For the record
During the campaign I wrote a few times about the bewildering behavior of the many feminists who attacked Sarah Palin in astonishingly sexist (and dishonest) terms — and did so in the name of feminism. The situation was appalling to many of us who have been lifelong feminists and who care deeply about the continuation of the movement.
As the editor of The New Agenda website,* I have lost track of the number of letters from women around the country saying that “feminism is dead,” or that feminism obviously never really meant anything if this is how prominent feminists behave. Women feel utterly betrayed. I don’t expect NOW to release their membership numbers, but they are experiencing the biggest rash of membership cancellations probably in their history.
That’s why I care about this. Feminism itself has been dishonored. Feminist leaders have not only made fools of themselves, but have made a mockery of feminist beliefs. This isn’t a question of healthy disagreement. This is a question of self-destruction.
As I wrote in this comment thread:
If your message to me is that people do have legitimate reasons to dislike Palin, then you’re telling me something I already know. I disagree with Republicans on virtually everything.
I have not once, ever, said that there are not legitimate reasons to dislike Palin. What I have said, and will say again, is that political disagreement is no excuse for sexist and misogynistic attacks. Furthermore, for self-described feminists to employ such means is the height of hypocrisy, and as someone who has been involved in the feminist movement for 37 years, it is exceptionally painful for me to watch.
The attacks on Palin have been analogous to what horrible racist attacks on Obama would look like. I dislike Obama and don’t trust him politically, but that doesn’t give me the right to call him a n***r or a coon or a spade, or indulge in ugly racist stereotypes to demean him.
On top of that is the damage that is being done to feminism in the name of attacking Palin. Forty years of progress have gone out the window while self-described feminists, eager to attack Palin on any grounds possible, have reviled her for being from a small town, for having a rural accent, for having children, for wearing her hair up, for any goddamn thing they like. It’s appalling. Establishment feminism has committed hari kiri in public this year and it’s a fucking disaster. It’s like the NAACP sponsoring a lynching.
And again:
This is what happened in the feminist world this year: Sarah Palin, a self-described feminist (conservative variety) was named to the Republican ticket. Feminists with public soapboxes proceeded to attack her in the most dishonest, sexist terms imaginable. They ridiculed her for considering herself a feminist. They said she was “the antithesis of everything feminism stands for” (though the only area where she disagrees with mainstream feminism is on abortion.) They said that because she had a husband and children and a career, she was an embarrassment to feminism. They ridiculed her speech patterns, her background, her education, her religion, everything — sending the clear message that feminism is only for urban atheist intellectuals, preferably of the single childless variety. They ridiculed her hair and makeup and called her a bimbo — while they themselves wear makeup, high heels, endorse pornography, and otherwise collaborate with the patriarchy in countless ways. They celebrated when Palin was called a cunt, hung in effigy, and made the object of public revenge-rape fantasies.
This was feminists doing this, in public. Making a mockery of feminism. Using “feminism” as an excuse to engage in an old-fashioned stoning of an uppity woman.
Considering the severity of this misbehavior and the damage it has done to the feminist movement, I’ve been pretty damn restrained about it on this blog.
I’m not interested in pursuing an argument with any of the feminists who did these things. I’m generally not interested in intra-feminist arguments, period: feminism doesn’t require that women agree on everything, and it certainly doesn’t demand perfect behavior at all times. It is, however, a political movement with basic tenets, and when those tenets are under attack by the movement’s own members, what’s left is a salvage operation. For me, the concerns are purely practical in terms of moving forward as feminists:
1. How can we rebuild feminism as an American political movement?
2. How can we prevent this kind of self-immolation from happening again?
3. Is the damage to the feminist brand such that we need to explicitly disavow this year’s behavior going forward? (As in, “I belong to the school of feminism that doesn’t see Republican women as cunts who should be murked. What about you?”)
*Note, however, that I am not writing this post in my capacity as a founder/editor of The New Agenda. There’s a reason I keep my own blog, and that’s so I can express my own feelings with untrammeled honesty. Over at The New Agenda we are being relentlessly positive, which is exactly the right thing to do in that venue. But over here, in the privacy of my own blog and without the need for political correctness, I am wrestling with the hard questions.
51 Responses to “For the record”
-
pumatiza says:
With regards to the self proclaimed “feminist community” (this to them means only the liberals) the only way to address it really is to write books, and promote them through video and art - it is the only thing they respect, although they will tear them down at first with their “academic critique” until they finally get it, sometime in the future.
November 19th, 2008 at 7:09 pm EST -
PhilosopherP says:
I agree with you about Palin and the manner in which some feminists attacked her.
I’m not sure how to go about rebuilding feminism, but I do think the attacks revealed some not-so-good sides of feminism. As a fairly new feminist, I have to admit being pretty shocked concerning the degree to which many feminists are comfortable trying to dictate certain kinds of ‘choices’ to me.
For example, I was married before I was 22 — and I took my husband’s last name. NOW (18 years later) I get static for that choice — When there is actually a discussion about it, my reasons are ignored and I’m treated as something less than a real feminist as a result. What is even worse, my husband has had a considerable amount of flack for MY decision — as if he were somehow responsible OR should have stopped me.
This sort of attitude needs to change. As feminists we need to continue to fight for actual choices AND support those who make choices we wouldn’t have made ourselves. To do anything less is to exchange a paternalism for an equally unacceptable level of control by women… (I don’t want to call that ‘feminism’ or ‘maternalism’… because those words don’t have the same impact).
-
pumatiza says:
I also think that the self proclaimed feminists are not the issue. Feminism needs a rebrand and the version 4.0 needs to be mainstream and reach those who are too lazy to get it at the moment. Aim for the center. I completely support the new agenda, and the non partizan approach you are taking.
-
Cynthia Ruccia says:
At the risk of sounding relentlessly Pollyannaish, I think that in some ways what happened this year to women has a silver lining. Having the misogyny is our culture so nakedly exposed gives us a small window to make exponential improvements.
We get the chance to redefine the whole topic of women’s rights and women’s progress. We don’t exactly get to wipe the slate clean, but we get the opportunity to remodel the whole concept.
I wouldn’t worry about self-immolation occurring again in the future. Everything tends to become its opposite no matter what, so there is no fail-safe that can be built in.
The old feminism as a movement is completely dead. Progress was made, but we need to take a quantum leap, and we have the chance to make that leap. History has opened up for us————let’s go!!!!
-
CoolAunt says:
Well, Cynthia Ruccia, if you’re a pollyanna, then so am I. I think the blatant misogyny we witnessed this election season was the wake-up call we may not have known we needed, something to prompt us into motion again.
-
Violet says:
Hey Cynthia, great to see you here. I do like your optimism.
Everything tends to become its opposite no matter what, so there is no fail-safe that can be built in.
That’s true. When I’m in a more cheerful mood I tend to say, well, any movement is bound to become hopelessly train-wrecked and need renewal after a few decades, so there’s no reason feminism should be any different. Just pick up the pieces and go on.
Possibly I need more alpaca pictures.
-
Cyn says:
I wrote 5 paragraphs, edited, and then deleted them.
This is not an easy assignment, Violet. And one that I never thought I would have to respond to.
Back to the drawing board…
-
pacific-cali says:
1. I agree that it is vital we disassociate ourselves from the humiliating failure that is NOW.
2. I think its important that we not bite off more than we can chew. Lets carefully choose our battles because its important to develop a track record of accomplishment. The legacy of failure & incompetence (NOW) needs to be overcome before women will feel proud to associate themselves with a feminist organization.
3. We need a basic program for teaching people what sexism is. It seems there are many people who don’t recognize it when they see it. Someone mentioned the “The More You Know” public announcement spots - i think that something along those lines could be a highly effective, non-threatening way to teach people. Sort of a “This is Sexism” campaign.
Education is everything.
4. I think our “brand” should be, essentially, “women for women”. I know that even “mean girls” wish that women were kinder and more supportive of each other. Lets make it our mission to show others what basic decency looks like. Our campaign could be about making it cool to defend/support other women. -
Lisa says:
Yay! I mentioned the public info spots “The More You Know” last week and I didn’t think anyone noticed. If The Denver Group can raise enough money for TV commercials, I would think we could too.
We should use Obama’s strategy for success (no, not misogyny, cheating, and lies), but using new technology: youtube, commercials, websites, etc. to bring women together and solidify a new movement.
And I can’t say often enough how important I think it is that we work to get women’s history taught in the grade schools.
Pacific-Cali, I agree that the campaign should be about modeling solidarity and support between women, and recognizing sexism when one sees it.
-
Violet says:
Yay! I mentioned the public info spots “The More You Know” last week and I didn’t think anyone noticed.
Lisa, I don’t watch TV so I don’t know what these spots are. What are they about?
-
madamab says:
I like Pacific-Cali’s #4 especially. We are not pro-life or pro-choice. We are PRO-WOMAN!
I agree with the optimism. The misogynists have been unmasked in all their ugliness. We now know the enemy - it’s much easier to fight a visible than an invisible foe.
-
Yanni Znaio says:
Violet, if you were at the range and shooting at targets, I’d say “Good group”.
Best regards,
YZ
-
Sandra S. says:
I know there’s been a lot of denigration among feminists I know of “choice feminism” and “fun feminism”, but I think that one of things that scares many women away from feminism is the threat of being judged, as both Violet and PhilosopherP have mentioned. We need to boil feminism down to the basic women supporting women stuff, make it welcoming, make it non-judgemental. The New Agenda is right to stick to the stuff we agree on, its how we’re going to get a mainstream movement going. The other stuff is still important, but it can’t be our recruitment pitch for the big tent.
-
Kat says:
I agree with Sandra on the non-judgmental point. I can think of two main reasons why I was wary of feminism until this election: 1) I didn’t think feminism was for women like me and 2) I was afraid of being judged for lack of feminist purity. Eg. I’ve been afraid to say I don’t hate religion. Er, I’m even nervous posting that statement. And a few more things I won’t write down because they make me ever more nervous to admit. :)
It feels like fitting in with feminism, the way I see it on feminists sites or magazines or academic journals, stresses me out. I’ll never be that pure. I’ll always be tainted. It’s feels like so much pressure and it makes me back away.
-
Alwaysthinking says:
I’m not sure I can answer any of Violet’s questions yet, but I do feel that Cynthia is right — that we have an opportunity for a quantum leap forward after the “naked exposure” of the current display of misogyny and sexism. I reached an intuitive feeling last week that makes me think we may have been seeing the last stand of the good old boys against women. Although I think there will be many more battles, I think women , if they do unite, can force some major shifts in societal thinking and actions.
I have seen the great divides between women first hand for a long time among family, friends, and co-workers — those feminists who have such strong beliefs about what real feminists should be and those more traditional women. Between those who reject women’s traditional arts and duties and those who dismiss women who dare to step away from them. Personally, I think we need to respect all of these aspects of each other’s lives. My life has been different from my sisters because I was always professionally employed, though I also had to maintain a separate career at home managing a household and children. My sisters remained “traditional women.” All of us, however, have been and are fierce feminists, that is, fiercely for equality. So was our mother, a very talented woman, who raised a very large family of boys and girls. I think we all separately reached the same conclusions about this year’s election, for example. Bottom line, it is important for society to respect the choices women make, respect their talents — whether they are traditional or not or think conservatively or liberally. The fact that “women’s work” was ever denigrated is astonishing to me. I know it was taken for granted because it was free, but, hey, where would most men be if women hadn’t made their clothes and blankets to keep them and their families going?
(I hope I’m not muddying the thoughts of this thread with this comment. I still have to ponder (think) more deeply about what Violet is asking.)
-
Lisa says:
Violet, “The MOre You Know” is a series of public service announcements. They have had them for years over many different subjects such as illiteracy, the environment, racism, health, etc. They are short commercial long spots normally with a celebrity talking. I don’t know who funds them but I will find out.
-
Lisa says:
Okay I am back (panting). Here is the link to the wikipedia info about The More you Know:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_More_You_Know
apparently it is sponsored by NBC.
ALSO, if you go to:
you can actually watch a bunch of them.
Even if we approached them and they wouldn’t do any on sexism, it seems like we could come up with something similar to this or to the anti-tobacco group that does
We could even do fundraisers such as art shows in a big city with all women artists donating work and all the proceeds could go to the New Agenda, or put out a book of writings by women, or a daybook like that Canadian women’s group. I would donate a painting happily.
-
donna darko says:
How did we get here? We fought for intersectionality but it seems in order for feminism to be anti-racist it is necessarily apologist and sexist. This took the teeth out of feminism to fight the misogyny of the election cycle. In a way, the fourth wave is a reaction to all this. The best would have been for feminism to keep its teeth and fight racism at the same time. Something I advocate all the time. Fighting sexism and racism equally. A better question is: would any other movement have itself replaced by another and had its teeth taken out? No, only the selfless women fell for it. Would the GLBT movement lose its teeth to be anti-racist? No. Would the anti-racism movement lose its teeth to be feminist? They would not be replaced by other movements in the first place. Only selfless women did this. We lost our chance for our first woman President and feminism at the same time.
-
donna darko says:
It’s an incredibly sad state of affairs for feminism when the only people to consistently speak up against the misogyny were unpaid feminist bloggers such as Reclusive Leftist, Tennessee Guerilla Women and Shakesville and smaller bloggers.
-
wilsher says:
Oops…I still think it’s a great video…however there are a few clips which express the “right to choose” as part of being a feminist. One of the infamous wedge issues.
I really am hopeful that woman everywhere will begin to come together and see the absolute relevance of standing on common ground.
-
Anna Belle says:
I saw your idea, Lisa, and I like it. It’d have to be different than NBC’s campaign, since they’ve likely got that copyrighted, and I don’t think we could convince that women’s issues need addressing in that way. Someone did one similar to that for AIDS recently. And, of course, there’s always the TruthOut ads regarding smoking. Some of those are chilling. I know my daughter is positively hostile toward smoking after years of watching them.
-
Polly styrene says:
I think that the reason so many so called feminists were prepared to join in the attacks on Palin was quite simply personal advantage. They are going with the mainstream and know it will be popular. It seems to me that a lot of “feminists” are really only interested in mainstream careers, quite often in the media. Yes they can see women are disadvantaged, but they’re mainly concerned about the impact on themselves, rather than women generally.
I speak as someone (who being in the UK and not particularly interested in the USA’s political processes) initially believed the attacks on Palin myself, because they were being repeated so much in ‘respectable’ media. It took quite a while to become aware of what was going on. But in the end it was so much in your face that it was impossible to ignore.
-
Cyn says:
I still can’t find the answers, but there are a lot of great ideas on this post.
Howard Dean put his 50 state strategy in place by asking Democrats to run for local office, talk to people, write letters to the editors, and fund his vision by purchasing a monthly “democracy bond”. Some of this could work for us. I love Lisa’s idea of running commercials.
And, I agree with Kat and Sandra. We have to stress that there is no right way or wrong way to be a feminist. It is not an exclusive club that obligates everyone to conform to one lifestyle. It’s open, welcoming, and diverse. I think the word “feminist” has been twisted and turned into something scary to many women. Like burning your bra in the 60’s. If you didn’t do it, you weren’t a real feminist.
-
yttik says:
I don’t want to criticize other women’s groups, but I am so cranky with NOW, they are no longer a group I want to be a part of. All they seem to be doing right now is singing praises to Obama and declaring womens victory. Victory how??
They are declaring the election of Obama/biden as a victory for women and girls in the US and around the world. Well where is the meat and potatoes? Exactly what have women accomplished? How have women and girls benefited?
I’m just left scratching my head because Obama/Biden haven’t done anything yet. They haven’t even taken office. Organizations like NOW are pre-emptively praising them for work they haven’t even done yet.
I see a lot of sexism in that. Women’s work, if it’s even acknowledged, is dismissed as nothing more then holding tea parties and yet men are given credit for work they haven’t even done yet based on nothing but hope?
-
yttik says:
Oh, and Violet, I hear you when you said, “I disagree with Republicans on virtually everything”.
I used to think the same but it’s no longer that clear for me. I agree with Arnold, R, when he said prop 8 has to go. I disagree with Obama when he said he doesn’t support gay marriage. I agree with Palin when she vetoed the ban on gay benefits in Alaska. I disagree with Biden when he voted for the defense of marriage act. I disagree with Harry Reid when he voted to ban access to birth control for our troops. And heaven forbid, but I agree with Bush when he gave us our first female four star general.
I can no longer look at Dem and Republican in the same way I used to. This election took all that away.
-
pacific-cali says:
Kudos, Lisa, on the “The More You Know” idea. I really think they could be effective.
Good to know who I was quoting! -
m Andrea says:
“Everything tends to become its opposite no matter what, so there is no fail-safe that can be built in.”
That is a pretty powerful thought, with even more powerful ramifications. It says there is no chance that designing preventive strategy into a ideology will have any effect, so we might as well not even try.
I am vehemently opposed to this way of thinking. I prefer at least trying to build in some strategy, which besides the possiblity of actually working it also sets an example: if strategy A doesn’t work, then future generations could try some other strategy.
Please remember that back in the 60’s when radical feminists were working on women’s sexual liberation, some ultra radical probably begged those fucking morons to include some strategy which would prevent their work from being turned into pornification of women. It was the damn vanilla girls who said, “oh no, men love us and would never hurt us, of course they want us to be equal”. So no preventive strategy was included.
Ho fucking hum. Welcome to the circle which never ends. As soon as you start with the assumption that a significant percentage of men will always attempt to control women for their own benefit, then you realize that preventive strategy MUST be included.
Examime the assertion which is never made explicit, and never proven. That assertion is “all we have to do is show how women are oppressed, and men will stop oppressing us”. Prove it, vanilla girl. Prove the other one while you’re at it, which is: “men want women to be equal, but are brainwashed by culture”.
These are unproven hypothese, now prove them.
-
Sis says:
Like burning your bra in the 60’s. If you didn’t do it, you weren’t a real feminist.
##
This didn’t happen. It was part of a smear campaign, and everyone believed it. You see, there’s really nothing new under the sun, especially as far as efforts to keep women ashamed to bond with other women.
You belong to a church, a particular religion, a political party, have a particular degree, or practice a particular skill? Then you must understand that there are things that define that skill, degree, political party, church, which differentiate it from the others, that make it unique. Catholic, not Jewish. Engineering, not Architecture, Knitting not Millinery, Democracy not Communism.
Feminism is for everyone, but it’s not going to be whatever you want it to be. It’s FEMINISM.
-
Ali says:
In regard to question #3. I keep on thinking about this. On the one hand I think bringing up the election over and over again could alienate us. Too many women were involved in the sexism and too many woman are reflexive about this issue.
However… (a big however)…. I cannot see going forward without, as a culture, sifting through our demons here. So I think it’s going to be hard but I think we need to teach Women’s History with this election being a big part of it.
Brainstorm… several Youtube video that address the LIES spread by the mainstream media and blogosphere about Sarah Palin. The Sex Ed issue makes me so livid I am constantly imagining my head spinning around in circles with fire coming out of my eyes. I cannot believe that the media used their power to spread LIES, over and over again, about a female candidate.
Just the other day I met up with a good friend who falls into the Palin-hating category. She knows how I feel but couldn’t help from telling me how “stupid” she is for supporting abstinence-only and how “ridiculous” she is for having a pregnant daughter. I started to tell her the real story and she wouldn’t have it - because COUNTLESS news sorces identified Palin as “abstinence-only”. So I forcefully told her that I was an expert on the matter, that most media publications are involved in spreading this lie and then went on to explain the difference between “abstinence-only”, “comprehensive sex-education” and “explicit sex education”. My friend was shocked. She still thinks Palin is an idiot but I got somewhere with her and she started to see the hatred of women that was prevalent in this election.
But most of all we need to organize, take action and succeed! Even little successes if they are tangible, will add up as someone mentioned above. I think a lot of us are getting itchy to DO something but I understand that our actions need to be smart and well thought out.
-
Lisa says:
Ali, I got that reaction too from my in law family. They kept sending me “scary” emails about Sarah Palin, and glowing emails about Obama. I would send them back info, and I got an angry email from one of them saying that I was being influenced by the fringe news sources I was reading, and if I really cared about the truth I would listen to the MSM. Unbelievable. You can’t even argue with that.
-
Anna Belle says:
Just the other day I met up with a good friend who falls into the Palin-hating category. She knows how I feel but couldn’t help from telling me how “stupid” she is for supporting abstinence-only and how “ridiculous” she is for having a pregnant daughter. I started to tell her the real story and she wouldn’t have it - because COUNTLESS news sorces identified Palin as “abstinence-only”. So I forcefully told her that I was an expert on the matter, that most media publications are involved in spreading this lie and then went on to explain the difference between “abstinence-only”, “comprehensive sex-education” and “explicit sex education”. My friend was shocked. She still thinks Palin is an idiot but I got somewhere with her and she started to see the hatred of women that was prevalent in this election.
This is how it’s done, Ali. Thank you. You know how I talked yesterday about women being confronted simply for voicing an opinion? The flip side of that is that often as women, we fail to challenge other women when they join on the patriarchal woman-bashing bandwagon. If your friends want to argue with you about it, tell them forcefully to STFU and listen to what you say for the entire spiel you give, and then they get a chance to talk. Remind them before you start that thinking about rebuttals while they’re supposed to be listening is an act of refusing to listen, too.
-
Sis says:
Yes, Donna Darko. In sisterhood.
-
octogalore says:
Those are hard questions! Which means — good ones.
People above have talked about the pros and cons of referencing the 2008 election. I can see both sides on this. I’d have to conclude, probably NOT referencing any beliefs re the election as a gating item is best. So many people, even rational ones, took things way too personally this election.
It would be better to stick with the overall governing principles, IMO. Women should not be belittled in gendered ways. Women should be treated professionally and personally as similarly situated men are treated. Media vehicles should treat women with the same deference and level of seriousness they treat men. Media vehicles which are specifically designated to focus on feminism should do exactly that. Such vehicles should not confuse a (necessary) intersectionality with an (unnecessary) substitution of liberal issues without gendered application for a feminist focus.
-
gxm17 says:
yttik, You pegged it. There is no longer any comfortable place for me to park my rear and sit it out. I’m a liberal without a Party.
The one thing I hope to keep doing is reaching out to conservative women. I joined Team Sarah and I am hoping to continue to build a relationship with women from diverse backgrounds and ideologies. We must not return to some of the myths we’ve dispelled about each other (left vs. right vs. middle). Now is a good time to keep pushing forward, together as women. We share so much. It’s important to embrace that.
-
quixote says:
Women-for-women is definitely the direction to head toward. There are some great ideas upthread, too.
I’d like to add an element. Men. I know I’m treading on thin ice here. I know as soon as they’re in the mix, it becomes all about them. Somehow, *somehow*, we have to avoid that and yet include the ones who are real friends of women.
They’re out there. The more people we have in this movement, the better. We can’t afford to waste anyone. That, after all, is what’s wrong with sexism to begin with. It wastes women because they’re women. I’d like to see us not waste men because they’re men.
We could call the movement “pro-woman.” Same idea as women-for-women, but anyone can do it. :-)
Any sympathy for that idea out there?
-
Cynthia Ruccia says:
Anna Belle And Ali have it right.
I’m Jewish, and I never let an anti-Semitic comment go by. I’m married to an Italian, and I took his name (hey—you would too—-Ruccia or Lichtenstein? I chose the 6 letters to spell out). I look Italian as well, so people are not inhibited about speaking badly about Jews around me.
Most of the time, the comments are ignorance on some level, but I am always courteous when I point things out.
We women need to do the same every single day in our lives about sexist comments. People need to be educated. Here’s Pollyanna again—–most people are basically good and don’t really aspire to be hateful bigots.
If we challenge people, we will send out powerful ripples. We used to do this back in the day. I guess we just got complacent.
-
donna darko says:
Yes, Octo, what happened to feminism happened regardless of the election. Neither feminism nor anti-racism should lose its teeth for another movement. I warned about the apologism and sexism in 2007 before the election heated up.
-
Violet says:
The Sex Ed issue makes me so livid I am constantly imagining my head spinning around in circles with fire coming out of my eyes. I cannot believe that the media used their power to spread LIES, over and over again, about a female candidate.
It’s not just the media. NOW and Planned Parenthood allowed their mailing lists to be used for an email smear campaign that included the sex ed lie along with a bunch of other lies. Feminists with media platforms repeated the lie shamelessly.
Feminists doing this. Feminists deliberately slandering a female candidate with the most cynical of lies.
You understand my anger.
-
votermom says:
Feminists deliberately slandering a female candidate with the most cynical of lies.
I propose we call fauxminists. -
votermom says:
Call THEM fauxminists… arg. Should preview.
Oh well, pronouns are passe anyway. -
Ali says:
Violet,
I didn’t know that - about NOW and Planned Parenthood. Now smoke is coming out of my ears.
-
Ali says:
Anna Belle:
“You know how I talked yesterday about women being confronted simply for voicing an opinion? The flip side of that is that often as women, we fail to challenge other women when they join on the patriarchal woman-bashing bandwagon.”
This is actually something that I struggle with. It’s very difficult to confront female friends, to tell them that they are wrong. I spoke up in this instance, and many, many other instances. But there are far too many scenarios where I backed down or kept quiet. I am presently suffering from Facebook shame. After so many long lost friends continually posted sexist Sarah Palin videos and engaged in incessant sexist twittering, I cancelled my Facebook profile in a fit or rage. But what good did that do? Before cancelling, I did speak up a little bit. I wrote things like “I hate sexism, even against Republicans” or “I can’t wait till we can all move beyond Sarah Palin’s wardrobe”. But I backed down from direct confrontations with people I hadn’t spoken with in fifteen years. But why did I do that? Why was it such a big deal to write “this offends me” or “this is irrelevant” or “this is hateful toward women.” ?
-
AniEm says:
Ali,
I try to hold onto the idea that small steps count for a lot. It is a big war and I am only one person, but I can do what I can do, and help others to understand whenever possible. I threw away Gloria Steinem’s book “Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions” that has been part of my book shelf for decades. That was my little act of rebellion against Steinem’s article on Palin. The hypocrisy of feminist leaders has been nothing other than loathsome during this election.
Both Republican and Democrat parties are male power structures who view women as useful political chattel on occasion. However, this power structure works for quite a few women in the upper class who have internalized that message and act out on it, as we saw in this election. Revamping of feminism will have to address socioeconomic divisiveness as well as bridge political ideologies. I think New Agenda is a good start.
-
Joanelle says:
I agree - we need to support each other - we can agree to disagree about political idiologies without attacking each other. And we wonder why men scratch their heads about how women think. This year was an embarrassment for the feminist movement - it just fell apart.
What we saw this year were personal attacks, by “feminist leaders” that I remember from my younger days who came forth to cast stones - they should be ashamed they allowed themselves to be used by the campaigns in such a way.
It is incomprehensible to me, over the years we’ve worked so hard to have our shot at the white house and we had two bright, capable women who had a legitimate shot and those news grabbers ruined our chances.
-
Joanelle says:
Ali - you are so on the mark - this election pushed me to start calling it what it was -to friends and colleagues - I’m happy to say that it seems to have raised awareness with some - others I will continue to listen and speak up
-
Sis says:
I suggest we send them postcards that have one word:
“Quisling”.
They should know they can’t do this to us with impunity. We bought their books, gave them as gifts to our daughters and nieces and women friends, taught their works in women’s studies classes, demanded those books be included when they weren’t, recited their poetry, proudly held them up as life examples.
Phtueu.
-
KendallJ says:
The hypocracy of some feminists who got on the “Sarah is a c*nt’ band wagon was obvious when they had nothing to say about the sexist “Obama girl” advertizing that Obama embraced, even though she was shaking her breasts and ass all over the screen. I didn’t hear Gloria Steinem denouncing this exploitation of female sexuality.
I didn’t support Sarah Palin on the issues, but refused to partake in the misogynistic pounding that went on against her. I was amazed and saddened about how many feminists were so willing to partake in her assassenation. It was like all the village women who came to the town square to witness in delight the stoning of the village prostitute. Self hate at its finist!!!!
This was a real dissapointment to those of us who stand for all women’s rights. But the real shocker was when these same feminists failed to say anything about the misogyny hurled at Hillary Clinton during the primary. I picketted MSNBC head quarters in New York in February with others who worked on Senator Clinton’s campaign about the media misogyny, but I didn’t see any representatives from the big feminist organizations there. Furthermore, as soon as the primaries were over and the DNC had once again reiterated their selection, these same women’s organizations had their heavy hitters on every news outlet including the misogyny channel, MSNBC, telling american women how they must vote for Obama or Roe v. Wade would be overturned. All of a sudden they had a voice!!! They didn’t seem to give a rats ass about equal treatment when the women bashing was happening. They have reduced their role to Roe v. Wade cheer leaders, rather than champions for women’s equality. This is what has killed feminism. Equality doesn’t begin or end with securing Roe v. Wade. Equality has to be at every level and in every venue. It’s puzzling to me how they missed this opportunity to stand firm for equal treatment.
Maybe it was the whole race thing. They were too willing to let the black guy go first, even if it cost women decades of progress. What a shame!!!! Has anybody reminded Kim Gindy that women are 53% of the population? When it is the feminist establishment who relegate us to the back of the bus, you know that the movement is in dire need of new blood. I never thought I would see it with my own eyes, but it is clear that we need to revive the feminist movement by taking it to the streets. Women need leaders who fight for equality, not just abortion. The irony is that securing reproductive freedom for women will only be realized when equal treatment is realized. They go hand and hand. As long as women are treated as second class citizans, our reproductive freedoms will remain at risk.
-
soopermouse says:
Sis is right, they are Quislings. they have abbandoned feminism for iberalism and have been more than willing to smear successful women for supporting a different political platform. The fact that liberalism has doen very little fr the women f America seems to be escaping them.
Shame on Steinem, shame on Morgan, shame on Katha Pollitt.I bet Andrea Dworkin is rolling in her grave.
Do you know what makes it even more difficult? it’s the fact that liberalism in and by itself has done very little for women. Women’s reprsentation, the 30% solution, egardless of said women’s political beliefs, has helped women and thus the communities and people in need more than most liberal male dominated regimes.
I live in a city that, while not quite at 30% solution, still have a solid 22% female representation in the local elected government. The result? The city ( leicester UK) is regarded as a wrldwide model for its racial equality polcies, racial representation and social justice and the qaklity of life for women and children in the city is considered one of the highest in the UK. ow? Women
Women elected officials, a female mayor, female Mps and the results of this can be seen. let’s face it, women in positions of power, regardless of their political affiliation, are better for the sociaty as a whole, a lot btter than dude liberalism. -
Greenconsciousness says:
“Feminism is for everyone, but it’s not going to be whatever you want it to be. It’s FEMINISM.”
This is what I agree with — feminism is for everyone from every lifestyle and religion but you may not agree with everything in feminism — that does not mean you have to reject feminism or that it rejects you. But it also means you cannot redefine feminism as the catholic church has funded groups to do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_feminismI do not agree with women who say anti choice is feminist but Palin’s Feminists for Life does not say that: it says we are feminist who hold that(anti feminist) view.
I do not believe it is feminist to accept the institutional degradation of women under Islam or that abandoning slaved women to support the anti war movement as NOW did is feminism.
I also don’t agree with the women on this blog who say they were afraid of feminism because someone told them they were not feminists if they took their husbands name or believed in God. WHO told you this stuff? Why did you accept it? We don’t have all knowing priests of feminism. Just BECAUSE women come to feminism from all ways of life, women have to be their own boss, read the great literature the movement has produced and draw your own conclusions.
As I see feminism, it is that which expands choice and opportunity for women and then lets’ them draw their own conclusions about the truth of those realized opportunities. This is slightly different from the term “woman identified” which is all inclusive and promotes supporting women regardless of whether you agree with them.
Normally feminism and woman identification are one and the same thing because you can support women while disagreeing with them. Which is why Octo, we should pay attention to whether people who claim to be feminist endorsed Hillary Clinton in the democratic primary. Those who did not need very careful examination and should not be mindlessly funded by feminists. Likewise, women who trashed Palin for her class, intelligence and her personal choices while minimizing her achievements are lacking some feminist understanding.
But there is more to feminism than being women identified. It is a political movement with targets. Feminism targets oppressors, identifies them and LIMITS their opportunity to exploit women. That is, there are two sides of the coin. We do not exclude male nor female but we also do not shy away from NAMING the oppressor.
THAT is what I think causes women to be afraid when they say they are afraid of feminism. That feminism names and fights the oppressor who may unexpectedly turn out to be their lover, priest or boss. You cannot turn feminism into something non-threatening because it does threaten the status quo - mass culture. So what? Get courage.
You can be civil while you do it, shave your legs, curl your hair, wear skirts, AND take your husband’s name. But we are going after those toxic animal testing cosmetic companies and commercial porn enterprises (as differentiated from sex education videos) and Mr big shot democrat Leader Reid’s legal brothels in Nevada and the Catholic Church’s tax exempt status. We can do it civilly although some of us won’t be civil. There are many places to be in feminism. We are like a billion fire ants each with their own place of action. Or maybe 18 million fire ants.
Yeah, feminism can be/will be scary.
-
Alwaysthinking says:
This is a late response to Violet’s question.
(Just some incomplete thoughts arising in my alpha state.)
1. Feminism must be reframed as a powerful revolution — the American Women’s Revolution – two hundred thirty-two years later.
American colonists revolted only after it became apparent that no other approach was working against the King of England. Women have tried almost everything and now we have seen a major backlash against a movement that had not even fully been accomplished. We must call a revolution against tyranny (per Abigail Adams) and demand full representation and rights (including economic) in politics, the board room, the workplace, at home, and everywhere. We must show why it is necessary, using vivid examples and data. Especially in the hard times we are approaching, we must ask what society would do without us. We must ask men (and some women) what they are afraid of and give them sound data in response. The declaration of sentiments must be posted everywhere, including this year’s updated version (was that by Annabelle?). We must demonstrate vividly and forcefully what women do for society, how valuable their contributions are, how skilled and knowledgeable they are, and what would be lost without them. We must demonstrate their social and economic value. We must include all women in the movement, whether they join or not, and whether or not they have spoken up for themselves. Again, if men are afraid of all of this, we must ask them why?
Already we have experienced many trials and this year in particular, we have experienced the well-known “significant emotional event,” the radicalizing moment, and are garnering momentum to move forward with change.
We must turn the denigrating terms used in the Obama campaign and others into rallying cries (ie, periodically down, a Washington personality, just serving tea, etc., etc., ad infinitum, including the pornographic terms). We must show vivid examples of women’s oppression world-wide and show why oppression is wrong and evil and that Americans must be leaders in the human rights movement. [Many of these efforts already are under way in books, documentaries, on the web, etc.]
We must not be intimidated by terms used against women when they speak up – ie, “whiners,” “victims.” We must declare against the pinpricks of daily oppression as well as obvious violence. We are the foundation of society. We must make that point to men and women. We must demand our rights and show how many times we have fought for others’ rights (as in abolition) – even if this takes rolling hospital beds with the sick down the streets. Our main challenges, besides the facts that we typically love men, are our economic and caretaking responsibilities. (I, for example, look after a mentally ill brother with a brain tumor advancing toward his frontal lobe; others have young children and elderly relatives to look after. We know we cannot simply strike because too many people would be hurt badly.)
We must have a fresh, strong plan and a new effort based on good marketing, pr, advertising, and lobbying strategies that include coordination with many organizations, schools, and individuals; use of many media outlets, etc.
We must personalize the problem to men – for some that might mean pointing out the effects on their daughters, although that won’t matter in certain religious circles. Other examples might include showing some of the most powerful clips of Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin and other high profile figures. We could show vivid scenes of women being harmed (rock throwing, etc., but somehow we must find a way to emotionally achieve empathy and positive responses – not male cheerleading.) Perhaps the psychologists could help here. Hollywood certainly knows how to get us to respond emotionally to any character or situation.
2. Regarding self-immolation.
We really need to know and understand more about why some groups and individuals joined in this behavior. Was it their lack of knowledge of what was happening? Fear of loss of Roe v. Wade? Going along to get along? The desire to be a part of a good-ole-boy group – honorary men? A muddy perception of history, including the facts surrounding the Great Depression? Fear that one would be called a racist, even though it was not true? Desire to be a part of what they thought would be the winning team? Mesmerized by a charismatic figure? Puppy love? Lack of a strong foundation of their own beliefs and values? Not wishing to be ridiculed if they supported women because they actually perceived that they were less important than men? Outright intimidation?
3. The feminist brand.
The damage to the feminist brand probably occurred at the very beginning. Many women always have been uncomfortable with the term and furthermore and many did not understand what it really meant. Men giggled and laughed at the term and saw no reason for it because, as we have seen, they did not even recognize the sexism and they further intimidated women by telling them they were too serious or emotional or didn’t have a sense of humor. Women also were called man-haters.
We must demonstrate the many tiny pinpricks of violence that are committed on a daily basis and we must show women that they are needlessly absorbing these insults – that these do culminate in a lifetime of oppression and to greater violence (as in rape, a crime of power).
We must mock the mockery and call the bluffs. If you kill us all, what will you do then?
We must show how much better and stronger our nation will be with the full contributions of women in positions of power.
We need a civil revolution, but one with teeth in it. No silly bra-burning either.
-
Alwaysthinking says:
One more point — although a lot can be done without bundles of money, we need to garner bundles to fight fire with fire.
