Comments on: Fighting Sexism With Sexism

By: Lets hope the election is this close, what happens if its a tie?

Lets hope the election is this close, what happens if its a tie? — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:52:27 +0000

Surely you need a greater margin than 2 percent to declare victory in the Palin Biden debate ?

By: Tina

Tina — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 03:24:31 +0000

The word I used was sexist–my point, and I stand by it, is that feminists have an obligation to point out sexism when they see it. I’m not going to be quiet just because a liberal or progressive says something retrograde. A real feminist, in my opinion , stands up for all women, not just those who share our political views. You might think I’m being a pollyanna, but this is the kind of compromise moderates and centrists are always raked over the coals for–it’s not different just because a liberal is the candidate.

By: Feminists Ponder Sarah Palin « Without Politicians

Feminists Ponder Sarah Palin « Without Politicians — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 02:57:39 +0000

[...] Feministe: It sure is interesting to see conservatives adopt the banner of feminism now that Sarah Palin is [...]

By: Jill

Jill — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 02:49:43 +0000

Sort of unrelated, but I got lost by the “paternalistic laws that attempt to criminalize pregnant women who do things like smoke” thing. What’s the anti-feminist part of that?

…because it criminalizes pregnant women for smoking?

Basically, it puts pregnant women in a different legal class than men and “regular” women. It criminalizes perfectly legal behavior because of the woman’s status, and takes away her individual liberties and freedoms because she’s pregnant. We can think that smoking (or drinking or whatever else) during pregnancy is unhealthy or wrong or even morally bad, but making it a crime? That’s scary. And it only targets women, and it treats women like they’re not full citizens worthy of the same rights and liberties to make decisions about their health as everyone else — it treats them like incubators. That’s why it’s anti-feminist.

By: aack

aack — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 02:46:08 +0000

did they actually talk about the size of women’s hips? and this is meant to not be sexist? really? how does that work? No, really. I want to know.

By: Bagelsan

Bagelsan — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 01:12:01 +0000

Sort of unrelated, but I got lost by the “paternalistic laws that attempt to criminalize pregnant women who do things like smoke” thing. What’s the anti-feminist part of that?

(And I ask this in good faith! Is there a post where this is explained elsewhere? Because I thought about it a bit but still don’t get it. I’m on-board with the pro-choice stuff, but this seems a little different…)

And to get back on topic:

Shorter Republicans: It’s not hypocritical for us to talk crap about women, because we actually hate women and don’t even try to pretend otherwise. Saying something sexist *without* hating women is the *real* hypocrisy!

By: shah8

shah8 — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:18:47 +0000

I’m realizing that I’m conflating posts too much, and that Jill’s post is more complex and right than I gave it credit for…

Blame it on being distracted by Hurricane Ike…

By: Ico

Ico — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:10:28 +0000

“What if it had been one of Obama’s kids who was pregnant instead of one of Palin’s?” (assuming, of course, that Obama’s kids were slightly older). [I also know I'm hardly the first one to throw this argument out there, but I haven't been reading other blogs at all, so I can't point you to who else has made this case better than I have; feel free to leave links in the comments].

Elle, PhD has a post on this:

http://elleabd.blogspot.com/2008/09/hmmm.html

By: shah8

shah8 — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 22:50:33 +0000

Jill, Eric is precisely what I’m talking about. I feel pretty strongly that you’re missing the holistic structure and environment in which these conversations are in. This is a culture war, with at least one side engaging in absolute shamelessness as a tactic in prosecuting the war. Public worrying about the nobility of your side disrupts the unity of your side because it invites rancorous debate. Not only that, it encourages controversy about just what is sexist–without a clear crossing of a brightline, it’s hard to even know what we’re talking about. With that, many conservatives will just wade in, and do their concern trolling best to keep the conversation about the controversy of Sarah Palin, rather than her acts whether that be personal or as a public official.

If you *reeeeaaaally* think I’m wrong, then I invite you to stroll down memory lane and check out the Anita Hill hearings. All of the games with Clarence Thomas then are repeated now.

By: ol cranky

ol cranky — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 18:38:12 +0000

We’re just pointing out blatant hypocrisy on the other side.

funny, some of us who are accused of being sexist are actually just pointing out the hypocrisy of the conservatives.