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

5 things that are wrong with this way of thinking

“This woman-hating world needs dash of chivalry” by Laurent Le Pierrès in The Chronicle Herald.

  1. ‘But my instincts still tell me it’s not right for a lady to be left standing while a gentleman sits.’ It’s not instinct telling a man to give up his bus seat for a woman, it’s social conditioning. And as much as it’s nice to be given a bus seat, it’s not so nice when someone’s doing it because of that same social conditioning which has harmed you in a thousand little ways.
  2. ‘And no gal would want him to.’ If ‘no gal’ would want to be given a seat, (which I don’t accept, lots of pregnant and disabled women, for instance, would need that seat irrespective of your motive in giving it up) in what way is doing so prioritising women and their wishes? That’s right, it’s not really about women at all, it’s about the seat giver-upperer’s internal comfort.
  3. ‘Women (and children) receive priority over men during mass evacuations or hostage dramas. On TV, anyway.’ …
  4. ‘Why? Because they still do not have it as easy as men, even in this day and age.’ You know what men could do to make women’s lives as easy as men’s? Stop oppressing us. Give us that equal pay and representation, let us live our lives. ‘A touch of gallantry’ is a condescending smokescreen allowing you to feel better while doing nothing of substance. You’re not making it easier by perpetuating a system like chivalry.
  5. ‘Women are so undervalued everywhere else on the planet that I think we should overcompensate here in the West.’ So many kinds of no.

I get so frustrated with this way of thinking, because, to mix metaphors, you can see the tipping point where it went off the rails. Because you know the person in question wants to do right by women, they just went hugely off track. Respect for women means respecting our wants, irrespective of your ideas of what’s best for us. It means making our lives easier through substantial change rather than through “courtesies” that make you feel good and make us feel less than. It means working for that everywhere and constantly.

Via Anna once more – that woman is on the ball!

Good Ideas Gone Bad

This letter to the New York Times Ethicist column made me see red this morning:

Our small nonprofit, the Opportunity Fund for Developing Countries, offers scholarships to African boys and girls who agree to keep up their grades, stay out of trouble and refrain from pregnancy. When a 20-year-old orphan we’ve supported for many years had a baby, we revoked her scholarship. (Significantly, we have never dropped a male’s scholarship for impregnating a female.) Now she wants to return to school. We’d like to readmit her to our program, but won’t that set a precedent? DEB DAY OLIVIER, SALT LAKE CITY

To restore this girl’s scholarship may well set a precedent, and I think it should. As you seem to realize, to apply this rule only to one sex is strikingly unfair and violates your own agreement with the students. What’s needed is a new policy, one with a better response to young people’s lives than “just say no babies.”

By definition, nobody welcomes an unwanted pregnancy. As Cynthia Lloyd, an authority on population and education issues and a lead author of the book “Growing Up Global: The Changing Transitions to Adulthood in Developing Countries,” put it in an e-mail exchange, “Obviously in Africa, many young women who get pregnant have not necessarily made that choice willingly or with any control.” I admire your wish to help these students avoid obstacles to education, like too-early parenthood, but I admire even more your reluctance to let an imperfect policy inflexibly applied thwart a young woman’s desire for an education and a better life.

What form should that new policy take? Here I defer to educators and experts in family planning. Lloyd suggests one that you might consult: Codou Diaw, executive director of the Forum for African Women Educationalists, an N.G.O. operating throughout the continent from its headquarters in Nairobi.

When you restore this girl’s scholarship, as I hope you will, you can announce your intention to change course. It is commendable to gauge how effectively your policies serve your ends, and to amend or abandon those that are ineffectual.

UPDATE: Olivier told me by e-mail that they did not continue this girl’s scholarship but that she may reapply next year.

Just, wow — because not setting a precedent is more important than helping a 20-year-old girl who has few resources and just had a baby? Disgusting.

Friday Fun-Reads

All things frivolous to make you happy this Friday:

My current favorite interior design blog. I’m in the midst of re-doing my apartment, and Dept. of the Interior and my just-discovered Domino Magazine (RIP) pool on Flickr have been my best friends.

Chanel goes Gaga.

Golden Girls: How One TV Show Turned a Generation of American Boys into Homosexuals. You’re welcome.

The beards of Mad Men.

Misspelled Tattoos, via Instaboner. I still cherish the episode of Sorority Life when one of the sisters, Julie, decided to get “JEWELZ” tattooed on her back, with a giant image of a diamond. Tattoo guy spelled it “JEWLEZ.” Amazing.

Just Food

Just Food: Where Locavores Get It Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly by James E. McWilliams
(Little, Brown)

Say what you want about publishers, but they know how to sell a book.

Let’s say a manuscript ended up on an editor’s desk with a title like Some More Things You Need to be Aware of About Our Food System or Why Aquaponics are Great. Boring! They’d toss it aside, right? Or at least send it back to the author with a request for a different angle.

But what if that same manuscript landed on that same desk with the words “Where Locavores Get It Wrong” splashed across the cover sheet? If it called the “eat local” ethic “not only pragmatically unachievable but simplistically smug” and called itself “an attack on the food world’s sacred cow”? Why, that editor would spit out their organic spinach-on-nine-grain-whole-wheat cibatta sandwich and start drawing up a contract!

Okay, I’m probably being unfair. Perhaps the birth of Just Food: Where Locavores Get it Wrong and How We Can Truly Eat Responsibly didn’t go quite like that. But I’m always skeptical of everything-you-know-is-wrong books – and James McWilliams’ polemic against the locavore movement is so full of questionable assumptions and faulty logic that it’s hard not to be suspicious of his motives.

The premise of the book is this: eating local isn’t enough, in and of itself, to solve our broken food system. Although it feels good to shop at farmers’ markets and subscribe to CSA boxes, there are many other factors that need to be addressed before problems with food production can be solved.

Sounds… obvious, doesn’t it?

Not in the world McWilliams seems to be living in. Although he claims, over and over again, that his goal isn’t to bash locavores for the sake of bashing locavores, he makes some pretty stunning assumptions about them. Here’s a list of things he seems to believe about people who support local agriculture:

1. They have zero experience with farming, and thus have no idea what it takes to grow and raise food;

Read More…Read More…

On the Virginia “Trust Women” license plate

I hear from my friends at Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia that they made their goal of 350 license plates. I won’t lie, I was a little worried about this, so I’m delighted. Yay, PPAV and yay, pro-choice Virginians!

On Wednesday, January 27, pro-choice activists from around the state of Virginia stepped up and put Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia over their goal of 350 pre-paid applications for the ‘Trust Women/Respect Choice’ license plate! Because of their generosity, both a House and Senate version of the license plate bill will be heard in the Virginia General Assembly. To date, PPAV has received 362 pre-orders and continues to see applications roll in. Folks interested in purchasing a plate can still do so at www.ppav.org. In the coming weeks, advocates will be called upon to contact their legislators in support of both HB 1108 and SB 704. Thank you for all of your support in this effort!

Support GRITtv

Just wanted to spread the word for our friends at GRITtv. We’ve posted their segments on here a few times, including Jill’s appearances, and I think it’s important to keep supporting media as much as we can. Here’s the post from GRITtv’s blog:

We’re sure you’ve heard about the ending of Air America Radio. We’re sorry to see our friends and officemates go, and wish them the best. We’re also stuck in a tight spot. GRITtv has broadcast from the Air America studios from the start, but now have to find a new home. It’s not going to be cheap! We’re looking at nearly $50,000 in moving expenses, equipment purchases, and cost increases, and we have to raise it fast.

Every donation you make will be matched dollar for dollar by Free Speech TV, and will go to helping us move to new studio and office space to continue bringing you your GRITtv fix with as little interruption as possible. We know we are going to end up with even better space and an even better show for you all. We’ve got other new, exciting features coming soon as well.

Every contribution helps. We appreciate all your support in helping us make GRITtv even better.

Breaking: Jury Convicts Scott Roeder of First Degree Murder

After deliberating for 37 minutes, a jury has found Scott Roeder, the murderer of abortion provider Dr. George Tiller, guilty as charged. He now faces a mandatory life sentence with consideration for parole after 25 years. The prosecution is aiming for 50 years without parole.

Dr. Tiller is still dead, and abortion providers and clinic workers are still living in fear, so it’s a little difficult for me to celebrate in a moment like this. But what I do feel is intense relief.

Consider this an open thread.