This week in the feminist insane-o-sphere: Oxford teacher worried Oxford will find coronavirus vaccine

[ruby sparks]

What control are you referring to? How will Oxford discovery of an effective vaccine allow for any kind of control? Universities are much more about freely sharing science and information than private corporations. Your concern, just like the lady the OP references, is delusional.

In recent statements, the UK government is dampening down on suggestions that Britons will get preferential access to any vaccines developed here and it is causing some outrage among the popular/nationalistic press, given that taxpayer's money has gone towards the research. Also, Boris Johnston (of whom I am no huge fan, nor am I a fan of Brexit) has recently (end of March) made Britain the largest funding contributor to CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations) and called for other G20 countries to step up their funding also.

Of course a national government would try (in some ways quite validly) to get kudos for themselves and the country in such instances, but I think the article writer's worries may be a bit overstated. They are certainly a bit speculative. As such, using them to go as far as saying that one hopes a certain research establishment does not achieve a successful breakthrough for something as globally crucial as this is a bit OTT, imo.

Coronavirus: Britain now the largest contributor to international effort to find vaccine after £210m commitment.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...oris-johnson-uk-donation-update-a9428566.html

Britons will not get preferential access to a UK-invented coronavirus vaccine afterall, says Government.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...-preferential-access-uk-invented-coronavirus/

"The deal with the World Health Organisation means Britain has agreed to work with 20 other countries and global organisations including France, Germany and Italy to find a vaccine and to share the results."

 

[ruby sparks]

Regarding her particular remarks about gender and race (skin colour) and indeed by implication 'western' privilege, it's her thing, she researches/teaches in gender, vulnerability and diversity, and has a masters in Women's Studies, so it's not surprising she should add such considerations into the mix of an article, as well as what appears to be a slice of anti-Conservative Party politics.

I think she does have a point about the University of Oxford still being dominated by privileged white men. It is high on the rankings compared to most UK universities in these respects (as regards staffing and management I mean, especially the higher up the job status you go). In other respects, in terms of its proportion of female students, it's not doing too bad (close to 50%, as for most UK universities).

I stand to be corrected on those items, since I got the facts wrong before.

I also think that her mention of how there may be some positive correlation between successful anti-coronavirus strategies and having a woman as national leader is interesting. It is a bit anecdotal though, and very complicated I'm sure, involving many possible variables, so I would not go so far as to say that there is yet a good case that the gender of a leader is a significant factor of itself. But at the same time I would also not be surprised if it turned out to be a factor in at least a small way. That's just my own guess.

Finally, Dr Cousins doesn't seem to be the worst sort of feminist (assuming she is one):



https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...re-the-only-refugees-who-matter-10493332.html

 

[Metaphor]

Finally, Dr Emily Cousins doesn't seem to be the worst sort of feminist (assuming she is one):

View attachment 27419

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...re-the-only-refugees-who-matter-10493332.html

It would be difficult to believe that somebody whose bio in the above article - Emily Cousens is a PhD student looking at feminist perspectives on vulnerability - is not a feminist.

Also, the article you've linked is certainly more sympathetic to men than the typical feminist article. But make no mistake her sympathy is expressed only for men of colour; her intersectional checkmark ticked.

EDIT: Her (now deleted but archived) page at Oxford Brookes says, in part:

Emily lectures in Politics at Oxford Brookes and is the Founder of the Free School of Critical Feminisms, an intimate feminist summer school that charges no fees.

What did you do over the summer? I went to an intimate feminist summer school.

You couldn't make it up.

 

[ruby sparks]

It would be difficult to believe that somebody whose bio in the above article - Emily Cousens is a PhD student looking at feminist perspectives on vulnerability - is not a feminist.

Also, the article you've linked is certainly more sympathetic to men than the typical feminist article. But make no mistake her sympathy is expressed only for men of colour; her intersectional checkmark ticked.

Again, I would be completely unsurprised if privileged 'western' white men were the group she least sympathises with.

That doesn't mean that such a view does not have validity. You may detest it. I'm not exactly a fan of it, but I think in the end it's about trying to get a balance, if possible, and to accept certain points and points of view as reasonable, when they are. You and I, perhaps, and many straight, CIS-gendered, white, western men like us, may understandably slightly overreact, because we are in the group being criticised. At least I think you are. I am.

As for feminism, it seems she is a feminist. I like feminism in some ways but not in others.

 

[Jokodo]

I think she does have a point about the University of Oxford still being dominated by privileged white men

She might, if she were making that point. She isn't though. J
Her point is that Britain's leadership is dominated by upper class white men who studied at Oxford. Not that Oxford is dominated by upper class white men, and certainly not that Oxford's microbiology labs are dominated by them.

 

[Jokodo]

Finally, Dr Emily Cousins doesn't seem to be the worst sort of feminist (assuming she is one):

View attachment 27419

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...re-the-only-refugees-who-matter-10493332.html

It would be difficult to believe that somebody whose bio in the above article - Emily Cousens is a PhD student looking at feminist perspectives on vulnerability - is not a feminist.

Also, the article you've linked is certainly more sympathetic to men than the typical feminist article. But make no mistake her sympathy is expressed only for men of colour; her intersectional checkmark ticked.

Have you tried seeking help for your persecution complex?

 

[Metaphor]

Again, I would be completely unsurprised if privileged 'western' white men were the group she least sympathises with.

That doesn't mean that such a view does not have validity. You may detest it.

Of course I detest it. It's a detestable attitude for Cousens to have.

I'm not exactly a fan of it, but I think in the end it's about trying to get a balance, if possible, and to accept certain points and points of view as reasonable, when they are. You and I, perhaps, and many straight, CIS-gendered, white, western men like us, may understandably slightly overreact, because we are in the group being criticised. At least I think you are. I am.

It isn't merely that feminists show naked contempt for white 'western' men. The braindead outpourings of people who hate me merely for my whiteness and maleness wouldn't concern me - I'm not trying to fuck them and I'm not trying to be their friends. It wouldn't concern me, that is, but feminists have significant cultural and institutional power and their ideas shape government and institutional policies.

As for feminism, it seems she is a feminist. I like feminism in some ways but not in others.

Feminism is a religion and Patriarchy is its devil.

But like all religions, feminism is false and its devil is fictive.

 

[Metaphor]

Finally, Dr Emily Cousins doesn't seem to be the worst sort of feminist (assuming she is one):

View attachment 27419

https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...re-the-only-refugees-who-matter-10493332.html

It would be difficult to believe that somebody whose bio in the above article - Emily Cousens is a PhD student looking at feminist perspectives on vulnerability - is not a feminist.

Also, the article you've linked is certainly more sympathetic to men than the typical feminist article. But make no mistake her sympathy is expressed only for men of colour; her intersectional checkmark ticked.

Have you tried seeking help for your persecution complex?

Ironic from somebody who believes in the persecution complex writ large of patriarchy theory.

 

[ruby sparks]

I think she does have a point about the University of Oxford still being dominated by privileged white men

She might, if she were making that point. She isn't though. J
Her point is that Britain's leadership is dominated by upper class white men who studied at Oxford. Not that Oxford is dominated by upper class white men, and certainly not that Oxford's microbiology labs are dominated by them.

Ah. Ok. Yes, She didn't make that point, I did.

I would still say her speculative worries should not prevent us from welcoming a breakthrough from Oxford.

 

[ruby sparks]

Of course I detest it. It's a detestable attitude for Cousens to have.



It isn't merely that feminists show naked contempt for white 'western' men. The braindead outpourings of people who hate me merely for my whiteness and maleness wouldn't concern me - I'm not trying to fuck them and I'm not trying to be their friends. It wouldn't concern me, that is, but feminists have significant cultural and institutional power and their ideas shape government and institutional policies.

As for feminism, it seems she is a feminist. I like feminism in some ways but not in others.

Feminism is a religion and Patriarchy is its devil.

But like all religions, feminism is false and its devil is fictive.

I probably share some of your objections, at least up to a point.

I don't think her views are detestable.

And patriarchy is not fiction, even if it may imo be an overstated factor in feminist theory.

 

[Jokodo]

Have you tried seeking help for your persecution complex?

Ironic from somebody who believes in the persecution complex writ large of patriarchy theory.

I haven't brought up "patriarchy theory" in this thread, nor in any interaction we've recently had. I'm pretty sure I haven't used the word "patriarchy" at all in half a year or so, and when I did, you weren't there. But sure, let's assume everyone who vaguely disagrees with you adheres to the same strawman set of ideas you've determined by way of revelation to motivate THEM EVIL FEMINAZIS.

 

[Jokodo]

I think she does have a point about the University of Oxford still being dominated by privileged white men

She might, if she were making that point. She isn't though. J
Her point is that Britain's leadership is dominated by upper class white men who studied at Oxford. Not that Oxford is dominated by upper class white men, and certainly not that Oxford's microbiology labs are dominated by them.

Ah. Ok. Yes, She didn't make that point, I did.

I would still say her speculative worries should not prevent us from welcoming a breakthrough from Oxford.

And she didn't say otherwise. She didn't say that she wouldn't welcome a breakthrough from Oxford. She said that she is also worried about how that might be used.

 

[Jokodo]

Of course I detest it. It's a detestable attitude for Cousens to have.



It isn't merely that feminists show naked contempt for white 'western' men. The braindead outpourings of people who hate me merely for my whiteness and maleness wouldn't concern me - I'm not trying to fuck them and I'm not trying to be their friends. It wouldn't concern me, that is, but feminists have significant cultural and institutional power and their ideas shape government and institutional policies.

As for feminism, it seems she is a feminist. I like feminism in some ways but not in others.

Feminism is a religion and Patriarchy is its devil.

But like all religions, feminism is false and its devil is fictive.

Quite ironic, coming from someone who, with religious fervor, opposes an article that actually makes a valid point that has nothing to do with feminism because it comes from a satanistfeminist.

 

[Jokodo]

Of course I detest it. It's a detestable attitude for Cousens to have.



It isn't merely that feminists show naked contempt for white 'western' men. The braindead outpourings of people who hate me merely for my whiteness and maleness wouldn't concern me -

You're right, something that only exists in your head shouldn't concern you.

I'm a white 'western' man, and straight with two kids on top of it, and I've yet to meet a feminist who hates me for what I am, or to read a text by a feminist anyone's ever heard of for real that implicates as much.

It's in your head, get over it.

 

[Metaphor]

Have you tried seeking help for your persecution complex?

Ironic from somebody who believes in the persecution complex writ large of patriarchy theory.

I haven't brought up "patriarchy theory" in this thread, nor in any interaction we've recently had. I'm pretty sure I haven't used the word "patriarchy" at all in half a year or so, and when I did, you weren't there. But sure, let's assume everyone who vaguely disagrees with you adheres to the same strawman set of ideas you've determined by way of revelation to motivate THEM EVIL FEMINAZIS.

That feminists believe in patriarchy theory is not a strawman.

 

[Metaphor]

Of course I detest it. It's a detestable attitude for Cousens to have.



It isn't merely that feminists show naked contempt for white 'western' men. The braindead outpourings of people who hate me merely for my whiteness and maleness wouldn't concern me -

You're right, something that only exists in your head shouldn't concern you.

I'm a white 'western' man, and straight with two kids on top of it, and I've yet to meet a feminist who hates me for what I am, or to read a text by a feminist anyone's ever heard of for real that implicates as much.

It's in your head, get over it.

The contempt espoused by feminists for white men is not in my head. It's in the articles and Tweets feminists write, and indeed, in what they choose to be silent about.

 

[Metaphor]

Of course I detest it. It's a detestable attitude for Cousens to have.



It isn't merely that feminists show naked contempt for white 'western' men. The braindead outpourings of people who hate me merely for my whiteness and maleness wouldn't concern me - I'm not trying to fuck them and I'm not trying to be their friends. It wouldn't concern me, that is, but feminists have significant cultural and institutional power and their ideas shape government and institutional policies.

As for feminism, it seems she is a feminist. I like feminism in some ways but not in others.

Feminism is a religion and Patriarchy is its devil.

But like all religions, feminism is false and its devil is fictive.

Quite ironic, coming from someone who, with religious fervor, opposes an article that actually makes a valid point that has nothing to do with feminism because it comes from a satanistfeminist.

No, I didn't oppose the ideas in the article "because feminist".

I opposed the stupid ideas in the article because they were idiotic. It's possible somebody who isn't a feminist could imagine similar deranged fantasies about the negative consequences of Oxford discovering a coronavirus vaccine, but this particular article was definitely written by a feminist.

 

[Jokodo]

I haven't brought up "patriarchy theory" in this thread, nor in any interaction we've recently had. I'm pretty sure I haven't used the word "patriarchy" at all in half a year or so, and when I did, you weren't there. But sure, let's assume everyone who vaguely disagrees with you adheres to the same strawman set of ideas you've determined by way of revelation to motivate THEM EVIL FEMINAZIS.

That feminists believe in patriarchy theory is not a strawman.

You aren't talking with feminists, you're talking with me, Jokodo. In response to me telling you to look at your persecution complex, you responded saying this was "Ironic from somebody who believes in the persecution complex writ large of patriarchy theory."

I'm not an English native speaker, but I'm pretty confident that the only obvious interpretation of that sentence is that Jokodo believes in patriarchy theory. Not that some or all feminists, who Jokodo may or may not consider himself a part of, do.

 

[Metaphor]

I haven't brought up "patriarchy theory" in this thread, nor in any interaction we've recently had. I'm pretty sure I haven't used the word "patriarchy" at all in half a year or so, and when I did, you weren't there. But sure, let's assume everyone who vaguely disagrees with you adheres to the same strawman set of ideas you've determined by way of revelation to motivate THEM EVIL FEMINAZIS.

That feminists believe in patriarchy theory is not a strawman.

You aren't talking with feminists, you're talking with me, Jokodo. In response to me telling you to look at your persecution complex, you responded saying this was "Ironic from somebody who believes in the persecution complex writ large of patriarchy theory."

I'm not an English native speaker, but I'm pretty confident that the only obvious interpretation of that sentence is that Jokodo believes in patriarchy theory. Not that some or all feminists, who Jokodo may or may not consider himself a part of, do.

Well Jokodo: do you believe in patriarchy theory?

 

[Jokodo]

Of course I detest it. It's a detestable attitude for Cousens to have.



It isn't merely that feminists show naked contempt for white 'western' men. The braindead outpourings of people who hate me merely for my whiteness and maleness wouldn't concern me -

You're right, something that only exists in your head shouldn't concern you.

I'm a white 'western' man, and straight with two kids on top of it, and I've yet to meet a feminist who hates me for what I am, or to read a text by a feminist anyone's ever heard of for real that implicates as much.

It's in your head, get over it.

The contempt espoused by feminists for white men is not in my head. It's in the articles and Tweets feminists write, and indeed, in what they choose to be silent about.

In what they choose to be silent about, seriously?

I haven't heard you say a word against "corrective rape" against Lesbian girls in South Africa. Can I thus conclude that you support it?

No?

Than maybe, just maybe, what people are silent about isn't a valid indicator of what who they have contempt for.

So to conclude, you still haven't given me an actual example of a feminist, any well-known and respected feminist preferably (since that's what you claimed worries you) with influence on government, expressing that she hates me simply for who I am. Just one example!