discrimination is not always straight forward as we think, it’s a heirarchy , even one group that is discriminated is capable of discriminating others which are lower than them

deleted by creator

Latina people are white , Colombia is the best example , were most of the Latina people like to identify as white over mestizo or black identity.

Most of the Latina people identify more as white than black or mestizo

1)“Literally the only feminism I’ve heard about for the past 10 years is intersectional feminism.”

Actions speaks more than words , Unlike Scandinavian countries where feminists became so inclusive that they heavily prioritised welfare and empowerment of minority women belonging to Sami tribe community Whereas in United States , everything is just in words not in action. Also the percentage of white women voting for trump increased in United States shows what is the state of intersectionality in United States compared to Nordic countries,

2)“Very much a just-so story. Imo, a far more reasonable interpretation breaks voting patterns along tribal identity, while most women voting care about more things than the very amorphous “collective welfare of all women”. Interesting to note that 38% of latina voters voted for Trump, a statistic strangely absent from your argument”

Exactly—voting is shaped by identity. That’s the point. The large gap between white and Black women voters shows that “women” are not a unified political group, and race often outweighs gender solidarity in practice. Bringing up Latina voters actually strengthens the argument—different groups of women have different lived realities and priorities. So main stream white feminists avoided problems of minorities despite making claims of suport for intersectionality

3)“I have never met a single self-identifying feminist who would not agree with this to some extent.”

Acknowledging history isn’t the same as centering it. The critique is that these histories are often treated as background context rather than shaping current feminist priorities and policy focus.

4)“I think Adam Smith would have a lot to say about this. Specifically, he would probably point out that the slave states really had an awfully small economy compared to the free states, and that most of the wealth generation which occurred in the US occurred due to productivity gains driven by technological innovations which were most aggressively exploited in the north. In the long run, few people could claim to have really benefitted noticeably from american slavery - it was just a shitty thing to do for no reason.”

That’s a very selective reading. slavery was deeply integrated into early American capitalism—financing, banking, and global trade . The effects didn’t just disappear; they shaped wealth distribution and institutions long-term. Jim crows laws also disadvantaged black people in economic wealth creation , most of the black workers during this period didn’t had an opportunity to generate assets unlike white people. productivity gains driven by technological innovations mostly benefitted white people because of restrictions for participation of black people in the economy

5)“I mean, from the pro-DEI arguments I keep hearing on lemmy, DEI seems to mostly involve removing names from resumes before they are rejected by AI or something. But I wouldn’t be surprised if this critique had merit - most people who benefit from adding footholds inside the system are people who know how to work the system.”

Yes—and that’s precisely the critique. When structural inequalities aren’t addressed, benefits often flow to those already closer to power like white women rather than the most marginalized groups.

6)“I really don’t have anything to say to this, because it feels like you kind of just shut down in the middle of a rant. Are you okay? Did you have a stroke?”

Dismissing the point doesn’t address it. There’s research showing that diversity initiatives and educational access programs often disproportionately benefit white women compared to more marginalized groups. That’s a structural outcome worth examining, not ignoring.

US feminism is mostly centering on the issues of white, middle-class women, failing to fully integrate the needs of women of color, marginalized, or lower-income women. This lack of a unified approach leads to fragmented advocacy and fragmented outcomes, rather than a broad movement.

Also 53% of white women vote for trump compared to 7% of black women who voted for trump. This showed that they gave more priority to racial identify over collective welfare of all women in usa .

White feminist often ignore or won’t acknowledge that in usa —specifically land ownership and early capital accumulation were built upon the exploitation of Native American and African people.

The systematic removal of Native Americans from their land provided massive amounts of property that was subsequently passed down through generations of white families, serving as a primary source of generational wealth which black women or native American women doesn’t have.

The wealth generated by the labor of enslaved African people in agriculture and other industries directly enriched white slaveholders and, by extension, their present generation . Jim crows law curbed wealth generation for black women compared to white women

Wealth disparity between Black and white women in the USA is severe, with white households holding nearly 10 times the median net worth of Black households, or approximately 15 cents for every dollar. Black women face lower income, less intergenerational wealth, lower homeownership rates, and higher debt, often keeping them in lower-wage service jobs without benefits.

white feminists often ignore these issues Best example would be :-1)DEI

Despite DEI mostly benefitted white women , most of the white feminist organisation ignored whether black women benefitted or not .they doesn’t cared about native American or black women . They often fail to view things from racial angle by focusing just on gender angle

2)Most of the educational scholarships are benefitted by white women over native American ,black women

Unlike Scandinavian countries where feminists became inclusive that they heavily prioritised welfare and empowerment of minority women belonging to Sami tribe community Whereas in United States , everything is just in words not in action.

British concentration camps in South Africa (1899–1902) were established during the Second Boer War, forcing over 100,000 Boer women, children, and Black South Africans into overcrowded, unsanitary sites. The camps were characterized by severe overcrowding, poor sanitation, inadequate food rations, and a lack of medical care, leading to massive outbreaks of measles, typhoid, and dysentery. Nearly 26,000 Boer women and children died, while over 20,000 Black Africans died. Some sources claim that actual death toll would be 42,081-47,900

the British operated concentration camps in the South African Republic, Orange Free State, Colony of Natal, and Cape Colony

British officials justified camp as a means to curb guerrilla warfare

Margaret Thatcher entered negotiations for the future of Hong Kong with significant confidence bolstered by the British victory in the Falklands War (1982). This victory increased her domestic prestige and encouraged a firmer stance in international dealings, including with China.

Coming only three months after the Falklands victory, Thatcher’s September 1982 visit to Beijing was seen as an opportunity to project strength and uphold British treaty rights regarding Hong Kong. Before negotiation, Margret thatcher had good confidence that she could extend the lease , but during the negotiation Deng emphasized that China would definitely take back Hong Kong, with or without British agreement.

According to memoir recollections on hongkong negotiation , Deng xioping told thatcher that :-----------> “” Congratulations on the Falklands, but don’t think that could happen in Hong Kong.” “I could send peoples liberation army to roll over hongkong in this afternoon if you don’t agree , Sovergnity is non negotiable”

Thatcher replied to Deng that :--------------> “There is nothing I could do to stop you, but world would see how china behaves"

thatcher describing the 1982 meeting :(From The Irish Times (1996)) “Deng was “short-tempered, bossy, " and very tough to negotiate .”

Unlike the Falklands, which could be defended militarily by a naval task force, Hong Kong was geographically vulnerable, bordering mainland China and china have a large sized army with over a million troops .

Despite having Hong Kong Island and Stonecutters Island which is Ceded to Britain in perpetuity under the Treaty of Nanjing (1842) and Convention of Peking (1860). UK gave up sovergnity on entire hongkong .

The handover of Hong Kong from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the People’s Republic of China occurred at midnight on 1 July 1997. This event ended 156 years of British rule, dating back to the cession of Hong Kong Island in 1841 during the First Opium War.

Handover of hongkong was done with an agreement for the protection of democracy in hongkong . But most political observors claim that by the indroduction of "The Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019 " defacto marked end of assured democracy under sino British agreement

If you compare western european countries with namibia , you could find that Namibia have more crime rate on women than western countries, but the catch is that in recent years there is significant volume of reported cases, particularly regarding intimate partner violence. That means women are finally reporting and no of arrests have also increased

Unlike other african countries where women fear reporting crimes , Namibia have made great strides in judiciary, police etc so that women are coming forward to report crimes. that’s a good thing and a foremost step towards in achieving great gender equality like in Scandinavian countries in future.

Namibia ranks as the top African country in gender equality in the 2025 Global Gender Gap Report, published by the World Economic Forum.

With a score of 81.1 percent, Namibia places 8th globally and has remained in the top 10 worldwide since 2021.

The report tracks gender parity across 148 countries using four dimensions: economic participation, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment.

Sub-Saharan Africa ranked sixth out of eight regions, closing 68 percent of its overall gender gap. While the region lags behind others in education and political empowerment, it showed measurable progress compared to past years.

Notably, Sub-Saharan Africa improved in tertiary education, with women now outnumbering men in enrollment across many countries.

The region also saw increased representation of women in leadership, including ministers and parliamentarians. Rwanda stands out with full gender parity in its national parliament.

deleted by creator

Japan’s women only train coaches are very different compared to india.

In india if you enter womens compartment as a man , you are legally punishable under law whereas in japan there isn’t any specific laws to prosecute rule breakers . In japan , disabled men along with their Caretakers which can be men too and boys of elementary school age are also allowed in women only train coaches.

Unlike india which have 24hrs woman only coaches, japan only have woman only coaches during certain time period especially during peak rush hours , weekends .

Japan railway authority doens’t specify any specific policy on whether transwomen are allowed or not.

Extra note :- in india , from 2020 onwards transwomen who legally identify as women and have undergone medical actions based on government’s specific requirements are allowed in women’s only compartment in certain cities like Delhi . The inclusion of transwomen is currently in ongoing phase and not completely implemented across all cities…

Supreme court of India made a recent judgement that Discrimating transwomen and not allowing them to enter is now punishable by law and may get 2 year prison sentence.

Key State-Wise Initiatives 1)Delhi: Offers year-round free travel for women , recently extended and expanded to include transgender passengers with the “Pink Saheli” card system. 2)Tamil Nadu: The Zero Ticket Bus Travel Scheme permits women to travel free in government-run normal-fare buses (up to 30 km). 3)Karnataka: The Shakti scheme launched on June 11, 2023, provides free transport for women domiciled in the state on KSRTC, BMTC, NWKRTC, and KKRTC buses. 4)Andhra Pradesh: The Stree Shakti Free Bus Travel Scheme promotes women’s empowerment, with significant ridership. 5)Punjab: Provides free travel for women in state-run buses. Special Occasions: Several states like Rajasthan, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh offer free travel on Raksha Bandhan.

Many provinces/states in india provide free public transportation especially bus and metro rides for women. Major motivations behind this initiative include : 1)providing women better access to public spaces, Female labour force participation in India has seen a significant increase, rising to 41.7% in 2023–24 from 23.3% in 2017–18 2)to promote education, and employment for women

Major criticism aganist this initiative:- 1)major criticism comes from lower caste dalit men organisation who claim that this actively discriminate millions of lower caste dalit men who earn $510.80 USD annually whereas it benefits Uppercaste women who owns huge amount of wealth via ancestral land and working Uppercaste women earns more annual salary than lower caste men. 2)many critics consider that giving freebies harm the economy negatively

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Approval rate of modi in morning consult is based on assumption excluding opinions of muslims , Dalits ,adivasi people ,people in kashmir , and mainly south indians . Also 65-75% approval is a blanded lie because it excluded a large section of indias non hindi/Urdu speaking population (especially dravidian language speaking group). The data for approval is based on data from indian state of Gujarat , uttarpradesh etc which are predominantly modi supporters base.

Modi is in power only because of first past the post system, also dispite having the advantage of first past the post system which primarily helped Modi’s party(Bharatiya Janata party ) , still he failed to get majority in parliament and made an aliance with regional parties like Janata dal United party and Telugu Desam party to win in 2024 election . That means this 65-75% approval rate is an assumption not the reality.

Non citizens account a small percentage of indian population (less than 1% of total population) , Total eligible population for voting is almost 70% if we exclude children , 36.6% vote share actually comes from total number of voters that have voted despite 70% being eligible , that’s why I said in my statement (2).

So what i said is truth , only 16% of population voted for him . Also look how bad is it for a country which claim itself as democratic have the leader of its country with only just 16% of total population support or 24.3% of eligible voters support

India is more of an electoral autocracy , you can vote an autocrat , it is the media which claims modi as one of the world’s most popular democratic leader

deleted by creator

First past the Post system of democracy is one of the biggest scams in the world

Despite being called as world’s most popular democratic leader, Modi’s party and alliance only got votes from 16% of total population(in exact numbers :- 235,974,144 out of 1.4Billion people of which 70% of population were eligible for 2024 elections). If we look at the percentage of eligible adults: 24.3% voted for Modi’s party . Factors causing this :-

1. first past the post system instead of proporational representation amplies this issue . ( Despite opposition party getting 21.19voting %, they only won 99 seats in Congress/parliament whereas Modi’s party with just 36.56 voting% won 240 seats)

2)A large number of eligible voters not voting is also a reason