It occurs to me after some reflection that this interaction may offer a teaching moment. I respond, therefore, for others, for the audience to this exchange rather than for Ms. Highsmith herself.
Perhaps the most unhealthy aspect of identity politics is that the act of assigning victim and oppressor groups by identity creates an assignation of moral inferiority and superiority. Since victims are morally superior to oppressors (because they are innocent and perpetrators are guilty), feminism, like other identity political ideologies, builds moral inequality in at the foundations. Women are morally superior to men, by definition.
This creates a powerful temptation towards arrogance. Since the moral superiority is innate rather than earned, about identity rather than behavior, it can be assumed without question, without any need for self-monitoring or behavior testing.
Now, I don't know Ms. Highsmith at all. I don't know where the arrogance and moral superiority that she demonstrates here in speaking to me comes from, but it is certainly possible that it results at least partly from the unhealthy foundation created by feminism, which she clearly supports without seeing much of its shadow. Wherever it comes from, this kind of arrogant moral superiority and prejudice towards men is one common result of the moral polarization that is built into feminist ideology.
To complete the picture, what would a healthy political movement around gender look like? Well, we saw one around race with the movement led by Martin Luther King, Jr. It was visionary and collaborative, and those are the two characteristics of a healthy movement. It was visionary in that it offered a positive, inspiring vision of what to move towards (see his "I Have a Dream" speech on YouTube to see what that looks like), rather than offering a negative judgement of what is here now, as BLM and feminism do. And it was collaborative in that it invited everyone, black and white, to participate as equals in the pursuit of that vision, rather than seeing men, or whites, as entrenched opponents to the ideology as feminism and BLM do.
It occurs to me after some reflection that this interaction may offer a teaching moment. I respond, therefore, for others, for the audience to this exchange rather than for Ms. Highsmith herself.
Perhaps the most unhealthy aspect of identity politics is that the act of assigning victim and oppressor groups by identity creates an assignation of moral inferiority and superiority. Since victims are morally superior to oppressors (because they are innocent and perpetrators are guilty), feminism, like other identity political ideologies, builds moral inequality in at the foundations. Women are morally superior to men, by definition.
This creates a powerful temptation towards arrogance. Since the moral superiority is innate rather than earned, about identity rather than behavior, it can be assumed without question, without any need for self-monitoring or behavior testing.
Now, I don't know Ms. Highsmith at all. I don't know where the arrogance and moral superiority that she demonstrates here in speaking to me comes from, but it is certainly possible that it results at least partly from the unhealthy foundation created by feminism, which she clearly supports without seeing much of its shadow. Wherever it comes from, this kind of arrogant moral superiority and prejudice towards men is one common result of the moral polarization that is built into feminist ideology.
To complete the picture, what would a healthy political movement around gender look like? Well, we saw one around race with the movement led by Martin Luther King, Jr. It was visionary and collaborative, and those are the two characteristics of a healthy movement. It was visionary in that it offered a positive, inspiring vision of what to move towards (see his "I Have a Dream" speech on YouTube to see what that looks like), rather than offering a negative judgement of what is here now, as BLM and feminism do. And it was collaborative in that it invited everyone, black and white, to participate as equals in the pursuit of that vision, rather than seeing men, or whites, as entrenched opponents to the ideology as feminism and BLM do.