Stickybuffalo.com

"Belaboring the Obvious Since 2001"

RSS Stickybuffalo.com Diggs

  • Out of Touch: Cindy McCain's Monday Outfit Cost $300,000 September 4, 2008
    One of the persistent memes in the Republican line of attack against Barack Obama is the notion that he is an elitist, whereas the G.O.P. represent real working Americans. But when Vanity Fair priced out Cindy McCain's Monday Night Convention outfit, the total price was staggering to say the least.... between $299,100 and $313,100
  • About Sarah Palin: an e-mail from Wasilla September 4, 2008
    An email from Anne Kilkenny, Wasilla resident, reprinted by Crosscut.com with her permission. This is the best, most comprehensive, objective writing on the history of Mayor Palin and her climb up the political career ladder.
  • Pollster.com: TIME/CNN: Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio (8/31-9/2) September 4, 2008
    Obama up 15 pts in Iowa
  • Oops! MIC's still on, commentators about Palin..... September 4, 2008
    2 conservative commentators forget the Mic is still on, and get caught saying what they REALLY think about Sarah Palin.....
  • Fringe Alaskan Independence Party: Palin was a Member September 2, 2008
    McCain's campaign likes to herald the independence of its new running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. Officials of the Alaskan Independence Party say that Palin was once so independent, she was once a member of their party, which has been pushing for a legal vote on whether or not residents of the 49th state can secede from the U.S.
  • sbuffalo commented on CAPTCHAs flummox bots, but may be doomed by CAPTCHA farmers September 1, 2008
    so does this mean that someone solves a captcha and it goes in a database of "solved?" It seems like there's only so many manual solvings that can happen per person per day. It would be much easier to say this captcha equals "XYZ."
  • CAPTCHAs flummox bots, but may be doomed by CAPTCHA farmers September 1, 2008
    CAPTCHAs were once considered proof (or at least an excellent defense) against the likes of spammers and automated registration programs, but those days appear to be almost over. CAPTCHA-cracking is now big business in India, and a means of gainful (if not quite legitimate) employment.
  • PALIN-tology - 35+ Problems for McCain's VP in just 35 hours August 31, 2008
    We all know that she is under investigation for abuse of power and there are audio recordings to back it up. What you won't hear on the news is this list of other things you didn't know about the woman they call "Miss Baracuda."
  • The Myth of "Obama Fatigue" August 29, 2008
    "...We are treated to the fiction of "Obama fatigue" as a cause of a "tightening race" - a spurious explanation of a non-event."
  • DailyKos Election Day Scoreboard August 28, 2008
    Why follow results on TV when you can get them on the web? Flash-based map showing live poll results from across the country in all levels: House, Senate, Gubernatorial and the White House.
  • Jun
    27

    People really don’t know what feminism is, do they?

    The finally-over primary season has made one thing crystal clear: pretty much everybody who doesn’t consider him/herself a feminist (and many people that do) has no idea what feminism is.  This has manifested on both sides of the Clinton/Obama divide, and continues to show up in the media pretty much daily.

     To many Obama supporters I’ve encountered, “feminism” is a way of behaving based on dualistic and oppositional thinking (men and women are at WAR!!!) and hypersensitivity to the possibility of slights.  The label “feminist” has often been tossed out as an insult against overzealous Clinton supporters, which is unsettling.  To a certain extent, this is the fault of incomplete gender awareness among said Obama supporters, but the blame also belongs to some Clinton supporters. 

    You see, it appears that a slice of Clinton’s backers (now mostly calling themselves PUMAs or Hillocrats or some such stupidity) agree with the above-mentioned Obama people that feminists are thin-skinned man-haters who spend their days hunting for examples of misogyny.  These folks not only practice this weirdness, they excoriate feminists who dare use the label without adopting their framing.  It’s very similar to the situation Josh discusses, wherein a small handful of stupid people who call themselves “Christians” have managed to convince most Americans (and, consequently, most American Christians) that Christianity is only for those who like snake handling, speaking in tongues, and directing one’s prayers to George W. Bush.

    Unfortunately for these people, feminism isn’t what they think it is.  It’s actually a pretty simple concept: feminism is the belief that women are equal to men, that they should be treated as such, and that we have to work hard to make that happen.  Yes, part of that is recognizing some of the more subtle instances of misogyny that pop up constantly, and, often, pointing them out in ways that may or may not be abrasive.  But it’s also a lot of other things.  Not to get all cultural theory or anything, but we’d really be better off discussing “feminisms,” since such a wide variety of approaches, many of which are contradictory, end up under the feminism umbrella.  The point is, just because one “feminist” does things a certain way doesn’t mean that any other (let alone all other) feminists do too.

    Of course, the problem goes far beyond Clinton and Obama supporters.  The worst of it has always come from the mass media (despite what the PUMAs seem to believe, almost none of the bona fide misogyny that polluted the primaries came from Obama, his campaign, or the vast majority of his supporters).  Take, for instance, this gem, wherein Scott Martelle of the LA Times suggests that Obama is a closet woman-hater because he referenced Ann Richards’s famous quip from her keynote at the 1988 Democratic National Convention: “After all, Ginger Rogers did everything that Fred Astaire did.  She just did it backwards and in high heels.” 

    Here’s Obama’s remark: “[W]omen can do anything that the boys can do – and do it better, and do it in heels.  I still don’t know how she [referencing Hillary Clinton] does it in heels.”  Apparently, Martelle thinks Obama’s mention of heels will be interpreted by “some” (oh, that pesky “some”!  They’re so touchy!) as misogynist because, well, I guess because some women wear heels.  I’m really not sure what offense Martelle expects women to take, and I think that’s because he doesn’t either.  Regardless of whether or not he calls himself a feminist (I doubt that he does), I’m 100% certain that he doesn’t understand what feminism is, if he thinks what he’s doing qualifies. 

    Most of the comments on his post indicate that most people are smart enough to see this as shameless conflict-mongering and nothing more.  But the problem is that “some people” (in this case, the PUMAs) will undoubtedly pick up on this and add it to the list of other dubious infractions Obama has supposedly committed.  These folks will once again use this comment as a litmus test for what they call feminism, and, sadly, lots of others will take their word for it.  The end result is that, once again, we’re letting crazy people define feminism for us, and more and more potential feminists will turn themselves off entirely to everything bearing that label because they believe that feminism is always already batshit crazy.

    The trick of it is, I can’t, in good conscience, go around  denying that these assholes are feminists, because it’s not my place to do so, and if I did, I’d be guilty of what I’m criticizing them for doing.  All I can do is offer my definition of feminism as an alternative.  So here we are: there are assholes everywhere, and some of them call themselves feminists.  Beware of assholes.  Sorry, internet, that’s the best I can do.

3 Responses to “People really don’t know what feminism is, do they?”

  1. I’ve posted a slightly altered version of this over at dkos. I’m curious to see the reaction it gets. I might try the same at MyDD.

  2. tsk tsk. it’s bad form to reference your off-site post without linking it. how are we supposed to rec you?

    i was a little surprised at obama’s ‘heels’ remark. not that there was anything objectionable about it content-wise. but tact is all about context, and in the context of a rally that was supposed to bring the clinton supporters home and smooth down various ruffled feminist feathers, it was bound to at least raise eyebrows. this from a guy who’s otherwise demonstrated an impressive knack for recognizing and treading lightly but purposefully through sensitive subjects.

    was it just a minor lapse, like the ’sweetie’ incident (which i still can’t quite wrap my head around)? or perhaps a subtle fuck-you to concern trolls like martelle and the handful of dead-enders who’ve already made up their minds never to support him no matter what? i like to think it was part of the mood of lighthearted, thank-god-we-can-laugh-about-it-now conviviality they were clearly cultivating yesterday, in the spirit of hillary’s quip about the “hard-fought” primary contest and how that was the most polite phrasing she could come up with…

    anyway, after watching the unity rally, i have to say that democrats have gotten much better at stagecraft and showmanship. they really and truly looked like winners up there, both of them. clinton deserves a lot of credit — i don’t know how, but she managed to wipe away most of my own lingering bad feelings about her, to the point where the idea of clinton as VP candidate seems damn near palatable. i have to believe that magic works both ways: hillary’s people will come around, all but the most dyed-in-the-wool ideologues among them. and who needs them anyway? let mccain have them, they’re cut from the same musty mid-20th-century cloth.

  3. there you are, you rascal…

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/27/201832/681

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.