Sunday, December 17, 2006
Maybe you haven't been tuned in from the beginning and so find yourself a little confused - but here you are anyway, at my blog, I Shame The Matriarchy, wondering "what's all the hubbub, bub?"
Well, that's not the original title of the blog. back in late April of this year I started this blog and called it "Paleofeminist."
I was really so happy to discover the deep and broad and vibrant feminist blogosphere back in February. It was all kinds of exciting and diverse and - just wow! It felt like coming home after a long long trip, and finding it all totally new, but all totally the same simultaneously. Like an oasis, in a lot of ways.
Of course, you know, there were some points of departure for me - a few minor nitpicky quibbles on the true nature of "patriarchy," for example, maybe an ideological challenge or two I was looking forward to exploring - but instead what happened is that I said stupid things that were offensive. True to my experience they were, but stupid and offensive, maybe, nonetheless. After being roundly chastised for it at such places as I Blame the Patriarchy and Den of the Biting Beaver, I had the idea to just start my own damn blog and not be such a pest. I was really doing more harm than good, in a lot of cases, to my own blood pressure as much as to anything else.
I had just gotten done re-reading Sisterhood is Powerful, and also The World Split Open, and a couple other books of similar content. it occurred to me, after my experience around the blogosphere, that pitched battles over lipstick, high heels and kinky sex were just not what the Great Righteous Sisters of the Second Wave had in mind - and in a brilliant moment of luminous hubris, I thought that I, mere mortal as I am, knew what they had in mind - hence, "Paleofeminist", to ally myself with the giants on whose shoulders we all stand.
But of course blogging is all interactive and shit - comment threads wax and wane, expand and contract, grow vicious and petty - I had big-ass rules once upon a time, I was going to be oh so civil and oh so respectful and stuff, and people were going to follow my oh so good example and nobody was going to fight and we were all going to learn stuff and not be mean...
and then came the Great Blowjob Wars of 2006.
I had just just just just JUST HAD ENOUGH. It's not worth going back through the whole sordid mess - suffice to say my great plans to usher in the New Era of Dignity in Discourse were somewhat disappointing, resultswise. But I'd had my fill of feeling dirty and unwanted by people I respected, which I just couldn't help but do everytime I opened my mouth.
from a post on July 26, 2006:
Don't Panic! Change is good!
Same bat-time, same bat-channel, same bat-URL, but a whole new title to reflect my stripped-down, high-speed, faster-tougher-smarter (or at least sadder-but-wiser) new attitude for the next millenium.
antiprincess v2.0: I shame the matriarchy.
Well, I do. Seriously - how can anyone argue with that?
I meant "bring shame TO", not "heap shame ON". In the way that a convicted murderer might be said to "shame" hir family (only not so horribly). Although I've come to some more-or-less cordial detente with many in the radfemblogosphere, I still feel like there are folks out there who are embarrassed and offended by what I have to say, and maybe would prefer I didn't run around calling myself a "feminist".
which, also, belies the snarky little tagline - came from Stormcloud, commenting on Heart's blog, to wit:
Ampgate was a good example of modern day fuckery (as has happened in the past to 2nd wavers), and certainly exposed the Handmaidens of the Patriarchy that call themselves ‘feminists’ (they should have a disclaimer along the lines of “any resemblance to feminism is purely co-incidental”).
so, I thought that was pretty funny.
But I didn't ask Stormcloud if it was okay to use it. Maybe I should have. I'll remove it if Stormcloud feels like I ought to. Similarly, the title stays, you know, unless La Twisty herself descends from her lofty height and suggests I change it. Which I'll totally do, if she asks.
So, if you're coming in from Ginmar's blog, again - welcome. Please feel free to leave a comment as the spirit moves you.
I've read a few threads on Twisty's blog but never felt compelled to respond. It seems like a bunch of sexist garbage if you ask me. `
As for BB, I find it odd that a stay at home mom living off child support and alimony can be a champion of the feminist movement just because she homeschools her boys and teaches them to be ashamed of their penises. Why can't a sex worker who stands up for herself and defends her choices be empowered? And why does a woman's right to choose apply to her uterus but not her vagina?
I think most of these women are just bitter about their own poor experiences with men, and blame the entire gender for the behavior of a few. So I guess it makes sense that they think harlotry has an impact on how the world sees all of woman kind. Just as all men are perverts and potential rapists in their eyes; women can only be objectified whores or respectable human beings. They can't be both and there can't be some of each.
Of course feminism will never see its goals met through bigotry and oppression. If feminism means reversing the table and treating men as inferiors, while denying women the freedom to make their own choices in life; then that's something I want no part in.
that is certainly true. no one is the boss of me.
however, I thought my side of the story could use some clarification. and in trying to clarify, it occurred to me that, you know, if the parties in question (Twisty, Stormcloud) had issue with my masthead, I could address that, if necessary. I'm not a monster, after all.
I mean, I'm sure I could come up with something even more disrespectful and insulting, if I really had to. ;)
oh, and thanks, frenchkiss. I'm glad I gave you a giggle.
Nicely put, FrenchKiss. May I quote you on that, if the need arises?
maybe my mom might know, altho' she was only on the receiving (buying really) end. and i think she ended up going for the synthetic.
I never got the impression that BB does this. I actually like the examples of the way BB teaches her kids gender lessons quite a bit...they're some of my favorite things from that blog among all the things she says!
I've always gotten the impression that she uses examples from her life, their lives, lives of people they know, and lives of people she discusses in theory on the internet (for example, whoever's in the porn her son's thinking about watching) to illustrate lessons about being a good person despite what culture tells you about your role as a member of a gender.
But just because she uses her sons' life events and sometimes uses sex and sometimes even uses her sons' life events involving sex as illustrations doesn't by itself mean she's teaching them to be ashamed of "their penises."
I've always come away with the impression that she was simply teaching them right and wrong and preemptively bringing up what messages contrary to her lesson they might encounter in social standards.
we have our differences, she and I, but, well, her kids - her rules.