debitage: part of the core tool and scraper tradition

debitage

12.11.05

About Feminism

This summer ApL asked a few questions about feminism. I'm reposting my reply here so that I can more easily refer to it later on.

(1) Do you consider yourself a feminist? Why or why not?
I don't consider myself a feminist, and I don't consider myself not a feminist. There are some feminists who would say I as a man can't be one, and it's not worth my time to argue. I believe what I believe, and everyone can decide for themselves whether I meet your own definition of feminism.

(2) What are your opinions/impressions of feminism today?
It's in the same boat as all the other progressive movements (environmentalism, labor, etc.) -- on the defensive because of a conservative shift in our culture and government. And like the other progressive movements it has an image problem because it's been relentlessly tarred with a caricature of its extremist fringe elements.

(3) What issues do you see being tackled by the feminist community today? Which issues do you think *should* be addressed?
I won't claim to have a comprehensive list, but I think there's a wide variety of things that feminists are fighting for both on a policy level and on a cultural level.
* Defending and improving access to abortion is without a doubt the top priority
* Connected to that, access to birth control
* Getting more women into positions of power, so our nation's boardrooms and legislatures and so forth are gender-balanced
* Attacking sexism in the media -- sexist characterizations/plots, the use of sexist themes in advertising, biased decisions about what issues get priority in the news, etc.
* Combatting the causes of body image problems and eating disorders
* Equality in relationships and dating -- getting rid of double standards, men who feel entitled to sex but aren't concerned about their partner's needs, etc.
* Eliminating the wage gap. This means not just paying women the same amount for the same work, but also addressing the overt and subtle ways that women are pushed into lower-paying and less prestigious careers, and the factors (like lack of child care and inflexible hours) that make it difficult for women to compete on a level playing field with men
* Equality within the household -- on average men still do less than their fair share of cooking/cleaning/childcare even when both spouses work
* Working to eliminate rape, both in the justice system (aggressively prosecuting rapists and not portraying rape victims as sluts who were asking for it) and on a cultural level (rooting out the sick views of sex and power that lead some men to rape)
* And I think American feminists are also very active in doing what they can to prevent some of the really egregious abuses of women's rights in other countries, like the imposition of strict Sharia law in Islamic countries (including, increasingly, Iraq) and female genital mutilation in Africa.

Also, I'd say GLBT rights are a feminist issue, since opposition to GLBT rights is usually based on defending traditional gender roles.

Aside from abortion (which I refuse to take sides on), all the battles I've listed as feminist agenda items are ones I'd love to see won. I could quibble with how they're prioritized, but I think the list is pretty good.

(4) If you consider yourself a feminist, what does that mean to you in your life? How does it influence your daily thinking and/or actions? If you don't consider yourself a feminist, do you see feminism and/or feminists playing any part in your life (either positive or negative)?
Feminists definitely play a role in my life, if for no other reason than that I read a number of their blogs every day. And I'm not a fan of traditional gender roles (to put it mildly), so I'm glad that feminists have opened up space for me to discard those roles in my own personal relationships.

Stentor Danielson, 12:25, ,

SUVs Make You Fat

Why is it that advocates of one left-wing cause are so eager to get ahead by working against other left-wing causes? And why is it that afterward, the proponents of these causes are so surprised at their inability to communicate a clear and coherent philosophy to the American people?

A recent case in point is Dweebs Drive SUVs (via Gristmill). I'm no fan of SUVs, both for environmental and safety reasons. And I support trying to make SUVs seem uncool as a strategy for getting people to get rid of them. What I don't support is accomplishing that by promoting unprogressive notions of coolness. In particular, that site makes shameless use of anti-fat prejudice in its case for why SUVs are uncool. (It arguably indulges in homophobia, although I think it generally stays on the "mocking men for feeling insecure about their masculinity" side of the line.)

Stentor Danielson, 10:41, ,

9.11.05

The Cultural Theory Of "He's A Douchebag But I'm Voting For Him Anyway"

Over at RedState, krempasky draws the same lesson from yesterday's Republican losses in New Jersey and Virginia as many Democrats did from the nationwide debacle last year: "welcome to the consequences of failing to inspire anyone." In both elections, the losers focused too much on the stick of prophesying doom should the other side win (Bush will overturn Roe! Kaine wouldn't execute Hitler!) than on the carrot of making people identify with the candidate and feel good about his plan to improve things.

I think some of the problem can be illuminated by Cultural Theory. The basic problem is that political junkies (including campaign managers and volunteers) tend to be Egalitarian with respect to elections, whereas most voters are Fatalists.

Douglas and Wildavsky argue that Egalitarian-Fatalist is a natural coalition (as is Hierarchist-Individualist). And there's some truth to that -- but it's a coalition that has to be carefully managed, and both the Kerry and Kilgore campaigns made a similar mistake in relying on their Egalitarian viewpoint in their interactions with the Fatalist electorate.

Egalitarians are easily motivated by fear. They see themselves as a small, tight-knit group struggling on behalf of the masses against an unjust system. They take a risk averse outlook, worrying that their small gains may slip away at any moment. So to tell a liberal Egalitarian that a Bush victory will spell the end of legal abortion will get him or her to the polls lickety-split.

It seems intuitive to an Egalitarian that a Fatalist ought to be open to the same sort of plea. Fatalists too feel oppressed by the system. There are problems, however. Fatalists have dealt with that oppression in a very different way. Egalitarians develop a theory of why and how the system is oppressive, and then fight to change it. Fatalists, on the other hand, give up on trying to understand their oppression and resign themselves to rolling with the punches. To point out that oppression is going to come from one direction is not very helpful, as they do not believe that anyone can really figure out and implement a plan for improvement. In fact, a fear-based argument is likely to cement their Fatalism further.

Fatalists may be experiencing and hating the high-grid situation that Egalitarians dislike, but they also lack the high-group that gives Egalitarians a sense of efficacy and purpose. An inspiring candidate can raise supporters' group, giving them a feeling of belonging and a vision of the future. That step of inspiration is necessary before fear-based appeals will have any purchase.

Stentor Danielson, 14:10, ,

8.11.05

Shoort Returns

I don't know what anything on this site says, but it showed up in my referrer logs and it has some neat pictures of people from Tierra del Fuego dressed up as demons.

Stentor Danielson, 21:41, ,