Sustainable and Active Feminism = Incompatible?

Consumption and sustainable and responsible diet tips daily to reduce energy and water consumption, waste ... Eat: preparations and recipes, find healthy food, seasonal and local conservation information food ...
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Sustainable and Active Feminism = Incompatible?




by Christophe » 18/02/10, 12:16

According to this "lady" one cannot be a modern woman and have a lasting behavior ... The title alone is shameful.

Because here, we wonder who are the real terrorists there ... forgive the realthe terrorists ...

Terrorisme =

Terrorism is the deliberate use of violence (attacks, assassinations, kidnappings, etc.) for political ends, so that their psychological repercussions - terror and fear - go far beyond the circle of direct victims to strike massively public opinion concerned


So where are the wastes and washable diapers removed?

Elisabeth Badinter, against the terrorism of washable diapers

Starting a few days after the BHL surge, we must prepare to undergo a Badinter (Elisabeth) surge. The philosopher publishing a book, France Inter opens to him, today Thursday, all its antenna, from the morning interview, to the Telephone rings in the evening. For one day, France Inter becomes Radio Badinter, promoting Badinterian thinking to the status of official thinking. If we understand his interview with Demorand, Badinter is protesting today against the implicit injunction, which would be made to mothers since the beginning of the crisis, to go home, to give up working, to breastfeed their children , prepare organic broccoli for them rather than serve them ready-made small pots, and return to washable diapers, preferably disposable diapers (non-biodegradable, of course, but whose invention, according to Badinter, marked a decisive advance in '' female emancipation).

Why not ? We have to debate everything. We have the right to oppose ecology to feminism, women's rights to those of nature, and to explore, between the two, oppositions or contradictions. We have every right to argue that female emancipation goes through work. But one little thing is embarrassing every time Badinter returns to the public eye. A detail. Three times nothing. But all the same. One of his "caps", as they say, is never recalled by fascinated interviewers (and yet not by Demorand, prior to his interview this morning): in addition to his esteemed activity as a philosopher and writer, Elisabeth Badinter , daughter and heiress of Marcel Bleustein-Blanchet, founder of Publicis, is today the second shareholder, and the president of the supervisory board of the multinational advertising company.

This obviously does not deprive her of the right to think, and to write. We can reign on the four-color pages of magazines, on the soft porn posters of bus shelters, and make a profession of philosophizing on female emancipation. You can, and Badinter's constancy testifies to the sincerity of his convictions. But this double status has always generated, in Baden-Baden philosophical production, a blind spot: the violence of the advertising injunction made to women. Cream yourself morning and evening, depilate yourself to look like porn actresses, be as thin as the skeletons that you see parading in the fashion pages, and consume, consume, consume, buy, heat the checkbook, to be finally perfectly, totally liberated. Seen from my male early morning window, this injunction, which unfolds on each back of a kiosk, on every street corner, seems at least as terrorist as the injunction to go home, and to return to the washable diapers. But Badinter, advertising philosopher, does not see it.


http://www.arretsurimages.net/vite.php?id=7135

This woman has apparently never been pregnant ... and we would like to lobby roundabout for pamp € rs that we would not do better ... but no, it is impossible on the part of an advertiser not... : Cheesy:

Go trash direction ...

Equality between men has never existed other than on paper ... after there are more or less great inequalities ... but never one man has been equal to another (not even the real twins) ... : Mrgreen:
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 21/02/10, 20:30

There is something unpleasant to argue about the original environment in a debate of ideas ...
Admittedly, I do not deny the influence of the personal context, but it is a characteristic of the freedom of the spirit to be freed from particularisms and to rise to more universal considerations.

I would not defend the disposable diapers, you will understand it easily, however, I can understand that this lady, taking note of a current inequality in the distribution of domestic tasks can make this choice, which is therefore only relative to a particular situation.

I think that Elisabeth Badinter's position is clear: the problem is not to prefer work to children, but to have the possibility of escaping a determinism which would condemn women to work, childbirth or anorexia.

As far as equality is concerned, it seems to me that you are making an unfortunate confusion: the fact that we are all unique has nothing to do with inequality.
Our equality comes from the fact that we are all, in the same way, human beings.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 02/03/10, 20:23

Indeed, after examination, I think that you are entirely right (mea culpa!), this lady has clearly not "freed herself from her particularisms" and presents the obvious features of the usual schizophrenia.
Considering the "values" it promotes, I understand better that some women in Europe are tempted, by reaction, to wear the burqa!
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 02/03/10, 20:26

I had not read your first reaction ...

Pkoi there such a change of opinion my dear Ahmed?
0 x
User avatar
vinzman
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 193
Registration: 01/07/09, 16:35
Location: Quebec




by vinzman » 02/03/10, 20:58

damn, imagine the women who are going to buy her book! After having finished reading the masterpiece (and taking into account that they have drunk Badinter's words), they will even less know who they are!
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 02/03/10, 21:34

Image
1 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 02/03/10, 22:31

My first "version" was more formal, the second more detailed; it is only fools who do not change their minds! :?
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Sustainable and active feminism = incompatible?




by Christophe » 15/03/16, 21:32

Relaunch of topic!

Attention gentlemen, feminism is fast approaching!

Heard 2 days ago on the radio:

a) "women have their 'revenge' to take on men to change the world, they are much more apt to do so than men in today's world"

b) "that 22 centuries that we take full face by you"

Personal remarks:

a) A bit presumptuous, right? All current men are therefore incompetent (completely logical reasoning on the part of a feminist who thinks that the man is a big shit ... it is not the parity which they want but the crushing)

b) 22 centuries ??? Nope??? No kidding!!! Is that out of the hated Madam? So men just started being macho assholes in the year 0 ???? Or only under Julius Caesar?

Either .... that's it for the facts ... note that such comments inverted would undoubtedly have pushed feminist associations to make lawsuits ... undoubtedly ... equality you say?

What I mean is that:

What I notice in everyday life, with my friends and friends: it is currently the woman who (often after having had at least one child) creates the ruptures, who breaks the social fabric and the family unit ... without the guy opposite being an "asshole" !! And society agrees with them, they know it well and take advantage of it!

Fact found in 8 out of 10 cases ...

There should be a law that penalizes breakups with young children, under 3 years old ... (except in extreme cases with big assholes or big assholes: violence, drugs ...)

Only society has become so generous and protective of 'poor) "women" that (good bad) dads can, of course, only be big assholes ...

Ah yes there was a "revenge" to take and shit, bad luck, it falls on my generation! You assholes, you are destroying society !!
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Sustainable and active feminism = incompatible?




by Ahmed » 15/03/16, 22:44

From the moment we accept that groups of people are recognized as being part of a particular typology, social determinisms are put in place which lead to antagonisms. Social classes are an example of this and it would be futile to hope to reconcile opposing interests, unless we achieve a homogeneity that suppresses them.
In the case of gender differentiation, which is also old, we must not forget that the antagonisms have long been denied, under pressure from society, which has never prevented the suffering, then inaudible, of women, without forgetting what it distorted (figuratively) the role imposed, hollow, on male partners.
It does not seem that the situation is completely resolved and the uneasiness probably comes from this entanglement of unconscious tradition and wobbly modernity. It is not from this period of instability and without structuring objectives that we must wait for pacification.
At the social level, resignation often prevails, for lack of a promising project and because of the ideological shelling of the dominant camp; within couples, the "standard" model no longer really responds to ill-defined expectations, but which are expressed at least negatively as "different".
JP Sartre, in the preface toAden Arabie say very harsh words, about the couple, when they mention "the solitude of promiscuityWhy, in a world that is going badly, would people be okay?
1 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Sustainable and active feminism = incompatible?




by Ahmed » 16/03/16, 10:17

We must not forget the underlying trend, which is the tropism towards the individual to the detriment of the person, the latter defining itself in relation to its relationships with others. In this individualism, which is promoted by powerful interests, social atomization reduces the interactions between individuals to selfish and opportunistic calculations, therefore subject to reversal. This is all the more so since interest alone cannot make society and that, considered from the most limited angle, it inevitably offers only what the ideology of unlimited desire can offer: dissatisfaction and frustration.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Sustainable consumption: responsible consumption, diet tips and tricks"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 97 guests