Don't worry though, this isn't another rehashed demonization. It's actually here to illustrate an important point, that has led to feminism hindering the liberty of woman. I'm looking for intelligent feedback. I'm fully supporting woman empowerment in this post. If anything is criticized here, it's mostly 'male feminism'.This is a link to an article on Amanda Palmer's Tumblr entitled "Real Feminists Don't Gaze At Males.
i won’t link to the full review of our show the other night, or even name the publication (if you care, google), because i don’t want to give the writer the satsifaction of the hits. but can i talk for a moment about how incredibly much this pisses me off? thanks, i will. the review begins:
“‘How can I make my friends into feminists?’ ran one of the more odd questions put to Amanda Palmer during a sit-down Q&A in the midst of this show. One answer, if you happen to be an internationally adored cabaret artist, is probably not to coo and gaze adoringly at your bestselling fantasy author husband for two hours in public.”
…and it goes on to give the rest of the show a great (four star) review. the show was, by the way, fantastic. neil read for about an hour, i played for about an hour, we did a bunch of great songs together, and i think pretty much everybody had a stellar fucking time.
anyway.
i’m not even sure what the journalist MEANT by this statement. did he mean “real feminists shouldn’t show open affection for their husbands?” or did he mean something else? the fact that i’m “internationally adored” and neil is “bestselling” seems to be part of the point he’s making, but….what’s the point? that if i were a real feminist i’d stand there screaming “I KNOW YOU THINK YOU’RE HOT SHIT, GAIMAN, WITH YOUR BEST-SELLING MAN-PENNED NOVELS AND ALL THAT CRAP, BUT I AM FAMOUS CABARET WOMAN! FUCK YOU MAN! I ALSO MAKE AN INCOME! I STAND HERE, EQUAL TO YOU, AND SHOWING YOU AFFECTION WOULD CLEARLY BE A SIGN THAT I KNOW I BELONG TO THE WEAKER SEX.”
rawr.
what?
the larger irony, of course, is how i ACTUALLY answered the question, which was something along the lines of:
“if you’re trying to turn your friends into feminists, i think you’re taking the wrong tack. i would back up and start off by not trying to turn them into ANYTHING…this is how we got into this whole mess in the first place.”
as far as i’m concerned, the most powerful feminist can doWHATEVER SHE WANTS.
THAT IS WHAT DEFINES A TRUE FEMINIST.
this includes: wearing heels, wearing combat boots, wearing nothing, sporting lipstick, shaving, not shaving, waxing, not waxing, being political, being apolitical, having a job, being homeless, gazing at men, gazing at women, gazing at porn of all sorts, glamming up like a drag queen, going in man-drag, being in a five-way polyamorous relationship, being childless, being a stay-at-home parent, being single, having a wife, having a husband, and gazing/cooing adoringly at those wives or husbands anywhere they fucking choose, including elevators, restaurants, puppet shows (well, maybe keep it g-rated if there are small children present), ….or on theatrical stages at fringe festivals. are we getting the picture here?? the most powerful feminist can do WHATEVER SHE WANTS. the minute you believe you’re a “bad feminist” because you said the wrong thing/wore the wrong thing/got married/chose to have children…or otherwise broke some unspecified ”code of feminism”: DON’T BUY IT. THERE ISN’T ONE. you can do ANYTHING YOU WANT. ANYTHING. THAT’S THE POINT.
let’s say that one more time for good measure:
ANYTHING.
don’t let anyone try to turn you into a feminist.
just be one.
People (especially those that are feminist) need to read my reply on this. Because I have something to say on it, and I need an evaluation.
Basically, I love this article, for a few reasons
1) It’s intelligent.
2) It addresses alot of hypocrisy male feminists suffer from, and kind of underpins how patriarchal alot of self-declared male feminists really are.
3) It’s staying true to what original agendas are about, and not distorting them from their original intentions towards another agenda.
[edit for those with no common sense]I include this article in my post, as the source is a foundation for my point. The source says is that no one has the right to tell someone what is or isn't properly feminist. This thread is centered around the notion that men should not make assumption on what it means to be feminist, because male feminists fall right into that trap [/edit for those with no common sense]
I agree feminism should be about woman having equal rights, the same rights as men, as in both genders having the same rights, as in both genders equal. That’s what it should be. It shouldn’t be focusing on misogynist conspiracies everywhere, or using misandry or reversed discrimination to try to demonize/stereotype all men as evil. A doctrine to promote equality and tolerance, should practice equality and tolerance. And that, I can be behind.
I mean technically speaking I have no right to talk about woman suffrage, on account that I am male and therefore have no grounds to comment on it. But I want to clarify that I guess I am creating this thread, because I feel it is a ‘take that’ at the fallacy of male feminists, who try and give themselves an academic/intellectual upper hand or moral high ground over other men in a debate, by demonizing the other debater as ‘fascist/misogynist’ or not ‘overzealously progressive or intelligent’ enough to have a credible opinion because they do not conform entirely to every element of leftist thought and critical theory, and demonize the patriarchy for every problem in society.
It’s a fallacy, and a hugely hypocritical one at that, because male feminists are subconsciously competing with others and trying to act macho (which is a byproduct of the patriarchy anyway), and secondly (the really huge hypocrisy) is that male feminists (in their mist to cling onto their progressive gimmicks) try to speak on behalf of all woman BEFORE woman themselves can intervene and actually say how they feel themselves… and if they DO intervene and say how they feel, they may accuse them of not having enough critical thought if they don't deem them 'progressive' enough.
Honestly, male feminists out there are, in my view, some of the biggest misogynists they know, because they fail to realize they’re being even more patriarchal than their ‘designated enemies of non feminist males, by trying to imply they know what’s best for all woman, or somehow have the clearance to speak on behalf of them. I entirely agree with Amanda Palmer on this blog post, because quite frankly I can be pro-equality for equal rights, without attaching myself to the label of ‘male feminist’ in a desperate attempt to appear ‘moral’ ‘sympathetic’ or ‘progressive’. What a woman wants to do, is her own choice, as it is my own choice as a male to do what I want (providing neither of these liberties cause the discomfort or harm of another).
If a feminist woman wants to do whatever she wants in her life, then IT’S HER OWN FUCKING RIGHT. Even if I don’t agree, or I think it’s demeaning, or not objectifying, or not progressive, do I REALLY have a right to tell her what she can or can’t do? No, I cannot make a claim on what is or isn’t the right feminist attitude, because my opinion means jack shit. It’s this same reason why I don’t go around being overzealously pro-choice.
If a woman CHOOSES to be pro-life instead, or wants to do modeling, what’s a male feminist going to say after that? “No you can’t, because I know what’s best for you?”
That’s the hypocritical fallacy of a male feminist. They think they can tell woman how to be a feminist. They can’t.
