Category Archives: Gender

What I’m Reading, August 13, 2014

Posted on by
Reply

The Rise of the Ironic Man-Hater, Amanda Hess, Slate, August 8, 2014

“Misandry”—literally, the hatred of men—is an accusation that’s been flung at feminists since the dawn of the women’s movement: By empowering women, critics argue, feminists are really oppressing men. Now, feminists are ironically embracing the man-hating label: The ironic misandrist sips from a mug marked “MALE TEARS,” frosts her cakes with the phrase “KILL ALL MEN,” and affixes “MISANDRY” heart pins to her lapel. Ironic misandry is “a reductio ad absurdum,” explains Jess Zimmerman, an editor at Medium and the proud owner of a “MALE TEARS” mug. (“I drink them to increase my strength,” she notes.) “It’s inhabiting the most exaggerated, implausible distortion of your position, in order to show that it’s ridiculous.”

On its most basic level, ironic misandry functions like a stuck-out tongue pointed at a playground bully: When men’s rights activists hurled insults at feminist writer Jessica Valenti on Twitter last month, she posted a picture of herself grinning in an “I BATHE IN MALE TEARS” T-shirt, and dedicated the message to the “misogynist whiners.” But ironic misandry is more than just a sarcastic retort to the haters; it’s an in-joke that like-minded feminists tell even when their critics aren’t looking, as a way to build solidarity within the group. “A lot of young feminists who I follow on Instagram and love this shit are teenagers,” Valenti says. (Search the tag #maletears and you’ll find dozens of young women—and a few young men—posed with a novelty mug.) “The feminism they grew up with was the feminism of snarky blog posts, and this is a natural extension of that.”

Logic and feeling, Ophelia Benson, Butterflies & Wheels, August 10, 2014 Continue reading →

Share

What I’m Reading, August 12, 2014

Posted on by
Reply

War in the womb, Suzanne Sadedin, Aeon Magazine, August 4, 2014

The cells of the human endometrium are tightly aligned, creating a fortress-like wall around the inside of the uterus. That barrier is packed with lethal immune cells. As far back as 1903, researchers observed embryos ‘invading’ and ‘digesting’ their way into the uterine lining. In 1914, R W Johnstone described the implantation zone as ‘the fighting line where the conflict between the maternal cells and the invading trophoderm takes place’. It was a battlefield ‘strewn with… the dead on both sides’.

When scientists tried to gestate mice outside the womb, they expected the embryos to wither, deprived of the surface that had evolved to nurture them. To their shock they found instead that – implanted in the brain, testis or eye of a mouse – the embryo went wild. Placental cells rampaged through surrounding tissues, slaughtering everything in their path as they hunted for arteries to sate their thirst for nutrients. It’s no accident that many of the same genes active in embryonic development have been implicated in cancer. Pregnancy is a lot more like war than we might care to admit.

The Trials and Tribulations of a Token Pretty Girl, Giana Ciapponi, Ravishly, July 23, 2014 (via Huffington Post)

Continue reading →

Share

What I’m Reading, August 11, 2014

Posted on by
Reply

The Guy Behind Confused Cats Against Feminism Is Sick of Mansplaining to Other Men, Simon Davis, David Futrelle, Vice, August 1, 2014

VICE: What is it about feminism that makes people misrepresent what it is when they argue against it?
David Futrelle: When it comes to discussing issues of consent, I think in that case a lot of the critics of feminism resort to caricatures especially because it’s something that really is fundamentally challenging them. Like the guy that feels he’s entitled to blatantly stare at women in public, or pressure a woman until she agrees to have sex, because that’s the way he’s always done it and that’s the only way he’s ever gonna get sex.

They don’t always want to say that out loud and so they pretend that consent is this extremely complicated thing and that feminists want everyone to sign forms in triplicate before they can have sex. So I think particularly around the issue of consent, there’s an enormous amount of smoke that they put up. They don’t want to have an honest conversation and say, “You know what? I don’t think I can have sex with a woman unless I get her really drunk first”. They don’t want to say that. So they’re like “oh, you want us to fill out a form first, well that’s ridiculous.”

Richard Dawkins and Rape Rape, Libby Anne, Love, Joy, Feminism, July 31, 2014 Continue reading →

Share

What I’m Reading, August 7, 2014

Posted on by
Reply

Fox News Calls Ruth Bader Ginsburg an Ignorant Misandrist, Amanda Marcotte, Slate, August 1, 2014

Ginsburg’s comments inspired comical levels of umbrage-taking on The Five on Fox News, where Andrea Tantaros worked herself into full-blown “misandry!” mode. “Isn’t she sort of saying, ‘Keep men away from this court?’ ” she complained. “I get it. She’s a fan of birth control, but she is an enemy to the Bill of Rights.”

“Can you imagine if Justice Scalia would say the same thing about the women on the court, that they have a blind spot? In other words, they’re not reasonable?” Tantaros said. That is an interesting hypothetical, given that, in his majority opinion, Justice Samuel Alito specifically shut down the possibility that any other kind of health care would be affected by this ruling. He’s the one who singled out contraception as a lesser form of health care, not Ginsburg. But hey, maybe the court will soon rule on whether male-only health care counts as health care enough to be protected as health care, and Tantaros will see her theory put to the test. I’m sure that will happen any day now.

A Reminder: Texas Murdered An Almost Certainly Innocent Man, Scott Lemieux, Lawyers, Guns & Money, August 4, 2014

Continue reading →

Share

The Feral Men of Comic Conventions

Posted on by
Reply

Sexual harassment was a major issue and topic of discussion at San Diego’s Comic-Con this year, where once again some people had to be reminded that a women dressing up in a possibly-skimpy costume—or any costume, or not in costume at all, for that matter—is not deliberately inviting any particular sort of attention.

To put it in simpler terms, cosplay ≠ consent.

Avicenna has some good observations on the problem:

Now think of it this way. This is something we love. Why would you not want it to be a safe space for women. They are entitled to the same stuff we are and the same safety. If a woman chooses to dress “hot” then sure.

Why would you drive women away from an event and a culture that was once defined by an abject lack of women. Aren’t we glad that we are mainstream? That our movies aren’t just fantasies or crummy but mainstream blockbusters. I mean holy crap, people are still talking about Heath Ledger’s redefining of the Joker. We are no longer weirdoes, we are cool.

And part of that is greater acceptance from groups that once ostracised us and from parts that we never expected. Women have begun to come to these events in greater numbers and they don’t feel welcome.

The sad fact is that many or most of the people who need to hear what he has to say have probably already heard it countless times from women, but are more likely to listen when it comes from a guy. I’ve been guilty of that myself many times.

Some people just refuse to see it that way, though. They can’t seem to get past the “dressing sexy” part, and as a result they portray men as uncontrollable sexual beings at the mercy of women in skimpy Lara Croft costumes (or whatever people are wearing nowadays—I’m actually a terrible geek.) Avicenna quotes one exemplar of male sexual entitlement and frustration: Continue reading →

Share

What I’m Reading, August 4, 2014

Posted on by
Reply

The Bullshit That Civilly Dare Not Speak Its Name, Batocchio, Vagabond Scholar, July 25, 2014

Civility does have value, but how it’s defined and actually observed (and enforced) can vary tremendously by community or venue. At its most basic, a civil discourse entails that each person gets his or her chance to speak without significant interruption and that needless personal attacks are avoided. A general ethic of cooperatively seeking the truth and exploring possible improvements to a given problem should also be in play. That said, among honest, sane, reasonably intelligent people, this standard is usually a given.

In contrast, in our national political discourse, the actual practice is that saying something that sounds harsh – even if it is factually, demonstrably true – is typically denounced as uncivil or otherwise rude, a breach of decorum. Newt Gingrich may be lying shamelessly, but the rules of the Beltway pundit game entail that calling him out as a liar is the true sin, not the lie itself. Rather than the hosts limiting the discourse to honest, sane, reasonably intelligent people (which necessitates qualitative judgment somewhere along the way), equal time – or rather, disproportionate time – is given to guests arguing in bad faith and/or with little to no expertise in the subject at hand. Consequently, civility as enforced usually does the audience a disservice.

How Big of a Problem is Harassment at Comic Conventions? Very Big. Janelle Asselin, Bitch Media, July 22, 2014

Continue reading →

Share

What I’m Reading, July 29, 2014

Posted on by
Reply

Religious Exemptions and Public Policy: Freedom to Discriminate, Genevieve Cato, Burnt Orange Report, July 26, 2014

Key to the legal fight to allow discrimination under the guise of religious freedom is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which, under Justice Alito, has become the primary tool for justifying these rulings of religious exemptions. It was also the basis for a ruling by a Texas judge in December, when she determined that three religious universities in Texas should not be required to cover methods of birth control they believe cause abortions.

***

The Catholic bishops had great success with what are called “conscience clauses,” which are laws created to allow certain employees to refuse service if it violates their religious belief. The most widely-used example of this is allowing pharmacists to refuse to sell birth control to consumers if it is against their religion. But this is completely counter to the way many Catholics understand the concept of religious conscience in the first place. “Individuals have conscience,” Smith explained, “not institutions.” Further, conscience is not about enforcing your beliefs on another person by refusing to sell someone their medical prescription. It is an individual journey for each Catholic person. This is why Smith refuses to use the term “conscience clause” and instead calls them what they are: “refusal clauses.” [Emphasis in original.]

Face It, Women: The NFL Does Not Give a Shit About You, Erin Gloria Ryan, Jezebel, July 26, 2014 Continue reading →

Share

What I’m Reading, July 25, 2014

Posted on by
Reply

If old white men feel maligned, they should take their own advice to minorities, Alyssa Rosenberg, Washington Post, June 2, 2014

If older white men feel maligned, they might try taking some of the recommendations that they routinely offer to people of color and women who want to better their lot. These suggestions are often presented as radically simple solutions to centuries of structural inequality. In reality, they function mostly as an attempt to make people with legitimate grievances less irritating to the powerful figures who might be expected to respond to their demands.

Africa Is Not a Derailment Tactic: Why Belittling ‘First World Problems’ Is Oppressive, Sian Ferguson, Everyday Feminism, July 11, 2014

Continue reading →

Share

What I’m Reading, July 24, 2014

Posted on by
Reply

A Congressman Questioned A Woman Living In Poverty And Revealed A Lot About Himself, Bryce Covert, ThinkProgress, July 11, 2014

On Thursday, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) held his fifth hearing on the War on Poverty, and for the first time he allowed a person actually living in poverty to testify. Tianna Gaines-Turner shared her personal experiences struggling to make ends meet and provide food for her three children who suffer from medical conditions along with her husband. She works as a seasonal employee with children for $10.88 an hour, while her husband works at a grocery store for $8.50.

But when Rep. Todd Rokita (R-IN) got the chance to ask questions of Gaines-Turner and the two other witnesses, he directed much of his attention toward calling into question whether she is dependent on government programs, whether she has tried to find more work, and if she is partisan. He gave a “theoretical example” in which the government would increase spending on government programs like food stamps and welfare by 500 percent and asked, “They [people on the programs] would be out of poverty and that would be a good thing?” to which Gaines-Turner responded, “Yes, the programs work, yes it would be good to move them out of poverty.”

***

Rokita’s questioning seemed to imply that Gaines-Turner could make more money and escape her “dependence” if she worked harder. But for many of those living in poverty, that’s just not the case. The majority of adult, able-bodied, non-elderly poor people work. But in this economy, finding extra work, or any work at all, can be nearly impossible. In May, the most recent month for which there is data, there were more than two times as many job seekers as job openings. And unemployment rates are even higher for those with less education, who also tend to have lower incomes.

The Senate flunks basic biology: Inside a disgraceful hearing, Andrea Flynn, Salon, July 20, 2014

Continue reading →

Share

Ted Cruz Is Not Happy About “True Blood”

Posted on by
Reply

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is not happy about the most recent episode of HBO’s True Blood, which included a fundraising event, with a very large picture of him, getting shot up by the Yakuza.

Let us pause a moment to marvel at what might be the strangest sentence I’ve ever written. Who would’ve thought True Blood could put the Tea Party and the Japanese mob together in the same room (with vampires!) and have it be sort of believable? But I digress.

Cruz’s objections to the episode are characteristically incoherent:

“Of all the places I never thought to be mentioned, HBO’s True Blood vampire show would have to be near the top of the list. Sunday night, they aired a misogynist and profanity-ridden episode where Texas Republicans are murdered attending a ‘Ted Cruz fundraiser,’” he wrote on his Facebook page. [Emphasis added.]

“Well, I’m sorry to have lost the vampire vote, but am astonished (and amused) that HBO is suggesting that hard-core leftists are blood-sucking fiends,” the Texas Republican said.

Cruz also threw in a voter fraud quip, because you gotta keep your material fresh, you know?

About that “misogynist and profanity-ridden” bit, though. Senator, have you ever watched this show before? This episode was tame in the woman-involved sex department. It even had a dang marriage proposal! In fact, a considerable portion of the episode dealt with forgiveness (Andy), redemption (Jessica), and healing (Arlene and Sookie)—very WWJD? kind of stuff.

I do wonder if the Lafayette-James sandwich caught Cruz’s attention at all…..it’s almost like he didn’t personally watch the episode. I don’t recall seeing anyone else naked* this week (although I could be wrong about that).

The fundraiser scene itself was uncomfortable, nihilistic, and gory, which is not at all uncommon for this or numerous other HBO series. On the plus side, it had a brilliant homage to Terminator 2 (and I don’t mean the guy who plays Alcide’s dad).

I don’t really think Cruz considers this episode, or this show, “misogynist.” I think he threw that word out there because he knows it’s something liberals take seriously, and he thought he could put us on the defensive with it. He failed to consider, however, that while liberals may take misogyny seriously, we do not have the same concern for the words of Senator Ted Cruz.

As for the episode being full of profanity? Yeah, no shit.

Finally, I assume Cruz got the idea** that “hard-core leftists are blood-sucking fiends” from Pam’s rather clever and off-color pun about being a “Republc###.” Clearly Cruz hasn’t seen much of the show, because Pam hates everybody. Except Eric. There’s nothing political about it.

* True Blood may come closest of any show yet, at least that I’ve seen, to what I’ll call nudity parity (a shamelessly borrowed term). This is not to say it gives equal time. Far from it. Over 6½ seasons, for every naked Anna Paquin we’ve had a naked Alexander Skarsgård, Joe Mangianello, and Ryan Kwanten (all links are tasteful, if technically naked). Don’t even get me started on all the permutations of possible sexual partners on the show.

** The other possibility is that he got the idea from flashbacks showing Bill Compton being opposed to slavery and secession at the start of the Civil War, but let’s stop right there with that, shall we?

Share