What does pastoral feminism mean?

Women's rights in rural areas of China, which is a freak of mixed feudal remnants of China and western rights consciousness. These women have no idea what women's rights are in their bones. I envy the benefits of others, but I don't want to give up the old almanac. This double standard is, in the final analysis, an extremely utilitarian and greedy selfishness. They won't consider right or wrong, as long as the theory is beneficial to her, they will admire it in all aspects. Only China's unique social culture can produce such wonderful "feminists", who will ask men to earn money to support their families like Japanese and Korean women, and have the freedom and right to evade obligations like European and American women. You talk to her about women's rights, and she talks to you about tradition; You and he really broke the tradition. She returned to feminism. This is why I have always despised the so-called modern women who have received higher education and are still full of feudalism. On the one hand, they want to fall in love freely, on the other hand, they want to have a bride price. He shouted equality between men and women, while insisting that men should support their families. While being lazy, greedy and extravagant, he asked men to live gently, diligently and thoughtfully. You should be a cow and a horse for me, because this is a fine tradition of the Chinese nation, and I want to be my own queen, because this is the embodiment of western progressive thought. There are various requirements for men to have a car and a house to make money and take care of their families. It is a euphemism to say that a big man should be capable and responsible. When it comes to his own obligations, he will put it in another way. What time is it? You old feudalists still want to oppress women, and we want to fight for freedom. When it comes to work, it is dirty work, dangerous manual work, soft and weak. Say, "How dare you let girls do it?" When it comes to recruitment, promotion and salary, you will firmly criticize the society for discriminating against women and not giving us the same treatment and opportunities. If you want someone or meet someone you like, you will show your weakness in all kinds of ways and do not hide your arrogance at all. People will think you are cold and arrogant. Why do we women please men? It won't be a woman, will it? There is no benefit. Real rights come from a free, independent and self-respecting individual. Women have no real independence and self-esteem. What about women's rights? Stop joking. They are always just arrogant and willful species attached to men. Without reciprocal obligations, how can there be equal rights? These pseudo-feminists just like to use chicken feathers as an arrow and women's rights as an excuse to earn benefits for themselves. They don't care what feminism is. What does pastoral feminism mean? Pastoral feminism requires equality between men and women, but requires men to bear the responsibility of a patriarchal society. For example, it requires men to buy houses and cars, but women don't. Traditionally, China's pastoral feminism refers to the feminist ideas put forward by some domestic women, which is characterized by pursuing the maximization of women's income under the pretext of feminism. China pastoral feminists put forward a series of "feminist propositions", which seem to be varied, but in fact, it is very simple to sum up, that is, as long as they are good, they are irresponsible. There are mainly the following three points: 1, self-awareness of women's inferiority, men's nobility, being ashamed of doing women's work and proud of doing men's work, so as a "feminist", women are naturally opposed to "lowly women's work". 2. Admit that women are inferior to men, and think that women can't compete fairly with men for social resources, but they will naturally get less. Therefore, as a "feminist", it is natural to advocate a more female-oriented scheme in the distribution system to pursue "feminist equality." 3. Pastoral feminists often regard the part of "objectifying women" in male chauvinism as truth, like self-objectification, do not admit that individual will is also a part of rights (such as affection and love), and only exchange realistic materials. Commodities don't need personal likes and dislikes, just need to sell at a good price. To put it bluntly, they are selling themselves as "Yangzhou thin horse" at a high price. This is why China's pastoral feminism is called "pseudo-feminism". To put it bluntly, these rural women's rights are just parasites who want to lie on the bodies of a patriarchal society and suck blood. Do you really think that they are real women's rights that really pursue equality and independence? Actually, it's not at all It's just that the supply and demand of high-quality men in the blind date market are seriously unbalanced. They can't find a stronger backer than themselves, and they don't want to settle for ordinary people. Theoretically, they adopt radical feminism to criticize the patriarchal oppression reflected by gender inequality, but at the same time they deviate from the fundamental demands of feminism for equal rights between men and women and put forward the style of "women enjoy rights". The false claim of "male obligation" is intended to achieve the morbid psychological purpose of secularism and the false purpose under the guidance of hedonism's wrong world view through a means of "public opinion moral kidnapping". If you have a grudge, vent it on a few weak men and most ordinary men, and form a powerful pastoral feminist group through cliques. There are not so many high-quality men assigned to them, so they like to make noise, but they look down on people who are slightly weaker. They thought they would do it, and there was really no way out, so they embarked on the road of rural women's rights. If she is a truly independent woman and supports equal rights in Europe and the United States, she will be happy to marry a small pet dog and be the queen herself, because she has a house and a car and is in good financial condition. What does pastoral feminism mean? 3 1. Against women's interests/feminism. That is to say, women who want to "take advantage" but are unwilling to "take responsibility" in gender relations and their own opinions. Most of Zhihu's discourses can be attributed to feminism, and all the examples come from personal experience. For example, a certain or a group of women's deeds of "selfishness and emphasis on independence" in class, work unit and marriage relationship. Or comments made by female users on the Internet (for example, independent women should not do housework, but men should earn money to support women), and even some imaginary jokes (I smoke and drink tattoos, but I am a good girl, and you lied to me that I am love rat) have also become evidence to support TAs against "rural women's rights". To put it simply, TAs oppose the view that "women should have higher status or get more resources than men". Theoretically speaking, feminism is a variant of patriarchy, and feminists oppose feminism, whether men are superior to women or women are superior to men. But the words used by critics are neither patriarchy nor feminism, but pastoral feminism and pseudo-feminism. This should not be because this proposition has nothing to do with women's rights, but when it is called "pastoral women's rights", it implies that women's rights have led to this radical idea. On the contrary, this radical idea is a stress response to a patriarchal society and a variant of patriarchy. Using the word "pastoral feminism" means that even teaching assistants will say that they support gender equality, but there is no reflection on the system at all. In other words, teaching assistants don't really understand what gender equality is. Feminism is not against the "male" group, but against the unequal patriarchy. Under this system, men monopolize most of the resources, while women suffer from large and small discrimination because of their gender. However, people who use "pastoral feminism" understand that "feminism" is a challenge and attack to men and a life-and-death battle between men and women. Based on this, the examples they cited are all contradictions between men and women in daily life. As a newly coined word, "pastoral feminism" magnifies these misunderstandings and creates a stigmatized feminist imagination on the basis of a large number of individual experiences. 2. Class view. "The core of rural women's rights is not equal rights at all, but whether there is money (for me). There is no money in diaosi, and even breathing is wrong. " Zhihu's answer to this high ticket gave me a little indigestion. She first took a screenshot of Weibo, who believed that the value of a woman lies in getting married and having children, and then pointed out that Weibo, who is so patriarchal, has not been strongly refuted by any opinion leader of "pastoral feminism", indicating that "pastoral feminism" only looks down on the poor. Although the logic of this high-vote answer is surprising, we can still talk about the discrimination suffered by "Phoenix Man" and "Diaosi" under the class background (a popular view is that "Phoenix Man" has a lot to do with "straight male cancer"). Teacher Sun Jinyu said that from the experience, the oppression of women at the bottom of society is often even more serious than that at the middle and upper levels. Feminism is always accepted by the middle and upper classes first. This has led to the reality that advocating women's rights has led to the accusation of poor individuals at the bottom. This is really worth thinking about by domestic feminists. However, if we point the finger of class injustice at gender discrimination, it not only confuses the real enemy (unfair social distribution system) and allies (only those who are squeezed by the system should unite with each other, such as the poor class, sexual minorities and women), but also proves that men still regard women as their own property. When a person sees a very patriarchal statement, what he thinks is "no woman will refute it, just because the other person is rich." If diaosi said that, he would have been scolded to death. "When he was labeled as" rural feminist ",it at least showed that Ta was not interested in feminist issues, but was concerned about the class problems within men under the patriarchal system. And such an answer has become a high-vote answer, which shows a social mentality. In fact, the group with this perspective has proved that they are supporters of patriarchy and oppose feminism, while teaching assistants still use the word "pastoral feminism" to attack their opposing ideas, which shows that opposing "pastoral feminism" is actually opposing "feminism". 3. Racial perspective. These three types of people are probably the most unpopular people on the Internet in China today: feminists, ethnic minorities and foreigners. In a word, mainstream netizens (young Han men below the middle class) think that these people have encroached on their resources. Many discourses in Zhihu portray feminists as hating China men and respecting foreign men. The article "Cool Play" connects feminists with foreigners and tells the story of a feminist who organized China women to engage in prostitution for foreigners, which directly ignited two bombs. From this point of view, it is very explicit for women to regard themselves as the resources of their own ethnic groups, which has nothing to do with feminism anyway, but they still aim at "pastoral feminism" and are actually attacking feminism. All these objections to pastoral feminism, pseudo-feminism, feminist bitch and feminist cancer (how many words have been created? ) will only lead to a single imagination about women's rights in China: there is something wrong with women's rights. At this point, it is obvious that anyone who considers himself a feminist or supports gender equality should stop using the word "pastoral feminism". From the wide spread and application of this word, we can also see how difficult it is to popularize the concept of feminism and do feminist work in China. Now that we have clarified so much, it seems that we should talk about what feminism is. This is a very big topic, which should be discussed in the historical background. What I know is only a passing remark. The important foundation of feminism is to question the view that men and women are essentially different based on physiological differences. Feminism holds that women are the product of social and cultural construction. The so-called femininity is influenced by factors such as class, nationality, religion and education. So in different social and historical stages, the understanding of femininity/masculinity is different. Modern society is used to using pink to represent women and blue to represent men (toilet sign), but in the American publication Earn Shaws Infants Department of1918, we can still read the following sentence: "Pink is a more vivid and dense color, which is more suitable for boys, while blue is more exquisite and elegant, which makes girls look better." There are too many such examples. In short, biological differences are not enough to deduce the conclusion that "women should be like this" or "men should be like this", not to mention the conclusion that "women are inferior to men in strength and intelligence". In other words, it is culture that shapes the differences between men and women. Even for contemporary philosophers like Judith Butler, even the framework of gender (male/female) is problematic. We have no gender subjects at all, only acting. I don't think it is necessary to go as far as Judith Butler in the current public discussion. At least the following points are not difficult to understand and should become a consensus: at present, the world is based on patriarchy, which gives men more rights and resources, which is unfair; Because of this patriarchal clan system, many women are suffering from physical violence, such as forced rape, domestic violence, circumcision and so on. This is unfair; Because of this patriarchal clan system, many women are sexually harassed, discriminated, assigned more housework, paid less, and regarded as ignorant of politics, which is unreasonable. Self-identity is an important anthropological proposition. There is no need to accept the bullying and discrimination suffered by a single woman in China. I don't like this kind of "confessing to my ancestors" full of nationalist pride. What I capture is the power relationship and gender inequality hidden behind this word. Women are eternal immigrants in this world. I am not a fatalist. What supports me to continue to do things is a Marxist optimism. I believe that free creation beyond identity can provide opportunities for human beings to change the world. I think it is possible for us to make some choices at present. The big background is not up to us, but some small choices can reflect our moral values and thoughts. Everyone's experience has something in common, full of ups and downs, and the most important question is what kind of life you want in the constant "choice".