What Are The Consequences of another Trump win for American feminism?

submitted by eddyelric from self.GenderCritical

Hard to feel optimistic for the near term future. He won the popular vote for almost all demographics. Do you think Project 2025 will come to pass, or was that a carrot? Personally, I want to disappear for awhile.

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]lipsy 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Insofar as it pumps (or—one can dream—slams) the brakes on libfemmery, I'm all for it.

As far as, y'know actual feminism, i.e., radical feminism? well... never in American history have elected officials ever rlly stood for any of the core principles of radical feminism, and I'm not holding my breath for that to change anytime soon. (Most major victories of U.S. radical feminists has been won in the courts, few by legislation or executive/agency fiat.) So rlly it's mostly neither here nor there which party holds the reins.

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't agree with you that

Every major victory of US feminists has been won in the courts, none by legislation

I can think of quite a bit of legislation in the US at the federal, state and local level that I'd count as major victories of/for US radical feminists.

At the federal level alone, my list includes: the 19th Amendment to the US Constitution; the Equal Pay Act of 1963; Title VII of the US Civil Rights Act of 1964; Title IX of the federal Education Amendments of 1972; the Women's Educational Equity Act of 1974; the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974; the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978; the Violence Against Women Act of 1994; the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act of 2023/24.

Lots of legislation passed by the states and local governments have been victories for feminists in my view: the legislation known as rape shield laws; legislation criminalizing violent sex offenses, sex by coercion, and "non contact" sex offenses such "peeping tom" laws; legislation pertaining to marriage and family life establishing the grounds and processes for legal separation and divorce, custody of children, division of marital property and allocation of spousal support/alimony; state laws that made it illegal for married men to rape and beat their wives; laws pertaining to sex offenders and child molestors post-conviction and when they've served their sentences; laws providing protections and methods of recourse for victims of domestic/intimate partner and family violence as well as stalking and menacing; state laws pertaining to breastfeeding outside the home, and which require employers in some states to provided lactation rooms and breaks for breastfeeding working moms to express and store pumped milk...

[–]lipsy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Valid points, thank you. Made some edits.

[–]LoveScience 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I don't think Trump is interested at all in Project 2025 - he has his own platform and he doesn't want to be a puppet to the Heritage Foundation. I'm sure there will be members of congress who are giving Project 2025 their all and we should be more concerned if an establishment Republican (who may be less self-interested than Trump) is elected in 2028. Trump has lots of other types of scary stuff in his agenda but I don't think any would set back women specifically.

I'm more concerned about the election revealing how alienated people have felt from the theatrics of the left when it comes to DEI/identity politics and how any group that was "less privileged" (including women) may experience some reactive backlash from the men who are tired of being demeaned. We already know that's a problem with walking piles of diarrhea like Andrew Tate.

[–]eddyelric[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

How do you address the problem of IdPol/DEI without telling others to grovel and go woke right? becayse that's what I'm seeing.

[–]lipsy 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think the best approach is to inject into our culture, at every decent opportunity, the fact (••fact••, She said) that institutional DEI ends up working against everybody's interests in the medium to long term.

Not just only against actually marginalized persons, who get punched repeatedly in the face right from the word go (...imagine telling dirt-poor Appalachian White people that they're going to have to spend the rest of their lives going around begging forgiveness for "their whiteness" and their "inherent privilege"... DEI actually fucking DOES that! Literally! It really does!)— but also, eventually, against the ultimate capacity for achievement of those who ARE graded on the DEI curve.

One of my best Friends (22 now, so, educated more-or-less entirely in woo-woo DEI-land) explained it to me thusly: "It almost doesn't matter what kind of work I go into; no matter what, the best I can rlly aspire to is to become seen as "the best Black Female (fill in job title here) out there". I'll never even get a SHOT at being "the best (job title) out there, periodt". Instead of a glass ceiling, it's a Black ceiling now, and damned if it isn't lower than the ceiling for everybody else".

She then went on to point out another cruel little twist, which is that She may well end up becoming "the best (job/hobby/whatever) ever, flat out" among Her friends, family and social circle—i.e., among literally everybody in Her life who ISN'T involved with that pursuit. ...🫤 whereas within Her field of endeavor itself, realistically She'll never be able to shake off the identity adjectives, so those higher tiers of achievement (or at least being recognized for reaching them) are preemptively closed off to Her.

She's absolutely right, of course. DEI encourages historically oppressed minority groups to be complacent, mediocre, and satisfied with "easy mode"—all of which will just perpetuate the effects of that historic oppression. Tyranny of low expectations etc etc. The cycle never breaks until everybody is ultimately measured by the same yardstick (regardless of whether they're given a boost to begin with).

[–]eddyelric[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

One of my best Friends (22 now, so, educated more-or-less entirely in woo-woo DEI-land) explained it to me thusly: "It almost doesn't matter what kind of work I go into; no matter what, the best I can rlly aspire to is to become seen as "the best Black Female (fill in job title here) out there". I'll never even get a SHOT at being "the best (job title) out there, periodt". Instead of a glass ceiling, it's a Black ceiling now, and damned if it isn't lower than the ceiling for everybody else".

She then went on to point out another cruel little twist, which is that She may well end up becoming "the best (job/hobby/whatever) ever, flat out" among Her friends, family and social circle—i.e., among literally everybody in Her life who ISN'T involved with that pursuit. ...🫤 whereas within Her field of endeavor itself, realistically She'll never be able to shake off the identity adjectives, so those higher tiers of achievement (or at least being recognized for reaching them) are preemptively closed off to Her.

She's absolutely right, of course. DEI encourages historically oppressed minority groups to be complacent, mediocre, and satisfied with "easy mode"—all of which will just perpetuate the effects of that historic oppression. Tyranny of low expectations etc etc. The cycle never breaks until everybody is ultimately measured by the same yardstick (regardless of whether they're given a boost to begin with).

I see. I've had thoughts like these too, and they stir something deep within me. It's as if a part of me wants to rebel against the labels that others seem to view as immutable boundaries. The truth is, if I’m going to be judged by these traits that I can't change, I could treat them as something imposed upon me—or I could seize them as a foundation for my own, proactive identity. I’m realizing that the key may not lie in merely assimilating or accepting what’s handed down but in transcending the entire framework. Neither left nor right.

When I look at my early experiences with racism, I see moments that taught me to doubt the system. That colorblindness was false and I will judged and boxed in. I learned to think that true recognition would always slip beyond reach, filtered through the lens of identity politics. This initially felt like the only realistic response: to work within the system as it is. But maybe that’s where I was wrong, and where so many of us have been wrong—thinking that simply playing the game would get us closer to fairness or success.

[–]carbon0va 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

more concerned if an establishment Republican (who may be less self-interested than Trump) is elected in 2028

How much is Vance bought into Project 2025? Or, perhaps more pertinently - does he have enough backbone and dgaf-ism to resist if he disagrees?

Trump is an old man who may not make the 4 years. Vance potentially has a long political career still ahead of him; how many enemies is he willing - and can afford - to make?

[–]ChaikiKarabli 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yep, that's why I'm concerned about Vance. He's better than Pence to be sure, but also it can be dangerous if he puts a reasonable face to a radical agenda.

[–]LoveScience 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Vance's political positions do seem to align with Project 2025.

I started reviewing Agenda 47 and Project 2025 and there is a lot of overlap. There are parts of P2025 missing from A47 like abortion, pornography, and other issues that we know Trump tends to be more liberal on. I haven't had time to dig into how closely they match the sections on the economy, journalism, etc.

[–]LoveScience 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I just read this article that elaborates a bit on the Heritage Foundation's interactions with the Trump campaign.