Monday, April 02, 2007

[post removed out of respect for people with either type of genitals, or both, or first one and then the other, or none at all, even]

One of the commentors said that she has a hard time holding these extreme political position against the men she loves.

The reply to her was something along the lines of, if she'd just realize that she wasn't at the centre of the issue, she wouldn't personalize it so much.

Who could argue with that?

(content at "I Blame the Patriarchy", for the curious)

— — — —

Retraction Retracted

My original post said something about being unable to resist linking the blamers, even though I felt certain they'd eat me for dinner. Then something about being meat. Something about being oppressed by my shoe collection.

It was cute, I thought, riffing on self-consciousness and objectification and shame. I guess you had to be there.

I give you the Blamers.

26 comments:

Keifus said...

Well, that was unpleasant to read.

For what it's worth, I cheerfully abdicate any real or perceived priveleges to rape, kill, buy, sell or consume women, or to suppress their autonomy.

I don't want to get into a dumb argument about porn, but I'll advise my daughters about marriage with or without solicitiation, thanks, even while respecting that the decision will ultimately be theirs.

That is all.

K

Dawn Coyote said...

um, keifus? Did I miss something? I didn't read the comments on that thread. I guess I should have. In fact, I can sort of imagine what they say, based on your reaction.

I apologize if I've offended you by posting that. Now I'll go do what I shoulda done in the first place and read the rest of what I linked.

What I find interesting about the blamers is the imperviousness of their position. My post was meant tongue-in-cheek - the piece of meat thing, the shaming of women who wear high-heeled shoes. Like we're second class citizens, or something.

Irony.

(I like the vagina/clown car poster. That was funny)

Dawn Coyote said...

Ten comments. I can't read anymore. It really is hate.

twiffer said...

well, after keif's post i ran through the comments and saw what he was reacting to. sort of over the top. but i'm not going to get into that. i had enough of shouldering the sins of all men from my ex-wife, thank you very much.

Dawn Coyote said...

I'm taking it down, unless anyone objects. I wouldn't want a post that was that hateful to women to stand. (more irony)

bEnder said...

I don't follow. I did, however, find your modesty a bit off-putting. My opinion: never delete. Strikethrough is cool.

Gregor Samsa said...

I object, but it's too late I suppose. I don't get the patriarchy newsletter anymore (feminist vandals, I suspect). Always eager to pick up stray news on the counter-revolution, anything that filters through the censorship.

Dawn Coyote said...

Modesty? Moi? Chagrin, maybe, for not reading through, and possibly offending keifus, and then reading hastily, and overreacting, and going back for a further read, and realizing that, hmmm - some thoughtful and balanced stuff there.

Flaky. I'm putting the link back.

I like the blamers. I especially like Twisty. But you're right, Ender, kind of - they make me uncomfortable for all sorts of reasons.

Keifus said...

Hey Dawn, your post was OK. I got the irony there, and found it pretty amusing.

But yeah, there's a line between feminism and misandry, and a lot of those commenters crossed it. I'll take your word on that twisty person.

K

Schadenfreude said...

I don't get it.

Stupid? Yes. Offensive? No.

(Although I have to admit that I have this sudden urge to have a sex change (but then I've always wanted to be a lesbian)).

Dawn Coyote said...

k: Misandry? But how come it feels so much like misogyny to me?

Schad: Obviously, I should leave this kinda thing to switters.

Up next: Dawn's review of alt. porn.

JohnMcG said...

Interesting...

Didn't quite make it through the whole comment thread, and to be honest it seems indistinguishable from a parody.

Seems like the blamers are coming up to a dilemna...

It's fun to blame the patriarchy, but in order to actually accomplish something, they need to include men in their coalition, and for some strange reason, individual men are reluctant to join a group that says that men are rapists and exploiters, and that anything that men have was stolen.

I'll say this for right wingers -- they may hate just as much or more than left-wingers, but they at least don't feign puzzlement at why members of the group they hate don't like them. I don't see right-wing Christian groups wondering why gay people don't want to join them, for instace.

JohnMcG said...

Could a parody do better than this? Hard to imagine..

"These constant sexual thoughts are unnecessary a hindrance to our species, as well as the possibility for extended life of any kind on Earth, at the rate humans are destryoing Her. There are too many humans in this world- period. All socialization of young humans should celebrate the individual, remove all encouragement toward heterosexually conjugal state-sanctioned unions resulting in a nuclear family unit, and begin to reinforce in everyone’s minds the non-priority that sexual intercourse is. "


Perhaps this is the Blamers' strategy -- stake out a position that is so extreme that it is impossible to parody.

JohnMcG said...

Sorry, here's a link to the comment I quoted.

Dawn Coyote said...

Follow up post here

Gregor Samsa said...

John: Did you read the mission statement? It'll blow you away.

twiffer said...

wait, one of 'em is suggesting we try to teach all kids to not want sex? good luck with that.

there's a reason there aren't any more shakers, after all.

twiffer said...

gregor, you bastard, that made me laugh.

Dawn Coyote said...

Well, I'm still reading the thread. It's fascinating, thought-provoking, uncomfortable and stupid by turns.

Some stupid stuff, just for fun:

“Even assuming that this is true, what you’re saying is that past evolutionary pressures encourage certain types of behaviour. If this were the case, we should all be adjusting selective pressures to wipe out this trait forthwith. By making an evolutionary psych argument for the existence of a trait, you are necessarily arguing that said trait can be changed.”

So okay, if you want to breed women-oppressing traits and conditions out of the species, how'rya gonna do that if you also hope to get women to stop reproducing? I know, I know - babies in vats. And if that doesn't work—what? Surrogates?

Okay, but if you want sex to stop, too? You're in a fix, I think. No sex and no breeding means that only those having sex and breeding are going to pass on their traits. Unless we're talking an elite class of women who employ surrogates or getstate babies in vats, who elevate virginity to a political statement, who abhor as the underclasses those who still have sex and reproduce.

I could see that, actually.

I feel oppressed by the blamers.

JohnMcG said...

Gregor,

Obviously any man who wouldn't want to be with a woman who subscribed to such a manifesto is useless.

Dawn,

Yeah, they would "win" any argument, by saying that whatever views their opposition holds demonstrates how completely they've been sucked in by the patriarchy.

Eh -- they can have their fun.

Dawn Coyote said...

I don't need to talk to them, even. I can refute myself:

Twisty sez: "You know, it means little or nothing in my young life if women are all “yay, porn and sex!” I don’t hate these women. I don’t hate porn and sex. I hate patriarchy. It remains to be seen whether patriarchy can be defeated by yay porn and sex. If it can, drinks are on me."

Sigh. Why do I even bother?

(I read that Valerie Solanis SCUM manifesto when I was in high school, in fact, I did a paper on RadFem for Social Studies. Solanis was charged with attempting to murder Andy Warhol.)

JohnMcG said...

Well, if effectiveness in defeating the patriarchy is the measure, I'm not sure their methods are doing so hot either.

JohnMcG said...

There is a part of me that wants to go over there and see what the most outlandish thing I could post there that would be received well or at least not condemned. Some possibilities:

-- Requiring girls (and boys) to wear the burkha or something similar in public schools, to send the message the girls and women are not sexual toys for males' pleasure. Attempt to establish it as the standard business attire for women.

-- Stigmatizing women who give birth to boys -- they should be aborted. There is no excuse for bringing another future oppressor into the world. None.

-- Prosecuting those who fantasize about women without their consent under sexual predator laws. Also establish civil penalties so that women can sue men who wrongfully fantasize about them. (Of course one problem is that those who would benefit from this are those who play the game and present themselves in a manner to appeal to men's disordered appetites, so this may require some work).

-- Mandatory vasectomies at birth for all boys who somehow get born.

---------------

It is interesting to note how they almost get all the way around to extreme right wing positions -- sex is dirty, as is sexual desire, women need to stop dressing like sluts, etc.

Keifus said...

Ah Dawn, you've given me an idea for the Wikifray T-shirt slogan:

"I ♥ my fellow misanthropes"

Catnapping said...

Oh, yes John, I think you post it.

heeeeee

TenaciousK said...

Followup to Dawn's followup (with followup comments) can be found here.