„Feminisms un maskulīnisms” ir pētījums par maskulīnisma, feminisma un to kustību attīstību un konfliktu. Darbā autore analizē iemeslus, kādēļ divas ideoloģijas un to kustības, kas postulē nepieciešamību nodrošināt līdztiesību un vienlīdzīgas iespējas sievietēm un vīriešiem, nav spējušas rast kopīgu valodu un to starpā veidojas regulāri konflikti. Autore analizē, vai iemesls šim konfliktam neslēpjas maskulīnisma un tā sociālo kustību antifeministiskajā nostājā. Darba ietvaros šī konflikta praktiskai analīzei autore pielieto deskriptīvo gadījuma analīzes metodi, pētot „Gamer Gate” konfliktu, kura laikā izcēlās visaptverošs disputs, kas radīja ne vien ietekmi uz kultūru, bet arī sabiedrību un politiku, turklāt tajā izgaismojās divas skaidras pozīcijas – feminisma un maskulīnisma kustību atšķirīgie viedokļi. ; „Feminism and masculinism” is a thesis about the development and conflict of masculinism and feminism, and their social movements. In this thesis, the author analyses the reasons why both ideologies and their social movements, that both agree on the neccessity of ensuring equal rights and opportunities for both women and men, are unable to find common grounds and conflicts within the two groups are prevalent. The author analyses, whether or not the conflict is based on antifeministic stance of masculinism and its social movements. To practically analyze this conflict, author uses a method of descriptive case analysis, by investigating the so-called „Gamer Gate” conflict that created a wide dispute, that had implications not only on culture, but on society and politics as well, and that had two distinct viewpoints in it - those of feminist and masculinist social movement.
Der Beitrag versucht, vor allem unter Bezugnahme auf frühere Beiträge in dieser Zeitschrift, die Entwicklung eines sozialistischen Konzepts zur Analyse der Lage der Frauen in ihren Grundzügen nachzuzeichnen. (DÜI-Hns)
'Feminism' wrote Marie Shear in 1986, 'is the radical notion that women are people'. But, simple and powerful though this definition is, feminism is not a single, clear narrative. It doesn't begin with a specific event at a particular moment in time, it can't be identified with any one political organization or movement, and it isn't defined by the contributions of a handful of great thinkers. Here, Professor Deborah Cameron unpicks the various strands that constitute one of history's most important intellectual and political movements. In her clear and incisive account, she discusses oppression, sexuality, violence, academic theory and practical activism, shows how feminism can be a way of viewing the world and provides an overview of its history. In an era of #metoo, pay gap scandals and online harrassment, it's impossible to deny that gender inequality is a fact of life. And as long as that continues to be true, we will need to understand and engage with the ideas and history of the feminist movement
A feminist friend asked me to write a piece addressed to this question: How would my work have been different if I had engaged with and learned from the feminists of the late 1960s and 1970s? I have tried to respond, in a more personal style than I usually adopt, but with what I hope is a familiar anxiety. Before I begin, I need to claim an earlier education. In 1953, I dated and later married a woman who was a bolshevik feminist, who wouldn't let me open a door for her, or help her on with her coat, or pay for her movie tickets, or do any of the things that boys were supposed to do for girls in those benighted days. And we had two daughters who were egalitarian, and argumentative about it, from their first conscious moment. I wanted them to grow up in a society where they could do... whatever they wanted to do. So long before I ever read a feminist tract, I was committed to August Bebel's proposition that there couldn't be a just society without "equality of the sexes." But that bit of political correctness didn't necessarily make for what you might call intelligence about gender. If I had been intelligent in that way, what would I have written differently? The book to focus on is Spheres of Justice, which I wrote in the early 1980s. Spheres deals with the distribution of social goods and bads, the benefits and burdens of our common life, and it includes a discussion of the conventional roles and rewards of men and women. The book provoked a lot of arguments, many of them critical, and for me the most interesting criticism came from feminist writers. Adapted from the source document.