deleted by creator
Not really? Soviets were pushing hyper-realism so the US government funded the opposite
deleted by creator
They didn’t. It was about opposing the Soviets everywhere more than anything
deleted by creator
Unless you lived in that era it’s really hard to imagine how the reds lived in the imagination of every American. if you’re old enough to remember the war culture during the start of Iraq/Afghanistan. it was like that on steroids. 50 years of Cold War means a couple generations were completely consumed by it. The cold war nostalgia tour didn’t end until the “terrorists are every where” tour began.
deleted by creator
A foolish strategy. It means you allow your opponent to limit you. People who like hyper realism would have no option but Soviet art.
deleted by creator
I always thought Suprematism was what the Soviets were pushing, now I read the wiki article and it seems it was not, and Socialist realism was, and I guess it was the hyper-realism you talk about?
Sources: Gloria Steinem, New York Times (1967); Redstockings press release and research report (1975); The Village Voice (May 21, 1979); Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural Cold War (1999); Daniel Brandt, NameBase/Portland
It’s kinda fucked that they link to Wikipedia all throughout this article, but the real primary source material has zero links.
Kinda kills your credibility.
Would it be too much to upload your primary source material to archive.org and link to it?
When Ramparts broke the story in 1967, Steinem confirmed her role to The New York Times without apology, describing the CIA as “liberal, nonviolent and honorable” and stating she would do it again.
Can we just talk about Rampart please?
That’s all I can think of when I hear rampart
Haha, what?
Why do humans suck so much?
Primate heritage.
Short sightedness
Good article, but the photos really need captions explaining who is in the images
Feminists of the 70s did not give two fucks about intersectionality or helping the oppressed…they only cared about white women getting the same slice of the pie as white men.
she seems more anti-feminist than feminist, like how TERFs are.
Ya it’s an effect of the passage of time, that’s why we label the 3 waves of feminism in America. the movement got broader and more inclusive as the years went on. Which upset some of the older feminists like JK Rowling who refused the memo of equality for all.
hmmm…this sounds very familiar… where have I heard of this type of person before…
Continuing the tradition. The suffragette movement was tied to the civil rights movement. Until the white patriarchy promised white women the right to vote if they dumped the civil rights movement. Then the white women went “fyigm” and helped keep Jim Crow alive.
It’s amazing how a large movement can achieve half its goals and then pull up the ladder on the other half isn’t it?
White feminists*
Black feminists wanted to talk about class and racism, it’s just the media didn’t give them a microphone to talk about it…
Very true.
Steinem
deleted by creator
I’m not sure how feminism can mean equality for all when all of us have a billionaire problem.
intersectional feminism
The only feminism we honor in this household
Gloria Steinem was paid $20k to speak/q&a at my school by an alumni committee and it was an hour of students just tearing her to shreds about what a money grubbing POS she was. It was great.
You paid her to bash her? I bet she left with a smug smile
Alumni paid her to come (à la Meryl Streep and her ilk) and students were extremely upset.
Looks like the link has some sharing metadata that should have been removed before sharing. This bit is completely unnecessary to access the article. Please edit it out.
?r=1t17zr&showWelcomeOnShare=true
And the link written this way works better methinks. https://hrnews1.substack.com/p/feminist-icon-gloria-steinem-was





