Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Men Explain Things to Me

By Rebecca Solnit, Tomdispatch.com. Posted April 14, 2008.


Facts didn't get in their way.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Atheists, It's Time to Stand Up to Jesus
Russell Blackford, Udo Schuklenk

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Rebecca Solnit

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg



I still don't know why Sallie and I bothered to go to that party in the forest slope above Aspen. The people were all older than us and dull in a distinguished way, old enough that we, at forty-ish, passed as the occasion's young ladies. The house was great -- if you like Ralph Lauren-style chalets -- a rugged luxury cabin at 9,000 feet complete with elk antlers, lots of kilims, and a wood-burning stove. We were preparing to leave, when our host said, "No, stay a little longer so I can talk to you." He was an imposing man who'd made a lot of money.



He kept us waiting while the other guests drifted out into the summer night, and then sat us down at his authentically grainy wood table and said to me, "So? I hear you've written a couple of books."



I replied, "Several, actually."




He said, in the way you encourage your friend's seven-year-old to describe flute practice, "And what are they about?"



They were actually about quite a few different things, the six or seven out by then, but I began to speak only of the most recent on that summer day in 2003, River of Shadows: Eadweard Muybridge and the Technological Wild West, my book on the annihilation of time and space and the industrialization of everyday life.





He cut me off soon after I mentioned Muybridge. "And have you heard about the very important Muybridge book that came out this year?"



So caught up was I in my assigned role as ingnue that I was perfectly willing to entertain the possibility that another book on the same subject had come out simultaneously and I'd somehow missed it. He was already telling me about the very important book -- with that smug look I know so well in a man holding forth, eyes fixed on the fuzzy far horizon of his own authority.



Here, let me just say that my life is well-sprinkled with lovely men, with a long succession of editors who have, since I was young, listened and encouraged and published me, with my infinitely generous younger brother, with splendid friends of whom it could be said -- like the Clerk in The Canterbury Tales I still remember from Mr. Pelen's class on Chaucer -- "gladly would he learn and gladly teach." Still, there are these other men, too. So, Mr. Very Important was going on smugly about this book I should have known when Sallie interrupted him to say, "That's her book." Or tried to interrupt him anyway.




But he just continued on his way. She had to say, "That's her book" three or four times before he finally took it in. And then, as if in a nineteenth-century novel, he went ashen. That I was indeed the author of the very important book it turned out he hadn't read, just read about in the New York Times Book Review a few months earlier, so confused the neat categories into which his world was sorted that he was stunned speechless -- for a moment, before he began holding forth again. Being women, we were politely out of earshot before we started laughing, and we've never really stopped.



I like incidents of that sort, when forces that are usually so sneaky and hard to point out slither out of the grass and are as obvious as, say, an anaconda that's eaten a cow or an elephant turd on the carpet.



When River of Shadows came out, some pedant wrote a snarky letter to the New York Times explaining that, though Muybridge had made improvements in camera technology, he had not made any breakthroughs in photographic chemistry. The guy had no idea what he was talking about. Both Philip Prodger, in his wonderful book on Muybridge, and I had actually researched the subject and made it clear that Muybridge had done something obscure but powerful to the wet-plate technology of the time to speed it up amazingly, but letters to the editor don't get fact-checked. And perhaps because the book was about the virile subjects of cinema and technology, the Men Who Knew came out of the woodwork.




A British academic wrote in to the London Review of Books with all kinds of nitpicking corrections and complaints, all of them from outer space. He carped, for example, that to aggrandize Muybridge's standing I left out technological predecessors like Henry R. Heyl. He'd apparently not read the book all the way to page 202 or checked the index, since Heyl was there (though his contribution was just not very significant). Surely one of these men has died of embarrassment, but not nearly publicly enough.



The Slippery Slope of Silencings




Yes, guys like this pick on other men's books too, and people of both genders pop up at events to hold forth on irrelevant things and conspiracy theories, but the out-and-out confrontational confidence of the totally ignorant is, in my experience, gendered. Men explain things to me, and other women, whether or not they know what they're talking about. Some men.



Every woman knows what I'm talking about. It's the presumption that makes it hard, at times, for any woman in any field; that keeps women from speaking up and from being heard when they dare; that crushes young women into silence by indicating, the way harassment on the street does, that this is not their world. It trains us in self-doubt and self-limitation just as it exercises men's unsupported overconfidence.




I wouldn't be surprised if part of the trajectory of American politics since 2001 was shaped by, say, the inability to hear Coleen Rowley, the FBI woman who issued those early warnings about al-Qaeda, and it was certainly shaped by a Bush administration to which you couldn't tell anything, including that Iraq had no links to al-Qaeda and no WMDs, or that the war was not going to be a "cakewalk." (Even male experts couldn't penetrate the fortress of their smugness.)



Arrogance might have had something to do with the war, but this syndrome is a war that nearly every woman faces every day, a war within herself too, a belief in her superfluity, an invitation to silence, one from which a fairly nice career as a writer (with a lot of research and facts correctly deployed) has not entirely freed me. After all, there was a moment there when I was willing to let Mr. Important and his overweening confidence bowl over my more shaky certainty.



Don't forget that I've had a lot more confirmation of my right to think and speak than most women, and I've learned that a certain amount of self-doubt is a good tool for correcting, understanding, listening, and progressing -- though too much is paralyzing and total self-confidence produces arrogant idiots, like the ones who have governed us since 2001. There's a happy medium between these poles to which the genders have been pushed, a warm equatorial belt of give and take where we should all meet.



More extreme versions of our situation exist in, for example, those Middle Eastern countries where women's testimony has no legal standing; so that a woman can't testify that she was raped without a male witness to counter the male rapist. Which there rarely is.



Credibility is a basic survival tool. When I was very young and just beginning to get what feminism was about and why it was necessary, I had a boyfriend whose uncle was a nuclear physicist. One Christmas, he was telling -- as though it were a light and amusing subject -- how a neighbor's wife in his suburban bomb-making community had come running out of her house naked in the middle of the night screaming that her husband was trying to kill her. How, I asked, did you know that he wasn't trying to kill her? He explained, patiently, that they were respectable middle-class people. Therefore, her-husband-trying-to-kill-her was simply not a credible explanation for her fleeing the house yelling that her husband was trying to kill her. That she was crazy, on the other hand….



Even getting a restraining order -- a fairly new legal tool -- requires acquiring the credibility to convince the courts that some guy is a menace and then getting the cops to enforce it. Restraining orders often don't work anyway. Violence is one way to silence people, to deny their voice and their credibility, to assert your right to control over their right to exist. About three women a day are murdered by spouses or ex-spouses in this country. It's one of the main causes of death in pregnant women in the U.S. At the heart of the struggle of feminism to give rape, date rape, marital rape, domestic violence, and workplace sexual harassment legal standing as crimes has been the necessity of making women credible and audible.




I tend to believe that women acquired the status of human beings when these kinds of acts started to be taken seriously, when the big things that stop us and kill us were addressed legally from the mid-1970s on; well after, that is, my birth. And for anyone about to argue that workplace sexual intimidation isn't a life or death issue, remember that Marine Lance Corporal Maria Lauterbach, age 20, was apparently killed by her higher-ranking colleague last winter while she was waiting to testify that he raped her. The burned remains of her pregnant body were found in the fire pit in his backyard in December.



Being told that, categorically, he knows what he's talking about and she doesn't, however minor a part of any given conversation, perpetuates the ugliness of this world and holds back its light. After my book Wanderlust came out in 2000, I found myself better able to resist being bullied out of my own perceptions and interpretations. On two occasions around that time, I objected to the behavior of a man, only to be told that the incidents hadn't happened at all as I said, that I was subjective, delusional, overwrought, dishonest -- in a nutshell, female.



Most of my life, I would have doubted myself and backed down. Having public standing as a writer of history helped me stand my ground, but few women get that boost, and billions of women must be out there on this six-billion-person planet being told that they are not reliable witnesses to their own lives, that the truth is not their property, now or ever. This goes way beyond Men Explaining Things, but it's part of the same archipelago of arrogance.



Men explain things to me, still. And no man has ever apologized for explaining, wrongly, things that I know and they don't. Not yet, but according to the actuarial tables, I may have another forty-something years to live, more or less, so it could happen. Though I'm not holding my breath.



Women Fighting on Two Fronts





A few years after the idiot in Aspen, I was in Berlin giving a talk when the Marxist writer Tariq Ali invited me out to a dinner that included a male writer and translator and three women a little younger than me who would remain deferential and mostly silent throughout the dinner. Tariq was great. Perhaps the translator was peeved that I insisted on playing a modest role in the conversation, but when I said something about how Women Strike for Peace, the extraordinary, little-known antinuclear and antiwar group founded in 1961, helped bring down the communist-hunting House Committee on Un-American Activities, HUAC, Mr. Very Important II sneered at me. HUAC, he insisted, didn't exist by the early 1960s and, anyway, no women's group played such a role in HUAC's downfall. His scorn was so withering, his confidence so aggressive, that arguing with him seemed a scary exercise in futility and an invitation to more insult.



I think I was at nine books at that point, including one that drew from primary documents and interviews about Women Strike for Peace. But explaining men still assume I am, in some sort of obscene impregnation metaphor, an empty vessel to be filled with their wisdom and knowledge. A Freudian would claim to know what they have and I lack, but intelligence is not situated in the crotch -- even if you can write one of Virginia Woolf's long mellifluous musical sentences about the subtle subjugation of women in the snow with your willie. Back in my hotel room, I Googled a bit and found that Eric Bentley in his definitive history of the House Committee on Un-American Activities credits Women Strike for Peace with "striking the crucial blow in the fall of HUAC's Bastille." In the early 1960s.



So I opened an essay for the Nation with this interchange, in part as a shout-out to one of the more unpleasant men who have explained things to me: Dude, if you're reading this, you're a carbuncle on the face of humanity and an obstacle to civilization. Feel the shame.



The battle with Men Who Explain Things has trampled down many women -- of my generation, of the up-and-coming generation we need so badly, here and in Pakistan and Bolivia and Java, not to speak of the countless women who came before me and were not allowed into the laboratory, or the library, or the conversation, or the revolution, or even the category called human.




After all, Women Strike for Peace was founded by women who were tired of making the coffee and doing the typing and not having any voice or decision-making role in the antinuclear movement of the 1950s. Most women fight wars on two fronts, one for whatever the putative topic is and one simply for the right to speak, to have ideas, to be acknowledged to be in possession of facts and truths, to have value, to be a human being. Things have certainly gotten better, but this war won't end in my lifetime. I'm still fighting it, for myself certainly, but also for all those younger women who have something to say, in the hope that they will get to say it.


Copyright 2008 Rebecca Solnit

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: sexism, misogyny

So many men, so little time; Rebecca Solnit left out hundreds more anecdotes of her own and her friends' experiences of being hectored to craft this tirade, which should in no way be taken as an endorsement of Hillary Clinton. She is on chapter eighteen of her next book.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Great read
Posted by: odie-wan on Apr 14, 2008 12:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I so enjoyed reading this article and found myself nodding in agreement as I read. "Men who know things" Fabulous phrase. I like it. I have encountered these creatures many times in my life and it is with a certain weariness that I confront them now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Great read Posted by: AMerrickanGirl
» RE: Great read Posted by: fringedweller
Kind of like Hillary Clinton in Bosnia
Posted by: TonyGottlieb on Apr 14, 2008 12:49 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This passively aggressive work of misandry use everything but the truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Better check your facts, Ms. Solnit
Posted by: LeftWright on Apr 14, 2008 1:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You wrote:

Coleen Rowley, the FBI woman who issued those early warnings about al-Qaeda

What, exactly, are you referring to here?

FBI special agent Kenneth Williams sent a memo from Phoenix to FBI headquarters warning of flight school students from Muslim countries more than a month before Coleen Rowley participated in the arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui. FBI special agent Robert Wright had been investigating and warning about al-Qaeda financial networks operating inside the U.S. for years before 9/11/01.

Don't get me wrong, whistleblowing FBI special agent Coleen Rowley is a heroine of mine, but her fight was with Dave Frasca to get a look into Zacarias Moussaoui's laptop, which she didn't get to do until two days AFTER 9/11/01.

Additionally, I have to wonder why AlterNet keeps investing so much energy in the gender wars. At this point, just identifying the existence of ignorant boors without suggesting a way forward is counterproductive and reinforces bunker mentalities.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yea! Great comment! Posted by: LeftWright
What a coincidence…
Posted by: whyoung on Apr 14, 2008 1:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just this morning listened to the July 7, 2007 WNYC RadioLab podcast about Time where you talk about Muybridge and his photographs of Stanford's race horse. It perked my interest, but now I know I have to read you.

I certainly enjoyed this article.

The respect and empowerment of women is the number one answer to solving the world's cultural and political problems as far as I am concerned. Thank you for helping me, a man, keep that in mind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So what is the point?
Posted by: Rune on Apr 14, 2008 1:08 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This reads like just another male bashing vent for the sake for venting and male bashing. Where is the insight into why such conditions exist, acknowledgment of ample exceptions (especially in certain regions), reflection on examples found even in this rant that illustrate that dominators turn a deaf ear to others regardless of their sex, and most importantly, what can be done to shift the pattern where it does exist?

From my vantage, it appears that men and women contribute to the expectations and social conditioning that encourage many men and women to play their parts in the communication failures Solnit describes. Males who do not display confidence and a certain amount of assertiveness are stigmatized early on, by adults and child peers, just as surely as females who are exceptionally confident and assertive will get the message that many people regard that as somehow wrong and unwelcome. When men and women identify as couples, those in which the females are verbally assertive tend to be unpopular with men and women alike.

The point is, we are dealing with cultural norms and conditioning, which is never as absolute as presented in this screed and is the product of expectations and reenforcement and acquiescence of males and females alike. One side does not make, enforce, and play out all the roles and behaviors that lead to gender norms. It just does not work like that, which is a good thing, because that means all of us have a role to play in evaluating our own beliefs and behaviors and reforming them as we see fit to encourage change in our respective communities.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So what is the point? Posted by: chrysalis124812
» evaluating our own beliefs Posted by: e rice
» RE: So what is the point? Posted by: OneSpirit
» cultural norm Posted by: e rice
Women who explain to me.
Posted by: Sojourner on Apr 14, 2008 1:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't find insensitivity and especially the inability to hear what someone else is saying a gendered disability.

One difference may be that I don't keep track of the instances. Then again it may be that I hang around with a lot of guys, and the vebal slap on the verbal butt is a familiar male form of bonding.

And then again it may be that no one else has ever had a mother like mine--explain? Now that she has a retirement home full of potential audience and the excuse of being a century old, she has found heaven, right here on Earth. No need to even buy the stairway, because it turns out to be walkers and wheelchairs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GROW A SPINE.
Posted by: leta on Apr 14, 2008 4:09 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If someone is talking down to you speak up. Stop playing the pathetic victim and people will stop treating you as such.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mr. Very Important I & II
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Apr 14, 2008 4:29 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know the type, even though I'm a man.

To be honest, this article was kind of amusing, and the writing was pretty good. A lot of recent man-bashing articles have been incoherent rants, full of cursing, terrible grammar, and disorganized spouting. This one had a witty, controlled edge to it, and stuck it to the snobs.

The only part that bothered me on a deeper level was the one-sided account of domestic violence. The idea that DV is a women's issue is one of the biggest and most destructive lies in the business. And the logic used to write off DV against men is pretty much the same as that physicist guy, playing on our assumptions and prejudices.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» DV is both sides... Posted by: manderson
» RE: DV is both sides... Posted by: manderson
Wow...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Apr 14, 2008 5:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are pedantic, know-it-all ass-hats in the world. No kidding! Wow... some of them are men!

While there is an issue here to be explored about the percieved infiriority of women.... it seems barely scratched by the way the article is written.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» DEAR WOW Posted by: judep
» RE: DEAR WOW Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: DEAR WOW Posted by: Basenjis
Comments Prove the Point
Posted by: kegbot1 on Apr 14, 2008 5:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Never let it be said that the progressive community doesn't have its share of troglodyte men as evidenced by so many of the comments to this story.

Perhaps the antipathy toward Solnit's experience is because few men of arts and letters or even of barroom punditry, have their views so thoroughly and systematically belittled as women experience. In many cases, if an man was so patronized by another man, it would be a invitation to 'step outside' and settle it.

It's no wonder that so many men can't understand this dynamic since it is so foreign to them. And they even read Alternet!

I date a university history professor and when she speaks about her area of expertise, regardless of my layman's interest in the subject matter, I keep my mouth shut and learn. Were so many other men to do the same what a world it might be.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Comments Prove the Point Posted by: clvngodess
» Congrats... Posted by: Phenix
» RE: Comments Prove the Point Posted by: donnambirdlady
The more you talk the less credibility you have..
Posted by: messedup on Apr 14, 2008 6:39 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The more you tell women to stand up to the man the more she's going to get bashed in the face by the crazy alpha men or kingsmen her psyche is so stupidly or crazily endeared to. Feel better?

It's easy to talk of great things when you are writer of seven books, endowed with specialized knowledge, have friends in high places, and also knowing that you really are quite a bit smarter than most people, let us say maybe all men.

Propagate your fullfillment!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ohhhh look!!
Posted by: Marlena on Apr 14, 2008 6:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
at all the males "explaining" this story to us!!
So typical. Maybe the problem is so many males are reality challenged? They are made to do one thing, and that not all that well, and then "know" they are the greatest things in creation!! And how much you want to bet ill get at least one male "explaining" how I'm wrong?? The males have been running things for a few thousand years, and look at the mess! Oh, wait i just don't understand, they will have to explain it to me:)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: JoshuaLudd
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: e rice
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: e rice
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: e rice
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: e rice
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: e rice
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: Marlena
» RE: Ohhhh look!! Posted by: radiomorning
Objecting to man-bashing is MISOGYNY!
Posted by: Q30 on Apr 14, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OOOh, you liberal men are the worst kind of MISOGYNISTS!

The comments here are just LOADED with misogyny!! The fact that I can't give a single example should in no way lessen the credibility of that statement.

Why, the fact that you object to something a WOMYN said is only because of one thing: YOU HATE WOMYN! There's no other explanation, because no male authors are ever disagreed with!

Furthermore, the comments here make me conclude that feminism is still more badly needed than ever-- because that's just about the only conclusion I ever reach about anything.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hey you spelled "women" wrong! Posted by: rancespergl
» RE: Hey you spelled "women" wrong! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
Lament
Posted by: ah2323 on Apr 14, 2008 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wah, wah, wah.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lament Posted by: e rice
love this article
Posted by: Becky on Apr 14, 2008 6:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I, too, loved reading this article. I've experienced having things explained to me too often, almost never by women. and regarding some of the negative comments posted here.... it makes me very depressed and I fear that John McCain might have a chance to win. If you are democrats, and supporting Obama, are you supporting him because he advocates open and respectful dialogue that can tolerate different views of the world, or are you supporting him because he is male?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

intelligence
Posted by: karyse on Apr 14, 2008 7:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, I'm well-informed, out-spoken, intelligent, and highly educated, BUT I come from a working class background, raised by a father who taught me to stand my ground. The consequence of which is that I always call idiots on their idiocy and proceed to explain why he (or she) is wrong. I can do this because I don't give a flying you-know-what whether or not someone likes me.

However, depending upon the class of the person I'm arguing with, I am accused of being arrogant (middle-class), self-involved (educated class), stubborn (working class), or a bitch (any class).

It always astonishes me when women back off rather than publicly ridicule someone. So long as the ridicule left private, know-nothings will continue to behave in the typical know-nothing way.

Oh, and as a P.S., doing this online is completely ineffective because (as is evidenced in alternet comments secitons) know-nothings simply continue on their rant without providing any evidence that they actually understood whatever the opposing position might be.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: intelligence Posted by: e rice
women are never complicit with men?
Posted by: peterpiano on Apr 14, 2008 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that Ms. Solnit raises the issues that stair us in the face and are more than obvious, but then lets look at women over the long history along with the men. They played power games and acted in complicity along with the men to gain some kind of status or social standing bar nothing. Many times they acted in duplicitous schemes and are as culpable as the men who supposedly condemned them for manipulating situations that can go terribly wrong for everyone involved. So lets play fair is fair and we all know that the guys always had the women behind them as it was in olden times and now its is the opposite where they are compelled to be on their own without the men calling the shots. But then if you read Macbeth I think that we see
how corrupt either of them can be. Trying to even the score is ludicrous wouldn't think?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» first of all Posted by: e rice
This is why Cassandra was a woman
Posted by: smart soprano on Apr 14, 2008 7:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Aeschylus knew that no-one would have believed people would not listen to the words of a concerned, intelligent man, but when Cassandra warned of a dire future, her female-ness precluded her being taken seriously.

Repeately being brushed aside, dismissed and infantilized has forced women to silence. This is also why women have historically resorted to feigning dreams and visions, in order to gain an audience for what in truth are ideas that they have developed through the use of their own cognition. However, they knew their logic would not be not deemed worthy of heeding, so they had to find an alternate basis of legitimacy. Hence: 'feminine intuition.'

Of course, this has backfired any time the men need to look 'tough' or express their frustration at their inability to solve a problem. In addition to lashing out at each other, they summarily dismiss women from the equation. After all, the masculine powers that be cannot be seen to be 'weak' by taking the advice of a women, or worse yet, to be following what is perceived as intuitive logic (but which we women really know is nothing more than repackaged intelligence.)

The intellectual violence lurking just below the surface of our culture's civility is getting a lot of air time in the constant Hillary bashing and imbalanced presentation of Hillary vs. Obama in the media. Not so latent fears that men have about 'taking orders' from a woman have turned the campaign into a sexist battleground. It is fruitless for us women to inform men that their fears are baseless, because the whole problem is they cannot allow themselves to listen to us in the first place.

Worse yet, they enjoy their chimeric, smug citadel so much. After all, there is nothing like dismissing women to make men look real tough. Works every time. Just like kicking the dog. Just put down not only what she thinks but how she thinks it. Then she has the problem, not you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This is why Cassandra was a woman Posted by: smart soprano
» RE: This is why Cassandra was a woman Posted by: smart soprano
Sonit explains things.
Posted by: particle on Apr 14, 2008 7:57 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Poses. Rambles. Wallows. Bores.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sonit explains things. Posted by: e rice
» RE: Sonit explains things. Posted by: particle
Good article
Posted by: sunnywater on Apr 14, 2008 8:27 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As science is well aware, almost all very early fetuses are potential females. A hormone shift modifies the female to the male form.

This alone should serve as a reminder that such things as rigorous gender identification is not as a simple matter as it might superficially appear to be.

Because we humans puts such a heavy significance on gender differentiation, we should be aware that these considerations tend to occupy more of the attention than is justified by the nature of life as we experience it.

For exapmle,oxygen is equally important to both sexes, as is water etc; but due to the apparent dichotomy of male and female, all manner of assumptions have been made predicated on nothing but a single, very minor variation within our species.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER TO LAUGH OR CRY
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Apr 14, 2008 8:30 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't like run of the mill male bashing and usually avoid it. But the author here talks about the need that some men have to guide us because they can't imagine how we'll manage without their help. It's nothng more than an annoying habit, but I do wish it would stop. If I need help I'll ask. Meantime, please stop nagging! Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Marginalization is a polite term
Posted by: ronavila on Apr 14, 2008 8:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some of the comments frieghten me. I don't care for broad generalizations either but there's certainly more than a grain of truth in this article.
Women ARE marginalized, period. What I've learned from women? Too numerous to list all, but here's a couple: 1) shut up and listen, women have something to say and sometimes all it takes is me allowing a space for them to say it. 2) keep an open mind, remain teachable, if not for the nobility of humility then for avoiding the embarassment of humiliation.
You go girl!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well said!!
Posted by: ladyoracle on Apr 14, 2008 9:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I, too, have experienced the oppressive force of the misniformed man whose inability to hear anything that I, a woman, counteragrue, no matter how factually based and intelligently I speak--even when my authorities are derived from other men--has resulted in his feeling doubly smug in his wrongness. And the result for myself, well one more reason to finish my Ph.D. (I defend my dissertation next week) and continue fighting the good fight for myself and other women.

And it's not that I am always right and they are always wrong, but it's that in those conversations "rightness" is entirely a matter of aggression.

Any by the way, we shouldn't at all be surprised by all the misogynist comments to this article. The left is full of just as many self-important blow holes as the right. That's why feminism's alliances with marxism and socialism, post structuralism, etc., have been tenuous at best.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well said!! Posted by: smart soprano
The skinny little boy sezs to the
Posted by: Beepath on Apr 14, 2008 9:30 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
pretty little girl, "You're only a feminist because you're ugly." Her reply: "No, actually I'm a feminist because you are a boy."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank You...
Posted by: abqgrl on Apr 14, 2008 10:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
for putting into words something I have not been able to express in all the conversations I've had with friends over the years. Being in IT, I run across a lot of men "who explain things" and have never been able to express how it feels to have conversations where I know what I'm saying is correct but the self-doubt creeps in as soon as a man asserts a different opinion/idea and I assume he knows something that I don't so I back down only to find out later I was right (specifically about a technical solution). This last year, I have made an effort to be more confident and aware, I force myself into the conversation and demand that my opinion be heard and noted and it has been great for my own self-esteem and also in the way my co-workers interact with me. Many times I'm still afraid I'll be wrong and they'll see that I don't know what I'm talking about so I'm not sure what the answer is but it lies somewhere between both men and women making a change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thank You... Posted by: radiomorning
» RE: Thank You... Posted by: abqgrl
There are many authors who'd be thrilled
Posted by: hotdog on Apr 14, 2008 10:11 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to have someone tell them about a great book that turned out to be there own.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where the sexism truly lies
Posted by: hotdog on Apr 14, 2008 10:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is not that so many men are pompous blow-hards but that said status has only recently become available to women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An "aha" moment
Posted by: CJC on Apr 14, 2008 10:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read Solnit's piece yesterday and promptly sent it off to a daughter, a granddaughter in college, a daughter-in-law, sister-in-law, and a niece.

Any educated outspoken woman who has not had some kind of experience that makes Solnit's story resonate is either not paying attention or is not remembering. It is NOT male-bashing to be aware of this.

Many years ago my very own husband, whom I met while we were both in college and who, as far as I was aware took my intelligence for granted, once shut me up in a 3 way conversation with a male friend who had introduced a topic that I was studying in graduate school. But my ever-opinionated husband waded in too and then really wanted the floor so he told me that a 3-way conversation was difficult, ie I should shut up. It still makes my eyes smart to remember how angry I was.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

in conversation with women
Posted by: e rice on Apr 14, 2008 10:58 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
some time ago, i was part of a group of about a dozen women. we ranged in age from mid-30s to mid-70s; we had a range of educational and professional experiences.

after discussing other topics, we got onto the topic of men. apropos of one comment, i said, 'if a woman says 2+2=4, a man will say, "don't be stupid, zebras don't have wings."'

everyone laughed and nodded. NOT ONE WOMAN asked me what i meant.

another woman said, 'if a woman says 2+2=4, a man has to argue with her about it.'

again, we all laughed and nodded.

while i continue to hope that attitudes are changing, i have to say that, in my personal experience, the 'sensitive new age guys' are only superficially different from their fathers, sometimes different only when there are women around.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Long Time Feminist
Posted by: Southern Gal on Apr 14, 2008 11:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ive been explained to, patronized, placed on a pedestal, loved and hated by men. I've worked under men for too many years to count. I decided that men and women are different, that I don't think or view things like a man and that if I want to I can pay attention or not to what they say. I am my own person and proud of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Overall...
Posted by: Blue Heron on Apr 14, 2008 11:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I like Rebecca's article. I understand her daily struggles to be heard and acknowledged. It's something I have certainly experienced. However, I would like to say that I think women are over-involved in the external world. They worry endlessly about approval from men, approval from their children, etc. They even seem to need constant approval from their girlfriends that their outfits are 'cute.' I'm hardly saying that women are bimbos. There are so many out there like Rebecca.

I would suggest that women stop seeking social approval. Yes, we are social animals, but the reality check here is that we live in a society where hatred of women and children is absolute. It's very sad, regrettable and all of that, but women need to get on with their lives and just let all that negativity roll off them. They owe that much to themselves. Of course It is difficult, but it's entirely possible.

Do I personally face such a challenge? Oh yeah. I work in the most arrogant of all male fields at the moment - in high tech. And there is nary a female in sight most of the time. But I did get the job, and no matter how many arrogant little male nerds may resent it, nothing changes that fact. I am the honey makin' all the money ;0)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Overall... Posted by: scryberwitch
I've done it.
Posted by: BobS on Apr 14, 2008 11:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's embarrassing to admit, but I've pulled the kind of crap she's talking about. All of us are works-in-progress so as I've grown older, I've been doing it less--- a trend that I try to encourage in myself and others.

Articles like this are very helpful for both men and women. I hope that some of the article-bashers will give it more thought after they've cooled off.

Hope springs eternal.....

Bob Simpson
The BobboSphere

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I've done it. Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: I've done it. Posted by: staryrebel2000
You have to be there
Posted by: tulugaq on Apr 14, 2008 11:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...to understand what Solnit is saying. And I see a number of responders have been.

Just a few weeks ago I was making a point to the manager of a government project my organization is administering: that my staff was having an incredibly difficult time dealing with the constant redefinitions of standards for the project that were coming from his office.

He accused me of being unprofessional. I was (momentarily) speechless, considering that he was (a) young enough to be my son, and (b) had barely worked as a manager long enough to know what "professional" meant.

On the other hand, my husband claims he fell in love with me when I corrected an error he made in one of our first e-mails to each other. Believe me, it's not men we have problems with; it's a certain type of man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Young Aspiring Historians
Posted by: jaygirl18 on Apr 14, 2008 11:55 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it interesting how academic discussions are carried out in classrooms. I will record my next classroom college discussion just to listen to who talks more, and who gets more credit. In my classes, which are overwhelmingly female, a female student will say something, only to have a male student reiterate it and receive credit for it. Women at my college are always discussing this problem part of the academic world. When will a female student receive credit for her work?
------------------------------------------------
More often than not, it could be said that I am not listening enough, and perhaps only see injustices done to females. However, I highly doubt that women are willfully talked down to, but are silenced by more booming voices.
Perhaps women are idiots, or have just given up after elementary school, middle school, high school, and college years of being silenced.
This is the flaw in our culture and education system, but not a flaw in women and those "non-booming men". I loved this article...it was sassy and just made me a little more confident in not being afraid of what I know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

fine party guest you'd be...
Posted by: Cooltruth on Apr 14, 2008 12:11 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Somehow I doubt you'll be getting invitations to anymore of his parties if such conversation as your host was making was 'patronizing' you! Admittedly he may not be as skilled as Sallie in engaging conversation with you, but lamer conversation skills making him 'patronizing'? Gimme a break! Just sounds like he was trying to get you to talk about your books instead of being patronizing towards you. The devil would be dodging snowballs before I'd invite such a guest to my next party if I were that hapless host! Often men have to know women longer for good conversations to happen than other women do. If you were adverse to talking with your host why bother with attending their parties? Sallie more fun to talk with? Enjoy talking to Sallie somewhere you won't be bored by old men attempting to make 'small talk' with you. (duh)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I enjoyed this article
Posted by: jeffr on Apr 14, 2008 12:28 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read the authors article with a lot of interest. Personally, I don't understand where all the "man-bashing" or pre-emptive defensive strikes from all the men are coming from.... Apparently everyone missed this sentence in her article, which I think was one of the most telling sentences in the entire piece...

"There's a happy medium between these poles to which the genders have been pushed, a warm equatorial belt of give and take where we should all meet."

Amen. I took no offense whatsoever from her description of these characters, because I'm not like that. So I like the article, and I "think" that I "get it".

I did however, take issue with the blanket statement about "restraining" orders, which is just misleading... and serves no purpose other than to discourage women from availing themselves of what little protection a court order may actually afford.

The author states "Even getting a restraining order -- a fairly new legal tool -- requires acquiring the credibility to convince the courts that some guy is a menace and then getting the cops to enforce it. Restraining orders often don't work anyway."

Having worked 8 years in the court system, dealing with "exactly" these issues, married to a feminist lady lawyer who specializes in helping indigent women, and serving 2+ years on the "Law and Legislative Subcommittee on Domestic Violence", I wanted to clarify a couple of things.

#1 - Typically (not always) the first order is an "Ex Parte Order Of Protection". The "Ex Parte" part means "without the party". In other words, it is issued without the other person knowing that the order is issued.

Person A comes in and says Person B is threatening/harrassing/stalking them, and they need protection. The Court says, "ok we'll give you this piece of paper ordering Person B not to bother you until we can get to the bottom of this". Then it issues the temporary order, and schedules it for hearing.

Meanwhile, person B could wind up in violation of an order they weren't even aware existed and be hauled off to jail. Very much borderline infringing on Person B's civil rights. (please don't get bent, because I understand WHY it is that way, and I support the way it is done, I'm just making an observation because not ALL cases are legit... if you can imagine, lots of people in my area find the "Ex Pahrtaay" the preferred method of terminating a relationship...)

At the hearing, the person asking for the order does indeed have to prove that the other party has done something to deserve a "Full Order Of Protection"... that "innocent until proven guilty" thing. Since violation of the Order of Protection is, or can be, a Felony in most jurisdictions, this is not a trivial thing. Even then, we aren't talking about a full-blown criminal trial. Each party just says their piece, and the judge decides.

#2 - BY FAR however, most of the cases progress to one of two conclusions... either they are dismissed by the person who filed, or the other party fails to appear (or consents) and the order is granted.

There are definitely, backward ignorant misogynistic judges that don't always (or ever) do the right thing... but MOST Judges can tell quickly whether or not there is credibility to the complaint. It usually doesn't take 5 seconds to figure out, because as soon as the woman begins to tell her side of it, the "Man who knows everything" starts "correcting" her.

Getting the cops to do anything is another issue, so I'll just leave that part of it with me and the author in agreement. In the end, the orders indeed many times aren't worth the paper they are printed on, because, after all, they are only a piece of paper. But sometimes, they do make a difference.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When guys communicate, we exchange information
Posted by: fanny666 on Apr 14, 2008 1:01 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obviously speaking in broad generalities: when guys communicate, we exchange information; when females communicate, they talk about subjective experience.

Ever meet a female who won't stop talking about her problems? The guy who won't stop sharing information- correct, incorrect, relevant, irrelevant- maybe that is the male version of her. Just talks to talk.

As a guy, you see it all the time- other guys feel competitive and try to come across as smarter, so they try to throw out facts and information... It usually backfires.

The sad thing in this article is the sentence, "Being women, we were politely out of earshot before we started laughing..."

Why?

I wish women would speak up more. Only if they know what they are talking about, of course... Condoleezza is just as full of shit as the rest of them are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Just an opinion! Posted by: fanny666
The Frustration
Posted by: sasha40 on Apr 14, 2008 1:20 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is it that Alternet's male readers have such a hard time dealing with any discussion of gender relations without becoming defensive and feeling "man-bashed"?

Many commenters seem to have completely missed the point of the article: that the woman is an expert on the topic being discussed, not tremendously young, widely published- but her opinions on her own subject are not of interest to the men, who assume, on no evidence and on more than one occasion, that they know more than she does. Men, how many of you have been so rudely challenged in YOUR field of expertise? How many have to struggle to get their own self-perception accepted by the people they interact with on a daily basis?

That is the point: the Very Important Man has made himself incapable of seeing the Writer, the Artist, the Doctor or whatever else a woman may have striven to become: he only sees someone who is there to confirm and legitimize his worldview, and his sense of his own importance.

It's not that men are so horrible. It's that at the exact moment when you least expect it, on your own playing field, this lack of respect is likely to crop up, and you, as a woman, are very likely to be complicit in your own humiliation.

How many times in every woman's life does she feel the frustration of knowing that no matter what she does, or accomplishes, or becomes, in the eyes of some men- not all, but more than a few- it will never matter. Never. Imagine receiving that message, after all the years of school, and girls-can-do-anything rhetoric, and working your ass off to make something out of yourself: in the real world you're just a sex object, a nursemaid and a sidekick. No matter what else you do, if you don't conform to those roles too, you've ungendered yourself, you're a bitch and very possibly no one will ever love you and you will die alone, pathetic and reviled by society.

Any woman who says she hasn't internalized these messages to some degree, any woman who doesn't admit to having to work like hell to overcome them, is not being honest, either with herself or others.

And any man who doesn't admit that this dynamic exists, even if he is also actively striving against it, as many men are; if he doesn't admit that these experiences are real and practically universal; if he can't understand why the reality is so painful and seems so hopeless to those who experience it- that man is not just holding women back, he's holding up the progress of all humankind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Frustration Posted by: leta
» I will second this Posted by: suprmark
» RE: The Frustration Posted by: Joe
Men Explain Things to Me...???...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Apr 14, 2008 1:32 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...WHY?...
OK, ok ...your a woman, I'm a man... there, done...

Why! do things always have to boil down to gender specifics with some people?
"Female chauvinism" is just too LOUD...

If you need a man to explain things to you then you've got some serious problems Fräulein
that I would prefer to run far and fast from...

its never about gender!
Gender divisions are usually only supported by those dead of heart,
while lacking common sense and good ears!

The answer to your query's always boil down to;
Honesty, Compassion and Empathy [to layman],
but to Capitalist's its ALWAYS about ...ABILITY...

Gender doesn't/shouldn't even rate a reply, unfortunately I did...
and I know I'm gunna get flamed for it...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Did you actually read the article Posted by: Bearzerker
It's evolution....
Posted by: Smiff on Apr 14, 2008 2:33 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ladies....be, say and do any and everything you feel the need or desire for. Work hard at it.

A little secret....if you do it REALLY well this time around, you get to come back as a man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Gets 'em every time... Posted by: Smiff
» Thank GOD I'm not a man .... Posted by: stellabloo
» RE: It's evolution.... Posted by: wal55
Thanks!
Posted by: dumdumboy on Apr 14, 2008 3:53 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I appreciated this article very much.

To those who didn't, I know that the truth hurts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Take it for what it is...
Posted by: abqchief on Apr 14, 2008 3:52 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and analyze your own behavior. You don't need bullet points or action items.

I'm a lucky guy. I had a woman tell me I was a bully many years ago while pontificating on a point intended to belittle her.

I listened and actually worked on it.

All it takes is believing that you're not any smarter than the next person. Listen first and then see what you can add to the discussion.

When you forget to act human toward someone else (male or female), recognize it, acknowledge it and move on.

It ain't that hard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Next Level
Posted by: LeslieR on Apr 14, 2008 7:05 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's take this there. If a member of a racially or ethnically oppressed group cited examples of his oppression here at Alternet, would anyone challenge the truth of those perceptions? Gawd, I hope not, or we haven't even stepped onto the path of listening to each other. But still today, when a woman does so, dozens of people from the oppressor group pile on to tell her she's wrong, she's generalizing, she's misinterpreting, she's absolutizing, she's whining, she's playing the victim, she's a harpy, she's ungrateful, she's a shrew, she's a b***h.

We have a whole bevy of names for women who complain about their condition, who assert themselves to speak their truths. Do I need to list more? Any linguist, even an amateur one, will tell you that we create names so that things/conditions/attitudes exist. And repetition is reaffirmation. Most of what's happening with this outpouring of repetitive and defensive blather is re-affirming, re-asserting, re-erecting the status quo that Ms. Solnit has dared to chip at.

What are so many of the men here telling the author and us? That middle-class white women in the United States are not oppressed because [liberal] middle-class white men deem there is no such oppression. Because they say so, it is so. Sad to say, telling women to shut up about women's inequality is, too often, a liberal mantra.

A few, a very few, people from the oppressor group here have listened. And if you'll read what they say, you'll find that, to a man, they've observed, learned, and come to confirm the truths in here long before Ms. Solnit's story. Goddess bless 'em, and goddess bless all the women who put up with the rest of the men on this planet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yeah Posted by: leta
Off topic, but I gotta know:
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Apr 14, 2008 9:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are all the posts in this thread italicized on your computer screens, too?

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thanks, Rebecca
Posted by: DaBear on Apr 14, 2008 10:04 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Intriguing piece. I don't personally know what to do with a good deal of it other than get mad and feel put-upon, but whatever, that's her truth and a lot of sisters' truth and I'm grateful to have interacted with that truth, if only by reading.

I can empathize to some extent with most of the elements she raises, and I realize that the gendered aspect of this has a different experience for me—as a male who gets explained-to a lot by both men and women, usually from across class lines (working class writers who refuse to play the owning-class games aren't embraced for their observations across the class divide.. we seem to be uniquely positioned for many a lecture by our class "betters").

Rebecca's writing is harder for me to read lately in general... like many AM-wired "activist" people of privilege, who tend to brim with confidence and surety, Solnit comes across to me as very smug and bitter without much cause. It was a revelation to me to read that she has had a self-doubt ever in her life.

One thing in genderized writings I seem to chafe at is the broad and often biting brush used to paint whomever is the targeted Other. But I get that, as much of my own work shares that biting frost for whomever class-Other gets into my own sights.

I don't know how to reconcile or shrink that gender gap between the mids and hypers of the female and male gender continuums. My own ordeals and experiences are in the realm of the hypos who get beat-on from both within and without our "gender" groups.

I know that I guess I don't need to worry about becoming a man-hate target of Solnit at some party... working class people don't get to go to such things, we're too busy working for the next meal, fighting with the cops or the landlord.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A woman explains to me
Posted by: DaBear on Apr 14, 2008 10:41 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My mate just read the piece and explained the whole point: "it's like that asshole who just fired me for not teaching exclusively and restrictively from the textbook even though four major publishers hire me as a consultant to develop supplemental content for those same textbooks. Bottom line: he's a wealthy privileged guy with only three years' experience in education. I'm a woman with twenty years classroom experience and ten years as a publisher's consultant. He felt inferior (for no reason) and so he fired me (for no reason) because I am a woman."

Oh fuck, Rebecca, now I totally get it. Now I'm just really really pissed off. Maybe Eric Cartman is right, you should just "kick them in the nuts." I hate men like that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some men
Posted by: YogiBear on Apr 15, 2008 12:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Restraining orders often don't work anyway. Violence is one way to silence people, to deny their voice and their credibility, to assert your right to control over their right to exist. About three women a day are murdered by spouses or ex-spouses in this country

As someone who writes about domestic violence, I agree, in part. I've been told by shelter workers that, in NC, about 3/4 of men accused of domestic violence never do it again. It's like it takes an actual arrest for them to see the error of their ways. The other 1/4, however, never stop until they are imprisoned for battery or their victim is dead or flees the state. It's scary stuff.

So long as the author understands it's some men, not all, not a majority who react this way, I agree with her point; though certainly in my life I've had my legs cut out from under me by know-nothing men and women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Men in a class of their own..
Posted by: Kevin Straw on Apr 15, 2008 3:46 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Then there are these other men...". The writer has to convince us that the kind of attitudes she is criticising can only be found in men, so that her criticism of "men" is not simply an airing of a prejudice. Implicit in her article is the notion that gender is relevant to a person's attitudes. It is seductive to think so, but who can present a Venn diagram of male and female attitudes where there is an area of each that neither share? It takes some effort these days when talking about the opposite gender to excise from one's thinking the notion that "men" or "women" form a discrete subset of humanity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impasse?
Posted by: talkville on Apr 15, 2008 4:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So. Does a woman explain back? Or does she proceed to explain how men explain things to her who then will be countered by a man explaining her explaining of men who explain things to her and explaining things about this dynamic? Then, in the annihilation of time and space, does each one of us regardless of gender maintain this dialectic of explanation represented within the mind?

It's hard to explain, but sometimes I get the sense that all of us are explaining shadows, specters and all sorts of spirits to ourselves and to others. Oh well, I don't know; still less do I understand. What knowledges and understandings are gendered? What knowledges and understandings aren't?

Questioning and dialectic are superb modes of reaching towards knowledge and possible understanding -- at least explanations are not being offered by anyone in such relations. That, however, requires equality -- something in short supply if not outright absence in our vertical and thickly Parentalistic society. Could SOMEONE please explain how this has come to be?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So what was the point again?
Posted by: tattery202 on Apr 15, 2008 6:48 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what was the point again? Men are idiots or women are better than men? It's a tough act to look down your nose at someone who you claim looks down their nose at you. Maybe you should look in the mirror to see who the arrogant one is. You must be the only person in the world who's ever written a book.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So what was the point again? Posted by: fringedweller
» ditto Posted by: keyinside
A quiet man
Posted by: keyinside on Apr 16, 2008 12:54 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My wife's mother married an "explainer." Frankly, he's a total bore who is no fun to talk to because he's an "expert" on everything, and nothing excites or interests him, since he knows everything.

I'm sure as a man I've done my share of unneeded explaining, but I hope to maintain the self-awareness to keep it under control.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who cares
Posted by: ladmeaux on Apr 17, 2008 8:57 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with other comments - the gender wars or overblown. So the man was a pompous ass - I've encountered this species in both genders. So he didn't believe she was an author - retire to the next room to buff your ego. So little substance in articles like this - an outraged sense of gender inequality fuels the never-sated sense outraged self-entitlement.

I spend a lot of time in Nepal. Coming back to the US I am struck often by 1) this sense of entitlement, 2) the arrogance and self-centeredness of many people here, and 3) the myopia of the media. Alternet is a perfect example. The fixation on gender issues IN THE US, perceived slights and injustices, while women around the world are struggling with more basic issues is nauseating. Like the recent article on "Feminism and Porn," or I should say take that article for example. If this is what "feminists" think about the most, or it is so important that we have feminist-approved porn, then who cares. Too much time and print wasted on issues that don't matter. Porn isn't worth discussing that much.

As is the case with this article - amusing, yes, but trite and ultimately pointless. Her book on Muybridge sounds tiresome as well. Alternet needs to dump its PostModern inter-disciplinary feel, and look into issues around the world. For example, since left-leaning politics is VERY cool on this site, in my country Maoists are winning elections and soon will have the governing majority when it comes to rewriting Nepal's new constitution. Any pseudo-liberals out there know about this, or care? And what would that mean to India? What about the tainted elections in Zimbabwe? Or Kenya?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

sensitive new age guys
Posted by: whealeydj on Apr 20, 2008 3:41 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is a great song. and the phrase explains why senstive men take offense at what we perceive as male bashing by womynists...because we are so sensitive even if criticism is aimed at insensive patriarchal types. I thought the article waw great and the comments revealing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chiming in
Posted by: scryberwitch on Apr 21, 2008 10:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have to add my voice to the other women's agreeing with this. I get that condescending treatment a *lot* because I'm only 5' tall and look quite a bit younger than my 35 years. I have a Master's degree in journalism, and because of all the research I've done for all the articles I've written, I have a pretty broad knowledge base, especially in forensic science.
And that's the point, for all those posters that want to insist that it's not about gender, or that they don't understand why we're getting our panties in a bunch about "a couple of pompous asses." It's not just two pompous asses. It's that we have to deal with this - being ignored, denigrated, disrespected - a lot. And it's usually from men. That's called "sexism." And yes, it still exists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement