Comments on: Social scientist attacks feminist theories http://sedgemore.com/2009/04/social-scientist-attacks-feminist-theories/ journalist and science writer Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:12:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Francis Sedgemore http://sedgemore.com/2009/04/social-scientist-attacks-feminist-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-3590 Francis Sedgemore Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:19:00 +0000 http://sedgemore.com/?p=4237#comment-3590 Down wiv dimism! Down wiv dimism!

]]> By: SnoopyTheGoon http://sedgemore.com/2009/04/social-scientist-attacks-feminist-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-3589 SnoopyTheGoon Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:09:04 +0000 http://sedgemore.com/?p=4237#comment-3589 As an ex-Soviet citizen, I take naturally a dim view of any ideology/religion, anything that ends with -ism or -ity. So this specific ism is no exception, esp. its raving wing. But as long as they have as their ultimate goal to stop men urinating in upright position, I can coexist with that ism. And continue urinating as above mentioned. NGB - "Is there an irony there somewhere?" It is not an irony, I am afraid, it's stark reality. Being a coward, I cannot say more. As an ex-Soviet citizen, I take naturally a dim view of any ideology/religion, anything that ends with -ism or -ity. So this specific ism is no exception, esp. its raving wing.

But as long as they have as their ultimate goal to stop men urinating in upright position, I can coexist with that ism. And continue urinating as above mentioned.

NGB – “Is there an irony there somewhere?” It is not an irony, I am afraid, it’s stark reality. Being a coward, I cannot say more.

]]> By: Francis Sedgemore http://sedgemore.com/2009/04/social-scientist-attacks-feminist-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-3584 Francis Sedgemore Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:55:01 +0000 http://sedgemore.com/?p=4237#comment-3584 I think she is saying something, and it's newsworthy to have a feminist intellectual pull apart in serious and substantive terms ‘social theories’ that are at odds with reality, yet taken seriously in some academic quarters. Social theories are empirical to varying degrees. Marxism and classical liberalism, for example, are two of the more empirical theories, and therefore two of the more useful. But, as Lindberg says, that use is limited. I think she is saying something, and it’s newsworthy to have a feminist intellectual pull apart in serious and substantive terms ‘social theories’ that are at odds with reality, yet taken seriously in some academic quarters. Social theories are empirical to varying degrees. Marxism and classical liberalism, for example, are two of the more empirical theories, and therefore two of the more useful. But, as Lindberg says, that use is limited.

]]> By: No Good Boyo http://sedgemore.com/2009/04/social-scientist-attacks-feminist-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-3582 No Good Boyo Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:13:35 +0000 http://sedgemore.com/?p=4237#comment-3582 All dpepends on what she looks like. High-profle feminists look like Gloria Steinem and Naomi Wolf, in my experience. Is there an irony there somewhere? All dpepends on what she looks like. High-profle feminists look like Gloria Steinem and Naomi Wolf, in my experience. Is there an irony there somewhere?

]]> By: Gadjo Dilo http://sedgemore.com/2009/04/social-scientist-attacks-feminist-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-3581 Gadjo Dilo Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:05:53 +0000 http://sedgemore.com/?p=4237#comment-3581 Is she actually saying anything? Social theories generally are based on ideologies, as they don't have the facts of hard science to play with; and theories very often are mutually contradictory, otherwise they'd be saying the same thing and wouldn't be different theories. Isn't it? Is she actually saying anything? Social theories generally are based on ideologies, as they don’t have the facts of hard science to play with; and theories very often are mutually contradictory, otherwise they’d be saying the same thing and wouldn’t be different theories. Isn’t it?

]]>