House of Eratosthenes

This flew under my radar. The floggers over at Feministing found out about the Urban Dictionary Entry for the word “feminist” and their reaction was…well…not good. Cassy Fiano, in turn, found out about that, and in turn did exactly what we did. Laughed her cute round little ass off.

I don’t want to speak for Cassy as to why she found this so amusing. But I know why I do. It has to do with how I defined the flog, a whole year ago almost to the day.

The feminist blog is not like the political blog. Surely you’ve noticed by now — a conservative blog, and a liberal blog, will make it a point to highlight what is to be deplored, and what is to be adored. Permanently. On the masthead. In the sidebar. Someplace that won’t move. This guy’s a fool…that other guy is a hero. Three cheers for so-and-so…boos and hisses to such-and-such. And the positive stuff will always at least be somewhat present. Usually, it’s an invitation to join a webring, hosted by like-minded people.

Not so with the feminist blog. These are not out-of-computer feminists, who on occasion at least pretend to like things or people. No, in Internet-land, the feminist blog is a decidedly negative fountainhead of bile. It exists to find things reprehensible, and to broadcast such findings frequently, voluminously, and with grandeur and gusto. The feminist blog is like the siren luring Jason and the Argonauts to certain doom, with tones screeching rather than dulcet. All other purposes are secondary.

This is a meaningful transformation. In my lifetime, orthodox feminism has clung to a veneer of plausible deniability — never straying far from the “Who, Me?” motif. Every insinuation that feminism had something to do with caustic things…even legitimately cynical things…was invariably answered with a peevish counterinsinuation — hey, no, we’re just here to assure fair play. No man regards us as an attack or a threat — no man has any need to — unless he is somehow “insecure.” A level playing field is all we’re about. Like what, you got a problem with that?

The Internet feminist labors under no such motif. Chalk it up to the sinister, anti-socially shading effect of the Internet itself. The cyber-feminist is a decidedly darker version of her flesh-and-blood sister. She is acrimonious, jaded, angry, petulant. She makes no apology for being so. Not only that, but if a day is spent and no nastiness has managed to bubble to the surface, it seems the day has been a waste. It’s part of the identity. The kitty has claws — or else she’s not worth the trouble of being.

It’s as if Feministing read about my definition, and decided someone should put some effort into making sure the prediction comes true. Especially with what comes next:

Check out masthead after masthead after masthead on some feminist blogs if you have trouble envisioning this. You’ll see what I mean. The “author” is represented by silhouette, or by avatar, or by an actual photograph. There is no smile…not unless it’s been made up into some misshapen sneer. Read the actual posts — and the problem is more pronounced still. Time after time, the theme is left intact, unshaken, unwrinkled, unmoved.

It is this: Somewhere, something is, and it ought not be. That’s it. Overall, it seems the fem-blog hasn’t much else to say. Sensors have detected something somewhere that exists, that we think should be banished to oblivion. Can we get an ‘Amen’ here? [emphases mine, in the hear-and-now]

We should be fair with those angry bitter feminists because this isn’t a “chick” thing. All populist movements eventually dissolve into this kind of ooze. “Somewhere something is, and it ought not be…Can we get an ‘Amen’ here?” And see you tomorrow when we tell you what else you’re supposed to hate. Why did this target earn our scorn? That’s seldom mentioned on the flog. Very seldom. You’re just supposed to get it.

Well it’s a little tough to just see that with the Urban Dictionary definition of “feminist” — today’s object of scorn.

Despite claims by some moderate (and misled) feminists to the contrary, feminism is not a movement for the betterment of men and women. If it was, it would be called humanism.

Feminists are not concerned, for example, about the fact that four times as many men commit suicide as women or that fewer and fewer boys attend college or graduate from high school.

Feminists demand that we treat men and women as exactly equal unless it suits women to differentiate between the sexes.

For example, a typical feminist will see no irony in arguing on one hand that women need more protection from domestic violence, rape and sexual harassment but on the other hand that women are just as good as men at construction and fighting crime, fires and wars.

Call it a human-rights movement or a political movement. Whatever suits you. It’s on the down-and-out. This is undeniable, because if it still found purpose and existed for constructive purposes, the feminists would come out of the woodwork and police their own to see if there was any legitimacy whatsoever in the criticisms above.

That didn’t happen. They came out of the woodwork, alright — but more like fire ants emerging from a mound. “All right girls — attack!” seems to be the rallying cry.

Not my idea of a meaningful productive dialog. But, like I said before about that word…

Multiple times a week, now, I hear the word “discussion” being used to propose something that isn’t a discussion at all. The word “dialog” is abused more feverishly, recklessly, and sadistically. I see it in Barack Obama’s call for a “dialog on race” — did anyone, anywhere, think a genuine dialog had anything to do with what he was requesting of us?

And that’s what feminism has become, I’m afraid. It goes through the motions of being a productive, back-and-forth dialog. But it has nothing to do with what that word is really supposed to describe.

How it got here, is explained in detail in Feminism, A Play in Ten Really Short Acts.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Uh Oh, They Found The Urban DictionarySunday, June 15th, 2008

Uh Oh, They Found The Urban Dictionary
Sunday, June 15th, 2008