Should get this out first: I am not partial to cultural relativism and identity politics.
Now to get on with it. Discussion has exploded on the internet about how presumptuous and Islamophobic Femen have been with respect to “Topless Jihad Day” - that title and way of framing is certainly…
The logical extension of the mentality of rape is the objectification of all who can be cast into the role of victims of violence. Rape is the primordial act of violation but it is more than an individual act. It is expressive of a basic alienation within the psyche and of structures of alienation within society. Rape is an act of group against group: male against female. As I have pointed out, it is also an act of male against male, in which the latter is attacked by the pollution of his property. Rape is expressive of group-think, and group-think is at the core of racial prejudice whose logical conclusion and final solution is genocide.
|—||Mary Daly, Beyond God the Father (ps. 117-118, ch. 4)|
I love this image so much.
I’ve seen some women who are offended by this and say it’s ridiculous that her cleavage is showing and things of that sort.
Personally, I think it’s great.
Why should we have an image of a women with her hair tied up and flexing her muscles like she’s a man? (not that that isn’t great too!) In a way it suggests that when our hair is down, our breasts are visible and we wear (GASP) lipstick, we’re somehow lesser than men? We can do it! We can be feminine and successful.
You see what I’m saying here, ladies?
You don’t have to lose your femininity. Being feminine is great. Being masculine is great. Strength is not limited to one way of being.
oh my fucking god, this again
Have you even looked at the actual Rosie the Riveter poster lately?
She’s ALREADY WEARING LIPSTICK. AND MASCARA. AND BLUSH. Her eyebrows have been PENCILED AND TWEEZED. And underneath her work bandana? HER HAIR HAS BEEN CURLED. Rosie the Riveter is a beautiful woman. This image in no way implies that wearing feminine apparel (like cosmetics) is a negative thing.
The reason that she has her hair up and her shirt buttoned and is flexing her arms has nothing to do with prudery, or with trying to be “masculine” (as if shows of physical strength are unique to one gender). It has to do with the information at the bottom of the poster: Rosie is involved in war production. That means doing hard physical labor in a 1940s factory, where large heavy machinery can easily snag a loose lock of hair, or a bit of jewelry, or an undone button. “Makeover” Rosie would not be able to do the real Rosie’s job without serious risk of injury to herself or the people around her. In that sense, the new poster is implying that no, women are NOT capable of doing the same work as men, because they are too weak/vain/self-absorbed/whatever. The old poster is saying that, while still being feminine, women are just as capable of doing the same work as men.
Also? The new and “improved” Rosie was specifically drawn to be ANTI-FEMINIST. “[William Murai] created this image for the Brazilian Alfa Magazine to accompany an article about the End of Feminism. ‘The idea was to remake the famous feminism symbol “Rosie the Riveter” [into] a lady who is giving up on her duties and trying to look sexy again.’” (emphasis mine)
Giving up her duties and trying to look sexy? For whom, exactly? According to the artist (and the patriarchy), men. In other words, quit your job, look hot, find a man, gb2 the kitchen, and make me a sandwich, bitch. Also known as THE SAME TIRED-ASS SHIT WOMEN HEAR EVERY. FUCKING. DAY.
The new poster is not “progress.” It is not about women being “feminine and successful.” It’s about the exact opposite: women being reduced to their appearance and their sex appeal according to the standards imposed by the male gaze. She is pretty, but that’s all she is, because that’s all women are supposed to be. The real Rosie (you know, the feminist icon?) is beautiful, and feminine, and strong enough to do the work necessary to keep her country safe, just the same as any man. Her worth is not in her appeal as a decorative object, but in the product of her labor and her own awareness of her abilities.
Rosie the Riveter. Accept NO substitutes.
Stop Patriarchy! went to the 27th annual conference at Amherst College, hosted by CLPP (Civil Liberties and Public Policy): “From Abortion Rights to Social Justice: Building the Movement for Reproductive Freedom” and on the second day, we were escorted out by police.
How did this happen??
Earlier this week someone I know was talking about how she was hearing International Women’s Day being covered on the radio and in the mainstream this year. She was astonished at how this day has slid into the background, as something to be “observed,” as if it was a birthday or a…
Thinking about that “soliciting a stranger for sex is not harassment” thing. That and some article floating around about how women should not be offended if a man tries to solicit them for sex.
When I read it,it just bothered me. I hardly ever get really pissed by things on the net,but it just…
I suspect that many WoC and ex-prostitutes don’t want to deal with white and/or libfem pro-prostitution supporters, because:
- tokenizing them as proof of “choice” when they get discriminated against outside of the sex industry anyway, is not okay - to say nothing of the discrimination within, the preference for light-skinned/blonde women (who get higher pay) and fetishization of darker-skinned ones.
- when they speak out, they are disregarded as “not experienced enough” or “but my (libfem) experience counts EVEN MORE, i am the authority!” or “ALL our voices are valid!” what this REALLY means is,”if you did it right, you would present it just as positively as i do!” (with rose-tinted glasses) oh yes, libfems are going to “save” prostitution from all the dangers in it, just by convincing those against it that it’s a good thing!
- negative experiences (like violence, STDs, mental illness, drug addiction, or not enjoying sex) are silenced because the libfems don’t want to give radical feminists more ammo, but also, it is very difficult to leave the sex industry (one of the things being finding another job afterwards).
- they don’t identify with their jobs or as “whores” and do have hopes and dreams and don’t want to be reduced to political talking points to support an industry that attempts to make itself the final stop for any woman. again, talking about things beyond the sex industry or in the larger picture is deemed “whorephobic” and giving other feminists more ammo.
- even though white/libfems pretend to be all-inclusive and intersectional, they have made it clear that when johns try to haggle for cheaper prices they don’t mind throwing other prostitutes under the bus with comments like,”go visit that $20 crackwhore down the street.”
- intersectional issues like classism where poverty is not neatly, but very often divides along racial lines thanks to continued discrimination - and that is an issue.
- streets don’t belong to people, prostitutes and johns included (you do NOT get an exception to it as a “free workplace”), and there is no (per Chris Rock’s lame joke) a “whore’s uniform” where a woman is “asking for it.”
- women are free to discuss issues that affect them, and it is not being hateful towards prostitutes when while being solicited there is not even a prostitute around. it’s an experience of misogyny. to say that one must be a prostitute puts pressure on them to take on those risks of danger, which they decided against anyway - since, after all, if it IS a choice as the libfems say then one is not a “born whore” and one can just as easily choose no, or leave, for very valid reasons.
- libfems make it seem the dangers are only coming from those who harass them on the streets, or arrest them, and not johns who could just as easily be those harassers (or their friends - they do gossip about them as if they were cars, and worse) and who go to them to degrade them, thinking women are there to be used. they imply that johns should be kept anonymous and uncriticized because they keep them unemployed, while making it obvious that it’s stupid to take seriously the opinions of someone who is on the job and fears losing clients due to speaking out.
“Whorephobia,” though, LOL
Second—and most obvious—sex workers are seen as objects to be bought, not as humans. More often than not, sex workers are not portrayed as skilled workers who provide their customers with a service in exchange for a fee. Rather, they are things—to be perused, used, and dispensed of by the “hobbyist” who uses them to bolster his monger status. The sex worker herself is seen as the product. Again, the “hobbyist” is the thinking, creative, artistic being here, while the sex worker is denied her status as a worker, performer, or businessperson—a person capable of choosing if, when, and under what circumstances to offer a service. The idea that johns think of sex workers as objects is obvious. But it’s also important. It suggests, first, that johns believe that the bodies of sex workers are available for their use in any way they choose. But it also reveals that the ability to treat women as objects is part—or perhaps even all—of a john’s real interest in prostitution.
Everyone needs to read this. “Child marriage” is the organized, repeated mass rape of girls by men, one on one. This often ends in the murder of those girls in pregnancy and childbirth, the number one killer of girls 15-19 worldwide. It is male violence on a massive scale.
This post brilliantly details the precise ways some trans supporters have adopted abusive tactics to SILENCE women, rather than engaging in honest debate. Especially the threats of suicide. I mean, REALLY???
This essay is well written, easy to read, comprehensive, and extremely illuminating.
PLEASE REBLOG IT!!!
It’s not so much that I am terrifically bothered on a personal level that some individuals live their lives as the opposite sex. However, I do not find the political or social implications of changing gender to be conducive to women’s liberation. In examining the structural and systemic nature of women’s oppression, trans ideology and practice seems opposed to an effort towards a more healthy social environment for women and men alike. For holding this view, myself and many other women have been at the brunt of a backlash to be reckoned with. The way this backlash manifests has a list of elements characteristic of classic abuser behavior. Let’s have a look at them.
Name calling:Women who critique the use of gender are routinely and quite quickly called transphobic, scum, vile, dangerous, Nazis, and evil—among other slurs. We are cursed at, verbally attacked, and berated for expressing any view short of total and complete adherence to the views of transgender theorists and activists. This happens regardless of how diplomatically we attempt to engage in discussion and, so far, without any verbal attacks or name calling in response.
Threats of violence:Radical feminist women are routinely threatened with physical violence, including beating, rape, stabbing, and even death.
Harassment and stalking:Radical feminists have been stalked privately and publicly. Trans activists have shown up to radical feminist events, sometimes in very large numbers, to harass, threaten, and verbal assault the women attending, sometimes singling out a single woman they particularly dislike. Online, some radical feminist women are sent constant emails and private messages containing threats of violence or verbal assault.
Rallying supporters and enablers: Trans activists enlist the help of women to side with them and assist in the the above mentioned activities. Women’s empathy is exploited to advance the goals of trans activists, even if the goals are achieved through abusing women who hold any opinion they dislike. Nearly all 3rd wave feminists support, protect, and help trans individuals to further their abuse.
Reversals: The word ‘cis’ has been coined and applied to women who do not identify as trans, and from this a theory of cis women oppressing transgendered people is formed. Underneath this analogy, women are accused of oppressing men, because the men claim to now be women. Since we do not claim to be anything, being that we simply are human females no matter how we identify, we are reframed as the oppressor for not taking on an identity that assumes the position of the ultimately oppressed. This completely side-steps thematerial realitythat we live in a male-dominated, patriarchal culture in which human females are oppressed on a global scale by men who wield power and privilege over us. No matter how we might identify, if we chose to, would this reality significantly change. The entire situation has been flipped upside down by simply adding a few words to the English language and developing a theory around the vocabulary. It is true that transgendered people face unique challenges when living their lives presenting as the opposite sex. It is not the case that women are now oppressing them.
Projection: Radical feminists are accused of hate, fear, and a desire to violate the human rights of transgendered people. Considering the behavior outlined in this list, I contend that this is projection.
Gas-lighting: We are routinely told that the threats of violence aren’t really happening, that we are just making this all up, that we are just hateful bigots or uneducated. It is demanded that everything be fully documented or else its existence is denied.
Erasure/Minimizing:For example, the word “female” is considered offensive and any conversation about menstruation or motherhood is called transphobic and/or hate speech.
Attempts to control, change, or distort reality:This is also related to gas-lighting, as mentioned above. For example, insisting that men who identify as women have vaginas, that there is no such thing as a female human being, or insisting that a penis is female, etc. are all forms of reality distortion.
Isolation: Because trans activists have an interest in the feminist movement, a split in the movement can be found along the lines of the trans position. In feminist circles, if a woman expresses any critique or sometimes even a question about the nature of gender and transgenderism, she is immediately ostracized, banned from the group, and rejected by her sisters. The only groups where this doesn’t happen is among other radical feminists. We are isolated for not conforming to an ideology that we have objections to, not for abuse or hate speech, but for disagreeing. Name calling, cussing, and verbal attacks are perfectly tolerated when directed at a feminist by a trans person. Disagreement with a trans person, however diplomatic and authentic the attempt to have a respectful discourse, is grounds for banning.
Sabotage: When radical feminists organize an event, it is often fervently protested, like clockwork, and sometimes successfully destroyed. Women’s reputations are targeted in a similar fashion the way a classic abuser tells the whole town and all the woman’s employers that she is a crazy bitch. The goal is to further isolate her and intimidate her into returning to the abuser or punish her for leaving.
Attention:We cannot focus on ourselves. As mentioned with my own experience, I was criticized for not mentioning transgenderism in my article about something completely unrelated. This stands true across the board. Any focus squarely on the rights of biological women is attacked. Discussion about women and girls, or anything that only effects women who were born as women, is attacked for not including transgendered people.
Constant, and I mean CONSTANT, drama:Sure to keep our heads spinning, no sooner do we announce a meeting than we have to work overtime to make sure that it’s not closed due to trans activist saboteur. No sooner do we start a discussion about, say, maternity rights than we have to address an onslaught of accusations that we are transphobic bigots. In fact, just saying, “I’m a radical feminist,” in a mixed feminist group can be cause for immediate upheaval of solidarity and drama all around the topic of transgenderismand nothing else. It can last all afternoon, all day, all week, all month—hell, we understand at this point that it will never end. We don’t have a second to breathe and reassess what is going on or focus on our own needs. Blogs are getting pulled, women are being email bombed, events are being crashed, groups are splitting in half, etc—ad nauseam. I am walking on eggshells, because I fear there’s a problem lurking around every corner when I try to do anything to improve the status of women.
No respect for boundaries: Women-born-women space is infiltrated regularly. Discussion takes place ridiculing lesbians for not being sexually attracted to male to transgendered people. Any establishment of a boundary by a woman that is tested by a trans person must be removed, or else the woman is in for the above list of actions. This is an especially sore spot for women, because we are not raised feeling like we have a right to set boundaries and are taught that having boundaries is abuse of the person who wants to cross them.
Threats of suicide and self-harm:Radical feminists are constantly told that we are killing trans people, although there is absolutely no record of an actual murder taking place in which a radical feminist killed a trans person. We are accused of causing violence against trans people, of causing trans people to hurt themselves, and being responsible for their suicides. This reminds me of when my ex, a narcissistic sociopath, faked his own suicide when I finally got away from him and didn’t go back. He got his own mother to call me and accuse me of killing her son. I found out later that he had never been in a coma, but had somehow convinced her that she needed to say that to make me talk to him—which I didn’t. He was abusive and I knew this was a trap. Another ex, also abusive, once punched through a glass door that I locked when fearing his attack and when he came in the house, he showed me his bloody hand and said, “Look what you made me do.” This is psychological manipulation. I do not ever want anyone to be so tormented that they take their own life, but it is abusive and coercive to attempt to make a person agree with you or else threaten suicide or blame them for the suicide of others.
In conclusion, based on this list of behaviors, I find much of the trans movement to be employing abusive tactics against radical feminists. I know at least one woman who has even taken out a restraining order to protect herself from physical violence after being vehemently stalked. I know multiple women who readily fear speaking at all because of this sort of violent backlash taking place. I’ve experienced enough of it myself to be absolutely fed up and ready to say: no more.
Regardless of how we disagree with one another, this is absolutely unacceptable behavior. It is intolerable. Assembling an army, a movement, which targets a group of women and then hailstorms them with abuse is not okay.
I am sure what will come of this article from trans activists is an assertion that we caused this, that we were asking for it in some way. Where have we heard this argument before??
Sheila Jeffreys paper The Eroticism of Inequality (via smashesthep)