Up Front: Say When
522 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 21 Newer→ Last
-
sally jones, in reply to
I guess I’m trying to rescue some useful descriptors that feminists have come up with over the years from the use that stupid people (here’s a worthwhile generalisation) make of them.
If anyone out there is genuinely interested in reading what highly educated and useful feminists have had to say on the issues debated and distorted by the 'lifestyle feminists' dominating the discussion here, I strongly recommend starting with Germaine Greer's the whole woman (1999). Danielle, she has some useful things to say about your interesting - and useful - comments made on PA a year ago on the subject of women's fear (349-358).
Her chapter on 'girlpower' (399-411) begins:
"The longest revolution has many phases, false starts and blind alleys, all of which must be explored before a way through can be found. One of these is the brief and catastrophic career of 'girls', 'girls behaving badly', 'girls on top'...".
Sorry to invoke the words of another, but if I use my own then, it would seem, they're rather likely to be dismissed here as "stupid". Hopefully Greer's words - and brain - will be granted a little more respect.
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
Sally, where have you been called anything close to stupid? or anyone saying what you believe has? Or perhaps, someone has styled their particular feminism as "educated and useful", as opposed to yours? Because I've found your comment enormously condescending and passive-aggressive, and if I've made any that warranted that, I want to know what they are so I can apologise.
-
sally jones, in reply to
Because I’ve found your comment enormously condescending and passive-aggressive,
Emma, where I'm coming from is roughly the position of the commentators on Boganette who you have been at pains to hold up for ridicule here. And, I believe, so is Germaine Greer. Your response to my point up thread that the issues under debate are a little more complicated than respecting a person's right to wear and drink what they want, I too found extremely condescending. No apology necessary, it's par for the course when you hold a position that is not consistent with the mainstream.
The first comment you highlighted from Boganette I believe was making the point that men who are neither gay nor feminist like women to be promiscuous and wear as little clothing as possible. I agree with this statement even if wishing it had been made with a little more tact. I do not think it stupid. But I would draw people's attention to the key word 'feminist' in this statement and hope especially that Russell and other men who have been offended by it might reconsider their objection by identifying themselves as feminists, namely people who recognise and challenge the ongoing, institutionalised and cultural oppression of women. -
I don't mean to speak for anyone else, but I'm trying to clarify your position Sally.
Are you saying dressing in certain ways upholds the patriarchy?
-
Sacha, in reply to
men who are neither gay nor feminist like women to be promiscuous and wear as little clothing as possible.
bollocks
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
making the point that men who are neither gay nor feminist like women to be promiscuous and wear as little clothing as possible.
Sally I'm not a feminist, lifestyle or otherwise. Nor am I gay. Yet I disagree with the statement. Perhaps I should be excluded from analysis as an outlier. Or perhaps the statement is not taking into account all the data available and is hence a flawed hypothesis.
Personally I think it's a trite shallow simplification but that's just my opinion.
-
Danielle, in reply to
Danielle, she has some useful things to say about your interesting – and useful – comments made on PA a year ago on the subject of women’s fear (349-358).
Eeep. I basically have the long-term memory of a mayfly. It’s quite fun to try and imagine what on earth I was going on about a year ago… I wonder if the search function will help? Bueller?
‘Lifestyle feminists’ in scare quotes is… a bit of a dodgy way to characterise people, though. I wouldn’t be happy to be described that way. You *can* actually have a bob each way, in that you can believe in kyriarchal social structures and *also* believe in not slut-shaming people. (Yes, I find this fence-post quite comfortable, why do you ask?)
-
nzlemming, in reply to
I share in your opinion, Bart, and in Sacha's succinct but trenchant comment. However, I've found, in other discussions with idealogues, that actual data points don't weigh as heavily as dogma.
-
Because (speaking for myself), the patriarchy has for me always been a power relation. Women could be entirely naked, or patched up in head to toe, and it wouldn't matter. Both are equally real.
I do think that the male gaze is a real phenomenon - I didn't realise how real until I went into gay clubs with friends - but how it is negotiated is something different entirely. If there is liberation, then dress will be a function of much more. If there isn't, it signifies little more.
And for the record, the sight of a woman is something that gives me great joy. Can't speak for anyone else on that either.
-
sally jones, in reply to
Sally I’m not a feminist
I gathered that.
-
Danielle, in reply to
I’m not a feminist
Is that because you don't believe men can be feminists (I totally disagree with this, but realise that some people think it) or because you don't believe in equal rights and opportunities for men and women?
(Sorry Bart, not picking on you, but I am slightly frustrated by this oft-repeated statement, because I think the entire leftist world should be explicitly feminist. :) )
-
sally jones, in reply to
I basically have the long-term memory of a mayfly. It’s quite fun to try and imagine what on earth I was going on about a year ago… I wonder if the search function will help?
Danielle, up thread Emma provided a link to her earlier post a year ago: "Does my mortgage look like a slag in this?" as a PA precursor to the debate here on 'slut-shaming'. There, you made an eloquent comment on women's right not to be made to feel frightened. I agree wholeheartedly. However, what I believe is an ongoing debate is the complicated question of how to achieve this worthy end. I think Greer has some interesting things to say on the matter.
-
@George
So this becomes:
Dressing and behaving in certain ways may uplift certain members of the patriarchy.As already pointed out in this thread, though -
why should that be allowed to become a problem for women?ETA: which leads into Sally's comment just above.
-
recordari, in reply to
because I think the entire leftist world should be explicitly feminist. :)
Ahem. Can I get a witness on the other side of the coin, please?
After the TOFO FAQs, I fell into silent contemplation, as did, I would note, most other males who had been active in the thread. Where did this contemplation take me? Actually, I’m still on the way, but when you read ‘lifestyle feminist’ and;
men who are neither gay nor feminist like women to be promiscuous and wear as little clothing as possible.
(aptly put Sacha) you wonder what is a safe stance for ‘us’ to take?
This is something I do seriously want to get right, because three girls who look to me for some guidance in this area, along with their wholly more card-carrying feminist mother, grandmother and auntie, could be influenced either positively or negatively, depending on how badly I stuff up.
Strangely, and possibly slap worthy, when I read your first post Sally, the phrase that jumped into my head was ‘nice mansplain’.
Where did this contemplation take me?
Now I remember. George Michael. I rest my case.
-
This is something I do seriously want to get right, because three girls who look to me for some guidance in this area, along with their wholly more card-carrying feminist mother, grandmother and auntie, could be influenced either positively or negatively, depending on how badly I stuff up.
You might have stated this concern slightly differently from how I would have recordari but I broadly agree. At the risk of oversimplifying, I'd like to think I can be a feminist (as per Danielle's definition) while still enjoying the banner for this post (with all due respect to Emma).
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
(Sorry Bart, not picking on you, but I am slightly frustrated by this oft-repeated statement, because I think the entire leftist world should be explicitly feminist. :) )
I was surprised at Bart's response though, and wondered how many men think only women can be feminists. Benefit of the doubt says at least three male posters here support feminism, but wouldn't describe themselves as feminists. Am I right?
-
I've been out, so I need a moment to catch up. Before that, however, I'd like to say what I didn't get time to say before I left.
Sally, way back here, I asked you a direct question. Could you answer it?
-
I'm getting very confused. What are we actually talking about here? I got lost sometime after the subject wasn't George Michael anymore....
I came up for air at Danielle's comment:
I think the entire leftist world should be explicitly feminist
+1
But other than that, I'm totally lost. Sally, I'm not clear what point you're making. If we want Greer's views we can read the book, but what are your views?
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
Benefit of the doubt says at least three male posters here support feminism, but wouldn't describe themselves as feminists. Am I right?
Works for me.
-
Danielle, in reply to
Ahem. Can I get a witness on the other side of the coin, please?
Oh, I'm sure there are also right-wing feminist peeps - I just think it's slightly more likely that the tenets of feminism are problematic for, say, social conservatives who fall under the right-wing banner.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
Is that because you don’t believe men can be feminists (I totally disagree with this, but realise that some people think it) or because you don’t believe in equal rights and opportunities for men and women?
I can't speak for Bart but, for myself, I don't take on any label to make someone else's life easier. The term "feminist" is loaded enough when applied to females - for males, it's a minefield.
And, according to certain persons, males can't be feminists because we're all rapists, perhaps because we like to see females dressed in as little as possible. </sarcasm>
I have 5 sisters. I grew up thinking they could do anything (and dammit! they can! Awesome women, all) and I have never understood why some people (both male and female) think that the situation is other than that. Undoubtedly, some people do think this way, as some people think the Pope is infallible, or that the sun will not rise if you don't ask it to. They're not people I give much credence to. I've worked for and with males and females, and I don't see any demonstrable gender bias in how insane some people can be, or in how good others can be. The best boss I ever had was female, and so was the worst.
If I had to pick a label, it would be something like "people-ist" as I believe in people's rights. I don't like to see anyone marginalised because of anything others might see as a "defining characteristic".
A discussion of "who is a feminist, anyway?" is doomed to failure, in my view, precisely because terms like those, while they may have reasonably accepted dictionary definitions, have emotional connotations that vary widely from individual to individual and it's the connotations that are brought to the discussion rather than the definitions.
Further, if one can review the thread dispassionately (always difficult in such discussions - even more than copyright!), one can see that Sally has successfully managed to divert and direct the discussion by misquoting or, at least, misunderstanding Giovanni's comment which is a standard tactic in ideological argument, regardless of the flavour of the ideology.
-
Okay, having read back, I'll assume that comment I linked to is the one you found condescending. It wasn't meant that way. That actually is my position - the theory is easy, the practise is difficult - and I'm not sure how else I could have put it.
And before we get into any further difficulties over semantics, I'm going to ask some more questions, not as snark, but for clarification. Your comment seems to suggest that "educated useful" feminism is exclusive of "lifestyle feminism" and that "lifestyle feminism" is, you feel, an adequate label for my beliefs. Is this the case?
And yes, we've had long discussions here over whether men can be feminists or not, and not reached a consensus.
ETA: Sally, I pulled that first quote in the main for what it said about women, not men:
Of course women (feminists) are going to be more 'pernicious' in their so called "slut-shaming" than men.
Which suggests that slut-shaming is something feminists should do.
-
Danielle, in reply to
Works for me.
I was just saying to Gio privately that I get why he doesn't identify as a feminist - because he doesn't believe that a dude can *be* a feminist, only a feminist ally - and I do respect that position (even if I think it's kinda bullshit, fundamentally. :) ).
-
James Butler, in reply to
Benefit of the doubt says at least three male posters here support feminism, but wouldn’t describe themselves as feminists. Am I right?
For myself, I'm reluctant to appropriate a label which I don't completely understand.
If "believe in equal rights and equal opportunities for men and women" is a sufficient definition, then sign me up! But I have had reason to doubt that this would satisfy everyone.
Probably the easiest, and most useful, way for me to engage in this issue is to a) try to live the principle of equality in my life and relationships, and b) stand on the sidelines and yell "Yay feminists!!" when necessary. I don't know if I have the skill or fortitude to actually play.
-
men who are neither gay nor feminist like women to be promiscuous and wear as little clothing as possible.
I do support the ideas of feminism (can leave labeling me as a feminist out of scope for this comment). However, I still like women to be promiscuous and wear as little clothing as possible. If that's their thing. Actually, I like them to do their thing, whatever that thing is, even if I'm not into that thing.
Is this called liberal feminism? I don't know the lingo.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.