This angry feminist wants to know: what is your favorite reply to daily sexism?
Many times, I don't know how to respond to the things that irk me in daily or weekly life. How do you reply to these things?
Random strangers saying "Why aren't you smiling?" or "Smile for me."
Me: "Because you're talking to me" or my timeless staple, "Fuck off." These will usually be answered with the patronizing "Whoooaa." Yeah, whoa, dickface.
Catcalls or stares.
Me: Usually trying to ignore them. Unfortunately, that just doesn't make me feel better the way a swift kick in the nuts would. I truly hate this version of excluding women from the public sphere. Often I couldn't even walk a few blocks to the store on Wilshire when I lived in Santa Monica in sweats without being made to feel like I didn't have a right to be outside.
Ass grabbed in a crowded bar.
Me: A hard smack to the face when I was in college, when this happened a lot, but if it happens again any time soon it will certainly be a swift and hard Cock Punch. (Grabbing someone is assault, and a Cock Punch is self defense. No joke). I will then notify someone with authority, and sometimes this person will be escorted out of the bar. That is if I know who the perpetrator is. All too often I will turn and not know who it was. This is the worst, and I never know what to do in that case.
Man approaching and asking to buy an unwanted drink, flirting, or asking "Why are you alone?" if I am.
Me: "Not interested." Or "Do I not have the right to be alone without being bothered?" or "Are you flirting with me? I'm sorry, but no." However, I want some way to communicate the inherent sexism without getting the patronizing "Whoooaa" (or being loudly insulted as I have been countless times). After all, communicating knowledge may prevent the behavior.
Female friend speaking patriarchal propaganda, including "I just don't like girls."
Me: Education! Including the forced reading of Full Frontal Feminism.
I know there are a million more, but I can't think of them right now. And now a little story for your reading pleasure:
Recently I was at Home Depot looking for Bay to Breakers costume pieces, and being helped by a man who was obviously trying to flirt with me. I left him quickly and was later redirected to him by another employee when I was looking for something else that he happened to be standing by (argh). When he asked how long I wanted a PVC pipe cut (to make a cane) I replied "I'm not sure. My boyfriend's shorter than me- he's 5'5"." To which he replied, "Well that's rubbing it in" quickly before talking about the cane again. I sort of laughed incredulously at the idea that he would ever think I could possibly have been flirting with him, or that by just saying I had a boyfriend I was somehow breaking his heart, because since I am a woman of course I would want to fuck him if I didn't have another man in my life. I couldn't possibly be just a person, but a woman "of marriageable age." I couldn't possibly have just been WANTING TO FUCKING CUT A PIECE OF PVC PIPE TO MAKE A CANE AND THEN BE ON MY FUCKING WAY. A few minutes later, he started talking about his wife. What the fuck.
Sure, this guy was a douchebag, but I have experienced this sort of interaction too often to not have a reflexive response. I, who never acts in any way that can be construed as flirty, ever, even when I want to fuck someone. (Do you know what my preferred pickup line is? It's "Hey, want to fuck?" Seriously. It's how I picked up on my current boyfriend of nearly two years, who was a feminist long before I came along- but he didn't call how he felt feminism. He called it logic. Interchangeable. But I digress). If my boyfriend had been there and heard the guy act the way he did, I can tell you what he would have done. He would have done nothing, because it's understood in our relationship that, if it involves me and physical contact is actually necessary (rare), it's my fight and he's there for backup (and vice versa). He would never, ever deny me the first Cock Punch.
Tell me if you can think of any other situations, and how you respond as well (or how you would respond). The more options the better!
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: This angry feminist wants to know: what is your favorite reply to daily sexism?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/13880
I understand that you came clean from the outset on feeling angry, but I'll also come clean and say that I don't understand why the very broad spectrum of passing social interactions outlined here might justify violence, verbal or physical.
I do appreciate that different personalities have different standards of personal space and etiquette, but as a boxer I don't feel that it's appropriate to assault someone in order to make your point, unless your safety is clearly threatened, and as a bisexual woman I definitely wouldn't expect a very inane conversation with a customer about PVC tubing to result in injury to my genitals...
Wow, Nik. Way to completely not understand.
First, I'd like to point out that the OP is soliciting advice on how better to deal with these problems. She, understandably, wants these things to stop happening, and isn't sure how to get across to strangers that their behavior is unwanted, insulting, and in some cases threatening and even illegal. If you have some non-violent suggestions, she clearly wants them.
Second, take another look at this list of offenses which you dismissively refer to as "the very broad spectrum of passing social interactions":
Being told to smile: This is patronizing, insulting, and rude. You don't know why someone who isn't smiling isn't smiling, and by telling them to smile it is like saying, "I don't care if something awful just happened to you, it will make ME feel better if you pretend to be happy." And why should we care about making a stranger feel better, especially when they have just expressed how little they care about how we are actually feeling?
Catcalls or stares: Dehumnizing, and once again showing lack of respect for space and a lack of etiquette. In addition, ogling has, in fact, been deemed a crime.
Ass grabbed in a crowded bar: THIS IS A VIOLENT AND CRIMINAL ACT - IT'S CALLED ASSAULT. It definitely warrants retaliation of some kind, if the perpetrator can be identified.
Man approaching in a bar: Note that she is not suggesting violence is in order. She just wants to know if anyone has a better way to respond that communicates how she feels about it.
Female friend saying sexist things: same as above.
Employee at Home Depot: The "don't rub it in" comment was definitely out of line. Home Depot probably has a sexual harassment policy, and might very well consider his conduct as inappropriate as she did. In fact, anyone in customer service should be well-versed in appropriate behavior, and know that deviating from it is not only risky and wrong, but just bad business. You make a customer uncomfortable, and she's going to find someplace else to shop. And possibly tell all her friends to avoid your store.
I agree with Nik. I counted two "cock punches" one face slap and a "swift kick to the nuts" in this post. I believe that she has a right to feel angry and violated and look for an effective reproach but violence is never the answer if she's not in immediate danger. If she was joking, then I'm not laughing.
Clementine,
At risk of sounding like a broken record, go back and reread the post.
The only case in which she actually took some violent action was when her ass had been grabbed. Grabbing her ass is an ASSAULT. Self-defense is justified.
The rest she did not actually take violent action on (although in a rather muddled way suggests that she might take violent action in certain hypothetical situations that she doesn't describe.)
The main thing she is looking for is advice.
I did read it. 3 times, thanks.
What really gets to me is the catcalling section. "that just doesn't make me feel better the way a swift kick in the nuts would." seriously? what would make me feel better is educating their ass or calling them out on their bullshit. i learned that you don't hit anyone even if the hit you first before i was in kindergarden.
maybe i just can't take this joke lightly because i saw too many girls in school kick guys in the crotch, even causing permanent injury, for no reason other than anger or because they thought it was funny.
as for the ass grabbing. i understand the severity of sexual assault but she is not in DANGER if she is in a crowd of people who could help her if the situation escalated. it would be much more appropriate to grab their hand and yell "hey that's my ass, not yours" and maybe "this is sexual assault and it's illegal"
Interesting how you seem to feel that there is no difference between a person saying they think a physically violent act might make them feel better, and them actually taking that action.
I don't think it was a joke. It was venting.
Perhaps your method of dealing with the assault would be effective, I don't know. I do know we could have avoided this entire conversation if you had just made a post with this as your advice to the original poster, instead of for reasons I still don't understand responding to me trying to convince me that the original poster is more violent than she actually is.
Exactly, thank you.
I don't think kicking guys in the crotch is funny at all, not even in movies. (And I'm glad you don't think it's funny, because I'm sick of hearing it portrayed humorously from people who do, who are almost always men. I've never understood the desire to see someone who did nothing offensive to you in pain).
The idea is that they mentally kicked me in the crotch (i.e. caused me mental pain, the kind that DOESN'T go away after a few minutes), so I think that an actual kick would about even the pain out. But I would never actually do that unless they assaulted me (see "ass grab" section).
That's kind of a tricky road to go down on--measuring physical and emotional pain...
Grabbing someone without permission is PHYSICAL ASSAULT and when that happens you have every right to fight back. It might not necessarily mean that you're in danger, but it definitely could. Also, from my experience, talking to the misogynist isn't effective at all. They usually have their mind set that women are toys, not people.
And 3 of those were all revolving around one incident: the unwanted grab in the bar. If they are asked to take their hands away and do not immediately do so, then physical violence is certainly justified. It's a basic violation of bodily integrity-- one of the clearest cut cases of self defense possible. This is particularly the case when the perpetrator might never be identified after the fact, because then there would be no deterrent to him doing it over and over again.
The final one is ambiguous, but I think the link between cock punch and the Home Depot guy is pretty tenuous at best. The OP was pretty up front with what she thought each type of offront deserved in response. Her preferred response to flirting was:
"Not interested." Or "Do I not have the right to be alone without being bothered?" or "Are you flirting with me? I'm sorry, but no."
The point about her boyfriend doing nothing was segued off the Home Depot story, but I thought the point was more than when a physical response is required, he is there for backup, in general.
I think you guys are reading way too much into this piece, in general. I'm not sure what "verbal violence" is, but for the most part the piece was pretty well balanced, if a bit tongue in cheek at times. I think we should really make an effort to give our writers the benefit of the doubt, because this site is supposed to be a 'safe space' where women can share their experiences. When writers come under attack too frequently, other readers may be dissuaded from writing and potentially from getting good feedback, advice, criticism, or support.
This doesn't mean that we shouldn't be critical, but when details are left out of the story, we shouldn't necessarily make the most unfavorable reading, without clarification from the OP. A question, like "Did you mean to say it's appropriate to punch someone who is flirting with you at a store?" might be more appropriate. IMHO.
"Ass-grabbing" is not (physical) "violence". A tap on the shoulder is also not violence. Physically there's not much difference in ass-grabbing and shoulder-tapping. But it's not the physical thing that matters here. Unwanted ass-grabbing is unpleasant, intimidating and a reminder of all the shit that the person doing it insinuates that he believes you should (and would) put up with. Ass-grabbing can be nice and pleasant (therefore not physical violence), but unwanted ass-grabbing by strangers is violating - unlike a unexpected tab on the shoulder which does not indicate that the person thinks he can do whatever he wants to do with you against your will and humiliate you in public.
It's a stretch to call ass-grabbing "violence" I think (maybe psychological violence?). Maybe you want to construct it as such to justify a physical response as "self-defense"? I don't think it's necessary to change the words: a physical reaction to teach the jerk that you don't accept his trying to dominate you and teach him that this behavior will not be tolerated is totally fine with me. Even if we don't construct his grabbing your ass as "violence".
Of course, in a court room I'd be willing to construct any words as anything if it was relevant. If you react physically to a scumbag who then sues you then of course: call his ass-grabbing "physical assault" and your totally justified reaction "self-defense". In the long run, it is self-defense: It's showing you'll stand up for yourself before the jerk goes further down the line he wanted to tell you he'd be willing to go.
It all depends on whether it's unwanted or not. When my boyfriend grabs my ass when we're making out, that's nice. When a stranger doesn't, it's violent. The same can be applied to sex, when it's consensual it's usually nice, but when it isn't it's rape and it's a physically and emotionally violent act.
Yeah... I guess my point was to distinguish between 'physical violence' and 'emotional assault'. It's not the 'actual' grabbing that's harmful - that depends on the context. And yes, in some contexts the grabbing is very distressing and intimidating. I think it's more like a 'threat of violence' which numbs you or in other ways hurt you as well as sends a message of fear. Whether we use the word 'violence' or not about this, I think a response that sends the signal that this is not tolerated and this person will defend herself is totally appropriate.
Nik, did you read her post? She suggested that for one thing, which was for the assault of being groped. Nothing else. I don't know how much you've had to deal with that offense, but it's terrible and dehumanizing and I believe the law sides with her.
Agreed. It is assault. And I can't tell you how violated I feel when it has happened. I would much, much rather be punched in the face than have my ass grabbed by a stranger, again. At least then I would not feel so dehumanized.
Agreed with mccarth. Getting your ass grabbed is incredibly demeaning and for me, terrifying. For you, it's a hand on a nice ass, for me, it means worrying the rest of the night: what did that mean? Is he watching me? What does he want? Is he following me? Is he going to be outside when I leave? Is he going to follow me home?
I'd say if people starting dishing out a slap in response, the frequency of ass-grabs would go way down, way fast.
I appreciate your question, but I have read this post several times, and I'm afraid I don't agree with you. By no means did I mean to say anything particularly controversial or divisive; as I have said, I just feel that the tone of this post on what is - understandably - a very common and worthy topic is unhelpful. At its best, the exchange of "Smile!" - "Fuck off!" has a parity of unnecessary disregard for the other's feelings, and at its worst, the exchange of sexual assault for a retaliation in kind is a dangerous (and hypocritical) escalation.
Yeah, saying 'fuck off' when someone tells you to smile is WAY overkill. Even I wouldn't do that and I'm not very nice. :|
OP: Next time somebody (creepily) tells you to smile, tell them "I would, but [my cat just died/I have cancer/my house burned down." Still mean but it might make them think about telling random people to smile. And better than saying 'fuck you' hah.
But why do you need to make excuses to strangers about why you're not smiling? They expect you to smile prettily for them, when they have no relation to you in any way?
There's a reason I don't smile for strangers: I have no reason to. Some strangers think a woman's default facial expression is a pretty smile. Well, guess what, unless you've had your face surgically altered to be that way, your default relaxed expression is just that - relaxed. Not a smile.
If people demand we smile, they should really just fuck off. They think they're entitled to only look at pretty smiling people(women) and newsflash: they're not. And giving them horrible, sad cancer/death/fire excuses just confirms that if life hadn't been so cruel we WOULD be smiling for them. But the truth is: most of us wouldn't.
They were disregarding her feelings the minute they told her to smile without knowing her circumstances. Someone could have just died and some random asshole has decided that he has the right to tell her to at least look happy for his benefit. How is that not dehumanising?
Well, if someone tells me to smile, I usually shoot them a smile! Anytime anyone has ever said that to me, it's been some sweet little old lady or man who noticed i was feeling down and wants to cheer me up, and I really appreciate the effort. :)
Catcalls and stares, I usually smile, or, in the case that I find the guy attractive, catcall right back! :D
Ass grabbing---first, I make sure it's not an accident---it's generally pretty easy to tell the difference btwn a full on ass-grab and an accidental bump, but if I feel they were doing it to be a jerk, I let my brother handle it, all he has to do is shoot them a stare, and it's done with! No violence necessary, which is nice, b/c I'm kind've a pacifist! :D
And female friends saying misogynist things, well, I don't require my friends to think like me, so I don't care. Just b/c people have different political opinions doesn't mean we can't be friends! :)
You might be the first person I've ever come across who actively likes it when strangers tell her to smile. I'm trying to articulate why I don't like your way of looking at it, and there are a couple things, but one of the main ones is that walking by someone and saying "smile!" doesn't really qualify as making an effort to make you feel better. How is that supposed to make you feel better? It seems more like you're being scolded for failing to keep up a happy enough expression, like a teacher might tell you not to look so bored.
To be honest, sometimes I don't mind it. If I'm not in a bad mood or deep in thought, and if the person seems genuinely friendly, I might smile at them. But usually its some guy (often someone who's selling things or looking for signatures on something) who is intruding on my thoughts in a pushy way, and doesn't seem like he's actually being friendly. They also often just look at me and say "smile!" as they walk by me-- they're not trying to start a conversation or anything, so they're not trying to cheer me up. It also bugs me that I don't think those same people would ever say that to a guy (although I could be wrong about that one, I haven't taken a poll).
And if you are trying to cheer someone up, that's a stupid way to do it. What if something really really bad just happened to them? A better way would be to ask them what's wrong, and if they say its nothing big, then you could say something like smile or cheer up. But if they say someone just died, I don't think you'd want to respond with "well, smile anyway!".
I got sidetracked replying to the first part of your post, but I just read the rest of it, and I gotta ask-- are you kidding? I think this could be satire, but its hard to tell in print. If not-- are you really saying that you like it when strangers catcall at you, that you prefer to have your brother handle your arguments (by threatening violence), and that misogynistic opinions are no big deal because they're "political" (since when are all misogynistic ideas connected to political issues)?
This could be in The Onion:
Why is that hypocritical?
Because douche commonly refers to vaginal irrigation. A douche bag is a piece of equipment for douching - a bag for holding the fluid used in douching.
So saying douche bag is associating something that historically, women have used to keep themselves "clean and fresh." It can be argued that by calling someone a douche bag is calling them a woman, or a device that is used by women, while adding an unnecessary ick factor for a lot of people.
I think Steven might be suggesting that it's misogynistic to use a douche bag to represent something bad -- like using "pussy" to mean someone weak or "cunt" to mean someone who's a jerk -- and he finds it hypocritical that the OP is using something he finds misogynistic to combat misogyny.
Not only is it misogynistic, but in this case it is misandristic as well.
It really is the best of both worlds.
How is it misandristic?
Wait, what? I'm under the impression that calling a douche bag misogynistic is not particularly controversial. If that can be taken as a given, how is identifying someone who is being a misogynist a douche bag ironic? You're indirectly calling them a misogynist. I think it's only problematic in that it may not successfully communicate your point.
....How on earth did ironic get in there..?
Sub: "hypocritical"
Mine? Or Steven's? I was trying to translate Steven's point because wax ghost didn't understand it. I wasn't agreeing with it.
I was really only intending to add that generally to the conversation, it wasn't particularly targeted.
Okey doke.
That's kind of an interesting idea, actually. Should we label misogynists (albeit in a somewhat joking fashion) something that's harmful to the vagina? I wonder what the male corollary would be?
Except 'douchebag' is not at all equal to 'pussy.' A douchebag is HARMFUL to your pussy. It's not misogynistic to use it as an insult
Hmmm... I wonder. I've always avoided using it because I thought that it was originally intended as an insult simply because it was a feminine hygiene product. We now know how harmful it is, but was it not once considered a perfectly acceptable form of contraception? So calling someone a douche bag would have been like calling them a tampon or an IUD. Like anything that has anything to do with vaginas is gross and hilarious and therefore a totally great insult. That is why I always found it misogynistic.
I do not think that "douche bag" is inherently misogynistic. The word "douche" does not mean vagina, so it is no where near the same as "pussy" or "cunt" as far as insults go. IMO, the act of douching is accepting that vaginas are gross and dirty and need to be cleaned. In those regards, douching is a way of performing submission to patriarchy (and with it, misogyny). Douche bags are the tools used for douching, and hence the tools used for performing misogyny. Therefore, a douche bag is a tool of patriarchy an misogyny. People who disrespect womyn by, say, ass-grabbing are being tools of patriarchy. Douche bag is the perfect phrase to use to describe such people.
You don't need to mock the original poster or pick on her for one word, avoiding the point of her entire piece.
Also, this site has been over the douchebag argument time and time again. It's not my insult of choice, but douching is generally known as something that is bad for women, a tool that shames women into thinking their natural bodies aren't good enough, and then actually harms them. Like some other tools I know.
I know some writers for the Onion. I'll pass on your idea. Something tells me they won't bite.
Oooh! Name dropping! Very cool. :)
It seems that the OP was getting at was asking for a way to call out people on their sexism...
So I called her out.
Feminist call people out all the time for saying "one word, avoiding the point of [the] entire piece" all the time. Turn about and all that.
Any equal rights movement need to hold a mirror up to its face, and look within, or it will be held back by the weight of its own hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy also makes the movement easier to dismiss, just as a hypocritical person is easy to dismiss.
Similar Onion stories:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/east_timors_first_female_dictator
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/bitchy_girlfriend_just?utm_source=b-section
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/preakness_winning_filly_an
and I just like this one:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/study_children_exposed_to
The use of the term "douchebag" was neither hypocritical nor misogynist. Watching you try to crowbar "misandry" in there as well was just painful to watch.
"Douching is a practice that it unhealthy and damaging to women. Human douchebags are too."
http://community.feministing.com/2009/05/this-angry-feminist-wants-to-k.html#comment-260586
The usage of the term is sure as hell not as cut-and-dry as to supply a basis for you to just declare having a one-up on the OP, or feminist discourse in general.
Hey Steven, before you call out the entire feminist movement, make sure you actually know what you're talking about. Douching is harmful, not helpful...therefore, 'douchebag' is an insult and NOT misogynistic (or 'misandristic' or whatever made up word you used)
Misandry is a real word. It's not made up.
Misandristic is not.
Okay. So what would be the correct word?
Ok. Then an asshole. Is that better?
Forgive me for my wording. In my many years of being brought up hearing anti-female words, sometimes I slip up, as I am still in the process of deprogramming myself to use them.
As for the violence, I must stress that the only time I advocate violence is in self defense, as when I have been assaulted. Grabbing my ass is an assault. And trust me, I know when it is an accident and when it is not-- and when I am in doubt, I do not act. Got it?
I think some readers here are missing the point of my post (and many more aren't, which is awesome), so let's get this conversation on track and be creative! Remember, feminists aren't "man-haters" just because there are a lot of men who can be assholes on a daily basis. That one is really getting old. On with the suggestions!
:D
Asshole is fine...
... but beware, anger (emotional violence) leads to hate; hate leads to suffering.
And the next thing we know is we have become Darth Vader.
Do you have anything useful to contribute to this thread yet?
You don't think this bit was useful?
"but beware, anger (emotional violence) leads to hate; hate leads to suffering."
That's a bit of a way of dismissing the problem, like saying "you don't have the right to be angry" or more accurately, "there is no reason for you to be angry," but without really saying why anger is not justified. Movie quotes aside, acknowledging anger doesn't always lead to more suffering. I think anger can be an involuntary thing that you feel whether you want to or not. The only question is... repress it, or try to confront the source of it? Sometimes repressing anger can lead to more suffering than confronting the source of it... Even if the result of the latter is just to discover the other person didn't mean it in the way you thought.
Real quick, there is a difference in acknowledging anger and repressing anger, but the basic underlying anger is at issue.
I think so, the OP asked for my forgiveness after I called her out.
Its been my experience that feminist have a poor track record when it comes to holding themselves to the same standards that they hold everyone else too. I do what I can when appropriate, as I am sure y'all would do for me.
The asking of forgiveness was sarcastic. I have no desire for your forgiveness.
Well this is true for any social movement though. Your reasoning is part of the reason why a lot of people dismiss Malcolm X for example without bothering to dig a bit deeper.
I think the variety of comments here are more than policing enough. The diversity of responses should be enough to assuage people's concerns that the movement needs finger waggers coming at it from all angles.
Someone did a great posting on the 5 stages of Feminism. I believe number 2 was anger. And whether or not you like the wording of the posting I can honestly think of no better way to deal with anger than to talk about solutions.
If you need an example:
How would you like a woman to respond to you if you did something that made her feel offended?
I especially would like to hear from someone who doesn't understand this sort of anger. After all, my goal is to be as communicative as possible!
So, can you think of anything that would get the point across to someone who didn't feel the same way?
(This is a serious question, not a rhetorical one).
I actually missed this question, I follow the conversation through my user profile and with the conversation going so fast I missed it...
How would you like a woman to respond to you if you did something that made her feel offended?
I think a "I find that offensive" would work pretty well.
Its simple, straight to the point, avoids histrionics, and probably not lead to an escalation of the confrontation.
I'm sure the people in question could reach deep down and come out with a "Your offensive" as a retort, and then you could verbally cut them down for being dumb.
If you want to escalate, you could use "turn into a corpse" it sounds so much better than drop dead.
You obviously have never been in a situation like the OP described. Telling someone to fuck off works. Turning around and telling them you're offended just makes them continue to do it.
You are completely forgetting the point that men are generally physically bigger then women and use that threat as a part of their harrassment. Saying fuck off shows that you are willing to stand up for yourself and won't take their shit.
I have obviously nothing.
I seen women use the "That's offensive" to great effect.
If you want to judge it on the qualifications that it is not a perfect retort, then very well.
"but beware, anger (emotional violence) leads to hate; hate leads to suffering."
What's your deal? I've had a few conversations with you that revolve around how uncomfortable you are with feminist anger. Why does it freak you out so much? Are you just thoroughly convinced that as soon as a woman gets angry about sexism that she starts to hate all men everywhere? Is your greatest fear in life that a woman you don't know will hate you?
I mean, don't get me wrong. You're contributions to the Feministing community are greatly appreciated. If you weren't around to warn us about getting too angry, who would do the job? There just aren't enough people on the internet to police feminists when they get angry.
In all honesty, I don't think I've ever seen a comment from you on Feministing where you weren't freaking out about us feminists being angry or us feminists being sexist against men. Why are you so threatened by feminists?
**Your contributions
Here is the thing, I say "anger" and you hear "feminist anger"
Is your greatest fear in life that a woman you don't know will hate you?
I know exactly what I would have to say on this site for y'all to not hate me, low bar that is. Nothing I say on feministing is geared specifically to appease the group, which is not how I would act if I cared what y'all thought about me.
Are you just thoroughly convinced that as soon as a woman gets angry about sexism that she starts to hate all men everywhere?
Sexism works in many different ways, and a subtle way it works is for someone to idealize their own group. And when feminist create a definition of patriarchy that they then use to blame the bad side of their own basic human nature they idealize their own group and say things like "I would have never expected that from a woman"
Another form of sexism that develop is sexism with exceptions. I remember being dumbstruck with an extreme version of that in Dworkin's Intercourse, when she said that an male author was the only man to ever to truly abhor rape.
But feminist operate under sexism with exceptions as a matter of course, and they explain it away, and they justify it, and to everything but look themselves in the mirror with the same standards they hold to other people.
I am not uncomfortable with 'feminist anger' as I am amused by it. Every feminist blog I have swung by, and every book I have read decries mans general anger towards women.
But they completely miss the point when it comes to addressing their own anger. They make excuses for it, justify it, and ignore the same anger in others.
Anger, in any of its forms, is a dangerous emotion, and it is selfdestructive. I use the Star Wars quote becuase it is so apt. Anger is a quick route to power and satisfaction, and it is a detour to any sort of reconciliation.
And this is a general reconsideration, not just limited to the feminist discourse.
I am annoyed about conversations regarding anger when people don't take credit for their own anger, and face up to it. They blame it on someone else, and hold on to it.
And holding on to anger is the problem... Anger is going to happen, its a primal emotion, but holding on to it, rewarding others in a group for anger is self destructive.
... I don't think I've ever seen a comment from you on Feministing where you weren't freaking out about us feminists being angry...
I did introduce Martine Votvik to Google Translator... and that was on this thread.
In a lot of ways I have been burned out on this site... A while back Okra posted a discussion on finding a 'better word for privileged' (or something like that) as she thought there were definitional issues.
I participated on that discussion and I was slammed for being an apologist for male privilege (or whatever) because I said what I thought was wrong with the word, and its use, and made some proposals.
I think the same thing happened on that thread that happen with you. I say something general like 'anger sucks' (paraphrasing) and when you read it its like you read "feminist anger sucks, male anger is ok" or some similar. Its systemic on this site, not just limited to a few.
I know for a fact that if I came on here with an feminine or androgynous name this community would respond to me completely differently to me.
How do I know this? Because I have been in conversations where I write a comment, then a community member with a feminine name with reply to me with something like "I agree" or "this" and the reply to my comment will have more votes than my original comment, sometimes by a clear margin.
I have also seen that happen when someone post a comment that is essentially the same as mine on a different part of the thread.
The behavior on this site is so clearly sexist. When I first came here I submitted what I thought was a thoughtful community post. It did not get through and I asked the moderates why, and I was told I was a troll (they really don't know what a troll is, but its an easy term to Other someone with a different POV) and then about a month later a substantively similar post made it through... but that had a feminine name attached.
And here is the thing, most of you don't even have the self-knowledge to know how hypocritical you are.
I am not uncomfortable with 'feminist anger' as I am amused by it. Every feminist blog I have swung by, and every book I have read decries mans general anger towards women.
It's this attitude that serves to restrict our voice. This site may not be for you. I suggest you start concentrating more on your own life rather than making an effort to restrict the voice of others whose issues you have not experienced firsthand.
I do not understand your fear, but I am not about to attempt to restrict it. I am, however, requesting that you educate yourself with this site rather than attempting to censor it by trying to cast social sanctions on those people who see something wrong with the status quo and want to change it for the better.
Also, as a supplement, I direct you here:
http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/13631
Please read all. And how about you come up with an answer to my post instead of criticism of it, as I requested you to before? I will not be responding to anything except productive posts from you from here on out.
that link doesn't work.
The purpose of that sentence was to lead into the next,/i> sentence...
"But they completely miss the point when it comes to addressing their own anger."
And it also fits into the context of the whole post. Now, the context that the sentence was placed in, how does that restrict your voice?
How is a call for self-evaluation, a call feminist constantly are are directing at other individuals and society at large a restriction of your voice?
And I don't mean a self-evaluation that serves to merely morally dismiss or justify holding on to a self-destructive emotion.
Take a look at the lengths you are going through to avoid self evaluation. Y'all direct your ire at me, calling me fearful, and say I am restricting your voices when I come here.
First, if I was truly fearful, why would I even come to this site? Why would I write anything that was not in lock-step with the group-think?
How does seeking out different view points and debating points make me fearful? Really, a more apt pejorative would be masochistic.
Second, I am restricting your voice with social sanctions? I am an impediment to your social change?
How?
It seems like you are more interested in writing with verve than anything else. Also seems to me like you are trying to limit my voice. HA!
What power do I have on this site? This forum? How does anything I write here have the power to stop you from doing or writing anything?
What social sanction did I threaten you with? That I would not reply to your post? Is there a stream of invectives I forgot I wrote?
Feminist for quite a while have been grappling with anger. The back and forth of "Not all feminist are angry" and "Whats wrong with anger" so forth and so on.
The thing is, you can have passion without anger. I guess a more accurate statement would be you should be able to have passion without anger.
It is your life, live it as angry as you want. But I will hold to my idea that anger is self-destructive.
Maybe you should take a different tact... Maybe me thinking that anger is self-destructive is a sign of my privilege, or a reflection of my ethnocentric values, or misogynistic on its face.
But I don't think it is.
P.S. I hope this stream of conversation has not been taken as a derail, I think it is a worthwhile conversation.
Oh man, you're making a fool out of yourself here, really bad.
If you are really interested in "self-evaluation" why dont you try and evaluate your tone and advice in these comments. It's like watching a kid trying to kick a wasp nest in order to get the wasps to quiet down. Painful...
First of all you are taking attention away from the subject, then you are acting surprised and judgemental when you are called on it and you respond with trying to put yourself in a place of moral alofness when this doesn't work.
If you want to communicate something you find valuable I recomend that you study communication, not bash the ones that can't understand what you're trying to say....
You stated that your attemted post to feministing community was turend down as trolling. It's allmost as if you're trying to wedge it in here. So in stead of acting surprised that people percive you as trolling here too, you might go self-evaluate a bit in stead...
Ah, crap. Hopefully this one works:
http://community.feministing.com/2009/05/some-more-thoughts-on-men-and.html
It is hard for it not to be a derail, especially with the length of the post and the subject matter. Why don't you post about feminist anger instead?
Let's take the worst-case scenario. Let's assume, MAYBE, that some of these events got Mccarth angry. First of all, Mccarth, I'm shocked and saddened to learn that you have glands, hormones, emotional centers of the brain, etc.
Second, what emotion would be appropriate to respond with? If these aren't events to get angry over, what is? These examples are of people who are AT BEST really rude and at worst, displaying ideas of ownership, presumably based around the idea that Mccarth is a female.
Third, in what way do emotional responses set back action? Successful social movements (to some extent) like the civil rights movement, the environmental movement, are all pretty full of emotions. That doesn't seem to stop what they're trying to do.
Anger's not self-destructive any more than grief, joy, or itchiness is. It's a motive force. Granted, it took a lot to get me angry about things in regards to the current gender disparity, but now I'm there, I plan on trying to fix it.
I guess I feel like-- give people a break in terms of the anger. It's a natural reaction and this is a good place, if any, for people to come with their anger to blow off steam, especially if they want to go back out into the real world and act appropriately, level-headedly without their anger. I think people have put you so much on the defensive in here that you may have come out with some things that you don't really believe-- like that anger is wholly bad. Anger (and associated emotions) has obviously propelled people to make great necessary changes over the course of history. I agree that seeing your name "steven", I read your comments differently, wondering how conscious you are of what you are saying in the context of you being a man (I assume.) And maybe that isn't fair. But I do this to women too when they start to say things that sound off. I think-- how much have you really read about this stuff? How much have you "decolonized your mind." I do think, in general, it is good to get constructive criticism (nitpickiness not so much). But sometimes it's good to answer the question too.
Why is the anger on this website such a big deal for you? I have trouble believing that you care so much for our benefit (regardless of your statement: "it is selfdestructive"). I doubt you care because you think feminists would be more persuasive when talking about feminist issues if they talked without anger, because I don't think you care about feminist issues. You can't just be bothered by anger or what you perceive as 'hypocrisy' in general because you are on a feminist website and not another website. So what's up? You seem to be avoiding that question. Or, in your words, going to great length to avoid self evaluation.
"most of you don't even have the self-knowledge to know how hypocritical you are."
I believe you might not have the self-knowledge to know how condescending and conceded you are. Perhaps you expected to come onto a feminist website and teach us ladies what's what with your superior knowledge (IF you were planning on questioning my phrasing in the prior sentence, then I'll add perhaps you wanted to teach male feminists what's what as well, but I've never seen you have an extended conversation with a male feminist on this site (yes, I've spent WAY too much time on this site this semester)). Perhaps you'll eventually realize that you have more to learn from us than us from you.
Your rephrasing of my rephrasing of your position is not correct: "feminist anger sucks, male anger is ok". I don't think you think male anger is ok. But you choose to spend your time on a feminist website policing our anger. Do you spend time in other online communities policing men's anger? If you do, then I have mischaracterized your position, and I apologize. If not, then yes, you do have a specific problem with feminist anger regardless of whether you also have a problem with men's anger.
"... I don't think I've ever seen a comment from you on Feministing where you weren't freaking out about us feminists being angry...
I did introduce Martine Votvik to Google Translator... and that was on this thread."
Wow, you really got me there.
I've been around here for a while -- he's certainly done a lot more than that. I don't always agree with him, but I think it's unfair to jump on him the way you are. He started an interesting conversation, and if you want to explain why he's wrong go ahead -- I personally think that anger is a fairly justified reaction to a lot of the stuff we're talking about -- but it's not very constructive to attack him.
I've only ever seen you in this thread, and you seem far more interested in being needlessly sarcastic than in contributing anything.
At least he's helpful.
"Because I have been in conversations where I write a comment, then a community member with a feminine name with reply to me with something like "I agree" or "this" and the reply to my comment will have more votes than my original comment, sometimes by a clear margin."
I don't believe that is true at all, but feel free to link to an example.
Perhaps someone agreed with something you said and elaborated and that got more votes, but that's different.
Perhaps people remember your name from other threads and are not voting for your comments, not because you have a male name, but because they know other things about your opinions on feminism that make them wary of any comments you make. It's pretty clear that you don't like feminism and have issues with feminists (see your "And here is the thing, most of you don't even have the self-knowledge to know how hypocritical you are" comment before you claim I'm mischaracterizing your opinions on feminists (perhaps I should replace the word 'feminists' with the phrase 'members of the Feministing community'?)) , so why do you expect us to take all of what you say at face value?
And don't worry Steven. I'm not angry in any of these comments, just irritated. Before, it seemed that you were getting involved in the Feministing community to participate in dialogue and educate yourself on feminist issues, but it is becoming clear that your opinions on feminism were set before coming onto Feministing, and you have no goal here but to convince us that those opinions are right. Perhaps you should reread Rachel's "In the grip of a picture" post and realize that you are only paying attention to facts that reaffirm your negative opinions on feminism and feminists and ignoring all facts contrary to your decided position... Then stick around, and participate with the idea that you might not be entirely right about everything.
I don't believe that is true at all, but feel free to link to an example.
http://community.feministing.com/2009/02/do-we-have-a-better-word-than.html#comment-217728 That is the sharpest example of someone agreeing with me and getting more votes than I did. They did not add or subtract from anything I said.
There are a lot of things that you may believe is true. On the thread I linked too, the discussion was at one point split between those that thought the word 'privileged' gets used as a silencing technique or as a ad hominem and those that thought privilege is not used as a silencing technique. Feminist where split on that, feminist are split on a lot of points. You just can't be a dude and fall on the 'wrong' side of the split.
It's pretty clear that you don't like feminism and have issues with feminists
First, not all feminist believe the same stuff, and I judge feminist as individuals... some of them are sexist, and hypocrites, and they don't even know it.
Phyllis Chesler agrees with me. You should read her book, Woman's Inhumanity to Woman.
Here is the thing... Valenti has stated feminism is the advocacy for the political, economical, and social equality of women and men. Sounds good, but that definition of feminism is utter crap.
Why? Because I have run into other feminist philosophies that advocate for the superiority of women, women are going to take over politics and the workplace, blah blah blah.
Does that bother me? Not terribly, but I am more bothered by the fact you don't really acknowledge the breath of feminist thought, and some are actively engaged in whitewashing the same.
But a lot of you don't really know how broad feminism is yourselves, or its implications. Some of y'all somehow read Dworkin and don't think that it is sexist.
but it is becoming clear that your opinions on feminism were set before coming onto Feministing
That is not so, I use to believe the vanilla, Valenti-ian tripe that feminism is advocating for the social (and so forth) equality of men and women. But I delved deeper, and I read more.
And don't worry Steven. I'm not angry in any of these comments, just irritated.
I am not worried. I cannot remember what discussion thread it was, but I found myself in substantial agreement with you on an issue. I cannot and should not expect you to be a Stevenist, nor would I be a Punchbuggyist.
And even if you were angry, what could you do to me? Write a scathing blog post?
you have no goal here but to convince us that those opinions are right.
My goal is to express my thought in regards to the topics posted, and I have little faith in my ability to convince the feministing community of anything.
Perhaps you should reread Rachel's "In the grip of a picture" post
I read it, bought the shirt. At her blog I asked her if it was possible to get caught in a feminist paradigm, she said yes...
...and I think we saw the affect of being caught in a feminist paradigm in the OP post where she had problems with people approaching her in a bar and starting a conversation.
Bars and clubs are social institutions, and one of the purposes is to meet new people.(It is also a place you go to get shit-faced, play pool, darts, Foosball, and hang out with friends).
There is nothing in wanting to meet new people that represents "inherent sexism." It can be done in a sexist way, but it can also be done in a non-sexist way.
Feminist get caught up in a picture were a lot of actions are attributed to sexism when that is not the case.
During the 2008 election cycle I was caught between two different paradigms. If I was going to support Sen. Obama then I was sexist against women and Sen Clinton. If I was going to support Sen Clinton then I was racist.
It was even possible for me to support Sen Obama and be racist and be acting out of white guilt... I assume I could have supported Sen. Clinton out of male guilt as well.
And all that was before I could say one word about their different positions on the issues.
...so why do you expect us to take all of what you say at face value
I expect you not to... because to do so with mess with your paradigm, your vision of the world. It is existentially part of you and to see otherwise for y'all is unacceptable.
Its easier for you to call me a liar than take what I say at face value.
"I judge feminist as individuals"
??? Then perhaps I am misinterpreting pretty much everything you have said. Who are you directing your complaints to? Us feminists? Us on this website? Us on this thread? A few people in particular that you just didn't feel like specifying?
"But a lot of you don't really know how broad feminism is yourselves"
I don't even know who you are talking about with this. Is this even directed at me?
"Some of y'all somehow read Dworkin and don't think that it is sexist."
I still don't know who this is supposed to be about.
You seem to be making claims in the abstract about some feminists somewhere and then getting frustrated with me when I think you are making generalizations about feminists.
Examples:
"Its been my experience that feminist have a poor track record when it comes to holding themselves to the same standards that they hold everyone else too."
"I know exactly what I would have to say on this site for y'all to not hate me"
"Every feminist blog I have swung by, and every book I have read decries mans general anger towards women.
But they completely miss the point when it comes to addressing their own anger."
"this community would respond to me completely differently"
"The behavior on this site is so clearly sexist."
Anger also leads to activism, activism lead to change (some of the time a least), and change leads to dissipated anger.
What's the problem, dear concern troll? Next I suppose you're gonna tell us all to speak in soft tones so's not to offend the menz?
+1.
"Smile": The worst part about this one, in my experience, is that it is said by someone walking past you on the street. You don't even get a chance to meaningfully respond. Which is why I understand the, "fuck you", response. It's about all you have time for, and at least they know their comment was unwelcome. Given a chance, I would like to ask them:
"And how would you feel if a stranger said this to you right after you found out a loved one has died?"
Similarly, I would like to respond to cat-callers and oglers with, "How would you feel about men like yourself whisting at your mother or sister?"
Ass grabbed in a crowded bar: You know this is a criminal violation. You do what you can to protect yourself or defend yourself, and he deserves it in my mind. I'd say call the cops, but what are the odds the guy will stick around long enough for that?
In the case where you don't know who did it, if it is quiet enough that you can be heard, my response would probably be to shout, "I would like to announce that my ass was just grabbed, and whichever of you did it is a sexist pervert and a criminal. Imagine someone doing what you just did to a female loved one, and have the decency to feel ashamed." But be prepared for some snickers, if only because it would make people uncomfortable to hear such an announcement. Maybe someone else can think of a better way to express it.
Guys at the bar: I'm sorry to say that, while I agree this can be annoying and invasive, I think a polite, "No thanks," is about the only appropriate response to a polite request. Now, if that doesn't get them to go away, and/or the request is made in an abusive fashion, I would ask them to stop harassing me before I enlist help. But don't say this unless you are actually prepared to talk to a bouncer if they don't back off. In my experience, it doesn't generally get that far, but if it does you have to follow through or you won't be taken seriously next time.
Female friend: Right on. Out of curiosity, have you had much success with this approach?
Home Depot employee: Try, "Look, I'm just here to buy some PVC pipe, and would appreciate if you kept your innuendos to yourself." If that doesn't fix the problem, complain to management later. Or walk out, buy the pipe some place else, and be sure to call Home Depot and explain that you did this because you felt harassed by their employee.
I resist the idea of trying to convince someone not to ass-grab by reminding the person that you are someone's sister/daughter/etc. While this might be effective for the particular audience in protecting you, it does nothing to question the actual practice in itself. I think this reinforces the idea that womyn are men's property, which is the reason that these people act that way in the first place. All that this practice does says to the asshole, "You can't do that because I belong to some other man, and you are insulting his territory."
Maybe that's how you take it.
What I would mean is to get them to think about a woman they know and care about being treated like an object.
If you can think of a better way to humanize for the perpetrator the person they just assaulted, I'm all ears.
I agree about being approached by a man in a bar who asks to buy you a drink....I mean, it's a bar. If he's polite about it, just politely decline. If he keeps on, then it becomes harrassy.
I agree with everything else from the original post, though.
The asking for a smile thing is, I think, related to the idea that women are sort of a window dressing for real - men's - life. It's kind of like if there was a picture on the wall that was in shadow. The mistake with that obviously is that women are people, not decorations.
Re: The announcement after an ass-grab:
I wonder if this shortened version would work or if it would just be tasteless?
"Someone in this room is training to be a rapist."
While it's true, because that sort of mentality about women is a slippery slope, I wonder if that would get the point across. Your thoughts?
Interesting idea. The only real problem I can see with it is that people who didn't do it and don't realize anything just happened would be completely in the dark as to the motivation behind the comment, and might think you're a bit unhinged. On the other hand, they might feel that way about my longer statement as well, even though it tells them what just happened. And hey, if the people around you think you're unhinged, maybe they're less likely to mess with you, which could be a benefit. ;) I guess I'd say it's worth a shot.
So far, only one person has actually read the book, as it's a new discovery for me, and they're mulling it over. It's more of my new strategy. The education is a staple though. I have been very open with my views and have made many of my female friends more comfortable with the idea of feminism. It takes awhile though. I mean, I thought feminists were all man-hating radicals until my second year of a Sociology major (when I had a really great teacher), and even then it took me about 5 years until I fully identified as a feminist- even though my views on the female situation changed very little in that time.
Now, I am incredulous that once in a college class I said, "I really don't think the feminist movement has done that much." Really? It just goes to show the lack of real education people have-and I went to some damn good schools, too.
I think the best is to be a good role model, call people out on the little things, and use the word feminist freely so it isn't so alien! (Ahh, loose Bikini Kill references...)
It's true it's a long, slow process. I can't remember exactly when I started calling myself a feminist, but it was a relatively recent event. I think mostly I feared the label because of the negative (and generally false) associations people generally make. I figured, they'll assume I'm a man-hater and a dozen other things. (And many people do!) Eventually I stopped worrying about it, because I realized how important it is to support what I know feminism is actually about.
Good luck with your friend. I'll have to add that book to my reading list. :)
Add "He's a Stud, She's a Slut" too. They're both by Valenti (a creator of this site). I think I like "He's a Stud" better out of the two now that I think about it. I discovered both books purely by accident and was pleasantly surprised when I found out they were authored by a founder of my favorite website!
I don't like the response to "Smile!" that implies the woman isn't smiling because she's just experienced something awful. Women don't need a reason to not be smiling at any given time. That's why I liked Jessica's response she gives in "He's a Stud, She's a Slut:"
"Why don't you smile for me?"
"I don't have to."
I think that's a short, polite, and to-the-point way to respond to that particular bit of entitlement.
Fair enough, and that seems like a good response.
For the record, I'm not trying to say that the only reason for a person to not smile is that they are unhappy and/or have recently experienced tragedy, but it seems like if you could get the person saying, "Smile!", to recognize that as a possibility maybe they'd think twice before opening their mouth.
See, this is when I wish I could fart on command.
*ass grab*
*POOOOOOTTTTTTT*
man that would be sweet.
Blue, I agree with Nik: I think Angry Feminist's nuclear rage is way out of proportion here. "Why aren't you smiling"? Yeah, OK, it's annoying. But come on: there are much, MUCH worse problems that people face every single day -- financial problems, health problems, family problems.
Lighten up and gain some perspective.
Ask anyone who has ever worked with the public: people can be irritating, regardless of gender. That's a given, and you're not going to be able to change it.
And BTW labeling a harmless conversation at Home Depot as "sexual harassment" diminishes a very real problem in the workplace. Was AF's job at stake? No. Did she feel threatened? No.
That's a bit like telling somebody not to take one pebble out of their shoe because there are people out there with ten pebbles, now that's a real problem.
Any pebble in the shoe is a problem, and if you can pick it out why shouldn't you?
Cowslip, just because there are worse problems, doesn't mean her feelings aren't valid.
Sexual harassment includes making unwelcome comments of a sexual nature. Sure, there are worse violations, but if his comment made her uncomfortable, she has every right to inform him, or his manager. The manager may think it's a problem, or may not. It may add to a pattern of behavior with this employee, or it may not. You might get a similar comment and think it's no big deal. That's your prerogative.
Honestly, I think you and Nik are both being rather dismissive. McCarth may, in your mind, be overreacting, but note that the main point of her post is that she would like advice on how better to deal with these things.
I find it very telling that you are both apparently willing to brush her having her ass grabbed under the rug, as if a physical violation of one's body is not a valid problem. It is.
Thank you.
As you probably know, that is a gross misinterpretation of the suggestion that escalating an assault on your dignity is an appropriate response.
Additionally, as it happens, there is a legal standard for sexual harassment - the "reasonable woman" - to which it is possible for one's feelings to fall short. No one should have to feel intimidated by others, particularly in a sexualised context, but unless you comfortably feel that either you can subscribe completely to a Dworkin conception of human intercourse or that you can expect a complete harmony of reaction and acknowledgement from all social actors of any gender or sexuality, we will always require "reasonableness" before falling upon an offender.
I happen to feel that the "reasonableness" of the last anecdote might be ambiguous. Whilst that is not for me to decide, I charge that it is possible to feel enmity unreasonably, and for this feeling to be valid for oneself without necessarily reflecting upon the perceived culprit.
In fact, I think I should retract the above. It's not for me to comment via a blog on the anecdote.
Nik, you might note that my suggestion is that she need not keep quiet about it if she felt uncomfortable/harassed, which she clearly did. There is, in fact, no harm in her informing either the offender or that person's manager of the perceived offense. Weirdly, by attacking me for saying she could mention that she was offended, you have made the assumption that she (and perhaps by extension I, for defending her right to speak) are not reasonable women. I'll thank you to keep such assumptions to yourself.
In addition ... Did I say call the cops, get a lawyer, and press charges? No. So quit overreacting as if that were even remotely what I said.
I KNOW you did not just mischaracterize Andrea Dworkin's statements on intercourse here...
Sure, there are worse problems. But this is still a problem. Plus, it's in my (and many others') face every day. Hence the "nuclear rage." (And you want to talk about blowing things out of proportion?)
Hm, maybe I'm damaged by Norwegian "pick up" culture, but isn't bars generally understood to be places where people could possibly get to know one another++?
I agree that line is creepy and stupid, "why are you alone?" Yuck... I would ignore the question and ask him politely what he wants and keep reverting focus back to his agenda untill he admits his attention and then reject him politely. Being polite to rude people always leaves me satisfied and superiorfeeling.
I must admit I was a bit confused by the home depot story, maybe because english is my second language, but I thought the "rubbing it in" comment came beacuse you stated the spesific height of your boyfriend after saying he was shorter than you. could it be possible this was the case?
As a norwegian I have never experienced any notable staring, catcalls, groping or smile requests since I got out of high school and little even then. So I'm not sure how I would react if it happened now.
I would probably be confrontational, maybe take a pitcure with my phone and post it on my blog if I felt justified in doing so :) I did it once when somebody approached me in the park at night. :) Sadly that blogrant is in Norwegian, so there's little use linking to it now. Oh well, he looked so darling when he threw himself away from the flash...
http://tinyurl.com/qv74gg
Google Translate...
It translated your blog, the sentence structure and some of the mechanics are clunky, and a few words are not translated, but for a free translate its pretty good.
It's not a terrible translation, but it makes it sound as if I'm with other people when I'm in fact completely alone.
In one way it sounds strangely poetic, and on the other hand utterly ridiculous, I laughed really hard.
This caught my eye
"I can not other than to fret and grieve about the representation here..." and later "and you generally Blowing if you get fired or the company goes Konk"
I chuckled, because it reminds me of Skwisgaar and Toki from Metalocalypse (an adult cartoon series if you don't get it in Norway). One Norwegian and the other is Swedish and there English is always good for a laugh.
Glad I could help.
The only people who've ever asked me to smile are people selling stuff on the street, and I always ignore them anyway-- I figure they're taking any way they can possibly think of to get you to interact with them.
I haven't tried this, but I think a good response might be something like "why would you say that to a stranger? How would you feel if I told you that my grandfather had just died, and that's why I'm frowning? How would you like it if you were deep in thought and a stranger interrupted you to criticize your expression?"
Question to people who are (like me) annoyed by the whole "smile" thing: Do you feel that it is rude in ALL situations? For example, is it equally rude if you're in a mostly empty coffee shop and there's an old woman behind the counter and when you go up to buy something you say hello and she says "cheer up, its a beautiful day", vs if you are walking down the street and some random guy in his 20s says "hey, why don't you give us a smile?"
Do you feel that it is rude in ALL situations?
I do think it's equally rude, no matter how well-intentioned, if you don't have a personal relationship with the person in question.
A better alternative, if a stranger wanted to express genuine concern, might be, "Are you OK?"
In the context you mentioned, it seems more like a pushy version of "have a nice day". I think the difference is whether the person seems to want you to be happier, vs whether they want you look happier/prettier for others. The former is generally fine, while the latter is always problematic.
In my experiences, it has NEVER been a woman, ALWAYS a man, usually much older.
The idea behind the street comments is that, in this culture, people feel like they can say what they want to women they don't know, when they want, just by virtue of them being women. Sure, maybe you don't, or the guys you know don't-- that you know of. But it happens way too often for it to just be an individual, rather than a societal issue.
Er... I said I didn't like it when people did that. Where did you get the idea that I needed an explanation of why it was bad? Did you mean to reply to another post? Heh, I actually just posted an explanation of why the smile thing was irritating higher up in the thread in response to someone else.
What I was asking is whether people have had this happen in different situations and whether that affects how you feel about it.
Uh, yeah, sorry... that one should go up a bit in the thread in with your reply to redredrose. Refreshing page too much, fingers are dizzy.
"smile"
me, "give me Katie Courics old salary from her morning show daze and I'll be bubbly for you"
or
"Sure, give me ten bucks"
also
re: "smile"
"Why?"
very simple and shuts them up or makes them come up with reasons-
It's key to walk away while they fumble in response to your question.
Why.
I like that. I'm totally stealing that for the next time some stranger on the street tells me to smile. :)
I like that one too. Simple and quick.
I think your ideas are great. Both humour and simple matter-of-factness work for making people feel foolish. I think mccarth's "fuck you" response is a good way of releasing her anger but may have the unintentional byproduct of buttressing the harasser's misogny. A quick, witty joke or a simple "why?" is likely to just make the harasser feel like an idiot, and may plant a seed that someday could change his behavior.
While I've never felt threatened or offended enough to resort to violence (thankfully), I encounter such an upsetting amount of sexism, particularly at school. It's ridiculous; I'm in high school and yet a decent amount of my male friends still harbor a belief in stereotypes from gradeschool, and most of them are closely akin to, "Eww, girls have cooties!" A lot of girls I know still have some pretty misogynistic ideas, too, but they tend to be a lot more subtle than the ones the boys spew forth as "fact."
I guess my typical reaction when I encounter sexism is to somehow outsmart the person or otherwise prove them wrong, although I try to be as respectful as possible (doesn't always work out; sometimes I get kinda "YEAH, IN YOUR FACE!"). For instance, my male friend R was giving me this over-confident monologue about how women do a terrible job in the military, and couldn't survive without men, and if you put a woman out in the wild to fend for herself, she wouldn't be able to do it. At the end of his little infuriating rant, I calmly asked him why he thought all this, and he said: "It's just fact. Women are weaker than men." I challenged him to an arm wrestling match. I beat him 3 out of 3 times. He just blushed and refused to talk to me for the rest of the class period.
A couple days before that another male friend, S, was being sexist in that he was using a lot of stereotypes. None of them were quite as bad as "Women are weaker," but they were things like, "You're a girl, so you know a lot about makeup, and I'm a guy so I hate talking about that stuff." Just silly but harmful generalizations like that. So my response was a long, passionate speech about why stereotypes were harmful. When I was finished, he just blinked and told me that he didn't understand half of the words that I said. (Most people I know are afraid of "big words" and instead of bothering to find out what they mean, they just sort of block them out. Sigh.) He told me specifically that he didn't know what "misogynist" and "patriarchy" meant, and when I explained them he gave me the same response about not understanding what I said.
I guess it wasn't so great that he refused to understand my reasoning (I know he was perfectly capable; he just didn't want to), but now whenever he mentions a stereotype about women, at the very least he says, "Oh, sorry, you're not into that stuff." So it's a little better, except that now he's switched from "All women like this thing" to "All women like this thing -- oh, wait, except for you." Baby steps, I suppose.
I still remember what my dad told me about stereotypes when I was a very little kid: "If you make an assumption about someone based on some group that they belong to, and there is even one exception to that rule in the whole wide world, then you've done that person an injustice."
You might try that with your friend, as it's mostly one syllable words, and even the three syllable words are fairly easy to explain.
I ageree that having your ass grabbed in a crowded bar is COMPLETELY innapropriate, intolerable, and disgraceful. When a man does that, he deserves whatever he gets.
BUT I think you might be overreacting about some things, like cat-calling. I think what a lot of women perceive as cat-calling is often just plain ol' friendliness. I don't think a man saying "Hello" or "Good morning" necessarily deserves to be told to fuck off. Sure, when they say something very sexual or insulting, I take issue with that.
I live in New York, and through the years, I have made many male acquaintances on my morning commute. There's the old man outside the deli who I say "good morning " to every day, the man in the deli where I get my coffee, the disabled homeless man who I buy donuts outside the subway...the list goes on and on. There might be sexual undertones to our interractions (I'm not sure), but honestly, I think our exchanges are generally cordial and appropriate. I think many women are so on-edge about being harrassed that they pass up opportunities to get to know members of their community.
There's a difference between making small talk with the people you interact throughout the day and having people shout at you as you walk down the street. Sadly, I do not have the luxury of stopping every time a man makes a comment about me in passing to decide whether or not he is being inappropriate, because I've had so many men make inappropriate comments to me in the past. There is no reason for a man to make a comment to or about me as I walk down the street, even if he's just saying "Hello," especially at the exclusion of everyone else. And even if he's just trying to be polite and I ignore him or am rude to him, too bad.
Uhhhh there's a BIG difference between saying "Good morning" and "Whoah, there, nice ass!" The former is not a catcall, it's a greeting, whereas the latter is neither a greeting nor polite.
The fact that you perceive your exchanges as "cordial and appropriate" means they probably are. Obviously not all interactions between women and men are harassment. BUT, many women DO get catcalled, and it's not hard to detect the air of hostility that comes with it. It seems you are lucky enough not to have experienced this.
No, I've experienced cat-calling. I experience it every day. But somehow, I don't really mind it. I find it funny (as long as it's not truly vile, as I said...). There are worse things in the world than having a man call you pretty.
And by the way, it's not like every day I go out of my way to get to know guys on the street...It's not really a concious decision, it just sort of happens. I think of it as common courtesy to respond to someone when they say hello. I would do the same for a woman.
"There are worse things in the world than having a man call you pretty."
True, but it's a loaded sentiment. Think of how many times this has happened to you or you have heard tell of this happening to another woman--you're walking down the street and a man catcalls you, and when you respond negatively, he starts calling you "bitch" or "slut" and other lovely terms. Maybe it's funny to you, but that sort of thing is not funny to me. Sometimes catcalls are innocent and borne of ignorance, but they are still an assertion of power and symptomatic of the same attitudes that lead to less "funny" things like sexual assault.
I wonder how effective it would be, if someone called you pretty, to stop and sort of examine them audibly. "I'm pretty? Thank you. You've got a strange little nose hair growing there..." etc. I mean, if they responded with "I was just being nice" you could just say you thought they were starting a conversation about subjective appearances. If that offends them, tell them that they should be careful what they start talking to random people about.
For the record, I don't think assault is funny.
And honestly, I'm not trying to say that catcalling isn't a little sleazy, or it hasn't ever made me feel uncomfortable...but I literally cannot remember a man ever calling me a bitch or slut for not responding to him. Literally. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I don't think it's as common as some people might have you believe.
And if it did happen, I wouldn't find it funny.
I guess one of the reasons why I tend to defend catcalling men is because where i live, in NYC, there are a lot of racial and class issues associated with it. After hearing "Mexican men are so horny" and "Watch out, there's a big group of black men over there...don't get raped...we all know how black men can't resist a hot little white girl" a million times, I sort of just want to throw my hands up in the air and say "Calm the fuck down!"
I'm not accusing anyone here of being racist or classist, and I think the reasons for criticizing catcalling are valid, but sometimes I can't help but think women overreact.
I know this might not be much help to the female feminists here, but I can offer a suggestion for the male feminists/allies:
My father and I were out walking one day when a passing car catcalled me. Without missing a beat, Dad turned towards the car, stroked HIS chest, and yelled, "Yeah, and for 20 bucks I will let you touch them!"
The people in the car did not take him up on the offer.
Your dad is AWESOME.
Agreed. Your dad is the shit. I like how he didn't try to defend you with aggression, but with humor.
Random (usually old, male... not to be ageist, but it's true!) stranger saying "Why aren't you smiling?" or "Smile for me."
**I say: "You find me a job and I'll smile all ya want." or just "Give me something to smile about.
Catcalls or stares:
** I INVARIABLY stare them down. Don't look away. 1)They'll see how it feels 2)Catcallers and gawkers are always cowards and will look away within 3 seconds 3)You will feel more powerful than if you just tried to avert your gave-- THEY will be confronted non-verbally 4)Staring them down in return can be discreet. If you're with others, you don't have to make a big commotion like, "Oh my god, there's a weird dude looking at me" because gawking happens all the time and if you let friends/family know each time it happened, they'd start to say "you're paranoid" when you know you're not. 5)It's legal. No physical violence necessary. ;)
Ass grabbed in a crowded bar.
**Never had this happen. (I just turned 21).
Man approaching and asking to buy an unwanted drink, flirting, or asking "Why are you alone?" if I am.
**If I'm feeling vulnerable like alone at night or something: "Why don't you ask my pepper spray?" or just turn around with my pepper spray to answer and say, "I'm sorry what was that?"
And I don't remember ever having heard the last one. My response would depend on the context.
Hope these help, and you're not alone in these situations!!
"just turn around with my pepper spray to answer and say, "I'm sorry what was that?""
Ha! I can see it now.
One of my methods of choice (if this happens in a safer environment) actually is saying "You know, I'm not going to fuck you." I have actually had someone run away. I think he was truly startled by the bluntness of it. I like it because it's a good way to weed out the men who approach a woman only for that reason- to liquor me up (ha, like I would need it if I were interested!).
I prefer men who approach on a friendly basis, because then if one of us isn't interested at least we've had a cool conversation or make a new acquaintance. The men who see women as strong, cool people, not fuck toys, generally aren't phased by the bluntness. In my experience, of course.
If someone politely asks you if you'd like to get a drink with him and you respond with PEPPER SPRAY, you're overreacting, to say the least. A polite "no, thanks" should suffice.
If he's being obnoxious or persistent or making you feel unsafe, that response is reasonable and you should do what you have to do to make him go away. But if you respond to polite questions and mild flirting like that, you're paranoid.
Maybe you should try reading what is actually written before responding to criticize it.
From the above comment: "If I'm feeling vulnerable like alone at night or something: "
Emphasis added for the reading comprehension impaired.
I feel like just being in a vulnerable position when someone talks to you doesn't justify threatening the said person with lots and lots of pain.
When I approach strangers to ask for the time or directions or whatever, I don't first evaluate the vulnerability of their situation. I don't have to, because I am small and female and generally un-intimidating, but I don't think anyone else should have to, either.
Also, re: being scared of someone for existing.
I can't help but think about this in the context of race relations, which is part of the reason it bothers me so much.
Freshman year of college I read an essay by a black man in which he wrote about how people are intimidated by him, particularly when he's walking around alone at night. He talked about making an effort to change his demeanor in order to seem less "scary."
So without ignoring gut feelings, I think there's a place where you should draw the line between a person being threatening and you feeling threatened because you're in a potentially unsafe situation. If it's the first, go ahead and whip out the pepper spray. If it's the second, be polite and walk as soon as you can. Have the pepper spray ready if it makes you feel safer, but I don't care what time of night it is -- you can't threaten someone for talking to you while being male.
Yeah, I see where you are coming from. Sorry my above comment was snarky and rude. I was irritated in general, and thus overly snarky...
Yeah, I see where you are coming from. Sorry my above comment was snarky and rude. I was irritated in general, and thus overly snarky...
**I meant the mace tactic would be used in a dark alley-type situation, not a casual bar scene.
I usually just ignore catcalls. They really want you to interact with them, and if you respond they take it as license to keep going.
Man approaching and asking to buy an unwanted drink, flirting, or asking "Why are you alone?" if I am.
Me: "Not interested." Or "Do I not have the right to be alone without being bothered?" or "Are you flirting with me? I'm sorry, but no." However, I want some way to communicate the inherent sexism without getting the patronizing "Whoooaa" (or being loudly insulted as I have been countless times). After all, communicating knowledge may prevent the behavior.
I don't think there's inherent sexism in asking someone at a bar if they want a drink. Most people at bars are looking to meet people. It's fine if you aren't, but you can't go crying sexism because a guy can't read your mind. Turn the person down politely, but feel free to be rude if they persist.
Eh, maybe. I think sometimes when you ignore them they think that means they've succeeded in intimidating you, though.
Hmm, let's see.
Telling me to smile: I get this one a lot. I usually just say "no." Most people are taken aback by the bluntness.
Catcalls: I usually yell "shut up," "fuck off," or something like that. They get all surprised when you talk back.
Staring: I make my eyes all wide and stare back, or just ask "WTF are you looking at?"
Ass grabbed: It's only happened to me a few times. But when it does I use my patented scary yelling voice and go "hey, WTF are you doing?!" or something like that.
Female friend saying sexist stuff: I usually point out that they are, in fact, women.
Other random sexist or annoying things: Usually an eyeroll, snide comment, or whatever fits the situation.
I find that direct confrontation works well for me. But for some people or certain situations it may not be feasible. I just try to keep my confidence and do what I feel is right.
Being told to SMILE: It depends on how I feel. If I'm happy (and it's rare that someone can tell me to smile and I actually stay happy), I might smile. If not, they get my patented WTF look. It all just smack of people telling me how to feel, which I do not take kindly to.
Catcalling: For me, catcalling usually comes from a passing car or from outside of windows above me. If I'm walking, they get ignored or my WTF face. If I'm running, I usually flip them the bird. If I'm feeling particularly intimidated (eg. in a small car getting honked at by semi trucks), I intentionally misinterpret the catcalls and act like I'm understanding something else (pointing to my watch and giving a thumbs up or asking if I might know their sister).
When someone grabs my ass, my best response if I can react fast enough is to grab their wrist and scold/question them for their rude behavior. However, in a crowded bar that's hard to do-- usually its impossible to even figure out who did it. If someone slaps your ass I think its ok to slap them back-- they started the slapping, after all. But kneeing in the crotch can cause permanent damage, so I think it should be reserved for when you really need to physically defend yourself.
If a guy comes up to you in a bar and politely tries to start a conversation, I think you should politely say you're not looking to meet new people right now, or something like that. There's no reason to be rude or offended just because he wanted to chat with you in a bar-- after all, that's why most people go to bars, especially if you're there alone. But if he doesn't take no for an answer, or if he starts the interaction in a rude way, then you can certainly be rude back.
Hehe. Well, if it's a situation where I'm passing by and don't have to hang around long, I'm a big fan of flipping off. This seems to work pretty well for cat-calls. Also, for people driving like assholes. Practice your technique, e.g., flipping off without looking at them, flipping off nonchalantly, etc.
At the bar, I get a lot of guys grabbing my ass - and occasionally, when they must been feeling especially obnoxious, my tits. One of my favorite things to do is to over-dramatically grab their ass (or, even better, their tits) right back and make a scene out of it. Really. Be annoying and obnoxious about it and it'll annoy the crap out of them. Turn it into a joke - since that is, in my opinion, after all, what their behavior is. It's pretty hilarious. They'll get discouraged and leave.
Oh, I also wanted to add, I find it amazing that men are capable of still disrespecting and harassing women even when women are doing the most disgusting, dirty, non-sexual of tasks. I take my cats' huge, smelly litter boxes outside to clean during the summer, and STILL my older neighbor walks by and whistles at my ass and stares at my tits while I'm bent over with a bunch of turds in my scoop.
I just find it funny. Really. Some guys need to get a fucking clue. If you can't even leave a goddamn woman alone when she has a scoop full of turds, there is some serious problem.
... is it wrong that in your situation I'd be tempted to fling a scoop of poo at them? >:)
LOL. This guy would seriously construe even the throwing of poop as flirting. I have a feeling that more guys than we'd care to know would think the same.
Ha! My only worry is how he'd flirt back... especially if he didn't have a cat...
I don't consider the term 'douche bag" as a sexist term. Douching is a practice that it unhealthy and damaging to women. human douchebags are too.
in fact, douching has only been popular because women have been taught that their bodies are dirty, and there is something naturally unclean about them.
That's how I've always thought about it too.
I really wish I remembered who said "A douchebag is a useless tool that hurts women." Because that's exactly why I use it.
Oh yeah. I have an ass-grabbing story by the way.
One time on vacation, I was walking with a friend and some kid, about 10 to 13 years old, rode by on a bike, grabbed my ass, and sped off. Being the person I am and feeling very violated, I immediately launched into a novel-sized collection of profanities and felt frustrated that I hadn't been able to do anything about it.
Well, lucky me, because in the distance I could see his bike turning back in our direction.
I acted like I didn't see him and started talking with my friend normally as we walked. I listened carefully for the sound of the bike behind us. Then, when it was almost next to us, I turned suddenly and yelled, "Blaaaaaahhahaha!" The kid fell halfway off his bike. He quickly got back on and sped off as fast as possible, unharmed. The look of terror in his face was priceless. I don't think he had ever gotten a reaction from anyone, and I was happy to be there to give him one that day.
So there's another strategy. Just scaring the shit out of someone.
Blue, it's not a question of understanding - I do understand, I have been subject to all of these behaviours - but of whether I agree.
In particular, I believe it is simplistic to assign a common subtext to all unwanted attention - as opposed to all persistent unwanted attention - and I do think that this post contains a good deal of aggressive fantasising and misandry. It is about as appropriate to ponder happily on delivering a "Cock Punch" as it would be to contemplate a "Pussy Kick" (or other, cruder expression for female genitalia). I feel that the original post is unduly focussed on maximising the possible satisfaction obtained in redressing wrongs, and not in methods of responding effectively and contextually; basically, this isn't about advice at all. At best it might be a anecdotal forum for pithy one-liners.
Now, clearly groping is not only disrespectful but illegal, completely unacceptable and morally wrong; we're speaking on a feminist blog, we share this knowledge in common. We can all agree that these behaviours are common enough issues, and that under the remit of "Yes Means Yes" we can probably agree that courting in any context needs to involve an acute sensitivity to active consent, strongly erring on the side of backing off, and the confidence to be firm and vocal - not necessarily aggressive - from the onset with disrespectful and intimidating behaviour. However, a left hook to the groin after the fact is not actually defence but retaliation.
I believe it is simplistic to assign a common subtext to all unwanted attention
Excuse me, but it seems to me that your response to the post was simplistic, given the range of actions the poster described.
and I do think that this post contains a good deal of aggressive fantasising and misandry
Fantasizing is not the same as acting. Your original comment made no distinction between the two. And this comment leads me to believe you actually see little difference between the two. If that is accurate, we're just going to have to agree to disagree, because I see a huge difference. If your view were widely accepted, thought crime wouldn't be far off.
Where you see misandry, I see venting/frustration regarding misogyny to which the poster has felt subject.
I feel that the original post is unduly focussed on maximising the possible satisfaction obtained in redressing wrongs, and not in methods of responding effectively and contextually; basically, this isn't about advice at all.
Nik, if you read through the comments, you'll see that the original poster confirmed that soliciting advice was, in fact, her purpose. You might not care for the way she worded it, but you're a bit late to the game to be quibbling over her intentions. And you might note that she did, in fact, get quite a bit of advice, maybe even some with which you'd agree. Giving your own advice or commenting on advice she's received from others would probably be more productive than arguing with me about her intentions.
I'm curious that even now you don't tell us how you would handle a stranger grabbing your ass. Surely some response would be in order? No response is to accept the action, which I and nearly everyone else here would find unacceptable.
I can't add much to what Blue said, but this:
"At best it might be a anecdotal forum for pithy one-liners"
One-liners are exactly what we need for this particular type of problem. These daily trespasses on our sense of self really build up over the years, and causes the public sphere to feel more daunting than it is for men. This has larger consequences as well. This in addition to other strategies that are aimed to keep women quiet and out of public issues take their toll more than we sometimes even realize, making it harder for women to speak up on the larger issues as well. On a daily basis, people who dehumanize us in this way tell us that we have no value and that women are not welcome in public arenas. No, we do not stop going outside (though the high rate of agorophobia in women is an indicator of this problem). But if you look at the number of women in political and other high-ranking positions compared to the number of men, you'll see how this has an effect far outreaching just when I walk down the street.
One-liners, as you call them, can be a way to firmly occupy our place in the public realm. If we have no response, we often feel powerless, like we are non-persons that others can do with as they like. When we speak back, we are saying, "You are WRONG." The problem is just knowing what to say in that fleeting moment, because we are often caught off-guard. Hence the desire for some creative solutions.
Correction-
"you'll see how this *mentality* has an effect far outreaching just when I walk down the street"
Nik, here's a thread where guys openly talk about fantasizing of physical violence to other guys who try to grab their girlfriends' asses. So it can't be misandry, because guys feel the same way:
I was at a dance party once, and this creeper kept trying to grab my girlfriend's boob. He's lucky I didn't lay him out and that I choose to instead to block his attempts constantly.
I've done it at a under 17's night club before, she never knew.
Also if some randomer touched my girlfriends boob i'de deck him.
If someone tries to grab your woman and you block their first attempt and they try again thats when you get physical.
Here's an interesting comment, too:
I almost got my left eye clawed out for doing that shit to the wrong girl.
NEVER doing that again.
On that last sentence: so even if you DO retaliate to a grope, it may not be legal, but I believe it's moral, in that it may force the man to think twice before he gropes you or any other female. You're really doing women and even the guy a favor. I like the idea of maybe a slap or something not too harmful so you don't have to get police involved. It's like community policing/parenting. If their parents didn't tell them it's wrong to grab a random woman's breast, then you can teach them.
"Nik, here's a thread where guys openly talk about fantasizing of physical violence to other guys who try to grab their girlfriends' asses. So it can't be misandry, because guys feel the same way"
Actually that is completely false. There are plenty of things that are misogynist even though women feel the same way. We all internalize and all grow up in the same culture, it doesn't matter which gender validates it, it's still misandry or misogyny.
What's that thing, where the males in the species have sort of show fights to show dominance and aquire a...harem, I suppose? I think lions do it.
This seems like one of those things.
This subject has come up before on this site and I remember much of the same responses.
I don't know what it is about me but I have never been the object of Catcalls. When I am out in public people are usually really polite. One time in Boston a guy exposed himself to me but he was obviously mentally disturb and it was a on a a train so he was "taken care of". I was at a conference in Japan and guy (not from the USA or Japan) got a little bit handsy and I told him that he wasn't allowed to touch me and that was that.
I am sure that what ever other people have perceived is completely valid I am just saying that in my 25 yrs I haven't really had the problem.
Why don't you just chill the fuck out. If the worst gender-based attack or assault that you have ever faced is having guys trying to flirt with you, then you're doing pretty well. You forget about the millions of women around the world who are undergoing real hardship, prejudice and discrimination due to their gender on a daily basis. You sound so angry, and obviously want to express your feminist values, so why not channel your rage into something productive, that could effect a real change, rather than just concocting a witty retort to one man in the street. Men are not the enemy, and it's ok to be a feminist and have a sense of humour about it.
Uh, sounds like _you're_ the one who needs to "chill the fuck out." And if you'd read higher on the thread, we're already familiar with the B.S. "your problems are tiny compared to other women's problems." But thanks for trying.
Actually, I sort of see Katy's point.
REAL sexual harrassment is obviously a big problem. Ass-grabbing (and from a 13 year old kid!?!?!?! I don't even KNOW how I would respond to that...I respect you for not punching his brains out..little fucker), harrassment in the workplace, etc should not be tolerated under any circumstance.
However, I think the-man-at-the- bar scenario you described is really, really not a big deal. What if he was just trying to be friendly?? Oh wait, I forgot: men could NEVER approach a woman just to get to know her.
What I'm getting at is this: sometimes, I think women are more concerned with causing a scene and "making a statement" than they are with actually causing social change. An old man once told my friend, who was eating a cupcake, to "be careful or you might get fat." In response, she threw out the rest of the cupcake. I demmanded that the man reimburse her for the uneaten portion because he had made her feel bad about her weight.
In retrospect, I realize that my real intention in demmanding money from the man was that I was in a shitty mood, and I wanted to create some controversy, look tough, etc....I didn't actually care about my friend, who later told me she had thrown out the cupcake because she was full.
I'm sorry to go on a tangent. I just think that Katy has a point when she says that there are more important things in the world than thinking of a kick-ass comeback to some old bum on the street.
I refer you to my comment above (I just posted it, after yours) about the mentality that women are not people and should be confined to the private sector. It's a reply to Nik's comment.
Ass-grabbing is on the same sliding scale as catcalling. At the end of that scale is rape. Same mentality, different degrees of intensity.
It's pretty important.
Damn, I forget who addressed this issue more clearly in a book, as it's been awhile since college.... I think it may have been Simone de Beauvoir in "The Second Sex." If you are interested in learning more about this, definitely pick it up.
Wait- brain fart. It's not the "Second Sex" at all. It may have been this by Carol Brooks Gardner:
http://www.jstor.org/pss/800745
Though I think there was something else I'm thinking of as well.
Got it. It's "Passing By: Gender and Public Harrassment" by Carol Brooks Gardner:
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=OJDa3PJU_xsC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=carol+brooks+garner+passing+by&ots=D7RVTfpKHW&sig=8mpAKiLrpS3B1ZvBDf0I0AR8_XA#PPA1,M1
Highly recommended from me.
Who are you to assume that I am not channeling my rage into something productive?
And who are you to assume that this is the only hardship I've endured? If that were the case, do you really think I would be a feminist?
Wow, Katy. Just wow.
This is a subject that impacts women every day, its something that needs to be discussed because it is dehumanizing. Do you enjoy sexual harassment? Violation? When a person yells a profanity at you do you smile? Do you like feeling like an object? It is evident that men are not the enemy, they are the complimentary sex, but it is important to brace ourselves with reactions that show that women do not deserve this type of treatment. Oh, and our rage is very productive Katy, have you ever looked around feministing? Perhaps you should better educate yourself and take your ignorant postings to another blog page ^_^.
Wow. Major commenting fail.