tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7146512.post5406603090548872506..comments2024-03-12T22:31:46.500-04:00Comments on What Would Phoebe Do?: Further thoughts on Mark Zuckerberg's undershirtsPhoebe Maltz Bovyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17996039330841139883noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7146512.post-50186276441379742232014-11-15T12:14:47.617-05:002014-11-15T12:14:47.617-05:00Although... let's look at this in a more big-p...Although... let's look at this in a more big-picture way: Let's say you are someone who believes that such a thing as "casual sexism" exists, and that both Zuckerberg's "frivolous" comment and Kohn's use of "shrill" are examples thereof. I totally get that there's an approach to such words that's over-the-top, and on some level I think that's what Kohn was complaining about. But... how *does* one address these things? It seems like there ought to be some middle-ground between dismissing these things as no big deal, and being all-out <i>offended</i>.Phoebe Maltz Bovyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17996039330841139883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7146512.post-92047980213165375102014-11-15T11:53:53.740-05:002014-11-15T11:53:53.740-05:00I suppose it is. But as a reader with limited info...I suppose it is. But as a reader with limited information, someone's use of "shrill" to describe feminists suggests to me that this is a person who's criticizing the movement from the outside. And... because 'critic-from-within' is a common strategy of critics-from-the-outside, I, as Carrie Bradshaw would say, can't help but wonder. Phoebe Maltz Bovyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17996039330841139883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7146512.post-26378540898981774262014-11-15T11:42:05.120-05:002014-11-15T11:42:05.120-05:00I think it's possible to be a feminist in ever...I think it's possible to be a feminist in every way that counts without sharing the leftist obsession with "offensive" code words.caryatisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7146512.post-66233488250476611762014-11-14T21:55:18.840-05:002014-11-14T21:55:18.840-05:00Caryatis,
It seems, from the piece, that the auth...Caryatis,<br /><br />It seems, from the piece, that the author is at the very least quite sympathetic to feminism: "We need that conversation now more than ever, and feminists are driving it."<br /><br />Re: "shrill," it's... just such a glaring example of a word used to undermine outspoken women, never men. I wouldn't expect a from-within-type critique to be a point-by-point explanation of why everything Jessica Valenti and Amanda Marcotte have ever written is 100% correct. But "shrill" is a bit much.Phoebe Maltz Bovyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17996039330841139883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7146512.post-24702776319650098882014-11-14T20:44:34.307-05:002014-11-14T20:44:34.307-05:00"Now, it's totally fine (if a bit contrad..."Now, it's totally fine (if a bit contradictory) for anti-feminist women to write opinion articles. But Kohn is claiming to be criticizing the movement from within, so as to save it from itself. Which seems a bit disingenuous, but who knows. "<br /><br />To the extent that any movement needs to be criticized, the people doing the criticism are not going to be at the heart of the movement. If they were, they would be rejected as soon as they started criticizing. It's probably impossible to tell whether Kohn considers herself a feminist criticizing the excesses of the movement, or an anti-feminist trying to undermine it. But you can't rule out the former just because of a particular word she uses.caryatisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7146512.post-65778212171056391682014-11-14T18:28:46.994-05:002014-11-14T18:28:46.994-05:00Yes, yes it is. (One might even say that "cas...Yes, yes it is. (One might even say that "casual sexism" along those lines contributes to the low percentage of female tech CEOs!)Phoebe Maltz Bovyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17996039330841139883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7146512.post-80712088404011085572014-11-14T18:24:58.166-05:002014-11-14T18:24:58.166-05:00"It can't be anti-feminist because there ..."It can't be anti-feminist because there aren't very many women in the relevant group anyway" is a weird, weird defense.Nicholashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05693481720368030657noreply@blogger.com