Why the women's movement has failed

[magical thyme]

A woman with a microphone dares to speak out about equality for women. Immediately men start parsing every word and "instruct" said woman on what she meant, why she was wrong, and what she should have said.

Lots of women can't jump on the bashfest fast enough, parsing and criticising every word, deliberately misinterpreting the obvious meaning of what the woman said.

Well played. Subject is no longer equality for women, but "white women's privilege."

Score:

mysogynists: 1
equality: 0

[el_bryanto]

1. The Perfect is the Enemy of the Good

Particularly if you aren't that bothered about achieving either the Perfect or the Good, as you say. If you took it as read that Arquette was generally acting in Good Faith you'd have to discuss the content of what she was saying; but once you can move to taking apart her words you can shelve all that other stuff.

Bryant

[gollygee]

2. Such a false dichotomy

1. Everything she said is perfect! Brava brava brava!

or

2. Everything she said was horrible! Bash bash bash!

How about that she said a lot of wonderful things. I've also had people of color point out to me that one sentence was hurtful to them, and I'm glad to hear that because I welcome opportunities for growth and self reflection. But no, we see that as weakness and bashing.

I think what hurts us most is our inability to look critically at ourselves - to do any self reflection at all - and to see all criticism as bashing.

[HappyMe]

3. Well said.

Probably the most sensible thing I have seen posted about this.

[tishaLA]

16. right. people forget that feminism is, at least in part, critique

...a critique specifically of patriarchy. And feminism itself has an internal critique of assumptions about race, class, sexuality, and what constitutes the category "woman"--a vibrant ritique that has lasted throughout the history of feminism and made the movement stronger and more inclusive. It is because of this critique that we have feminist thinkers like Gayatri Spivak, Patricia Hill Collins, Judith Butler, Adrienne Rich, Gloria Anzaldua, and many other thinkers whose voices have strengthened feminism through dialogue and debate.

[The2ndWheel]

5. Everyone gets their words parsed all the time

It's what makes the internet the internet. Happened before the internet too. Now you know why PR companies make so much money. Bland language, nobody cares. Off the cuff language, and yes, every word will be analyzed. No matter who says whatever they say. In context, out of context, through this filter, or from that perspective, it doesn't matter. Everyone gives their take on it. A diversity of opinion makes the water muddy. It's all very subjective.

[magical thyme]

6. I disagree. Plenty of people say things publically that are taken at face value.

Arquette's meaning was quite clear. The topic is what is unacceptable to those picking apart her words and deliberately miscontruing their meaning.

The intent is to divide and conquer, in this case by changing the subject from "equality for women" to "white women's privilege." And everybody who joins in-- whether by deliberately miscontruing her meaning or by telling her what she should have said, what they would have said -- is helping.

[The2ndWheel]

7. Like who?

Even with this, if someone writes something about what Arquette said that isn't just agreeing with it, their intent is to divide and conquer. Maybe it is, maybe they just have a different perspective.

Again, this is why nobody ever says anything. Why people pay people to write things for them, in the most general way possible. If anyone says anything that isn't perfect, and nothing will be perfect, someone somewhere is going to have a problem with it. Reasonably or not. All depends on where you're coming from. It's inescapable.

[magical thyme]

8. where are the dozens of threads and articles on what Snowden said after the Oscars?

The one's re-defining what he was saying, telling him how he said it wrong, and what he should have said?

And the other day, a genius republican asked why women couldn't just swallow a camera to get a look at the contents of their uterus, or something to that effect. There are all of 2 threads discussing what he said. No discussion, though, on how he said it wrong, what he meant, or what he should have said.

[The2ndWheel]

12. Well they're all different issues I guess

Come at in different ways by different people.

With the genius Republican, ok, I suppose his words are taken at face value. Since everyone probably thinks he's an idiot, maybe what how he said it doesn't matter. People here are going to laugh at Republicans who say stupid things anyway, so I don't know if that's a great example.

There's a pretty active thread about Snowden. Haven't read it though.

What Arquette said is smart, and means something, so it'll probably attract more attention.

[closeupready]

19. I posted an interesting article yesterday about "Outrage Porn" -

that is, a journalist who writes that he feels today's internet media is little more than outrage clickbait machines, churning out outrage on a daily basis, even when contributors are NOT really outraged.

[seabeyond]

9. not a fail. it just makes us louder, strong, clearer, fine tune the issues.

feminism is on the rise

[magical thyme]

10. in my working lifetime, women's pay has gone from 67 cents on the dollar

to what?

40 years...still no parity. And a women with a microphone brings up that subject and immediately the topic is changed.

[seabeyond]

13. ya. and, there are a lot more people calling that shit out. like you. not nearly so subtle as the

past

[PasadenaTrudy]

11. Mansplainers

strike again

[hamsterjill]

14. The English language is not always a perfect form of communication.

In my mind, I know what she meant, and I'm very happy that she got up there and said what she said.

[dilby]

15. Could not agree with you more.

Everyone who support women's rights clearly understood what she said.

[BainsBane]

17. Oh, boy.

Look, I didn't understand the concern by African Americans entirely either (partly because I only saw the remarks during her acceptance speech and partly because as a white woman there is stuff I don't understand), but lumping them in with misogynists really does not help. Yes, lots of men like to parse and delegitimate women's speech. That has gone on. But black women have every right to raise issues that concern them without being lumped in with misogynists.

[closeupready]

18. Since this is posted in GD, I'll say this - most women, even liberal women, continue

to validate the concept of a female as sex object whose worth is diminished as she diverges from the patriarchal ideal of the woman as non-threatening decoration to and for men. It's difficult to reconcile 1) living in a world where women are chemical engineers and heads of state, and 2) most seem to aspire to be pretty - or at least, when you think about the women in our culture who are popularly admired, they are women like Kim Kardashian, not Angela Merkel.

As a gay man, I'm not sure I'll ever get it, for a lot of reasons. I just stay out of most of these discussions because my views aren't probably appreciated, which is fine. But for what it's worth...