thats what he said, but in fewer words.
On Wednesday, Drexel University professor Amelia Hoover Green took to Twitter to offer her “ice cold feminist take” on the popular image, criticizing Sanders’ apparently disinterested demeanor in the photo as evidence of his failure to perform the “emotional labor” expected of women.
“Ice cold feminist take: I love Bernie, I really do, but sir: emotional labor is not beneath you. Not feeling it? Fucking pretend for one minute, like [most] women do every minute,” reads Green’s original tweet.
Others have also attempted to take a critical feminist lens to Sanders’ inauguration day outfit, with Female Persuasion’s Anne B. Kelly going as far as to declare Sanders’ mittens and parka a willful act of “misogyny,” done “purposefully to cast a shadow on women’s historic day.”
If we're gonna talk Bourdieusean Distinction re: music as signal, then we gotta make obligatory nods to the "hot take" economy of political culture
all this stuff has always been a part of being 'into music' at least for as long as ive been alive but the forums and social media etc have foregrounded it like never before. partly because its made it impossible to be unique. the positions you have to take to differentiate yourself from basic people are now impossibly convoulted.
any opinion you can formulate has been expressed by at least 10,000 other 'indviduals' on twitter. you can search for it and find it. mortifying. does terrible things to peoples sense of self.
obligatory nod.even if you decide to go off piste and be a North Korea admirer or a Stalin apologist. thousands of other people, just like you.
Also this hopefullyJohn Eden is going to give you lot the biggest bollocking if he sees this!
Feminism clearly picks up the Marxist maneuver, which is [emphasize to disempowered groups all the ways they're disempowered in order to shake up & anneal (under a new equity regime) class relations]. The long-term gambit is that half-truths and exaggerations of disempowerment are an instrumental good to this re-annealing. But in a system that's shown itself anti-fragile to agitation (it'll adjust to your complaints, but never revolutionize itself beyond the minimum required), this gambit is no longer economical, it actually hurts the very groups it purports to work on behalf of, undermining the group's identitarian self-esteem, changing their perception of the world to something much more antagonistic (or apathetic) to their plights.
To get concrete: women thinking the conviction rate on rapes is 6% or 12%, when it's really 58%, or that they make $.72 on the dollar for the same exact job, or that 1 of 4 college women is sexually assaulted, does no favors to anyone except the revolutionary, who prays the stirred-up outrage and anger will come to a head. The disempowered groups are not being protected or advocated for by revolutionaries; they're being used. Their subjectively perceived conditions degrade as the statistics grow ever-grimmer, and with it tanks their sense of security and value—which allows them eventually to dehumanize other identitarian groups, a precondition for wheeling out the guillotines.