This Week's Femnist "Feel The Love" Post...

What can you say to something like this bit of femnist love and respect?

I'll reproduce the post here so you can avoid the possibility that Feministing has installed some sort of diabolical internet castrating device: 

Fact: calling yourself a "liberal" or "democrat" doesn't make the shit coming out of your mouth any less sexist

So, calling people out on their prejudices (and other stupid shit they say) can be pretty awkward.  Uncomfortable to the point that, a lot of the time, I bite my tongue and conduct an angry debate in the confines of my own mind – so as not to be the nagging, “PC-obsessed” feminazi of the group (/my family).  I’ve been noticing a pattern, though, in the reactions I get when I do venture to call peeps out on the anti-feminist or just plain sexist shit spewing from their faces.

You see, the level of hostile defensiveness in said peeps’ reactions is directly proportional to the amount of pride they take in “being über liberal” (commonly measured in units of just how muchthey like Obama, or, similarly, just how manyblack friends they have).  Somehow, in their bluer-than-Massachusetts minds, the comment she just made about Hillary Clinton being “too ambitious,” or the fact that he just called some girl a “dirty skank, ” CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be misconstrued as “sexist” (air quotes!) because s/he…doesn’t…vote…Republican..?

It’s like, k, congratulations on discerning the fact that John Palin would have gotten us all killed (read: driven half the country to mass suicide).  But, I don’t see how you self-identifying as a “liberal” factors into, or altogether excuses, your 1950s-esque outlook on women politicians or girls who...have sex / enjoy sex / are fat / don’t subscribe to patriarchal norms / aren’t sexually interested in you / don’t want children / fuck other girls / used to be “boys” / dedicate themselves to their jobs / don’t get married / et fucking cetera.

Yeah, not seeing the connection…YOU AN ANTI-FEMINIST FOOL!

Now why would anyone adopt an attitude of hostile defensiveness with this particular femnist?

Has The Patriarchy no shame?

Note: Be sure to read the first two comments to the post. It was all in fun! Fun? Maggie must be a riot at parties.

Comments

[Eric Blair]

I like the 'for fun' comment when she gets called on being vulgar. Like somehow you stumbed upon the special secret we-just-post-stuff-here-for-fun board.

The whole vulgarity thing appears to me to be a left over from the 1960's and the "shock the bourgeoisie" sorts of agit-prop or street theatre antics that are so beloved of 'counter-culture' types everywhere.

But I think it has long since lost its power to shock, and so is actually counter-productive.

Like you said, she must be fun at parties. I wonder if people avoid her in her daily life.

[Dennis The Peasant]

A lot of younger femnists are into the vulgarity thing in a serious way. Amanda Marcotte, Jessica Valenti and Melissa McEwan are just three that come to my mind immediately. While I think it may be about them thinging they're shocking squares like you and me, I also think a lot of it has to do with throwing off the appearance of "being tough". With all three of the above, you get the sense after awhile that each very much wants to be regarded as being at least as tough as the boys. Which is kind of funny when you think about it.

[markg8]

See that's why it's so much better to use gender neutral insults when name calling. Women can be creeps, jerks, and assholes just like men. Use those insults and there's no kneejerk gender based attempt to willfully ignore your intent or deflect your argument that works.

[Q]

Den: Funny. I'd always thought that it was just their way of rebelling against oppressive "ladylike" behavior.

The justification is simple: Claim that you're acting like a man since all men talk like foul-mouthed sailors. Interestingly, the feminist desire to "act like a man" never seems to involve filling-out a Selective Service application.

[markg8]

Or maybe they just like talking that way. The more you guys keep tut tutting about it, the more it looks like the shock value really hasn't worn off.

[Simon]

Amanda reminds me of a very straight girl I went to high school with who turned up at the 10 year school reunion dressed up as a punk. She swore a lot and constantly talked about the drugs she had taken. At one point she actually slapped me on the face because I asked her why she was telling us all this. As it ended up she had a one night stand with a mate of mine that very night....

She was making the point that she was no longer the mousy bookworm we remembered.

Amanda does the same thing with her swearing and constant references to sex being no big deal (blowjobs this and blowjobs that).

Have a scan thru the Panda comments section - you will be amazed as to how many references there are to right wing relatives - 'my racist uncle', 'my stupid republican dad' and 'my redneck roots'.

The site is one big slap in the fact to daddy - and a sh*t load of entertainment to me.

[Dennis The Peasant]

Simon-

Excellent observation.

Mark-

I'm not one to tut-tut, as I tend to swear like a sailor. The real difference to me is that I'm not proud of it (nor am I particularly ashamed of it, either). It's just that Amanda and her pals seem to be so proud of it that it tends to suggest there's something else going on there.

[Guesst]

I did like the ending, where she cussed etc as "et fucking cetera".

Like, omg. Totally!

[Guesst]

The young feminazis of today are manly, but that's okay because the boys are all effeminate. It balances out.

The girls cuss and talk about blowjobs, and the boys are all about drama and attention. They're Generation Sex. This is the result of boys and girls growing up with men being portrayed as submissive emasculated bitches, and women portrayed as domineering emasculating bitches. Indiscriminate sex is out of the closet now, thanks to the new sexed-up feminists.

Et fucking cetera.

[Q]

A slap in the face to daddy? I have to say that almost every self-described "feminist" I've ever come across (note: I'm not referring to healthy and well-adjusted women who act like equals, I'm referring to maladjusted grrrls in adult bodies who enjoy beating people over the head about how "equal" they are) has shared 2 signal features:

1. She has had a strained relationship with one or more of her parents.

2. She was a tomboy growing-up.

In some ways, I don't think they ever fully grew out of that. In the study of childhood development, it is thought that adolescence is the angry period which separates children from their parents. The Pandagon brand of feminism seems calculated to keep its members from moving beyond this state.

Or maybe us menz are all stupid fuckers. It's a toss-up.

[markg8]

Guesst where is this place where men are portrayed as submissive emasculated bitches, and women portrayed as domineering emasculating bitches? I'm a lefty and I'm not familiar with it.

About the only time I see women portrayed as domineering emasculating bitches is when the far rightwing fringe talks about Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton.

[Dennis The Peasant]

Mark-

Chris Matthews' show would be one place you could start.

[markg8]

Good Point Dennis but I think it's his personal fixation with Hillary that's his problem, that and the cold chill running up his leg he gets listening to Obama.

[Dennis The Peasant]

Mark-

He does have a personal fixation with Hillary, but he still manages to get thoughtlessly sexist enough in other areas to piss off femnists like Amanda and Jessica and to amaze Patriarchal neandethals such as my own true self.

Then again, with all the chills running up his leg over Obama, it could just be that he's a woman-hating gay person.

[Scott Lemieux]

I know you've sworn off OpenPaj Sourcamas blogging, but surely recent events compel an exception?

[Serr8d]

Yes, it's time for you to confront and confound Teh Raj. Everyone's waiting.

[markg8]

Dennis I think Matthews has his own little narrative running in his brain that he either confuses with reality or tries like hell to make reality.

He made a very telling admission on his show a few weeks ago. One of his MSM pundit guests responded to his "Obama appointee in deep trouble" narrative of the day by saying right out of the box he thought the media was overreacting. An incredulous Matthews looked at him as if to say, get with the program and in his typical stream of consciousness said, "overreacting is what we do here. That's what this show is all about."

Stories about political confrontations and scandal are his bread and butter and the way he sees it the more of it the better. That's why it was so much fun to see that Hillary operative slap him down at the convention when he insisted for days Clinton was still angling to find some way to torpedo or at least diss Obama to further her own ambitions.

On top of that the guy's an out of touch wanker who thinks his opinions are shared by the vast majority of Americans. Hell they're not even shared by the majority of Pennsylvanians, a fairly old and conservative state, otherwise he would have run for Specter's seat.

[JS]

markg8 said: "Guesst where is this place where men are portrayed as submissive emasculated bitches, and women portrayed as domineering emasculating bitches? I'm a lefty and I'm not familiar with it. "

Uh, turn on any tv sitcom these days? "Everybody loves raymond", "according to jim", and "king of queens" being the obvious ones. Look at the Simpsons these days, Homer has gone from a nutty but caring father/husband to a caricature of a caricature. Though maybe thats just a decline in production quality.

Lefty favorite Bill Maher even has a standup bit on this phenomenon in our culture. Look it up on youtube, "bill maher and feminisim".

[richard mcenroe]

Eric -- the desire to shock the bourgoisie is in itself a profoundly bourgeois notion, as it allows them to set the terms of your argument...

[Hattie]

Oh, don't be so upset. You don't care what women think of you, so why worry. Just go your merry way, tra la la.