Feminism aims to establish equal rights and opportunities for women, but the document questions whether this focus on equality perpetuates problems. It argues that demanding equal rights in areas like education, employment, and politics continues intoxicating influences that distance people from relationships and listening to oneself. True equity may require letting go of public consensus and labels to facilitate deeper listening between all people. Feminism's focus on women's work could overlook how structural inequalities more broadly affect interpretive labor and imagination for both women and men.

3. adding just after.. interpretive labor ness..
while deep into
re
re
re
re
reading/absorbing/conversing-w.. David Graeber‘s revolution in reverse..

4. Feminism is a range of political movements, ideologies, and social movements that share a
common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, personal, and
social rights for *women.
*so i guess my biggest question is
.. what’s up with this gender ness
.. why are we accepting this binary
ness of a human..

5. This includes seeking to establish *equal opportunities for women in education and
employment. Feminists typically advocate or support the rights and equality of women.
as evidenced by this very thing..*equal opps.. qualified as
ed, employment,..
which to me.. shows how much we are missing the whole
premise of being human.. of interpretive labor.. of equity…
to demand equal – ed/employment.. both not
really/naturally human.. perpetuates more of a broken
feedback loop… based on os (money via rushkoff).. that is
not human/natural

6. used to be that we had hugely intoxicated men.. ie: toward ed/employment.. and away from
relationship/listening..
now woman wanting equal rights.. are intoxicated away from relationship/listening.. ie: – going to
work.. breastfeeding less… not trusting that relationship to know what’s best, when to stop, et al..
how silly are we that a human would demand equal rights.. and that those rights we’re demanding
are.. ie:
● face on money (fake representation of measuring of transactions that is making us sick);
● voting (false sense of voice being heard.. when really just getting to pick between spinach or
rock.. and.. false sense that voice being heard by others matters most.. rather than voice of
self.. and being able to hear via relationship ness – interp labor ness);
● education (manufacturing consent ness from early childhood is best.. of course);
● employment (spend day doing something you don’t love in order to get money to fill fulfilled..
when if we were listening.. we realize 2 needs over our addictions/obsessions);
● war (demanding we enlist in craziness of fighting/killing in order to stop all the
fighting/killing);
● et al

7. Feminist movements have campaigned and continue to campaign for women’s rights,
including the right to vote, to hold public office, to work, to earn fair wages or equal pay, to
own property, to receive education, to enter contracts, to have equal rights within marriage,
and to have maternity leave.
oh my.. reality oriented thinking trumping our guts..
just reading that sentence should be enough .. to
woke people..
ah.. reading ahead (below).. next para lists all these..

8. Feminists have also worked to promote bodily autonomy and integrity, and to protect
women and girls from rape, sexual harassment, and domestic violence
violence .. because we’ve squelched natural
interpretive-labor/imagination in all humans kind of
equally now..

9. Feminist campaigns are generally considered to be one of the main forces behind major historical societal changes for women’s
rights, particularly in the West, where they are near-universally credited with having achieved women’s suffrage, gender neutrality
in English, reproductive rights for women (including access to contraceptives and abortion), and the right to enter into contracts
and own property. Although feminist advocacy is and has been mainly focused on women’s rights, some feminists, including bell
hooks, argue for the inclusion of men’s liberation within its aims because men are also harmed by traditional gender roles.
Feminist theory, which emerged from feminist movements, aims to understand the nature of gender inequality by examining
women’s social roles and lived experience; it has developed theories in a variety of disciplines in order to respond to issues such
as the social construction of gender.
Some forms of feminism have been criticized for taking into account only white, middle class, and educated perspectives. This
criticism led to the creation of ethnically specific or multicultural forms of feminism, including black feminism and intersectional
feminism.
this isn’t a red flag..?

10. ie: new forms listed are councils, assemblies, processes, …
when could be.. self talk as data input for hosted life bits that io dance
bottom/huge line…we have to let go. so that we all can.
public consensus always oppresses somebody..
none of us are free if one of us is chained (ie: obliged to public consensus)

11. Women’s (*and/or suppressed/oppressed/hidden men’s) logic was always being treated as
alien and incomprehensible. One never had the impression, on the other hand, that women had
much trouble understanding the men. That’s because the women had no choice but to understand
men: this was the heyday of the American patriarchal family, and women with no access to their own
income or resources had little choice but to spend a fair amount of time and energy
understanding what the relevant men thought was going on. Actually, this sort of rhetoric about
the mysteries of womankind is a perennial feature of patriarchal families: structures that can, indeed,
be considered forms of structural violence insofar as the power of men over women within them is, as
generations of feminists have pointed out, ultimately backed up, if often in indirect and hidden ways,
by all sorts of coercive force. But generations of female novelists — Virginia Woolf comes immediately
to mind — have also documented the other side of this: the constant work women perform in
managing, maintaining, and adjusting the egos of apparently oblivious men — involving an endless
work of imaginative identification and what I’ve called interpretive labor.
*my add
quotes in brown from David Graeber‘s revolution in reverse..

12. The result is that while those on the bottom spend a great deal of time imagining the
perspectives of, and actually caring about, those on the top, but it almost never
happens the other way around. That is my real point. Whatever the mechanisms, something
like this always seems to occur: whether one is dealing with masters and servants, men and
women, bosses and workers, rich and poor.
Structural inequality — structural violence — invariably
creates the same lopsided structures of the imagination. And
since, as Smith correctly observed, imagination tends to bring with it sympathy, the victims of
structural violence tend to care about its beneficiaries, or at least, to care far more about them
than those beneficiaries care about them. In fact, this might well be (aside from the violence
itself) the single most powerful force preserving such relations.
It’s not that interpretive work isn’t carried out. Society, in any recognizable form, could not
operate without it. Rather, the overwhelming burden of the labor is relegated to its
victims.

13. once again… huge…
on what is … lots of behind scene work… not what we’re thinking… ie:woman’s work as we
know it…is not the labor we need.. perhaps attitude is..
so diff work… rather.. art… by 7 bill people.. just w mindset of invisibility is trusted
after this.. is where the whole breastfeeding thing hit me.. that’s the behind the scenes work –
the invisible listening to self/other.. to know when enough is enough.. when more is needed..
thinking silence ness.. and never nothing going on ness.. and how our perceived notions of
civilization.. freedom.. et al.. is so whack.
again.. first we intoxicated men (thinking of laurie couture’s work).. then we intoxicated women
.. who were already not feeling not themselves (or they wouldn’t have asked to put face on
money and spend day doing not what wanted for money, and leave child too soon for
money).. from all the labor David references.. that is invisible.. but not natural.. ie:
prepping/cleaning/interpreting.. an intoxicated male/male-world..

14. what if we all have this in us..
what if this is what we’re wired for..
but from all the manufacturing consent and pluralistic ignorance ..
that perpetuate broken feedback loops..
most of us are not us.. enough..
so that interpretive labor seems isolated to ie: women..
what if the violence.. [discrimination, judgment, …]
all stems from this suffocating of (a naturally inclined) interpretive labor..
keeping us from
l i s t e n i n g
deeply enough
to selves and each other

15. which begs we quit saying man/woman/feminism ness.. rather just call us human..,
and too.. today... in a nother way to live...call us humans that listen deeper.. humans that
act/see us (all of us or it won't work... www ness) as one..
this has potential/capability of freeing all the time we spend on labeling... and section ing off
into groupings...(that are never authentically separate.. thinking e langer's.. prej decreases as
discrimination increases.. and thinking all our current separations ie: blm;lgbt; refugee; et al)..
and then spending our days justifying our justifying of them..
like bucky's inspectors of inspectors... being too much

16. taking away our time/energy/luxury/quiet/still/imagination
we spinach or rock our way thru life (ie: leave or remain; man or woman; black or
white... ie: separate rooms at idea/idec retreat.. where many didn't know which to
choose.. main fear.. making some in each room mad if picked the other)
binary ness is keeping us from us.., and killing/suffocating us
let's take what i hear you saying about freeman...
and rather than say... see large doesn't work...
create that mech she referenced.. that can keep
us small... ginormously small

17. One of the most important contributions of feminism, it seems to me, has been to constantly remind everyone
that “situations” do not create themselves. There is usually a great deal of work involved. For much
of human history, what has been taken as politics has consisted essentially of a series of dramatic
performances carried out upon theatrical stages. One of the great gifts of feminism to political
thought has been to continually remind us of the people is in fact making and preparing
and cleaning those stages, and even more, maintaining the invisible structures that
make them possible — people who have, overwhelmingly, been women.
invisibility ness.. indeed.. (little prince - most important invisible to the eye ness)
perhaps problem here however.. is that this work has been a clean up mode work.. rather
than an art/commons work.. so we have people/women/whoever..
interpreting/cleaning/prepping for toxic people/men/situations.. rather than people
doing/being their art.. rather than what we are now capable of ..ie: eudaimoniative
surplus.. for everyone..
has to be everyone or won't work.. www ness

18. from *one of most important contributions of feminism.. consensus.. but comes from a lot of work
so maybe this isn’t r in r .. not a lot of prep...work... but rather... a human/ multitudinal leap...
meaning... mech has to be for everyone... no bias... no labels... no prep.. so... can't be about
measuring/credential ing…
begs a hosting life bits ness l e a p
for (blank)’s sake

19. The normal process of politics of course is to make such people disappear. Indeed one of
the chief functions of women’s work is to make itself disappear. One might say that the
political ideal within direct action circles has become to efface the difference; or, to put it
another way, that action is seen as genuinely revolutionary when the process of production
of situations is experienced as just as liberating as the situations themselves.
It is an experiment one might say in the realignment of imagination, of
creating truly non-alienated forms of experience.
...efface the difference..... the invisibility becomes the liberation..
on things that matter being invisible to the eye.. or perhaps.. just invisible to
the eye as we’re currently using it.. (ie: to measure/validate/judge/compete.)
let’s try.. a nother way.. where the whole idea of seen/unseen work is
irrelevant/disengageable..

20. then .. we listen to these intoxicated women.. saying they are of a feminist movement..
to get us to equity.. not realizing (perhaps) that we were seeing equity as a balancing
act over intoxication.. ie: it’s my right to be as intoxicated as you..
oy.. if we listen.. deep/simple/open.. enough..
and back to this huge ness..
i think that’s why this is so huge/diff.
key is – nationality: human
we play any binary card.. and we’ve lost/compromised from the get go.. we have to help
ourselves out of this mess by constantly reminding ourselves.. of the stories going on in
each head .. the every actor has a reason ness.. the danger of a single story ness..
so the feminsim ness and all the other ism nesses.. really come down to:
binaryness
which really comes down to .. spinach or rock ness.. ie: not really a choice.. after all
and the answer isn’t more equality.. more isms.. (actually it is more isms.. to the point of
7 billion plus guts)… but more listening.. to self/others.. all the stories..

21. ie: men vs women…
on assumed group we call men - and their condition today.. toxic... because we all
placed on them the responsibility of: finances - owning/measuring/valuing money;
wars- killing other humans to keep us from killing humans; work - bring home money
from jobs they don't love
and to show how intoxicated that has made us all.. in regard to the assumed feminist
movement ness.. remnants include women wanting responsibility for assumed
honorable/desirable men's responsibilities: finances - wanting pic on bills; wars -
wanting to help kill in order to keep us from killing; work - wanting to spend hours of
our day doing things we don't necessarily/always love for money

22. the huge/100%/whole ness acknowledges the reliability oriented thinking of most people
in the world.. [ie: bemoaning that..here we go again.. w tragedy of the commons ness; w
tragedy of the structureless ness; et al…] but have we honestly ever given it/us a fair
shot.. have we ever honestly trusted people.. enough.. along with.. a mech to facilitate
alive trusted people..?
i think not.
i think that's why this is so huge/diff.
again.. key is - nationality: human

23. redefineschool.com/feminism-ness/