Ann Bartow finds my feminism lacking.
Sorry, Jill and piny. I’m not feminist enough for this blog. I’ll have to pack up and go. Ann said so, and she’s the arbiter of All Things Feminist, don’tchaknow.
Lowering the Discourse
Previous post: All Abortion, All the Time
Next post: Desperate Feminist Wives
Previous post: All Abortion, All the Time
Next post: Desperate Feminist Wives
{ 54 comments }
zuzu, I think you’re plenty feminist. :-D
What an absolute charmer.
I get regular letters from the Feminist High Command, pulling my credentials. I’ve learned to charitably ignore them.
Feminism is a great big flower bed, with peonies and daisies and orchids and daffodils. Ain’t much point in a begonia telling a rose that she ain’t a real flower.
It’s sexist to notice that people are sexy? Or, y’know, not?
I resign from feminism. From now on, I’m a sexyist.
So celebrity snark lowers your feminist street cred? I’m screwed.
Ann seems to have a problem with humor and snark.
And my comment was responding to Ann Althouse’s talking-points crabbing about having to “endure” Clooney now that he’s “opened his mouth,” meaning “I used to think he was hot, but now that I know for sure he’s a liberal, I have to toe the party line and devalue his work and his sex appeal.”
To be sure, knowing that certain celebrities are actually right-wingers (or at the very least post-9/11 security freaks) has lessened their appeal for me, but I’m able to form my own opinions of them, rather than get my points from Liberal Central. Roy Edroso at alicublog has some really good stuff on right-wing or “centrist” movie criticism that entails not actually watching the films in question but instead critiquing based on talking points.
The really funny part is the complete groundlessness of the “not as feminist as it used to be” charge. What the hell is the yardstick for that? Amp gets pilloried for providing a forum where conservatarians can attack feminists; Lauren (who is a friend) was more friendly with and tolerant of the conservatarians than Zuzu is by a mile, and moreso than Jill or Piny.
I’m not as nice as Lauren, I suppose.
Though why anyone who calls herself a feminist should insist that another woman be all nicey-nicey when we get enough pressure to do that escapes me.
Your comment on TBogg (without clarification) does seem to attack her sexuality.
Really, ryan? Please elaborate.
Because I used “heterosexual” simply to distinguish from “homosexual,” on the grounds that a woman who is a lesbian would not naturally be attracted to men, and therefore might indeed feel that The Clooney had to be “endured.”
In any event, you may have missed this — but it was snark.
Zuzu, Jill and I were planning to talk to you about that, actually. Ann’s post is just confirmation of suspicions we’ve had for a long time. It would be best, we think, if you’d resign and save yourself any more embarrassment. Turn in your badge and castrating shears and clear out your desk.
(Oh, and Ann, who I’m sure will be reading along? Thanks ever so much for the kind words.)
All I’m saying is that I can understand that reading of your comment. What you said was brief and in that context it can be read that way. Snark is often not understood in text – much easier to interpret differently than intended.
There’s no need for you to be sarcastic with me.
This is what Althouse said about Parton’s appearance:
Is there some qualitative difference between this kind of nastiness and the comment about collagen? Either way la Parton gets turned into a pinata.
Ryan, considering that you’ve insisted I was a racist for looking askance at the port deal, and now you’re piling on in the anti-feminism department, I think there’s plenty of reason for me to get sarcastic with you.
Piny — I’ll get right on it.
Don’t forget to return your nameplate to HR. We can sand it down when we hire a real feminist blogger.
I’m kind of surprised that any charge of feminist dilution on Feministe wouldn’t include me as exhibit A. Oh, well. Teach me to be so self-absorbed, huh?
Zuzu, actually, I commented that the whole thread (and the whole port deal issue in general) was exaggerated by xenophobia. I posted on a separate thread that the term “white trash,” which you used – without aknowledging it’s loaded meaning – is intrinsically racist. I find language powerful and I personally think it’s important to comment on it.
I haven’t intended to attack you personally (this is a forum for debate about ideas, no?) and I’m not trying to “pile on” someone else’s criticism or attack you in this thread either. It’s discouraging that you would take my comments that way. I’ve always thought Feministe the best place I’ve found for debating about ideas without it getting personal. I’m sincerely surprised that you’ve held a grudge for past comments I’ve made in good faith. I’ve never felt that here before.
I understand that’s it’s upsetting to be publically attacked, and I’m sorry if I’ve added to it. Because I read your posts here I would not have interpreted your comment as it was taken (which was probably as negative a read as one could put on it). All I was saying is that in that context it is understandable that your words were misinterpreted.
Piny, as a feminist guy who draws fire from the anti-BDSM-and-trans kind of feminist, I’m really glad to have you around. Also, having a transman is a welcome new perspective (especially with ft? Nick Kiddle sidelined by a newborn) So any such accusation will not come from me.
I think that this is why you should give someone the benefit of the doubt before bashing them on your blog, yes? But then, zuzu’s a baby-eating Steinem-kicker, so maybe she doesn’t deserve it.
See? Totally not a real feminist.
And speaking of babies, zuzu, make sure you clean out your shelf in the breakroom minifridge.
Gosh, ryan, why would I be upset that someone is ascribing all kinds of racist motives to me in several different threads? You were called on it in the ports thread, but you never responded, and I chose to ignore you in the sibling violence thread because it would have led to derailment. However, you never did address the issue when called on it, so it remains unresolved.
Nuh-uh. Just the desk.
Unbelievable. Seems Ann has forgotten the diversity of thought that is inherent in feminism. There may be shared tenets among the various schools of feminist thought, but there are also some slight to moderate differences. I’m appalled that she thinks her brand of feminism is the only acceptable one.
Well, and for every difference, there’s an argument. Or five. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with criticism; I just think that Ann’s remarks were uncalled-for, and that her read of zuzu’s comment as sexist and homophobic (!?) was wrongheaded.
Darn those humorless feminists, anyway. Can’t they take a joke?
I, too, fail to see how zuzu’s comment about Clooney was sexist. It snarkily “attacked” (if you can call it that, even) someone’s failure to find Clooney attractive. So what. That ain’t sexism, heterosexism, or whatever. I’m open to a reasonable argument why it is, but I haven’t seen that argument made yet.
For what it’s worth, I did find some of TBogg’s comments to be somewhat sexist. As I did Althouse’s comments about Dolly Parton, which I think piny pointed out upthread.
I’m just raising issues, not “ascribing motives.” I assumed everyone was familiar with the criticism of “white trash” so I just posted what I did to add it to the thread so it could be read by anyone who was not familiar with it. If it were my blog, I would have made it clear that I was using “white trash” in a pomo way. I assumed that you thought my comment was unneccessary – that everyone knew that criticism and nothing more needed to be said. I didn’t intend to derail the thread, and I didn’t need anything more to be said.
I didn’t feel particulary “called out” on the port deal thread. I said my piece and you strongly disagreed. I don’t need anyone to agree with me, nor did I need a last word (especially on your blog), so I didn’t see any reason to post the same argument again. I wasn’t trying to derail the thread or your arguments about the topic (which were completely valid). I was just adding to the conversation my opinion that the reaction was partly fueled by xenophobia.
I think it’s troubling that you’re characterizing my comments as “ascribing motives” to you. I didn’t make it personal. Your defensive reaction says to me that you don’t want these issues raised. I’d hate to think that good faith comments critical of blogger’s posts (or comment threads in the case of the port deal) have become taboo on feministe. That would be a real change from the past and obviously very dissappointing.
Ryan, I have no problem with good-faith arguments directed at the posts. The problem I have had with some of your comments is that you have not limited your attacks to the arguments and ideas in the posts. You either raised extrinsic issues, or you were not responding to the arguments as framed, instead responding to other arguments or positions (such as the xenophobia you chose to address in relation to the ports deal, even though it was not raised by my post nor was it raised in the comments except as something to bludgeon me with by conservatarians).
And I hate to tell you this, but of course Feministe has changed. There are two new bloggers here. If you find this disappointing, well, I don’t know what to tell you.
So a new rule of the new Feministe is “no bringing up issues unless the blogger does”? I didn’t intend to join any other commenter – and I’m not conservative by most measures.
I still don’t see my comments as attacking. Were you unaware that “white trash” is widely considered racist? Do you disagree with that and have some stated idea about it I should have known about before posting my comment? If anything, in that case I was “attacking” the uncritical use of a loaded term. Is criticising the language of a post out of bounds? I once posted a comment using the word “retard” as a verb – using it’s dictionary definition. I was criticised, apologized for my unintended offense and rephrased my comment. I didn’t feel attacked.
Are you implying that my comments are unwelcome? If so, please be direct.
Now who’s defensive?
Ryan, look. If you have a point to make when you bring something up, make it. Don’t just say, “well, I’m just bringing this up” without connecting it to something. I’d be a lot more forgiving of your xenophobia comments if you had made a point with them, such as either directly accusing me of xenophobia/racism or stating exactly what your reason was for bringing them up. Because you want to talk about a loaded term, that’s it. What you did, instead, was throw out the idea that opposition to the ports deal was motivated by racism or xenophobia without also saying either that my arguments were not so motivated (or even that they were). So my conclusion from that is that you’re accusing me of xenophobia/racism.
Language, as you say, means something. So does saying what you mean. So if you mean to say that you think my arguments are racist, say so. If you mean to say that you think my arguments are fine but others are racist, say that. And if you mean to complain that you don’t like the way the blog has changed, say so and say why.
But if you’re just going to throw stuff out there and see what sticks, be prepared to be criticized, and be prepared for people to view what you’re saying as an attack on them.
Without attacking any of the individual bloggers’ feminism, I do feel this blog has drifted away from its feminist mission of late with an excess of personal stories. Anecdotes are all well and good, but as I understand it, this is not a personal blog, it’s an issues blog. Perhaps what Ann meant was not that Feministe’s becoming unfeminist, but rather that it’s straying a bit these days.
I don’t intend to be defensive – and I apologize if I am.
I think I’ve said pretty clearly that my point in mentioning xenophobia was that I thought it was fueling the very strong reaction of not only your post and the other commenters in the thread, but also the MSM and politicians. Xenophobia is not a loaded term, it’s a very specific term, and I did mean to communicate it’s meaning specifically. I wasn’t trying to aim it at you personally.
Personally I don’t believe most individuals are “racists” or “xenophobes.” They are ajectives that describe very parts of our culture – and as individuals in that culture I think we’re all racist or xenophobic. To some extent we all reflect the dominant values of our culture. I’m racist. I’m xenophobic. I’m guessing there are very few people in our culture who have reached a progressive nirvana where they truely transcend dominate cultural values. It is important to me to identify the moments when dominant cultural values are communicated. That’s what I tried to do.
I still don’t know if your use of “white trash” was “racist.” You have yet to answer my specific questions meant to clarify the issue. If you were unaware (or didn’t care) about the racist subtext of the term, then yes, you were being “racist.”
I’m still interested in a direct answer to this question:
But you did, ryan — do you see that? By saying that you think that xenophobia was fueling my reaction, you’re saying that I’m motivated by xenophobia and, by extension, racism.
Yes, I’m not an idiot. I did implicate you in what I considered an exaggerated reaction to an issue which was partly fueled by xenophobia. That’s not the same thing as calling you “racist” as I explained above.
Why aren’t you responding to my specific questions? I’m sincerely interested in answers – they weren’t rhetorical.
The thing is, anon, I really believe that the personal is political. I think that idea is pretty central to modern feminism. I mean, a while back someone complained about amp’s “baby blogging.” But when you think about it, amp is actually giving us a glimpse of what an alternative arrangement for raising kids might look like, something a lot of feminists call for but many of us, I think, have trouble actually envisioning.
Or maybe I’m just a gossipy busy-body who enjoys knowing about people’s personal lives!
So, damned if I do, damned if I don’t? Frankly, I just don’t, and didn’t, agree with your framing of the term, plus it was completely irrelevant to the topic of the thread and I didn’t — and still don’t — want to get into a digression about it. Because it seems pretty clear that you’ll condemn me as a racist regardless of what I say on the issue.
Considering that much of the gotcha posting from those criticizing liberals for opposing the ports deal specifically equated the alleged xenophobia with anti-Arabism and racism, and considering you did not make any distinction between the two concepts, I think I’m justified in my interpretation to your comments.
I’m not sure what these two sentences have to do with each other, honestly. The first is an utter misinterpretation of what I was arguing earlier about how I might have come to the conclusion that you were directing accusations of xenophobia and/or racism at me (which you’ve admitted to, at least wrt xenophobia; see above for why I interpreted it as also accusing me of racism). The second — I’m not sure what that has to do with anything. You can be not-a-conservative and still make the same arguments (liberals opposing the ports deal are motivated by xenophobia!) as conservatives are.
http://www.blogger.com/
Strayed? Well, we have stopped posting Ethan updates.
Zuzu,
Regarding “white trash” well, that’s quite the cop out. If you have seriously never considered the racist meaning of the term, well, I’m speechless. I’m not sure why else you would avoid the topic.
Regarding the rest, well, you’re either not reading what I wrote or rejecting it, which is fine – like I said, I don’t need to change anyone’s opinion. I do reject your “interpretation” of my very intentional comments. My comments about xenophobia are not negated by the presence of the term in conservative arguments that inculdes the term, nor was I “on their side.” I don’t see much use in “us” vs. “them” bantering. That doesn’t go anywhere.
I supposed I assumed a certain level of discourse on Feministe. I never would have guessed that it was taboo to acknowledge racism or xenophobia whenever it came up. I assumed it was ok to err on the side of too much analysis as I have in other leftist circles. Being called on my own bigotry – however slight, or seeminly insignificant – has been very instructive to me, and I sincerely appreciate it.
You kept steering the conversation to unuseful polemics (“accusing” you of racism) when I was sincerely trying to explain myself and make a specific point. Putting that language in my mouth is disingenuous and, again, a cop out.
Shutting down conversation about these issues is hurtful to liberal/progressive discourse (Lavender Menace, yadda yadda). If we can’t start talking about our own cultural programing (“racism” to match your language), then how can we begin to deconstruct the mechanisms and institutions that communicate them?
I didn’t intended to attack you personally, and I’m sorry for the many posts in this thread that have devolved to what I’m sure will be taken as just that. I just wanted to process, but it seems this conversation has come to a close of sorts. To be direct: I’ve said all that I think is productive for me to say.
And hair updates. And Pablo and Doug updates. And there is a lot less on the meme end of things. But yeah. Ya’ll have strayed. *snort*
Maybe if I took up knitting?
Anti-feminists crochet.
Well, we have stopped posting Ethan updates.
Penis haters!
(Which makes that whole FTM thing problematic, from a consistency point of view.)
We agreed that I’d leave them at home.
I’m not sure if I see this as sexist, since TBogg goes on to complain about how obnoxious her personality is. It’s status quo to make fun of conservative male bloggers and pundits (and ploggers) by implying that a date with them would be about as much fun as attempting to pierce one’s nipple with a plastic fork. Since TBogg didn’t talk about Althouse’s appearance, I don’t think this is in the same category as the MAnn Coulter comments.
This thread makes me kind of sad.
I’m…sorry?
This thread makes me slightly wistful, with a tinge of melancholy, all of which overlays a base level of unbounded optimism.
I think this has something to do with how you convinced me to go buy a stick blender and make lots of soups. How unfeminist of you! Or something. I don’t care though, because my broccoli soup kicked ass the other day. Thank you for the tip :)
Well, welcome to the club zuzu.
TBogg is a WOMAN?!?!?!
Zuzu,
Since they’ve obviously come and burned your NOW card I want to let you know that I know a good “papers” guy whenever you’re ready to try and pass again as a feminist.
This really pains me, Zuzu. I adore both you and Ann, think you’re both terrific feminists, and as I said in the comments section on Ann’s blog I think this might be one of those mountains-out-of-molehills things that tends to happen online and if you were discussing it in person you’d probably come to an agreement within 10 seconds. I hope the two of you can move beyond this quickly!!
Comments on this entry are closed.