Creative Destruction

October 16, 2006

More Oppressed Than Ever

Filed under: Feminist Issues,International Politics — Tuomas @ 3:34 am

In which country is the officially endorsed policy of the former ruling party (until very recently):”women are systematically and structurally subordinated to men”?

The answer is, obviously, Sweden (I’m sure what everyone is thinking now: “Damn, I knew that!”)

From Wikipedia article on Feminist Initiative::

One of the foundation of the party’s policy platform is the concept called k√∂nsmaktsordning (literal translation: Gender Power Hierarchy), a term used within Swedish feminism for the belief that women are systematically and structurally subordinated to men. This concept is also endorsed by the Social Democratic party.

(my emphasis)

This is feminism at it’s best: Being the Officially Accepted Truth,(=being in power) and having already achieved it’s supposed goals, all the while denying having any actual power, living in “patriarchy”. An endless revolution of the proletariat women as class against the oppressive capitalism patriarchy.

Oh, I forgot. It’s a Big Tent and there is no “one true feminism”. All are accepted.

Advertisements

9 Comments »

  1. Come to think of it, “it’s supposed goals” is somewhat vague. It may be that feminists raise the ante at every turn, first it is suffrage (a worthy goal) and now it is complete equality of outcome, which at some areas is still lacking. The point really is that when feminism by wikipedia definition becomes perfect common sense, what remains as (revolutionary) feminism is necessarily totalitarian.

    Comment by Tuomas — October 16, 2006 @ 3:43 am | Reply

  2. Wow, you really have become unhinged.

    Sweden was a totalitarian feminist state (luckily recently overthrown). Who knew? I imagine we’ll be getting footage from the Swedish mass graves any time now.

    Comment by Charles S — October 16, 2006 @ 4:42 am | Reply

  3. It does somewhat weaken the strength of the point, Tuomas, to (rightly) note the power temptation inherent in revolutionary feminism, but then to equate that awful evil with the dread fascist land of Sweden, feared home of a thousand thousand mighty Viking…social workers. Perhaps not where I’d choose to live, or how I’d order a society, but not quite Gehenna to most of us.

    Comment by Robert — October 16, 2006 @ 4:50 am | Reply

  4. Fools. You fell for it.

    Comment by Tuomas — October 16, 2006 @ 4:59 am | Reply

  5. To clarify: Indeed, Sweden is not a bad place to live. It is (supposedly) especially good regarding gender (=womens) issues.

    Which kind of makes the “systematic subordination to men” laughable.

    (edited to add a parenthetical comment)

    Comment by Tuomas — October 16, 2006 @ 5:01 am | Reply

  6. Second clarification for the slow: This indeed surprised me too. But the point is: If feminism is such a powerless, marginalized ideology, why on Earth does the Social Democratic Party need to acknowledge the “truth” of such an obviously laughable concept (don’t kid yourselves that they were talking about anything other than the Swedish/Western White Heteropatriarchy)?

    It’s not that Sweden is totalitarian, but the fact that the former ruling party is effectively claiming that they are (but in opposite direction), to appease a loony (totalitarian) fringe.

    WTF?

    (edited to add a parenthetical comment)

    Comment by Tuomas — October 16, 2006 @ 5:25 am | Reply

  7. Charles, kindly moderate the personal insults.

    Comment by Daran — October 16, 2006 @ 11:50 am | Reply

  8. Merely because the (former) ruling party recognized that there is systematic and structural subordination of women as a class to men as a class does not mean that they had cured that subordination (recognition is only the first baby step). It merely means that they were committed to fixing it. However, since they were not a totalitarian party, fixing deeply ingrained social structures is a slow process.

    Is Sweden arguably further along in fixing the systematic and structural subordination of women? Sure. Had they actually attained equality? No. Was suffrage ever the sole goal of feminism? No.

    Comment by Charles S — October 16, 2006 @ 3:59 pm | Reply

  9. Is Sweden arguably further along in fixing the systematic and structural subordination of women?

    Well, if you believe in that.

    Had they actually attained equality? No. Was suffrage ever the sole goal of feminism? No.

    And how will you know when equality is attained, and the goals of feminism are complete?

    Comment by Tuomas — October 16, 2006 @ 4:06 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: