and I quite believe this describes most feminists.
Sane feminism recognizes that men are privileged in this society in almost every way. Men hold the power and have done so completely and for so long we — women and men — don’t even recognize how deeply ingrained this power differential is.
About porn and sexual victimization of women: It is ubiquitous and a serious issue. Rape is a weapon used against women. Porn is, also.
Women are disadvantaged in terms of personal freedom, wages, and power in general.
Sane feminists recognize this and work to change this. The goal, however, is equality for women and men. All men are not rapists. Some men, believe it or not, are kind and value women. Men are not the enemy. Many men are valuable allies and deserve to be treated with respect.
“What about the men?” Which man? Just as women vary in degrees of decency, so do men. Which man are we talking about?
Sane feminism.
August 11, 2008 at 5:01 pm
I have found that a man’s supposed “ally-hood” is dependent upon which woman he’s presented with. A man who seems feminist to *you* may not be quite as feminist-inclined when dealing with women who are of a lesser status than yourself – say, disabled women, or darker-skinned/slantier-eyed/kinkier-haired women, or homeless women, or prostituted women, or uneducated women, or “ugly” women, or fat women, or third-world women, or women in hijab/niqab/burqa/sari/ankle-length-quiverfull-dress.
For that reason, if you’re so keen on naming men allies, may I humbly suggest that you can only name a man an “ally” for yourself and yourself alone. None of us has any idea how the men in our lives have treated women not ourselves. I personally was treated quite kindly by a vile pimp in my youth – he respected me, thought me his intellectual equal, called me his friend, came through for me in pinches, considered me his sister, and often introduced me that way. It wasn’t until years later that I found out he’d been selling other women’s bodies for sexual abuse by johns. I’d never have thought he was capable of it, since he’d been so “feminist” with me. But that whole time he was being my “friend” he was selling other women (among other horrors, including some against my own person, which went unnoticed to me at the time because of my insistence on believing him a decent man).
I’m really glad that I kept my mistakenly positive opinion of him to myself. I would hate to have gone around broadly and publicly declaring him a “good” guy, when some woman who’d had an entirely different experience with him might have heard me and felt silenced, contradicted, and betrayed. One of the things that makes it really hard for women to speak out about the abuses we suffer is the fact that some other woman, along with the male patriarchs, will always come out of the woodwork to corroborate the man’s “good” “upstanding” character.
August 12, 2008 at 3:11 am
Justice walks, you make some excellent points. But do you agree there must be, somewhere, truly decent men?
That said, the idea that any given man may treat different women differently is well taken. I submit that the same is true of women…and humans in general. We don’t treat all members of any group the same. The difference is, of course, that men have more power than women.
Perhaps it is enough that we break it down to the individual level and resist the trap of lumping all members of any group together.
Thanks for your comments.
August 12, 2008 at 9:55 am
No, I do not agree that there must exist truly decent men. In fact, I think that the belief in truly decent men is one of the main forms of patriarchal deceit in socialization. Every man wields misogyny in such a way as to spare the women most likely to have social recourse against it. These spared women, then, go on to proclaim the “goodness” of the men they know, while never once thinking that perhaps the misogyny has simply been redirected, as opposed to its being nonexistent.
And, of course, women can be assholes. But assholery is not misogyny. The pimp in that story above wasn’t *just* treating some other women differently than he did me – he was denigrating the entire class of women in his actions. The “respect” I thought was sincere for me was false – I was nothing but a madonna in contrast to “his” whores. There is no correlative behavior that a woman could engage in that would similarly belie a belief in the inferiority of men. Trading on these sorts of valuations is the sole privilege of men and men alone. As you note, women are not in such a position with regard to class man.
August 12, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Ok, we disagree on that point. I believe there are decent men. The question now is, can we disagree and remain respectful of each other? Sanity is the ability to allow diversity of opinion.
I think I can learn a great deal from you although I don’t think I’ll ever come over to the “you can’t trust men — any man” viewpoint. But I’m very interested in continued discussion with you.
I’ve been reading blogs lately. On many blogs, when disagreement surfaces, especially on this point, it turns into an attack. Your responses are thoughtful and respectful. If we can discuss these things, I’d very much like to visit your blog and encourage you to post here as well.
Thank you.
August 13, 2008 at 11:41 am
Here’s the thing. I disagree with your assessment that you were “attacked” when you voiced your opinion on the thread at Lara’s. I don’t really know anything about Lara at all, so I’m not saying that out of some sense of loyalty to any group or anything. I don’t cyber-hang with those women, if you catch my drift.
And, yet, I can see why they may have been less than welcoming of your ingression. So, that’s all I’ll say about that, other than to say that I won’t be elevated above them under the auspices of my own “better” behavior, in comparison with their “boorishness,” or whatever. You haven’t yet insinuated that I’m totally illogical, hysterical, and unjustly enraged in my outlook just yet, all of which I got the feel of when I cursorily browsed the thread in question, so, please consider that perhaps that is why I have seemed less hostile. It’s no indication of any superior character on my part, so I’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t try to distinguish me from them in that way. I’m not part of their group, but I also do not consider myself a total outsider.
Anyway, I’m not sure if you noticed that I don’t accept comments on my blog. I conduct most communications by email, so please feel free to send me a note. I don’t normally post comments to other people’s blogs very much, but thanks for extending your welcome to me.
August 13, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Fair enough. I appreciate different perspectives as they help me have a more balanced assessment. That doesn’t mean I roll over when anyone disagrees, but I certainly think about it.
And your point is well taken. Phrased this way, I see the problem with the implied (or explicit) value judgment. Perhaps not better behavior but different anyway.
And now, my turn to say “here’s the thing.” I have a temper myself. And I express it. Still, I’m open to hearing other perspectives and in fact enjoy having my lapses in logic pointed out. Lara really set my teeth on edge and I responded in kind.
I very much object to the sort of lock-step you-must-agree-with-me-or-I’ll-totally-discount-anything-you-say approach I see dominating those blogs. And it pisses me off.
I’ve read some of your blog and disagree with much of it. But I sense a willingness on your part to think independently and to voice your views. I like that. I think I’m somewhat like that, also.
And I’ll send you a note quite soon. Who knows…we might find it interesting!
August 13, 2008 at 3:27 pm
In fact, Justice, I quite like your protest at being “elevated.” I’ve always liked rebels and iconoclasts. So feel free to get in my face as long as there is no condescension. (I suspect I didn’t need to encourage you to be direct and plain spoken….lol!)