Log in

No account? Create an account
bear by san

March 2017



Powered by LiveJournal.com
rengeek kit faustus commodorified

don't want to wake up with no one beside me. don't want to take up with nobody new.

pnkrokhockeymom points out that feminism is not about men.

Man, there's a sentiment that could get some airplay.

Civil rights activism is not about white people. Gay rights activism is not about straight people. Ad nauseum.

Also, go look at the original post and the postcard at Feministe.

NB: The part that is about men: male writers? Understanding the naked terror and righteous wrath (conscious and actualized or subliminal and unprocessed) the madonna/whore complex evokes in many western women will help you write better female characters.


Actually, I rather believe I've known a few men who would understand that sentiment, as well.

And now I promise to stop spamming lj and go read a book.



(That's the sound of gears grinding in Charlie's head as he suddenly realizes there's a whole huge subtext in his post-Heinleinian sex robot yarn that needs to be subtly emphasized. Like, oh, the implicit feminization of robot servants ...)
You big goofy feminist, you.

Mmhm. What she said.

And the postcard spoke the words inside my head that echo too often and too loud.
Interesting timing. Yesterday, I put up a post about the sudden profusion of anti-heroines in television (Carmela Soprano, Kyra Sedgwick's character in The Closer, Holly Hunter's in Saving Grace, etc.), and came to the same conclusion in regards to shared humanity. I can provide the link if you'd like. Hopefully, it adds to the discussion.
Sure. Lay it on me. *g*
((sings)) Wanting a ball equality is not wanting a prince.
In general, when somebody complains about discrimination?

IT IS NOT GROUP THERAPY TIME. Shut the fuck up about why you are traumatized yourself, or aren't part of the trauma, or don't have any responsibility for it.
I'm gonna get oyceter in here to give you a gold star.
Understanding the naked terror and righteous wrath (conscious and actualized or subliminal and unprocessed) the madonna/whore complex evokes in many western women will help you write better female characters.

Yep. Because if you get it, and you get how varied and overlapping and contradictory and changeable the responses to that dichotomy are (amongst women, internally to any one woman, etc.), your female characters will act like actual females almost of their own accord.

I'm almost positive that this is why I enjoy relationships with men. I understand our fucked up world shit, and so don't get confused by the whole "varied and overlapping and contradictory and changeable" thing. :)
swirling emotions without exit or calm. Hrmmm.
Sits back to consider more than the words (and this could/will take a while).

I am still parsing, too.
Feminism + "all about men" = First Church of Satan.
Feminism - "all about men" = unorganized* paganism.

Makes sense, if you think about it.

* As opposed to "disorganized", natch.
interesting and so damn frustrating at the same time. Having been away from these debates for a number of years (busy, busy, busy) - it is disappointing to see how, despite the progress, there is still so much further to go.

Every year when the student elections happen, we get the age old whine "but why isn't there the post of Men's Officer? You have a Women's Officer . . . "

Gah! Listen, guys, it's not all about YOU.

There doesn't need to be a hetero committee, or a British students society, or a Men's Officer etc. You already have those things in every other society, elected officer etc. Don't tell me that oppression doesn't happen just because you personally are not oppressing me personally.

thank you for letting me get that off my chest.
I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment, but there is a naggling warning in my brain.

And that is, I don't want the message of "it's not about you" to translate into "this isn't your problem" so that men, white people, and straight people feel like they don't have to worry about how queers, POC's, and women get treated. I don't want them to have an excuse to say, "Oh, it's their problem. I'll go back to enjoying my privilege now."

Because the thing is? We need the people who have the privilege to work with us in dismantling that privilege. So we do need them to be involved in the discussion, just not in the whiny "waaaah, why don't we have a White Guy History Month" kind of way.

As a white woman, I know that it would be easy for me to say, "Oh, this discussion about race isn't mine to get involved with, I'll go back to La-La Land" or "This is about People of Color, so it doesn't concern me." Because it *DOES*. Because when POC's are getting treated wrongly in my country, my society, it is my job to step in, sound the alarm and say "Hey, fellow honkies, y'all got to cut this stuff out. Now. Uncool, y'all, uncool."

So, yes, we need to make the guys understand that this topic isn't about them, but we don't need to alienate them from it.

That's to say nothing of how much it sucks that we have to be so damn careful, that we have to even mention this sort of thing.

In a perfect world, we could just start educating slapping people with trout until this mess got sorted out, but there's laws and the trout probably wouldn't appreciate being used as weapons of mass education.
"weapons of mass education" is my Phrase of the Day.

(aren't cod traditional for that purpose?)

Also, yeah.
Reason #1 I love my husband: he doesn't ever, not once, try and protest that he's a nice guy when I/other women start talking feminist issues. He shuts the fuck up and LISTENS.
>Actually, I rather believe I've known a few men who would understand that sentiment, as well.

Well some of us should if we think about it, because the exact same patriarchal dynamic puts a similar pressure on men in a different form. Which is not to deny male privilege[*] around this issue, because most men have some cheap (if somewhat unpalatable) outs within the patriarchal game, while women don't seem to have any that don't rely on maintaining spectacular cognitive dissonances.

But it's very clear to those of us who did not instinctively understand how to make a sexual connection as an adolescent that the culture says you aren't a real man until you're having sex with women. period. And that sex==appreciation from a woman. Women have "the sex", and choose who to let have it, and if nobody is letting you have it, that's because you're unworthy. The madonna/whore reflection is the niceguy/jerk dichotomy. And then you have the NiceGuy[tm]s. I'm not sure who they're analogous to. Maybe the Paglias, except they are constantly complaining about the cultural trope at the same time that they are caught in it and busy enforcing it on the women and men around them.

[*] No, I don't really like the term "privilege" and the other night my wife put her finger on why. Some of things that are termed "privilege" aren't privileges at all, but basic civil rights that happen to be frequently denied people in oppressed classes. In the world I want to live in, everyone would be free of police harrassment because of skin color, not just white people (for example). I suppose that's a very white male way of looking at things, but I have a hard time seeing a world in which white men lost their privilege by being treated exactly as women of color are today as an improvement. It seems to me that in most cases of privilege, the RightThing[tm] is for the opposite to happen.
When people talk about privilege, it seems to me that mostly what they are talking about is not the civil rights, but the experience of never having had your civil rights questioned, or being dismissed because you are not a Christian white male.

Men *do* lose this privilege as they get older, unless they are wealthy, and thus you get the angry bewildered disregarded old man tragedy trope. But for a man it's a tragedy, and for a woman or a person of color it's a fact of life.

So, in other words, yeah, I get what you are saying, and also what you are saying about the ways the love/sex divide affects men as well as women.