So, calling people out on their prejudices (and other stupid shit they say) can be pretty awkward. Uncomfortable to the point that, a lot of the time, I bite my tongue and conduct an angry debate in the confines of my own mind – so as not to be the nagging, “PC-obsessed” feminazi of the group (/my family). I’ve been noticing a pattern, though, in the reactions I get when I do venture to call peeps out on the anti-feminist or just plain sexist shit spewing from their faces.
You see, the level of hostile defensiveness in said peeps’ reactions is directly proportional to the amount of pride they take in “being über liberal” (commonly measured in units of just how much they like Obama, or, similarly, just how many black friends they have). Somehow, in their bluer-than-Massachusetts minds, the comment she just made about Hillary Clinton being “too ambitious,” or the fact that he just called some girl a “dirty skank, ” CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be misconstrued as “sexist” (air quotes!) because s/he…doesn’t…vote…Republican..?
It’s like, k, congratulations on discerning the fact that John Palin would have gotten us all killed (read: driven half the country to mass suicide). But, I don’t see how you self-identifying as a “liberal” factors into, or altogether excuses, your 1950s-esque outlook on women politicians or girls who...have sex / enjoy sex / are fat / don’t subscribe to patriarchal norms / aren’t sexually interested in you / don’t want children / fuck other girls / used to be “boys” / dedicate themselves to their jobs / don’t get married / et fucking cetera.
Yeah, not seeing the connection…YOU AN ANTI-FEMINIST FOOL!
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Fact: calling yourself a "liberal" or "democrat" doesn't make the shit coming out of your mouth any less sexist.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/11612
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I see the connection, but am confused by the vitriol. If this is how you speak with them, I can see why it is they react the way they do. I've always found that asking lots of questions tends to get people more in line with you than actually just telling them how they feel. I'm not sure if this is directly related to everything on here, but we've had a lot of trolls in the halls recently.
I'm not exactly certain of the intent of this post, so a little more explanation would help me get through the screaming and vitriol and to the real meat of what's going on.
i curse a lot, i don't mean to sound overly aggressive or rub people the wrong way. it's usually how i speak though.
and you're right, reacting like this to people with whom i disagree is not the best way to have a conversation, but this post is just meant for fun on this forum.
ok. I feel much better about this then. ^_^ I was just kind of concerned.
i think the point here is very clear. and i actually think it is well said.
I think the main point (which I totally agree with) is that it's ridiculous to thing that declaring yourself liberal after spewing sexist nonsense makes what you just said any less sexist, and it misogyny is misogyny regardless of what your political beliefs are. This is kind of similar to the "Hey, I have gay friends, but gay people are disgusting and sinners and weird and zombie mutants" you get all too often.
Sorry, I meant "it's ridiculous to think (not thing)"
Thank you for this!
I hate when people use the word 'liberal' as a get-out-of-sexism-free card. Then they wonder why we don't shut up like good little feminists and blindly support the Democratic Party banner. I think it's a failure to realize the ol' Personal is Political idea. Sexist people make sexist politicos make sexist policies.
Gular - I do not think Maggie is being particularly vitriolic about the issue at all. You have no need to apologize Maggie for telling blind hypocrites about their sexism.
Yes - staying calm and asking questions can get people to listen but ultimately sexism hutrs like hell. I deal with the pain of it everyday - and I think that sometimes asking questions just is not enough. Sometimes "having a go" at someone makes them think much more.
Just as an add-on to my above post: many people (especially men due to their priveledge) just see feminism as another political thought process to be debated in a logical manner.
They do not see that many women have been severely hurt by patriarchy and so have turned to feminsim. So if you talk about how much pain you have suffered and you are showing anger or hurt - then many people are much more likely to see why sexism hurts women.
I have found that when I am angry about sexism - people I know have reacted with much more consideration towards my feminist views because they finally realize that this is not just my "ranting" ....I really get hurt by what they say. Anger can ge a great way to motivate people to examine their sexism - much more than calm talking, sometimes.
I can relate to this post; I have many men patron the bar I tend and they expect some sort of present for voting for Obama. They think they are in my good graces for "being liberal", yet many proceed to tell me that I can't throw 100# bags of whatever into a truck all day. How sexist is that? I, in return counter with "I work out everyday and you are completely unaware of my strength for one." And two, maybe if men would think women have been TAUGHT to think they are the weaker sex and thus are not capable of doing such "tasks" we wouldn't be having this discussion. But at least I can plant the seed of "I hope you don't discourage your daughters from wanting to work in factories or lift anything heavier than a baby." Patriarchy! It makes my head spin!!
I completely agree. Many Democrats didn't vote for Hillary just because she's a woman.
Why are so many Liberal guys much more sensitive to issues of racism than sexism? They can tolerate racism but they still laugh at sexist jokes or have no problem with sexist programs? If you substituted the word racist for sexist it wouldn't fly. For example, recently the show Mad Men was being promoted on TV and as they bragged about emmy nominations they proudly proclaimed it as THE most sexist show on TV. If you substitute "racist" for "sexist" how long would the ad be on before some civil rights leader got it yanked? I just registered to chime in. Great topic. Its my first time here.
welcome, jt. good point.
Because differences between men and women are still seen as "natural", "biological", whereas race differences are not. I think Gloria Steinem said it best in her op-ed piece in the New York Times last January, about Clinton v. Obama:
"So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects “only” the female half of the human race; because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more “masculine” for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren’t too many of them); and because there is still no “right” way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what."
OK, this is where my semi-secret, late-teens, half-buried love of Sartre comes in. Along with my genetic heritage of deeply-pragmatic, somewhat skeptical dairy farmers. I always think that it's unecessary to tell me what you think/feel/believe, because sooner or later you'll show me. And when there's a conflict between what you claim to believe and the way you actually act, your actions speak for you. Hence my favortie quote from Marx:
Agreed. It's just like when someone says something horribly racist towards Black people, only to say right afterwards '...But I'm not racist! I assure you! I have black friends!'
It irritates me beyond belief. Well said.
The concept of women "ranting" whenever we have something to say, fight or change is an age old way to shut us up. There is nothing at this point in my professional career as a human that would tell me that sitting down and speaking in a calm, collected and slightly deeper voice (so as not to appear shrill, a word used to describe every powerful woman's voice lately) will do anything. See, the black man's movement did not get where it is today by describing the views of it's people in a quiet manner. The Boston Tea Party was not the result of collected relaxers. That is why women are still battling. Because we insist on thinking of the sexist pigs' feelings on our "ranting" instead of fighting for what is ours. Keep cursing MAGGIE wake us all the fuck up!
I agree; I think women's rights movements have been held back a lot by the (common) stereotypes of nagging women or hysteria. And, for that matter, PMS.
Media examples always seem to express it best: Disney's Mary Poppins (my sister loved that movie when we were younger) - the suffragette mother who was so dedicated to her cause that she'd get everyone marching around the house, but was undeniably air-headed. Another, more recent media example was, for me, one of the mothers in That 70s Show, who was all about women's lib, but too dumb for words... Yeah, it's just meant to be a joke, but these stereotypes are "funny" because they have taken root in society.
Women need to speak up and keep speaking up, even when people respond to us with "Oh, well, you just don't have a sense of humour". Would a lot of black people have a "sense of humour" if they were still portrayed as simple-minded and servile in the media? If we spend so much time trying to negotiate being PC and inoffensive we won't accomplish anything.
I agree in spirit, but I don't necessarily see the value of your examples. Is it not possible for an individual to be ambitious and grasping? It might be applied in a manner suggestive of traditional gender concepts - "she's too ambitious, she should be happy with whatever the patriarchy allows" - or not - "she's too ambitious, I'm concerned that her motives are politically selfish and that her integrity is threatened by this".
Rigorous self-examination in this case and where one feels moved to comment on someone's sexual behaviour is important, but it is still possible to criticise women as individuals without being sexist. I think it's important to explore someone's rhetoric with them when it comes up like this in conversation or debate, and get to the root of their feelings.