Saturday, 20 December 2008

Feminism: ur still doin it rong

The Beaver Flap* continues.

In response to a poll at A Creative Revolution speculating on the identity of the 'secret expert' who deemed Choice for Childcare feminist and Unrepentant Old Hippie not feminist, Northern BC Dipper wrote a juvenileha-ha post.

In the comments there I asked for the expert's reasons for allowing CforC in. The following is a direct quote from the expert:

I felt the reason’s that Choice for Childcare was initially considered a feminist blog was because it pertained the issue of both choice for women, and for dealing with daycare (an issue that affects both single and married women). Unlike Small Dead Animals or some of the other conservative ‘feminist’ blogs, the arguments were based on economic principals under the assumption that these would benefit women, not something like religious reasons (that Suzanne provided for her arguments about abortion) or the simple fact that she was a woman. In fact, some of the ones eliminated were women, but appeared to me to be anti-feminist (a contradiction for the category they appeared in). One was a stripper, the others argued for free speech - which may have been a compelling argument for having them included in the feminist category if it was so heavily in favour of hate speech. Many didn’t seem to display an understanding of feminist logic. Choice for Childcare was using economic arguments for her position. In many of the classes I’ve attended, both in economic and women’s studies, this was the single most advancing portion of the feminist movement other than historical arguments themselves.
Oy. Where to start?

General literacy? Logic? Weird emphasis on the economic aspect of feminism?

General cluelessness?

(The nominations threads seem to have disappeared at CBA. I don't know who the 'stripper' was -- [anybody know?] -- but being a stripper does not automatically disqualify one from feminism. At least not for actual feminists.)

Hell, go read Sarah at Choice for Childcare herself on her nomination. Remember this is the woman who said (quote taken from Antonia):

They say unbelievably stupid things such as – and I quote – "I believe in equality for everyone, not just women. Also, I believe in equal rights, not one group getting more than others."
My head hurts. I'm going with 'general cluelessness'. On all their parts. The 'expert' and the dough-heads at CBA who accepted this inanity as an argument in favour of CforC's inclusion in the feminist category.

*h/t Antonia

SORRY: I missed this link provided to the stripper. I had a quick buzz through it and while it doesn't seem anti-feminist, it would take more time than I've got right now to say more than that.

UPDATE: Go read balbulican.

11 comments:

Prole said...

So, you can't be a feminist and a blogging stripper. That's news to this feminist. Wait, don't tell me, you also have to be white and married to a member of the opposite sex?

Fucking academics. I think I know who came in last in their Women's Studies program...

deBeauxOs said...

Shouldn't that be c4c, the same format as fathers4justice, since the ideology is the same?

fern hill said...

Good point, dBO. If I ever write about this again -- and I hope I don't -- I will use that format.

alterwords said...

ZOMG, I've never read anything quite so appalling in my life as that supposed apologia by the Women's Studies person. But then, I was always amazed when teaching university students that so many people made it to the academy who could neither read, write, speak nor think. Clearly, the CBA found such a person. I understand the outcome now.

Pale said...

poll results are up. heh.

http://www.acreativerevolution.ca/node/1585

fern hill said...

Hevvinhelpme, I am a bad person. There's a picture of Sarah at her place. Well, I'm assuming that's Sarah.

Who does she remind you of?

I know, I know, coal in the stocking for me.

deBeauxOs said...

Her user profile is pretty insulting to stay-at-home moms.

Occupation: Non-working dependant

All mothers are working mothers. Except Sara - by choice - it would seem. Who cares for her children? Cooks? Cleans? Keeps the household running?

matttbastard said...

Who cares for her children? Cooks? Cleans? Keeps the household running?

Gnomes.

deBeauxOs said...

Dependant or independant gnomes?

matttbastard said...

All I know is they're tax-deductible.

Frank Frink said...

Dependant or independant gnomes?

*ducking*

Co-dependant gnomes.

Post a Comment