Yea, but then it doesn't really make sense to argue about anything, because everything can be statically defined in terms of the environment it exists in. The part can be described in terms of the the discrete whole of which it belongs to, minus the part.

I like to complain a lot, about many things, for like an hour, and then I get frustrated without observable resolution. It's all thinking noise, patterns, I prefer to stay at home, I like sleeping, so tired of arguing on the internet.

You can talk about different groups of actual physical women who have different types of thought about sex, sexuality, and men, because waves and groups of feminisms actually do exist. I recommend "Gender Inequality" by Judith Lorber as a starting point

Right, this is what I meant to say. Arguing with "feminism" is a bit like arguing with "politics" or "ethics" or "philosophy" given how disparate the different strains of it really are. I suppose most people who are arguing against feminism have a specific kind in mind but it doesn't do any good to the reader if you don't explain.

Yes. she just disagrees with a specific article of Shanley and calls it "feminism".

I once got into a twitter fight with Shanley. She's a bit... un-nuanced. I'd say "immature" but that's ageism, I'm surely double her age. ;)

And hilariously/ironically/awesomely, it turns out that Meredith is according to her Facebook page:

   "Principle NLP engineer at Nuance Communications"

So although she says she struggled with fast communication and language and talking to people directly, she now works on speech processing software :)

Honestly, who better to? I saw a talk by an IBM guy about competence that seems to have been based off of this idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_competence

If you need to encode everything that a person does to properly parse sentences and sentiment and intent and whatever, do you want someone whose in the "unconscious competence" category, where it's effortless and they barely know what they're doing? Or might you prefer someone who really has to work at it, who still has to reason through things in their own mind? The person who is only "consciously competent" probably still has hooks into their own mental processes and can explain them to themselves, to others, and to the computer.

A person who is unconsciously competent just reacts a certain way and can't tell you why.

Hilarious. I also know it's entirely possible that some of her twitter output is a "persona"... but she drew a lot of negative attention to me at some point (quite unnecessarily I think) so I unfollowed her. Glancing at her latest feed, not really missing it either