Comments on: Feminists: answering sexism with sexism? So not cool. http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2007-10-20_662 Because we care about stuff Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:34:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Kat http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2007-10-20_662#comment-130157 Kat Wed, 07 Nov 2007 22:41:04 +0000 http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2007-10-20_662#comment-130157 (like, oh, Coulter's chilling lack of empathy and disregard for human rights), as well as insulting everyone else who is not traditionally attractive/is a masculine looking woman/is a trans woman etc. It's like using a mallet to squash a mosquito and crushing a bystander's hand in the process. (like, oh, Coulter’s chilling lack of empathy and disregard for human rights), as well as insulting everyone else who is not traditionally attractive/is a masculine looking woman/is a trans woman etc. It’s like using a mallet to squash a mosquito and crushing a bystander’s hand in the process.

]]> By: Kat http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2007-10-20_662#comment-130150 Kat Wed, 07 Nov 2007 22:36:27 +0000 http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2007-10-20_662#comment-130150 Excellent post (and comment from Sigel Phoenix). It is not out of some quixotic liberal altruism that we should 'defend' vile human beings like Ann Coulter from misogynistic and transphobic attacks; it is because such attacks not only illustrate the contemptible attitudes lurking behind the enlightened veneer of many so-called liberals, but also wreak massive collatoral damage. Mocking peripheral, innocuous attributes like people's looks, gender, race etc both lets them off the hook for their ~truly~ negative qualities Excellent post (and comment from Sigel Phoenix). It is not out of some quixotic liberal altruism that we should ‘defend’ vile human beings like Ann Coulter from misogynistic and transphobic attacks; it is because such attacks not only illustrate the contemptible attitudes lurking behind the enlightened veneer of many so-called liberals, but also wreak massive collatoral damage. Mocking peripheral, innocuous attributes like people’s looks, gender, race etc both lets them off the hook for their ~truly~ negative qualities

]]> By: Sigel Phoenix http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2007-10-20_662#comment-126867 Sigel Phoenix Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:48:53 +0000 http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2007-10-20_662#comment-126867 Exactly. The point of social justice is not "justice for people we like." One person's moral failing does not legitimize an immoral attack from us - for example, men of color who act sexist do not deserve a racist reaction from feminists. Responding to Coulter's own sexism with sexism (and transphobia) just continues the fight on her morally bankrupt terms. Furthermore, this legitimizes sexism as a viable weapon, which is exactly what we <i>don't</i> want to do. It feels like a similar dynamic to women who want protection from rape and victim-blaming of rape victims - but then fall into the trap of buying the excuses of, "Well, if she hadn't been so drunk ..." or "She shouldn't have flirted so much with that guy ..." It's exerting minimum behavior requirements on who deserves justice. It allows for the sexist mindset that enables rape to continue, even if it's only used on a certain group of women. If someone acts stupidly - and I hesitate to label the behavior of any rape victim "stupid" because it's so easy to judge from outside - then we can call them stupid. Endorsing rape myths is endorsing rape myths (is endorsing rape myths ...). Similarly, endorsing negative views of trans or not-feminine-enough people still perpetuates sexism and transphobia, even if it's against someone we don't like. Exactly. The point of social justice is not “justice for people we like.” One person’s moral failing does not legitimize an immoral attack from us - for example, men of color who act sexist do not deserve a racist reaction from feminists. Responding to Coulter’s own sexism with sexism (and transphobia) just continues the fight on her morally bankrupt terms. Furthermore, this legitimizes sexism as a viable weapon, which is exactly what we don’t want to do.

It feels like a similar dynamic to women who want protection from rape and victim-blaming of rape victims - but then fall into the trap of buying the excuses of, “Well, if she hadn’t been so drunk …” or “She shouldn’t have flirted so much with that guy …” It’s exerting minimum behavior requirements on who deserves justice. It allows for the sexist mindset that enables rape to continue, even if it’s only used on a certain group of women.

If someone acts stupidly - and I hesitate to label the behavior of any rape victim “stupid” because it’s so easy to judge from outside - then we can call them stupid. Endorsing rape myths is endorsing rape myths (is endorsing rape myths …). Similarly, endorsing negative views of trans or not-feminine-enough people still perpetuates sexism and transphobia, even if it’s against someone we don’t like.

]]>