Tuesday, October 10, 2006

"I'm Every Woman! Mysistermydaughtermysistermy..."

Okay, and I said i was generally against this sort of thing, so, hmm, how to do this. Well, o.k. Over at Plucky Punk (who is swell), there was this...comment, which i shall leave the name off of. mostly because in a way (ironically enough) this could have been any number of comments i have seen in Feminist Land o'er the last number of months. This one just sort of summed up the bizarro nature of...well, read it yourself. Am I crazy? Or...

[quoting Plucky Punk]

"My body size and shape means I'm more comfortable in skirts and my short calves and flat feet means I'm more comfortable wearing shoes with a heel)"

[begin commenter]

Well sorry, but that's bullshit. Especially the statement about your feet.
Maybe you're accustomed to wearing high heels and skirts, so you feel ok wearing them. However as a woman with flat feet, short calves and a curvy figure I can say to you that I absolutely can't wear high heels (since my feet start hurting exactly because they're flat) and skirts restrict movement no matter what build you have. Even the wide ones, since you can't do all the stuff you can do in pants.
Yeah, I also like to wear a skirt once in a while and have no problem with a woman dressing feminine. However yes, women do it because of the societal norms which are different for them. So don't try to explain your dress choice (particularly feminine that is) just by your bodily comfort.



Okay. Let's back up for a second. What?...

"My body is built a certain way; this is how I feel."

"Nuh-uh! I have that body, too! I don't feel like that! And you are contradicting the Theory, which I believe in and is therefore True. Therefore, you are WRONG."

...about. how. you. feel.

Okay, I know this can't be just feminism; clearly this particular exchange just strikes me as often as it does because for some masochistic reason i keep hanging around these places, right?

...actually, would that be more or less upsetting? I'm not sure. On the one hand, if it IS something specific to feminism, then, well, i mean i can theorize about why all day and actually have done, and probably will do again, but i mean: i can JOKE about "Borg feminism," but...

um, i, you know, should probably be protecting my precious bodily fluids at some point, no? I mean, too much exposure to this shit can't be good for anybody.

On the other hand, if, as I suspect, this actually happens all the time everywhere and I just haven't been paying attention...

I think I'd like to go back to not paying attention again, plz.

fuck. doesn't work.

Well:

14 comments:

JackGoff said...

That post makes me want to throw sumpthin'. And yeah. Vanessa rocks.

emily said...

This post makes me want to listen to Chaka Khan and watch Star Trek..

Zan said...

Dear gods. That's just.....don't explain your dress choices by saying it just feels right to you? Huh? What? Isn't that the most basic reason anyone wears anything? I don't wear dresses often because I don't like how they feel. It has nothing to do with the fact that I'm tall, fat, have long legs, big feet...no no no. It has to do strictly with the fact that I DON'T LIKE THEM. Gah.

So, I guess we could say the other posters decision to wear pants most of the time is the effect of the patriarchy's pushing women to "be like men" if they want to succeed? I mean, clearly she's immulating a man's style of dress. She's clearly abandoning her own sense of femininity in order to achieve an acceptiable position in our society. Plus, she's probably a lesbian. Only those silly lesbians wear pants! They never wear dresses. Oh and I bet she doesn't shave her legs either! Yep, clearly a very confused power-made lesbian. Probably sacrifices puppies in her spare time. GAH!

People like that make me want to throw things at them. Sharp, pointy things tipped with get-a-clue poison.

belledame222 said...

I mean, this sort of thing has been pretty common 'round the 'sphere, just usually a tad more sophisticated; that is, i rarely see someone come right out and say directly to someone who's just -spoken in I-statements herself-, "no, you don't!" Usually it's more, I have experienced such and so, ergo Women experience such and so (or maybe just, skip directly to Women); someone else comes in like Vanessa, except they'll be more likely to put it as, since we're already in this sort of territory,

well, SOME women don't, for example, me--

and then they'll start in with, ah, but, the patriarchy, blahblahblah!

and -then- when other person gets frustrated, it'll be like, what? i'm not trying to tell you what to do! just think about WHY you like what you like! like me! this is what consciousness raising IS! I clock you on the head with my own experiences disguised as EveryWoman until you either concede that i am right or scream with exasperation and leave! the fact that the latter seems to happen much more frequently than the former simply means i must DO IT MORE; the defensiveness means i am ONTO SOMETHING IMPORTANT. or some damn thing, who the hell knows,

i mean, that's what i -thought;- of course the natural corollary to "I do not understand the difference between me saying 'I don't like pudding' and 'Women like pudding, because the patriarchy has conditioned them to do so, and i have examined my pudding, and even though it was delicious and succulent i am putting it away from me, away i say! because it was BAD for me, i came to realize. or not; i do still indulge; but i EXAMINED my pudding. that's all anyone is asking. why are you so defensive about your pudding? hm? how selfish. it's only pudding! don't you understand that if we all gave up pudding at once, the world would split open? you are letting us all down! you are holding back the Revolution! in some way which has yet to be explained! pudding is part of the key--oh, no, don't be so literal-minded, we are not speaking -only- of pudding, but of all commercially made, over-sweetened desserts. possibly all desserts period, and maybe even all food, but that's not importatn right now, the POINT is, god! can't you ever talk about anything but "yay! pudding ROOLZ!" 24/7? you are so SELFISH and UNTHINKING. but, no pressure, really."

...i guess it makes sense that in turn, it would make sense for such a person to, when confronted with someone who says, simply,

"look, i like pudding; i find it creamy and succulent, and chocolate especially pleases my tastebuds"

to respond, "no you DON'T! -i- don't like pudding! so -you- CAN'T. you brainwashed patriarchy-fucker."

it's just kind of doing my head in is all. i mean, i understand that neither therapy speak ("I-statements," people!) -or- the grammatic difference between first and second and third person -or- social graces 101 for anyone -not- raised in a barn are not exactly as universally taught as one might hope; but somehow, i think this disconnect goes beyond any of those things...

belledame222 said...

...i mean, look, okay. When you have the msost popular cheerleader i mean feminist blogger on the internets saying, pretty much in so many words,

"This person whom I do not know is telling a story that Reminds Me of Me; it is pushing my buttons majorly; and yes! i can even acknowledge that this person Reminds Me of Me!

...but! but! this therefore -still- gives me free rein to talk about this other person (critically and harshly, no less, because this is how i feel about Former Me) -as though we were one and the same.-"

...and not nearly as many people as one would hope see the problem in this; nor with the fact that the other person HERSELF is protesting this (ah. yes. denial. so sad)...

...it sort of makes me feel, you know,

AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

i mean, and yes, irony alert, this is my OWN stuff being played out in front of me, or me seeing this way, BUT okay:

there is just...something, okay, about the experience of attempting to communicate with,

"Hi! I am apparently constitutionally incapable of processing anything that doesn't have Me in it! The world, it is Me! you there, you are talking of something that either 1) reminds me of Me in a way i would like to not be reminded of, or 2) are talking about something that does -not- have Me in it and yet, irritatingly, for some strange reason seem to want me to pay attention, or, worst of all, 3) both at once. How can you do this to Me? You are so Selfish. Here, let me layer on some half-baked Theory to justify this! ...oh, good, see, all these other people are buying it, they know how important Theory, or rather Me is; what's wrong with YOU?"

AAAAAHHHHHHHHHH

Vanessa said...

Mmmmmmmmm pudding...

antiprincess said...

you totally don't want to know about the last time I encountered pudding.

what I did with it - SO unfeminist.

Alon Levy said...

FSM.

Sorry for going off-topic, but you may be interested to know that the radicals of the feminist blogosphere are doing what they're best at, again - that is, having a schism. Enjoy.

Hanna said...

They aren't radicals. They're bigots.

Love,

Hanna

Zan said...

Oh, wow. The comments about Amp are just....*sigh* I begin to understand now how so many people have such a bad image of feminists.

Renegade Evolution said...

women...can't live with 'em....

belledame222 said...

OH what a giveaway!...

Dharma said...

I do think the woman who "because my body is shaped thusly, I am comfortable in" sounds, well unexamined and defensive in *advance* of the inevitable attack that followed. Probably because "feminists" have attacked her style of dress before, accusing her of being unexamined, which yes I just did too, but Isuspect for different reasons. I have no problem with her coice to dress in skirts and heels(hello? have you seen my closet?)but her defensive response leads me to think she is still in the beginning stages of forming her identity, one that is comfortable not in skirts so much as dicotomy.

Belledame - you are bad for my schoolwork!

belledame222 said...

well, she was responding to that long and involved thread at feministe, including some direct (already, yes, by someone else) attacks; I don't blame her at all for the defensive tone.