Comments

3

Dumai wrote

sure, but consider the fact that this guy wrote an article about it himself and published it under his own name when he could just have easily used his position to signal boost a similar, probably much better article by a female feminist, who would naturally be in a better position to tell men how to support her

3

Dumai wrote (edited )

well i hope i am doing it for the right reasons; the clique of completely fake "pro-feminist" men who still treat women like shit are equally as likely to get people in danger, but they're better at hiding behind the clout they've earned as allies. all i'm saying is: i don't want to be that, in any respect, and i don't want to associate with men who are.

that doesn't mean i'm going to be silent, that just means i'm going to try not to take up too much space and attention in the feminist conversation. because while i get the point of this article, obviously, i've seen it happen before that men who write pieces like this earn too much praise for "helping dismantle rape culture" and then later turn out to be rapists themselves, or otherwise reveal themselves as huge misogynists, or end up literally trying to murder their wives;* so it would often seem their "feminist activism" was more about solidifying their own influence in the intellectual scene than any sincere concern for women's issues. i think i'd be much more interested in an article written by a woman telling men how to be good allies. the positionality of it just feels a lot more comfortable to me

*not that i'm saying ramanathan s. is any of those things, i'm sure his intentions are absolutely good, but articles like this from men are always a little concerning to me

3

Dumai wrote (edited )

aside from "suck it" i don't really agree that the connotations are inherently sexual and i once witnessed an incredibly self-righteous male feminist lecture a group of female activists about how they were supporting rape culture by telling him "fuck you" so i'm a bit suspicious about this tbh

2

Dumai wrote (edited )

i call out misogyny when i see but i'm weary of trying too hard to appear like "one of the good ones" because i don't want to be one of those men who get accolades for basic performative allyship

i absolutely do not want to be complicit, by silence or any other means, but i also don't think i should ever be leading the conversation

4

Dumai wrote

he strikes me as somebody who's read a little bit of theory but only for the purpose of gathering material for internet polemic

he accused "idpols" of psychological behaviourism, which is a fairly common talking point used by critics of figures like judith butler, but then went on to describe their philosophy of "unconscious beliefs", which makes no sense if you know even the first thing about what behaviourism is.

2

Dumai wrote (edited )

Those who eat like shit and can afford not to while demanding acceptance for their over-indulgence make me sick to my stomach

so fuck anybody with a mental illness then? not like overeating is a commonly recognised symptom of depression or anything!

8

Dumai wrote

Gee, sorry. How are you opposing the occupation of native land by Europeans?

By not supporting it? lol

i love how he thinks this is a question of whether or not he likes colonialism rather than a question of what he's actually doing about it

You gonna help us get our land back?

When the revolution starts...

1

Dumai wrote (edited )

if (and this a big if) there was any dharmic inspiration in the early church then it was certainly through hellinistic influences, so koenraad elst is right to underline the significance of "ambient hellenistic-cosmopolitan culture". aside from that, this article is not very well researched. he's correct in saying that there is no doctrine of original sin in judaism, but definitely wrong to insinuate that it has no concept of spiritual salvation; that is to say, that jews only believe in "political salvation" (i don't know if the words "the world to come" mean anything koenraad, but they certainly did to many second temple jews). his statement that there could be no connection between jewish and christian ideas about salvation is patently absurd, as anyone up-to-date on their pauline scholarship would know. he botches the relationship between christianity and mithraism (mithraism borrowed from christianity, not the other way around -- most historical evidence we have on mithraic doctrine post-date the new testament) and seems to be labouring under the bizarre assumption that a first-century jewish day labourer from galilee would have a deep enough understanding of hindu philosophy to incorporate into his ministry. if hinduism had any direct influence on jesus or the gospel scholars, there should be some extraordinary evidence for significant contact between jewish and hindu communities in roman judea, but as elst points out, there's absolutely nothing to suggest a significant hindu community even existed there outside of his weird interpretation of the new testatement.

koenraad elst is an infamous right-wing hack btw