See, my comment isn’t limited at all to the article. I’d really appreciate it if you’d comment on the aspect of this which is splitting and re-directing ire from the ruling class to the middle-class vs. middle-class. We can disagree on subjectivity all we want, but I can’t ignore the fact that we’re more interested in who gets the bigger part of the table scraps rather than a movement and ideology that seeks to better everyone economically and politically. It’s easy to point out how our society is unjust, it’s another to raise oneself above and expand that worldview to understand that there’s a breaking point of wealth inequality which is just completely unaddressed in favor of “men vs. women” which helps no one aside from those who keep pulling more and more profit at the expense of everyone.
This is seriously like campaigning for the rights of children in a labor camp. Sure we might make their backbreaking labor a little easier, but we’re all still doing backbreaking labor. Better to address the real underlying concerns of wealth, economics and safety net rather than put all one’s eggs in the basket of making middle-class women feel better about themselves. It isn’t an either/or, either. We’re putting on blinders and only addressing the emotional side while the part which governs having food on the table and a job to support one’s family are seen as “helping men”. This is, literally, a movement which desires us to engage with an emotionally subjective evil while we forget about how our system destroys lives and actually kills people via topsided economics and a complete unwillingness to break the same systems which cause the ills across the board.
