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

Gloria Steinem, Power Geezer

Lauren

From an interview on Alternet:

What is Gloria Steinem’s advice to young women these days?

To do “whatever they fucking well please,” America’s foremost feminist said, stabbing into poached eggs at a brunch-mobbed diner on a recent Sunday. “Ha ha ha! Have some fries.”

God, I love her.

46 thoughts on Gloria Steinem, Power Geezer

  2. man, isn’t she just the coolest lady on the planet? i mean, really. And she eats fries. She’s my hero.

  4. Further down in the article is this great quote:
    “In a general way, women become more radical as they get older. The pattern is that women are conservative when they’re young. That’s when there’s the most pressure on us to conform, when we’re potential child bearers and sex objects. And we lose power when we get older. Which is a very radicalizing experience.”
    There’s a wealth of wisdom in that statement.

    I remember Gloria Steinem from when I was a young girl (being almost 40 now). I loved her then and I love her now.

  5. *Sigh* Girl Crush. I’ve had many, but there’s something sweet about your first, and mine was Ms. Steinem.

  6. OT but I need some info – it’s Girl Scout Cookie time as I’m sure you are all aware. And I’m also sure that you all know they are under attack from various parts of the religious right wing.

    I know people who assume that the Girl Scouts are under the same leadership as the Boy Scouts, and they don’t want to support an organization that excludes homosexuals. I have read in various places that the Girl Scouts are in fact supportive of gay rights (not to mention that part of their mission is to teach leadership skills) but I need links.

    Thanks!

  7. Interesting interview. But whoa:

    Ms. Steinem said [of Hefner]. “Now he’s going around with four young women in their 20s, instead of just one. It’s sort of moslem, actually. And it’s pathetic.

    If, say, Michelle Malkin or Ann Coulter said this, y’all would flip out.

    Just saying.

  8. “In a general way, women become more radical as they get older. The pattern is that women are conservative when they’re young. That’s when there’s the most pressure on us to conform, when we’re potential child bearers and sex objects. And we lose power when we get older. Which is a very radicalizing experience.”

    Actually, I’ve always thought this was the opposite. College students seem more radical than older adults. Maybe that’s just my experience.

  10. Marian – I can honestly say that the older I get the more radical I get…not that I bought into a lot of the bullshit when I was younger, but yeah, especially as a teen the pressure to conform (and be “traditionally” beautiful, popluar etc.) was huge. As a young mother in my early twenties that pressure continued, but as I move through my thirties some of that has lessened – or (and this is, I think, more likely) I just don’t give a shit. And while I’m still a huge believer in dialogue and educating the misinformed, I find myself a lot more willing to call “bullshit” when I see it.

  12. Lynne–interesting. I guess different people have different experiences. My sister was fairly moderate/liberal in HS and college, went through a really “radical liberal” phase in law school–almost becoming a “1970’s” feminist thinker as well as going farther left than Democrat. Since graduating, working in her career, and having a child, she has moved more towards the middle again.

    Other women I’ve known were quite feminist (of the anti-marriage/kids variety, not the third-wave variety) until having kids or getting married.

    Then again, I know of conservatives/right-of-centers who have gone liberal as they aged, so perhaps people can go either way.

  13. Yes…Glory be to Gloria,

    I like it when the Feminists react violently towards the animal products, it really helps the right-wing male supremacists like myself in the job of recruiting more women hunters. Especially such heavy weight feminists…
    Stabbing a female product such as eggs from a female animal really reinforces the oppression of women…by its way of aligning them (women) with what they hate about their own oppressers. Manly robust Males.
    When men violently attack women’s bodies it can be minimized by male society and authorities when women do the same to their animal sisters. It aides men like myself who work so desperatly for a world of patriarchy. It also completley helps us men justify our hunting and killing the critters for fun, for sport and for Jesus. Although truthfully we do it for more homo-erotic reasons, I’m not comfortable with going over here…never the less it makes our excuses easy when women lash out at the animals.

    God Bless.

    Sports-manly yours,

    Philbert

  14. I know people who assume that the Girl Scouts are under the same leadership as the Boy Scouts, and they don’t want to support an organization that excludes homosexuals. I have read in various places that the Girl Scouts are in fact supportive of gay rights (not to mention that part of their mission is to teach leadership skills) but I need links.

    Here’s a Google search I did on the issue. The first link is about a chain letter, but try some of the others.

    If I’m not mistaken, the cookies are a huge part of the reason that the GSA is a lot more flexible than the BSA. The BSA has a lot of ties to military groups and whatnot, while the GSA is able to maintain its independence.

    And order some Thin Mints, dammit!

  16. Actually, I did find that quote a bit…jarring.

    But, I think it was in reference to Harems, which aren’t actually Koran-sanctioned. So, yeah, slur against a religious practice that doesn’t exist, I think we would have reacted poorly.

    But I realistically crush on people: they’re not gods and goddesses, they’re failuable human beings.

  18. If, say, Michelle Malkin or Ann Coulter said this, y’all would flip out.
    Just saying.

    I didn’t read the interview when I first saw this post; your comment is the first place I saw this quote. It is a fucked-up, racist, ignorant thing to say, and I appreciate you pointing it out to me. I think it’s safe to say that people treat their allies a bit more charitably than their enemies; I don’t think it’s true that racism among progressives is forgiven by other progressives. I can come up with two sensitivity-smackdowns on blogs over the past twenty-four hours that argue otherwise.

    Neither la Coulter nor la Malkin would ever say anything like this. They don’t believe that sexism exists unless it’s being practiced by actual Muslim and Arab people. When white Western men treat women shabbily, they actually provide further proof that feminists are insane.

    Marian – I can honestly say that the older I get the more radical I get…not that I bought into a lot of the bullshit when I was younger, but yeah, especially as a teen the pressure to conform (and be “traditionally” beautiful, popluar etc.) was huge. As a young mother in my early twenties that pressure continued, but as I move through my thirties some of that has lessened – or (and this is, I think, more likely) I just don’t give a shit. And while I’m still a huge believer in dialogue and educating the misinformed, I find myself a lot more willing to call “bullshit” when I see it.

    There are two competing cause-and-effect arguments here, both of which I believe to be true to some extent.

    Personal comfort tends to make people complacent. If your kid’s school’s textbooks are up to date, you’re less likely to care that the textbooks in the next district over are thirty years old. If your neighborhood is safe, you’re less likely to care that a neighborhood two miles away saw twelve shooting deaths in the previous year. And if some local politician can convince you that their lack of police protection and educational funding is necessary to maintain your relative wealth, you’re even less likely to become an activist on their behalf.

    However, personal security tends to make people less afraid of speaking out. If I know that I can write a letter to the editor without losing my job, I’ll do so. And if my society has tossed me onto the certain-age trash heap, I’ll be less likely to worry about saying or doing something unattractive.

  20. You know, if Ms. Steinem is going to use language like that, I don’t think she can reasonably expect anyone to listen to a thing she says. Intelligent people can express their opinions without the use of profanity.

    (Joking.)

  21. Neither la Coulter nor la Malkin would ever say anything like this. They don’t believe that sexism exists unless it’s being practiced by actual Muslim and Arab people. When white Western men treat women shabbily, they actually provide further proof that feminists are insane.

    If they were to say something like this, Coulter would be calling for the Playboy mansion to be invaded and Hefner converted or killed, and Malkin would be calling for the internment of all Muslims.

  23. Re: There is no way that Malkin or Coulter would say that, because whether you think Steinem was being racist or not, her point was that our country coddles patriarchs who think of themselves as sultans in charge of harems. Malkin and Coulter are interested in pushing the notion that Americans are superior, not the same, as everyone else.

  24. Piny and I have a history of disputative argumentation that has grown heated in the past, antigone. When someone I disagree with a lot shows chops, it behooves me to recognize it. And piny’s was a lot more this-is-unequivocally-bad than yours was.

  25. Malkin and Coulter are also known to be HUGE fans of Hefner and all pornography. They would never criticise him.

  27. Re: Thin Mints – my favorite (then come the carmel delites, and so on….) Thanks for the links, and any more that you all can think of would be welcome.

    Re: Comfort level….for myself, I find that having my son’s textbooks be up to date made me more concerned (not less) that the surrounding schools were as well. The same goes for safety. And, for the record, no, I did not grow up in a privaleged middle-class neighborhood in the elitist north east 🙂

  28. B Moe, here’s a link to a Coulter article defending the state’s right to ban most pornography; her attitude towards the material in question is obviously negative.

    Malkin had this to say about pretty much the entire sexualized culture, and again, she’s fervently negative. Now, the pornography references in this essay are about child porn; maybe she is all in favor of the Bang Bus and the Playboy mansion (while simultaneously decrying pretty much every other social change in the direction of greater sexual liberty), but I’m just not seeing it.

    I looked in vain for either woman to say anything positive about porn or Hugh Hefner; found zip. I did find some articles by Coulter ragging on Hef for agreeing with Democratic positions on sexual morality, but she didn’t really spell out whether she hated him or just didn’t like him for being a Democrat supporter.

    If you have something concrete to contradict any of this, I’d love to read it. Otherwise, you’re empirically full of crap.

  29. When this Steinem interview first came out, I distinctly remember her being roundly criticized for that comment, by feminists and other left-leaning folks. Just sayin’.

    But for the record, I’m with piny — it was a shitty remark, and she deserves to be criticized for it. But it doesn’t necessarily negate the value of everything else she has to say.

    And Shankar, I am glad to see you’re back in the comments!

  30. If you have something concrete to contradict any of this, I’d love to read it. Otherwise, you’re empirically full of crap.

    I was being sarcastic, but assuming I am full of crap is never a bad guess.

  32. I’m in the process of getting a group of ladies integrated into my field efforts for the upcoming Congressional campaign in my district.

    They’re all over 50. They’re all very steady-natured. And they are really, really ready to go to work. And while they are typically very pleasant to be with, you never, ever treat them lightly.

    There are 30 of them.

    Our Repug opponent doesn’t stand a chance… 😉

  33. Actually, I did find that quote a bit…jarring.

    It is a fucked-up, racist, ignorant thing to say

    it was a shitty remark, and she deserves to be criticized for it.

    I agree with everybody here that the comment is incredibly offensive. But I think the same is true for calling Evangelical Christians “fundies” and “wingnuts”. Granted, Christian blogs aren’t any nicer but that doesn’t make it right. Why the double standard?

    At least Steniem is consistent. She takes a clear stand against all religion. I’m not telling anybody here to like Christianity or Islam. By all means, criticize what you disagree with and don’t pull punches. But on a blog where the word “fundies” makes a regular appearance, and “Christian” is an assumed insult, it hardly seems fair to harp on Steniem for doing the same thing.

  34. We don’t call all Evangelican Christians “fundies” and “wingnuts.” There are ideological differences even within the category of Christians commonly referred to as “Evangelicals.” Nor are all Christians or all Evangelical Christians conservative, reactionary, or Republican.

    …But you know what? You’re not even being honest here, so it’s pointless to respond to you.

  35. I see no reason to disbelieve Malkin, but considering that Coulter had no problem dating Bob Guccione, one can take her statements with a grain of salt. 😉 Rule #1 with Coulter is she will say anything to get attention, and actually believing her own shit is beside the point.

  36. I get accused of being a wingnut on a fairly regular basis, I think it is funny, tell the truth. Like moonbat, kind of a silly way to insult someone. I use fundie because I am too lazy to type out fundamentalist. Do you consider fundamentalist to be offensive? How would you label someone who believes in a strictly literal interpretation of the Bible?

  37. I agree with everybody here that the comment is incredibly offensive. But I think the same is true for calling Evangelical Christians “fundies” and “wingnuts”. Granted, Christian blogs aren’t any nicer but that doesn’t make it right. Why the double standard?

    In the US, Muslims are in the minority and have no power to shape policy.

    Whereas fundagelicals have their hooks very deep into the power structure and have shaped policy that affects everyone — even though they have not been elected to power.

  38. Echoing piny, I don’t think I’ve seen either of the bloggers use “Christian” or “evangelical Christian” as an insult, and I don’t know of anyone on this blog–Lauren, Jill, or the commenters–for whom “Christian” is an assumed insult. That would be, um, stupid.

    “Fundy” is perfectly legit as far as I’m concerned; that term refers to specific kind of Christian who tend to ignore the surrounding realities and consider themselves to be a higher life-form. It does not, as David assumes, refer to all Christians; just the morons. I’m sure that you would prefer “fundy” to my preferred term, FuckingMentalists, which has the added benefit of describing exactly what leaders of the “Christian” fundamentalist movement are.

  39. Hmm…previous comment awaiting moderation…does that mean I should refrain from using the word “fuck”?

    [Feel free to delete this comment and respond via e-mail to randomliberal[at]email[period]com]

  41. And, fundamentalists I have known have no problem referring to themselves as fundamentalists. They tend to mislike the term “fundie” however. Not that it stops me from using it….

  42. In the US, Muslims are in the minority and have no power to shape policy.

    Whereas fundagelicals have their hooks very deep into the power structure and have shaped policy that affects everyone — even though they have not been elected to power.

    Well, that, and no one here seems confused as to the multitude of beliefs that fall under “Christian.” Lumping all Muslims together–as Steinem’s use of the term did–is like saying that Rev. Pat Robertson and Rev. Cecil Williams are the same. Actually, it’s like saying that Rev. Cecil Williams doesn’t exist.

    But I have another problem with its comparisons. The thing is–and I get that this is what she was trying to point towards–the Playboy mansion isn’t Muslim on any level. Playboy and Hugh, and the understanding of women that they represent, is quintessentially American. It’s our fault, our problem, our baby, the natural conclusion of native attitudes towards women and sexuality. And saying, “He’s such a misogynist bastard he’s almost a Muslim,” when you really mean, “We need to put our own house in order,” allows us to shove some of that culpability onto other cultures.

  43. Playboy and Hugh, and the understanding of women that they represent, is quintessentially American. It’s our fault, our problem, our baby, the natural conclusion of native attitudes towards women and sexuality.

    This is where some of you start to lose me. If you mean native attitudes in a historical sense, they seem to me to be much more Puritan than hedonistic, and traditionally have repressed recreational sex as sinful. I would say Hef is a reaction against the native attitudes towards women and sexuality. Granted the traditional Christian view has women subservient to man, but it is usually a committed partnership based on long term stability and emotional attachment, rather than a purely physical one that leads to objectification.

    And let me say I am speaking in hugely general terms and don’t want to start a flame war. I am NOT a fundamentalist and am not advocating any belief system. Just asking a question is all.

  44. You’re not even being honest here, so it’s pointless to respond to you.

    Is that really necessary? You can disagree without calling me dishonest. I didn’t come here and start throwing insults around. I’m pointing out what I think is a double standard and knee-jerk reaction against Christians.

    I use fundie because I am too lazy to type out fundamentalist. Do you consider fundamentalist to be offensive?

    Oh c’mon. Let me know the next time you hear a Christian call himself a fundie. Case in point:

    They tend to [d]islike the term “fundie” however. Not that it stops me from using it.

    You’re dodging the issue. My point is that you don’t exactly tip-toe around to make sure not to misrepresent or oversimplify their beliefs but you’re quick to cry racist when somebody does the same to Islam. Could it be that you’re more sensitive toward Muslims because “fundies” are Republicans? Just a guess.

  45. Trust me, David. Fundy Muslims get it as hard as fundy Christians do here. The difference is that Ms. Steinem didn’t bother to specify which Muslims she was talking about. She painted them all with the same brush, even though not all Muslims believe that polygamy is OK. Not kosher.

    Also, I submit that it’s not possible to oversimplify the beliefs of fundamentalists (of any religion).

  46. B moe, I would refer to someone who believes in a strictly literal interpretation of the bible as a bibliolatrist. Also, deliberately ignorant, but I don’t usually say that in debate, as it tends to cut off said debate. Bibliolatrist though, I stand by.

Comments are currently closed.