Blog Social Justice

Internet: conquered.

July 11, 2011

Well, I have finally made it, in terms of internet bloggers. Curiously, I did not feel that I had “made it” when I hit my official decade mark of blogging, nor did I feel it when I was interviewed for a book because of my blog.

I feel it now because I was finally name-called on the internet. Apparently, I am “Bitchy, Entitled Feminist.” The best part of this is that, for some reason, I got referenced in a post that also mentions Rebecca Watson, Richard Dawkins, and Greg Laden, who, I’m sure you can agree, are great company. Still seriously trying to figure this one out, unless this person searched WordPress tags right after I posted about Nice Guys and, vaguely, about Elevator Guy (that post only has nine unique views, anyway). I thought for a moment about commenting on his blog, but after perusing it I realized that there would be no point; he is a person who argues for “men’s rights,” and so I am pretty much writing him off as a lost cause.

To be clear: I write this blog primarily for myself, but also with hope that the persons around me might find it interesting and that it might lead to good discussions. I also am bitchy, I’m entitled (in the sense that I am “entitled” to an opinion, and also that I have entitled myself to the title of “blogger”) and I sure as hell am a feminist. In the blog post, I was also put under the umbrella term of “oppressed feminist bitches.” This adds in two new words to my title, “oppressed” and “bitch.” I won’t say more than: if somebody is oppressed, they certainly have reason to be a bitch, no matter what gender, cis- or trans-, genderqueer, othergendered, etc.

The truth of the world, in general, is this: in general, men have more privilege than women. Similarly, white people have more privilege than people of other racial or ethnic backgrounds. Other groups with more privilege than their counterparts (this list is not exhaustive, and, while in general it is universally true, this list also has a western societal bias): rich vs. poor, heterosexual vs. any other sexuality, able-bodied vs. handicapped, religious vs. non-religious, etc. If an able-bodied person argued, “I can’t believe our tax dollars go to paying for handicap accessible shit, we shouldn’t have to change our world for them,” then you would probably think that they were missing the point, or even that they’re at least slightly leaning towards the side of “douche.” Handicapped people of all sorts face difficulties every day, and yes, we should change the world for “them” because they have a right to the same chances at life and enjoying it as every other person. There is a need for change in general because, historically, much of our and other societies have treated handicapped persons as “less than,” or “lost causes,” for reasons fueled by religion or ignorance.

Similarly, though not in any way identically, women have faced difficulties historically for religious and ignorance issues, as well as plenty of other issues and motivations. Yes, we have come a very long way even in just the past decade. But that doesn’t mean that we should stop fighting for equality. Also, when I say “equality,” I do not mean “women deserve more than men,” because this goes against the definition of “equality” as well as displays a gross lack of understanding that gender is not binary. My feminism says “no matter what gender or sex, no person should have to be discriminated against, put down in any way, hurt or endure prejudice simply based on their gender or sex.” My feminism says, “fuck the patriarchy,” because it hurts everybody, including men. Women are treated as “less than,” men are treated as having to be hyper-masculine and bullied if they display feminine attributes, and anybody who doesn’t fit into this idea of binary genders is treated as a freak. Feminist issues are men’s issues, and they certainly do have to deal with “men’s rights.” Men’s rights are equal to all other genders’ rights.

I don’t have a lot of hope for the person who wrote that blog post, but I do have hope that at least one person will see what I have said (which is in no way unique or different from what other feminists are saying or have been saying for a very long time) and be exposed to the idea that feminism is not a dirty word, and that it is probably what they have been thinking about for a long time.

You Might Also Like


  • Reply warminthewake July 12, 2011 at 1:35 am

    Ahh lish, I love you, but I’m going to have to disagree with your “truth”s of the world.
    Not that I think you’re wrong.
    I just think that the longer people see the world that way, the longer it will remain so <3

    • Reply Elizabeth Anne July 12, 2011 at 9:39 am

      We can totally talk about this more in person, but just to clarify: I see the world’s problems much like Harry Potter sees Voldemort’s name, in that we can call it something different but that the most effective way to fight back against injustice that we see is to face it head-on, raise awareness, and call it what it is.

  • Reply Inspiring White Females to action: rationalization abjection* and separatist feminist cowardice. « pornalysis July 12, 2011 at 5:19 pm

    […] Internet: conquered. ( […]

  • Reply Nepene July 14, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    There’s two sides to every coin.

    “My feminism says, “fuck the patriarchy,” because it hurts everybody, including men. Women are treated as “less than,” men are treated as having to be hyper-masculine and bullied if they display feminine attributes, and anybody who doesn’t fit into this idea of binary genders is treated as a freak.”

    Feminists love women who break the stereotypes, and men who display feminine attributes. And they hate women who don’t break the stereotypes and men who display masculine characteristics. Some men are hyper masculine, some women do just want to cook and clean for a man and feminism sucks at accepting the normal gender roles.

    In the post referenced, a man did a masculine thing, approached a woman (if with terrible technique) and you ripped him to shreds. Both men and women should be free to do what their heart desires, including obey their gender stereotypes.

    I’ve had a lot of debates with feminists over this. They seem awkward at my assertion that I am happy being unambiguously masculine and have no desire to be feminine or homosexual.

    You have an emotive gap. In our earlier discussion, I mentioned makeup. You had a host of excuses for women. You were very defensive of women. In utter contrast to you leaping to attack the man in the post. That is why you were called an entitled feminist. Simply try to see it from the man’s point of view and you are less likely to conquer the internet.

    • Reply Elizabeth Anne July 14, 2011 at 1:57 pm

      I was writing a reply to you in the other thread, but I will reply to you here instead.

      Let me first say that I have deeply appreciated the comments that you have placed in my blog. This conversation with you has been very productive for me in that it stretched my mind, and I hope that you would be able to say the same.

      However, I don’t think that it would be productive to continue the conversation further. Part of a healthy discussion is that both parties listen to each other and be able to respectfully disagree. It seems to me that your comments come from a very emotionally charged place that I obviously don’t and cannot understand because I do not know your story or your experiences, which I can only guess have been peppered with negativity from feminists and perhaps some women as well. I deeply empathize with this; negative experiences of all kinds can be very difficult to overcome. I would love to hear your story and best understand you (if you do want to talk, you may e-mail me, but there is obviously no pressure) but I feel that continuing this thread would serve no purpose but to further create negativity. I do not feel as though you are listening or making much of an attempt to see things from my viewpoint, and in turn I am finding myself less willing to listen to yours, which is a disservice to you that I would rather not commit any further.

      For the record: I have no problem with female-identifying persons who are comfortable being, generally, “feminine.” I also have no problem with male-identifying persons being, generally, “masculine.” There is absolutely nothing wrong with people making their own choices and being themselves, which is exactly what I fight for and what I write about. It is only when somebody tries to assert that their way is the only way that I take umbrage and say something about it.

      I would like to say this in closing: I understand that you might not want to talk about these topic with me. I can recommend different people with whom you would probably be more likely to listen to. If asked for, I can ask one of the following men in my circle to speak to you: a reverend of my local MCC church who was also my professor; one of my previous bosses who is the person who introduced feminism to me; a friend who is a particularly well-spoken and patient labor union organizer who fights for minority rights; any of my physicist roommates who would love to speak to you about science’s influence on human behavior and its limits; practically any of my trans* friends who can speak to you about femininity and masculinity. If none of these work for you, there are a large number of male, atheist bloggers who are also feminists whose writings are readily available.

      • Reply Nepene July 14, 2011 at 3:37 pm

        My negativity is essentially from you combining nice guys and cruel guys to make a point that nice guys are manipulative

        “From my perspective, there are very few other scenarios in which getting hit on doesn’t feel like an invasion, or inappropriate, or rude, or just downright uncalled for. Getting yelled at on the street isn’t fun; it’s frightening, especially if the car circles back to do it again (this has happened to be often), and it’s also giving a clear message of “I’m going to assert my dominance over you and make you out to be a purely sexual object because it’s culturally acceptable for me to do so.” Being listened to/treated “nicely” by a man who gets angry when you turn him down sends the message: “I’ll be nice to you as long as you reward me in the end.”

        You are saying that being hit on, as with the girl in the elevator, is almost always a negative experience and to justify that cite two situations. A man yelling at you on the street from a car, and a man getting angry when you turn him down, worsened by the fact that he has expectations of you as a woman. Two very extreme examples.

        These situations suck. They are in no way ‘culturally acceptable’ though. People look at men who call out on the street for women with disdain because they recognise the threat of violence these women face. People will actively intervene if a man gets too aggressive with a woman for the same reasons.

        You then use this concept to tar the nice guy, saying he seeks to

        “have the ability to trap you in an enclosed space with me.”

        You later note what actually angers you about nice guys.

        Facebook posts about the woman being cruel after four years of her refusing him.

        You conflated low confidence low aggression low sexuality nice guys with high confidence high aggression high sexuality cruel men to make a point that nice guys were manipulative as they would get pissed off after you refused them sex, even though you know they wouldn’t. You conflated very very different men to make a point that an essential thing that a man does, coming onto women, was wrong. I can very clearly state the past causes of my negativity. Feminists who stereotyped men all as high confidence, high aggression highly sexualized women abusers.

        I can feel the man’s pain. All men can. We can understand how sucky his life is without love, even if he “ha[s] more privilege[s] than women”. His life is worse than a woman who faces awkward nerds coming onto her in elevators. Men either win the game of life or lose it, and those who lose it have a much worse quality of life than women.

        • Reply Elizabeth Anne July 14, 2011 at 4:07 pm

          I have responded to yourself and to others in the comment section of my post calmly. I have further explained my position and repeated over and over that I have no problem with nice guys, but with the actions of “Nice Guys,” which is a very small subset of the population.

          I won’t stop you from continuing to make attempts to justify your conclusions based on some illogical combination of any vaguely biological study that you can stretch to fit your ideas (for example, citing “digit ratio” as a relevant clue towards aggression. I suppose you are ignoring the 29 other cited traits listed in the Wikipedia article that can apparently be traced to digit ratio as well. Perhaps Elevator Guy should not only look into his prenatal testosterone levels, but his sperm count, his risk of an eating disorder, the health of his heart, and, of course, his sexuality. Wouldn’t want to miss anything, because, as we know, correlation always implies causality.) and also some vague anecdotal evidence.

          I am and always will be sympathetic to people who are emotionally affected by negative experiences. However, I have no patience for people who are unwilling to listen, unwilling to open their minds, and who will only put time and effort into the causes that they feel affect them directly. I further have no time for people who live in generalizations and not in reality, especially in generalizations that insulate themselves from any kind of responsibility or self-insight and only serve to feed into their own victim mentality.

          I tried being nice, polite, and I tried to listen to your point of view. However, as you are apparently unwilling to display even a modicum of self-awareness, I will leave you to your world where you feel that men are more victimized than women. Because, honestly, I don’t want a part of that world at all. I would also like to invite you to share your opinions in the elsewhere that is Anywhere-But-My-Blog.

  • Reply When Reason fails: Emotion takes its place « pornalysis July 21, 2011 at 4:33 pm

    […] Internet: conquered. ( […]

  • Leave a Reply