November 21, 2005

Democrats have a long, long way to go to convince me that they care about feminism.

Atrios links to my post asking feminists to care about the sexual harrassment of women -- specifically in this case, me -- on the web:
I saw this the other day because my Google Desktop is for some reason obsessed with Ann Althouse. Waaah! Why won't feminists speak up for me!!! wahhh!

The underlying issue is, of course, a real one. Critics across the political spectrum (and of both genders) are quick to jump to use sexist and sexual language when criticizing women. Still, the "I can ignore it until it happens to me" game is annoying.
My question is why Atrios assumes I haven't been a feminist all along? Did he read enough of my work to make this assumption? It's quite wrong and offensive. I'd like him to prove to me now that it isn't the case that he's an example of the sort of person on the left who thinks that women who don't hew to liberal dogma deserve sexual harassment. These are the people who sold out feminism to protect Bill Clinton not so long ago. People of the left ought to see the need to prove to people like me that they actually care about feminism, as opposed to partisan politics, which, for Democrats, is concurrent with feminism often enough that they may imagine that their lack of real interest in feminism won't show. In my case, I don't care about partisan politics, but I do care about feminism, and I have a long record of writing to prove it.

Atrios, who doesn't deign to link to my blog as he discusses me, sets off a spate of comments that is now over 800. Let's see how his folks respond, and perhaps we can get a sense of how the left really processes feminism:
Feminism is OK in its place.

Feminism is OK in its place.
in the kitchen.

Feminism is OK in its place.
in the kitchen.
Hey, yeah! Fetch me an eclair!

"Remember back last February when Kevin Drum wrote about why there are so few women in political blogging?"
Because mainly ugly chicks and dudes are interested in politics. Pasty greasy faced (I saw the picture here and shivered in revulsion) fish belly white thighs and guts are not attractive.
That is why Pam Anderson can play a ditz and ROLL in cash.
Plus most Democrat women are real bow wows. One thing the Republicans have is a whole stable of hot blonde white women they can roll out for tv.
Who really wants to f**k her for her mind anyway?
But as an old black buddy of mine told me " Put a flag over her head and f**k her for old glory!
That's patriotism!

Hey, yeah! Fetch me an eclair!
You have to remove your pants first before I entertain that command.

Feminism is OK in its place.
So are Negroes. Once either gets uppity there's gotta be hell to pay.

but she looks like a man

It's pretty f**king awful to be a feminist, actually. You get called names by Rush Limbaugh and friends, you get to be ridiculed in the mainstream media and if the wingnut sources are anything to come by you are responsible for white women disappearing in Aruba, for the falling birthrate, for every divorce that has taken place and the demise of the Western civilization. You are even responsible for increased alcohol use among young women and male depression. In fact, you are pretty goddamnawful.
Yeah, but Echidne, every so often you get to use the Courts to beat the sons of bitches senseless and make them give you large amounts of money for having screwed you over. And that counts too.....
Well, I'm not one eighth of the way into Atrios's comments, and no one has shown up to beat back this sexist crap. Atrios managed to summon up worse misogynists than Charles Johnson did. I hope he's proud of his people.

Democrats have a long, long way to go to convince me that they care at all about feminism.

UPDATE: Atrios has now linked to this post, but he doesn't answer my questions and doesn't correct his false assumption that I have only recently adopted feminism and only to serve my personal interests. He doesn't condemn his despicable commenters. He just says I'm missing the "irony." Yes, yes, I lack an appropriate sense of humor. Sexist jokes galore, and I ought to just learn to laugh about it. He seems to lack a shred of sensibility about how pathetically retro-male chauvinist that is. I'll say it again: Democrats have a long, long way to go to convince me that they care at all about feminism.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Atrios (AKA Duncan Black) adds some more material his post that links to me:
...to answer Althouse's question, the reason I assumed that she hadn't "been a feminist all along" was because she wrote:
Are there any feminists around to see when it's happening and say a little something?
Meaning, quite clearly, that feminists are other people. Had she written, "as a feminist, I think it's important to point these things out" or something similar taking ownership of the label I (and proud feminist Echidne) wouldn't have responded the way I did.
That's a weak attempt at a close reading argument. If that were true, if I wrote "Doesn't anyone care?" it would mean that I didn't care. Both Edchidne and Black didn't pick up the allusion in the title of my post. "Can I get a feminist?" was meant to invoke "Can I get a witness?" Those who say "Can I get a witness?" are themselves also witnesses.

More from Black:
I of course haven't devoted my life to reading the entirety of Althouse's body of work, on her blog and elsewhere, though I certainly am no stranger to it. If Althouse would like to point me to something she's written which, for example, happened "say a little something" when it wasn't directed at her I'll happily make the correction.
I could send him three law review articles. Or I could spend three hours going back over the blog to put together the argument that I've consistently and frequently taken feminist positions on this blog. Or I could get affidavits from people who know me personally avowing to the fact that Althouse has been openly feminist as long as they've known her. What is this, discovery?

The point is that Black chose to make an assumption about me and assert something about me without checking it. I could shout triumphantly: Duncan Black doesn't fact check!

Or I could return his treatment in kind and assert: Duncan Black is an anti-feminist! Because I, of course, haven't devoted my life to reading the entirety of Duncan Black's body of work, on his blog and elsewhere, though I certainly am no stranger to it, but if Duncan Black would like to point me to something he's written which proves that he isn't an anti-feminist, I'll be glad to issue a correction.

Is that how we're doing assertions of fact about individuals now?

Black adds something that substitutes for chiding his commenters:
I agree that it's understandable if people find ironic jokes about racism or sexism genuinely inappropriate or offensive. Sometimes those jokes are almost indistinguishable from genuine racism and sexism, no matter the intent of the person making them, and I'm not going to tell people what should or shouldn't offend them.
That's the old sorry-if-you-were-offended faux apology. I'd like to ask Black to do one more thing. Compare the comments made after he did his post calling attention to me for crying about something with the comments made on the post he made one day earlier laughing at a Roger L. Simon for crying about something. I called attention to that post of his:
Atrios has unleashed the commenters on Roger. I can almost empathize. It's actually a good opportunity to compare the behavior of lefty and righty commenters. The lefties, in this sample, are all over the place, in "open thread" mode, despite the assigned topic.
The righty commenters referred to were those at Little Green Footballs, who were extremely viciously toward me in blatant sexual language. Now, we can see how the Atrios commenters acted in two similar situations, with the difference being the sex of the two chosen targets. Look at the difference, Duncan and all those of you who think the left adheres to feminist values.

I repeat: Democrats have a long, long way to go to convince me that they care about feminism.

IN THE COMMENTS: Commenters strain to distance Atrios from his vile comment thread: "Atrios can only do to his comments what Haloscan allows him to do. And when he has a dayjob and a blog and a family, there is only so much he can do when he is regularly gets 300+ comments to a post."

I answer:
You and others are missing the point. I am asking him to condemn the sexist comments, not monitor or censor everything. I'm asking him to show that he cares, that he is some sort of feminist. I'm just sick and tired of liberals and lefties who assume it's taken for granted that they care about feminism. Atrios is a channel for putrid sexist invective. It's irrelevant that the commenters had a smile on their face when they wrote it or think they are cute when they say it. Try living in the real world and speaking like that. It doesn't work. The fact is Atrios and his defenders are more interested in getting him off the hook than in looking to the infection of bigotry in their own house. Why is he not appalled that this is the "community" he's nurturing on his blog? My theory is he doesn't care about feminism, only his side of partisan politics. I'm calling him on that, and he and his defenders have yet to respond to that. The lack of response is in itself instructive. He doesn't care! Feminists, disaggregate yourself from these folks. Why don't you?

217 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 217 of 217
Thers said...

HaloJonesFan, stop being a clown. Althouse wants to say a post that includes the sentence "Democrat women are bow-wows" constitutes evidence of Democratic attitudes towards women. That makes no sense on its face.

Ann Althouse is embarrassing herself, and clearly prefers sycophancy to actual respect. She is most certainly not behaving in any acceptable way for a professor.

The evidence is here, at the request of wildaboutharrie: Ann Althouse needs to retract.

And she knows it.

reader_iam said...

nTodd:

"Serious" was NOT referring to your attitude on the topic.

It was specifically and ONLY referring to the language you were using in discussing it. That's all. Perhaps "serious" wasn't the right word: I had no attention of repeating the series of words, statements, or imagery you chose that's unnecessarily, gratuitously, and deliberately offensively and that take away from the point you're trying to make. That is, if you're actually interested in persuading others, or at least having a reasonable conversation with them.


I didn't say a thing about your attitude to the subject. Whether serious or unserious, I'd still make the same point.

Personally, I'd have guessed that in terms of attitude you're probably a little bit of both.

reader_iam said...

And, by the way, I think I've generally been pretty respectful, if sometimes vehement, in addressing people's points, acknowledging them when they have validity (as in some of Thersites'), and not engaging in ad hominem attacks or ridiculing them.

I guess that makes me too bourgeois for words.

(And what the heck does seven years of college have to do with anything?)

ntodd said...

if you're actually interested in persuading others, or at least having a reasonable conversation with them.

Not interested in either in this case. I leave the "persuasion" to the likes on My Darling Annie, and this whole tempest in a teacup has no potential for reasonable conversation, so why should I put out?

I was just talking to my mom about this on the phone, actually. She has never liked my use of naughty, disrespectful language (though since I started blogging, she's become strangely more accepting of it), but even she thought the reaction here was rather... humorous.

ntodd said...

(And what the heck does seven years of college have to do with anything?)

Animal House. I received a copy off my Amazon Wishlist, and I was running a string of post titles with quotes from the movie. I figured everybody would know a class Belushi line, but I see my elitist, literary allusion was lost on some folks...

ntodd said...

She is most certainly not behaving in any acceptable way for a professor.

Well, to be fair, I'm not either. But I think the rules are different for adjuncts, or in the telecom biz. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

reader_iam said...

Saw the movie multiple times when it first came out ... haven't watched it since. A lot of water over the dam since then.

I take it you've watched more recently than 25 years ago.

KCFleming said...

YG Brown's comments may have had some validity, if for a brief moment, but, I had read the entire thread in question (more than once) and can safely pronounce it certifiable Crap, and I further find that its status as a cesspool remained undisturbed (and unchallenged) for most of the additional comments (clearly, Atrios followers are not the most cerebral one will find on blogs). NTodd, for example.

Happy?

ntodd said...

most of the additional comments (clearly, Atrios followers are not the most cerebral one will find on blogs). NTodd, for example.

So wait, now it's bad for me to not act cerebral? Wish I'd gotten that memo years ago. Thanks, pogo, for setting me straight. I promise to once again be the best elitist intellectual I can be. It's so hard to keep up with fashion...

The likes of NTodd and Thersites are typical of the Atrios fever swamp. They celebrate the demeaning of any target Black trots out in their pavlovian manner and to these nuts, the offended voice is the troll.

Actually, we don't celebrate demeaning any target Atrios selects. We choose our own. You seem to really not understand the likes of our community, just like the folks who derided our gathering in Philly. It's not about Duncan. It's about a bunch of people with similar interests who have discovered each other through a wicked cool medium. And we like each other.

This is why when I tell watertiger to fetch me an eclair, she has myriad possible responses, all of them loving, though many would seem rather derogatory to an outsider.

reader_iam said...

Wow, WildAboutHarrie:

That was a nice thing with which to send me into the holiday frenzy (not sure everyone would agree, though).

Especially since the comment to which it was a response was actually written while I was actually feeling a little snide.

Thanks.

Chagrined and Mollified

(Say, does anyone normal actually use those words anymore? Just wondering.)

Dominion said...

One thing has become very clear...Ann has taken intellectual dishonesty to a whole new low.

ntodd said...

Just Passing Through - Yes, dear. Would you like me to get you another drink? It's no trouble: I'm going to refill my glass of pinot.

Bas-O-Matic said...

You live there because you're accepted there as long as you stay on topic.

This demonstrates a complete and thourough knowledge of the nature of Atrios' comments. Because they always stay on topic. And NTodd never posts off topic. Ever.

Thers said...

Ann 'cherry picked' some comments to illustrate her overall point. Thersites ignores her overall point and repeated suggestions that he address it in favor of taking an offended tone over whether the comments in question individually buttress her point sufficiently and demanding she address his spin. On her blog no less.


Uh, that's nonsense. Her "overall point" doesn't stand if her examples don't support it, and they don't. How old are you?

Althouse contends the thread in question is sexist and that she is attacked personally on sexist grounds. She can't prove this beyond saying that she just "believes it." All she can do is produce examples which DISPROVE her point once seen in context -- and one of them is absurd on its face.

You apparently believe that Althouse can say anything she wants about anyone and it will be true simply because she says it.

You and her other sycophants are utter hypocrites. You lie, smear, and whine. You become apoplectic when it is suggested she is not a feminist, but you find it acceptable for her to single out individuals and call them sexists for entirely ridiculous reasons.

Althouse needs to apologize to the people she falsely and publicly called sexists. Whether that is hard for her to do or not, she needs to be an adult and do it.

KCFleming said...

Reading thersites' repeated demands on Althouse is like having a colonoscopy.

Only without the fun parts.

Nim said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Ann Althouse said...

Pogo: My thoughts exactly. The repetition here is absurd. I've already answered everything I intend to. And with that, I will put this thread out of its misery.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 217 of 217   Newer› Newest»