The "good feminist"

[BainsBane]

A recent, reactionary thread has led to a swarm of people claiming "all feminists aren't like that."
They are responding to blatant sexist posts comparing feminists to "school marms," by saying you're letting a few extreme examples determine your perception. No, what is happening is that you are talking to a defender of white male privilege.

Let's examine the "school marm" reference. A school marm is a teacher. She is informed. She corrects bad information. She interferes with the sexist's right to be stupid. Now, the right to be stupid is a jealously guarded one. It is highly irritating to sexists when we women demonstrate we know things. What they resent most, however, is when we confront them on their ignorance.

Consider why FEMEN was so popular among those who typically oppose women's rights. They were "hot chicks" picked by the Larry Flint of Russia, Victor Svyatski. They appeared topless, with slogans limited to three words written across their breasts. They didn't force European and American men to think about their privilege or the way in which sexism pervades all aspects of society. They were pretty and fun. Of course they were hand picked and run by a male Russian oligarch who refused to listen to the concerns of women in any of the local FEMEN chapters around the world, from places like Brazil to Tunisia. Brazilian FEMEN protesters were told they were too "chubby" and therefore didn't fit the image the group wanted to project. Muslim women were told their problems came from Islam itself rather than patriarchy.

Feminists are okay only as long as they don't challenge patriarchy and privilege. Demand the enforcement of EEOC law from the 80s, you're being preachy. Talk about violence against women and you're sexist because you fail to recognize that women's lives are secondary to men's. Guess what? This feminist doesn't give a rat's ass what you think about me. If your support for equal rights depends on how softly someone speaks to you, that tells me you don't support basic human rights at all. The sexists and misogynists can piss off back to the 15th century where they belong. I will continue to live in the 21st century.

[seabeyond]

1. If your support for equal rights depends on how softly someone speaks to you,...

i do nto know how many men have said... you talk mean to me, see if i support feminists anymore. really? so what you are saying is you no longer support equal pay for women, simply cause your feelers are hurt? really?

when these femen women throw their topless body at a putin or berlusconi for them to only like little boys, clap their hands in glee... ya, no. that is not empowering. it is stupid. and reduced women to exactly what these men have been getting away with all their lives.

[BlueJazz]

2. "School Marms ??" Did someone actually say that ? I might as well say what's on my mind:

I feel like I'm from some other world. Why do some humans cut off part of the grand intellect that might make things better for everyone.

I've NEVER understood it ...even as a child. How many inventions, starships or whatever would be in existence if we didn't try to destroy over half of our spirits. We should be in a paradise by now.

Well...that's my crazy thoughts for the day.

[BainsBane]

3. Yes, someone said it

and a jury allowed it to stand 2-4. In these instances, it's always the juries that bother me more than the comment itself.

Why they oppose equal rights: I think they see their own privilege as more important than the social good as a whole.

[BlueJazz]

7. "I think they see their own privilege as more important than the social good as a whole"

I started to post.."Some things you don't want to know" but that's the cowards way out.
I feel strengthened by those in the past that were strong. They were essentially fighting half the world.

[delrem]

4. I'm so fricken old....

I didn't know anything of feminism until I found out that every single woman of my acquaintance was a feminist. But that was when I found myself in a University and, well, feminism back then in the 70's was totally awesome. At the apex of studies in philosophy, and law (these weren't called "progressive studies", they were called "studies of fact&quot . It was also subtle because not one women I knew challenged me re. what she was learning, not in the combative sense that I had been weaned on, so I had to pirate books from their libraries to get a clue. Even then I've got to say that I remain pretty damned ignorant. OK, but not THAT ignorant.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. oh, I talk softly all right -

but, I carry a big stick

[Gravitycollapse]

6. If my brief education in women and gender studies has taught me anything...

It's two very important points.

1. Anything you do in the name of feminism will be considered the wrong way of doing something by the enemies of feminism. Instead of critiquing what you are saying, they will criticize how you say it. Which plays perfectly into the historical, hysterical archetype of the Victorian woman. To be a feminist is to be hysterical and that means you can by default dismiss whatever she or he says for no other reason than it is being said.

2. Being an asshole is a prerequisite to being an effective and trenchant feminist. Not because it fulfills a stereotype but because the application of theory is not merely an argument but a performance. To mock the anti-intellectual male machismo is not simply to argue how it is illogical but also to use language to literally attack it; to turn their own tactics on themselves. It is often the case that the only way to counter the male chauvinist is by instilling in him a fear forcing him to avoid us.

When I attack the arguments of a male chauvinist, especially in person with other witnesses, the goal is not simply to present my case. It is to intellectually castrate him in front of his friends. Which is, to him, the ultimate form of embarrassment and failure. And this negates his superiority to such an extent that the only other feasible form of dominance left is the physical. So we have stripped away the layers of the idiots idiocy until we come to the truest form of his argument (or lack thereof).

[seabeyond]

8. number one is a given. but, ya know, that number two?

there is a reason for that. hmmm. lol.

" intellectually castrate him in front of his friends." there is a whole phenomenon that can be discussed with this. i see tentacles angling out in different directions.

[Gravitycollapse]

9. So do you disagree with #2?

[seabeyond]

11. no.

but having seen you write it out in print, i can see so many reasons and would be an interesting conversation. but no, i do not disagree at all.

[BainsBane]

13. I do

If he feels that way after I've said what I need to, so be it, but it's not my goal. Only an insecure man could feel castrated after something someone says to him.

Gravitycollapse, I thought you were male. Was I wrong?

[Gravitycollapse]

14. I am, indeed, a man. Which adds a very strange level of irony to most of my arguments.

An important question or set of questions that must be asked is: Do I, as a man who benefits unceasingly from privilege, even belong in these types of discussions? Can I even begin to understand the abject identity of the non-male in all of its many forms?

[BainsBane]

16. I think it's fine you are here

but I have to wonder if your emphasis on castration might signal a male perspective. I don't think most women think so combatively. I have a sharp tongue, to be sure, more so in print than face to face because tone is harder to communicate through writing. However, my goal is usually communicating the idea or argument itself. Now, if I happen to have a particular dislike for a person I may want to draw a bit of blood, but that's not gender specific, and it doesn't rise to the level of verbal castration--at least not in my mind.

[seabeyond]

17. i said i see it in different ways. and if allowed to really look at what is being suggested,

then it is interesting.

at the point that we are discussing these issues, .... see, i do not think we are free to talk about this. i will shoot you an pm.

[Gravitycollapse]

18. That is sort of an inescapable issue with anything I think or say or suggest on the subject.

Which is why I have never been able to fully answer the questions I posed.

I try to avoid arguing with female feminists at almost any cost precisely because we are not on equal footing both in understanding and privilege. Being an ally is not necessarily born out of necessity. I could just as easily ignore the movement all together and reap the benefit of my privilege.

Which is why I never, ever say that a feminist is being too aggressive or "overreacting" because the bottom line is I don't know what it is truly like to be wholly on the receiving end of the patriarchal system.

I do, however, know most, if not all, of the benefits and, more importantly, weakness of being a man. Because insecurity is inherent in this sort of social male dominance, that I experience and understand these securities is a good asset. That might at least present something of value I could contribute to feminism.

Kind of like the criminal turned informant except I'm still totally a criminal in one manner or another and I still make a living breaking into people's homes.

[BainsBane]

19. I think the key is listening

What bothers me is how many insist blatantly sexist things are not sexist. They refuse to listen or care about how they impact me or others concerned about an issue. They don't care enough to listen.

I appreciate your not denouncing feminists as too aggressive, but I don't think it's necessary that you avoid disagreement, as long as you care enough to listen to the other person's perspective and seek to understand it. Common among all men who oppose feminism is the refusal to listen, to acknowledge the other person's point of view. They consistently trivialize it because they not want to acknowledge anything that challenges their view of the world. Or, as another member's husband says, it may be as simple as they just don't like women enough to listen to us. Denouncing the woman as too aggressive or as a "school marm" is an excuse not to listen.

[Gravitycollapse]

23. Listening is probably the most fundamentally important aspect.

And not automatically assuming everything that comes out of your mouth is a stroke of genius is also extremely important. I think there is a function of society that aggrandizes the male voice. Everything a man says is automatically of greater import.

It's like the difference between a single father and a single mother. The assumption is the single mother was an irresponsible whore and she is now a terrible person for leaving her children to fend for themselves while she slaves away 60 hours a week to provide. But the single father is granted a deity like status for simply not letting his kids die. His suffering and sacrifice are beautiful love poems for his children.

When you are brought up in a world that automatically grants you greater importance for having a penis, you will vigorously attack anyone who tries to take that superiority away.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

10. what about respect? interesting, I need to think about #2 some more. thanks for that post.

[Gravitycollapse]

12. My philosophy on respect is give it to those who have earned it.

Part of the issue with misogyny is the idea of universal access to women. To deny respect is a form of protest against this system; men don't get what they want. That's why things like political lesbianism and feminist separatism are so important, at the very least, in theory.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. yes, that is what I am getting at ... I have found that once I earn a man's repsect or any human for

that matter, then it all flows from there ... and they are receptive to listening to my thoughts. This is where the real communication begins, I think. Somehow we have ALL got to get past this ... other .... this cross shouting and not listening and disrespecting the other person ... regardless of gender or issue.

at some point we need to sit down and converse with one another.

how do we get there as a world?

[Gravitycollapse]

20. Very, very, painfully slowly.

I'm sure you've heard one character or another say something along the lines of "Do not confuse my generosity with weakness."

Well, the issue is that the male machismo ALWAYS confuses generosity with weakness. So it is not as easy as offering him or, occasionally, her a reasoned, peaceful argument. The philosopher's table is not often a feasible option. And half the meatheads in the world are simply too stupid to conceptualize or realize the feminist argument. They're just too dumb.

What else is out there? Fuck if I know for certain. But it seems that presenting yourself aggressively, overwhelmingly, very quickly erases the male's sense of superiority. The fog is removed from their eyes and, if only for a moment, they are all ears.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

21. yes, that One Moment of lucidity, of clarity, of epiphany ... and then build on it.

and YES, it is painfully slow and it is one step forward and two steps backwards at times and it seems to work better on the individual level ... for me ... any way.

and then in the morning we get up and do it again, amen.

thanks for the reply.

good night, all.

see ya in the trenches again tomorrow.

[seabeyond]

22. the fog is removed from their eyes. if only for a moment.

Right fuckin' on.

[redqueen]

25. I so strongly agree with everything you've said in this thread.

I agree 100% that a man's role in feminist discussions is to LISTEN, and that men who want to be allies to feminism should focus on speaking to other men.

NOT lecturing feminists about how they should be nicer and how some feminists are killing their boners.

[ismnotwasm]

24. HeH!

I work very hard to be polite on-line because my natural inclination reacting to bullshit is towards--- bluntness, rudeness, often aggressive bluntness and rudeness.

So there's a few on-line personalities I've been exposed to I'm convinced are unstable, deeply deluded-- or strangely damaged, so I don't pay much attention to them under the adage "if you can't say anything nice..." And they're spewing crap I have no time for, I'm not a fixer, they can go get a therapist or continue to use the internet for their "issues" rather than seek practical solutions for their little psychic breaks and mommy issues and gender role confusion The terminally privileged are fucking Dinosaurs. And like you say this is the 21st century. Times are a changin'

Every single acquaintance or friend in RL knows that I'm a feminist. I start conversations, sometimes uncomfortable ones, but always stimulating. Recently, I was with a small group of women and one young man and we started talking about rape and the fear women have. This guy was appalled at some of the stories; he wanted to know what he could do to change things. Another recent event was explaining that "transphobia" is a real phenomenon to active, compassionate listeners.

Well intentioned people may not have the same information I do, but they're willing to discuss, to think about, to become change agents. And we joke and laugh and love and learn.

On the other hand:

Dedicated Sexists and misogynists (who should really be in the DSM IV as mental aberrations)are truly creepy you know--they make my skin crawl and I can spot 'em easily after all these years. I have no time or inclination to be polite to them.

[redqueen]

26. This is why I pretty much stick to this group and the Feminists group.

So much noxious fucking misogynist bullshit is not only allowed to stand but encouraged, and fuck that.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

31. >> and fuck that! << so tired of it, too. redqueen.

[orpupilofnature57]

27. " Good Feminist " is like " Agreeable Dissident "

[redqueen]

28. Well that was a laugh riot.

What a typical display. Nice to see most putting the BS in perspective.

And there weren't any of those fucking annoying, 'Well I'm a feminist, but not the hairy, anti-porn kind' type comments (or at least not that I saw) so that was icing on the cake!

[NuclearDem]

29. That whole OP and a bunch of responses to it were just depressing.

It's too reminiscent of when Freeperville has a collective sad over "uppity black people" not allowing them to say the N word.

That's really it. The privileged being confronted with it, and instead of just listening to what the other person has to say, crying "woe is me" and decrying the "fun-hating", uppity feminists for ruining their privilege.

[seabeyond]

30. you are jsut right. it is no more than that. the men that came in to applaud are the very men that

are in every womans issue thread dismissing the issue or derailing the conversation. so in the face obvious. why the OP poster had to run away from his own thread. not even the conviction to delete the stupid ass post.

[NuclearDem]

32. It was obviously deliberate flame bait.

If the OP had said "everyone hates Hispanics and Muslims", it would have been hidden 6-0 and the poster TS'd.

But since it was about feminists, and DU had a miserable track record of tolerating misogyny and sexism, it stands. This kind of crap really makes DU suck.

[seabeyond]

33. as 95% of the posters easily recognized the flamebait, yet jury held. results.

At Thu Sep 26, 2013, 09:18 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

Study: Everyone hates environmentalists and feminists
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023735810

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS:

"You mean pedantic screeds belittling people for not behaving and thinking exactly the way you think they ought to backfires?"

This poster reinforces the basic stupid facing these two very important groups. Then he enjoys some popcorn, well aware of the flamebait he employed. Over the top and rude, insulting to fellow duers.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Sep 26, 2013, 09:25 PM, and voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: If there were still a TOS alert, this one should deserve it. Posting the article was not the problem, but the misogynistic flame-baiting comment certainly IS.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

[chervilant]

35. That (miserable track record), and the fact that

Skinner, et al, have done nothing to address the sexism and misogyny perniciously apparent on this site. I have to wonder: do they tolerate it because they agree?

[BainsBane]

34. Exactly

It was totally reactionary.