Category Archives: Women

Feminism Is Not This Trivial

not importantAs if there aren’t enough important issues for women to be dealing with, it seems some women are going in search of slights. Previously, I wrote about a young lady in a tizzy about the word too, after somehow getting it into her head that it was an insult to women:

In my experience, I rarely hear too thrown around about men. You hear someone say, “He’s short,” but you seldom hear “too short.” I hear women and men alike each day describing women as too something. But what does it really mean when you call a woman too? I asked myself, “too what?” I have determined that too means you’re calling a woman too far away from your idyllic vision of what a woman should be.

Yeah okay, you can read my response here… anyway, now we have Jessica Ensley who refers to herself as a “feminist extraordinaire” telling us in a post on RHReality Check, that “Gendered Language Teaches Us Women Are Objects To Be Controlled“. She writes:

The practice of using feminine pronouns (often in a sexually suggestive way) to refer to things such as tools, cars, and even boats is fairly common—so common that many people do not stop to question what they are actually saying, which is that women are objects. This underlying message in our language is reflective of how our society treats women…

… The words we use to describe objects helps us to understand how we actually feel about them. I grew up around men who loved fast cars. They liked to fix them up and race them at a local track. It wasn’t uncommon to hear “I’ve got to polish her up,” and, “Look at how beautiful she is; she’s just begging to be taken for a spin.” Not only were they talking about an inanimate object as being female, but they talked about the car as if it were something to have sex with. The car, like a woman, is something to be owned and controlled by men. The car (woman) has no autonomy. It (she) does not get to decide what happens to it (her).

There was a television show dedicated to “pimping your ride.” At car shows where people go to buy, sell or oogle (sic) at various vehicles, women are shown standing in front of them with barely any clothes as if they are another pretty car to buy and own…

… Our language clearly reflects a larger issue. Women are seen as objects to be controlled, bought, driven, or used. While this reclaiming of our bodies must be fought on multiple fronts, we also should push back to make our language more inclusive…

Seriously, is any woman losing sleep this? I’ve used male and female pronouns my whole life. I call my truck “her” and “she” with never a thought of “owning women”. I often refer to trees I plant as he, which doesn’t imply men that are dumb as a stump, either. Ms. Ensley continues:

Gendering objects not only harmfully impacts cisgender women, but also transgender and gender-nonconforming people, individuals with a gender identity and expression that fits outside of the gender binary. Yet we live in a world where people assume objects, from modes of transportation to pets, work within a gender binary, thus reinforcing it.

Sorry, but I’m calling bullshit. We cannot run around editing the English language to remove words we’ve trumped up phony grievances with. Men call cars “her or she” because cars are sexy to guys (and quite a few women, too); if anything, it’s meant as a compliment. Who cares? Who has time to spend parsing every little word or phrase people use? We live in a world with hers and shes, and hims and hes; equality does not require androgyny in language or people.

On a final note, I’ve mentioned before that we’re only seen as objects if that’s how we put ourselves out there, so blame your fellow women for that. The truth is, there will always be women like those car models, who are glad to be treated as second class citizens if there’s enough money involved.

1187819-Clipart-Of-A-Red-Rose-And-Black-And-White-Foliage-Border-Page-Rule-3-Royalty-Free-Vector-Illustration_zpsea82d6f2

Leave a Comment

Filed under Feminism, Politics, Women

RW Phony Christians React To PP Shooting

As All Things Democrat’s Doug Marquardt wrote yesterday,Planned Parenthood Terrorist Was A Conservative, Anti-Abortion Nut – End Of Story. If only the crazy stopped there; but the Right Wing reaction on Twitter shows how many unstable, uninformed, willfully ignorant people align themselves with Conservatism. Here are a few “Christian” tweets, mixed with a little irony:

CU4AutMU8AQ82LP

In case you can’t read it, this guy’s avatar says: “Love Thy Neighbor. Period.”

PP-hero-620x202

This avatar is a Black person in front of a rebel flag.

PP-twitter2-620x241PP-Twitter3-620x284

There’s the “Black people get all the abortions” myth again, but I’ll come to that later.

PP-Twitter4-620x254

The insanity raged at the usual RW Crazy hot spots like Breitbart, among others; but “Lifesite” had some of the most interesting/callous comments:

Lifesite comments

Yes, PP has just been hoping and praying for a shooter so they could get sympathy. Idiot. How ironic that a RW’er, who’s political party’s entire philosophy is predicated on dishonesty, would utter the phrase: “Tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.” It is precisely the lies told by the right, and Carly Fiorins in particular, that led to this shooting.

James O’Keefe wannabe, David Daleiden, the person responsible for the bogus Planned Parenthood video, had to admit on CNN that an image purportedly showing an aborted baby was actually a miscarriage. As If You Only News wrote:

Daleiden knowingly used a mother’s personal pictures of her miscarried son, which he stole from her by using them without permission, to misrepresent an aborted late-term, living fetus being prepared to have its organs harvested. Then, when pressed on it he excused his lying and theft by generally saying “Well it sorta looks like what an abortion could be.”

Well, as long as it “sorta looks like” what something “could be”, I’m sold; how about you? Now to the ridiculous and bogus “Black Babies” statements. Here are some FACTS to know, via NPR:

[Margaret] Sanger’s birth control movement did have support in black neighborhoods, beginning in the ’20s when there were leagues in Harlem started by African-Americans. Sanger also worked closely with NAACP founder W.E.B. DuBois on a “Negro Project,” which she viewed as a way to get safe contraception to African-Americans.

In 2014, the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research center, surveyed all known abortion providers, including Planned Parenthood clinics, in the U.S. (nearly 2,000) and found that 60 percent are in majority-white neighborhoods.

Margaret Sanger certainly had some questionable views, and in some ways was a detestable human being; but her opinions like many others’, were borne of the ignorance of the times. That’s not an excuse, it’s a fact. One thing she was right about:

image sanger

 

“No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her body. No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother.”

 

That is true regardless of race, nationality, or ethnicity. Now here’s a tidbit you won’t hear RW’ers echoing; Charisma News reports (as many might have guessed): 70 Percent of Women Who Have Had Abortions Call Themselves Christians. They write:

Fear of gossip and judgmental reactions routinely prevents churchgoing women who are considering an abortion from first seeking the counsel of pastors or others in their church, according to a new survey by an evangelical polling group.

The survey was conducted by LifeWay Research, associated with the Southern Baptist Convention, and sponsored by the Care Net network of anti-abortion pregnancy centers.

The survey found that seven in 10 women who had an abortion identified themselves as Christian. Breaking that down, Catholic women represented 27 percent; Protestant, 26 percent; and nondenominational, 15 percent. Among Protestants, the top three denominations represented among women who had abortions were Baptist (33 percent), Episcopal (6 percent), Church of Christ (4 percent).

It’s hardly a surprise that religious doctrines of “submit to your husband“, coupled with the determination of conservatives to provide no, or incorrect sex education, is a recipe for disaster. Maybe if religion practiced a little more “Judge not lest ye be judged”, and a little less “Let’s stone her”, we would have far fewer abortions. 

One final point for sex ignorant RW’ers:

baby vs tissue

1187819-Clipart-Of-A-Red-Rose-And-Black-And-White-Foliage-Border-Page-Rule-3-Royalty-Free-Vector-Illustration_zpsea82d6f2

cross posted at All Things Democrat

Leave a Comment

Filed under Politics, Religion, Religious Right, Reproductive Rights, Women

Not Just Trivial, TOO Trivial

roseA young woman named Cameron Schaeffer recently wrote a post for HuffPo’s blog titled: “The 3-Letter Word That Cuts Women Down Every Day“. While you might be expecting the word to be something crude or “sexist”, it is not; the word she’s talking about is too. Yes, you read that right, the word too.

Ms. Schaeffer writes of her self-described “epiphany”:

There is no proper way for a woman to cut her hair, let alone do anything right in this world. There seems to be an unobtainable one-millimeter-wide mark of perfection, and none of us can reach it. Everything is too this or too that. We see it every day in the tabloids. For example, one day a female celebrity is too revealing and the next day she is too matronly.

In my experience, I rarely hear too thrown around about men. You hear someone say, “He’s short,” but you seldom hear “too short.” I hear women and men alike each day describing women as too something. But what does it really mean when you call a woman too? I asked myself, “too what?” I have determined that too means you’re calling a woman too far away from your idyllic vision of what a woman should be.

Something as small as calling a woman’s dress too long or her muscles too built has a much larger social construct. With all the varying tastes and cultures in this world, it is impossible for a woman — or anyone, for that matter — to fulfill everyone’s criteria. And why is it our responsibility to satisfy them, anyway?

 

Merriam-Webster gives these three uses for the word too:

a :  to an excessive degree :  excessively <too large a house for us>
b :  to such a degree as to be regrettable <this time he has gone too far>
c :  very <didn’t seem too interested>
The word seems rather innocuous to me. Now I’m all for young women thinking about their role in the world, but honestly, this cultural critique is nonsense. She continues:
 
What makes me furious is the constant strain on females to find their unreachable perfect self. This realization really struck me when I figured out that I’ve never been satisfied with myself. My internal opinion is always that I’m too this or too that. I, like most women, have been deprived of self-satisfaction and appreciation because of this word and this attitude.
Most women deprived of self-satisfaction and appreciation because of the word too”? Seriously? Moving on:
 
Women are still objects to a disturbingly large number of people. If society continues on in this way, women will always be unfairly judged. But there are small and achievable steps we can take. We should call on both genders to cut the word too from their vocabulary when discussing women. If we ever want an end to the way females are put in boxes, this is the beginning of an important and tumultuous journey ahead.
 
I’ve grown weary of the constant refrain that “women are objectified”, as if someone is doing it to them; women do not become “objects” unless they allow it. Do you think professional female anchors dress like the women at Fox News? Do you think the women at Fox don’t know that? They trade on their appearance because it makes them money; and while I’m no psychologist, I’m pretty sure there’s some sort of weird self-validation going on there as well. Whether it’s music, magazines, movies, or commercials, there will always be women who objectify themselves; that is hardly men’s doing.
 
If there is one failure of feminism thus far, it is this: We are still not raising enough daughters who realize their self-worth isn’t located between their neck and their knees.
 
But, back to Ms. Schaeffer‘s post. The idea that the word too is somehow anti-women, and rarely used pertaining to men is ludicrous. We have enough gender issues to contend with; we don’t need to be fabricating new ones. I’m sorry, but this was about the most ridiculous post I’ve read from a woman. The whole premise is just too trivial.
 
1187819-Clipart-Of-A-Red-Rose-And-Black-And-White-Foliage-Border-Page-Rule-3-Royalty-Free-Vector-Illustration_zpsea82d6f2
 

1 Comment

Filed under Feminism, Men, Women