Musings on American Culture, and How To Change it For the Better
February 1, 2009
by MadamaB
|
Women Are Still Wearing These
This week, I have been thinking about American culture, and shaking my head in disgust. For example, I noticed that Oscar-winning actress Renee Zellweger is starring in a new movie. When I saw the publicity shots for the film, my jaw dropped, as it was obvious Ms. Zellweger, at the ripe old age of 39, has had a great deal of cosmetic surgery done on her face. As a result, she now bears a startling resemblance to Nicole Kidman and has all the expressiveness of a Madame Tussaud’s mannequin. But darn it, she doesn’t have wrinkles anymore, so I suppose it’s all for the best! And then there’s another Oscar-winning actress, Gabrielle Anwar, who currently stars in USA’s hit television show, “Burn Notice.” She used to look like this, but now looks like this. Ms. Anwar is certainly anorexic, yet is portrayed as a sexy, irresistible bombshell on the show. No normal woman could ever achieve a look like hers without literally starving herself to death.
Why are actresses refusing to age, and to eat, in order to keep their jobs?
A more pointed question is this: In a world where the feminine principle dominates, do we really think that these women would torture themselves in order to morph into some bizarre, impossible ideal of feminine beauty?
The New Agenda editor Dr. Violet Socks has defined the patriarchy as a vast ocean in which we are all fish, and states that every feminist learns to taste the water at a different time in his or her life. I would like to tweak this metaphor a little, and argue that if we are all fish, we rot from the head first.
In other words, the culture that defines women by their perceived sexuality, youth and fertility is an outgrowth of government. If we change the government, we will change the culture.
150 years ago, black slavery used to be perfectly acceptable; in fact, it was an economically necessary institution for an entire region of America. Now, it is socially abhorrent to think that African-Americans are subhuman creatures who should be considered property, and if violence is perpetrated against a man for the color of his skin, it is correctly termed a hate crime. How did this come about? Certainly the abolitionist movement was important, but until Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves through the agency of government, nothing could really change.
By contrast, women are still slaves throughout the world. Women are raped, beaten and killed every day, and far from gender-based violence being called a hate crime, its incredibly high incidence never seems to penetrate our collective consciousness. I believe that these shocking examples of female disempowerment pass under the cultural radar because womens’ equality has still not been recognized directly by our government and is not enshrined in our Constitution. Thus, it is still socially acceptable to think of women as subhuman creatures who can be considered property of males, and to perpetrate violence against them.
As The New Agenda editor Sheryl Robinson noted, this lack of governmental recognition is also leading to a rather disturbing tendency by Barack Obama’s new administration to throw womens’ rights in the trash solely for perceived political gain. Thus, the Lilly Ledbetter Act passes, but the Fair Paycheck Act is jettisoned. Thus funding for birth control is stripped out of the latest stimulus package in order to court the religious right and gain Republican votes (which was a losing strategy in terms of the stimulus package, but probably a winning one in terms of Mr. Obama’s re-election campaign for 2012). All of this is happening as if on an alternate plane of reality, while Ms. Magazine lauds this President as the most feminist-est ever, and the corporate media gushes over how great Mr. Obama looks without a shirt on, and dissects First Lady Michelle Obama’s fashion choices as if the fate of the universe hangs upon them.
If we are ever to change the fact that the most common role models for women are anorexics whose faces look as lifeless as plastic dolls, and that second-class citizenship is the norm, not the rule for a female in America, we must focus our efforts on achieving equal representation in government, and in the ratification of the ERA.
Only then will real cultural change come for America’s women.
“madamb”
You always have such; thought provoking Posts. This one “most definitely” included.
The period of the Obama administration will be a difficult one for Feminists. An obvious and consistent theme of the Obama campaign and now administration is “Race trumps Gender”. Note how President Obama pointedly qualified his comments when speaking about the Ledbetter legislation, stating that women of color of course earn even less (paraphrased not quoted).
You will be open to charges of racism or selfishness whenever you push Gender Issues outside of the context of Race. You should expect that this administration will, if only subtly, work against you when you push for Gender equality in general.
This is a really great piece. Thanks for bringing up the ERA. The dems don’t like to talk about this anymore but instead have put dem women into such a hungry trance that we all get crazy giddy whenever they throw us a pro-choice bone. Which of course, is supposed to make us vote for them over and over again.
Yes, the ERA!
I love Burn Notice, but I’ve been worrying about the actress Gabrielle Anwar….this season she looks even more wasted away than last, and she’s not looking well.
Ironically, Bruce Campbell had to gain weight for his role in that series, to match the character’s alcoholic puffiness.
Well stated piece, MadamaB.
Thanks MadamaB for another thought provoking and thoughtful piece.
The first step towards change is recognition of a problem. We all need to be strong and stay in front of this as an issue and not let go until it becomes part of the national dialogue. This is well underway but we must not lose our resolve!!!
Wonderful piece, madamab! Did you know that the ERA was another Alice Paul idea? That it was originally called The Lucretia Mott Amendment (google that name, sisters, if you don’t already know) and became The Alice Paul Amendment upon her death? I think we need to use the ERA term and link it with Paul’s legacy. Paul is absolutely our MLK, and he in fact took a few pages from her playbook when he envisioned the Civil Rights organization.
Timely piece, too, as I am planning an essay on the 14th and 15th amendment for tomorrow, to kick off Black History Month in the women’s history series I write.
Here’s a great easy link to the history behind the ERA.
Interesting piece. I agree that the messages our government sends are central to the issue at hand. I also feel that looking to government, only, as the answer to any problem can be problematic in itself. In theory, if members of society were to wake up, we as individual citizens can also change the world in which we live through our actions. One can refuse to participate in behaviors that are wrong (having slaves), one can refuse to pay a woman less than a man for the same work, and one can participate in building a more just society. Macro and micro are both needed. Not diminishing the role of government, but not looking to it as The Fix, either.
excellent, excellent post. thank you madamaB.
I look forward to the post on Alice Paul who introduced the ERA in 1923 and warned not to attach birth control to it, because everything will be lost.
for your info. there is activity on facebook ERA NOW started by hillary supporters. I am very interested that this activity stays nonpartisan.
to extend antidiscrimination in the constitution to females should not be linked to any party. It should include members of at least both major parties parties.
John Horning,
Thank you for that sobering point. We have already noticed this fact and are working to fight against it. Obama has never supported full equality for women and his campaign tactics were indicative of this fact.
He is of the Reverend Wright school of thought, 20 years worth. And you know “Hillary ain’t never been called a n*gger”. The fact that she has been called a bitch, whore and c*nt has no import in the Obama bot world! I expect that there will be a backlash against White women in particular that will be led by white men and blacks of the Obama school of thought. It will take a couple of years before N.O.W. and the Feminist Majority catch-up on this one. They absolution from their white liberal guilt first. This could take awhile, while poor women of every color continue to bare the brunt of this unfolding depression.
I have always said that real change for women will only come when there is a significant inclusion the waitresses and factory workers. Until then, the movement will continue to be little more than well educated women musing about our misfortunes.
oops! Above I meant to say, They need absolution from their white guilt first.
KendallJ:
I think that this organization may have a chance to reach the people you mentioned. So many of the “working class” women that I have known over the course of my life are politically conservative. They are put-off by “Feminism” which they identify with Liberal Democrats and liberal politics. Meanwhile they agree with the narrow agenda as set out by TNA. I suspect that if TNA can find its way to publicly support one or more female Republican candidates for national office that action will open the door.
By the way, I am a life-long liberal Democrat.
KendallJ-
Don’t forget that many of the “well educated musers” who may now have more time to dedicate to this cause than your average waitress or factory worker, may have gotten well educated while working as a waitress to pay for it.
As long as women allow themselves to be objectified this will continue to occur. In a newspaper article discussing the Alfalfa dinner, it discussed several attendees, but only in the case of Gov Palin, was what she was wearing discussed-just another case of Palinization
John and Thia,
I think this notion that working class women are socially conservative is a misnomer and their politics are misunderstood. I am the well educated daughter of a poor single welfare mother who had seven children before her 30th birthday. My mother worked, but was unable to earn enough to support us. We were on and off welfare throughout my childhood. We were often homeless and I watched my mother’s life destroyed by numerous unwanted pregnancies and poverty.
Working class women, like working class men, get disgusted with liberal hypocrisy, the same crap that we have been discussing here on the TNA for months. They are sick of the hypocrisy inherent in the over the top political correctness, and the lack of common sense approach to politicking. They feel less suspicious of Republicans because they are more straight forward about their ties with and agenda for the wealthy. The Republicans favor the wealthy and make no bones about it. The democrats favor the wealthy as well, but pretend they don’t. But as we saw in this election, working class women often still trend democratic. My mother was a democrat and I have always been one as well. I grew up in a heavily republican area and waitressed my way through college and law school. So I hear you Thia!
I think part of the problem is that no one in either party is directly talking to working class women. HRC came the closest that I have seen in recent memory. Its the double talk that looses these people, not that they are really that conservative. For example, when working class and poor women go into a welfare center and ask for help they are treated like shit. This reinforces their shame for doing so. So when Democrats talk about expanding welfare services for them, rather than real economic opportunity that they can be proud of, they are turned off. This is just one example. Women who have no choice, but to ask for the help resent it and hate themselves and others for it.
I honestly think that it is much more complicated than just concluding that working class women are conservative. They don’t want to be the object of pity by democrats who seem to do little for them in providing real opportunity. My mother always told me that the democrats are better for the poor and working class. I have always lived with this belief, but I think that it is important to further dissect the body politic of this demographic. Part of the suspicion comes from at the end of the day always being thrown under the bus for political expediency by the democrats. Bill Clinton’s welfare reform act and now the family planning money removed from Obama’s stimulus are just a couple of examples.
I think more educated women have the skills to sort out the double talk and realize that the democrats, regardless of their bias in favor of the wealthy, are generally better on policy concerning women.
But to drive the point home, we just witnessed working class America voting for Obama and the democrats just on time to watch the democratic congress give wall street trillions of dollars without any strings, while working class families continue to loose their homes and jobs. Now we learn that only 18% percent of the stimulus is set aside for job creation and most of that is for men. Furthermore, most of the tax cuts proposed in the stimulus is also for the wealthy. I don’t know about you, but I feel burned and I have an education, job and a home that is not being foreclosed on!
Forget government, start with the girls.
Another interesting post. Here is what I think. We have let men define sex and female sexuality. In fact they actually think they own female sexuality and grant it at will or withdraw it when it serves their purpose. The women who are actresses and “singers” are irrelevant to women in this culture. They simply portray women as the men who control media see women If they don’t there is a line of younger women waiting to replace them who will toe the malecentric media line. It doesn’t matter how old a female character is the main point of her existence is serving male sexual needs, male characters and male viewers. The only point Hollywood cares to make when an older woman (over 30) is in a movie is “Older women can be HOT TOO!” There is little we can do about this because we do not have consumer rights. Sure we don’t go to the movies, we don’t watch “women’s content” channels” like Oxygen, We don’t pay for music anymore. But there is no way for you to say “hey Comcast I want to sign up for these 15 channels but I do not want to subsidize these sexist channels” You either subsidize everything or you get nothing.
Then there is the problem of American Feminism has been too intellectual to appeal to the young. Basically our daughters have male culture offering them a severely truncated sexuality where all female fantasies can be about how to best fit into male fantasies and they can be free to purchase and prance around in lingerie and stilettos at will. Feminism offers them lesbianism (not that there is anything wrong with it) or asexual esoteric dialog. The obvious move for feminism would be to offer young women their real complex heterosexual sexuality….start with the half of female sexuality that scares the limp dick old men to death, that taboo part where females sit on their average sweat panted bums and enjoy hot men (lesbians you need to go a separate but equal route here). Perhaps women bond over enjoying hot men, this seems to come naturally to the young kids who are around me. Then in between all this fun you place the feminist ideology and it seems fun too. You also keep all traces of typical ads out and ban the top 10 articles for women’s mags. So in other words you provide young women with an experience where they can go and feel good. No one talks to them about weight, buying the right fashion, wearing the right shoes, looking a certain way etc etc etc. While there they learn feminist principles through well written articles and they learn to own their sexuality.
Kendall – Your post is amazing on so many levels. I am deeply moved by the self disclosure and giving high fives on your arguments (you can’t see me doing it, but I’m giving high fives to the computer!). Thank you for sharing your insights.
I second Anna’s comment. Thank you all for the great posts here.
Following Constance’s comments, here are a few resources:
Positive sources for helping to build strong girls and women:
1. http://www.thewhitehouseproject.org/
The White House Project, a 501(c)(3), aims to advance women’s leadership in all communities and sectors—up to the U.S. presidency—by filling the leadership pipeline with a richly diverse, critical mass of women. . . . At The White House Project, we believe that if you add women to the ranks of leadership, you change everything.
2. http://www.swsg.org/about_mission.htm
Strong Women, Strong Girls is an emerging not-for-profit organization that supports the leadership and self-esteem development of women and girls. The mission of Strong Women, Strong Girls is to build upon the lessons learned from strong women throughout history to encourage girls and young women become strong women themselves.
3. http://girlshealth.gov/
GIRL POWER! is paving the way for girls to build confidence, competence, and pride in themselves, in other words, enhancing girls’ mental wellness.
4. http://www.respectrx.com/about.....ct_rx.html
Respect Rx LLC is a social entrepreneurial venture that empowers girls, women and their advocates to respect themselves, create mutual respect in relationships and to spread respect for all.
Talking about women in media, does anyone else here ever read Michelle Malkin? Or am I all alone?
The reason I bring this up is because she posted some intersting hate mail on her blog a couple of days ago (the 29th). Most of the letters she posted seemed like the senders were supporters of Mr. Obama. They used racism and sexism to their own end. One person were actually rather polite (though called her a bigot). The others made me cringe with the normal b word and c word, plesentries like that. One lady even said that Ms. Malkin looked like “an Asian whore from a titty bar in Manila”.
It made me want to be sick.
Another thing; is the MSM now attacking Sen. Gillabrand? I ‘d heard some things around… I don’t read a lot of newspapers because I’m tired of them. But there was an interesting post a couple days ago the mentioned her being torn apart by the media, in the same vein as SOS Clinton and Gov. Palin, and how the media did it.
Anna,
I feel a connection to two of the three sides of the class divide. I’m not wealthy, but I am now solidly middle class with only one child and two professional incomes in my household. But in my heart I am still that little girl, homeless and afraid of what’s next. I told myself as a child that I would learn from my mothers misfortune and carry on being a voice for those who have so little. I still see so much despair in the faces of my siblings and their children. I think that women, the majority of the working class and poor, are an untapped resource and are gravely misunderstood. They are worth analysis and consideration. As HRC has said so eloquently they are the “invisible” in our society. I truly believe that she saw them and that is why so many voted for her in the primary. I think that the future of feminism is in this untapped resource. Its not that feminist don’t care about poor and working class women, because they do, but it’s the fact that these poor and working class women are often spoken for, rather than actually being included in the discourse. If you don’t have the fancy degrees, etc., nobody listens, not even the feminists! Blacks seem to have moved past this and are much more inclusive in this way, but feminists haven’t gotten there yet and its a shame. We really need to explore this if feminism is to survive. We need this untapped resource.
Kendall,
I also applaud … and am hesitant to inquire and raise bad memories. But you mentioned unwanted pregnancies. Just what is needed in the way of new contraceptives or distribution?
Can TNA or TNA collaborating with other women’s groups, work together to involve working class women in the cause?
Kendall – I agree completely with what you’ve written. It is one reason I feel that TNA’s mission statement needs to be revised, as I find the wording about being a voice for those who have no voice (something to that effect) to be patronizing in its good intentions. I understand the spirit of it but I think a better direction is to find a way to include/tap into the voices of many women and let/us them have their/our own voice.
One challenge I see is that when you’re living in crisis mode due to poverty it is extremely difficult to find the energy to devote to the kinds of issues we discuss on this blog, even if those issues might directly impact one’s life in a postiive way. So, it’s a bit of a catch. Poverty keeps millions running from appointment to appointment, filling out paperwork, dealing with horrible bureacracies that dehumanize but which provide meager and needed concrete resources. It’s like Maslow’s hierarchy of needs:
When you’re dealing day in and day out with trying to survive on the most basic level, it’s hard to focus on anything else.
But, these women and girls are an extraordinary resource and if we don’t find a way to include them, I fear we will remain stuck having our lofty discussions while remaining removed from a huge swath of womankind in America.
Enough said. I have a lot of passion about this issue. I doubt this comment came out in an articulate way, but hopefully the gyst came through.
KendallJ and ER-
We are recruiting ANYONE who wants to help the cause and believes in our goals. I think we have a pretty diverse group here already and hopefully that will continue as we grow. I would certainly consider myself “working class” and I’m not sure why anyone would feel excluded or unwelcome here?
fsteele,
Poor and working class women rely heavily on Planned Parenthood. They generally don’t have health-care or what they have is medicaid. Those funds removed from the stimulus will surely make poor women poorer. This is the democratic back stabbing that I was talking about. When you can’t afford transportation back and forth to and from work, birth control becomes secondary. Planned parenthood has always been a good resource for these women, because it functions on a sliding scale based on income and doesn’t turn women away.
In my mother’s case, we were all born in the 1950’s and 1960’s before Roe v. Wade and before Griswald v. Conn.. Before Griswald v. Conn., in many states it was illegal for doctors to distribute birth control to unmarried women. Furthermore, married women were only allowed access with the consent of their husbands. Griswald v. Conn. was a supreme court case that changed this and allowed women access to birth control free of marrage or consent by their spouses. It was decided on in 1965, the year my youngest brother was born.
I share your thinking about the left and welfare, KendallJ. One of the things I’ve noticed about especially Asian cultures here, is they support each other to degrees in the sciences and maths. If they love literature they can read in their spare time from being the CEO of an engineering firm. And hey. They can afford the books.
So feminists need to set up career co-ops. Not a cow or a goat, or a water well, but a chemistry degree. Can this be done? Once you graduate, you put in enough time and money to get some other woman going.
Anna,
Your points are spot on and your passion came through with the utmost articulation. I don’t claim to have all the answers and yes poor women are rapped up in basic survival making it difficult for them to muse about what could be. I guess we have to go where they are, into the factories, welfare centers, the coffee shops, and diners, etc.. Many women feel insecure about there educational skills and would never dream of writing posts like we do here. I think that some would and some wouldn’t. The point is that we have to expand our base and it will be lofty task to do so. The suspicion will be one of the biggest barriers. I love TNA and find all kinds of voices here. But we are a new group and our mission has just begun. The fact that we are discussing this is a good sign. Amy has always said that TNA is a big tent organization and I am pleased by its inclusion.
Thia,
I’m not referring to TNA. I’m referring to the democratic establishment and the traditional women’s organizations who have chosen to bow down to them.
Kendall,
Are there ways that the paperwork bureaucracy can be by-passed to get better contraceptive resources to poor women? What about providing non-prescription items by mail or some other route? Churches?
Kendall – Yes, many women who are poor, who have limited formal education, etc, often lack the confidence to speak out in varioius forms and venues. There is enormous self consciousness about the sound of the voice, how “well spoken” (or not) they may sound, how the writing comes across, etc.
Your post also reminded me that we need more Normal Rae’s!
BTW, for anyone living in the Los Angeles/Santa Monica area, there is an outstanding non-profit organaization called One Voice that, among other services, has a program to help kids who would otherwise be unable to, get a leg up to prepare for college via educational support in H.S. and scholarships for the duration of their college years. They stick with families for the long haul, not some fly-by-night shot in the arm, band aide, and gone. They get involved with families with various needs on myriad levels and stick with them, providing numerous levels of support to empower families. I thought of this org when I read Sis’s post. And, yes, take a child under your wing if you can, invest in them, spend time, nurture, set up a fund for them if you can. Be a stepping stone for a young girl who may fall through the cracks of poverty.
We must work this from all angles: from big picture government to one-on-one in our own villages, so to speak.
Jummbled post, again, I’m afraid. This is hitting a nerve, but in a good way and the thoughs are flying fast.
One more thing: Bottom line: I don’t think any real lasting, deep change occurs when it only comes top down. But when people are lacking basic needs, scrammbling to survive, distracted by so many issues, etc, it’s hard to see clear or to even figure out how to organize. But, people have organized and there have been mass movements. I wonder why none now?
fsteele,
Churches generally are more of a problem than a help in this department. If female contraception were available over the counter, like condoms are for men, than women would have more control. But the government wants to control female sexuality. Men have always found power in controlling female sexuality ever since they learned of its role in procreation. They don’t want women to have exclusive control over this function. That’s the real debate underlying the abortion issue. So to answer your question, I can only say that when birth control is accessible to all, women have true freedom from unwanted pregnancy.
kendall,
It seems to me that development of new contraceptives (or better availabily of existing ones) is something we can work on now. Are there no women’s non-prescription items available at all? What about diaphrams? Jellies? Even if not as good as the prescription items, they could still save many tragedies.
And there are things like the ‘Plan B’ from overseas that HIllary got approved here.
Yes, some churches are part of the problem, but surely not all. If not churches, where do poor women go already, where contraceptive items and info could be dispensed, without government involvement?
fsteele,
They go to Planned Parenthood. They rely on men using condoms. They use the withdrawal method and so on. I think the plan B pill that Clinton was pushing is great. I’m personally not familiar with its availability, but think that it makes more sense than the regular birth control pill that you have to take everyday. These are all things that we can work on and many people are.
Another part of the problem is young girls who often look to a pregnancy as a way for them to find self-worth. I know this sounds crazy, but some girls think that if they have a baby, they will find in that child the unconditional love for which they are longing. This is another issue that addresses the lack of confidence and self worth that so many girls experience. This is a situation that can be dealt with by accomplished women mentoring young girls. We all can help in this regard. Personally, this is what saved my life. I was lucky that a few teachers found me worthy and mentored me. It meant the world to me and I believe it made the difference.
Kendall – Yes to everything, again, on your most recent post. Though I would add to the first point: Or they do nothing and get pregnant because of lack of information, lack of access to care, lack of money, lack of “compliance” if using the pill, feeling pressured by the man re: use or lack thereof of birth control, getting dis-information from the street, and what you said in your second paragraph.
We can all serve as stepping stones in the life of even just one young girl.
Marian Wright Edelman wrote a great book called LANTERNS about all of those who mentored her through her life. The title is very apt.
Wow, this thread has got me going….Among other things, it had never occured to me that birth control for women to control is not available OTC. That is so powerful. Why not diaphrams? It makes no sense. As for birth control pills, it’s a bit more complex, perhaps, because of medical issues and potential contraindications. I don’t know enough about it to comment. But, they may be no more risky than half of the other OTC meds available that, if they included the fine print sheet you get with Rx meds many would be shocked! Folks think that cause it’s OTC it’s no big deal in terms of risks and side effects.
Anyway, enough for today……
Kendall, I would love to talk with you further about some of this. See Grassroots section connect online.
A number of forms of birth control are available over the counter.
Oral contraceptives – i.e., birth control pills — are by prescription only. This is as it should be for a number of reasons: there are many different types of oral contraceptives with different combinations and amounts of hormones (different amounts of estrogen and progestin); serious side effects and contraindications do exist and the use of such pills should be monitored by a physician. The physician can also determine what kind of pill is the best for a given patient, and provide preventive care and education for patients. Planned Parenthood does a good job of this as well.
Plan B is an emergency contraceptive and should not be used as a regular contraceptive. It is available in some areas over the counter, though many who use it (especially teenage girls) need preventive care and counseling along with it—better healthcare overall!
Anna from AK….Michelle Malkin is a rightwing shill. Just like all the people who were suddenly “concerned” about “freeing” Islamic women when they wanted a talking point for the pre-emptive war, any time Malkin gets it right regarding women, it’s only to bash the left, too many of whom went off the cliff with Obama.
One of her latest goosesteps to the rightwing talking points was to misrepresent the idea that the government, when awarding contracts, should take care that traditionally male fields also include women and minorities. Malkin and Hannity immediately twisted that to “white men needn’t apply” —literally, they falsely headlined that Obama said white men needn’t apply for government contracts.
As far as Malkin’s personal appearance being targeted….I think the women news “talent” are far more disturbing than Hollywood stars. Why should women posing as *news journalists* need all that cosmetic surgery, all that makeup, all that big hair, and all those baby doll clothes and teen butterfly necklaces? I include Malkin amongst those who need to lay off the injections, stop shopping at Claire’s, and maybe scale the makeup down a notch or two before they start silicone-pouting their super-glossed lips over what others say about their appearance.
I also don’t think emails from unknown crude fratboys are in any way equal to the continued outrageous treatment of Palin, because
A. Palin is a serious professional, who works to represent all of her constituents, as opposed to a dolled-up rightwing megaphone posing as a “journalist”
and
B. It is the full might of the megaphonies in the “mainstream media” who are still discussing Palin’s clothes instead of her work…and that is a far cry more damaging to all of us than some powerless anonymous rude emails.
Malkin doesn’t need our patronage or concern.
I agree Zee. Malkin is disgusting and feminists shouldn’t waste time defending her. She is NOT our friend, to the contrary!
It doesn’t look to me like Renee Zelleweger has had any plastic surgery, and I don’t think it’s appropriate to throw around specious accusations like that. Those kinds of comments just contribute to making women feel even more insecure and obsessed over their appearance. If anything, I’m really grateful to Zelleweger for opting to gain 30 pounds for each of the Bridget Jones movies so that we could all see someone who actually looked like us star in a movie.
Re contraceptives, I went surfing and found this:
http://www.onemoresoul.com/con.....ffects.php
“All methods of birth control are efforts to separate sexual intercourse from procreation. This separation supports sexual relationships that are much weaker than traditional marriage—hooking up, cohabitation, adultery, and serial monogamy. These relationships erode society by leading to divorce, unexpected pregnancy, abortion, single parent households, abuse, and poverty. The consequences of birth control clearly demonstrate an unhealthy, anti-culture and anti-life, impact that raises major ethical concerns. Use of birth control is like intentionally eating unhealthy, nutrition-less, food just for the pleasure of eating. A steady diet will kill you. In much the same way, a steady diet of birth control kills relationships.”
I was surfing for diaphragms etc by mall-order non-prescription — darn little to be found on the first few screens, except jellies to be used with diaphragm.
I couldn’t disagree more about Malkin. Here is a perfect example of someone you may not agree with politically, you may not even like, but you must defend ALL women from sexist attacks. This is exactly the kind of reasoning that was used against Palin. Feminists felt they needn’t defend her because she wasn’t “deserving.”
Anna from AK- It makes no difference to me whether it is Gillibrand, Malkin, or anyone else. I’m not tolerating sexist attacks on women of ANY kind.
You need to reread what I wrote, Thia. Malkin is part of the problem.
I could’ve written the expected, easy “we need to defend all women” response. It was so easy to see coming I almost included it in my original comment.
By your reasoning, however, we should all be taking MadamaB to task for targeting and denigrating Nicole Kidman’s and Renee Zellweger’s “plastic” looks. I personally think cosmetic surgery is not only acceptable, but will become as common, accepted and expected as dental care and cosmetic dentistry.
1. It is far worse a problem for the “women” in news to doll themselves up with blindingly shiny teen-aged lip gloss and little butterfly necklaces straight out of the teeny-bop outlet at the mall.
That is far more damaging to women in our culture than anything any of those actresses have done.
2. I’m not saying those neanderthal fratboys shouldn’t be deplored. But anonymous emails are not an issue we need to take on directly. They aren’t the issue, they’re a symptom. The issue is the nonstop 24/7 across the board “mainstream” media having mostly misogynistic male pundits. The issue is having the mainstream media frequently gathering all-male panels to pooh-pooh the notion that they’re part of a sick, sexist system. The issue is the huge megaphone of the corporate media attack women like Palin, Clinton and Gillibrand. It has nothing to do with their politics, but their integrity, which leads me to three…
3. It’s not about Malkin’s politics, it’s her lack of integrity. She is part of the concerted broadcasting of misinformation. My point was that, hopefully unlike us, whenever she seems to be a “champion” for women it’s in service to her agenda as a rightwing shill. There are “conservative” women in broadcasting out there who don’t stoop to dolling up and misinfo campaigns….women like Greta, so I’m not talking about a mere political slant. Then there are women like Malkin and Coulter, who are part of the problem and take glee in creating faux outrage when it suits them. Maureen Dowd is their soul(less) sister on the “left” and I denounce her deliberate and misleading opportunism all the time as well.
I’m entirely for letting even the opportunists benefit when we raise the bar for all women, but Malkin herself needs nothing from The New Agenda but calling out when she spews deliberately false headlines like “White Men Needn’t Apply.” Otherwise, she isn’t someone we should ever use as a source, and definitely not anyone we need to be duped into sympathy for. Those of us firmly aligned to the left are already well aware of the “progressive” frat-boy attitude problem….but as Malkin’s fake white-men-are-victims headline proves, she only points it out to further an extreme political agenda, not to improve male-female relations in our culture.
Here are some of what I view as the complexities re: defending and any all women re: sexist attacks:
One needs to be able to clearly identify the attack as sexist, as opposed to the woman being attacked due to her views. I think this difference came up in one of Amy’s first interviews, on Fox, I think. I recall the moderator pressing Amy on the point, well, how do you know Palin wasn’t simply attacked because of her ideas, her demeanor, her apparent lack of knowledge, etc, as is done to political candidates (ie, they get skewered – my words, not the commentator). Amy commented that “it’s subtle.” I recall contacting Amy about that, as I felt anyone confronting a question like that needs to be able to clearly point to what, why and how something is sexist and not part of the usual bs slings and arrows of life in politics.
Second (perhaps somewhat related to Malkin), do we view all women as equally deserving of our time and attention on this matter? I know this question sounds crass and has obvious problems, but I believe it holds truths. For example, if a woman is horrendously racist or expresses some other horrid point of view and if, among other things, she is then spoken to and about in a way that is sexist, do we still rush to her defense on that point? In this way I feel that we will likely confront situations where we may need to prioritize, or perhaps, as per Thia’s post, we don’t and we have a blanket policy that we defend any and all women against sexist attacks. I just wonder how this would play out in reality re: time, energy and potentially conflicting interests.
If you refer back to Anna from AK’s original post, I thought she was talking about clearly sexist attacks. (b word c word etc) To me, it makes no difference who those things are being said about, they are unacceptable. When a woman is being attacked in that way, I don’t care what her politics are, what she looks like, what comes out of her own mouth etc. It’s not about her. It’s about whether we will tolerate sexism in our society, regardless of who it is directed at. For myself, I won’t.
Thia – I agree. In cases where the attack is blatantly sexist, we should call it out. (Case in point: I can’t stand Samantha Powers based on her politics. Saw a description of her on a web site that was horrible sexist. Posted that it was legit to call her out on her politics with as much passion as desired, but not to describe her in sexist ways as it is wrong and, in my view, diminshes the credibillity of the argument. Person who runs the blog, a man btw, posted: “fair enough” and changed the verbage to eliminate the needless sexist language.) BUT, there’s so much out there, we’ll become drained trying to call out every person in every instance. BUT, if we want to try, how about if TNA has a place on the site where we can post links to media coverage that is sexist so anyone who wants to address it, can?
PS Re: macro AND micro, as many have pointed out in various comments on various posts, this is important to do in every day life, not just with the big media, high visibility things. Speak up for ourselves and for other women when we hear nasty remarks. Just gotta’ keep chipping away, every day, from all angles.
Interesting discussion of the view today as Ziegler was discussing his interview with Gov Palin, Whoopie discussed rightfully the treatment of HRC by the media and that she felt that was wrong but seemed to defend the attacks on Palin, Joy just enjoyed the fact that” who cares we won” and Barbara defended the media. Will they ever learn?
bruce nahin – I forced myself to watch clips of this interview too. They completely missed the point and it was par for that show.
Blegh!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQQZZo6brWY
Bruce – Thanks for sharing. My depression level just sunk that much more! Just kidding – You’re not responsible for my feelings, but just sayin’…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQQZZo6brWY
View clip mentioned above.
Anna and Thia,
Yes, it’s hard to draw the line on whether, and how much, to defend people like Malkin. One factor might be whether they want our defense and how they are likely to react. Palin seemed friendly to the Pumas, glad to see us at her rallies, etc; so I’d guess she might brush off the sexist attack or something, but she won’t attack us. Malkin might attack us.
Also, who is ‘we’? TNA with an official press release….? I’d be cautious about that. Amy or someone if asked the direct question on tv? Again, cautious…. Us peon bloggers, on a comment string somewhere … more free.
I think it ought to be possible to make some very short clear statement (tried out in comments at Malkin’s site maybe) about even people like Malkin not deserving outright sexist treatment such as [current example]. ‘This is a kind of talk that denigrates women and has been used against HIllary and Palin and others and should not be used against any woman, including Malkin. Even women whose policies and conduct we disagree with deserve defense against this.’ — See how Malkin reacts to this. If she responds well, then consider using it as an answer on tv. If she attacks, then avoid the subject publicly, or make the public answer very very basic and final.
Something like that, anyway.
Disagreeing with policies is one thing, as with Palin. Disapproving of conduct, as with Malkin, is another thing; especially if she’s likely to bite the hand that defends her.
Bruce,
I read it like this! Whoopie has a heart, sole, and conscience. Joy is an asshole who is becoming part of the problem. And, Barbara is part of the problem!
fsteele,
I’m just speaking for me, myself, and I.
To me, it isn’t about “defending” a woman or whether she would want me to speak out or not. It’s the sexism I am attacking rather than a woman I am defending. I don’t know if that makes sense, but when you think about it like that, the rest becomes irrelevant to me.
I take a practical approach. There is only so much time, resources and energy. At the end of the day, we have no choice but to choose our battles. In light of this, I’ll save my energy to defend those who defend me and women in general. Women who cut other women’s throats for male approval, may deserve defending on principal, but given the limitations outlined above, I will reserve my energy and resources for those who are on our side.
fsteele, Thia, and Kendall – Yes, yes, yes despite some variations in approach. All wise, fair and well defended approaches.
Thia,
I understand your point and it is valid. No one can deny the ideals that you uphold. All I’m saying is that we have to be strategic and understand that our energy and fight has to count for something. We have to focus our resources and use them where they are most effective. If we spend time on those who fight against us and turn on us during our defense of them, we have accomplished little to nothing. We become the object of mockery by those whom we fight so hard to defend. Where does this get us? We need to focus on what we can accomplish, not just on what we believe is right!
I think I’m speaking more about every day life. Obviously an organization can only do so much, but it only takes me about 6 seconds to tell someone to bite me.
I got in a huge argument with a friend a few days ago over “defending” Pelosi. He said some things about her that were similar to sexist crap we heard about Hillary (I won’t bother repeating) and I had to tell him to shut up. Trust me, it causes me actual physical pain to “defend” Pelosi, but I try to look at it as fighting sexism and ignore the subject of the attacks.
Actually, I was just using Mrs. Malkin’s hate mail post as an example of how sexism is all around us, is permissable, and how people often use it for their own personal gains. Malkin seems to be used to it.
Btw, I’ve never seen Malkin on TV; I don’t watch the news. I do like to visit her blog to read about what’s going on in with the ultra-liberal nutcases, and she makes some good points. It balances out reading my local (liberal!) newspaper. She did a least post about Favareu’s groping of the cardboard cutout of SOS Clinton
I haven’t agreed with everything I’ve read there and she does seem to overly bash liberals. I would perfer respectfull disagrement.
P.S. Sometimes I like to read Rush Limbaugh (though I think he’s a blowhard). I really like the doomsday clock!
Anna from AK – I am so tempted to inquire as to what the “doomsday clock” is, but I won’t since I think I’ve had one of my own ticking since birth…
Thia,
I hear you and I don’t disagree. I have often found myself in the same situation and instinctively react as you do. I would never suggest that you should react differently. I think that if you have the energy and gumption, by all means.
On the other hand, as an organization like TNA, we have no choice but to be focused like a laser. We have to be strategic and focused on what we can do to reach measurable goals that move us one step closer toward what we are trying to accomplish. This is not to say that those small acts of conscientious objections don’t matter, they do. So please do not take my comments as anything other than an effort to focus our collective energies on those things that we can collectively achieve.
KendallJ – I’m with you.
Anna from AK- Doomsday Clock amuses me too
OK, that put me over the edge. Gotta know about RL’s “doomsday clock.” Spill the beans, Anna from AK!
OK, guys. About the doomsday clock. App. 4 years, 1 month, and 6 days ago, a Mr. Albert Gore (anyone remember him?) said we had ten years to save the planet from scorching. So Limbaugh started the Al Gore Doomsday Clock to count down ’till Armageddon. I like to check it periodically. On Limbaugh’s site, if you scroll most of the way down, there’s a “window”. The clock is the second “choice”. The first on eis Rush For Peace”.
Like most Alaskans, I’m skeptical of “global warming”. It’s particularly hard when it’s been on of the coldest winters in several years. Supposedly the Earth is beginning a cooling period, according to the “Farmer’s Almanac”. Did anyone else hear of the big snow fall in England?(well, big for them, but not for me
Sorry for the typos and the convoluted directions. I wish I could have drawn a map! I have yet to eat dinner, so me thinks my brain is starved. But the elk soup smells wonderful.
I don’t actually see any conflict, we’re just using different words. I do think we as individuals might well drop in a sentence here and there just to be on record as condemning sexist attacks when done to Malkin, Pelosi, etc, as well as as attacks directed against the women we like; we needn’t get into detailed defense of Malkin etc. It doesn’t have to be a long sentence or get us into a long debate.
“This attack on Malkin is sexism and we condemn sexism no matter who it is directed at” is a good formulation and may well be all that’s needed.
Leave your Response
Supporting women.
Ending sexism.
Finding common ground.
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Blogroll
Find the New Agenda Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...