Over at Historiann, good points being made: "Looking for sexism in coverage of women candidates? Trying looking in the mirror."
Until “the left” reckons with its own misogyny, it’s really not credible to say that the “War on Women” is being prosecuted only by Republicans and right-wingers.
I particularly like the guy who cites his wife as cover for his sexist belief. "Hey, I gotta woman right here, she says I'm right."
5 hours ago
5 comments:
Maybe I've been reading too many blogs on privilege etc. lately, but it seems like the main blame for fixing everything is on the heads of liberals and white women.
The folks with the real power, white men, rich conservatives... they seem to get a pass from daily condemnation on these issues from the people who write about them. (When white men talk about privilege, they get applause, just like my husband gets complimented for taking care of our kids.)
Yes, many liberals are sexist jerks too. Everyone's racist and sexist and -ist -ist -ist. We swim in patriarchical waters and breathe its air. Yes, we all have privilege to some extent and should be aware of it. But, I think we can say that catty sexist remarks about Hilary Clinton (or Sarah Palin or whoever) aren't *quite* as bad as taking away women's right to choose.
We can point out those injustices along with our own misogyny, but we're a hell of a long way away from not being -ist, but I'd still like to be able to keep my ability to say, control my own body, even if some liberal reporter out there says something catty about Michelle Bachman.
There were plenty of hard core natalist leftists throughout history. The most extreme example being Romania under Ceausecu. In the 1980s that regime became notorious for forcing monthly gynecological exams upon women to make sure they did not get illegal abortions. At the same time the Romanian government eliminated birth control for the population. So on the issue of allowing abortions and birth control the Left has a mixed record and its worst elements have been far worse than anything existing today on the right in the US.
Thanks for the link, Delagar.
I'm sorry nicoleandmaggie thought that it was contributing to blaming liberal white women for everything. I thought the post was about how Katrina vanden Heuvel could make better editorial decisions in her own publication. That's not fixing everything; that's just fixing an obvious problem that she has the power to fix.
@Historiann
How about male editors? Why is it only female editors that are called out for not making better editorial decisions?
Why are Sheryl Sandberg and Marissa Meyers the only CEOs called out for making women's work conditions better? Why not Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg?
Why this pattern and practice of calling people who try to make little changes hypocrites because they're not doing everything when they call out people who are doing even more terrible things?
As an observer I wonder why a woman should try to do anything to fight the patriarchy if all she's going to get is condemned when white men get applauded for the same or smaller actions. (Some women do it because it's the right thing to do, but I'm pretty sure it's the patriarchy working its magic when society makes it harder to do the right thing.)
http://xkcd.com/871/
Yeah, I don't know. I see your point, Nicole & Maggie, and I agree that Progressives do a bit too much self-excoriation. Also, I 110% agree with your point there in the final paragraph of your first comment.
OTOH, I didn't think that was what Historiann was saying here, exactly. I thought it was more of a don't use the master's tools if you want to tear down the master's house post.
Even if we're a progressive publication, IOW, it's not useful to attack our (very few) feminist leaders using gendered and sexist terms, *even* *if* those tools work, because winning that way will not lead to a progressive and feminist future, but only more of the same (patriarchal, conservative, sexist) world.
If I've got you wrong, Historiann, feel free to correct me!
Post a Comment