when has acting like "ladies" and, "asking nicely" ever advanced women's rights?

[niyad]

was directed to a thread I had not noticed a couple of days ago about how EVERYONE hates enviros and feminists. sadly, the expected support was right on schedule. enviros and feminists (particularly feminists) ruin things, turn people off, because of the way the message of equal rights, reproductive autonomy, etc., is presented. (of course, the fact that the people saying this are doing so in the same manner apparently escapes their notice, but that is another issue)

so, it got me to thinking: what rights, exactly, have women EVER won by asking nicely, by being demure little ladies, and patiently hoping the great white father will deign to allow us one modicum of independence, of autonomy, of equal pay, etc? surely there must be some, or we would not keep hearing that the reason we don't get things is because of the way we ask. so, please, sister and brother DU'ers--refresh my memory. WHAT RIGHTS have women EVER gotten by acting like milquetoasts?

thanks in advance

[seabeyond]

1. you kick ass woman. so, how is that for awesome postive, drippin in sugah... lol. nt

[niyad]

3. bless your little ole' heart. . . those 4 inch stilettos do come in handy!!

[seabeyond]

5. ya know, i just blessed another little heart in another thread. all this sugah is making me,

well, feeling kinda high, lol.

[MichiganVote]

2. Answer: Never.

[niyad]

4. I was pretty sure of that, but thought perhaps I had just overlooked one.

[seabeyond]

11. and being the nice girl you are, decided to be open minded enough to ask for the help that so many

are willing to give us???

well, there is a thought.

i will wait along side of you for these men to tell us just how we can speak so nicely, that they will be able to hear what we are saying.

you know, a huge smile on our face while we talk about our rapes, or our harrassment in the street. no no, being angry at being raped or harrassed in the street turns people off. our total bad.

or maybe happy faces talking about the children and women kidnapped and enslaved in the sex trafficking. yes. butterflies.

oh, and surely we can serves some cake while we talk about pay discrepency, and male privilege, and patriarchy.

[ismnotwasm]

6. Let's see, nope not that

Hmm not that either. Oh wait--meh, that that either.

I got nothin'.

[niyad]

27. nor do I. was thinking there must have been at least one I overlooked.

[Taverner]

7. Ann Richards was damn polite, and when pushed she pushed back

Gotta love the good Governor

[niyad]

10. she was, and always will be, one of my sheroes.

[Taverner]

12. Sheroes, I like that!

[niyad]

26. one of my favourites

[seabeyond]

13. um. no. i am here in texas and she was an uppity woman along with all of us women that speak up.

it is that simple.

[Starry Messenger]

8. Never, please see "tone argument"

(I'm sure you are conversant with this niyad, but for all others )


http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument

"A tone argument is an argument used in discussions, sometimes by Concern trolls and sometimes as a Derailment, in which it is suggested that feminists would be more successful if only they expressed themselves in a more pleasant tone. This is also sometimes described as catching more flies with honey than with vinegar, a particular variant of the tone argument.

The tone argument is a form of derailment, or a red herring, because the tone of a statement is independent of the content of the statement in question, and calling attention to it distracts from the issue at hand. Drawing attention to the tone rather than content of a statement can allow other parties to avoid engaging with sound arguments presented in that statement, thus undermining the original party's attempt to communicate and effectively shutting them down."

[niyad]

15. thank you for posting that

[seabeyond]

17. why, i just had someone lecture me on the " more flies with honey than with vinegar"

and i gotta tell you, he was not using a lot of honey while lecturing me on honey.

why is he allowed to be all that in vinegar demanding i be all that in honey.

[niyad]

23. I know, that post cracked me up. just remember the quote I shared.

[Squinch]

53. I bet I know who that was! I think he told me the same thing once! And if I recall, it

suddenly came out when it became obvious he was losing the argument.

[seabeyond]

75. ya. well. i cant count the number of times i have been told, more sugar, less vinegar

in a very vinegary way

[Squinch]

57. Just saw the post referred to. And it isn't the same person. They're multiplying!!!!

It's the attack of the 1890's Finishing School Comportment teachers!!!!!

[niyad]

67. you nearly owed me a keyboard

[Squinch]

69. .

[ismnotwasm]

61. Coming from a political board where

A common complaint is that Democrats need to stop being 'nice' get some serious real on repukes I finds this supremely ironic.

[niyad]

68. that is a most excellent point

[seabeyond]

74. i did suggest that since they have vilified the word liberal, that all liberals must carry a soft

stick.

i got more vinegar from his reply.

[niyad]

119. when in a mood, and I hear that nonsense, I reply, "who the HELL wants to catch flies anyway??"

[seabeyond]

122. lol. cute. now the discussion has gone to vinegar catch flies better anyway. apple cidar vinegar.

wine.

i say ... shit catches the most flies

du, gotta love it.

[TheKentuckian]

50. Just about what I was thinking and it is much broader in impact in Democratic circles

Sometimes it may well be trolling but it is so widespread and consistent that I have to believe that along the way we have been picking up voters who are primarily tone driven who cannot "hear" any message until it is packaged in a way they can consume and will accept ANY and ALL arguments as reasonable IF they can be spoken with a smile and in the right cadence and tone.

I call for those folks to be utterly ignored and safely so. There is little risk they will find the current incarnation of TeaPubliKlans tolerable so they will tune out and good riddance to the content and real life condition ignoring whiners.

[Starry Messenger]

113. Yes, it is applied to people working in several other arenas of struggle.

[liberal_at_heart]

9. The activists I have always admired the most have always been the ones who have

refused to be thought of as less but did so with quit dignity. You don't have to be aggressive to stand up for yourself. All Rosa Parks did was refuse to go to the back of the bus. She didn't insist that every person on that bus agree with her or go to hell.

[LittleBlue]

14. I was thinking Gandhi and MLK

did pretty well advancing revolutionary change with politeness. The notion that activists must be rude and impolite to change society is very misguided.

[niyad]

19. see post 8 above, nobody was talking about being rude. interesting that you used that word to

describe the fight for women's rights. could you give us some specific examples of that rudeness?

[LittleBlue]

24. The other thread is full of insults

The last one I recall is someone being called blind to racism for defending FEMEN. So far in this thread you have a winner, someone has already used ignore. Kind of proves the OP in the other thread, which is degenerating into a load of insulting insinuations. And this discussion will devolve into me pointing out insults and you probably insisting it isn't rude.

[seabeyond]

28. do you have any clue what the racist issue with femen is...? cause i know you do not. and if you

are cluesless, wouldnt that make you blind to the racism issue with femen? or do you blindly defend while being clueless. hmmmmm

too much sugah, not enough?

ya, i heard lots of insults, starting with screed from the OP and working down thru the few men that cheered.

[LittleBlue]

34. And one could argue that such a group is racist

without personally attacking the person whom one is debating.

You've provided me with another excellent example:

or do you blindly defend while being clueless.

So far, your first reply labels me clueless without really addressing anything.

too much sugah, not enough?

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean. It's just rude behavior, but doesn't actually mean anything.

[seabeyond]

37. So you do not know what you are talking about

I suppose that is rude of me to say also

[Violet_Crumble]

81. I was the person who was told I was blind to racism...

I'm not, nor am I clueless. And it wasn't a man who attacked me in that thread, btw.

[seabeyond]

87. you did not know what the issue was with femen and where we have gone on this board

with the information we have gathered. who is doing what ect... yet, you walked right to one of my posts, and was ready for another attack. why? this is twice you have done it and i see a couple other threads that you are sending a loud and clear message.

i do not mess with you. i like you. i have been respectful to you.

you have misrepresented my posts and refuse to acknowledge the mistake after i respectfully, kindly pointed it out.

you did great things for me. you listened to me when i needed. you were there. i appreciate it.

but, i am not gonna battle you VC on whatever quest you are on right now.

i have been thinking about it and trying to figure it out. but, the best i can do is conclude, you are an awesome woman. we do not agree on things. that is cool. but whatever is going on, i cannot play in it for different reasons. i like you too much.

so, i will leave you to it and wish you the best. and maybe we will touch base elsewhere. and i will always be appreciative of your friendship when i so so so needed it.

thank you

[Violet_Crumble]

91. Uh, getting back on track, I was accused of being blind to racism...

..and it was strongly implied that I turn a blind eye to Islamophobia. Now, unlike me asking you: 'Show me the link where a woman said Femen are clueless and need a man to tell them what to do n/t'*, which isn't an attack, accusations of bigotry fired at someone for daring to disagree on something to do with feminism is an attack.

And it's the insult flung at me in that thread that was being talked about in this sub-thread. I don't have an issue with you, btw. Yr not the person who insulted me

* btw, I was provided with some stuff to read that confirmed that what you said was pretty much close to what the woman from FEMEN was saying...

[niyad]

30. amazingly enough, some of us noticed clearly who was doing the insulting in the thread to which I

referred. but, feel free to keep trying.

[bettyellen]

36. Yes, I was insulted, lied about, and accused of being "angry" just for calmly typing my thoughts.

Some people cannot handle thoughtful dissent at all without going off. What is THAT about?

[LittleBlue]

40. I don't know

Didn't read every argument in that thread. It appears you were abused, personally attacked rather than your argument being scrutinized. Poor behavior.

[ismnotwasm]

66. Do you think white racists found MLK's seminal speeches

"Polite"? Really? He was assassinated as I recall. Gandhi spent many years in prison for his views. Clearly SOMEBODY didn't consider him "polite"

There is a difference between polite and diffidence, just as there is a difference between talking and activism. Both your examples were strong activists and while they espoused non-violence, that's a little different than being "polite"

What is too often demanded of women activists is diffidence, in whatever form it's coached in.

[bettyellen]

115. you didn't know that they were considered radicals in their time and vilified? Spit on, imprisoned

and assassinated? The only difference is, history paints them in a fairer light, because they won, and their ideas widely are accepted.
Look at the suffragette thread- the passage of time and the *very laudable* progress that they made softens the edges quite a bit, doesn't it? Perspective informed by history can be very helpful.

[Jamastiene]

127. They were men.

Women are seen, heard, and treated differently than men in most cases.

[niyad]

16. see post 8 above

[liberal_at_heart]

18. you are going on ignore.

[niyad]

20. I will do my best to bear up under the strain.

[niyad]

38. you DO remember what followed that famous refusal, yes?

[WinkyDink]

64. She also DIDN'T ASK, LET ALONE "NICELY."

[NuclearDem]

21. Nothing gets done without people who are willing to piss people off and make them uncomfortable.

That goes not just for feminism, but every social movement in Western history.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of privileged individuals who have a sad whenever they're confronted.

[niyad]

31. you are absolutely correct

[Squinch]

54. And women demanding equality is such a fundamental threat to many people's ways of life,

even if people behaved like English butlers, those who oppose rights for women would still be outraged, and find it unacceptable. As I said in the other thread, thank god the feminists who came before us have cleared the path for us to say, "You're outraged that I demand to be treated equally? Tough."

[ohheckyeah]

22. That would be none, nada,

zilch.

I have a question....why is it so hard for some people to refer to women as WOMEN....not gals, not ladies, not girls, but WOMEN? It's a perfectly good word.

[niyad]

25. dismissive and diminutive terms to denigrate and demean. simple, really, especially "girls"

as an old saying goes, "a girl is a female child. to accept being called "girl" is to accept being treated like a child". I ceased being a child many decades ago.

[ohheckyeah]

29. Me, too....

it's been a long time since I was a girl and I've never been much of a lady.

[niyad]

33. neither have I--although one of my favourite groups was "ladies against women", a wonderful

satire group

[seabeyond]

32. you are so right on. cause woman would be adult, and maybe you are accusing her of being *gasp* OLD

OMG... not allowed. adult and old, throw away.

i know.

we as a society cannot say a woman. it must be girl or lady, and ya, that says a hell of a lot. i have brought it up. but then i was accused of being one of "those" feminists. lol

[ohheckyeah]

44. And if it's not girl or lady,

it's chick or gal.

I guess I'm one of "those" feminists because it irritates the hell out of me.

[Harmony Blue]

35. Rosa Park is a good example

because black women have been oppressed the most throughout U.S. history. Being militant is one form of activism but not the only one that has been successful.

[niyad]

39. you do remember what followed that famous refusal, yes? as I recall, no magic wand was waved

granting women equality as a result. perhaps I am mistaken.

[Hekate]

46. Ms. Parks was one small part of a giant strategy. Many of her cohorts were beaten, killed, spit upon

Four young girls were blown up while at Sunday school in a church known for activism -- which was the KKK's answer to Dr. King's I Have a Dream speech.

Rosa Parks was impressive -- but she was active in the movement both before and after her sit-down, and was only a part of a movement that encompassed a lot of direct confrontation by African Americans; confrontation that got a lot of violence against them in response.

[Squinch]

55. Rosa Park's protest would never have had any effect at all if it had not been backed up by

threats of economic militancy in the form of an organized boycott, and by a determined, vocal civil rights movement. Which was considered by a majority of Americans at the time to be "too militant" and "unnecessarily unpleasant."

Thank God the protesters never listened.

[niyad]

41. a couple of quotes

and this one:

[Bluenorthwest]

58. 'Well behaved women rarely make history' -Laura Thatcher Ulrich

Ulrich is an amazing historian working out of Harvard.

[BainsBane]

42. It doesn't, but the fact is they don't want things to change

The people who make that argument do not support women's rights. In fact, most don't like women at all.

[iemitsu]

43. Equal rights, like democracy, must be seized, taken or won.

Asking for permission to be treated equally implies an acceptance of inequality.
What struck me as I read that "people hate environmentalists and feminists" post a couple of days ago, was how effective the right wing propaganda machine has been in poisoning these words. People hate the negative stereotypes associated with the words but don't actually hate the goals, attitudes, and under-pinning ideas behind either movement.
People like clean water and air and increasingly people are willing to adjust their lifestyles to support a healthy environment. And people think women should be paid the same as men when they have equal experience. Few men think women should not participate in public life or think they should be barred from any other activities either.
Yet both men and women report negative feelings about environmentalists and feminists. People are so shallow.
These movements need new packaging, labels, fresh descriptions that entice adherents rather than chase them away.

[markpkessinger]

45. When has acting nicely ever advanced the rights of ANY minority in this country . . .

. . . be they women, African Americans or other racial minorities, LGBT folks, etc.?

[Hekate]

47. mmmm--ahhh--nope--dang, not that either. Power is never given -- it is only acquired by taking it.

Those who already possess power are seldom gracious about yielding it, either.

[Riftaxe]

48. When has acting like a completely

bombastic arrogant bastard ever advanced anything?

The thread and "study" within it, had little to do with the questions advanced by the "survey".

Let's skip the science of the actually study and pretend the replies actually were related to the subject....

It would seem like it was more a matter of perception then related to environmentalism or feminism.

The old trope that "stereotypes are wrong, but hysterically accurate." comes to mind, but you are discussing a joke of a study that addressed not the issues but their perceptions.

Surely which do you remember more, the loudmouthed assholes dictating their demands or the person who does not advance their cause so forcefully but actually presents a much superior and reasoned case for them?

[Harmony Blue]

83. Malcolm X or Martin Luther King?

history is kinder to one of these men for the obvious reasons. Well stated by the way. +1

[seabeyond]

114. yet could the movement and MLK have accomplished what it did without the MX? i do not think so.

i believe the man is to be admired and accomplished a great deal and without him the movement would not have been the same.

shame on us that we have such a narrow view for history.

[Shankapotomus]

49. It's sometimes necessary

to be aggressive against your oppressors.

At the same time, I think the women's movement would be wise to be careful not to adopt the corrupted masculine ethos of competition and force that has brought it to be under such scrutiny and universally detested by female and many males alike.

It might help to look at traditionally thought of feminine traits such as politeness and discussion over violence and aggression as not traits imposed on women by their oppressors but as the proper traits that advance group cohesiveness and allow humanity to evolve beyond its primitive tendency toward aggression.

You don't win by adopting the failed and universally despised policy of aggression of your oppressors.

You win by getting humanity to adopt the superior feminine ethos of, well, femininity.

Don't hide your feminine flag because you think it's weak. It's not. Wave it proudly. It advances humanity.

Feminism will have won not when women have become as equally aggressive as men but when men have become as careful and wise at avoiding the unproductive behaviors of competition, violence and aggression as women.

We don't need more women adopting and exercising the masculine ethos. That is what has wreaked havoc to humanity through wars and unbridled ego.

We need more men adopting and exercising the feminine ethos.

[seabeyond]

71. i beg your pardon? so you are suggesting we adopt the steriotypical conditioning of what "feminine"

is in order to walk away from our conditioned roles in society that hold a whole gender down?

our feminine ways? masculine ways? being aggressive is a mans world? and being "soft", kind, quiet, gentle is a womans?

if i barf, am i being too masculine?

or am i not allowed to use the word barf?

have i become too masculine merely being flabbergasted by your role assignment of me and calling it out?

[Shankapotomus]

89. You know I'm not saying that...

I would never categorized your gender in that way.

I am only "assigning" behavior to gender for the point of this discussion because one kind has been traditionally associated with one gender and another kind of behavior with the other. Of course, aggression is a human trait and can evolve into a pronounced behavior no matter the gender.

What I'm saying is aggression itself is ultimately a losing option for any person, culture or gender that adopts it. Gandhi, MLK, Bobby Kennedy were precisely successful because they rejected violence. They saw that the path to victory was through renouncing violence and aggressive tendencies, not continuing it.

So if aggression and violence is the problem with male culture, why wouldn't it, if taken to the same extreme as male culture, it be as equally problematic to female culture?

I respectfully submit the problem is not getting women to wear less pink but getting men to wear more.

Ultimately, there's nothing wrong with docility, discussion and cooperation. No matter the person, culture or gender the ultimate goal is to get us to be less aggressive and competitive with each other and more cooperative and rational.

Being able to say "I can get in the boxing ring just like a man" is not a victory. That there are boxing rings at all is the problem.

This interview Naomi Wolf did with Harvey Mansfield is an excellent illustration of my point where she hammered home the point that aggression and competition is all negative no matter what gender adopts it:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/191618-1

[MadrasT]

90. See my #84 reply to seabeyond that also addresses this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3746671



I think we are on the same page.

[Shankapotomus]

96. Yes. Exactly. Thank you.

It's just an optional behavior that a male or female can choose. No matter who chooses aggression over cerebral deliberation, male or female, ultimately they will fall under scrutiny, be accused of cruelty and finally fail.

[seabeyond]

97. you are wrong. nothing would be accomplished if you did not have the radical.

this is simply a false statement. as much as you need the one that sit kumbyia, you need the one that boldly stands and reaches fist in the sky and stand strong.

you cannot have a one sided accomplishment on a movement. will. not. happen.

maybe in a movement, especially with women so cocooned in a web of femininity, the masses need to vilify the women as masculine, too aggressive and not the "nice" feminist, to save face so they bond with the "good" feminist. but that is not the feminist issue. that is the person that needs the crutch to save face. and if that is what it takes, fine, vilify. but, it fools no one. and that is the point of this OP.

[Shankapotomus]

101. Of course, aggressively oppose oppression

when it is due aggressive opposition. We agree on that. Part of the evolution of our pre-ancestors involved coalitions of oppressed females and males aggressively standing up to lone bullies and upstarts. That part certainly must continue if we are to evolve to greater cooperation as a species. I just hope we are on the same page in the understanding that being aggressive is about suppressing and getting under control an oppressive faction and aggressive tendency within the group, not merely switching places and replacing one oppressive coalition with another. It's about ultimately evolving away from aggression where it is suppressed enough in ourselves that we don't need it anymore because no one is using it.

[seabeyond]

106. and still you defined aggression thru gender which i oppose. women have always been aggressive when

the need arose as much as men. to defend self or defend child or...

it is a human trait. and no, i do not always see aggressive as a means of control but a simple ability to confront. there have been many times in my life where i needed to confront. it is merely speaking out. standing up to. the simple act of speaking up in a crowd can solve an issue. t hat is a form of aggression. it is not physical assault only.

i am a pacifist and i am aggressive by nature. there you go. oh, and i am also a nurturer that takes care of everyone and i am also a person that must be nice to all. almost always.

but yet still, you define male with a characteristic continually keep us well in our box. that is what is bothersome and what i will not allow.

[Shankapotomus]

108. No, I agree

Aggression is not inherent or absent in one gender over another, despite my habitual verbiage. I admit I have to replace that. However, (and I say this with sincere respect) you seem to not want to let go of the notion that aggression is, ultimately, anything but bad for humanity. Is this an accurate conclusion?

[seabeyond]

111. thank you for the first acknowledgment. you and i have always been able to discuss. i appreciate

that beyond all else. even agreement. that being said, yes. you accurately describe. i will tell you, i have had a lifetime of an aggressive personality. it is all of who i am all my life. it has benefited so many. it is a bluntness that brings an honesty and truth in the face, clearly, with no fuzziness involved. and it is hard for others to hear. personally, i welcome it. it makes life so damn easy for me. give me the straight truth so i do not have to waste the time to try and figure out what is really wanted/needed/meant. and i am not afraid to meet the non perfect of who i am. it does not hurt. always from the heart, always with the intent of win win win, always with the best intent. but still, in the aggressiveness of who i am, be ready for blunt, straight and few words.

that is not saying that i will always be right. and when i am wrong, that is fine with me. just more learning, growing, being a better person. that is always good.

but many cannot handle. though many need even though they do not like. because it gives them truth, upside the head.

the reality is that is needed. and often a soft person will come along and hold the wounded. coddle, stroke the ego, and say the same thing, only gently. and viola.... the truth is seen.

they work together. and one without the other is not effective.

it is a story i like. first truth is presented. then a person is nudged with the truth. then the person is tapped with the truth. and finally a brick up side the head to see the truth.

no. i am not afraid of aggressiveness. i see so many advantages to aggressiveness. and i get pissed at those that are so damn fragile they cannot handle aggressiveness. just as those that cannot stand my aggressiveness cause it offends or scares them and they think it is always a fail.

i wish people would buck up and deal. cause it is people like me that do the damn heavy lifting all the fuckin time for others to gain the reward. benefit. all my life i have taken care of others and walked them thru the stuff they refused or were unable to face for them to come out on the other end in peace. they struggle and fight and i put in the time and energy and effort.

i am tired.

the world needs to hear from the aggressive cause it will not be the meek that speak out.

[Shankapotomus]

118. Sorry for the late reply

I had gotten so caught up in this thread earlier I forgot I was supposed to have read my brother's manuscript by the afternoon.
I was interrupted in responding to you when he showed up looking for a finished critique and I hadn't even started reading. This discussion was more interesting to me (I'm not really a thriller fan) but I had made a commitment.

Anyway, I wouldn't call not allowing yourself to be a victim a form of true "aggressiveness", though yourself and others might. There's a moral difference between the defensive aggressiveness of not allowing oneself to be a victim and the overtly offensive kind that creates victims where there were none before and starts trouble with others. Now that you mentioned it, I recall my own frequent realizations for the need to stand firm against "alphas" in my own life who would assume presumptuous authority over myself. There have been abusive people who have had me in vulnerable situations where all I wanted to do was get in a position where I could tell them to fuck off but couldn't do it lest I make my situation worse. So I can fully appreciate the compulsion to finally set some people straight, and aggressively, once and for all. There definitely are situations and individuals that call for a resounding lecture.

I guess it's just a matter of personal preference based on your situation and how much shit others are trying to pull over on you. I'm at a stage where I can get by with just avoidance of the suspect characters. I also think shunning is an effective non-offensive behavior modifier if you can pull it off with a group. It worked for our ancestral hunter-gatherer tribes.

I do think the meek and humble will win in the end, however. When I hear the examples the Buddhist teachers give about how to handle aggressive people who would make us a victim, when you can't just simply avoid the trouble maker, it's always about extending more kindness and patience, not less. I still struggle with that one myself, but there has to be some wisdom to it when deeply introspective and perceptive monks have settled upon it as a coping device.

[seabeyond]

123. maybe it is in the definition. i looked it up. confrontation is part of the definition.

confrontation jsut is not too too (enough to stay quiet) scary to me. i am never talking about making victim. i do not hurt others so in discussing aggressive it is not how some may define in bully or abusing in any manner. maybe that is the problem is our definition.

oh, and i procrastinated and had to put a dinner together for company. so i hear you

[seabeyond]

93. ok. now we are breaking this down. yes.... the first part. that is exactly what i am talking

reading yoru post and madras... 92. not gonna retype here but was thinking about you while typing. i cannot go with defining an angel like character of femininity. i wont do it. it sets women up to a hell of a lot of hurt. and really harsh if we step outside the box. and i love aggressiveness. has been a part of who i am for a life time. and has accomplished and given so very much. so i will not vilify that, nor will i allow it to be owned by masculinity.

but thanks for the thinking moment.

[RKP5637]

51. NO rights are ever won by asking nicely IMO! There are way too many blunder head

dinos walking around and in positions of power and authority for intelligent logical decisions to arise, hence, it is always a struggle.

[abelenkpe]

52. I don't hate environmentalists and feminists

No rights have ever been won by asking nicely

[KG]

56. or anyone's rights?

[MadrasT]

59. Thank you for starting this thread, I have been thinking about this the last couple days, too.

And I haven't thought of one.

I keep thinking of what women in this country (and the UK) had to go through to be allowed to VOTE, and that wasn't that long ago.

People in positions of power do not relinquish that power when the people they oppress ask nicely.

The tone argument is nothing more than a (very transparent) convenient excuse to dismiss issue(s) entirely.

[seabeyond]

72. so tell me what you think when it is suggested we hold onto our feminine manner in order to be heard

and not adopt the more masculine approach?

that one hurt.

[MadrasT]

84. Reaction to that comment (I assume #49?)

Depends on how you intepret this:

Feminism will have won not when women have become as equally aggressive as men but when men have become as careful and wise at avoiding the unproductive behaviors of competition, violence and aggression as women.

We don't need more women adopting and exercising the masculine ethos. That is what has wreaked havoc to humanity through wars and unbridled ego.

We need more men adopting and exercising the feminine ethos.

I have a lot of, um, "conversations" with people about this, and they get ugly because people are really attached to the idea that "feminine qualities" are something female bodied people are supposed to have.

If you see "the feminine ethos" as something inherent to, or inextricably linked with, the female body type, those comments seems gender stereotyped and offensive.

If you see "the feminine ethos" as a set of human qualities, that in the the past have been stereotypically thought of as "female", but are really just a set of human qualities that humans of ALL GENDERS can display, then I think there is something to that comment that deserves to be thought about.

I am on a campaign to replace the use of the terms "masculine" and "feminine" with "agency" (for masculine) and "communion" (for feminine) because people can't seem to get past "masculine qualities" means "also has penis", etc.

The traits stereotypically thought of as "masculine" and "feminine" are complementary and there is a time and a place for all of them, for people of all genders.

Feminists can get pissy if you tell them to be more "feminine" (and lordy I am certainly one of them)... but is Shank really saying "wimmenz should be more feminine" or is Shank saying "there is a time and place for qualities of communion and a little more of that wouldn't hurt". It seemed like the latter to me.

To anyone who doesn't "know" me... all this is coming from an Aspie female who identifies as nongendered, and simply does not comprehend why the world is so insistent in dividing people into two sides based on their genitals, as if genital configuration means anything beyond "innie" or "outie". (I believe it does not, unless a person chooses to make it mean more, or chooses to adopt the role society thrusts upon them.)

Edited to add -- and seabeyond, you well know that I do not believe feminists should have to be "nice" to be heard. And I am not especially "nice" at times. At the same time, I also do believe that the whole world might be better served if NOBODY had to be aggressive and confrontational to be heard.

[seabeyond]

92. instead of reinforcing the stereotypes that have done all of us so much damage, why use femininity

and instead use the adjectives all on their own without a defining character.

thank you for interpreting. i was surprised by the post. and yes, i absolutely saw it defining gender in forever old characteristics that society has assigned to us. i am not gonna put a woman on the alter of all these wonderful characteristics while having men firmly on the ground looking up with all their defined characteristics for many reasons.

interesting interesting.

and i absolutely feel that aggressiveness is needed as much as other characteristics. it is no more bad or good than kindness, say. they have there place.

thanks

[bemildred]

60. It depends on who you are dealing with, really.

Some people you can talk to, other people you have to get their full attention first.

[ismnotwasm]

62. Nine inspiring lessons the suffragettes can teach feminists today

(Cross-post from HoF)

On 4 June 1913, Emily Wilding Davison travelled to Epsom Downs to watch the Derby, carrying two suffrage flags – one rolled tight in her hand, the other wrapped around her body, hidden beneath her coat. She waited at Tattenham Corner as the horses streamed past, then squeezed through the railings and made an apparent grab for the reins of the king's horse, Anmer. In the Manchester Guardian the next day, an eyewitness reported: "The horse fell on the woman and kicked out furiously". News footage shows racegoers surging on to the track to find out what had happened.

Davison suffered a fractured skull and internal bleeding, and as hate mail against her poured in to the hospital, she remained unconscious. She died four days later. Thousands of suffragettes turned out on the London streets dressed in white, bearing laurel wreaths for her funeral. They marched four abreast behind purple banners, urging them all to fight on.

There has always been speculation about Davison's intentions. The return train ticket she was carrying, for instance, offered as evidence that she didn't mean to die. But there's no doubt she was prepared to make dangerous sacrifices for women's rights. As Fran Abrams writes in her book Freedom's Cause, Davison had been imprisoned repeatedly for her suffrage work, had gone on hunger strike and been force fed numerous times.

In 1912, when she and a large number of other suffragettes were imprisoned in Holloway, there was what Davison referred to as a siege – the doors of women's cells were broken down by guards – and she determined that one big tragedy might save her sisters. Davison threw herself over a balcony, was caught by some netting, then immediately tried again, launching herself down an iron staircase. This led to two cracked vertebrae, and a thwack to the head, but the authorities were unmoved. She and the other women continued to be force-fed, regularly and brutally.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/29/nine-lessons-suffragettes-feminists?CMP=twt_gu

Fuck "Nice"

[seabeyond]

76. damn good thing they held onto their femininity as they held them down and force fed....

i bet that would be very very hard, but bet these women did it.

these are awesome women that went thru things i never knew, at a time when they had everything against them. and i bet they were told to be quiet and allow time to magically change things.

for the women that goes against the social norms we have been conditioned in, they are a very small group. always has been, always will be. they are not well liked cause they are beating at a comfortable conditioned world where roles are well defined. and still, with every accomplishment so many people benefit with very little to no... thnak yous.

we are the minority, even on a progressive board. we will always be. we will always be dislike by some, maybe even many

no one said, saying what needs to be said is easy. we do it, because it is that important for what we say to be heard.

many will keep there heads buried to not hear, many will throw tantrums and insults when we speak. and there will always be the few that a light bulb goes off for. and those few are worth all the ugly. cause those few will spread it to others....

[WinkyDink]

63. "Asking nicely" was skewered by Dickens, and it remains the same in its effect.

[Solly Mack]

65. K/R

[WatermelonRat]

70. Your basic position I agree with, but there's a difference

between assertiveness and belligerence. Standing up does not need to entail vulgarity and abrasiveness.

[seabeyond]

78. and who decides what is too abrasive and vulgar? the person that does not want to hear the message?

like, simply challenging you, is that too abrasive for you? have i stepped over the line yet?

[niyad]

85. what sea said--and see post 8 above.

the fascinating thing is, I have been a feminist for many decades, and have yet to see the behaviour that is so decried and derided here. what I HAVE seen is a lot of ugliness and threats and brutality from those who do not want to hear. the death threats I have gotten did not come from feminists. the attempt to kill me at a roe v wade rally did not come from feminists. the suffragists who were beaten, imprisoned and force-fed (here and in great britain) were note beaten, jailed and imprisoned by feminists. the ugly characterizations and hateful vitriol and violence come from those who feel threatened by what we demand.

and, as sea said, exactly where is that line between assertiveness and belligerence. more to the point, why should I care?

[seabeyond]

95. you know, the other thread a man saying he and his family are turned off by that vocal abrasive

feminist. and i asked him. one name. give men one name. one feminist you re hearing int he real world that has so turned you, your wife and you feminist daughter off feminism. who is this mystery femininst that is doing the whole friggin cause so much damage that people near and far are outraged by her voice. cause i am hearing NO feminists in the real world. not a one. so i want a name, of the abrasive woman, or women that is causing us all this damage.

[Zorra]

73. But acting like ladies/asking nicely works so well in advancing womens's rights in Saudi Arabia.

[niyad]

79. thank you

[GreenEyedLefty]

77. Sorry if this is a digression, but I have to post about my former boss.

She is a woman who was incredibly myopic about what it meant to be a good boss, and at times, a woman.

I work in public education... where the majority of employees are women. The superintendent of the district where I work is your basic "man's man." Big guy, booming voice, not shy about spitting, picking scratching. Etc.

It was fascinating to watch my boss interact with this guy. Around me, she was hard charging, focused, energetic, etc.

When supe came into the room, she underwent a personality transplant, suddenly morphing into a giggling coquette. Even the tone of her voice went up an octave. I quietly observed their interactions... and made certain to never alter my personality in the presence of that man.

She might be one of the most profoundly insecure people I had ever met.

I learned SO much from her... She has no idea.

Not sure where this post is going... but I had to throw this out there.

[seabeyond]

82. interesting. and yes. we are all conditioned for our roles that tightly define who we are

and are more comfortable living those roles. i have found in observation, me setting lines for myself also.

interesting story. thanks

[niyad]

98. it's not a digression. you are describing exactly the kind of behaviour we are expected to exhibit

by those who insist that it is our tone that keeps them from responding to us.

[mathematic]

80. The problem with "asking nicely" is the "asking" not the "nicely"

Everyday people "demand nicely" every day about all sorts of things, including rights.

[GreenEyedLefty]

86. I learned early on, especially at work, to never "ask" for anything

I counsel people, other women mostly, to "tell" people what they want.

If you want or need time off, tell your boss. Never ask for time off.

If you want a raise, tell your boss. Never ask for a raise. The worst they can do is say no... but there is no harm whatsoever in verbalizing your wants and needs.

People often times will say, what if I get fired? What if I am punished for telling higher-ups what I want? Well, then perhaps that company or organization is not worthy of your talents.

[seabeyond]

100. and never ask your toddler if he is ready to go. you tell him it is time to go. lol. nt

[GreenEyedLefty]

103. Yes! LOL nt

[Sheldon Cooper]

88. I have it on good authority that if you show them your tits, they'll be more than happy

to 'listen' to your message. That only applies if your tits are young and perky, however. And the minute you put your shirt back on, I'm afraid that your message goes...*poof*!

[Squinch]

94. And it isn't really listening. You think it's listening because they have finally

shut up with the telling you to shut up. But really they are just being quiet because their brain has gone into a loop where it keeps saying, "Look! Boobs!" They aren't actually hearing or noticing anything else. You can tell by the glazed expression.

[seabeyond]

102. you would think men would be offended by this. and they are not. they are proud. they will agree

and rejoice and cheer this weak. odd that, huh.

[etherealtruth]

99. I always act like a woman

I rely on my intelligence, I am assertive and aggressive when the situation calls for it (and I get to decide when/ if the situation calls for it), I work hard, I stand up and speak out when confronted with a situation or idea that runs counter to my sense of morale right, I take control of and responsibility for my sexuality, I am a fully engaged and dedicated parent, I am warm and kind, I am loving, I am a tough and relentless fighter ... I exhibit the strengths and frailties of humanity ... I am a human being and I am a woman ... and I act like it!

[seabeyond]

104. thank you. this. thank you so much. nt

[LWolf]

105. Was that the thread

about that study that contrasted people's impressions of activists with their actual desire for change? Or was that a different thread?

Your OP makes me think of that study, though. Activists change things. Anyone who WANTS positive change should embrace the activists who get out and spend their time and energies and resources to create that change, instead of sitting home in their armchairs criticizing.

Once, about 15 years ago or so, I was having a conversation with my then-boss, the principal of my school. He was patiently listening to me, again, tell him why the new policies set by our district in response to AYP and API and the standards and accountability "reform" movement were bad for schools, bad for students, and getting in our way. I told him, "I know what the law says. I don't care. I'm an idealist, and I want to focus on what's BEST for our school and our students, not on what some politician thinks." He told me this: "You BE that idealist, and you keep on fighting. I have to be the pragmatist and find a way to make this work at our school with the least damage possible. We NEED idealists. Where would the world be; what progress would have been made, without you? Idealists are the catalyst for change. Don't ever apologize."

Not that "idealist" and "activist" are synonymous; they're not. But the point applies.

As for your more specific point: Acting like "ladies" is just one more way in all the myriad ways that our male-dominated society has used to control women and keep them stifled. People who supposedly support equality ought to be celebrating strong, vocal, active women.

[niyad]

112. that was indeed the thread. I was, frankly, appalled at the chorus of agreement I saw in that

thread. reminds me of the old saying, "with friends like you, who needs enemies". very sad to see on what is supposedly a progressive board. shows how far we really have not come. love your last sentence.

[Iggo]

107. Never. So don't.

It's the overall most effective tone argument in the history of civilization.

And it only works if you play along. So don't.

[historylovr]

109. Never. It's just a way to shut us up.

[alarimer]

110. I suspect that that study was deeply flawed anyway.

Perhaps the sample was drawn from a non-representative population.

In any case, I do think people don't like being told things they don't want to hear: i.e, that they ARE the problem.

Why do you think even liberals give pushback whenever the topic of male privilege comes up? No one wants to hear that they benefit by their gender and skin color and not solely because they earned it. That is an uncomfortable truth. It is uncomfortable to me to know that I have personally benefited largely because my family was upper middle-class. And white. And suburban. Without those things, I might not be where I am today.

And people like shiny new tech toys. They do not want to hear that they are ruining the planet with their acquisitiveness. Although I believe it's the corporations like Apple that sell us the idea that we need a new Iphone every year. Meanwhile all the OLD Iphones are mostly thrown away. Incredibly wasteful, but nobody wants to hear it.

I think cognitive dissonance plays a huge role in why people say they "hate" feminists and environmentalists.

And, interestingly enough, you hear the same arguments about atheists. They are too "strident", too mean to believers. On and on and on.

[DirkGently]

116. "Well-behaved women seldom make history."

- Laura Thatcher Ulrich

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/books/review/harrison.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/11/03/well-behaved-women/



I seriously doubt the "everyone hates environmentalists and feminists" thing was an accurate view of reality.

[Brigid]

117. How about . . . Never?

See my sig for further details.

[Generic Other]

120. Being milqutoasts got us the right to be

barefoot and pregnant...in veils...unable to work, drive, or vote. It got us genital mutilation...bound feet...corsets...and plastic surgery. Short skirts...low wages...catcalls...and glass ceilings.

[niyad]

121. exactly

[niyad]

124. . . .

[niyad]

125. . . .

[Jamastiene]

126. You are talking to *crickets*

I do that too sometimes. No one will give you an answer to this. The only replies pretending to answer you will be excuses why women should be demure and beg for rights, blah blah blah.

K&R for trying to point out the truth though.