[PREV - THEME_RUSTLER] [TOP]
EXPLAINING_FEMINISM
November 10-14, 2014
From material originally
Allow me to explain feminism to you. posted to the dailykos.
Or something about feminism anyway.
It's often observed that my fellow dick-holders
and I are not shy about sharing our opinions. Tip: Leading with some
But the corollary is that that other gender out irreverent wit like this
there is not speaking up quite so often-- I'm is just what you need to
afraid that this leads to a bit of a trap where win over feminists, who
feminists of the female persuasion are led are famous for their
astray in thinking that they and their friends tolerance of dumb jokes.
are representative of all women, and they then
begin trying to act as the spokespersons for the
whole group. They're then very surprised and
hurt when they find themselves suddenly fighting
off attacks from the rear when the silent
majority wakes up.
Something like this went down when the 70s
feminists encountered the third wave: all of a WAVICALISM
sudden the feminist's somewhat rigid doctrines
about sexual roles and sexuality were challenged
by both the mainstream defenders of tradition
and the "pro-sex" feminists that came out of San
Francisco in the 80s and 90s.
(In these porn-fried days it might be hard to remember the
kind of attitudes that were taken seriously among feminist
activists back then... consider that strap-on dildos were
regarded as evil because they supposedly suggested there
was some truth in the Freudian theory of "penis-envy".
*Real* women get by on clitoral stimulation alone.)
[link]
More recently, in the realm of open source software there's
been a faction calling themselves the "geek feminists", who
have argued that rampant sexism has created a boys club
attitude in the field that's driving away potential female
recruits. They have a point that there's probably more
sexism around than a dick-bearing person like myself would
be aware of, but I must confess I have trouble taking the
"geek feminists" entirely seriously ("Um... so, women are
just as good as men, except that they're delicate little
flowers who need special protection by us chivalrous white
knights?"). The geek feminists, don't hesitate to speak as But then, I
though they know what's best for all women everywhere, an suspect it's
attitude which seems all too familiar... "not all geek
feminists".
They've already received a bit of push-back from other
women, faster than I would've expected (but that's the
internet era for you).
[link]
Back in 2012, a "Nice Girl" wrote about
"The Dark Side of Geek Feminism":
"I attended OSCON for the first time last year, and had
some experiences that almost completely turned me off
of the idea of attending this year. I was criticized
to my face for wearing low necklines and skirts of a
short-yet-modest length, and told that I was
'sexualizing' the conference through my attire. I was
lambasted for my honest answer ('I’m here with my
boyfriend.') when I was asked about my reasoning for
attending, and even told that I should lie about why I
was attending OSCON instead of 'undermining' the
feminist community."
More recently, November 03, 2014, the Linux Journal
ran a piece by Susan Sons, "Girls and Software":
[link]
"I've never had a problem with old-school hackers.
These guys treat me like one of them, rather than
'the woman in the group' ... "
"The new breed of open-source programmer isn't like the
old. They've changed the rules in ways that have put a
spotlight on my sex for the first time in my 18 years
in this community. ..."
"It used to be that I was comfortable standing side by
side with men, and no one cared how I looked. Now I
find myself having to waste time talking about my
gender rather than my technology...otherwise, there are
lectures:
o The 'you didn't have a woman on the panel'
lecture. I'm on the panel, but I'm told I don't
count because of the way I dress: t-shirt, jeans,
boots, no make-up.
o The 'you desexualize yourself to fit in; you're
oppressed!' lecture. I'm told that deep in my female
heart I must really love make-up and fashion. It's
not that I'm a geek who doesn't much care how she
looks.
o The 'you aren't representing women; you'd be a
better role model for girls if you looked the part'
lecture. ... "
"With one exception, I've heard these lectures only
from women, and women who can't code at that. ... "
It's pretty interesting that we have here two women complaining
about being pushed *in different directions* by champions of
"feminism". What their experiences have in common is that they
were treated like symbols of their gender rather than like
human beings, and ran into people convinced that they knew
precisely how they should live.
Then in the wider world outside the open source software
community, there's been a storm of feminist protest
concerning some remarks by Salma Hayek.
Consider this piece by Barbara Ellen in the
Guardian UK, of November 9, 2014:
[link]
"What is it about the term 'feminist' that still makes
some women flinch and bridle, even when they are
actively engaged in helping other females? Actress
Salma Hayek has just been honoured at Equality Now’s
'Make Equality Reality' event, for co-founding 'Chime
for Change', which fights for women’s rights around the
world. ... Hayek said: 'I am not a feminist. If men
were going through the things women are going through
today, I would be fighting for them with just as much
passion. I believe in equality.' "
The first thing to note: the issue here is *entirely symbolic*:
it's not about being in favor of equality, but whether
you wave a flag labeled "feminist" when you do it...
"Hayek is, to put it politely, confused. Someone should explain
to her that feminism is all about wanting equality. That,
arguably, to divorce feminism from equality is like shaking an
egg and trying to separate the yolk from the white afterwards."
I'm glad she put it politely. It strikes me that if a
dick-encumbered person like myself found myself talking down
to a woman like this, I would probably think twice about it.
But condescension is okay as long as you're a Feminist.
"However, this isn’t just about definitions of
feminism, or how everyone, including Hayek, has a
right to self-define as they wish."
Ah, she *is* allowed to self-define. That's nice.
"This is about the astonishing persistence of what I’d term
small-f feminist-woman. The kind of woman who isn’t
necessarily stupid or ill-informed, who, in fact, often talks
and behaves in a 'feminist' way, yet she still recoils from
the term 'feminist' as if she’d just found a scorpion nestling
in her shoe. The kind of woman, such as Hayek, who accepts an
award for helping women at an event also honouring Gloria
Steinem (Gloria Steinem!) and then has the graceless gall to
use it as an opportunity to announce that she isn’t a
feminist."
Admittedly, Barbara Ellen does seem to know about "graceless gall".
"You have to wonder-- what's with these women and
their seemingly all-consuming need to distance
themselves from feminism? An unworthy thought crawls I find myself
through my brain: is this a man-pleasing exercise-- wondering about
are they afraid that men might find even the slightest the set of
whiff of feminism a turn-off, so they bang on about thoughts
'equality' to keep everything safely gender-neutral unworthy of
and 'sexy'? Barbara Ellen.
Or does it go yet deeper, darker, than that, into the
realms of female self-hatred? Where the cause of
womankind in itself is just not good enough,
interesting enough and so men must be prominently
included, feted and appeased, even at a
female-celebrating event?"
This is just fascinating, it's a syndrome you
see in many other areas, notably with the
Zionists and their fights with "self-hating I define myself in terms of
Jews". quality X, and because of
that I believe in Y, if you
I was beginning to wonder if Barbara Ellen don't support Y despite
is an odd case (it does seem that she's a possessing quality X, there
professional asshole, in the business of must be something deeply
being "controversial"), but a few web wrong with you, you're
searches show that she's certainly not consumed with self-hatred
alone. because of quality X.
You couldn't put this spectacle in a satiric novel,
it'd seem way too heavy-handed: a swarm of female
WASPs buzzing around a Latina woman, femsplaining to Can't imagine why
her about the right way to promote equality-- anyone would want to
distance themselves
from these folks...
Looking back over what I've written above,
I think I've left myself open to a charge
of "rotten-cherrypicking", but this isn't
supposed to be some grand critique of all E.g. the "geek feminists"
of feminism-- it can't be, if only because have some sympathy for some
the number of feminist voices is so large. complaints I've cited here:
Every group has some crazy extremists [link]
and judging a group by their worst
examples is a poor heuristic.
The central point I was trying to make is
pretty simple, and probably seems obvious
to most: be careful about speaking for My critics see something
other people. stunningly ironic about
that remark, strangely
There are some other issues here that enough.
are trickier (and maybe more interesting
because of that) about the definition of I think I can go with the
political movements, and what you might "intolerant of intolerance"
call their "reputation management". defense, though that admittedly
In addition to the question "who gets can have problems, too.
to speak for women?" there's the question
of "who gets to speak for feminism?"
[link]
Oh hell, and since I wrote the above Julie Bindel at the
Guardian UK has weighed in with a different set of criticisms:
"Feminism, a great social movement, is in danger of
becoming toxic and repressive. The focus on individuals,
however vile they may be, signifies a shift away from the
more difficult, long-term work of making institutions
such as the Crown Prosecution Service and other
governmental departments accountable. ... Identity
politics and the emergence of feminist preciousness --
the tendency towards putting trigger warnings on everything
and wrapping each other in cotton wool -- has translated
into a disproportionate focus on individuals who offend,
rather than the culture that allows them to do so. ...
We are in danger of becoming autocrats who would rather
organise a pile-on than try to change systems. The life
blood of feminism is in danger of becoming bile."
This all seems so much like the 70s
I've got Meatloaf songs running
through my head.
A later update:
But: what's the action item?
If we put aside the fascinating questions about my
depraved character, what's left is an alert:
"watch out, incipient backlash ahead!"
So okay, either that's right or wrong. If it's wrong
we can add (some additional) stupidty to my other
sterling characteristics. If it's right, then what?
Is the message just "moderate before it's too late!"?
But... really I think that's often lame advice for
activists. And it's something of a moot point:
I doubt there's going to be a move in the "moderate"
direction any time soon (certainly not just on my
advice).
So I'm predicting an inevitable crash, and then the
only point there can be is this: think about what
comes next. If this wave breaks, what will the next
wave look like?
--------
[NEXT - BACK_TO_THE_PAST]