The Feminist Divide
October 30, 2010
by Malvina Kefalas
|The following op-ed was written by The New Agenda’s fabulous, brilliant intern from Barnard. If you’re wondering what the future generation thinks about feminism, read on!!! The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda.
As an overly involved college student, I have little time to peruse my favorite feminist blogs and analyze feminist news as much as I’d like. However, I still make the time to search the ‘net for all most intriguing of insights into the world of feminism, sometimes landing on stories, speeches, interviews of feminists from all different walks of life. Don’t pelt me with stones just yet, but I’ve come to see that our feminist ideal is a little too narrow, a little too selective.
We have long talked about the “gender divide,” and we’ve even discussed the issues arising from separating the waves of feminism, but we’ve yet to address the ever-pressing issue: The Feminist Divide. Sounds familiar – factions in social movements have existed throughout history. Especially throughout the existence of women’s movements, we’ve been wrought with questions like, “What does ‘feminist’ really mean?” As a result of this, we’ve created infighting within our sphere of ideas; it has gone on, neglected, for too long, and must stop if we ever hope to tackle larger issues.
I began studying at Barnard College this fall and have had quite a few discussions about whether or not the student body, as a whole, accepts the term feminist. While many of the women I’ll be going to school with this year certainly hold the opinions of feminists, not all of them use the word itself. I was not shocked with the taboo intertwined with the word, though I may have been a little appalled. That got me thinking.
The genuine definition of the word feminism, more or less, is a belief that women should hold social, economic, and political equality, yet it still has such a negative connotation all around the world. Why is it that we are so afraid to claim the word “feminist” in this new era of change?
“Man-hater.” We’ve all been exposed to words that manipulate the denotation of feminism, and they somehow seem more prevalent than the actual word. Now, this is not a revelation by any means; feminists have been refuting these vile word choices for years. Maybe that’s only part of the problem. Yes, we’ve eagerly placed deserved blame on those who’ve defiled what should be an unambiguous term.
But, maybe some of the blame lies with us, too. Women, and men, within the movement have been arguing, sometimes bickering over what makes a feminist, who can be a feminist, what is “truly” feminist, what is “anti” feminist, and at the heart of it, what feminism hopes to accomplish, since the emergence of the movement itself. This back-and-forth has led to an inability of feminists to actually decide upon who can rightfully say she, or he, personifies the canon of feminism.
In a very adamant way, I’m quite liberal and pro-choice, and say so freely. In the very same adamant way, I have friends who are quite conservative and pro-life. I subscribe to the school of the thought that there is no one factor that defines feminism. Nevertheless, we have become so wrapped up in trimming down the feminist world to an elite few, and every single one of us is guilty of it.
Instead of the much-hyped sisterhood that’s expected, we alienate each other if, for example, our views on reproductive freedom differ. When we attach apologetic language for believing something different from the feminist norm, we have gone too far. When we tell people brave enough to accept and reclaim the word feminist that their beliefs don’t qualify them to do so, we have gone too far. When we persecute our fellow feminists the same way nonbelievers do, we have gone too far.
You are not the only one who has been a perpetrator – or survivor of – this. Hey, I’m guilty of it, too! It is, unfortunately, a natural defense mechanism to protect us against the real opposition. I have, on more than one occasion, accused someone of not being feminist “enough,” as if there were scales of feminism or degrees to which one could gauge their feminist ideology.
We are so intent on creating this ideal, elite picture of a “feminist” that we’ve become hypocrites. While we chide the media on creating the image of the perfect woman, we’ve done exactly the same thing. In the feminist aristocracy, you can be only a feminist if you’re this, or you believe in that, or you’ve worked for so-and-so organization and worked against another.
Of course, it sounds incredibly like I’m knocking feminism, but I’m not. I am a feminist with all my heart and soul, so I hope to give others the courage to love the word “feminist” as much as I do. I wholly understand why this infighting originated. At the real base of these attempts to clarify the meaning of feminism is a wish to create a safe-haven for all the women and men who have ever felt wronged as a result of their belief in equality or their recognition of societal issues. I get it.
When I first realized I’d always been a feminist, I wanted to “fit” into the community and be a kick-ass feminist, too. It took me a long while to realize that I could still wear the color pink and advocate equality, but I got there with the help of some fabulous feminists who were willing to tell me that those stereotypes that kept me out were ridiculous. So I’m here to say that this infighting is ridiculous.
The stakes are too high. We can’t let feminism die when gross human rights violations throughout the globe occur disproportionately against women; we just can’t. This isn’t about who’s a feminist and who’s not a feminist anymore. Feminism is personal, it’s real, and it’s raw. It changes the lives of women every day, and it should mean something different to everyone if it’s truly as awe-inspiring as we all claim it is.
Let’s give ourselves some credit, though. If we can come to the point of discussion where this dichotomy can exist, we’ve done a wonderful job of intricately examining feminism. This divergence within the movement is an attempt of those who hate feminism to distract us; we can’t let them win by preventing us from acting as one entity.
So let Sarah Palin call herself a feminist, and let Hillary Clinton call herself a feminist with the same sense of urgency as Gloria Steinem: they’ve all seen the world through different eyes and challenged barriers through different actions. They want to eradicate and stomp all the world’s sexism, patriarchy, and misogyny, too.
Let’s come together as feminist individuals and fight the battles that we’ve marginalized just as we were marginalized for so long. Our collective wish to get back to the basic and principal essence of feminism transcends our differences. Just as the human race shares a basic genetic structure, we all found feminism through the same basic view that the world should afford us all better choices and better opportunities. We can solidify our purpose if we allow that hunger for justice to unite us because of, not in spite of, our diversity.
Excellent article. Congratulations. Thorough & covers all of the components of wrongdoing that women face and how we break down barriers by standing together and speaking out.
However; “What’s in a word”? Everything. I don’t think the choice of “feminist” was the correct word from the beginning (1970?) and has, since then, come to mean too many diverse passions and commitments that almost frighten some.
Just my 2 cents. Thanks for the brilliant, articulate and thoughtful op-ed.
Nancy
Great article. Love your comment…”Feminism is personal, it’s real, and it’s raw. It changes the lives of women every day, and it should mean something different to everyone if it’s truly as awe-inspiring as we all claim it is.”
Well said Malvina. With young feminists like you in charge the old movement has hope. For my part I am tired of debating the old ivory tower issues while average women’s reality falls backwards and I don’t need political dogma to substitute for religion so I am now a Parity Person. I vote for women candidates every chance I get and if any party wants to win my vote the way they can do it is by running women candidates.
Excellent article Malvina, you make so many good points. Given that the word “feminist” seems to turn off so many young men and women, I’m still unsure if we need to reclaim it or morph it into a new word/description for the 21st Century. I’ll keep thinking about it. Thanks again for a great article.
Malvina I always called myself a feminist too, also have to accuse myself of splitting behavior. See now that the most important thing is to be inclusive. that is easier said than done. the suggestion of using the term pro women has some value, but splitters will have different opinions what “pro woman” is.
to me the two most important dichotomies in the feminist movement are 1) range of negative views we have about men and 2) the abortion issue. I am so glad that TNA has broke some middle ground to allow a broader discussion than any other feminist organization. we here actually tolerate a certain degree of men hating. this is very important, because the abuse and violence women have experienced varies and the resulting emotions about men’s inequities vary. I am very glad for that, that we are not afraid of the truely pro-women men running away. with 1/4 to1/5 of women raped men hate needs a voice and thank you TNA for allowing some space.
the second division around abortion has been overcome her by generally shunning the topic and allowing only minimal discussion. it worked. but I still think we need to discuss the problem. I cannot fight for abortion because it is a cruel practice. on the other hand interfering in desperate woman’s life is equally cruel. So I am all for a woman’s right to decide over her body. But I do not like to fight for abortion. I think the problem is actually going back to the cause, the root of unwanted pregnancy. if we are not ready to call out the perpetraters who don’t care about unwanted pregnancies, and let it be a women’s problem, we will not get anywhere. abortion need to become a menz problem. if we had stiff fines for impregnating a woman against her will, we would make headway. it would mean that sexually active men would need to think about contracts, committments of they wanted to avoid fines. they would need documentation, that the pregnancy was wanted by his partner. so we could talk with the pro life people about fining the men who cause unwanted pregnancies.
the fight for abortions in my mind has just enabled all the guys who don’t care to present abortion as a minor procedure, eliminating a few cells. very wrong a fetus and a have seen hundreds are usually looking like tiny babies with all physical features just less personality. it is wrong to paint abortion similar to extracting a tooth.
Well put Malvina. It gives me hope for the future that younger women and men are still fighting the good fight. You are right that there is room for all under the broad umbrella of feminism. There can be ‘Feminists For _______” , whatever, fill in the blank. As long as it goes back to the genuine definition of the word feminism that you noted, the belief that women should hold social, economic, and political equality, Good job! Keep going! We’re here with you!
Melvina,
Loved your article. I hope you continue to write and prob this very important issue, which affects not only women, but men as well. Unfortunately, men have been conditioned to believe that women don’t deserve their respect in terms of being viewed as equal and deserving of having an equal place at the table of life.
What I’ve noticed is that women are constantly analyzing themselves and trying to understand how we can better communicate our right, our “human right” to be hold equal status in society as men and that we should abolish all laws and obstructions placed by men (and sadly with the help of some very misguided and disillusioned women) and stop this insanit.
Women and men are different sides of the same coin. That their continued oppression, suppression and violent acts against women will ultimately destroy them as well. The patriarchy has defined what it means to be a man to control women and to be able to do this, men must “objectify” women. We can never really understand the why of that mindset. It defies logic and reason and must evolve from a centuries-old fear of women, which, in itself, is terribly ironic, considering men consider themselves superior to us.
Why not turn the tables? Why not start a viable campaign which asks men a rather simple, but very relevant question…”would they want their mothers, wives, daughters, aunts, grandmothers to be treated in the mysognistic way women they don’t know (or rather, women who are not of their tribe) are treated by themselves and other men?
If they can answer this one question honestly and reflect on what it means when (and we hope that they will conclude) that NO, they wouldn’t want this to happen to the women they know and love, then maybe we can finally answer the big question of “why they do it in the first place to any woman” and be able to stop man’s inexplicable hatred of women, once and for all.
Maybe we will never be able to reach those men who still view women (even women in their own families) as second class citizens or worse, chattel, to do with as they please no matter what we do, but maybe by getting even the least rational of men to answer that question, we’ll be able to bring more men in alliance in understanding our desire to live our lives to the fullest extent, just like they do. To finally lead them to the realization that human rights don’t just apply to men, but to “all human beings” and women are the other half of the human race and they cannot survive without us anymore than we can without them (although I think women might have an easier time of it, than men would!)
I just want a feminism that says pro-woman and means it. Not pro-woman-but-I-still-hate-that-bitch-over-there. Pro-ALL-women. No more “pro-women’s-issues” or “pro-women’s-concerns” or any of that jerrymandering junk that lets people call themselves feminists while still allowing SOME women to be punished as asking for it, bringing it on themselves, or deserving it.
The “it” in question of course being sexism.
Pro-WOMAN. I want women to realize that ANYTIME a woman comes out on top in ANY struggle over a man, this is a victory for ALL WOMEN. No, it is NOT a victory for women for an anti-choice woman to be sexually degraded and harassed off the national political stage by calling her a whore, slut, cunt, and other delightful things. The defeat embodied by those is larger than any “victory” we kid ourselves we’ve won by watching her get ripped to bits before the eyes of 300,000,000 people in ways that only a woman ever suffers.
I never want to hear anyone say again that a bunch of Republican women winning their primaries is a blow to feminism, more so than if a bunch of Republican MEN had won them. I no longer want to be lectured at that the lukewarm “victory” of watching a Democratic male win an election (who will end up rolling back abortion rights with his tepid not-really-support anyway) is better for women than not watching a Republican woman be sexually degraded nonstop for months.
Feminists are REAL GOOD at saying that we can’t support imperfect women because a high-visibility failure of a less-than-perfect woman would do such damage to us. Do they not see that failing to support such tragically imperfect women and thus watching her get politically gang-raped for months on end counts as a high-visibility failure?!
Do they think they are hiding what their real motivation is? Getting off watching That Bitch Get Hers? Because that’s what it’s about. They aren’t protecting women from the terrible hypothetical ideological failure of the insufficiently perfect Sarah Palin. They are just getting off watching her get sexually humiliated.
I want a feminism where women don’t make conscience-cleansing ideological excuses for their own woman-hatred.
Janis,
“their own woman-hatred…”
I believe it’s more “self-hatred”, which women are conditioned to feel towards themselves and other women who fail to achieve “perfection” in a very imperfect world.
Remember what we were taught as children, is just as relevant when we become adults, as far as how men and women view themselves:
“Girls are sugar and spice and everything nice…” and “boys are snakes and snail and puppy dog tails…”
The different definitions society immediately places on little girls and boys is that little girls have to be perfect and little boys do not. No explanation as to why, just do what the patriarchy tells you and no questions asked or you will pay a huge price. Hence, what you so eloquently described in the huge price women pay for running for office that men clearly don’t.
I guess you could say that men don’t want to give up the free ride they’ve conveniently given themselves, while imposing impossible standards on women, which we spend our entire lives trying to achieve.
Oh, one last thing, Janis…any woman who does not hate herself, must be a “man-hater”. That’s one way they keep us divided and off-balance.
Men never have to face the real hatred in the ongoing saga between men and women…men’s hatred for women which is based the overwhelming stats of violence they perpetrate upon women all over the world every dim, damn day!
Has anyone here figured out why men feel they can “define” women and how we should act, look and dress, but would never allow women to impose our definition of what being a “real man” is?
When did men start believing that they had the right to define women? On what authority?
It also tangles up in the accusation of “man hatred” that Malvina talked about, too. Women are so anxious and terrified of being accused of it that they bend over backwards to reassure people and themselves that they aren’t. I have seen so many absolutely appalling exchanges online in supposedly “feminist” forums by women who would call themselves feminists where they are all falling over themselves trying to outdo one another over who LUUUUURVES men more!!!!!
“I’m a feminist, but I’m not one of those manhating ones!”
“Me neither me neither!”
“I LOOOOVE MEN!”
“I love sex with men! Love it!”
“I can’t live without men!”
“I know TONS of women I hate WAY MORE!”
“ME TOO ME TOO!”
“I think men are PERFECT AND WONDERFUL!”
Who the hell are they trying to convince?
It’s incredibly depressing — they feel like just because they are feminist that they had better abject themselves to men extra hard before someone somewhere (WHO?) accuses them of hating men because they don’t hate themselves.
And they know deep in their hearts that they are cutting extra slack for men because they are terrified of being MAN HATERS. So they cut no slack at all for women to prove how not-man-hating they are, and to make themselves feel better for being ultimately doormats for men. I know I’ve yelled about this in the past even here, but I am firmly convinced that the WE CARE ABOUT MENZ TOO! garbage that you occasionally find even on this site is ultimately an apology to men for caring about women. We are still not to the point where we can talk about breast cancer and just leave it at that. No, we have to find a boy-part cancer that we can set alongside it because simply focusing on women without further comment might make someone call us MAN HATING, eek not that. Caring about women == hating men! Even if the only people out there who might conceivably even imagine this are so crazy and beyond help that we shouldn’t even be giving a crap about what they think.
So all those women who forgave the shit out of Jerry Brown and stomped on Meg Whitman were proving (again, TO WHO?) that they weren’t manhating. They were so un-manhating that they would even forgive a man for calling a pro-choice woman a whore! Look, see how un-manhating I am?!
I am just tired of women who fear that accusation so much that they will go out of their way to shove a woman out of the lifeboat for minor infractions in order to prove (TO WHO?) that they aren’t.
The only way you can prove that you aren’t a manhater (or won’t “vote for a woman just because she’s a woman!”) is to go out of your way to hate the woman instead.
But women pine for the love and affection of men, and so that accusation will slide under the skin and sting every single time. It is the perfect Achilles heel.
” … any woman who does not hate herself, must be a “man-hater”.”
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Ladies – what you write does not represent the belief of this organization. The New Agenda is not anti-male nor do we in any way agree with the notion of women being men haters. Perhaps you can express those sentiments at other websites – a general anti-male rhetoric has no place here. Thank you.
I’m not a man-hater; I’m just frustrated more men don’t see it (sexism) and aren’t more pro-active. I think it’s difficult to develop a point of view for most women because there is such a disconnect between the relationships women have with men they know and love (father, husbands, sons, friends, etc) and the very real fact that women in general are disadvantaged compared to men in general. I think we do ourselves no favors by blurring the line between our realities and our generalizations.
That said, Malvina, I loved your article. It’s very hopeful, and you made a lot of good, cogent points. Does Bernard have a student paper that this editorial could be submitted to? It needs an audience among your peers, too.
As an aside, I LOVE your name. It’s the name of a wonderful woman from history, Malvina Shanklin Harlan, who was married to John Marshall Harlan, who was Chief Justice of the SCOTUS for many years. She wrote an autobiography called “Some Memories of a Long Life,” that is pretty revealing in terms of what the norms and important events of the day looked like to an observer. She tells her story with wit and a charming voice. If you get the chance, I hope you look her up!
Amy,
I appreciate your concern for TNA to not be viewed as anti-male; however, I think what Janis, I and others here have been trying to say is that women spend way too much time worry about not being viewed as men haters so much so that we see nothing wrong with hurting another woman in order to prove that we aren’t.
It isn’t “man-hatred” that we are talking about, it’s “self-hatred” women have for themselves because we have been conditioned since birth to consider men first and ourselves last.
I find it amusing how much we worry about not being “anti-male” in a world that has proven to be predominately “anti-female” by the men who run it. Yet, inspite of the horrific injustices perpetrated against women by men, women are still capable of loving them unconditionally.
The problem is, and always has been, the anti-female attitude by men AND women that continues to rob us of our God given right to a full life, not the anti-male.
I understand your point of view which you have expressed several times here. I can only assure you that as an organization we do not “worry” about anything but being pro-women and finding ways to empower women and have women support women.
Again, the anti-male rhetoric is not part of what this organization stands for. We are one of the fiercest advocates for women in the country right now and we by speaking out for and protecting women.
If you feel the need to express anti-male sentiment, we appreciate that you do so elsewhere.
Malvina- well thought out, cogent, passionate article…keep up the great work exhibited here and I know that many doors will open for you…
“Has anyone here figured out why men feel they can “define” women and how we should act, look and dress, but would never allow women to impose our definition of what being a “real man” is?”
I think it is human nature to define the world around you and the beings in it, women do it too. Yes men’s institutions have missed in their definition of women and they have defined women relative to themselves and their needs. But a lot of women define men relative to their own needs (why is it that any man with money will have women all over him regardless of how old he is or how he looks). Men built societies institutions and so they used their definition of women and the world around them. We all know men see things differently than we do, they miss some forms of communication and they communicate differently than women. They don’t understand the concept that THEY are the minority not women and clearly they need to get that through their heads. But I do believe women have a responsibility to communicate with them in terms they can process. You wouldn’t walk up to a person who speaks only Russian and give them important information in English and then expect them to respond to you like they spoke your language. Similarly you can’t talk and talk and talk at men about a problem and expect them to “get it” because clearly they don’t process language very well. I don’t subscribe to the victim theory of Feminism, women have a responsibility to communicate clearly in a way the other people around them can understand.
Bes,
“(why is it that any man with money will have women all over him regardless of how old he is or how he looks…”
In a word, “conditioning”.
I would agree with you totally if women had equal power with men. Then our definitions would not be a result of not having much power, if any real power, at all.
Women are taught that they must seek out men with money, power and prestige, in order to obtain it for themselves vicariously through the man.
What we are trying to achieve with feminist blogs like TNA is how women can unite and achieve it for themselves and no longer depend on men to be empowered. That’s what the patriarchy is working overtime to stop from happening with the ongoing vitrolic mysogyny we see happening in this election cycle.
You’re right. Men do define women through their own eyes and that’s why so many of them are so afriad of us obtaining equity with them in power. They think we will do to them, what they’ve done to us for centuries.
Amy,
First, with all due respect to you and TNA, I don’t think there has been any “anti-male” rhetoric expressed in response to this article. What I and OTHERS have tried to make clear “several times” on this site, is that we don’t think it’s anti-male to focus entirely on the female condition. How is that being anti-male?
Women have never really had a place where they could go and ONLY focus on their needs, their concerns, their anger, their place in this world. Again, like we said before and it continues to get lost in the fear of being viewed as anti-male, that the African-American community does not consider it “anti-white” nor do they ever apologize for not allowing other issues to cloud their own while they seek solutions to why they haven’t yet achieved equal opportunity in society.
Women who are 51% of the population are still lagging so far behind the AA males, who are less than 12% of society. Why? As we’ve said before. It’s because they stayed focused on what it wss to be black in this society without concern for being called “anti-white”. Maybe they got away with it because their movement involves MEN and not just WOMEN.
If you take their progress into consideration, then it comes down to the problem is US, with our constant need to be conciliatory while we are fighting for a place in society that is already rightfully our’s but STILL continues to evade us. Has it occurred to you that maybe what Janis, I and others have said on many occasions here to your chagrin might be true? If we ever want to unite women in the way necessary to achieve the same kind of respect and progress the AA men have managed to achieve, then maybe we will have to follow their example?
NOW didn’t. MS didn’t and look where they are today. If you ask me, the writing’s on the wall. The question we have to answer is do we have the courage to accept it for what it is and do something about it?
Nice article! What a joy to read.
I don’t hate men, I have a father, brother, son, husband. But I do hate the patriarchy because although women suffer some obvious harm, men are destroyed by it too, much of the time without even being aware of it, believing they’re enjoying all these great benefits of male entitlement. But in exchange they suffer more fragile health, higher suicide rates, accidents, war, violence. Thankfully we focus on women for a change at TNA, but I’m always aware of how many young boys are out getting themselves maimed and murdered over some sort of twisted definition of masculinity. All that human potential is dying in the streets for the stupidest reasons.
As to women who attack other women and collude with the powers that be, we have to remember that women are trained to do this from day one, but also that for much of the female population it’s a matter of survival. Those of us who don’t depend on men for physical protections, for economic security, are actually very lucky. Somebody once shared a piece of gallows humor with me about how hating men was a luxury she couldn’t afford. I try to remember that when I get angry with women who throw other women under the bus. I’ve got it kind of easy, some women have to actually sacrifice their souls just to survive.
I agree that NOW, MS and Emily’s list failed to be focused on women’s issues and they sold us all out. We thought we had representatives all this time and we didn’t, they took our money and they focused on issues that don’t affect all women even though they had the issues of media images of women, equal pay for equal work, equal research of disease in women, equal medical coverage for women, parity in government, etc staring them in the face. But they had all been off track for years and we let them go on auto pilot. Yeah I wrote them letters but I never received a reply because obviously they talk at people they don’t allow conversation or input from the great unwashed masses.
I think women’s causes never get anywhere for a number of reasons. A very big one is failing to communicate in ways that are clearly understood by the patriarchy. If women really vote Republican this election that will be communication all political men can understand because they don’t actually care about your issues and they never will but they do care about their own wealth and power.
Also devotion to non violence is another mistake women make. Violence is a form of communication men understand. As an example a young woman I know who is in engineering school went to Physics lab (2 girls in the class) and the teacher forced the kids to work with new groups so she was separated from her usual guys. The guys she was stuck with started talking about how women can’t drive, can’t play video games etc, etc. She ignored them for about an hour and then she punched the mouthiest one. She says he stopped talking, left the room and she hasn’t had any further problems. The men in her class consider this to be a problem solved.
Terrific post, Malvina…and as the mother of a teen, I am thrilled with where younger women are taking the pro-woman movement. As others have stated, the issue has always been how women relate to themselves and each other. Consistently and collectively making demands, insisting on fairness, and not defining ourselves on male terms are hard to do, but we’re proving every day that it is possible. I’ve always said that when we lead, the good men will follow…The second wave only got so far because of left/right infighting. Some women on the right tried hard to weaken feminism, and in many ways they succeeded. Like you, I am a pro-choice liberal…and I too am very happy to hear conservative women call themselves feminists. That was what the Second wave never achieved.
I am not so concerned with the word “feminist”, who claims it, who doesn’t, etc. I am more concerned with the realities for women in this country and globally.
I am happy to see a record number of women candidates in the US this year.
Dilma Rousseff just won the runoff to become Brazil’s first president. I am glad to hear of any country electing their first female leader and still hope to someday see a female president of the US.
I never really cared to call myself a feminist. I consider myself to be an individualist. I defend those who seem to need to be defended, the vulnerable and the wrongfully accused. Women and girls are vulnerable because of their physical make up. If it were not the case there would not be so much rape and violence committed against women because they would have a fighting chance against it. In the male dominated liberal media many female journalists fall in line with the Chauvinism and become female chauvinist pigs themself. I wish Hillary Clinton stood up stronger against the misogynic left. I thought she had it in her but now it seems to me that the conservative women are the ones who will slay the Chauvenist Pigs. They don’t have to worry about alienating the approval of the sexist Hollywood elites or the Hip-hop women haters. They never had their votes so they don’t need to appease them. Feminism is just a label. If men were the ones being oppresses I hope we would be fighting that oppression. The New Agenda began out of an urgent need to defend women running for high office because they were being attacked in a vile, cowardly and destructive way. I think we TNA members are all just people who want justice and freedom for all people, but we know that it is women who have been denied these things more than any other group.
“I wish Hillary Clinton stood up stronger against the misogynic left. I thought she had it in her but now it seems to me that the conservative women are the ones who will slay the Chauvenist Pigs.”
I think Clinton was still working off of the old playbook that says, “Ignore the bullies and they’ll go away.” Liberals have had a lot of that “rise above it all” mentality ingrained into them. I would run through a gasoline fire for that woman, but when you’re hit, you hit back. Sure, they’ll call you names for it, but they were calling her names anyhow.
I think in a lot of ways, conservative women aren’t operating under any illusions about what men are like. They know that you hit back, that you HAVE TO hit back. Palin came in after seeing Hillary ripped into bloody shreds, and she just ripped back — thankfully. I admire her so much for that. Every single time they attack her, she hits back harder. they are scared to attack her now, which is precisely as it should be.
I LOVED it when they mocked her for writing maybe four words on her hand — unlike the Teleprompter In Chief over there, whose hand isn’t big enough for all the notes HE needs. And she leaped on it and called it “a poor man’s teleprompter.” Arnie tried to mouth off at her about “can’t see Russia from here” when he flew over Alaska, and she ripped him a new one about “he should have landed, I could have explained the state’s surplus to him!” She makes her enemies look ridiculous.
I see them as two sides of one coin — Athena and Kali. And I love them both … but Kali is a LOT of fun to watch. Heh heh heh … :->
Janis,
I think Palin and Clinton both learned TONS from campaigning. Palin did not hit hard back when she was running for VP at first and even mentioned (when discussing Hillary / sexism) that it was best to rise above it and just do a great job. Since then, she has stated that this viewpoint was a mistake and at the time that she said that, she hadn’t yet had enough experience into the pits of misogyny.
Who knows how Clinton would handle it now if she were running again? I’m sure it would be different. But I agree. I LOVE The way Palin handles it now! It is indeed fun to watch Palin, time after time, rip them all new ones…
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 22, 2012 at 11:22 am
February 17, 2012 at 2:39 pm
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...