Feminist Rage Page

Horrible sexism from a privileged gay man

2008-08-27T15:56:25Z

    I hate how some gay men think they can say blatantly, openly sexist things about women because We're gay! We're a sexual minority! We can say anything we want and it doesn't count as sexist!
    I was reading My Lives by Edmund White, a rather succesfull writer. My Lives was his autobiography and he's gay. He goes into a lot of detail about his relationships. Most of his friends are male, so most chapters, except for the one about his mother, have few women in them.
     The book is not in chronological order; it's in topic order, with each chapter being about something specific, e.g. "My Mother, ""My Father," "My Shrinks," etc. One of them is called "My Women" (sexist alert number one.) He talks about his view on women in general and then about his handful of female friends. White describes what qualities he likes in women: he thinks they should be clean, subdued, graceful. He describes how men should be wild and bad and women should be "good." White goes on at lengths about how many women were attracted to him.
    And I quote from the book: "If she's brilliant and original and stylish and lightly scheming, I can be bridled and saddled. But a loud nasal voice, hysterical giggling or dirty fingernails can cause me to bolt and run. When Michael [his partner] points out that, illogically, I'm attracted to loud, brash, bullying, dirty boys, I have to admit he's perfectly right. Boys can be bad, girls good."
     And the usually heterosexual complaint about marriage, (in which women actually end up making all the sacrifices and doing all the work): "Marriage, it seemed, was designed to make at least one unhappy woman happy, though at what an awful cost to the man. To me. Maybe a straight man is first and foremost someone who can piss off a woman and laugh it off."

Dollar store merchandise rage.

2008-08-20T18:40:19Z

I work at a dollar store. We sell a few useful, cheap products and various useless trinkets. Among these trinkets are those little things that you put in water and they expand/grow. They vary from grow-your-own-dinosaur to grow-your-own-wedding-ring to grow-your-own-sister/brother. Harmless, and they wouldn't warrant a second thought from me if it weren't for the 'grow-your-own-girlfriend'.

The product label.

Lol, okay. Because all women hate sports, and they'll nag you incessantly about watching them if you like them.

Okay, what the fuck. This is seriously getting stupid. Do these corporate designers honestly think of women that way? If they're trying to be cute and play on a stereotype, it's not working. They're coming off as the second graders that tell you that you "throw like a girl".

This next one, though, is the one that REALLY made me mad, and you'll see why immediately:

OKAY. SERIOUSLY?
Not only is this a fucking horrifying example of unabashed sexism a la advertisements SIXTY YEARS AGO (because I have nothing better to do than cook, clean and worry about my appearance), but...you get it. "Always says yes". I'm not easily offended, but that made me want to smash the whole fucking display.

So the kids who are shopping in the toy aisle have now learned that to be the perfect girlfriend, you must do what you are told, be pretty and quiet, and "always say yes".

I thought that "women belong in the kitchen" and "barefoot and pregnant" were outdated to the point of hilarity in today's culture. Apparently, to this corporation, they aren't.

Kindly take your stupid fucking comments, your outdated notions of femininity and your worthless toy and shove them down your throat. Thanks.

Ban Notice: absentesse

2008-07-30T14:43:17Z

absentesse has been banned here for repeated flaunting of community rules, including calling out other members in their rages, unsupportive comments, and assuming moderation duties.

This community has a moderation team for a reason. When something seems problematic with a post, members are to email us, and then back away. Just because we don't move fast enough or resolve it to your liking does not mean that it is the individual member's responsibility to appoint themselves moderator. Contrary to popular belief, your mods are people, with lives. We do this because we feel it is important, not because we are paid or otherwise materially compensated. We need time to review possible infringement of community rules, and we may not agree with you. Even if we do agree with you, we may need to find ways to resolve an issue that respects everyone involved and their right to a safe space. There is more than one way of seeing most issues, and we need to keep in mind the background and needs of a rather large community with varied ideologies.

So for future notice, please when you email the Mods, give us some time to assess the situation and resolve it. DO NOT call out other members on their own rages, and DO NOT decide to act as Mod if we don't jump to your whim.

Book rage. Kinda spoilery.

2008-07-21T16:34:48Z

I recently read Ned Vizzini's It's Kind of a Funny Story. To put this in some context, the main character is a 15-year-old straight cisboy...who seems unaware of the existence of transphobia and is *probably* not a victim of rape or sexual assault based on what he compares it to.

Dear author,

"I hate spending money. Every time I spend it, I feel as if I'm being raped."
I had a very bad reaction to these sentences. I have had several graphic nightmares in which I have been sexually assaulted in public places where no one hears me screaming for help--but I would NEVER compare even that to having the actual experience. No, main character, spending money is NOT like being raped. You CHOOSE to spend money. RAPE VICTIMS DON'T CHOOSE TO BE ATTACKED. >_<

Further, author, what was the purpose of having a transgender character in your book for all of three pages if all the other characters did was mock her and deny her identity? It was not okay to write all the other characters describing her as "Jennifer/birthname" or " 'Jennifer' " or, most often, just as birthname--and always with masculine pronouns. Author, you never comment on this throughout the book, and you allow your main character to continue to believe that Jennifer is not a "real" girl and to believe that it's all fun and games when another slips the main character a note reading "BEWARE OF [Jennifer's] PENIS" and another note referring to Jennifer as "HE/SHE/IT." Your main character never realizes (and you never address) that mocking transpeople is NOT OKAY.

If all this was intended to be funny like the inside cover says your book is supposed to be...IT WASN'T FUCKING FUNNY. RAPE JOKES AND TRANSPHOBIA ARE NOT FUNNY. x_x

No love,
An angry queer feminist transkid who is not amused

P.S.: When your main character is making out on a bed with another character, I thought it was really unrealistic when he slipped up her skirt, pulled down her underwear and penetrated her (WITHOUT ASKING OR OTHERWISE OBTAINING CONSENT)...and she didn't have any reaction to that. I felt like you were insinuating in the writing that consenting to making out on a bed with someone "implies" consent to penetration. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SUCH IMPLIED CONSENT.

P.P.S. I was really disgusted with how the main character says a few times in the scene before that one, "My crotch pointed the way [to the room]." It was NOT NECESSARY. x_x

feminist_rage @ 2008-07-12T20:53:00

2008-07-13T01:54:59Z

ripper677: there is 1 way to easlily fet some action with lesbo but its illeagal
ripper677: its caled rape

i'm really hoping this is a troll, but i'm pretty sure it's just a sixteen year old boy thinking he's being funny on a game chat.
i know i shouldn't get all upset, but everyone in the room agreed with him and laughed.

LONG rage that has been building up for quite some time.

2008-06-27T15:31:39Z

I am SO SICK of the barrage of ethnocentrism and pigheadedness I encounter any time I go to research body modification.

Today I happened upon an article about foot-binding in China, which is a subject I still don't know a lot about. Not being able to judge firsthand the motivations behind that practice, I was a little disturbed by the implied motivations (because it was something only women did, and something potentially crippling) and made a quick mental note to research it further.

Just so you know, I'm not, nor will I ever be justifying foot-binding. I am a body modification enthusiast, but I am adamantly against people being modified as anything but a symbol of pride in some part of their identity, and DEFINITELY opposed to modification against the will of the modified. (I have a feeling that body modification as a way to cripple women is going to be raged about within the next couple weeks, so stay tuned.)

As I scrolled down, I came upon this comment:
What, no pics of the women that have their necks stretched by having blacksmiths stack up brass rings around their necks as they grow?
I don’t remember what ethnicity does this, but It’s a minority ethnicity in thailand I beleive.
Also, there are the ostrich foot people of zimbabwe (incidentally, not a modification, but a congenital condition)
And the lip plate people, I don’t recall where they come from. Probably africa.

I headdesked, because I immediately knew what was coming up. And sure enough, pictures followed, and following those were some ridiculous comments.

Here are the ones that really pissed me off.

OMG!!! ATTRACTIVE???? I guess if big BONES in the LIPS and EARS is attractive, it’s all relative.....NON-CHRISTIAN Nations have some very sick ideas. (Mind you, I did not add caps for emphasis.)
On the contrary, I would like to point out to you that "Christian nations" and the members of said nations also have some very sick ideas.
• The Inquisition
• If not being involved in the beginnings of, then not doing enough about the Holocaust
• Colonialism
• Murdering and raping the peoples of "inferior" nations
• The atomic bomb
• Bombing the victims of the Taliban in some misguided effort to flex the bicep of the United States in the face of "terrorism"
• Destroying rainforests and other natural environments, putting some species out of existance forever.
• Murdering people based on things such as sexuality, gender identity or even physical sex
• The rape of men, women and children alike
• Police officers forcing transgendered arrestees to perform sexual acts on them
• Making the body a pilferable commodity
• Unwillingly circumcizing children (although, I will concede, this is a common practice in "NON-CHRISTIAN Nations" as well, that does not mean it's okay that we do it.)
• Inducing skin cancer by making excessively tanned skin an ideal
• Encouraging eating disorders
• Encouraging women to get themselves cut open to meet an ideal propagated by society at large

You can PROBABLY see by NOW the way that the ACTIONS of these CHRISTIAN nations stack up PRETTY WELL against the SICK and DISGUSTING things that these HEATHENS do to THEIR OWN BODIES.

(on this picture) At least she always knows where that safety pin is if she was to break a bra strap..... oh wait...... never mind.
You are implying that lack of bra = uncivilized, yes? I'm not wearing one today. Aw, I guess tht meens I'm uncivilized nao. :(

Do you assume that these women have access to bras? Do you assume that, even if they did, they would desire to subject themselves to being pushed up and strapped down in a way that Western women are culturally obliged to be? Are you suggesting that people who do not embrace the McWesternWorld™'s beauty standards are people that are beneath you? The arrogance you've just portrayed proves further my point that, generally, Western culture is ignorant and egotistic.

And besides that, your general implication of uncivilization amongst all African peoples, especially considering the fact that you probably couldn't tell me what tribe or even what PART of Africa that woman is from, is ridiculous. Just because you don't know anything about Africa doesn't mean that all the peoples on the entire continent are just as unaware of THEMSELVES. The mental image so many American youths end up with, of naked men and women dancing around fires and sacrificing their children to a sun-god, is still prevalant, and proves itself nothing but a ridiculously nationalistic and assimilationist diatribe. There is a rich history to all the African peoples, even if no European man ever came to Africa to write it down in the history books.

Observe the workings of a healthy and functional East African tribe, for example. There is a sense of community that is no longer comprehended in the corporate world. There is tradition; there is spirituality; there is a feeling of family (as opposed to blind proletarian patriotism) -- even IF they have stretched earlobes, don't wear bras or worship a different god. If anything, I'd say said hypothetical tribe has got civilized down pat and WE'RE the ones having trouble with that.

And lastly, there was a comment that I can't even bring myself to rage about, which was about the lovely Elaine Davidson, the world's most pierced woman and, as I've heard, the world's sweetest lady:
How does it get throught the airport metal detector?

Uncool.

(BTW: I know parts of this aren't 100% on the topic of feminism, so if you find anything unnecessarily irrelevant, let me know and I can take it out.)

not so equal pay for equal work

2008-06-25T02:51:48Z

Biz Journals did a survey of 112 occupations, the gender makeup of these occupations, the pay for men and women, and the differences between them. The article links to a chart that displays everything so I'm not going to post it all here.

Pay gap between men, women varies strikingly by occupation

In other words, parts of the business world really realize what we already know: men make more than women for doing the exact same thing.

"Equal pay for equal work." That phrase has been federal law for nearly half a century, ever since enactment of the Equal Pay Act of 1963.

Experts still disagree about the law's impact. Some contend that its goal of equality has become reality, while others insist that a large wage gap remains between male and female workers.

What is clear, as shown by a new bizjournals study on gender equity, is that the balance between the sexes varies dramatically by occupation. Men and women are essentially equal in many fields, especially food services, education and transportation. But they're far apart in heavy industry, skilled trades and child care.

Bizjournals ranked 112 major occupational groups, searching for jobs that employed men and women in roughly equal numbers at comparable pay levels. The study was based on data compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Coming closest to the ideal of equality is an occupation officially classified as "dining room and cafeteria attendants and bartender helpers," commonly known as busers and assistant bartenders. A total of 380,000 of these restaurant workers are employed across the country.

They aren't paid much, typically $318 per week for full-time employees, yet both sexes are basically on an even footing. Men hold 51.5 percent of these jobs, women 48.5 percent. And the gender difference in their weekly paychecks is just 4.5 percent, with women having a slight advantage of $14 ($328 to $314 for men).

The runners-up in gender equity are food preparation workers, secondary school teachers, cooks and stock clerks. Each of these occupations is closely divided between male and female workers, though men receive slightly larger paychecks at all four, making 3 percent to 9.2 percent extra. Here are the 10 most equitable occupations.

The largest disparity between the sexes, on the other hand, exists among the nation's 367,000 bus and truck mechanics and diesel-engine specialists. Only 3,300 women have ventured into this field, 0.9 percent of its total workforce. That's the smallest female representation in any of the 112 occupations covered by the study.

Other jobs that rank in the bottom five for gender equity are auto mechanics, operating engineers, plumbers and electricians. Women account for just 1.6 to 1.9 percent of the employees in each of these groups.

The tables are turned for the occupation with the sixth-worst equity score, preschool and kindergarten teachers. Women hold almost 675,000 of these jobs, men less than 16,000, or 2.3 percent of the total. Here are the 10 least equitable occupations, according to bizjournals.

Views differ as to why such disparities remain decades after pay equality became federal law.

"The wage gap exists, in part, because many women and people of color are still segregated into a few low-paying occupations," contends the National Committee on Pay Equity (NCPE), a coalition of women's and civil rights groups.

NCPE acknowledges that women sometimes make less money than men because of differences in experience and education. But the broader problem, it says, is that women historically have been funneled into sales, clerical and service jobs: "It is attributable to discrimination. In other words, certain jobs pay less because they are held by women and people of color."

The opposite camp insists that men and women do draw equal pay when their resumes and responsibilities are comparable. Wage disparities are only natural, according to this view, because men seem more willing to enter technical fields or tackle dangerous jobs that pay well, while women are more likely to leave the workforce to care for their families.

"Women tend to trade income for fulfillment, flexibility, family and safety," says Warren Farrell, author of a 2005 book, "Why Men Earn More: The Startling Truth Behind the Pay Gap -- and What Women Can Do About It."

Bizjournals used a two-part formula to rate each occupation's level of gender equity, based on employment trends and median pay. The lower the resulting score, the closer the job comes to perfect equality. View the methodology.

Dining room and cafeteria attendants earned the best score, 6.0 points, with bus and truck mechanics at the opposite end of the scale, 90.8 points.

So if you're a woman and want to make as much as a man, you should look at low-paying jobs. Minimum wage jobs. Or secondary school teacher. But don't be a preschool or kindergarden teacher.

If you look at all 112 major occupations, the four jobs in which women make more than men (food attendants, combined food preparers and attenders, file clerks, and secretaries), women make between 3% and 8% more than the men, but in the vast majority of the other occupations where men make more than women, it's between 5% and 40%.

And why is there this difference? According to one person, it's because we women have babies and are, therefore, not as experienced or skilled.

Why do people still want to doubt there's a pay gap?!?! As a human resource manager, if I were a man, I'd make nearly $190 more a week. That's almost TEN THOUSAND A YEAR.

Why the hell is this still happening?! And why does everyone still doubt it?!

PSA of the Day

2008-06-21T19:10:02Z

typhoid and cicipsychobunny are banned for snarking at another member for pointing out racism. Telling a woman of color that calling out racism/colonialism/imperialism is 'uncalled for' and a waste of valuable time and energy is not acceptable in a feminist community.

Saying 'shut up about racism' to women of color is definitely in the feminist_rage Zero Tolerance Handbook.

<3!

PSA: twiggy_j banned and a rules reminder

2008-06-19T20:58:58Z

Oddly enough, we don't have a whole userinfo full of rules just to hear ourselves talk into the ether.

Today, we get an object lesson in failing to remember that! Member twiggy_j was banned for breaking rules all over this post.

Let's review, shall we?

First, the user posted a fully unsupportive comment, thereby breaking the most important "support the rage" rule.

Then, the user deleted another comment in the same thread, which is explicitly against the rules.

Finally, the user then chose to send a pissy message bluestareyed via LJ, not via e-mail, to all mods, as stipulated in the rules.

Right. So would you get banned for sending a pissy message? Nah, we get them all the time, though that's not the way to the mods' hearts, for sure. Nor would a user get banned for messing up once. But three times in less than twelve hours just tells us that you don't care enough to read those rules.

We have pretty extensive rules in this community, it's true. But we have these rules because they're important and they're necessary to maintain the space that ya'll enjoy so much. So. Please. Reread the rules if you think you might be breaking them. And, for the love of any deity you wish, please doublecheck them if you find out for sure that you're breaking them.

Thanks,
The Mods

feminist_rage @ 2008-06-05T12:55:00

2008-06-05T17:04:49Z

This article is appalling. However, it's not just appalling because of the obvious- that a man would want a divorce solely based on the fact that his wife was not a "virgin." Of course that's a misogynistic, sexist viewpoint and I think we can all agree that that man clearly not a catch anyways.

But it's the tone of the article (and its comments) that get to me. It suggests that a woman's virginity or lack thereof is not grounds for a divorce and the marriage should not have been annulled. People sound as if they are the feminists, complaining about how a society should not judge a woman based on her "sexual purity," blah blah blah. Apparantely, not granting the divorce would've been proof that they French courts don't stand up for sexism. It would have shown how progressive they are. It would be a victory for women.

The writer of the article and its commenters just forget one thing- No fault divorce is a major priority for a society that is against sexism and misogyny. It is not up to the court to decide whether a couple should stay married or not. May I remind everyone that to get married, both parties must agree, but to get divorced, only one party must agree? If the judge had not annulled the marriage, I guarantee that that man would most certainly not have been a very good husband. Sure he's a sexist, archaic bastard, but he at least has the right to a divorce. No fault divorce protects women from abusive or just plain unpleasant marriages. Limiting divorce because of the argument (that valuing a woman's virginity above all is sexst-- which it is) is just as sexist. In a real progress, feminist society that values men and women equally, no fault divorce is an unquestionable right.

PSA of the Day

2008-05-22T22:21:45Z

radmuggle is banned for flouncing. Above all for flouncing in outsized font.

We hope zie's ruffled feathers are smoothed after all that preening.

z.

Nothing like a fresh Banning in the morning

2008-05-05T12:47:39Z

earthstone has been banned for being unsupportive, being unsupportive, telling the OP straight up that she doesn't agree with hir, questioning why we would think that rape jokes aren't funny, and finally, for getting defensive instead of just apologizing to the OP.

Did I mention that all of this happened on one post?

Membership Revoked : nacho_cheese

2008-04-24T15:05:05Z

nacho_cheese has had hir membership from feminist_rage revoked for making posts that broke our rules.

On first warning, the user was asked to reread the rules, but made a second post breaking a different rule. If the user had read the rules, as we ask everyone to, there would have been no confusion. The rules broken were not ambiguously worded. Further, the rules state that not knowing the rules is no excuse for breaking them.

There's nothing funny here, sorry. Nothing controversial, and no trolling behavior. Just blatant disregard of the rules, and we simply don't do that here. It's how it is, and it's what keeps this space safe and on topic.

So, if you are a bit fuzzy on them, I encourage you to go back and read the rules. We will revoke your membership for breaking them, and yes, we're serious.

Thanks
PANIC, for the mod team.

Update - Yale: 'Abortion' art won't be displayed without disclaimer

2008-04-22T20:42:22Z

What google returns for the search string, "Yale Moron." Such high standards, it's no wonder poor womb-ridden Aliza doesn't live up to them!

Alternate title (because what other cipher have I for my snark?): Yale Patriarchs Demand Uterine Affidavits; Quod Erat Demonstratum, Morons.

How perfectly absurd is this? Yale is using its position as artistic gatekeeper to demand that this woman disambiguate her fucking menstrual blood! Is there any other possible reaction that would more definitively prove the worth of her art than a bunch of dudes gathering to force her to publically repudiate her unauthorized use of Teh Sperm Magic?

Words fail me.

Reaction to Shvarts: "Outrage, shock, disgust"

2008-04-18T20:14:58Z

Pictured: Four Yale students gather to reassure me that I made the right choice by not applying to Yale.

Alternate Title: Yale Student Uses Privately-Owned Uterus for Her Own Reasons; Nation Flips Its Shit

So the story is that a Yale student, for her senior art project, claimed to self-inseminate, take herbal abortifacients, and collect the ensuing menstrual blood, once a month, for nine months.*

And people are completely losing their shit over it. Noted patriarchy-enthusiast and forced-pregnancy advocate John Behan said of the contumacious woman-creature,

"“We believe that Yale students, regardless of their views of abortion, will be deeply disturbed by this trivialization of the agony of women who face crisis pregnancies and endure miscarriages."

Note that it doesn't trivialize the famed agony of women with unwanted uterine growths to force them to give birth.

And bringing up the irrelevant end of the spectrum of reactions to this project, Yale freshman Elle Ramel bemoaned the hypothetical seventeen year olds who would defect to other Ivy Leagues: “What if you are a pre-frosh and this is your last impression before you decide what school to go to?”

Quelle horreur!

As a brief digression, I feel compelled to comment on the name of Behan's organization: Choose Life at Yale, or CLAY. This is presumably a throwback to Genesis, where Art to Grow On shows up at God's fourth grade classroom and gives him the chance to form the first human being (a dude, of course - women are the Divine Afterthought) out of that most organic class of molecules, the phyllosilicates.

So I thought I'd come on livejournal and give my $0.02 about whence the hoopla has come:

What makes her art powerful is that she’s forcing people to address the contradiction of, on the one hand, seeing menstrual blood (and women, by extension) as this dirty, gross, contaminating, quasi-sinful insult to human decency, and on the other hand, claiming to believe all the sentimental crap that posits that embryos are these sacrosanct snowflakes from conception onward, whose personhood is inarguable and whose beauty and symbolic value can be read as an extension of the presumptively extant father’s virility.

The reason people are pissed about this, then, is because of the cognitive dissonance inherent in facing the fact that no, there’s no magic line between miscarriage, abortion, and menstruation - that it’s all fundamentally the same uterus expelling the same damn tissue, sperm magic notwithstanding. I would argue that this is the primary reason, and that it beats out, however slightly, the competing anger about a woman (1)attempting to impregnate herself (and thereby co-opting that sacred male prerogative) and then (2) attempting to abort (further emasculating the male prerogative) while (3) thinking she had the right to go and talk about it. And trailing all those reasons is the concomitant squickiness at seeing what could very well be The Curse on public display.

This dynamic shows up other parts of, to use Twisty’s terminology, the megatheocorporatocracy. Think of the archetypal fundie squawking about depictions of sexuality that do not conform to the man and woman in obvious heteronormative marriage "ideal." It’s not that there’s something obviously different about unmarried or even (gasp) queer boinking that makes it intolerable. Indeed, the undeniable similarity between the actual acts of a married heterocouple’s sexing, and any other kind of sexing under the sun, has forced patriarchy enthusiasts such as our dear John Behan to invent the whole goddamn sex-gender system itself in order to carve out these bullshit value-laden distinctions where previously there were none. Give these asswipes a few millennia, and - oh wait, they’ve already done that for we members of the temporarily functional uterati!

The fact that anyone cares at all whether she did what she said she did makes this art (or rather, makes this a patriarchy, to which she is responding with art). In a sane world, no one would give a rat’s ass about what’s going on in anyone else’s reproductive tract, and she would have had to do something else for her senior project.

*I should say, for the benefit of those among you that may not be familiar with women's bodies, that it's impossible to actually do this and know you are doing this. She's "self-aborting" before she could possibly know she is pregnant. So she may be miscarrying. She may be making embryos that don't implant (most, by the way, don't, regardless of artistic intent). She may actually be inducing some sort of early miscarriage. She may just be having her damn period. Or any combination thereof! But the mere suggestion that a woman could opt for a period instead of a pregnancy like she was a human being with rights makes people lose their freaking minds.

(Crossposted on my personal journal)

feminist_rage @ 2008-04-04T21:48:00

2008-04-04T20:51:29Z

I don't post here usually and this isn't so much a rage, but an expression of frustration!!

I've been asked a really stupid question by a friend and I basically just wanted to tell some other feminists how annoying a question it is, and how perplexed I am about how to answer it sensitively while also being assertive. I don't want to pander him and spoon feed him because feminists shouldn't have to do that for men, but he is a man I care for like a brother.

I did that meme going 'round about 'blog about things you largely don't' and a [feminist] friend asked me what i would hypothetically say to a young girl who didn't feel feminism was relevant. I answered to the best of my ability and my [close, also rl] friend basically commented in a way that suggested they DESPERATELY needed reassurance that THEY wern't sexist, needed to inform me they DEFINITELY WERN'T a misogynist and also asked if unearned privilege was a Bad Thing.

It just seemed to me to be one more example of feminist discourse derailed by men's seemingly inherant need to go WHAT ABOUT ME. If he wasn't such a dear friend I'd be tempted just to give it no response at all, answer the more sensible points but otherwise reaffirm that I don't need to give absolution to men because of the patriarchy. I think if men want to become feminists, they really need to learn how to stfd, confront their privilege and learn from us.

I've added my comments in italics.
-----

I have questions if you don't mind. You don't need to answer them in essay form though ;)

1) Is there anything wrong with unearned privilege?
How can there be anything RIGHT with it?!

2) The media compartmentalises and reduces everything to soundbites, especially political issues. Do you feel that there is any difference with the way this is done to feminism, and do you really believe it is a conscious choice to benefit the patriarchy?
Yes and no, there are horrible people out there but there are also people that are brought up into the system with their male privilege that never question it&so it perpetuates it. Also true for classism and racism. That incredulous 'really' makes me feel like a conspiracy theorist though

3) As you know, I support feminism from the men and women should be equal point of view, dislike men who mistreat women, believe the pay gap should be eliminated etc. However, I still have issues with the idea of the patriarchy. I can see language, pay gap, rape convictions etc all being products of misogyny, but I don't see men working together to keep women down across the board. I've certainly never been approached to do my bit, although perhaps they know I'd say no ;)
How do I point out his obvious insecurity here sensitively?!

So my question is, what causes the patriarchy, how can it be dismantled, and who is to blame? And overall, what exactly is it?

A thought which might or might not affect your answers - I think one of the reasons I am uncomfortable with the idea of the patriarchy is I hate the idea that I am, even unconsciously, part of devaluing women just because I was born with a penis.

So another question to add on to the last one I guess - is every man part of the patriarchy - if so, is it possible for a man to escape it and if not, roughly how "large" is the patriarchy?
Again, how can I say that YES, you have privilege and maybe you should confront it and maybe you should actually talk about feminism and not the feelings of men every time we ever talk about this

Bratz - a long rambly rage

2008-03-26T14:15:43Z

This rage was sparked by the discovery of Bratz: The Movie on IMDB.

See here.

I was angry at this point, after reading the plot and certain reviews. But then my anger was magnified when I read some ASSHOLE trying to justify the movie and its agenda by saying:

"I think that the Bratz are a good example. I mean they encouredge kids to take an interest in fashion, being interested in fashion and having taste in the long term helps stop being made fun of. Also it encouredges wearing make up and having good hair, making the most of what you have, which also helps stop being made fun of."

"In ALL schools, you never get ugly popular kids... maybe in your school you did. But at my school, if you were ugly, fat, and wore down and out un-fashionable clothing, you got bullied, end of story. You can agree of disagree, I don't really care, think what you want, but to an extent, I am right. Pretty kids, rarely get bullied, fact."

Don't you DARE try and justify this stereotypcial nonsense!!
"Pretty kids, rarely get bullied, fact" ?! Grow a brain, jackass. And while you're at it, learn how to use grammar properly.

Bratz objectify women and the very fact that they are aimed at children under the age of 12 surely shows that they are trying to brainwash (for lack of a better word) girls to follow this view that girls should be pretty and dumb and for men to ogle.
How many children do you know that should wear make up and worry about how fashionable they look? Seriously? Yes, 14 year olds, but any younger than that, and you are SEXUALIZING children.

Bratz provide the perfect example of why so many young people are unhappy with their appearance. It's this constant message from the media that girls should be stick thin, have big made-up eyes, big red lips, short skirts and high heels to be considered "cool" or "attractive". This is why there is a rise in anorexia and bulemia - this inexorable PROPAGANDA (because that's what it is!!) that's being forced down our throats.

Bratz don't encourage any other traits in girls, such as "talent" or "individuality" or "creativity". It's purely about fashion. You could even try and argue that they encourage friend-loyalty values, but you can't escape from the fact that the primary agenda is fashion (hence the slogan on the adverts "the girls with a passion for fashion").
All the Bratz look the same, with the possible exception of different colour skin or tight jeans instead of a miniskirt. There isn't one with a big nose, or one with curves, or one that wears something radically different to the other girls. They all look the same. If they were all white, you probably wouldn't know the difference between Chloe and Jade and blahblahblah.

Also - the name "Bratz" - a "brat" is an annoying spoilt child. Why did they name the dolls after a contemptuous colloquialism, and turn it into this ideal?!

And to tie this angry rant back to the movie - the movie perpetuates the franchise, and is, as someone said, nothing more than a very long commercial for a sick and degrading concept.

They make me sick.
I encourage anyone to provide some justification for these revolting THINGS. But, unfortunately it's usually something along the lines of "encouraging girls to look good means they are respected", in which case: GROW THE FUCK UP.

feminist_rage @ 2008-03-25T20:26:00

2008-03-26T00:36:48Z

When it comes to abortion, I have to say, there are a variety of arguments against it, but one in particular bothers me. It's the Well, she should have known to use birth control, and knows it's her own responsibility. Or the related one, Well, she should have known that complete abstinence is the only safe way, and birth control doesn't always work.

Okay. So now, pregnancy is a punishment for unsafe sex or failed birth control. Which means that even if you have unsafe sex and don't get pregnant, you should be sentenced to forced pregnancy because of your crime. Or if your condom breaks and you don't get pregnant, you should also be sentenced to forced pregnancy. How would a kid feel knowing that they are the product of a punishment? Who cares? Family values, people!

But wait! What happens to the man in the relationship? Does he get some sort of physical, emotional and financially trying punishment? What are we going to inflict on him? Nothing, of course. Because men Can't Control Their Urges and it's Not Their Responsibility.

If unsafe sex and failed protection is a crime, then we need to prosecute LGBT couples too. Of course, gay men should be sentenced to AIDS- since they deserve a cruel and unusal death penalty (bring back biological warfare!) and lesbians? AIDS and forced pregnancy, because they're women and should have known better.

Now that pregnancy and AIDS are punishments, we have to use them for other cases, too. Income tax evasion? Forced pregnancy for women and AIDS for men. Breaking and entering? Forced pregnancy or AIDS. Credit card fraud? Well, since all women are greedy and are spending their husbands' money shopping, then both punishments will do.

What'll we do with all these babies? Who cares. That's the mothers' problems, not the government. The government doesn't need to give out welfare or daycare- don't all little girls want to be mommies when they grow up?

Goddamn patriarchal programming

2008-02-27T10:54:06Z

I try to be a good little radical feminist. Smash the patriarchy, yeah. Who needs boys when there's Lisa around. And then, growing up in a fundamentally sexist environment, you still get those bits of programming coming through to eat your brain.

See, when I was heading back from karate (don't get excited: I'm not very badass and there isn't gonna be a fight scene) with a friend on Thursday night, I saw a couple having an argument of some kind, and the guy had the girl pinned against a shopfront, and she was crying. So I stopped and asked, "Are you alright there, bab?" and when the guy said "she's fine", I caught her eye and asked again, "Are you?" (She seemed to be. I'm not sure. They went their separate ways and he wasn't violent towards her in our presence, anyway.)

But just to do that much, I had to shout down this voice in my head saying "it's private, you shouldn't interfere." Goddamn patriarchal programming!

PSA: Bannination and I finally get to use this icon!!

2008-02-13T23:54:57Z

The user whackbonk has been banned from feminist_rage for invading the privacy of women for the purpose of mocking their behavior. Yep. whackbonk posted something here that has been friends-locked in either a community or personal journal, and expected us to rip it apart here.

Just in case anyone here thought that was OK, we're making it clear that it's just not.

But I'm sure y'all already knew that.

Rage On!

When Pro-Choice means Pro-Preapproved Choices

2008-01-24T18:48:13Z

An older feminist once pointed out to me that in the history of restricting fertility choices, abortion has remained Enemy Number One because it is the birth control method that leaves the decision exclusively in the woman's hands for the longest period of time. And I think there's something to that. Perhaps this explains part of why abortion is the last pro-choice issue people will agree to. First comes not having sex during ovulation, then condoms, then things like hormonal birth control, then EC (after they find out it isn't an abortion)... and maybe then they'll agree to abortion with "exceptions" for rape and incest, after that it's abortion "but only, like, once or twice," and finally, maybe they'll agree that pro-choice means all choices all the time as many times as you want. And a lot of those folks will still consider abortion to be in a distinct category from birth control; some of them refuse to even call it that.

Why?

Yeah, sure, maybe they just can't turn off the Life At Conception show on the All Babies All The Time network, even when they're talking to someone who doesn't even own a damn TV. But maybe it's because of the deeply rooted, misogynistic fear that women might - GASP! - have complete and utter control over reproduction, at least on the not reproducing end of things. After all, we don't worry about the day that men stop getting people pregnant, but men sure are wetting their pants over the thought that women might stop having their babies. In this light it makes Patriarchal sense to set the cut-off date for the decision as far back as possible. Or maybe it's just that, as we all know, the contents of the pregnant womb belong to the man who "put" them there. The message of "Contraception: Fine, (I guess...) vs. Abortion: Evil (even if it's necessary)" can be translated as: "If you're lucky, a Patriarchal society will allow you to make your womb as inhospitable for pregnancy as possible. ... But if you fail and someone manages plant some seed there, by God you'd better not mess with it."

Geography of a woman (apparently)

2008-01-23T21:55:43Z

Ugh. This is the fifth or sixth time I've received this 'forward' email in the last six months. Doesn't anyone read it and see how utterly misogynist it is?

I let the first few of these emails fly because I hadn't the energy to deal with them, but I've shouted at the senders of the last few. Please stop perpetuating this disrespect for women! Why on earth would I, the 'smart woman' this email is for, find it funny?

GEOGRAPHY OF A WOMAN:

Between 18 and 20 a woman is like Africa, half discovered, half wild, naturally beautiful with fertile deltas.

Between 21 and 30 a woman is like America, well-developed and open to trade especially for someone with cash.

Between 31 and 35 she is like India, very hot, relaxed and convinced of her own beauty.

Between 36 and 40 a woman is like France, gently ageing but still a warm and desirable place to visit.

Between 41 and 50 she is like Yugoslavia, lost the war - haunted by past mistakes. Massive reconstruction is now necessary.

Between 51 and 60, she is like Russia, very wide and borders are un-patrolled. The frigid climate keeps people away.

Between 61 and 70, a woman is like Mongolia, with a glorious and all conquering past but alas, no future.

After 70, they become Afghanistan. Almost everyone knows where it is, but no one wants to go there.

GEOGRAPHY OF A MAN:

Between 15 and 70 a man is like Iran - ruled by a dick.

SEND THIS TO A SMART WOMAN WHO NEEDS A LAUGH AND TO MEN YOU THINK CAN HANDLE IT.

(Cross-posted.)

Preaching to the choir.

2008-01-21T12:58:28Z

I am weary unto death of the idea that feminism somehow robs women of their dignity.

The right to have my work justly valued based on merit rather than gender does not rob me of my dignity. My right to choose of my own free will what is done with my body does not rob me of my dignity. Having my voice heard and respected for the value of what I say, rather than by the indulgence of some mythical patriarchal chivalry or through my connection to some man does not rob me of my dignity, nor does my ability to participate in government, receive credit for my intellectual work and gain an education, walk alone at night, support myself financially, or give and receive sexual pleasure when, where, and with whom I see fit. Freedom does not rob me of my dignity.

Sexism robs me of my dignity. Never once have I felt exalted by what scraps of honor I am afforded when I conform to patriarchal standards of femininity. I feel debased, helpless, and resentful, not dignified. Dignity granted or withheld at the whim of another is not dignity at all; power is not power when one has no agency to wield it. The abilities to persuade, to evoke sympathy, and to be granted protection are not power, but symptoms of the lack of it.

That is all.

This rant has been building for a while, but was triggered in part by Ladies Against Feminism.

My nieces got a Geotrax train system for Christmas.

2007-12-27T19:21:11Z

(And they love it to bits, by the way. Precious few people have told them this sort of thing is a "boy" toy yet, and I think I'll have to hurt anybody who tries it in the future. But that's another rant for another day.)

Now, you know how it goes, there's a little pamphlet inside the box telling you all the other stuff you can buy to go with your new toy. Apparently, there are lots of "teams". There's the "Oldest team" and the "Biggest Bullies" and the "Most Trusted Team" and a whole storyline...

And there's predictably only one team with any female human or train on it. And you know what they get fobbed off with? They're the Nicest team. Nicest. Not that nice isn't a perfectly good thing to be, but it's so boring. Like that's the best thing you can say about them. In a world of adjectives like "Most Rugged" and "Most Generous", they get the world's most boring adjective ever. Nice.

And so stereotypical. Nice, nice, nice. I mean, seriously. If you're only going to have the one token female in the entire playset, can't you come up with a better adjective? ANY other adjective? All the other teams get great things, like "Most Adventurous" and "Toughest" and even "Crankiest" or "Stinkiest" (which is interesting, if nothing else), and the girls get nice. The character, I'm reading, doesn't even work on the train. She's a passenger. So I've got my nieces playing with these toys all day, and the underlying message is that they shouldn't be, that working on or with trains is for guys. (Again.)

I'm so irritated. And then I'm upset that I'm upset - like a toy is that important? - and upset that I'm upset that I'm upset. So it's not "that important". Shouldn't I still care that it's full of stereotypicity?

Ugh.

At least neither niece can read yet. They don't know any of this. That's something, anyway.

feminist_rage @ 2007-12-19T15:21:00

2007-12-19T20:34:01Z

this will be scattered.

dear sir:

i dont see how i could be more clear. i told you a thousand and one times that i was uncomfortable with you pursuing me. i am 19 and you are 29, married (but "seperated) with a child. the fact that this was online makes this even creepier to me, since you took things so far knowing i was uncomfortable with the situation. the fact that you talked very seriously over and over again of us meeting when i told you i was uncomfortable with your advances makes this even creepier. the fact that you knew this all made me uncomfortable, but still did it after putting yourself in a "supportive friend" position, KNOWING i had no one else at the time and knowing i was struggling with a very hard time in my life, makes you an absolute asshole. and it doesnt help that through everything, at key moments, you would ignore what i said and fill my mouth with words and portray me as this cute, childlike little creature, naive and innocent, that was just waiting to dote on you. you wanted a toy. thats a whole other rant, but fuck you for messing with me when i was at such a low, and fuck you for trying to ignore everything about who i am so you could build me into your fucking dream of what a sweet little girl should be. ASIDE from how pervy and creepy that is, its fucking bullshit. and you did it too many times for me to be making something of nothing.

i flat out told you (and you later found my online journal and saw my entries detailing) that your behavior toward me caused severe daily panic attacks and made me very suicidal, made me hate myself, made me lay in bed imagining abstract ways to harm myself. but even without reading it in my journal, i told you this. SEVERAL times. i thought you understood because you stopped talking to me and left me alone. i was feeling better.

so WHY, you fucking piece of shit, did i just get a phonecall from my cousin asking why she had a box of godiva chocolates with her address but my name, with an UNSIGNED NOTE? WHY THE FUCK did you think it was alright to find her brother, ask him for my mailing address, then use his when he said he wasnt comfortable giving that information? you FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT. i TOLD YOU i was uncomfortable with the age and power dynamics and that you made me fucking suicidal when you acted the way you did. and you respond to this by sending CHOCOLATES? anonymously?! with a cryptic note giving only enough information to let me know it was someone i know online?

FUCK. YOU. and fuck all the people who think its silly that im curled up in my room crying and shaking, terrified that this creep knows the address of people 5 miles away from me.

sincerely NOT yours and never fucking will be you piece of shit,

me.

ps: you dont "surprise" people with gifts when as far as they know, you don't know their address, and you only know them online and live in another country, and know they've had trouble with sexual harassment online and you're included in their list of ASSHOLES. have you HEARD of "stalking"? cause you're fucking doing it. BACK. OFF.