Showing posts with label respect. Show all posts
Showing posts with label respect. Show all posts

Monday, 15 September 2014

Respectability vs RESPECT: Part One

R•E•S•P•E•C•T  is of course:


Respectability is a different kettle of fish, however.  The very foundation of patriarchy is cemented with the premise that only some women are respectable - that is, worthy and deserving of respect - and others are NOT.

My co-blogger fern hill recently addressed the *stigma* of abortion. And we have many more blogposts at DJ! that challenge the notion that respectable women should grieve, do penance, and wear ashes on their head when a pregnancy - their OWN, in fact - is terminated. By choice.  Or when it's forcibly rejected by the body, an occurrence that happens regularly.

By way of an example, Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis' disclosure of how and why she had two abortions, illustrates the division between what is considered a 'respectable' abortion and what is not. 

"For a woman to reveal she has had an abortion because she wanted one, because she couldn't emotionally sacrifice for another child, because she was remiss in her use of contraception, and, further, to declare she has only felt happiness towards her decision is truly groundbreaking. Davis' abortion narrative has helped diminish the social stigma surrounding abortion. But until the “bad” abortion stories are just as acceptable, pro-choice advocates have a long way to go."

From must-read: _Wendy Davis and the 'Good Abortion' Myth_ found here.

Respectability is at issue with regard to abortion because when women have sex, consensually or not, that can produce a pregnancy - unwanted or planned.

Sex as procreative versus sex as a recreative activity.  Also, sex as gender bigotry.

Yesterday some hack writer, compensating for whatever pathetic sense of inadequacy seized him, dismissed Naomi Klein and her recent publication in calculated, malevolent, gendered, barnyard animal terms.  



Not even bothering to address or refute her arguments, he deems her stupid. 



There you have it. But wait, here is more to consider.



As observed: "...the word cow is a put down to women but the term bull is considered a compliment for men." 

Note also in the exchange cited above, the comparison used when vilifying mayoral candidate Olivia Chow.  Her competitor John Tory said that she had "more positions than Masters and Johnson".  

"Respectability" is a toxic judgement passed on women and the last remaining double standard for judging women's choices and behaviours as indecent.  Feminists of African, Indigenous and Asian ancestry have identified the use of "respectability" politics as a weapon specifically used to target women of colour (WoC) for social opprobrium.

An incident that unfolded in Los Angeles last week gained publicity when Danièle Watts, intimidated and humiliated by police who profiled her as prostitute, spoke up.  

Her experience is not unusual. As evident from the insult slung at Ms Chow by her opponent, these assumptions of impropriety about racialized women are claimed by men who reduce them to female beings unworthy of respect, with little or no resources other than the unbridled hyper-sexuality that others project upon their bodies.

Next: Part Two will examine how respectability politics reinforce whorephobia as a partisan neo-conservative tactic to divide women and destroy solidarity among feminists. Read the blogpost from @kwetoday that I've linked to, above.

Wednesday, 14 September 2011

Citizens Demand Respect



Glen Pearson offers a thoughtful blogpost titled: 'The New Democracy'.
Those who watched the Republican rivals in their leadership debate this week were treated to quite a scene – eight rivals squaring off against one another in hopes of the politics’ ultimate prize. Whatever your political leanings, it was an impressive sight as they spread out across the entire platform.

Sadly, it might be a rare occurrence in the new age of Canadian politics. Last May’s federal election introduced citizens to a new kind of political strategy – opting out of debates. It occurred extensively and was practiced primarily by those running for the Conservative party. This isn’t a partisan shot; it was just a reality that was confronting Canadians for the first time.

Somehow the Conservatives figured on two growing realities. The first was that citizens were increasingly tuning out of politics, and the second was the split vote on the left provided them an obvious advantage in any kind of electoral contest. In both cases they turned out to be right. And now we hear of reports that the Ontario Progressive Conservative candidates are refusing to attend debates in the run-up to the provincial election. What’s going on out there?

Pearson attributes the phenom to candidates' ambition and public inertia. Ambitious pols don't want to fuck up. Public inertia is a reaction to relentless talking points and bullshit. We're starting to believe that none of it matters. Not one of these assholes is going to be accountable to us after the election, so why should they show us any respect even to try to get our votes?

Pearson concludes:
If Jesse Jackson was right when he said, “Deliberation and debate is the way you stir the soul of our democracy,” then any jurisdiction where people refuse to participate in public debates is cheapened. When any party adopts the motto “Silence is Golden” in a campaign, the result is political and social deafness. It might be the new democracy, but it’s demeaning to us all.

In the May federal election, CBC's Janyce McGregor got saddled with maintaining a list of no-shows. It started with a short report that other reporters added to. Members of the public piled on and it got very looooong indeed.

Just now on Twitter I proposed that we help out whoever ends up being the Ontario election's McGregor, by reporting on #NoShows.

I found a few quite easily:

Hudork was a no-show in own riding's all-candidates debate.

In Lambton-Kent-Meddlesex, only three candidates turned up at an all-candidates debate on post-secondary education.
[Lib] Van Bommel made note of [PC Monte] McNaughton's absence in her closing remarks, noting her disappointment that he could not be there to answer questions or defend the Conservative's record on education.

"More importantly, he was not here to listen to the views or concerns of the people of Lambton-Kent-Middlesex," Van Bommel said.

She notes that McNaughton also did not attend an earlier all-candidates meeting regarding agriculture held earlier in the week in Glencoe.

Same in Ottawa.
An all-candidates debate expecting high-profile faces yielded a mere pair of hopefuls for the upcoming Ontario provincial election.

The debate, hosted by the Municipal Taxpayer Advocacy Group, attracted only Liberal Madeleine Meilleur and NDP Anil Naidoo.

But the two candidates are not even going head-to-head in the Oct. 6 provincial election. Meilleur is the incumbent in the riding of Ottawa-Vanier and Naidoo is hoping to steal the seat in Ottawa-Centre from Meilleur's Liberal counterpart Yasir Naqvi.

No Progressive Conservative candidate appeared before the disappointed crowd.

The event held at Ottawa City Hall was advertised as an arena for known names such as Randall Denley, Jack MacLaren and Bob Chiarelli.

The Cons got away with this in the federal election, but then they were the governing party.

If Hudork and gang -- or any of them -- think they can hide from us and we'll vote for them anyway, let's show them they've got another think coming.

Pearson tagged his post with 'political absence'. I'd call it political abstinence and like sexual abstinence, let's show the pols it will NOT continue to work.

Keep an eye on local reporting. If you go to meetings, note no-shows.

If you're on twitter use #NoShow and #VoteOn. If you're not, leave links here and I'll twitterize them.

PILE ON: Dr. Dawg! Who else?

Image source