SubscribeAdvertise here: Contact FM.
1801 M. EDGEWORTH Angelina ii. 22 Heigh-ho! must I sleep again without seeing my Araminta?
1871 W. H. BEEVER Daily Life Farm 40 Heigh-ho! this dreary day!
Ann Coulter, for example, is a detestable woman. She is a woman who says detestable things. She is not saying detestable things because she is a woman, and she is not detestable for being a woman. So if you're going to attack her, it should be for being detestable ("idiotic right-wing polemicist") and not for being a woman ("skanky tranny bimbo"). Because being a woman has nothing to do with her fascist rhetoric, and if you're going to fling poo at her at least try not to splatter the rest of us with your bad aim.I find this somewhat disingenuous — she would not be notable were she not a woman.
"Here is what you need to understand. It does not matter, one iota, whether you think a woman is exceptional, whether you think she deserves the most violent and derogatory put-down you can dream up. In all likelihood, Paris Hilton will never read your comments. But I will, and it will stay with me that you have these words in your repertoire ready to deploy if you think some woman deserves it. That, if I am a woman and in public and someone decides I am disgusting and odious enough, he may feel free -- even feel righteous and justified -- to wish specifically sexual violence on me"So you see, the position you seem to be considering would have it that statements or prose be measured, not by their inherent misogynistic styling, but by their literary quality. I don't suppose, with a bit more thought about it, you see how ludicrous a concept that is.
MSNBC (the channel affiliated with this wonderful website) presents 17 straight hours of its prison documentary series "Lockup." When it gets to the regular timeslot for "Countdown," they should show a special disclaimer reassuring us that Keith Olbermann has NOT been thrown in jail for badmouthing the President. Yet.But I never really expected it to get published (it's the old trick Producer Garry Marshall used to get some of Robin Williams' wilder stuff past the censors on 'Mork and Mindy'; you offer something you know they'll reject and the other stuff looks less bad).
I will use bitch rhetorically or jokingly, in fact I can think of one recent comment where I used it as pretty much every other word. But I'm pretty confident I've never used it in anger against another person sine I was a teen, certainly never a female. I may have slipped a time or two against a male.
No caveats here, in fact I try just be safe and never say it. Maybe I've used it in a joke or two. I'll be more stringent on this. I do give some leeway in other poster's use of it, as I cannot be sure it has the same connotations for them as it does for me.2a. Any word for female genitalia really.
A corollary is that there's no reason to call anybody a pussy or a twat in a heated way, when dick or asshole have the same meaning and less potential for alienation. Again, I'm more strict about this if I know the person I'm addressing is female. I do use these words quite frequently in non-heated ways, though. Genitalia are funny.
I may think this on occasion in real-life situations ( e.g. my wife, heh), often correctly, but I would never say it. And in online situations I don't usually have enough information to even think it.3a. Be careful about suggesting a woman is being over-sensitive or emotional.
Some of you may be surprised by this one, as I've been accused of it on occasion, but it really is a rule I've operated under for some time. It's hard because it's very subjective and loose ... people of every persuasion do get emotional at times and I will call them on it. But if I know the the person I'm talking to is female I make an extra effort to chose my words carefully.
In the 'hysterics' thread I was accused of breaking this norm by suggesting a woman had 'whined'. I can only assure folks that my assessment had nothing to do with her gender. I have said males were being whiny many-a-time too.
Like the c-word, I make this easy by just generally refraining from speaking about a female poster's body parts at all (unless I know her really well and I'm really, really sure she's cool with it).4a. Be careful when discussing any woman's appearance.
Rule 4 becomes more complex when speaking about women generally (as opposed to female mefites). I just try to be cognizant of objectifying language, while still speaking openly. It's tough and I certainly have probably failed on this front, but I do try.
Ok, this is one I don't have in my current repertoire. I dunno, I'm willing to tentatively add it to the list and make an effort on this front. I certainly have no problem getting my affront on. But I do have my doubts about how effective I can be about this.
For one thing, I think I'm pretty tone deaf on this stuff. On the Condeleeza issue, for example, I would have been much more likely to call out the original use of 'Cuntapedia' (see 2) than I would have Ubu's response to it. I do associate 'pussy' with 'stinky' in the sense that they have a distinctive, sometimes strong, scent, so I was able to get the joke. But I don't personally attach any distaste to that stink so I forget that "oh yeah, guys have used that to put down women for ages" thing. It just isn't on my radar, because it's not something I've dealt with much.
For another, some of the males active in this thread already have a bit of a problem acting as the hall monitor. We get huffy and condescending too easily. *looks at languagehat, EB, the mirror* I'm not sure putting another set of items on our checklist of offenses is really such a good idea.
For these reasons, I feel the ladies might have to take the lead on this one, and just look for the fellas to have their back.
I think I generally follow this one instinctively, but this thread has made it explicit in my mind. I've never been big on rape jokes, but I do enjoy getting nasty on occasion and I do feel there are people in this world who have earned a certain amount of suffering.
About a year ago I said a female should be 'reamed' (in a metatalk sense) for something she'd done. Only a few minutes later it felt very wrong. I'm sure I'd probably said something along those lines to a dude before and really thought nothing of it. But this was the first time I'd used such language towards a female, and it had an additional prurient layer of meaning that I was uncomfortable with. I have no qualms about pledging now to avoid saying such things in the future. At least not to another mefite, and I'll be extra careful about suggesting anybody deserves violence. I need more faith in karma.
posted by iconomy at 7:57 AM on November 16, 2007 [1 favorite]