Post by khankrumthebulgar on Jul 13, 2009 8:12:52 GMT -5
This gets better and better. According to Violet Socks Amanda Marcotte, Jessica Valenti and other Third Wave FemBots are frauds. Who are sucking up to Alpha Liberal males for their approval and a career in Political circles. So they bashed Clinton then Palin engaging in Misogyny to be the paid for Political Whores for the Liberal Males.
This is terrific. A Feminist with decades long credentials calling out Amanda Marcotte as a Fraud. And the Feministe, and Feministing crowd as well. Read and enjoy. You cannot make this stuff up.
Comments from the giant thread: who speaks for feminism?
Dr. Socks is still working on the new curtains for the lounge.
Dr. Socks is still working on the new curtains for the lounge.
I’m brewing up a post on the question of litmus tests for feminism, and why it’s okay for dishonest misogynistic patriarchal tools to call themselves feminists as long as they’re in favor of choice, while a “pro-life” woman who’s a feminist in every other respect is reviled by these same paragons as a despicable anti-feminist bitch who needs to shut and up die. (You can probably guess what my take is going to be.) But I need to wake up a little more and do some reclusive things first.
In the meantime, as a kind of hors d’oeuvres platter, I invite you to consider these two comments from the giant thread:
#62 Reader says:
I think the explanation for the excoriation of both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin by Third Wave Feminist bloggers is pretty straightforward, myself. They are trying to carve out careers for themselves as public intellectuals. The fastest, most efficient way to do this is with the mentorship and assistance of people who have already reached a certain level of fame and connectedness. Most all of these people are men. To gain approval from men they desperately want to impress, folks like Amanda Marcotte, Jill Filipovic, Jessica Valenti, Ann Friedman, Megan Carpenter, to name but a few, went after Clinton and Palin and anyone who defended them, doing a service for men who would be accused of sexism for invoking that level of dishonesty and vitriol.
Seems to be paying off for them, too, at least in the short run. But someday they are going to reach a little too high and experience the same sort of smack downs from younger women on the way up that they have administered to anyone who supported or even defended Clinton and Palin. I can only hope they have enough self awareness to reflect on what they’ve done, when that happens. And maybe then they will become more principled feminists.
#97 Gayle says:
“To gain approval from men they desperately want to impress, folks like Amanda Marcotte, Jill Filipovic, Jessica Valenti, Ann Friedman, Megan Carpenter, to name but a few, went after Clinton and Palin and anyone who defended them,”
Approval and those all important links. I don’t know who Ann Friedman is and I can’t speak to all of those bloggers so I’m leaving (most) names aside for a moment. What I will say this that the better trafficked progressive feminist blogs used to exist somewhat independently of the big boy political blogs but that disconnect is all but gone now. I think this began, more or less, when Jesse Taylor invited Amanda Marcotte to blog on Pandagon. She linked to Feministe a lot; Feministe linked to Feministing, etc., and, eventually, this whole circle was connected to the progressive political blogs. There was an uneasy alliance made with some pro-feminist men welcoming the Third Wavers while other wanted nothing to do with them. The Third Wavers with integrity did call out sexism in the progressive blogosphere back then. I remember a few big flame wars.
Close to the beginning of the last primary election those women were invited to Yearly Kos (now called Yearly Netroots, but whatever) and a big to-do was made of their attendance there. Marcotte was given a two thousand dollar award from Act Blue at some point around that time. Extra added effort was put into bringing the Third Wavers into the Dem-blog tent and I have no doubt HRC’s run for the Presidency was behind those efforts.
I don’t know if people here know about the “Town House” email list but it’s kinda interesting if you want to know how the political blogs operate or if you’ve ever wondered why you read the same messaging over and over again, in predictable cycles. Town House is/was a by-invitation only group that hands out acceptable talking points to be disseminated by its affiliated blogs. The idea of Town House was to create a method by which progressives could do what right wing radio does with its audience: get those memes started and re-enforced through sheer repetition. Challenge those talking points and you get chased off the blogs.
Now lots of bloggers want readers and links and will link and repeat what’s popular on larger blogs to gain those rewards with or without a Town House type e-list. It’s not too hard to figure out what talking points are acceptable to those blogs without Town House. The problem is the larger progressive blogs are stuffed with political operators and outright misogynists. If you’re trying to be an honest blogger, you’re going to come up against this at some time and have to make a decision.
During the primary feminist bloggers did tend to point out and condemn outright sexist comments about Hillary Clinton. But at the same time, they were repeating all those other ridiculous talking points against her without any critical analysis. How could they trust the very same people who were calling HRC a castrating you-know-what when they were repeating lies about her killing Vince Foster? How could they not see through all the other lies and call them out? Did they really believe SHE was the risky candidate when it came to abortion rights?
My own hypothesis is a number of those bigger feminist bloggers aren’t really interested in raw politics all that much, anyway. They’re certainly not wonks. If you’re not the type to delve deep into political analysis, to study issues and politicians on your own you’re more likely to repeat what you hear without question. Especially if you don’t much care about what’s true or not true because you’d rather be discussing something more interesting to you: like racism or burkas or sexist advertising, etc.
If you read the larger third wave blogs you’ll see their interest in women’s issues is somewhat limited to two or three hot button topics: abortion, abstinence and rape. Now let’s see what political points were used against Palin in the GE. Hmm. Not too surprising, is it? Some feminist bloggers were well used. We’ll see what it wins them in the end.
PS: In fairness, around the time the Town House list was “outed” on-line, A.M. claimed she declined the invitation to join. I don’t know if there’s anyway to know who belongs or doesn’t or if it even exists anymore. I used it only as an example of how a group-think mentality has been purposely created in the blogosphere.
Now, just to be clear, since some folks reading this may not be friendly to feminism:
Feminism is both a philosophy and a political movement. As a philosophy, it’s noble and true and just plain right. As a political movement, it’s subject to the same weaknesses that plague any other political movement. There are hypocrites, fellow travelers, and a whole bunch of people who are there “in name only.” That’s true of feminism and Christianity and the civil rights movement and the Democratic Party — everything, in fact, that humans undertake.
No one should expect feminists to be perfect, and no one should expect the feminist movement to be any more pristine than any other political movement. But when the realpolitik starts impinging on the message itself, then as feminists we have a right — and a duty — to start asking questions.
Posted by Violet under Various and Sundry on July 9, 2009, 7:36 pm EST
This is terrific. A Feminist with decades long credentials calling out Amanda Marcotte as a Fraud. And the Feministe, and Feministing crowd as well. Read and enjoy. You cannot make this stuff up.
Comments from the giant thread: who speaks for feminism?
Dr. Socks is still working on the new curtains for the lounge.
Dr. Socks is still working on the new curtains for the lounge.
I’m brewing up a post on the question of litmus tests for feminism, and why it’s okay for dishonest misogynistic patriarchal tools to call themselves feminists as long as they’re in favor of choice, while a “pro-life” woman who’s a feminist in every other respect is reviled by these same paragons as a despicable anti-feminist bitch who needs to shut and up die. (You can probably guess what my take is going to be.) But I need to wake up a little more and do some reclusive things first.
In the meantime, as a kind of hors d’oeuvres platter, I invite you to consider these two comments from the giant thread:
#62 Reader says:
I think the explanation for the excoriation of both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin by Third Wave Feminist bloggers is pretty straightforward, myself. They are trying to carve out careers for themselves as public intellectuals. The fastest, most efficient way to do this is with the mentorship and assistance of people who have already reached a certain level of fame and connectedness. Most all of these people are men. To gain approval from men they desperately want to impress, folks like Amanda Marcotte, Jill Filipovic, Jessica Valenti, Ann Friedman, Megan Carpenter, to name but a few, went after Clinton and Palin and anyone who defended them, doing a service for men who would be accused of sexism for invoking that level of dishonesty and vitriol.
Seems to be paying off for them, too, at least in the short run. But someday they are going to reach a little too high and experience the same sort of smack downs from younger women on the way up that they have administered to anyone who supported or even defended Clinton and Palin. I can only hope they have enough self awareness to reflect on what they’ve done, when that happens. And maybe then they will become more principled feminists.
#97 Gayle says:
“To gain approval from men they desperately want to impress, folks like Amanda Marcotte, Jill Filipovic, Jessica Valenti, Ann Friedman, Megan Carpenter, to name but a few, went after Clinton and Palin and anyone who defended them,”
Approval and those all important links. I don’t know who Ann Friedman is and I can’t speak to all of those bloggers so I’m leaving (most) names aside for a moment. What I will say this that the better trafficked progressive feminist blogs used to exist somewhat independently of the big boy political blogs but that disconnect is all but gone now. I think this began, more or less, when Jesse Taylor invited Amanda Marcotte to blog on Pandagon. She linked to Feministe a lot; Feministe linked to Feministing, etc., and, eventually, this whole circle was connected to the progressive political blogs. There was an uneasy alliance made with some pro-feminist men welcoming the Third Wavers while other wanted nothing to do with them. The Third Wavers with integrity did call out sexism in the progressive blogosphere back then. I remember a few big flame wars.
Close to the beginning of the last primary election those women were invited to Yearly Kos (now called Yearly Netroots, but whatever) and a big to-do was made of their attendance there. Marcotte was given a two thousand dollar award from Act Blue at some point around that time. Extra added effort was put into bringing the Third Wavers into the Dem-blog tent and I have no doubt HRC’s run for the Presidency was behind those efforts.
I don’t know if people here know about the “Town House” email list but it’s kinda interesting if you want to know how the political blogs operate or if you’ve ever wondered why you read the same messaging over and over again, in predictable cycles. Town House is/was a by-invitation only group that hands out acceptable talking points to be disseminated by its affiliated blogs. The idea of Town House was to create a method by which progressives could do what right wing radio does with its audience: get those memes started and re-enforced through sheer repetition. Challenge those talking points and you get chased off the blogs.
Now lots of bloggers want readers and links and will link and repeat what’s popular on larger blogs to gain those rewards with or without a Town House type e-list. It’s not too hard to figure out what talking points are acceptable to those blogs without Town House. The problem is the larger progressive blogs are stuffed with political operators and outright misogynists. If you’re trying to be an honest blogger, you’re going to come up against this at some time and have to make a decision.
During the primary feminist bloggers did tend to point out and condemn outright sexist comments about Hillary Clinton. But at the same time, they were repeating all those other ridiculous talking points against her without any critical analysis. How could they trust the very same people who were calling HRC a castrating you-know-what when they were repeating lies about her killing Vince Foster? How could they not see through all the other lies and call them out? Did they really believe SHE was the risky candidate when it came to abortion rights?
My own hypothesis is a number of those bigger feminist bloggers aren’t really interested in raw politics all that much, anyway. They’re certainly not wonks. If you’re not the type to delve deep into political analysis, to study issues and politicians on your own you’re more likely to repeat what you hear without question. Especially if you don’t much care about what’s true or not true because you’d rather be discussing something more interesting to you: like racism or burkas or sexist advertising, etc.
If you read the larger third wave blogs you’ll see their interest in women’s issues is somewhat limited to two or three hot button topics: abortion, abstinence and rape. Now let’s see what political points were used against Palin in the GE. Hmm. Not too surprising, is it? Some feminist bloggers were well used. We’ll see what it wins them in the end.
PS: In fairness, around the time the Town House list was “outed” on-line, A.M. claimed she declined the invitation to join. I don’t know if there’s anyway to know who belongs or doesn’t or if it even exists anymore. I used it only as an example of how a group-think mentality has been purposely created in the blogosphere.
Now, just to be clear, since some folks reading this may not be friendly to feminism:
Feminism is both a philosophy and a political movement. As a philosophy, it’s noble and true and just plain right. As a political movement, it’s subject to the same weaknesses that plague any other political movement. There are hypocrites, fellow travelers, and a whole bunch of people who are there “in name only.” That’s true of feminism and Christianity and the civil rights movement and the Democratic Party — everything, in fact, that humans undertake.
No one should expect feminists to be perfect, and no one should expect the feminist movement to be any more pristine than any other political movement. But when the realpolitik starts impinging on the message itself, then as feminists we have a right — and a duty — to start asking questions.
Posted by Violet under Various and Sundry on July 9, 2009, 7:36 pm EST