well, as dizzy pretty much says, fuck that.
I am happy, or at the very least willing, to debate whether or not a certain act, behavior, word, or belief is inherently sexist or misogynistic. I am not, however, willing to debate the importance or necessity of feminism. Honestly, if you really truly think feminism is wrong, or that women just have it made these days and that we should suck it up and be grateful for the rights men have already granted us, then you’re a complete fucking tool. Period. No discussion necessary.
then she manages to summarize every conversation i've ever had with those smarmy, sanctimonious men - and they've been men of all ages, stripes, political affiliations and purported intellect levels - who think feminism is kind of passé but really want to, you know, discuss it.
I know it must be hard to fathom that a girl doesn’t care what a smart man thinks about the thing that she cares most about in the world, or that there’s a movement that exists that doesn’t much take into consideration what men have to say on the topic. I know I’m supposed to 1) nod thoughtfully as I process your wisdom, asking clarifying questions about your points just in case I don’t immediately understand something you say, and then 2) offer up some powerful and intelligent argument on why feminism is important, and then 3) try to prove my point with examples from women in politics and a few stories about my grandmother, but of course, in the end, 4) concede that yes, you have some very good points that I will certainly think about, and thank you for educating me about feminism and correcting me on those things I didn’t fully understand about women and the world.
Well, that conversation has been had before and is a bullshit boring ass waste of time that does absolutely nothing for anyone.
bullshit boring ass waste of time. thank you. it took me a good ten years, i'd say, to realize that i was under no obligation to dialogue like this! i actually don't have to engage dismissers of feminism at all if i don't feel like it! such a small realization, and yet such a big rush of power. you really, honestly interested in learning about why feminism is not only still relevant, but still necessary? well, go get a public library card, head for Section HQ1101, and bring some stenopads. i've got better things to do.
9 comments:
Well now. That was off-putting.
toast, the irony of that comment is magically delicious!
Oh, I'm sure it was. A man complaining about the tone of piece the main point of which was that men who have issues with feminist points of view are tedious idiots and who cares what men think anyhow. High comedy.
Hey, if that's the way you or "dizzy" or other feminists want to play it, knock yourselves out. Just don't be shocked if I roll my eyes and walk away next time someone comes to the table with a "feminist perspective".
(Adding: Juxtaposing this post with Mr. Shakes famous post that reduced feminism to "Wanting equal rights for women" and urged all liberal men to take the label "feminist" onto themselves, I'm just left shaking my head.)
no, i meant the irony of a guy needed to note how "put-off" he is by a woman talking about how frustrating it is when refusing to engage with outlandish statements about the death/futility of feminism is thrown back in her face as unreasonable and, um, off-putting.
and i don't think it's splitting hairs to note that the post's point was about people who make such outlandish claims, not necessarily men who have "issues with feminist points of view." if a guy's issues are that "feminism as a whole is pointless/stupid/worthy of my derision", well then hell yes i don't care what he thinks. i'm not here to educate anyone on that kind of scale.
i don't think that this point - some men are arrogant, self-righteous douchebags who just want to be wily about "winning" an argument - contradicts mr. shakes point about well-meaning, good-hearted men and feminism in the slightest. you've lost me there.
I think the nugget of her post that is utterly at cross purposes with the "men should embrace feminism" meme is the line where she says, and I quote:
"or that there’s a movement that exists that doesn’t much take into consideration what men have to say on the topic."
Not exactly an open and inviting stance.
Also, your own caveat:
and they've been men of all ages, stripes, political affiliations and purported intellect levels
Leads me to think we're not talking just about your bullet-headed, knuckle-dragging reactionaries here, but about anyone -- including lefties who share the same objective goals as you do -- who dares take issue with the feminist stance.
Thanks for that.
I've opted out of the whole, yeah, that's valid thing, because um, no. It's not. I don't want to have this discussion with you. It's not my job to bring you up to speed. And it's not my job to coddle you and whatever genius idea you think you have.
Whew. Thanks for the post!
ah, open and inviting. we are supposed to be open and inviting at all times. got it.
you're right, those were not the most precise words in the world, and she could've used a more nuanced description of the way that men are related to feminism. but then that puts her right back where she started, right - let me go out of my way to explain everything in a perfectly reasoned and logically airtight way, lest some one get "put-off" by it!
Leads me to think we're not talking just about your bullet-headed, knuckle-dragging reactionaries here, but about anyone -- including lefties who share the same objective goals as you do -- who dares take issue with the feminist stance.
as my friend nadia likes to say, "A) of all," if a purportedly liberal guy takes serious "issue" (again, of the "it's dead/futile/worthless, and i'll tell you why" variety) with feminism, i highly doubt we actually have the same objective goals. B) of all, people exist on a spectrum - unfortunately, they don't all walk around with signs on their forehead that say either "knuckle-dragging reactionary" or "liberal feminist ally" on them. for me, dizzy's post immediately brought to mind a number of "discussions" i had with a grad school classmate(many who know me IRL already know who i'm talking about!) who loved to come off as Mr. Subversive Superstar. But I soon realized that every debate I had with him (on feminism or anything else, for that matter), usually took the Four-Point Patriarchy plan described by dizzy - it was always, in the end, about him being right.
this is the kind of crap we're talking about. we're not talking about every conversation we've ever had with any man about anything related to feminism. and the fact that such qualifications are so often deemed necessary - "oh of course i don't mean you, sweetie!" - when we talk about our interactions with men is pretty damn tiring, too.
I think avoiding descriptors such as "doesn't care what men think" qualifies as something more than "nuance". But whatever. I'll stop being tiring now.
Post a Comment