Tagline: Little Light
Wondering why Queer Dewd? Wondering what happend to Bitch | Lab? Read Why Queer Dewd and Shame Affirmative.
Skip all this. Take me straight to the comment form »
[...] Bitch Lab » Blog Archive » Tidy bowl [...]
Leave a comment, a trackback from your own blog, or subscribe to an RSS feed for this entry.
"For what it’s worth, I don’t like Bitch Lab, I don’t read her, I don’t think she’s very bright, and I think the main thing she piggybacked on recently was a comment thread to a post she didn’t author. Nice appropriation, that. ... Don’t like Bitch Lab? Join the club, and don’t read her. Read the women she rips off instead. They’re better." - Ilyka Damen
"Really, I mean you no personal harm, but please, stop the lying. Stop undermining feminists and feminism. Make your living doing something else." Feminism Gone Wild, Ann Bartow
Listed on Top 10 Sources
"Come for the animal porn, stay for the cultural analysis." Â Michael Berube "I hereby nominate Bitch | Lab for the role of my inadvertent theory djinni." Â Prosphoros
"The sanctimonious Bitch | Lab, a multi-degreed asswipe (with) a tedious blog of regurgitated theory..." Â Amanda Marcotte, Pandagon
Note: This blog is a natural product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and are not to be considered flaws or defects.
Right on! This whole civility issue is reminiscent of the right-wing puling about Paul Wellstone’s and Coretta Scott King’s funerals, and for the same reasons: discourse that must conform to a privileged class’ standard, that must avoid insulting (or challenging, for that matter) that class, will *always* reify said class’s privilege and reinforce the status quo.
The presence of Trent Lott at a funeral shouldn’t negate Paul Wellstone’s activism any more than the presence of George W Bush should silence Coretta Scott King’s life work. But somehow look how “impolite” it is to even refer to that work (much less applaud the activism). Impolite solely because the Lott and Bush are *there*.
Methinks we need to be reading “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” again:
“You deplore the demonstrations taking place In Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.”
There are vast sections of The Genealogy of Morals which deal with the “mendacity” of ‘truth-telling’ and politefulness, among other things…
By the way, have you seen this: http://www.feminista.com/issue.....6&n= 1
(I’d be interested in your commentary!)
It’s based on a false premise: the idea that “sex positivity” makes a claim for erotic liberation to solve all problems *all by itself.* I don’t know of anyone who makes that claim. And I’m getting mighty sick of the whole “more radical than thou” business. It’s like: look, I don’t give a fuck how radical and all-encompassing your theory is. Find something that has actual results you can show me and get back to me.
As far as sex-positive culture: I know it has had results in my own life, profoundly transformative ones. I’m sure it’s not a solution to everyone’s problems, but I can’t think of a single thing that is; that’s not my concern.
…And I also think a lot of people who bitch about Susie Bright (in particular; there are others) need to maybe actually read what she actually writes a bit more. She’s as capable and willing to take action about (for example) the resurgent push to topple Roe as anyone else. Bread and roses never meant you can just skip the bread; it just means that you need the roses, *too.*
Hey there,
Thanks for this post.
I’m still really interested in conversations I’ve encountered or been the brunt of in wimmin’s circles where civility and courtesy are conflated with not openly questioning oppression among wimmin. Those who can be dealing with oppression head on attempt to side step conversations that challenge in a myriad of ways that exhaust and stymie.
I’d like to see more wimmin talking about patriarchal, class, elitist oppression as manifested through us imposing “standards” of courtesy on each other in times when we could be getting messy. i’d like us to talk some more about the unacceptability of our rage, not just in circles occupied or dominated by men, but also in circles frequented mostly by wimmin.
I’m interested in wimmin pensively engaging with challenges from those who vociferously deconstruct their own oppression in surprising ways, with surprising results.
In any case, I saw what Kevin posted and wrote this post about patriarchal male feminists in response…
http://darkdaughta.blogspot.co.....ists. html
It’s so funny how people feel free to talk about their privilege when they bring it up themselves, but God forbid anyone less privileged actually bring it up to them. I’m sure I’m guilty of it myself in some contexts, but it always floors me when I hear someone go on and on about how privileged they are and then, when I might bring up a class bias or a heterosexist bias in their conversation, I’m being impolite and rude. Of course, as a white person, I seem to be able to bring up racism to other white people- not really so rude then.
@ darkdaughta
i love you. i’m still steaming pissed off at the way Kevin, Shannon, and nubian were treated in that thread.
and, quite frankly, I became even more pissed off at the response to Kevin’s ‘Fuck your civility post’. I was so pissed off last night and this is NOT good for the old genetic heart disease!
that whole fucking “i’m so sorry post” just radiated toxicity. oh poor me, i’m such a racist. oh poor me, i’m so sorry. oh poor me, i should have known better. oh look at me as i stretch my gumby arms and reach round to pat myself on the back for acknowledging my privilege.
blah fuckeddety blah fuckeddety blah.
the rhetoric in that post. fuckmedead fuckmeadead fuckmedead. does it change the focus? no. does it decenter? no. it’s me me me me me ME. all about me. that’s the rhetoric.
i love piny, so this isn’t a personal slam. it takes a long time to learn to how fucking centered one can be. and it doesn’t necessarily help that you are marginalized in some way. it might give insight, but that’s only the start. doing the work that needs to be done ain’t going to be accomplished by an unproductive emotion called guilt. publicly flogging yourself in such an obsessive way — makes no never mind to me.
bending over backwards to kiss ass and politely pretend you get it, doesn’t work either. sometimes, you just have to get messy.
I was happy to see my concerns addressed for once. I’m more pissed that NO ONE over there is bothering to pick up the ball and run with it, which is part of the point I’m trying to make. So, while I think your critique of piny’s response is accurate, I also think we should give him some props for putting it out there on the front page rather than letting the issue wither away in the comments.
Withering away on the front page is step, no? :)
Oh, good…so Feminista! ’s back at it with the “sex positive = pro-male abuse” feminism cant, ehhh??? *yawn, yawn, yawn
On the subject of civility in discourse: I usually do tend to believe in respectful debate in general…but when it comes to those who deliberately peddle fascist BS, the gloves have to come off. Of course, “civility” can be thrown around by those in power as a means of silencing legitimate anger at real injustice. On the other hand, though, I still believe that there are right and wrong ways to process that anger; it’s one thing to vent on a blog about a legitimate outrage, but it’s something else to exploit it to demonize an entire group or class of people for the sins of a few. That’s the main reason why I tend to emphasize a more institutional analysis of inequality based on systemic oppression, rather than a more individualistic analysis.
That’s the one thing about Ginmar that really pisses me off…while I understand and even share to an extent her anger with having to deal with those MRA con artists who exploit some of the weakness of those supposed “feminist male” bloggers to implant their BS; her constant baiting of other feminists as not pure enough for her standards just leaves me cold. Such a mentality may kick out the real misogynists, but it also alienates a lot of legitimate wannabe male feminist symps who really do want to attempt to change their ways and support the broader program of equality. Some folks do need to get whacked indeed on their nonsense..but some may just need to be educated a bit.
And a +1 to what Dark Daughta said about the challenges to men who do make an honest attempt to challenge their own privileges….it isn’t easy, and you will get whacked from both sides (the KKK types and the more extreme Black Nationalists who will forever brand you due to your skin color)..but the rewards are more than worth the risks.
Finally, ti EL…it’s a lot easier for some people to condemn other people’s privilege when they are able to take their own for granted. And it’s a lot easier to acknowledge their own privilege when they know that they can’t (or won’t) do anything to challenge that prilvilege. We can acknowledge inequality until we are blue in the face; the real issue is DOING something about it…and that would raise the possibility of them actually giving up some things that they take for granted. See why thusly it’s so much more comfortable to talk about other people’s privilege??
My nickel..keep the change as usual.
Anthony
Well, I took a gander at that long thread at Feministe, or one of them. It looked to my jaundiced eye like two things were happening there:
1) Tensions arising from privilege being called out, yes
2) the usual ta-ra about everyone’s auTHORitah stuff that happens in any hosted space that gets beyond a certain size, particularly when there’s a political component
3) people (well, mainly one person) complaining about the trolls taking up all the space and making everything about them, and then going right back and daring the “trolls” (who may or may not have been so in general, I’d have to see more context; but didn’t seem too terribly trollish in there, per se, or at least one of them didn’t) to come back and knock the chip off their shoulders, even after troll seemed to have conceded the floor for the moment. Surprise surprise, troll comes back and knocks it off. lather, rinse, repeat.
–three, three things.
And then of course everyone, but some people more than others, really, really hates to say “okay, you’re right. I was wrong.” Or, even more so, to accept gracefully when someone *else* who you’ve been passionately arguing with finally concedes *partially* to you, rather than plowing right past it and demanding 100% concession, plus repentance for so misunderstanding and miscontruing you in the first place, plus maybe a little discreet shirt rending and sackcloth and ash wearing. It doesn’t matter if you’re right, it doesn’t matter if you’re justified; that shit just doesn’t work. Never has. Never will. Why do people keep doing the same damn thing over and over and expecting different results?
…Four things. Well, five, really. Say four and a half.
The funny part is that you could strip the who’s-a-feminist business from that thrash, reverse the genders of some of the main players, and you’d have something that looks remarkably similar to the endless policy/rank thrashes on another BBS I belong to. In that case, the main tension comes from the…uberhost, I suppose …(who is female, as is her main assistant) believes in a very “civilized”–to the point of passive aggressive crypticness, many say–approach to online discourse probably similar to Hugo (based on what I saw in that thread from and about him); whereas a lot of the longtime regular posters (more male than not, though not exclusively) mostly range from blunt to sledgehammer. The gender stuff, if it gets called out at all (it’s not the world’s most sophisticated place in that regard) tends to play out like Huck Finn baring his ass at the tea-drinking civilizin’ lady. So, interesting to me that in this case it’s the guy(s) who wants to play nice.
Anyway I found myself sort of sympathetic to Hugo just based on that thread–he reads like a well-meaning enough fellow–and yet, I could completely imagine how his space might have been overrun by trolls, and how frustrating that would be for the regular posters, again, extrapolating from my experiences at the other BBS. Namely, uberhost, and hosts who have similar styles, are so invested in being *civilized* (i.e. no name-calling, no arm-rasslin’, no spittin’) that they miss the more seasoned trollers, who have honed the art of adhering to the letter of a comments policy while subverting its spirit at every turn to a fine art. Then, when people blow up in response to the endless baiting, as they’re meant to, *they* look like the troublemakers. Maddening!
On the BBS in question, which is reasonably diverse, certainly enough so that it’s quite possible to not get into fights with *everybody* in *every* conference, one of the unofficial ways for separating the sheep from the trolls is the maxim that “if you’re walking down the street and someone kicks you, they have a problem. If *everyone* kicks you, *you* have a problem.”
Personally, I have found this maxim to be largely true, particularly on the Internets, where scapegoating, while certainly not gone, is kept to a minimum by the lack of visible signs. However, the *other* thing that happens with the “civilized” hosts, particularly those of the leftie persuasion, is that they get extremely uncomfortable with this sort of talk; be fair! Don’t pick on the underdog! Everyone means well, if you only give them a chance! Or fifty! Or a thousand! And meanwhile the troll, of course, is happily taking advantage of this by going HELP HELP I’M BEING OPPRESSED:
“I’m a conservative in a liberal majority! I’m a radical in a conservative majority! I’m a fruitbat in a wombat majority! I’m a minority in a majority majority! I’m a Me in a Them majority! You, you bunch of…anti-ME-ISTS!! You ugly, mama-dresses-you-funny, shit-eating BULLIES! DIE DRINKING DRANO!! p.s. why’s everyone picking on MEEEEEE”
(FIVE, no, SIX, no, SEVEN things hap–oh, bugger it).
As per Amp; I, uh, haven’t actually been around Alas that much for a long while. and, when I was there, I uh. had assumed Amp was a chick. oopsie.
(just to clarify for anyone who’s even more lost than I am/was: talking about the thrash(es) on Feministe, as referenced in one of the threads belowdecks, not Feminista, as referenced in the middle of this one).
@ Belledame
oh. good rant. and for somone who hates people, you sure are good at understanding them. :) funny how that works.
funny thing about Alas — for a long while, I thought it was a male run blog and I didn’t perceive it as a place that discussed feminist issues. back then, i didn’t read comments, most read what people were saying about political issues surrounding the elections circa 2003 - 2004.
then I learned it was a feminist blog but I almost always read the about page, particularly if it’s a well designed blog. so i knew there was a man involved. but, i still never perceived as feminist. i think this was before the redesign. or maybe i just never saw specifically feminist topics raised when i visited — which was mostly just surfing the internets ™. In fact, I’d completely stricken it from my reading list as just another political lefty blog that i found boring.
same thing with pandagon — which i perceived as a male space during the election season. a’course, i was working 90 hour weeks on a regular basis, so i was prob. sleep reading.
Actually Pandagon used to be a male space. Ezra Klein and Jesse Taylor.
Then one of the guys left, and Amanda was brought in as co-blogger.
Then the other original left, and they brought in Jedmunds (male) and Pam.
It has no bloggers in common with its earlier incarnations, which may explain the confusion…
per people who talk about their own (or their group’s) privilege freely but bristle when someone else calls them (or their group) on it:
well, first of all, I’d start with the premise that just about nobody likes being criticized; and that it’s easier to do it to oneself than to hear it from someone else, on account of you can control your own
then, of course, there’s guilt, when it’s a person from the less-privileged group calling it. and then resentment for feeling guilt. and for not being recognized as the good person one wants to think one is.
actually that last is the key for me. Anthony, your question was about what do you DO once you recognize your own privilege? It’s a good question, and the answer’s not always immediately obvious. Maybe there isn’t always an immediate answer. But the thing is, I think everyone expects there to be one. And if there isn’t something concrete that one can do to atone/expiate/whatever right that minute, it…well, it’s very uncomfortable. In a way I almost think it’s harder to NOT do anything (I mean in the moment of the discussion, not Ever), but instead, just sit with it.
And, too, frankly, people are people, and a righteous rant on the subject of hegemonic privilege can and often does get all mixed up with personal shit that may or may not be even tangentially related to the sociopolitical issue in question: hungry, tired, angry, lonely, bad day at work, broke again, no one to vent at–SAY, there’s a person displaying their sociopolitical privilege in a discussion, the bastard! Have at it! I shall SMITE this person with the SMITE of fiery righteousness! DO you or DO you not admit that you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, BAAD–hey, come back here! Typical privileged reaction: YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!
And then again again, of course, person-of-privilege may be having a day (or a month, or a life) him/herself and will hear even the most evenhanded, dispassionate, and impersonal dissection of a sociopolitical discrimination as IT’S ALL ABOUT MEEEEEEE, isn’t it. you’re saying I’m WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, BAAD–hey, come back here! Typical (member of group): so p.c. and sensitive!
multiply by a few more factors and inevitably you get at least some:
THERE’S JUST NO TALKING TO YOU, IS THERE. YOU JUST DON’T UNDERSTAND; YOU’LL *NEVER* UNDERSTAND. SCREW YOU GUYS, **I’M GOING HOME**”
–hey, come back here!
–I don’t hate people! did I say I hate people?? do I give off the impression that I– I love people!
they’re wonderful!
with orange sauce!
no, I’m not a misanthrope…weeellll…I’m getting better….
[...] Bitch Lab » Blog Archive » Tidy bowl [...]