In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Month: January 2008

Help John Find the -ism

Sweet Jesus.

Are women, on average, the same as men? Emotionally? Psychologically? In the way they approach problems and solutions? In the way they handle human relationships? When it comes to showing emotion? Is the charge “sexism” because someone is saying there is a difference between men and women or because someone is saying that the supposed difference makes women less qualified to be president, or both? (What if a female candidate were to say that the differences between the sexes make women MORE qualified than men – or at least her status as a woman makes her uniquely qualified – would that be sexist too?) Now take the word “woman” out of it altogether. Is it wrong for a candidate to say that their opponent is emotional, empathetic, and strives to settle differences peacefully, and that those aren’t qualities we need in a commander in chief during wartime? Is it okay to make those charges if you leave the word “woman” out of it? Then again, Edwards did leave the word woman out of it, but since his target was a woman, you could argue that it was implied. So is it okay to make those charges against a man who is emotional, empathetic and all the rest? Or is that sexist too, or even homophobic?

…

Introducing…

bitch8.jpg

The Reproductive Justice and Gender special coverage section at Alternet, edited by yours truly.

I’ve just started work on the section, so I’m still getting my grounding and figuring everything out. But I’m very, very excited about it, and I think it’ll be a great opportunity to showcase the many stories, blog posts and organization efforts promoting reproductive freedom and gender equality. I’m hoping that the section will be a good platform to highlight traditionally marginalized voices in feminist communities.

I’m going to spend the next few weeks reaching out to bloggers, writers and organizations whose work I think deserves greater visibility. If you’re a pro-choice blogger, writer, or organization member, please feel free to email me with links to your work and permissions to reproduce it on Alternet. If you’re a reader and you come across something for the section, send it my way. (You can send stuff to the address listed in the About Jill section, or jill -at- alternet -dot- org).

I’m curious to hear from all of you: What would you like to see covered in the Repro Justice section? What kinds of information and resources would you find helpful?

And while you’re over there, sign up for the Reproductive Justice and Gender weekly newletter.

Clinton takes New Hampshire; MoDo gets out the knife

Clinton won the New Hampshire primary yesterday, proving that rumors of her demise were greatly exaggerated. Which is encouraging, if only from the perspective of someone who lives in a state with a late primary: the whole damn thing doesn’t have to be over after one small state votes, or even two. Some of the rest of us might like a shot at actually having a say in who runs. ‘Cause FSM knows it’s not like my New York vote in the general election is going to sway anything.

Jeff Fecke looked at the support Clinton got from women in New Hampshire, which was substantially more than she got in Iowa, and concluded that the overt misogyny that appeared this week (yes, I’m looking at you, John Edwards), what with the “crying” clusterfuck and some of the nastiness in the debate, may have motivated female voters to say, “Oh, HELL no,” and turn out for her. I’m inclined to agree.

In any event, turnout was huge, aided no doubt by unseasonably warm weather and the importance of the 2008 election in determining the direction of the country. And in New Hampshire, you can register at the polls, so there’s no obstacle to casting your vote if you suddenly got interested (or finally felt you had a stake) in the outcome.

And then we have MoDo, who’s still flogging the “manipulative tears” angle:

As Spencer Tracy said to Katharine Hepburn in “Adam’s Rib,” “Here we go again, the old juice. Guaranteed heart melter. A few female tears, stronger than any acid.”

Shut up, MoDo.

Dear Elaine

Please folks, I know this is a loaded issue, but please no more comments suggesting Elaine cause harm to herself. And if you do go to her site, please be respectful. I don’t want to have to put all comments on moderation, and I really don’t want to have to edit any comments, but if I hear another suggestion that Elaine jump off of a high place or any references to defenestration or self-harm, I’ll get pissed myself. I like you all very, very much and I don’t want to have to be MEAN to you.

I regret the day I ever used the term “happy pills” within your hearing. You don’t know me, you don’t know my blog, Super Babymama, and you obviously don’t know about my penchant for being flippant about important matters.

This is the way I operate. This is how I navigate painful territory. I guess to make you “happy” I should have first talked about the last year I’ve lived through, starting out in intensive care in the hospital and then, oh I don’t know, finding my roommate dead in his bed of a heroin overdose, and having such severe panic attacks that I had to stop driving my car and couldn’t sleep for days on end and was snapping on everybody in snapping distance. I supposed I should have gone on at length about my year, my overwhelming fears for my Wayward Eldest Daughter’s safety and well-being. I guess you, Elaine, have a right to hear all the details of her hospitalization after being assaulted on the beach in Venice. All of this, of course, being a way of saying that yeah, Elaine, I have had serious panic attacks and stress this last year. I have been scared approximately 300 days out of 365. I have needed sleep. I have been worried about my health. I’ve been Depressed, and it hasn’t motivated me to start any revolutions or political movements or write any symphonies.

But you just cannot get over the fact that I used the term “happy pills.” It’s like an obsession with you. And you won’t stop blogging about it.

Ok Elaine, I apologize. They are not “happy pills.” In fact, the very existence of them, and my need for them, is about the unhappiest thing I can imagine. Ok, satisfied now? And if you are, then DROP IT.

Charming.

Perhaps, John, when the press comes sniffing around looking for a quote from you about how one of your rivals — you know, the girl — had an “emotional outburst” and What It All Means, you might want to think about the message your response will send to female voters:

ABC News’ David Muir, Raelyn Johnson and Sunlen Miller Report: Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., on the tail end of his 36-hour campaigning marathon in New Hampshire on day before the primary vote, reacted to rival Sen. Hillary Clinton’s emotional moment Monday.

Edwards offered little sympathy and pounced on the opportunity to question Clinton’s ability to endure the stresses of the presidency.

“I think what we need in a commander-in-chief is strength and resolve, and presidential campaigns are tough business, but being president of the United States is also tough business,” Edwards told reporters Laconia, New Hampshire.

Earlier in the day, Clinton became emotional when speaking to a group of voters in Portsmouth, New Hampshire….

Edwards jumped on the chance to express his readiness to face the strenuous demands of the presidency: “What I know is I’m prepared for that and I’m in this fight for the middle class and the future of this country for the long haul, through the conventions, straight to the White House.”

Well, I suppose it’s something that he didn’t tell her to iron his shirt.

And here comes Elizabeth to cover his ass:

However, in an interview with ABC News’ David Muir, Elizabeth Edwards offered more compassion than her husband. She noted that everyone on the campaign trail can relate to how grueling the task can be. In the end, Elizabeth Edwards did not pass on the political opportunity and added that voters will decide whether or not they want to see watery eyes.

Later, at another campaign stop, Edwards appeared to adopt his wife’s more sympathetic tone.

“These campaigns are very grueling,” he said, “they’re tough and difficult affairs, running for president is a tough process.”

You know what else is a tough process? Overcoming your ingrained sexism and not taking the bait when a reporter wants you to agree that a woman is too emotional to be President, John. Perhaps you should give it a try. Observe:

During a campaign stop at Jake’s Coffee in New London, New Hampshire, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was also asked to comment about Clinton’s teary moment.

“I didn’t see what happened,” he said, but added, “I know this process is a grind. So that’s not something I care to comment on.”

Standing up to gasbags like Bill Donohue is tough, too, John, but you couldn’t manage that, either.

via.