Letters to the Editor
firefly82
Published Letters: 276 Editor's Choice: 30
-
@ LeCastor
[Read the article: The mommy wars rage on]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Imagine if ALL WOMEN, including you and me, suddenly decided to be SAHM, and drop out of the workforce."
It's really, really difficult to take such an outrageously unlikely scenario seriously. Dropping out of the work force just isn't an option for me and a whole lot of women I know.
A scenario of all women instantaneously deciding not to work anymore bears so little relation to the one we have in which a certain fraction of partnered and relatively affluent women with children choose not to work for a portion of their lives that it really, frankly, disables my imagination.
And your hypothetical presumes that, um, all those women who don't want to work will...magically, immediately find partners who will financially support them for the next couple decades? Huh?
I'm single, I have to work...so no, I can't imagine your scenario, short of finding some way to do away with single women who have to work.
-
Just like I said originally
[Read the article: The mommy wars rage on]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"...because people read into those collective choices all sorts of truths about womankind, and then want to base all kinds of legislation/action/reform on those conclusions."
And it is THOSE people who threaten my freedom.
We do better to combat bullying, fundamentalism of all kinds, and the groupthink, intimidation and intellectual dishonesty that those people employ, rather than demean other women's choices.
That only makes the people who do it as bad as the gender-role enforcers they say they're trying to combat.
And what are "collective choices?" Do you really think a whole lot of women got together and made group choice to stay home with kids? Or do you think that individual women make choices based on what they believe to be best for their families, and then other people perceive it as a movement or statement and try to spin it as something easy to sell stories about?
-
No, I think we should work on building a society where the self-determination of all is respected.
[Read the article: The mommy wars rage on]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]'Are you seriously suggesting that it is even remotely possible to eliminate "bullying, fundamentalism of all kinds, and the groupthink, intimidation and intellectual dishonesty"?'
No. But I am seriously suggesting that we try.
I am seriously suggesting that we protect each other by respecting each other's choices and rights to make them, that we stand up for all men's and women's rights to make choices different from our own.
I am seriously suggesting that it plays into the hands of the oppressive to villify those who make choices with which we don't agree, rather than those who would take away our choices.
Are you seriously suggesting that "everything that is not forbidden is mandatory, and everything that is not mandatory is forbidden?"
Are you seriously suggesting that the best counterargument to "All women must live in this way because of (insert vague moral imperative here)," is, "NO! All women must live in this OTHER way, because of (insert vague moral imperative here)?" That we have to coerce women into working, lest they be coerced into staying home?
Are you seriously suggesting that we must all live only in mind of what our enemies might think? As opposed to working to reduce the ability of authoritarians to dictate our lives?
And how is your saying "All women should do this," different from any other authoritarian saying "All women should do this," except that you're in no position to bend the law to your will?
-
Real men are feminists...?
[Read the article: Quote of the day: It's a gynocracy!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]*Some* real men are feminists. *Some* real women are feminists. Some real people are not feminists. Or find themselves unable to consider themselves as such.
Otherwise, DurianJoe, I'm in total agreement with you about the right wingnuts. They behave like middle school hallway bullies to disguise their fear for their own masculinity.
-
Yes to Anne in NYC and others...
[Read the article: Are women less willing to speak their minds?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not many people who know me well would say I'm shy about speaking my mind--when I know what I'm talking about, anyway.
But I am extremely resistant to being accosted on the street by unknown pushy people with cameras and unknown purposes.
-
apocryphal sexism
[Read the article: Hey, Obama boys: Back off already!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As someone who remains a non-feminist...I will say that the dynamic towards Hillary has made me see a whole lot more subtle sexism than I did before. But I still don't think it's why she's losing. The article was a lot more nuanced and carefully observant than much of what I've seen here at Salon on Clinton/Obama. I won't deny the extremity of some of the emotion involved on both sides.
But a lot of what I see happening still boils down to an experience that I still have on a fairly regular basis with a friend (and this is, obviously, anecdotal--I'm not claiming any kind of statistical verifiability here):
ME: I won't vote for Hillary because of (any of the following: her health care plan is authoritarian, not progressive; it will likely make me go hungry; I find her stance on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard dangerous; she says nasty, mal-informed things about our generation; I feel like her candidacy is being sold on the possibility of a spousal co-presidency and I don't think that's how our country should work).
HER: Some people will just never vote for a woman. I'm not saying you...but so many people will say those things that sound reasonable, but the truth is they won't say that they just won't vote for a woman.
Okay, fine, and she's probably right that some people will just never vote for a woman, but how is that an answer to my objections? Of course there is crypto-sexism...but there is also a whole lot of totally rational utter outrage towards some of the positions she's put forth.
And yes, some people are hiding their sexism behind a facade of rational objection. Some of the justified anger will be misinterpreted as crypto-sexism by more-paranoid feminists. Some justifiable anger will be expressed as totally unjustifiable misogyny. But I'm tired of having to answer for the fact that some people won't vote for a woman because *I* just won't vote for Clinton.