COMMENTS: 80
Vaginas, V-Day and Anti-Violence Activism: Three Things Conservatives Wish Would Disappear
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Reproductive Justice headlines via email.
Now I know what you're thinking: But those two things are very different! It's true, they are. Vaginas do so much good for the world and violence against women doesn't do much good at all. Vaginas give pleasure and give birth, and violence against women is about punishing women for just that. Oh wait, that's the connection. Vaginas (and reproductive and sexual capacity in general) make society want to control women, and violence is the tool often used in service of that agenda. Playwright Eve Ensler made this connection many years ago after writing her famous and quite frankly funny play "The Vagina Monologues". The rampant misogyny that drives people to be afraid to discuss female bits without fear and shame also drives violence against women. So why not use the play's popularity to raise money to fight violence against women, and simultaneously educate people about these connections? And do it on Valentine's Day, to keep the "V" thing going and because people are surrounded by reminders of ladyparts everywhere they turn by the red and pink hearts that proliferate on Valentine's Day. Who could object to fighting rampant misogyny?
Well, it turns out that rampant misogynists object. Which makes sense -- you can't really have rampant misogyny without the misogynists, and nor can you expect them to give up their worldview that easily. Anti-feminist women's organizations (Yes, you'd think that's a contradiction in terms, but some women find sister-bashing quite the profitable enterprise.) have made a sport out of protesting the various campus productions of "The Vagina Monologues" that help raise money and awareness every year.
The Independent Women's Forum, along with Concerned Women for America, takes the lead, and has established a "Take Back The Date" counter-event, based on the argument that admitting one has a vagina and attracting dates are mutually exclusive activities. They have some success with this argument, though it's hard to say where they're finding women who think men would rather ask them out if they believe a) you don't have a vagina to speak of or at least b) they'll never have to see the foul thing. Perhaps if you pick up all your dates at "ex-gay" events, then the promise of a future together with all roses, no nudity does work as a pick-up line.
Unfortunately, the hostility towards raising women's self-esteem and fighting violence through this play hasn't stopped at just establishing pouty counter-events advocating that self-esteem and opposition to violence are unromantic. This year at St. Louis University, campus feminists found that the university not only wouldn't permit the play on campus, they tried to shut down another Ensler play, having already refused to approve "The Vagina Monologues," all in order to appease funders who don't approve of women's autonomy.
Critics of V-Day performances of "The Vagina Monologues" would have you believe that they're just motivated by a squeamishness about ladyparts, and not that they're necessarily opposed to women's right not to be beaten or raped. But I am more suspicious. Not that anyone is like, "Yea, wife-beating!", but advocacy against violence against women necessarily fits into a pantheon of beliefs centered around the belief that women are full human beings deserving of their full rights. Which means reproductive rights, the right to non-traditional family choices, the right to dignity within the family, and the right to feel good about yourself as a woman, all things that set social conservatives on edge. In short, you can't stop rape and domestic violence without curtailing male dominance, and social conservatives support male dominance.
And they're quite aware of how you can't have a male dominance omelet without cracking some rape and wife-beating eggs. Take the situation in South Carolina, for example. When feminists protested the fact that wife-beating is a misdeameanor, even though cock-fighting is about to become a felony, legislators dismissed the protesters by questioning their intelligence and suggesting that cock-fighting is indeed brutal in a way that beating the tar out of your supposed loved one is not.
In Tenneesse, a state senator gruffed during abortion law hearings about how the rape laws protect all women, instead of a man's virgin daughter property alone, stating:
"Rape, ladies and gentlemen, is not today what rape was. Rape, when I was learning these things, was the violation of a chaste woman, against her will, by some party not her spouse. Today it's simply, ‘Let's don't go forward with this act.' "In this case, the outrageous quote was directly in service of another part of the anti-feminist agenda. Democratic legislators in the state are using women's basic rights as a political football to score points against Republicans in a gamble that might not win for them and certainly not for women.
In all the pearl-clutching about the word "vagina", it's important not to miss the forest for the trees. Are social conservatives just easily offended babies who faint at hearing that women actually have genitals? (What do they think the precious babies emerge from, anyway?) Or do they oppose the actual message of V-Day and "The Vagina Monologues" -- that women are full human beings, equal to men, and deserving of full autonomy and self-determination. Considering all the hostility towards not just the play, but the day, I'm firmly convinced that it's the latter.
Stay up to date with the latest Reproductive Justice headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Crazy H on Feb 21, 2008 3:16 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You can't make penises disappear
Posted by: PaulK
» rape isn't about sex...
Posted by: undrgrndgirl
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ames on Feb 21, 2008 6:51 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This hits the nail on the head. When push comes to shove, policies and programs to combat sexual violence focus all their attention on the victims taking responsibility for prevention because to place responsibility on the perpetrators would mean changing the way our society is structured and what our social values are. And the upper echelons (including many so-called progressives) either don't want to or simply are just not brave enough to.
great article. thank you.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: male dominance
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: art guerrilla on Feb 23, 2008 4:26 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i don't care HOW she dresses it up, she BELIEVES IN AND USES CENSORSHIP...
sorry, kampers, them there's the facts...
i don't care how righteous and 100% metaphysically correct she may be on 99% of the issues on our plates, she is a CENSOR and she believes in it JUST AS MUCH as reichwing censors do...
*that* is not a good progressive, period, i don't care how you slice it...
now, run along little baby citizen marcotte, don't let anyone rain on your (CENSORED) parade...
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» REALLY, she is a CENSOR?
Posted by: Beck
» RE: ALLY, she is a CENSOR?
Posted by: art guerrilla
» RE: My sainted mother.
Posted by: Edward George
» RE: amanda marcotte is not a progressive...
Posted by: jvaljon1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Timberbee on Feb 23, 2008 6:14 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All of this, other, this nastiness, this damage, this anger, all thought, all rational, all politics, all hate. All psychology. And, it will not go away. All the dead women, their wombs filled with the unwanted, shallow graves of grief and shame, and utter selfishness. Who identifies with those who, stand alone, within themselves, contemplating a crime born of fear, or rejection?
I cannot say this is a problem of male domination, it is a crime committed by people, against other people, male domination is but a cloak, but a justification which never fully penetrates the soul of the perpetrator, not at the time of the act.
Don't stop V-day.
Peace
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: On with V-day
Posted by: rickiey
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cyr3n on Feb 23, 2008 6:15 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The play talks about things that some men dont want to hear. menstruation, effects of rape, menopause... they all want to eat the hamburger but not see how its made.
In general, I'm a little worried about over-the-top feminism because it goes beyond making men aware of us, it practically demonizes masculine men. Where are the stats that support the belief masculine guys beat women? From observation, I've found the guys that are not quite up there in the patriarchy to be most dangerous. they pick on women because they can't compete with other men. Your uber-males are very protective of women.. emasculating them is doing a great disservice to society at large.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» a little worried.... that nerd will beat me?
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: human rights violator?
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: Turiye
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: scheherezade
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: mr. joshua
» Ur # 1
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: Turiye
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: bornxeyed
» The Question.
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: The Question.
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: The Question.
Posted by: mr. joshua
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sparks56 on Feb 23, 2008 6:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Vaginal Circumcision; Genital mutilation, Northern Africa, not other Muslim cultures..
Posted by: Turiye
» RE: Vaginal Circumcision; Genital mutilation, Northern Africa, not other Muslim cultures..
Posted by: Sparks56
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Kevbo on Feb 23, 2008 8:34 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All those free-roaming, untethered genitalia out there keeps them awake at night.
It's the same mindset that produces an abstinence-only education policy. The motto of conservatives on Capitol Hill seems to be "If you're not having sex with me then you shouldn't be having sex at all."
Some conservative women seem afraid to admit they even have a vagina. They probably shower with their eyes closed. How sad.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Would Freud Have a Field Day?
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: Would Freud Have a Field Day?
Posted by: Kevbo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Feb 23, 2008 8:36 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Conservatives are a problem because they hold no other doctrines than their own. They used to prostitute themselves as 'upholders of the Constitution', to bad that was just salesmanship. Conservatives only want to conserve 'their' way of life not yours,mine or anyone who else who does'nt fit in their cliche. The conservatives are only going to give us more of what we already have...Hell on Earth
Draft jeffrey7 for Prez '08
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: terradea42 on Feb 23, 2008 10:01 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Only Way = ERA
Posted by: rickiey
» RE: The Only Way = ERA
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: The Only Way = ERA
Posted by: rickiey
Comments are closed-
Posted by: WizardX on Feb 23, 2008 10:07 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is a sickness of an overinflated sense of self. Hence it rails against anything that has no hierarchy such as thinking in an egalitarian or ecological way. It is threatened by consciousness altering drugs for the same reason - such experiences tend to open people to the reality of their manipulation and invite ecological rather than hierarchical and classical/categorical thinking.
These are the real cancer of our societies, and probably always have been since we gained the ability to have excessive power over nature, and its a sickness that has probably evolved to take advantage of the power that comes when one can hold resources and manipulate others mentally and physically.
It is cruel to the point of sociopathy and psychopathy - look around you at the arrogant, unsympathetic nature of business 'leaders' and politicians where this sickness is most concentrated.
But they can only do this while the rest of us can be kept ignorant. Not for much longer though. The internet promises a revolution of mind that will overthrow these inhuman social retards. Fight them with logic and watch the dim reactionary frothing response, then fight them with more until they go confused, half-relaising, gibbering to the shrink where they belong.
Free the vagina and protect women. Fight the fear and free the love.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Dim reactionary manipulative sociopathic
Posted by: suprmark
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rickiey on Feb 23, 2008 10:13 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a male, I'd like the make the minimum penalty for rape, first time offender, be immediate execution. First because they deserve it, and second, so I wouldn't have to hear it anymore.
Quite frankly, rapists are the biggest traitors to men's rights everywhere, AND the biggest perpetrator of crimes to women.
Why can't we just execute em and make everyone happy?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about rapists
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: lets not generalize...
Posted by: WyrdSister
» Oh My!
Posted by: Beepath
» RE: Oh My!
Posted by: rickiey
Comments are closed-
Posted by: GriGri on Feb 23, 2008 11:29 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Non sequitor
Posted by: billslm
» RE: Non sequitor
Posted by: GriGri
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sanddollar on Feb 23, 2008 11:50 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Species have come and gone over and over and over, but the unbroken line of gender division can be traced back to some of our most primitive ancestors, many hundreds of millions of years ago.
Countless eons have passed, subtly fashioning unique gender outlooks, idiosyncrasies, and kinks reflecting complementary reproductive roles, far beyond our capacity to comprehend as we live the one into which fate cast us.
And yet, the differences between individual males and females, in character, ability, intelligence, wisdom, and countless other traits are often much less than the range of those same differences one finds among samplings of males or females alone.
It's just a damn shame what should be mutually celebrated and enjoyed is so often subverted to serve fear-based, low self-esteem impulses as dominance or reprisal.
Peace and understanding, sisters and brothers.
Keep shaking those body parts, and never stop speaking out against injustice.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: debpark on Feb 23, 2008 1:08 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a punchy, well written article. Read the books of Dr. James Dobson the ideological darling of the right-wing Evangelical movement (and advisor to the White House) to see how much emphasis is still placed on male dominance within the hetro nuclear family by Christian conservatives. It is God's law that a woman obey and serve her man and to defy it is being disloyal to Him. !
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: holmes
Posted by: leta
» RE: holmes
Posted by: luckypuck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: GPFrank on Feb 23, 2008 6:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
off behind a billboard.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: luckypuck on Feb 23, 2008 11:31 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, what’s a women’s power base? Hypothetical situation, highly oversimplified because I’m still working this out in my head: Two lawyers, one female, one male. All their qualifications for partnership are identical. They’re both equally smart, equally capable lawyers, both personable and a good fit for the partnership. In their interviews for partnership, neither one of them gets any signals from the senior partners to indicate which one they might favor. The two are told there will be a decision in a few days.
The guy thinks to himself, “we’re both equally qualified. There’s nothing I can do to set myself above her.” Then, he goes ballistic ‘cause he thinks, “Omigod, she can screw the boss and it’ll be all over for me.” A woman’s power base is her lower body advantage. There are ample examples of men literally fighting their way to the top, as there are examples of women screwing their way to the top, so the guy is scared to death she’ll use her power base to disadvantage him.
Next example: Guy meets girl, guy wants girl, girl is willing to be wanted by the guy. One problem: The guy’s brother is married and the guy thinks his brother is pussy-whipped. His brother does anything his wife tells him, she belittles him for real and imagined faults, but the sex is so good the brother takes it all. The guy is hoping for good sex with his girlfriend, too, but doesn’t want to be as wimpy and controlled as is his brother.
All he’s got to counter his girl-friend’s lower body power is his upper body power. He doesn’t want her to start dominating him as his sister-in-law has done to his brother. He’s afraid she’ll dominate him (and he’s not into whips and chains), so he starts being overly assertive. She can’t figure out what his problem is and is as yet unwilling to break it off. She thinks she’s not being sexy enough for him, so she starts vamping him. He sees that as confirmation she’s trying to use sex to get over on him. So, the poor schmuck gets even more aggressive. She thinks he wants to play rough and goes out and buys some whips and chains. The guy goes screaming out the door.
Okay, scratch that last bit.
See, and I know what it takes to work through this, lots of adjustments, probably some sacrifice, lots of talk and, the hard part, both a commitment from each to make it work for the other person and an assumption that the other person will be trying to make it work for you. But underneath it all is that power base thing and the hope that the fear part gets set aside.
If this is anywhere accurate, isn’t it an innate, probably primal circumstance? Is this notion entirely off the mark? I feel safe enough putting out rough, unfinished ideas here, so if there’s any feedback, I’d appreciate it. Please be gentle.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Ruminations
Posted by: sasha40
» Re-ruminating
Posted by: luckypuck
» Re-ruminating (continued)
Posted by: luckypuck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dannrusso on Feb 24, 2008 8:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: a quick insight on physiology
Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: a quick insight on anthropology
Posted by: luckypuck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Feb 24, 2008 9:59 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's some staunch Conservatives: Mark Foley, Larry (Wide-Stance) Craig, (all pro-war, pro-estate tax and ANTI-gay marriage) need I say more??? Oh yeah, one more thing:
Thank GOD, that I'm an opposite-sex loving Liberal! (None of that 'progressive' crap for me, either!)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LeeAnnG on Feb 25, 2008 8:27 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But although I am aware that both genders are targeted in the media, there is a really unfortunate disparaging of women that would not be accepted if it were directed at any race or ethnic group. This goes along with many other forms of ridiculing women that are implicitly accepted in American culture.
I have written about this in numerous other posts, but it bears repeating because it does not seem that this will cease anytime in the near future. Some examples of bias against women are using "balls" as compliments and "pussy" as insults, coaches calling their team members "ladies" to get them to perform, and calling a boy a "sissy" as opposed to the more tolerant or affectionate "tomboy" for a girl.
Recently there have been a rash of advertisements that make fun of women. The first, and probably most egregious, are the light beer commercials that show some man behaving in a sensitive, "weak," or somehow non-masculine way, after which a beer squashes him and the voice-over says, "Men should act like men." Wow! Because acting otherwise makes them like women, and that would be really, really awful!
Then there's the ad for Hungry Man dinners. A couple of guys are sitting together and they decide to accompany each other to the rest room, even though they "don't really need to go" and just do it for the company. As they pass another man, he says something about "where are you LADIES going?" Okay. Women like to go to the restroom together, and that's hillarious, especially when men do it to show how silly it is. MEN, of course, are all independent and don't need to communicate (because maybe that's just weak and feminine) and if they act like women, they are LADIES and that most definitely is not good.
And now there's one for AT&T. A man has this pink phone with little bells because he has a teenage daughter. Why he has this phone is unclear - maybe his daughter buys his phone for him - and it is not what he needs. But, according to the daughter, this phone is HOT. After he gets off the phone with her, a waitress asks, "More coffee, PRINCESS?" Imagine a woman with a "masculine" phone and someone asking, "More coffee, SARGE" to make fun of her gender role. It doesn't happen in reverse in quite the same way.
There is an underlying assumption that it's just not OK for men to be feminine in any way at all. If women begin to take on male roles, it's seen as an improvement, so Buffy and other women who are strong and aggressive are fine.
In addition, Viva Viagra and erectile dysfunction are perfectly acceptable advertisements on prime time TV, but a glimpse of Janet Jackson's nipple sends the wingnuts into a frenzy. Men's reproductive performance is an important, dignified issue, but the part of the body that feeds those fetuses once they are born is obscene!
It's not that the media never make fun of men or make them look foolish - obviously this happens regularly. It's that men are still understood to be superior to women in some essential way. Maybe someday this will change, but it's not likely to happen in the current macho, hyperaggressive society in which we live. Until women are really and truly thought of as "just as good as men," violence against women will continue, "conservatives" will deny that it exists, and women's genitals will still be considered by many to be off-limits in polite society.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Oops
Posted by: LeeAnnG
» RE: Oops
Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: Oops
Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: Gender bias in the media
Posted by: John Wilbur
» Oh, yes! I absolutely agree!
Posted by: LeeAnnG
» Because acting otherwise makes them like women
Posted by: suprmark
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Livemike on Feb 25, 2008 7:59 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Crazy H on Feb 21, 2008 3:16 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» You can't make penises disappear
Posted by: PaulK
» rape isn't about sex...
Posted by: undrgrndgirl
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Ames on Feb 21, 2008 6:51 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This hits the nail on the head. When push comes to shove, policies and programs to combat sexual violence focus all their attention on the victims taking responsibility for prevention because to place responsibility on the perpetrators would mean changing the way our society is structured and what our social values are. And the upper echelons (including many so-called progressives) either don't want to or simply are just not brave enough to.
great article. thank you.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: male dominance
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: art guerrilla on Feb 23, 2008 4:26 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i don't care HOW she dresses it up, she BELIEVES IN AND USES CENSORSHIP...
sorry, kampers, them there's the facts...
i don't care how righteous and 100% metaphysically correct she may be on 99% of the issues on our plates, she is a CENSOR and she believes in it JUST AS MUCH as reichwing censors do...
*that* is not a good progressive, period, i don't care how you slice it...
now, run along little baby citizen marcotte, don't let anyone rain on your (CENSORED) parade...
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» REALLY, she is a CENSOR?
Posted by: Beck
» RE: ALLY, she is a CENSOR?
Posted by: art guerrilla
» RE: My sainted mother.
Posted by: Edward George
» RE: amanda marcotte is not a progressive...
Posted by: jvaljon1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Timberbee on Feb 23, 2008 6:14 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All of this, other, this nastiness, this damage, this anger, all thought, all rational, all politics, all hate. All psychology. And, it will not go away. All the dead women, their wombs filled with the unwanted, shallow graves of grief and shame, and utter selfishness. Who identifies with those who, stand alone, within themselves, contemplating a crime born of fear, or rejection?
I cannot say this is a problem of male domination, it is a crime committed by people, against other people, male domination is but a cloak, but a justification which never fully penetrates the soul of the perpetrator, not at the time of the act.
Don't stop V-day.
Peace
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: On with V-day
Posted by: rickiey
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cyr3n on Feb 23, 2008 6:15 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The play talks about things that some men dont want to hear. menstruation, effects of rape, menopause... they all want to eat the hamburger but not see how its made.
In general, I'm a little worried about over-the-top feminism because it goes beyond making men aware of us, it practically demonizes masculine men. Where are the stats that support the belief masculine guys beat women? From observation, I've found the guys that are not quite up there in the patriarchy to be most dangerous. they pick on women because they can't compete with other men. Your uber-males are very protective of women.. emasculating them is doing a great disservice to society at large.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» a little worried.... that nerd will beat me?
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: human rights violator?
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: Turiye
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: scheherezade
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: mr. joshua
» Ur # 1
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: Turiye
» RE: demonizing masculine men?
Posted by: bornxeyed
» The Question.
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: The Question.
Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: The Question.
Posted by: mr. joshua
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sparks56 on Feb 23, 2008 6:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Vaginal Circumcision; Genital mutilation, Northern Africa, not other Muslim cultures..
Posted by: Turiye
» RE: Vaginal Circumcision; Genital mutilation, Northern Africa, not other Muslim cultures..
Posted by: Sparks56
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Kevbo on Feb 23, 2008 8:34 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All those free-roaming, untethered genitalia out there keeps them awake at night.
It's the same mindset that produces an abstinence-only education policy. The motto of conservatives on Capitol Hill seems to be "If you're not having sex with me then you shouldn't be having sex at all."
Some conservative women seem afraid to admit they even have a vagina. They probably shower with their eyes closed. How sad.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Would Freud Have a Field Day?
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: Would Freud Have a Field Day?
Posted by: Kevbo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Feb 23, 2008 8:36 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Conservatives are a problem because they hold no other doctrines than their own. They used to prostitute themselves as 'upholders of the Constitution', to bad that was just salesmanship. Conservatives only want to conserve 'their' way of life not yours,mine or anyone who else who does'nt fit in their cliche. The conservatives are only going to give us more of what we already have...Hell on Earth
Draft jeffrey7 for Prez '08
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: terradea42 on Feb 23, 2008 10:01 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Only Way = ERA
Posted by: rickiey
» RE: The Only Way = ERA
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: The Only Way = ERA
Posted by: rickiey
Comments are closed-
Posted by: WizardX on Feb 23, 2008 10:07 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is a sickness of an overinflated sense of self. Hence it rails against anything that has no hierarchy such as thinking in an egalitarian or ecological way. It is threatened by consciousness altering drugs for the same reason - such experiences tend to open people to the reality of their manipulation and invite ecological rather than hierarchical and classical/categorical thinking.
These are the real cancer of our societies, and probably always have been since we gained the ability to have excessive power over nature, and its a sickness that has probably evolved to take advantage of the power that comes when one can hold resources and manipulate others mentally and physically.
It is cruel to the point of sociopathy and psychopathy - look around you at the arrogant, unsympathetic nature of business 'leaders' and politicians where this sickness is most concentrated.
But they can only do this while the rest of us can be kept ignorant. Not for much longer though. The internet promises a revolution of mind that will overthrow these inhuman social retards. Fight them with logic and watch the dim reactionary frothing response, then fight them with more until they go confused, half-relaising, gibbering to the shrink where they belong.
Free the vagina and protect women. Fight the fear and free the love.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Dim reactionary manipulative sociopathic
Posted by: suprmark
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rickiey on Feb 23, 2008 10:13 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a male, I'd like the make the minimum penalty for rape, first time offender, be immediate execution. First because they deserve it, and second, so I wouldn't have to hear it anymore.
Quite frankly, rapists are the biggest traitors to men's rights everywhere, AND the biggest perpetrator of crimes to women.
Why can't we just execute em and make everyone happy?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about DUE PROCESS
Posted by: Deadbeat Dad
» RE: I'm sick of hearing about rapists
Posted by: MobileSucks
» RE: lets not generalize...
Posted by: WyrdSister
» Oh My!
Posted by: Beepath
» RE: Oh My!
Posted by: rickiey
Comments are closed-
Posted by: GriGri on Feb 23, 2008 11:29 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Non sequitor
Posted by: billslm
» RE: Non sequitor
Posted by: GriGri
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sanddollar on Feb 23, 2008 11:50 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Species have come and gone over and over and over, but the unbroken line of gender division can be traced back to some of our most primitive ancestors, many hundreds of millions of years ago.
Countless eons have passed, subtly fashioning unique gender outlooks, idiosyncrasies, and kinks reflecting complementary reproductive roles, far beyond our capacity to comprehend as we live the one into which fate cast us.
And yet, the differences between individual males and females, in character, ability, intelligence, wisdom, and countless other traits are often much less than the range of those same differences one finds among samplings of males or females alone.
It's just a damn shame what should be mutually celebrated and enjoyed is so often subverted to serve fear-based, low self-esteem impulses as dominance or reprisal.
Peace and understanding, sisters and brothers.
Keep shaking those body parts, and never stop speaking out against injustice.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: debpark on Feb 23, 2008 1:08 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a punchy, well written article. Read the books of Dr. James Dobson the ideological darling of the right-wing Evangelical movement (and advisor to the White House) to see how much emphasis is still placed on male dominance within the hetro nuclear family by Christian conservatives. It is God's law that a woman obey and serve her man and to defy it is being disloyal to Him. !
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: holmes
Posted by: leta
» RE: holmes
Posted by: luckypuck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: GPFrank on Feb 23, 2008 6:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
off behind a billboard.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: luckypuck on Feb 23, 2008 11:31 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, what’s a women’s power base? Hypothetical situation, highly oversimplified because I’m still working this out in my head: Two lawyers, one female, one male. All their qualifications for partnership are identical. They’re both equally smart, equally capable lawyers, both personable and a good fit for the partnership. In their interviews for partnership, neither one of them gets any signals from the senior partners to indicate which one they might favor. The two are told there will be a decision in a few days.
The guy thinks to himself, “we’re both equally qualified. There’s nothing I can do to set myself above her.” Then, he goes ballistic ‘cause he thinks, “Omigod, she can screw the boss and it’ll be all over for me.” A woman’s power base is her lower body advantage. There are ample examples of men literally fighting their way to the top, as there are examples of women screwing their way to the top, so the guy is scared to death she’ll use her power base to disadvantage him.
Next example: Guy meets girl, guy wants girl, girl is willing to be wanted by the guy. One problem: The guy’s brother is married and the guy thinks his brother is pussy-whipped. His brother does anything his wife tells him, she belittles him for real and imagined faults, but the sex is so good the brother takes it all. The guy is hoping for good sex with his girlfriend, too, but doesn’t want to be as wimpy and controlled as is his brother.
All he’s got to counter his girl-friend’s lower body power is his upper body power. He doesn’t want her to start dominating him as his sister-in-law has done to his brother. He’s afraid she’ll dominate him (and he’s not into whips and chains), so he starts being overly assertive. She can’t figure out what his problem is and is as yet unwilling to break it off. She thinks she’s not being sexy enough for him, so she starts vamping him. He sees that as confirmation she’s trying to use sex to get over on him. So, the poor schmuck gets even more aggressive. She thinks he wants to play rough and goes out and buys some whips and chains. The guy goes screaming out the door.
Okay, scratch that last bit.
See, and I know what it takes to work through this, lots of adjustments, probably some sacrifice, lots of talk and, the hard part, both a commitment from each to make it work for the other person and an assumption that the other person will be trying to make it work for you. But underneath it all is that power base thing and the hope that the fear part gets set aside.
If this is anywhere accurate, isn’t it an innate, probably primal circumstance? Is this notion entirely off the mark? I feel safe enough putting out rough, unfinished ideas here, so if there’s any feedback, I’d appreciate it. Please be gentle.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Ruminations
Posted by: sasha40
» Re-ruminating
Posted by: luckypuck
» Re-ruminating (continued)
Posted by: luckypuck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dannrusso on Feb 24, 2008 8:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: a quick insight on physiology
Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: a quick insight on anthropology
Posted by: luckypuck
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Feb 24, 2008 9:59 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's some staunch Conservatives: Mark Foley, Larry (Wide-Stance) Craig, (all pro-war, pro-estate tax and ANTI-gay marriage) need I say more??? Oh yeah, one more thing:
Thank GOD, that I'm an opposite-sex loving Liberal! (None of that 'progressive' crap for me, either!)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LeeAnnG on Feb 25, 2008 8:27 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But although I am aware that both genders are targeted in the media, there is a really unfortunate disparaging of women that would not be accepted if it were directed at any race or ethnic group. This goes along with many other forms of ridiculing women that are implicitly accepted in American culture.
I have written about this in numerous other posts, but it bears repeating because it does not seem that this will cease anytime in the near future. Some examples of bias against women are using "balls" as compliments and "pussy" as insults, coaches calling their team members "ladies" to get them to perform, and calling a boy a "sissy" as opposed to the more tolerant or affectionate "tomboy" for a girl.
Recently there have been a rash of advertisements that make fun of women. The first, and probably most egregious, are the light beer commercials that show some man behaving in a sensitive, "weak," or somehow non-masculine way, after which a beer squashes him and the voice-over says, "Men should act like men." Wow! Because acting otherwise makes them like women, and that would be really, really awful!
Then there's the ad for Hungry Man dinners. A couple of guys are sitting together and they decide to accompany each other to the rest room, even though they "don't really need to go" and just do it for the company. As they pass another man, he says something about "where are you LADIES going?" Okay. Women like to go to the restroom together, and that's hillarious, especially when men do it to show how silly it is. MEN, of course, are all independent and don't need to communicate (because maybe that's just weak and feminine) and if they act like women, they are LADIES and that most definitely is not good.
And now there's one for AT&T. A man has this pink phone with little bells because he has a teenage daughter. Why he has this phone is unclear - maybe his daughter buys his phone for him - and it is not what he needs. But, according to the daughter, this phone is HOT. After he gets off the phone with her, a waitress asks, "More coffee, PRINCESS?" Imagine a woman with a "masculine" phone and someone asking, "More coffee, SARGE" to make fun of her gender role. It doesn't happen in reverse in quite the same way.
There is an underlying assumption that it's just not OK for men to be feminine in any way at all. If women begin to take on male roles, it's seen as an improvement, so Buffy and other women who are strong and aggressive are fine.
In addition, Viva Viagra and erectile dysfunction are perfectly acceptable advertisements on prime time TV, but a glimpse of Janet Jackson's nipple sends the wingnuts into a frenzy. Men's reproductive performance is an important, dignified issue, but the part of the body that feeds those fetuses once they are born is obscene!
It's not that the media never make fun of men or make them look foolish - obviously this happens regularly. It's that men are still understood to be superior to women in some essential way. Maybe someday this will change, but it's not likely to happen in the current macho, hyperaggressive society in which we live. Until women are really and truly thought of as "just as good as men," violence against women will continue, "conservatives" will deny that it exists, and women's genitals will still be considered by many to be off-limits in polite society.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Oops
Posted by: LeeAnnG
» RE: Oops
Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: Oops
Posted by: TheLimit
» RE: Gender bias in the media
Posted by: John Wilbur
» Oh, yes! I absolutely agree!
Posted by: LeeAnnG
» Because acting otherwise makes them like women
Posted by: suprmark
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Livemike on Feb 25, 2008 7:59 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Updated: Catholic Bishops Embrace Anti-Abortion Terrorizers Missy Smith and Randall Terry
10 Defining Feminist Moments of 2009
Going Undercover in the Crazy, Tragic World of Christian Gay-Conversion Therapy




