The New York Times has an article about a group of New York schools who have started requiring cheerleaders to girls' basketball games as well as boys'.

Not surprisingly, there are a lot of complaints to this new policy, most of them being some variation of, "But we don't waaaaaaannaaaaaaaa." Mostly, this is because the added workload of cheering at girls' games has required the schools to stop sending cheerleaders to the boys' away games. Because, you know, of course we're all equal now and Title IX is outdated and female athletes are on equal footing with the boys ... except, you know, when giving girls equal support means actually having to take something away from the boys (gasp!).

To the Times' credit, the article itself is rather well-balanced - not very surprising, since the Times is part of the Lib-rul Media and all. However, there were a couple of ... interesting quotes just ripe for analysis:

( more )

feminist_writer

I figure some of you guys would be interested in this. :D I haven't worked on my writing in a really long time, but I joined anyway because this sounds like it'll be a great space.

You know what's sexist? White guys who see Asian women as exotic sex objects, something they can use in their porn-based fantasies about "sideways" vaginas. Why? Because everything about me is obscured by my sexual utility for them - they are attempting to define MY identity through THEIR penis.

You know what's ALSO sexist? Asian guys who think that Asian women aren't "Asian" enough if they don't exclusively date Asian men. Why? Because ONCE AGAIN my identity is being defined by a man's penis.

Look. I don't hold with the fringe view that women can only be feminists if they're lesbians, as if having sex with other women was the only way to be in solidarity with them. This is because women can have meaningful and supportive relationships with people that aren't characterized by what goes into their vaginas. Get it? WHAT I do, WHO I am, and WHAT I believe are not determined by whom I choose to fuck.

Oh, wait - that would be who fucks me, because clearly these perspectives treat women as passive sexual receptacles that can only have sex happen to them.

Stop exerting male privilege over me to make yourselves feel more important. Just stop. I don't care if you've got layers of privilege coming out your ass and this is just one more way for you to oppress people; I don't care if you're disadvantaged because of your color or class or whatever, and penis-privilege is all you've got. You DO NOT have the right to lift yourself up by taking advantage of the power society gives you over me.

I have the right to define my identity in the way that I want. That means who I date, but that's just a tiny part of it. It also means: who my important relationships are with, how I spend my time, what I learn, how I challenge the power structures around me.

I also have the responsibility to be aware of how my choices about my romantic relationships - among all the millions of other important choices in my life - affect me. But that DOESN'T mean doling out my sexuality based on the color of a man's penis. Or lack of penis. Or anything else.

I am not defined based on which men do what to me. I am defined based on my mind, not random parts of my body. My body is not the important part of me and my activism. MY VAGINA DOES NOT CONTAIN A MAGIC WELLSPRING OF POLITICAL SOLIDARITY, THANK YOU.

This rant brought to you by the letter FUCKING MORONS WHO CAN'T SEPARATE A WOMAN'S VAGINA FROM HER PERSONHOOD.

Here's what I read today at work before going to do a C.O.R.E. presentation.

According to a court in Maryland, a woman cannot withdraw consent to sex once it has begun.

Because, apparently, once a man sticks his penis in you, you lose all say over what happens to your own body. I guess this isn't terribly surprising, though, since that's the common conservative position on abortion - if you consented to have sex, then you lose the ability to decide what happens to your body if you get pregnant. It doesn't matter if the pregnancy is inconvenient, painful, damaging to your body, or even life-threatening. And now, apparently, it doesn't matter if sex does the same thing. You said 'yes' at one point, after all.

Does anyone else have an image of a three year-old whining, "No take-backs!"?

But wait, there's more! The court graciously explained the basis for this ruling, which was a law that states that raping a woman "de-flowers" her and is thus a loss for the man who owns her.

Maryland court in less than 50 words: You're not allowed to control your body once a man penetrates you. But that's okay, because your only worth is being a pristine virgin for the man who actually controls you anyway.

More here, here, and here.

You know, contrary to popular belief, I don't hate men because I'm a feminist. But I do hold a scathing contempt for a large number of them, namely the ones who are too selfish, lazy, stupid, or cruel to own up to their privilege. Particularly the ones who purport to be intelligent or even enlightened, and have the tools for education staring them in the face. I include judges in this category.

( which brings me to C.O.R.E. )

I was reading ahead for my English class (trying to stay afloat above the workload) and got to an article that my professor assigned for next week. ( This is the 'not' part )

( This is the 'faith' part )

Dear random-dude-in-my-class,

( Asshattery ahead )

But here's some good that happened today:

My philosophy professor took time to point out the inherent sexism of "we're so good for human rights" political liberalism when it fails to address the abuse of women that occurs in "private" (and therefore, not for the government to interfere in) places. And he didn't even have to be prompted to do it!

(But you know what's pathetic? That this is a special "good" thing that I feel the need to point out, instead of being "normal" or "decent.")

I bought the latest issue of Bitch for a class assignment, and there's a short feature in the back about male nudity in film, which lauds Harvey Keitel and Ewan "wanna see my lightsaber?" McGregor for their openness to baring it all for the camera: "No discussion of male full-frontal nudity is complete without a tip of the hat to these willy-waving pioneers." Really, how can you stay in a bad mood after that? XD

I also met with my advisor in C.O.R.E. about a special presentation I'll be doing for her tomorrow morning. She's a great woman, and talking with her always makes me feel heartened. I'm really glad to be able to help her out.

Stephen Colbert rocks my socks. Again. Last week on an episode of The Colbert Report he did a "Salute to the American Lady," including this segment that hilariously mocks people (men) who say they "aren't sexist."

If you've seen much of Colbert, you'll probably recognize the theme from his "non-racist" remarks. Here's one of my favorite examples, a segment on Senator George Allen trying to prove he isn't a racist fuckwit.

Colbert's satire in general is really well done, and more insightful than I expect even out of most liberal comedians. I'm afraid it goes over a lot of liberals' heads, though, when he mocks the liberal tendencies to be "blind" to race and gender.

Also, here's another bit from the "Salute to the American Lady" episode with Gloria Steinem. *points to icon* I love how she manages to hold her own against Colbert without breaking out of the comedy routine.

I've been following the new NBC show Heroes (all two episodes) after I saw a commercial for it on TV. Because, hey, superheroes! (Also, the song used in the ad was Imogen Heap's "Hide and Seek," which happens to be tied to the Jedi game. XD;;) I'm posting this review for people who might also be interested in it, because it shows a lot of potential.

( general impressions (mild spoilers) )

( character breakdown (more specific spoilers) )

First of all, coramegan linked this video from The Daily Show, a collection of clips from the "Even StepVhen" feature with Steve Carrell and Stephen Colbert. Hilarious stuff. XD

Also check out this clip from the 9/12/06 episode - or, as Jon Stewart calls it, "the fifth anniversary of the misappropriation of the events of September 11th."

Next, Luke notified us about a documentary called "I Was a Teenage Feminist" that looks worthwhile. There's a trailer, as well as clips showing surveys asking women whether or not they call themselves feminists and men what they think feminists are. (Warning - that last clip made me want to curl up into the safe haven of my feministy friends-list. Or fulfill some stereotypes and go on a castratin' spree.)

It's discouraging, but definitely enlightening, to see what the general public thinks/thinks they know. It's also encouraging, too, to see normal people proclaiming their feminism. I loved how in the second clip, the first woman who says proudly that yes, she is a feminist, is Asian. :D Also, I loved this quote: "Saying I'm a feminist almost seems the same question as asking me whether or not I'm black. I don't really understand why I wouldn't be." XD XD XD

So what do you call it when a man repeatedly pushes his attention upon a woman in a bar, then tries to grope her, and promptly gets schooled by that woman?

Teaching someone a well-deserved lesson? A justifiable use of force? A sure-fire way of making sure at least one man doesn't view women as accessories for his testicles anymore?

Of course not! You call it unfeminine! battery! the reason men are buying foreign wives! After all, he was "just trying to touch her"! Silly vaginas-on-legs, what were you thinking?

See, men are more intelligent than that, and never react with so base an action. I mean, just imagine that a man was in that woman's place - certainly he would never react with any form of violence to unwanted sexual advances from another man! And of course he wouldn't ever try to pass off his reaction as a legally justifiable defense!

Oh, you vaginas-on-legs, trying to use logic, when we all know full well that's the domain of men (the penis is the logic-muscle, you know). Now take your shoes back off and get back into the kitchen. You'll only get groped if you're outside the home, remember, and only because you deserve it.


*See Amanda's post for further snark, especially this comment, which made me cheer.

Aaaaaaand there's more! Via wordweaverlynn, we have another response by Ellison regarding his groping of Connie Willis. And no, this isn't him dropping all sarcasm and misguided attempts at humor in order to make a straightforward, sincere apology. (We can only dream.)

Since jfpbookworm did such a great job deconstructing the first "apology", I think it's only fitting that we subject Ellison's newest offering to analysis as well. One, because he's so spectacularly idiotic - but more importantly, because of the unexamined privilege that drips from his words alongside the expected arrogance. He may be a talented writer, but that skill does nothing to save him from his underlying sexist assumptions.

( Apparently no one told him that humility is the better part of sincerity )

x-posted to Shrub.com

A few days ago at the Hugo Awards ceremony at Worldcon, Harlan Ellison groped Connie Willis on stage. The primary source of the news is pnh, a.k.a. Patrick Nielsen Hayden, though Ellison himself confirmed it inthe (ostensible) apology on his message board. (Text provided here by matociquala, a.k.a. Elizabeth Bear. Also see her post on the original incident.)

He wrote the "apology" yesterday, even though the event occurred a couple of days ago, because he had no idea that there was a problem until he saw the reaction online. In other words, he didn't know it was wrong until someone else told him. This is the kind of behavior that you would expect out of children developing their sense of politeness and ethics, not a grown man (especially one with as inflated a sense of self as Ellison apparently has).

Connie Willis is one of the most respected science fiction authors writing today - certainly one of the most well-known women in the field. She did not invite the groping, nor did she give him permission. Ellison calls it "intendedly-childlike," and supposedly it came as part of a comedic schtick. However, Willis was not previously informed about his intention, and since she immediately removed his hand and continued on without comment, it's obvious that she didn't feel inclined to join in on the "comedy."

His behavior - the fact that he even thought that this was an acceptable action (or at least funny, maybe "cheeky little bastard," but not reprehensibly sexist), and furthermore, had to be told that it wasn't - speaks to a deep disrespect for women. A disrespect that, really, isn't all that uncommon.

( Now don't misunderstand what I'm saying ... )

x-posted to Shrub.com

So what do you do when everything you read seems to conspire to piss you the fuck (the comments, not the post) off (ditto)?

Clearly, the answer is to ruthlessly mock a fuckwit.

( *cracks knuckles and rolls up sleeves* )

See PunkAssBlog for further hilarious mockery!

I'm lucky in the people I geek out with, because it's a mixed-gender group, mostly socially aware, and made up of generally good people. I don't have to worry about guys telling me I can't play something because I'm female, or looking down on what I'm interested in.

But I never hear the word "bitch" so often as in the middle of a tense battle in a game.

( Listen to my Chair Leg of Truth! )

x-posted to Shrub.com (!!!)

Check out the latest Carnival of Feminists over at Super Babymama: the theme this time around is feminism and poverty.

Class is perhaps the least-covered topic in the feminist blogosphere. Race, as I've experienced it, is often treated poorly, but at least it's treated at all - class issues just tend to be overlooked. Of course, I'm fully implicating myself as well - I don't talk about class much. I have very poor understanding of classism, either how it works on a large scale, or how I perpetuate it personally. I don't even have a classism tag, the way I do for sexism, racism, and homophobia. My class privilege is, I would say, the least examined.

I've had my eyes opened a little bit recently, especially with all my Women Studies courses last quarter - in particular, the global classist structure (tied in with racism and sexism) that perpetuates the "Third World"/"First World" division. But I know thismuch about, say, welfare in the U.S. One of the reasons for that is that the U.S. hates to talk about economic privilege, because we're supposed to be a free market, where everyone has a chance on an equal playing field. Class is like a four-letter word.

Anyway, my point is: this Carnival is a great place to start. I talked about self-education on privilege - well, here we go, a buttload of information dropped onto my lap. I'll be reading through these entries, and I highly recommend that all of you out there do the same - there's far too much ignorance on this topic.

Still don't believe in male privilege in fandom?

I give you Exhibit A. Here we have a report on WriterCon from an articulate, intelligent-sounding man. An articulate, intelligent-sounding man who says this about slashfic:

"Taken in its rawest form, that situation would go as follows: the people who formed and maintained a fandom for years, purely from love of the world and its characters, find themselves invaded by a new crowd enthusiastically producing (and celebrating) a mass of stories built around a premise revolting to the original fandom group and glaringly OOC for the fandom characters involved [...] The fandom is being flat-out ruined for its builders by something utterly alien and utterly incompatible with everything they originally loved in it."

This casual dismissal of slash writers and readers exudes privilege.

( Shall we count the ways? )

You might remember that New York Times article I linked awhile back, about the usage of "slut." (Unfortunately, the article is no longer available for free; you have to be a paid member.) Here's a choice quote from it:

"'When I think of the word slut,' wrote Don Reisinger, a student doing accounting and law work in Albany, in an e-mail message, 'I think of a woman who has been around the block more times than my dad's Chevy. I might date a slut, but I certainly wouldn't marry one.'"

What is this man saying? Well, let's start with the obvious: he's saying that that a so-called "slut" wouldn't be good enough to marry him, due to her past sexual behavior. However, by saying that he would get married, he's assuming that he would be good enough to marry his future wife - despite his past sexual behavior of having sex with "sluts."

( Women are whores when it's convenient for him )

In keeping with my earlier post on self-education about privilege, I bring you proof that education is neither hard to find, nor hard to understand.

-How (heterosexual?) men should act around women in public. Short, to the point, and not nearly as hard as anti-feminist whiners would make it out to be.

-A book excerpt (Jackson Katz, woo!) explaining how men's and women's general understandings of sexual assault are fundamentally different.

-Why the 'you're just overreacting' response to accusations of sexual harassment is bullshit. (Amanda's analysis also applies to racist/homophobic/etc. harassment.)

-Why the 'it's your fault for not stopping it' response to accusations of sexual harassment is also bullshit. (I highly, highly recommend reading this post, as well as the personal anecdotes in the comments. I guarantee that any woman who has experienced sexual harassment will recognize herself in them. And Happy's explanation of why women generally respond the way they do is right on.)

-On a different subject, why the 'but there are _____ people who act like this' defense of stereotypes in fiction is bullshit. If you ever worry about relying on stereotypes in your own creations (I know I do), read it. Learn it. Do it.

Some links to start off your morning by making you laugh, cry, or go WTF?

-From the New York Times comes an article about the changing role of the word "slut." A decent treatment of the subject, especially for a mainstream publication - though you gotta love how both Ariel Levy (Female Chauvinist Pigs) and Leora Tanenbaum (Slut! Growing Up Female with a Bad Reputation) are quoted, and yet there is nary a mention of feminism in the article. Ah well.

-Sony has now officially pulled the fucked up PSP ads and apologized ... sorta. From the official statement: [W]e wish to apologize to those who perceived the advert differently to that intended." In other words, We're sorry that YOU have a problem, but it's not really our fault. Gotta love pseudo-apologies like that. (Actually, what you have to really love are the comments in response, which include a few level heads but also some of the most stereotypical racially ignorant statements I have ever seen - including the gem, "i'm white, so i know these things.")

-Of course, not to be outdone by racism in the geek world, sexism makes its own showing by reminding us what a woman's place is. Thanks, Marvel!

-Ragnell shows us how "dynamic" translates into "porntastic anal sex pose" to some in the comics industry. Thanks again, Marvel!

-She also has a lovely and pithy analysis of Princess Leia's empowerment. XD

-And finally, remix17 reminds us that feminists must be careful in their response to these things. Hilarious satire.

I just finished reading Ariel Levy's Female Chauvinist Pigs. There was a lot of good in it - and some bad - and I'll share some of it when I get the chance.

In the meantime, I wanted to say: I'm depressed.

I'm depressed at the way sex and feminism have met in an ugly train wreck of a collision, such that it seems inevitable that one or the other gets twisted and mutilated when we deal with the two issues together. I don't know exactly why this has happened - whether it's the fault of the feminist in-fighting of the "sex wars" of the 1980s, or the manipulation by conservative pundits, or the simple fact that sex is really personal and complicated and scary - and so is feminism, so what chance do you have at putting the two together?

I've seen both sides of the "sex wars." I've seen the self-proclaimed sex-positive feminists, and their counterparts (for whom I haven't been able to find a label that is widely agreed upon, except maybe anti-porn). I really don't think the two are as far apart as they might seem. But I haven't been satisfied by either one on its own.

And thus, I've decided to get a little pretentious.

( A personal manifesto on sex and feminism )