Skip to main content

Can Feminism be too inclusive?


A couple of things about this article: 
1) The professional class needs to stop talking about the snob cashier / barista who looked down at their purchase... who made them feel momentarily small. Not to worry, good woman! You can retaliate in knowing that that will be only moment that that person won't serve as a human dwarf compared to your accomplishments! 
Also, you can't have a world where people can get away being weird, be the kind of feminists Jessa Crispin (referenced in this article -- shit! she's getting press!) would like to see more of... the hairy-armpit, scary Andrea Dworkins, rather than the glam Gloria Steinems, unless you go back several decades when such were respectable in the feminist movement. These days, anyone like that is only going to be a barista, or stocking shelves. Leave room for the possibility that the person serving you isn't some borderline afraid of accomplishing more with their lives; that person might be the Andrea Dworkin of our time, easily forced into giving you a smile next time if you would have preferred to have complained rather than smuggled your minor humiliation out the door with you.
2) The further along into a period of growth you go, the worse the growth will appear to the sane. Growth makes people nervous. The hugely long legacy of the idea of original sin, that people are born to suffer not to self-actualize, owes to the fact that most people in history were born to unloved parents who needed their children far more than they loved them, and abandoned them emotionally when they began to individuate... when they began to leave them, grow up. These kids can't cope with that kind of apocalyptic loss and form within themselves a psychic overlord, a super-ego, a persecutory mental altar, that rages at them when they start "spoiling" themselves. We've been living in an ongoing period of growth that began right after World War Two. It was superb near the beginning -- during the 60s and 70s -- but is at a very ambiguous stage right now, and can easily be made to look preposterous. This article tries to keep faith with it, nonetheless, and deserves credit for doing so. The phase up ahead... is about the kind of horrible regression, punishment and sacrifice of talent and youth that enables a subsequent generation to feel justified in reaching for the skies again, claiming a Golden Age for themselves; it isn't about reaching those heights itself. 
Can Feminism Be Too Inclusive?
Who thinks Ivanka Trump is a feminist? Seriously, who? As far as I can tell, the only people calling her a feminist are Ivanka herself and conservatives who use her to attack real feminists as a pack of radical banshees.
THENATION.COM

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...
3 comments
Read more

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...
2 comments
Read more