|
|
|
|
|
|
by limulus
4665 days ago
|
|
|
Your translation seems to be oblivious to the fact that "the white male establishment" != "all white men". In fact, there are plenty of women and plenty of people of color who are a part of the white male establishment. And there are even plenty of white men who aren't a part of it! How can that be? Well, all it takes to be a part of it is to be an apologist for inequality or to otherwise perpetuate inequality. So the reason why it can be referred to as the "white male establishment" isn't because of its membership, but because its existence is mainly for the benefit of white males. |
|
|
The term "white male establishment" seems pretty unambiguous. Even if it involves proxies of many colors and genders, which is your point, it's still fair to describe it as a "problem with men".
> Well, all it takes to be a part of it is to be an apologist for inequality or to otherwise perpetuate inequality.
Yes, and the most effective way for women to address that inequality is to start their own institutions (schools, financial institutions, businesses) that proactively and positively address injustice and inequality, which women can certainly do. Oh, and stop whining about men, which can only serve to hide the fact that the key obstacle women face in 2013 is ... women.