tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post1506396207330346474..comments2023-06-16T05:25:55.741-07:00Comments on Elliptica: On Using Feminine Cultural AdvantageLynethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06357023675142716573noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-28764603563810281652008-02-11T09:15:00.000-08:002008-02-11T09:15:00.000-08:00Very well put. I do think she has to show a femini...Very well put. I do think she has to show a feminine side; there are those who would condemn her for being too hard. And let's remember that she isn't the first politician to show a few tears. To my recollection, Bush has done that and so has B Clinton. And I'm sure there are more!<BR/><BR/>Needless to say, my vote will ultimately not depend on such fleeting moments in the spotlight.L.L. Barkathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13333960142447144678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-78993038085152879902008-02-08T14:39:00.000-08:002008-02-08T14:39:00.000-08:00Alon,I'm not sure if "concern trolling" is a usefu...Alon,<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure if "concern trolling" is a useful term or not, but I will certainly agree that it is often used to dismiss people who have honest reasons for saying "I'd like to be part of your movement but . . ."<BR/><BR/>I don't think that's what is happening with Andrew Sullivan, though.<BR/><BR/>Quixote: <I>I do not know the full context this quote was delivered in, but shouldn't it be mentioned that this is just another example of veiled patriarchalism?</I><BR/><BR/>Case in point. It could very well be veiled patriarchalism. It's presented as advice to feminists, though, so if it were veiled <I>deliberate</I> patriarchalism, it would be the very definition of concern-trolling. <BR/><BR/>I suspect, however, that Sullivan believes what he is saying and that it is veiled <I>inadvertant</I> patriarchalism. He probably doesn't care enough about feminism to really think through the implications.<BR/><BR/>Feminism is diverse enough that I can't dismiss a statement that claims to be feminist just because it doesn't agree with the conclusion I would come to. I have to argue against it from a feminist standpoint, instead.<BR/><BR/>Q: <I>The goal of feminism as I was trained was not that women should be men (heaven forbid), but that they should be women with equality.</I><BR/><BR/>See, most feminists would agree with that statement, but you'd find us arguing over what it <I>means</I> to be a "woman with equality". Liberal feminists would definitely be concerned that "women should be women with equality" might be taken to mean "women should act feminine -- but still have equality". On the other hand, some very radical feminists would agree entirely that women should act in ways that radical feminists see as womanly and not allow themselves to be tainted by the masculine 'poison'.<BR/><BR/>As a relatively liberal feminist, it seems to me that the most sensible solution is to fight at both ends: try to reduce the stigma attached to certain types of behaviours that are seen as 'feminine' <I>and</I> try to reduce the stigma on women 'acting like men'.Lynethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06357023675142716573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-53301226820164324642008-02-08T06:08:00.000-08:002008-02-08T06:08:00.000-08:00Very nice post, Lynet. The whole idea that a woma...Very nice post, Lynet. The whole idea that a woman can't lead as a woman, but must become more masculine is sickening.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09429263099197981481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-71308398811747730382008-02-07T19:09:00.000-08:002008-02-07T19:09:00.000-08:00"Can you imagine a male politician breaking down i..."Can you imagine a male politician breaking down in public the day before a crucial vote - and expecting it to help?"<BR/><BR/>Lynet,<BR/><BR/>I do not know the full context this quote was delivered in, but shouldn't it be mentioned that this is just another example of veiled patriarchalism? Underneath or behind the quote, it appears that Ms. Clinton is faulted for not behaving like a man.<BR/><BR/>bell hooks said that "silence is often seen as the sexist 'right speech of womanhood'--the sign of woman's submission to patriarchal authority." When women break that silence, especially strong ones, they are criticised. The kicker is that they can never satisfy the critics: they are either "robotic," too tough as if they are overcompensating, or criticised for being too feminine. The fix is in...<BR/><BR/>The goal of feminism as I was trained was not that women should be men (heaven forbid), but that they should be women with equality. <BR/><BR/>QuixoteAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-34646286798090036822008-02-07T17:35:00.000-08:002008-02-07T17:35:00.000-08:00Some do. Some Democrats tell Republicans how to ac...Some do. Some Democrats tell Republicans how to act to avoid being extreme. Read any liberal pundit on how bad it is that Republicans aren't following the small-government ideals of Goldwater if you don't believe me.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-85471279273347125412008-02-07T16:36:00.000-08:002008-02-07T16:36:00.000-08:00Alon, there most certainly is such a thing as conc...Alon, there most certainly is such a thing as concern trolling. Watch any conservative pundit, on TV or the internet, and you'll soon see it in action: lifelong Republicans who offer advice to Democrats on what votes would "help" them and how they can keep themselves from appearing "extremist" (invariably, this involves knuckling under to conservatives' demands).<BR/><BR/>Getting back to the original topic, it's obvious that there is a double standard, and though Hillary's learned to play to it somewhat, it still tends to shade how she's depicted in the media. Typically, she's a robotic "ice queen" until she shows the slightest hint of emotion, which inevitably gets her marked as "hysterical". <A HREF="http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2008/01/hostile-environ.html" REL="nofollow">Slacktivist</A>, a few weeks back, linked to a political cartoon in which Hillary is depicted as giving in to terrorist leaders because she was suffering from a bout of PMS. As he pointed out, one can only assume that this cartoonist is disturbingly ignorant of human psychology if he thinks this would still be happening to a woman in her 60s.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-40794460368930583292008-02-07T16:31:00.000-08:002008-02-07T16:31:00.000-08:00Well, part of it is that Obama isn't running an is...Well, part of it is that Obama isn't running an issue-based campaign; he's running a campaign that's about his campaign, just like Dean in 2004. Policy-wise, he's practically the same as Clinton. His health plan is slightly more conservative, but it's not as if Clinton is advocating single-payer health care. So of course he's going to employ character attacks. It's the same with Clinton, who has no problem using character assassination against political enemies, and on top of it seems to think everyone to her right is conspiring against her.<BR/><BR/>The pundits like writing about things other than controversial issues; it's easier to maintain readership when you don't have to take a position on Iran or health care reform or immigration. But it's not as if Clinton and Obama are giving them a lot of issue-based stories to write about to begin with.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-60593822237908177462008-02-07T11:07:00.000-08:002008-02-07T11:07:00.000-08:00My gut-level reaction is that I can't stand how th...My gut-level reaction is that I can't stand how the American political scene has descended into this cynical pit where politicians are praised on their skills with superficial positioning. I know you probably don't read the Mormon blogs, but when people who disagree with Mitt were praising his strategic abilities for cleverly getting free airtime for his "faith" speech and for pandering just right, I was about to tear my hair out. And I feel exactly the same way watching the Democrats -- who naturally should be the winners this time -- at each other's throats deconstructing women vs. blacks trivia.<BR/><BR/>Maybe analyzing such questions will be fun when it's all over, but I feel like other questions (such as war record, etc.) should take center stage for the moment.C. L. Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12698855413639518095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1948420587779787298.post-16370797512113046452008-02-07T10:02:00.000-08:002008-02-07T10:02:00.000-08:00First things first: there's no such thing as conce...First things first: there's no such thing as concern trolling. It's a term invented by liberal bloggers who can't possibly fathom how their rhetoric and tactics might turn people off.<BR/><BR/>As for Sullivan's article, it's just punditry. The pollsters got New Hampshire's Democratic primary all wrong, so the pundits latched to whatever explanation would make people read their columns. The only thing worse than mainstream political pundits is off-mainstream political pundits.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.com