Feminist read ’ems!
Jenn talks about men who cyberharass bloggers who are women of colour. Her experiences are harrowing and revolting, but she vows to survive:
When I participated in a popular APIA forum, I was disheartened to watch as feminist voices were shot down by male participants who threw around words like “whore” and “slut” within their counterarguments. In another forum, men angry that I am unabashedly partnered in a stable, eight-year-long interracial relationship have accused me of “loving to suck White dick”, “daddy issues”, and worse. They re-posted photos of my loved ones (that I used to host on this site to share with real-life friends) and made racially and sexually derogatory remarks about the people in them, including mean-spirited mockery of my boyfriend’s mother. . I no longer host personal photos for this reason. Still others have emailed me hateful judgements and presuppositions of my personal life while assuming materialistic, superficial motivations for all Asian American women. In all these behaviours “” commonly received by many women in cyberspace ““ it is the woman and her experience that becomes decentralized; even in assaulting us, male aggressors shift the focus from a female blogger’s feminism to a denial of her self-worth based exclusively upon the men in her life.
From Diary of a Goldfish, “Paris Hilton and the Iconic Blonde”. The Goldfish takes a generational look, drawing parallels between the misogynistic media treatment of iconic blondes Marilyn Monroe, Princess Diana, and Paris Hilton:
“Every decade has an iconic blond like Marilyn Monroe or Princess Diana, and right now I’m that icon.” – Paris Hilton.
In fact there’s probably no legal or social misdemeanour that Paris Hilton hasn’t committed which someone I know hasn’t also done. A dalliance in amateur porn? Indulgence in drink and drugs? Horrific fashion sense? I can personally lay claim to at least one of these.
To be an iconic blonde – and the blondeness is important but not essential – you have to give us a reason to hate you. Some weakness, some foolishness. And then you’ll never be out of the papers.
In the Guardian, Zoe Williams fulminates “Wake up. Feminism is more than just capitalism with tits.” Her premise is that the parliamentary numbers game of counting politicians and comparing sides isn’t a valid way to assign a feminist value to a party’s policies:
“[Sarah] Sands gives us mistake one, that the rabid possessive individualism characterised by Margaret Thatcher is a truer “feminism” than [Harriet] Harman’s. The sine qua non of feminism is battling for collective rights, anything else is just capitalism with tits.
Look instead at the conditions keeping women out of politics, which are the same as those keeping women at the bottom of any heap. The pay gap, the carer gap, the maternity drain, all the ossified iniquities that fence women into hardship. That’s what closes down opportunities. Scratch anyone who uses the word “role model” and you’ll find they’re either avoiding solutions which are ultimately fiscal, or they’ve given no thought to gender politics at all.”
And your wild-card link for the day: “Parlez-vous l33t?”: Txt-speak in French and Mandarin.