I am not one to get offended easily. But lately, I've become more irritated and slightly angered at the sexism going on in my life. Maybe I've just become more aware of it. Who knows.
Here are some highlights from a conversation that set me off last week:
"I know I might sound sexist, but could you imagine if women ran the UN?"
"Yeah, every 28 days there would be a war."
"They would scream that they were PMSing."
Those statements made me leave the room--irritated, angered, offended. I am not proud of my reaction. I was asked if everything was okay; I came up with the excuse that I wasn't feeling well, which was only partly true.
On another note, I recieved a birithday card a few months ago. I'm not sure how to take it; I know that I am slightly offended.
On the front of the card a close up picture of a woman with mouth wide open, appearing shocked, and the words in bright red:
"The only word women fear more than Birthday:"
Inside, in bright red again, the word:
"Stirrups"
I have to say, I don't believe my friend understood me when he gave me the card. He thought it was funny. At the time, I didn't find it funny or offensive, I just plain did not understand it. In fact, I thought the card was reffering to stirruped leggings or a horse saddle. After giving it some thought, I began to realize that it referred to something completely different; that is when it hit me, I am a feminist.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Is it just polite conversation and birthday wishes?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12472
The only thing I could think of was stirruped leggings. I still don't get it...
It's referring to the stirrups used in gynecological exam.
Yeah, I don't get it. It just doesn't sound funny, especially as a birthday card.
I believe it's referring to the stirrups used during a gynecological examination.
"I am not one to get offended easily."
This is not agreeing with evidence in this post.
Sorry to derail your thread a little, but I see this in tons of posts like this one. People say they are not easily offended, and then give some example of how they were the only person in the room who was offended by XYZ sexist comment.
If you want to get offended by every sexist, misogynistic, intolerant comment or TV commercial or whatever that you see, that's great, more power to you. But that means you are easily offended. I don't know what else you would even mean by using that phrase. Half of the posts on this website are just examples of mainstream culture to find offensive. Be easily offended, that's fine.
I don't think that's necessarily being easily offended, I think it's just being more conscious of how excepted misogyny and oppression in general are.
Total thread derail, indeed. Of course, that's a pattern with you.
Original re-poster: You were offended by something that rightly offends many thinking people. Your offense did not come "easily;" when you're a minority trying to stay afloat in the majority's world, it never does. It's the natural accumulation of years of seeing members of your group categorized, misdefined, denigrated, and given short shrift.
Those with unearned socal privilege can smugly chuckle about how "easily" you were offended.
They can wield this charge against you and other women and non-Westerners and queer folk because few of society's poison missiles have ever been pointed at them.
It's easy to joke about "the easily offended" when the offense-missiles are rarely aimed at oneself.
The rest of us, those whose genitals or skin color or sexuality never got us a whit of unearned privilege--we understand.
And we take offense, along with you, when offense is thrown up into our faces, aimed straight at our hearts.
I knew I should have included this at first, but I'll just add it now. What does easily offended mean? To me it means that you are more easily offended than most people. It means that you will be offended more often, and by more things than most people. Does this not apply? Or do you have some other meaning of the phrase in mind?
I'm also not "joking" about being easily offended. I'm not chuckling, and I never said "too easily offended" as Meghan suggested below. In fact, I explicitly said being easily offended is fine. But don't listen to what I say. Decide what you think I mean based on your perceptions of my privilege, put words in my mouth, and then get offended at them. I'm not saying that the things she mentioned aren't offensive. They are. And being offended is absolutely the appropriate response. But when one is always more offended than others, I just think that's the definition of easily offended.
Oh, and the "who-has-more-privilege" game is fun.
To me it means that you are more easily offended than most people. It means that you will be offended more often, and by more things than most people.
*
"To me, it means that you are more easily offended than the European, male, hetero default social paradigm. It means that you will be offended more often, and by more things than most European, male, heterosexual men."
There. Fixed.
What was that you were saying about privilege again?
Yes, you have pointed out that different cultures have different standards of offense, and completely different reasons for being offended. We live in a particular culture; within that culture, different people are offended by different things. I would suggest that those who are offended by an uncharacteristically large number of things are the ones referred to by the phrase "easily offended." I also suggest that feminists, you in particular, are offended by an uncharacteristically large number of things, relative to others in the culture in which we live.
So do you have any interest in actually discussing the use of this term, which was the whole reason for my post, or would you like to continue making pointless, glib remarks about privilege so you can avoid having to actually think about this an potentially agree with me?
Have you genuinely missed the point--not a glib one in the least, but a very earnest and serious one--of my translation of your term "most people?"
Your use of the term "most people" refers to the default person recognized in Western society: the European-descended, the male, the heterosexual.
Many women, on the other hand, are indeed offended by the outright statement that women cannot govern an international organization because they had the abject misfortune to be born with a disfavored set of genitals. Removing these women from the phrase "most people" is a reification of the patriarchy and, yes, an expression of unexamined privilege.
It's difficult for me to tell over the internet whether you're being purposely obtuse or whether you have, in all innocence, never stepped back and taken note of the fact that what you consider to be "most people" is in fact an artifact of patriarchy and its power structures.
Now, I never said that I take offense at every little sexist or misogynistic thing found in commercials or mainstream media; however, your misguided opinion assumes that I am more offended than most. You really need to take the context of what is being analyzed: 1) a conversation made to put women down, assuming that war would rage every time they had their periods; 2) a harmless birthday card made to make fun of gynecological exams.
I am more personally offended by the first, it was directed toward making women appear that they are inferior, that we should not be in positions of high power due to the fact that we bleed every month. Quite frankly, I want to be successful and influential, comments like that make me angry because I feel as though it were a personal attack.
As I mentioned, I was more confused by the card than offended; the mild offense came much later when I figured that the stirrups was a reference to a gynecological exam. My reaction was more like, "what, is that what it meant? Wow that is slightly offensive." Whereas I left the room in the other situation, clearly upset while my five friends laughed at the conversation. When it came to the card, I still feel as though my friend just did, or does not, understand me. He holds a lot of gendered stereotypes about relationships and women in general, more than likely he thought I would find it amusing, probably laugh at myself.
I never said that I take offense at every little sexist or misogynistic thing found in commercials or mainstream media
I do, whenever I notice it. That does make me more offended than most people, and I have no problem with that. Most people aren't offended enough.
Total thread derail, indeed. Of course, that's a pattern with you.
Do we have to go through this again? Please, lets not make this personal.
Half of the posts on this website are just examples of mainstream culture to find offensive. Be easily offended, that's fine.
I agree. The people who think it is a problem to be easily offended are the same people who attack Political Correctness and joke about how feminists need to just get a sense of humor. It's all the same idea, and the source of that idea is a bunch of assholes trying to protect their privilege. What is so bad about being easily offended? Why do we have to apologize for it, and why are we buying into the idea that it's a problem?
People call me "sensitive" sometimes and act like I get worked up over nothing. Well, fuck them. It seems kind of silencing: "Oh, the crazy feminist, so easily offended. We don't have to listen to her."
Sensitive only means you're more discerning, and easily offended only means you're paying attention.
I suggest you go back and read several months' worth of threads in which doubleb removes the focus from the original poster's question or problem and spins off a contentious, fruitless back-and-forth (often bordering on anti-feminist).
He himself has admitted no less than *two times* that he does this too frequently and that it is not meet.
And yet he continues to do it, to the detriment of the original posters who seek on-point discussions of their problems.
I second that.
I third it. I was not aware doubleb was a 'he' but now you have said it I am unfortunately not surprised, as his posts do fit the bill of an male who feels threatened by feminism so comes on here to try and bait feminists. He does not come across as genuinely concerned about any of the actual issues at hand, and as others have said, I wonder why he is on this site at all.
Although I suppose I have just employed his favoured tactic by continuing to derail this thread...oops.
***I suggest you go back and read several months' worth of threads in which doubleb removes the focus from the original poster's question or problem and spins off a contentious, fruitless back-and-forth (often bordering on anti-feminist)***.
Okra - just wondering if you have reported him for trolling? Sounds like you would be within the feministing.com guidelines to do so; they state that "anti-feminist comments, blogs, and profiles are not permitted".
I don't think it means you're easily offended if you are offended by something offensive. I think that's downplaying misogyny, to tell the truth. Telling feminists they're too easily offended is one of the most utilized methods of silencing women.
Also, there is a difference between awareness and offense. Often times I won't actually feel offended at all, but may point out the obvious double standards and essentialism of jokes like that just because someone else honestly seems to have missed it.
Other times I may actually be worn down by it all or something, and actually take offense.
I think part of the problem is that people take calling out sexism when you see it as some sort of "hysterical" emotional response, rather than a realistic assessment of whatever crap you've just been subjected to.
I know a lot of examples on a forum such as this may seem trivial to someone coming in to poke fun at "sensitive feminists." However, sometimes that is just the point. These things can be so trivial, they just fly right under the radar.
It can be a bit discombobulating when they're not invisible anymore, and especially when they become irritatingly blatant. This compels people to share these minor annoyances with like minded people to gain a bit of validation against the constant cries of "But aren't you just being oversensitive? Get over it!"
I agree with Meghan Elaine. There is no need to make excuses or doubt yourself when discussing something that is offensive to you or a group of people. It does downplay misogyny. It is similar to a lot of the posts where people here use the word "rant" to describe a post that is usually the opposite - thought-out and intelligent, not just emotional and violent. And maybe emotion and violent speech are necessary at times - if you are saying it, you feel strongly about it, but our culture tells us that our outrage against sexist, racist, or other offensive language or terms or ideas is "ranting" in a bad way - too emotional, coming from overly sensitive people.
The things mentioned in this post are sexist, and it makes sense that they bother you. Don't degrade yourself or let others put you down for noticing, being uncomfortable, and speaking up.
I honestly think we're all getting at basically the same idea.
There are two ways to approach this: one way is to fight the idea that being offended at misogyny is being easily offended.
Another way is to fight the idea that being easily offended is bad. I like this. I like the idea of claiming the label "easily offended" and telling people who silence me to fuck off.
I'm sorry you had to sit through that conversation, and even sorrier that you did not stay to offer a counter-response, although I certainly do not blame you.
Just the other day, I sat in a meeting (12 or so people) in which the meeting leader, a person with power over me and my job, told an anecdote that was extremely offensive to both Black Americans and minorities generally. (This man prides himself on being "with it" and "hip to" racial issues, and probably has gotten some postiive reinforcement from minorities from it; I think this is the source of his confidence in throwing around the "n-word" in what he felt was a post-racial way).
I felt the same anger and helplessness you describe above. It actually burned in my midsection the way heartburn sometimes does when you've eaten too quickly. I felt sick to my stomach not only over his comments but at the realization that, as one of two ethnic minorities in the room, I was one of the only people in the room to automatically feel that the everyone's thoughts had turned to me and what my reaction would be. I saw a few pairs of eyes flick in my direction and I felt even worse, but I kept my face expressionless.
Everyone else--all people who pride themselves on being progressive--was smiling, though I know not whether they were tolerating it like me, or whether they really found this man's stories amusing.
To answer your question: No, it was not just "Polite conversation." It was a direct attack, born of misogyny and patriarchy, on a category of human beings on account of the set of organs with which they were born.
I understand entirely that we cannot always do and say the heroic thing. Sometimes a lifetime of such scenarios takes such a toll on us that all we can do is leave the room and look down and see our own hands shaking with anger and hurt and pain.
I myself sat there, feeling ill, hating that I chose not to say anything because this man is responsible for writing my job evaluations and I need a good recommendation to get into a position of authority comparable to his.
But once I have that authority...I will never sit, silent, again.
I'm sorry to be dense, but why is the fact that women fear birthing stirrups either funny or offensive?
I'd suggest that the more sexist part of that card was the idea that women are terrified of aging (i.e. we "fear birthdays").
I'm also mystified by the "stirrups" bit. How is it even a decent punch line? Nothing else in the joke leads up to the stirrups gag. It's just tacky and frankly dumb.
Yes, exactly. So why is everyone getting offended? If I say "why are a woman and a gramophone similar", and the answer is "baked beans", surely the correct response is slightly amused bemusement.
It's offensive on a gut level, like "why is a woman being scared of having something put in her vagina... funny?"
I don't find gynecological exams scary, but they are pretty awkward, and when you put your feet in those stirrups you are putting yourself in a very vulnerable position. The idea of making a joke about a woman being scared to be in this position kind of creeps me out.
A joke about women being afraid of a gynecological exam is fine in the right context, but that card is not a good context. The joke about women being afraid of aging set the tone, and that tone was not friendly toward women. Therefore, the stirrup joke is creepy.
Why do we not delete such derailing posts from obvious non-feminists? This is a feminist website. What are these anti-feminists even doing here? What do you think the reaction would be if a lesbian posted continuously, offensively, on a right-wing Christian website? Do you think they'd be so polite as here, and let her say whatever she wanted all the time? Oh, wait. On second thought, a lesbian would have more of a life than the guys posting over here...
i really wonder why doubleb hasn't been removed from the site.
n e wayz, i wanted to add my interesting experience with taking "offense." for quite some time, in college, i couldn't identify with "being offended." i got angry, rather. being offended meant to me a feeling of helplessness, and i really thought of myself as strong.
then i came to mississippi, to the med school no less, and realized why i felt that way before, and why it has changed now. i was at an all women's college surrounded by feminists who were active. being active made me feel less victimized. but now i'm the only person around here who believes the things i do, let alone act the same way. so i've realized again what it means to be offended. and yes, i'm easily offended, because i have to live in a misogynistic world.
I think that the stirrups joke isn't necessarily sexist, but the aging part is.
To clarify, I immediately assumed they were talking about pap smear stirrups.
I personally have a major emotional/mental/nervous breakdown everytime I have to go for that exam, so getting that card would have been offensive to me just for that part. But yeah, I'm definitely offended by the conversation... as if women are run by their periods, pshah.
I also think you were rude and condescending to principes and completely shut her down.I never claimed that anecdotal evidence is better than statistical data. However, I do think that there is a place for listening to individual women's voices when you're talking about feminism. If you can open your mind a little, anecdotal evidence and statistical evidence both have their bedroom furniture place. Anecdotal evidence needs to stay out of scientific journals, but on a feminist community blog it should be part of the discussion.