carl and brett
carl writes
>
>Haven't seen the movie in some decades, but I recall the central liaison as
>at least a bittersweet affair where each party derived some benefit. I
>guess you just don't like screen romances -- you probably don't think The
>Night Porter is a great love story either ;-)
uh yeah....right. you're the " i hate popular media products, tv's bad for you, it all sucks" person as i recall.
chalk another one up on the board under "dismissals of anything a woman says on behalf of feminist analyses with a fucking smiley=con" [translation help: isn't she annoyingly cute for harping on this so much..
there there little girl. it'll all go away once you start being a grown up about these things and realize it's all individuals, and it's all just the movies and look and see what progress we've made]
and this one from brett to Katha: "I'm not sure what you mean by the "structure of sex and gender." But I'm sure you will educate me."
let me just remind everyone that when we had the daly debate, someone asked frances to explain daly's work to him. frances basically told him to look it up himself[trans help; fuck off buddy. you go girrrrrrl]
now, why on earth should anyone have to explain any of this to any of you? if bill gates descended on the list and said, 'please explain why capitalism sucks and why i should support socialism/marxism' and then he proceeded to object with his i heart capitalism arguments, what do you suppose would happen. we'd be reduced to finding the guy a source of amusement and ridicule at best, a target for flamage and a big fat exasperation to us all.
now tell me, why should i or any other feminist woman on this list feel any differently about the objections being trotted out here? [this is #precisely* what butler is talking about so those of you who consider yourself marxists and think katha and i are nutters, then put yourself right into the conservative left crowd as far as i'm concerned]
why is it *our* job to explain to men what they just don't understand? [is that like some of you can't ever figure out how to scrub a toilet and suddenly become incompetent? heh.]
why don't you, brett, figure it out. seriously reflect on the world around you. take a look at the structure of the world you work in: who does what and how much do you think they get paid? walk around your neighborhood and take a long hard look at the couples you see. by standards of conventional attractiveness, who's married to whom? what about their jobs? who do you see driving the kids around?
and do this systematically and for a while. and don't dwell on the anomalies and bring them up, but rather look at the patterns.
yes, you're right capitalism stinks. but that these attitudes thrive here on *this* list doesn't suggest to me that a socialist revolution is going to change a whole lot in and of itself. and so, therefore, sexism and structural sexism probably lie in places other than the capitalist organization of the economy.
so yeah, how much peole make and their material ability to live counts. it's important. but one of the points of feminist analyses is to ask not only how images of women and representations of women interact with, contribute to, affect the decisions made that result in a segregated, gender unequal dividison of labor, but also how it's not just about material "things" but also about feelings of self worth, dignity, access to a range of choices and possibilities in one's life etc and so on.
kelley