rights Movement: Reinventing the Economy to End Oppression
These are required reading for my policies.
Discovered your channel thanks to this video and the algorithm!!
Thank you so much for this video!!!! As a colonial subject of the United States I was told to shut up and not complain about Hillary Clinton’s policies related to Puerto Rico in 2016, before a major hurricane put us on the map.
In fact, it has been hard to talk to liberal feminists, even within the academy during the difficult political times of the last few years. It is complicated and I understand their terror (as a brown woman, the few remaining rights have been quickly vanishing).
Also, thank you for bringing in intersectionality.
When HIllary ran against Obama, a whole boatload of white folk didn't want to vote for her because of Iraq. Eight years later, a whole boatload of white folk nominated her for president. The American electorate has the memory the size of a guppy.
Fascinating discussion. I learned a lot.
I think there is a problem with the notion that masculinity equates to conflict.
While I think there is some truth to the notion that men are more inherently conflict driven, it’s a stretch to say conflict happens as result of this phenomenon.
Generally speaking, I think conflict arises when diplomacy fails, and that isn’t an issue that can be alleviated by the sex of either party.
In other words, diplomacy is not an all encompassing solution.
There will always be cases in which diplomacy won’t (or can’t), meet the needs of a given party, and conflict will be the only option for that party.
You can’t just throw femininity at that problem, and expect it to resolve for that reason alone.
Meanwhile, women's social hierarchies include and incite some of the most intense and vicious conflicts.
It's this onesided perception that needs to be let go of, in order for feminism to become anything other than a movement of hate.
Excellent video, Alice. I was reminded, by your discussion of the different ways in which men and woman are treated in the criminal justice system, of Davis' 'Are Prisons Obsolete?' where she describes how women's crime is pathologized. A couple great quotes:
"It is true that men who commit the kinds of transgressions that are regarded as punishable by the state are labeled as social deviants. Nevertheless, masculine criminality has always been deemed more 'normal' than feminine criminality."
"While jails and prisons have been dominant institutions for the control of men, mental institutions have served a similar purpose for women. That is, deviant men have been constructed as criminal, while deviant women have been constructed as insane."
"Psychiatric drugs continue to be distributed far more extensively to imprisoned women than to their male counterparts."
"If male criminals were considered to be public individuals who had simply violated the social contract, female criminals were seen as having transgressed fundamental moral principles of womanhood."
She goes on to talk about how many of the proposed and established systems of punishment for women who had committed crimes mirrored domestic labor and were a kind of 'reset' to the supposed womanly duties these women had fallen away from.
Very well spoken. Any time a group goes to extremes it will always lead to a feeling of superiority over the other. This is toxic no matter who is doing it. We are all human.
How cool must It be being able to quote your own book
ahaha
Hey Alice have u considered doing longer videos? They are really good but I always feel like there is so much more to talk about
While it is true that in wars the vast majority of those who participate in it are men in the army, to say that women are left asking for peace while men wage war is to disassociate the participation of women in war, because Women participate indirectly while men participate directly. Also, doesn't this establish a dualism of Women = peaceful versus Men = violent?
1Dime has an outstanding video in which he deconstruct the idea of "centrism". Highly recommended
PS: I've always thought that you doing a collab with OliSunVia would be an excellent idea
I feel like this is the logical extension of that one time you talked about ‘choice feminism’.
Agreed. Is there a description on which branch or sect of feminism she'd refer to her thinking as? I'm not familiar with many other creators with takes like these and would love to look into it
@@nyshyn307 Sorry. Wish I could help you with that.
@@PokhrajRoy. all good, maybe someone else will come along and know
@nyshyn307 Since she mentioned Bourgeois and Liberal Feminism and criticizes it, my educational guess of her brand of feminism is something similar to Proletariat/Marxist or Socialist Feminism.
@@senseibeastcr Marx wasn't a feminist
I just found this channel
It’s amazing! I love the way you speak about these issues the way you analyze them in such a nuanced way! Keep it up! We need more grey online
This is the earliest I've ever been to one of your videos and I'm so ready to see your take on this 👀💖
Hope you like it :)
Is that ur real picture
@@sciencifyingtheworld ...weird
Very thought-provoking video. Thank you. I like how everything is so well-explained and called out. My only issue was not going into such a polarizing issue as bourgeois feminism's relationship with the LGBTQ community,in particular,with trans women,where we REALLY see how bourgeois feminism becomes exclusionary, dehumanizing and authoritarian (of course,in the name of what they call "preserving femininity"), although I'm sure that's an entire video in itself
This! 💓
17:07 Nice to see Rani Lakshmibai added to the ranks. Also, the British colonialists used her example to assert colonial masculinity which in turn created a reactionary masculinity.
so good, you helped me put together all my scattered thoughts on liberal feminism and class issues
I don't think that Reeves argues that inequalities are working in reverse nowadays. Rather, his point is that men are suffering because they lack a vision, an example to follow. While women are emancipating themselves and becoming more financially independent, men are stuck with their fathers and grandfathers as role models, meaning that they are unable to "keep up" with this inevitably changing society. I think that he's actually making a huge point in favour of feminism, that is, that even men would benefit from a more equal, less patriarchal society (which he also says explicitly in the book and interviews).
We don't have a patriarchal society. Women are the protected special gender whose authority is almost automatic and who is believed without needing reason.
I have been struggling to make this point in the comments section in a respectful manner as you did, thank you. I truly believe that his work is a strong basis for educating a less violent, more egalitarian and better adapted man that celebrates the achievements of women’s rights. Alice’s points about class and ethnicity really nail it as well, but within the context of mental health and better preparing young men to live in a world where they need to create new models to thrive in, I believe that she misses the point of Reeves’ work.
Wrong
@@CamaradaCJ Great point, thx!
Indeed, Reeves' suggested solutions are also much more on the progressive end, including letting boys start a year later with school (he lists some pros and cons of the idea), encouraging men to go into teaching and nursing, and investment in male vocational training. Hardly the stuff of matriarchal conspiracy...
Wow this was so insightful.
I wonder if there is an additional layer of what I would call "grumpy feminism" that is the counterpart to the incel movement. A group of basically unpolitical persons, that like to label their everyday personal struggles, interpersonal conflicts and self doubts with big words because they like to be heard. Not every conflict with a person of the other gender is sign of the patriarchy. The other person might be actually grumpy to everyone or you are just perceiving it negatively because you are grumpy.
I know it sounds like a reduction and its certainly not everyone, but it also happens.
they're grumpy bc of what men do, and being hypervigilant means they might misperceive sometimes, not all the time
While I genuinely don’t disagree on the existence of people who are exactly as you’ve described, I think there’s still too much generality with your definition for “grumpy feminism”, it doesn’t provide any specificity to how someone would discern these women from those with valid grievances. The definition’s vagueness would make it too easy for another individual’s political illiteracy/ignorance to result in them mislabeling another person’s valid grievance as just another “grumpy feminist”.
Additionally, what you’ve described isn’t a counterpart to male incels. I know “Incel” gets thoughtlessly tossed around as a generic insult but the definition of Incel encompasses a very specific view of the world, not just general woe-is-me grumpiness.
Incels view themselves as unjustifiably bereaved by women, stemming from a belief that a man should be able to “earn” or be “deserving of” access to women (access to their romantic affection and sexual access to their bodies). An Incel feels entitled to the encroachment of another human being’s (specifically a woman’s) self determination and bodily autonomy.
So while Incels have a faulty premise behind their claim to victimisation, it’s based on a real obstruction that comes from the very real very existence of a woman’s self sovereignty. Their issue isn’t that they’ve imagined a nonexistent force standing between them and what they want, it’s that they resent, want to invalidate and overrule the very real thing presently obstructing them.
Where as, what you’ve described as “grumpy feminism” involves someone who is misusing if not knowingly weaponising political terminology to give the false veneer of validity to their claim to be a victim to an otherwise nonexistent obstruction.
@@Sanakudou yeah these are valid points. The term could be misused and the comparison to incels is not really fitting. I guess the key indicator is if there is really (how convenient, just referring to objective reality) a bias in someone's perception before labeling them as patriarchal. Stupidity, mistakes or lack of knowledge could be reasons too (and in turn CAN be results of patriarchy, but there needs to be a difference between direct and indirect or involuntary discrimination). The comparison to incels is just in regard to over-representing or widening the divide between the genders instead of referring to a shared humanity and a shared enemy of class oppression.
Both are hurting their proclaimed goal by the way. Both bringing a lot of negative attention that ultimately is counter productive because they present the movement as outside the Overton window
If you think the two are the same, you should also think that poc people who make "white people be like" memes are the same as police violence and white supremacists or your a hypocrite. One is mean, the other KILLS
I'm here for the overton window and other technicalities
The funny thing is that trying to educate guys with a model built for women is causing frustrations, and causings a rise in criminality. It is an ironic vicious circle. The better move would have been to hone on the recurrent traits among guys, and aloow them to put them to good use (ex: manual labour, respectful sparring in boxing, etc...). If there is one thing I learned from myself and other guys, is that we predominantly get motivated by competition, fucking around and finding out and using our hands. Men just don't like to play safe and docile for the most part, and a gynocentric school system that doesn't seek to guide men to use their recurrent inner attributes to constructive potential is a recipe for unhinged violence.
Thank you for telling us about the Overton Window- that's so freaking useful & interesting
Quite a lot of social scientists would call it an oversimplification of complex social and political dynamics. Because it is.
@@DmitryFromForest Thanks for mansplaining Kevin- always appreciate a man's perspective- yearning for it even- so thank you for relieving me
@@DmitryFromForestit's useful as an instructive tool. It's only an oversimplification if it can't be expanded upon in pedagogy. Then it's just a simplification, which isn't always bad
@@kerycktotebag8164precisely. Lots of people love to claim things are oversimplified just to dismiss them because they don't like the overarching point being made.
@@punkybrewstar83 I'm sorry, are you suggesting that a female political scientist's critique of the "Overton window" theory would be more valid than mine? Or are you implying that a female political scientist would not speak up and share her critique, even if she believed it was important to do so? Isn't labeling my comment as "mansplaining" a form of sexist ad hominem?
Putting aside rhetoric, I believe it is important (and professionally ethical) to warn about the critiques of the "Overton window" theory in the comments, especially when it is not mentioned in the video and there are many enthusiasts who want to learn more about this theory. My main argument, as I have already stated, is that the "Overton window" is an oversimplification of more complex social and political dynamics, and it may lead to incorrect conclusions (as is often the case with oversimplification in science, especially in social science). This is exactly why many conspiracy theorists like to talk about "Overton windows".
Please forgive me if anything I have said could have been phrased better.
1:42 Jubilee Jumpscare
jubilee is downright terrifying. I can't watch it without absolutely destroying my mental state.
The entire time it's just "no.. NO. People cannot be that gullible, can they? OH GOD THEY ARE" over and over and over. I hate it so much lol
@@idontwantahandlethough You are not alone in that sentiment
Thank you so much for this video. It is incredibly important for widening and deepening the discourse around feminism.
Im not gonna pretend like I know anything substantial about feminism or that Im familiar with 100% of what you explained in the video. However, your honest and authentic way of expressing your thoughts and also the intelligent yet careful research you made caught my immediate attention. I have a knack to simplify the discussions that are going on today even though I know it carries more nuance than a surface level assumption. It's intelligent and eloquent people like you that help simple minded people like me to understand the depth behind crucial matters.
This came like a breath of fresh air today. Misogyny and sexism condition women to be accepting of the situation they are given, even if it means denying their needs and feelings.
While it’s natural to reject that impulse, this toxic kind of assimilationist feminism seems to just be playing the same game somehow. Like somehow, no option(neither the resurgent second wave feminism you are describing here nor the man-o-sphere) supports the idea that all human autonomy is real and important.
Thanks again for voicing these ideas in this context.
I don't think true human autonomy is feasible, maybe a trans-human one. Accepting a societal role comes with benefits and protections, and the female sex needs (and is guaranteed) those more. I cannot conceive of an egalitarian anarchy or similar construct.
“Misogyny and sexism”
At this point I don’t even know what these terms mean anymore .
So glad this was recommended to me :) And thank you for making a passing reference to Rani Lakshmi Bai... It isn't usual for me to hear foreigners make references to Indian Freedom Fighters.
i got arrested at a sit in at my school for palestine - people like to act like im radical and crazy for it but in my head i'm like "i could be doing so much worse"
hey! it's awesome that you did that :) you're also totally right lol
Does Israel have the right to exist or not? And within what borders?
@@penultimateh766 people definately hold Israel to standards they would never hold themselves to.
@@penultimateh766 Do the Palestinian people have a right to exist?
@@PamperedDuchess Yes, but that does not mean Israel has to let the Palestinians automatically win every war they start.
Got my dose of Yapping from alice for this month
These are complex issues, I love sociology, watched to the end❤
You posed a question about the men going into the streets to cause violence and assert dominance, and just before that I thought "Does anyone ever ask us 'power hungry dominance seeking men' why there are times where we are violent?" I'm not a violent man by nature, but there have been times in my life where something happened to me that I became so angry that I punched a wall or broke something. Does that mean deep down I was looking for power and to dominate? Absolutely not. It's sometimes easier to lean into your raw emotions and react viscerally than to rationalize your thoughts and feelings and then reflect on them, especially when we're young and haven't been taught to do anything else.
It seems on the surface that a lot of these opinions and books come up with theories without actually talking to men about their experiences and emotions.
In the same situations I've seen women react violently, too.
Heck, the scale tends to be much larger than just hurting your hand on a wall once, and often target people around them.
Men being more violent than women is a myth.
The pattern is different, that's all.
@@sneezyfidodude, is not a myth. Is just you wanting to convince people of that yo make men the "better ones" when all the data point to the contrary. Rape, violent crimes, genocide, warcrimes,domestic violence, anger management, mirder, torture, etc. All crimes tipicaly done by men and rarely by women.
Anectodes are not science. Just stories.
It’s almost as if its all made up
Merci beaucoup pour ta vidéo, qui synthétise plein de bouts d’idées que j’avais dans la tête, et qui se relient aussi à mes réflexions sur la pertinence de la binarité des genres dans la société, qui n’est pas seulement pertinente pour les libertés des sexualité mais aussi pour l’égalité et/ou equité entre toustes les humain·e·s.
Chaque vidéos sont vraiment super à regarder, bien construites et alimentées de références, pas trop longues, merciiii pour ton contenu !! Ha et super de parler de Léo et son travail hehe
This is so brilliantly set forth. I’m a woman born at very tail end of Baby Boom who mostly hung out with Gen X. Thank you for identifying the Prime Directive that I was handed and, consequently, lived by all my adult life: DO NOT SUBMIT.
Right now, I’m feeling the tragedy of loss. I could’ve lived a life that embraced my feminine strengths and traits more than I did. It’s strange how I’m suddenly seeing that my “freedom” was yet an oppression. Again. Still. In another guise. A different flavor.
First time watcher here. I really enjoyed the video, great work.
bonjour! this was a rlly well produced and informative video. as someone w an interest in politics and studying french i think i might have found a new favourite channel
Bonjour means good morning not hello
@@kant.68are you even french? Shut up
Omg now I understand why I was excluded for some "feminist" groups (clearly bourgeois and neoliberal) because I wasn't soft & feminine (submissive) enough and I didn't though men were like this or that. I understand several things now. There are really many different kind of feminism and true one is not that classist and exclusive. Thanks for this video, it is enlightening. 😊
There’s no such thing as a singular Overton window with social media. People live in their polarized bubbles, with their own Overton window. Algorithms are designed that way to maximize engagement. It’s what caused the disagreement on who won the latest election the US, people on both sides are dissociated from reality. Problem is, there should be more than two sides.
The violent resistance of modern women for a variety of social causes has been vital but completely overlooked historically or seen as insignificant, when it was significant but was showing they were active participaters in society a space reserved for men especially so in the era between enlightenment and universal suffrage
I just found your channel. I really appreciate your videos please keep the good work you’re doing.
As an Arab woman I was always appalled by the racist stereotypical view on Arab men. I got my Master degree and established my own company. I am also a mother of 4. I will never be able to achieve where I am now without the support of my family and the tender love and encouragement of them.
They try to impose western values on other culture, and no one ever thought that maybe no one asked for it?
Reminder, violent oppression will create violent resistance. Violence may not be the most productive way to resolve issues and will cause significant harm to those even not directly involved in the violence, but violent resistance can't be critiqued while violent oppression is justified. The responsibility and accountability for resolving the violence sits with the oppressor, not the resistance. Rulers propagandize a paradigm where their violence is deemed righteous (both domestically and globally) while the response violence is barbaric. The West routinely does this. Israel's Hasbara (and pro-Israel states/media) and 'law and order' rhetoric and framing are prime examples. That state, a structure controlled by the ruling class, wants a monopoly on violence to maintain status quo. Any other violence is vilified as terrorism, rioting, lawlessness, etc. It places blame for violence on the reaction to injustice and violence, not on the cause of the reaction.
Bingo ! .
If you were not antiwhite, you'd go to jail for this statement. This proves that the regime is antiwhite, and Whites are the ones being oppressed.
@@unruffledhomelander what an enlightened centrist take, well done (/s)
An Enlightened centrist liberal. Here to tell us, slaves rising against their slave masters is "just as bad" as slavery. Lol
@@velasericousland2443 The fact he decided to create an account using Homelander as his inspiration makes his comment even more absurd.
Famous Last Words: “We have a lot of overthinking to do today.”
What else feminist can do?😂
@@ultimate6243 , self reflect.
@@inbb510 But that would require the mirror, and they tend to prefer the finger.
The Center Ground is the interplay point between discussing the advantages and disadvantages of ideas and proposals and thus progressing them. It doesn't move.
Great video, Alice! Though I think these liberal feminists aren't exactly being "gender essentialists." I'm sure they're probably referring to how men are socialized to be violent, not that men are inherently violent due to biology or something like that - it's a foundational belief of feminism. Still, your critique of how they reduce things to just gender is spot on. Love your videos.
Eh I wouldn’t be so sure. Many gender critical feminists ascribe to the belief that men are biologically hardwired to be predatory and violent.
Not all men are inherently violent, but the overwhelming majority of violent people are men and there are biological underpinnings for that.
Another banger from Alice 🎉 Your videos keep me on my toes and help me to be a better educated person.
I'll be picking up a copy of collapse feminism soon for sure!