sexism in the US is real

[niyad]

there are many on DU who vehemently deny that sexism still exists in this country, no matter how much evidence is provided. A couple of weeks ago, I briefly pointed out the sexism of our language.

Today, I simply want to say that all one has to do is look at the battle over reproductive rights. WHO is making the laws about women's bodies? men, for the most part. WHO truly runs the anti-choice groups, such as operation rescue? men, for the most part. WHO are the clinic bombers and murderers of clinic workers and doctors? men. WHO runs the religious groups that are so vehemently anti-choice? men.

remember this: each and every anti-choice argument has, as its core, a deep and profound hatred for women, for each of those arguments, whether religious, or secular, says that some THING, or some ONE, whether it is the sperm, the sperm donor, the church or the state, is more important than the woman. it doesn't matter how you dress it up, or justify it, or deny it, that is the basis of all the arguments.

it really is that simple.

[Donnachaidh]

1. George Carlin had a bit about the men who want to control women's uterus's

Something to the effect that "These are the same guys nobody in their right mind would want to fuck".

It IS that simple.

[niyad]

2. thank you, I had forgotten that one!!

[JerseygirlCT]

3. Absolutely

It's quite real, it's quite tangible, and I do wonder if things will improve at all in the short-term. We're living through the backlash still, I fear.

[TahitiNut]

4. Yup. It was males and males alone, without a SINGLE female vote (not ONE!) ...

... that amended the Constitution to recognize women's voting rights. :silly:

How the fuck DARE they!?!

[niyad]

10. gee, and they did this out of the goodness of their hearts, after 150 YEARS

of COURSE women didn't vote on that, they COULDN"T. women were not IN the constitution until the 19th amendment, and look what it took to get them there (in case you don't know that part of our history, I suggest you watch "Iron Jawed Angels" to see what our foremothers went through.


nice try, but you missed the point entirely.

[femrap]

30. It was the Senator from TN that

gave women the right to vote. The night before the vote, he received a letter from his mother who told him to do the right thing and give his mother the vote. I can't remember his name now.

But he had all intention to vote against suffrage until the letter from Mom.

You know, TahitiNut, I've seen some men step up and truly do the just and fair act. And I applaud them. Is this what you want? Some recognition that there are men out there with consciences?

It's funny though that it took so many years for the men to come to their sense of justice and 'grant' the women their vote....and it was by ONE VOTE ONLY THAT IT PASSED....and some 50 years AFTER black men were granted the vote.

Shirley Chisholm always said, 'Men are men.'

[lumberjack_jeff]

37. If "men are men" then why would a majority vote for suffrage?

For most men, "just and fair" isn't an act. Take it from one.

[femrap]

41. Shirley Chisholm is

black...she ran for Prez in '72, I think. Regarding discrimination, she said she felt held back because of her gender. She felt that whatever the color of the man, he oppressed. Thus, "Men are men."

And the majority was just one vote....you know how long it takes to get an amendment to the Constitution, right?

Please do not waste your time convincing me that there are just and fair men out there. Please use your time to convince those men that ARE NOT just and fair to be so. We, as women, haven't had much success. It would be best if it came from you...the chances of them listening to you are greater.

[TahitiNut]

42. Harry Burn. Tennessee House. The 36th state to ratify the 19th Amendment.

After it passed by 2/3rd of both houses of Congress and was ratified by 35 other states. The (other) southern states refused to ratify it. But it WAS ratified in "merely" 14 months. Then my mother was one of the first female babies born in the U.S. with her full citizenship recognized since day one. Then again, maybe she deserved it more, being born in Michigan which was one of the first three states to (eagerly) ratify the 19th Amendment, along with Illinois and Wisconsin. (Maybe it's something in the water? Then again, Michigan has never had a state death penalty, either.)

Yes, women waited another 55 years from the time blacks were given suffrage. Perhaps we should have had another war in which many hundreds of thousands of men died ... say in 1875? Or maybe women's suffrage should've come first? So, would that make a war in 1835 worth it? Just what do we need to do to get those southern states to recognize such fundamentals?

I dunno ...what's an abomination against human rights worth? Hell... we wasted the lives of over 58,000 men in Viet Nam, not counting the other injuries to body and mind - my "brothers" - for what? I guess we could've marched 60,000 men out, chosen by lottery of course, and shot them to get women's suffrage. (Or maybe we could just let Viet Nam and other wars be a substitute for that?) Maybe that way, we wouldn't have to keep fighting THAT battle, too.

You see, it's just NOT about what I want. Obviously. Why even ask? You sure as hell don't need my input, right? Hell, I wouldn't even want to take on that burden. It's funny that DU is chosen as the place to fight this out. I'm just not under the impression this is the "front line." YMMV, of course. Take no prisoners.

:shrug:

[femrap]

47. Why does women's suffrage lead to

all the death's of the Vietnam war? I don't get it. Women caused the war??? You're creeping me out.

You ever read anything about the 6 million women burned at the stake for being uppity....I think they called then witches? Is that an ABOMINATION AGAINST HUMAN RIGHTS?

I think I'll leave now...with my back to door...slowly, step by step. Don't want to upset anyone.

[BoneDaddy]

5. Every ism has a basis in reality

but it is what you do about it that matters. The question becomes "how do you legislate speech"? I think that there is a fine line when it comes to acknowledging and working to create a less sexist world but I likewise reject the left's often encroachment into the personal realm regardless of how you may justify it. I reject the Christian Right's intrusion into my life, I likewise reject the PC police on the left.

You would like to reduce this to a simple gender argument and it isn't. There are large numbers of women who are anti-choice and large numbers of men who are pro-choice. I think posts like this are often counter-productive to gender relationships which ultimately need to be supportive.

[niyad]

13. having been on the front lines of the choice battle all my life, I know that

there are anti-choice women, and pro-choice men. that doesn't change what I said. women can hate other women just as much as men can, and there are men who understand that women are not brood mares or sex slaves or kitchen drudges. but the reality is, men are the ones making the laws, along with a few anti-choice women in the various legislatures.

[BoneDaddy]

49. That is why we need to be seen as allies

instead of enemies, as men are often portrayed in here. Sure, you can think whatever you want to think but if you think shaming men into action will work, it will not. Nobody likes to be told what to think by anyone. Women certainly do not like it, and neither do men. I am not telling you what you should do, just asking you to look at other options other than what I see which is not working. It just further alientates and divides.

[Nay]

6. I don't know if they "hate" women as much as consider them totally

unworthy of much attention at all -- until something women do, or want, threatens their little sperm factories and their big man of the household hierarchy. THEN they get riled up. And it's why marriage is failing as an institution here and in most of the Western world.

[Fridays Child]

9. Some men are misogynists but, for most, women are merely a resource...

...to be acquired, defended, and exploited, sort of like the mineral rights that Monkey Boy and his old boy compatriots hold so dear.

[Nay]

14. Yep, we're just there to be used, like farm animals, and we'll go back

to that status in a heartbeat if things keep devolving here. I hold on to the fact that for 30 years women have had a better place in the Western world than for the past 100,000 years, and I was privileged to see it and live it.

[Fridays Child]

7. I was Googling the George Carlin reference and found this hilarious question at answers.com:

"Why do sperm cells die when wearing tight pants?"

:spray: :rofl:

Thank you, Goddess, for bad syntax!

[BeFree]

8. Well

I used to be too sexy. Does that count?

Of course sexism is rampant. There is a difference, ya know?

Problem is we are not equal and we may never be, because we are not the same. Viva la difference!

[niyad]

11. there is a difference between sex appeal and sexism.

USED to be too sexy? what happened? and what, pray tell, is TOO sexy?

[BeFree]

16. Too sexy.

Used to be I was so good looking that the opposite sex just swooned at me. Oh how I miss those days.

Nowadays, all I can say is that pretty women get nervous around me.

Funny, tho, I am one of the greatest women libbers that ever liberated women of their inhibitions, and encouraged them to be as equal as possible in this man dominated world.

[femrap]

35. yin and yang....different energies, but

very much on the same level. It's just that now our culture is enamored with the masculine...in love with violence and war and conquest.

See what has happened to the world without the Feminine? Scorched Earth is what is happening. Anyway, it's all gonna collapse pretty soon anyway.

[undeterred]

12. let me tell you about a sexist man

I am hijacking this thread, sorry. I was going to help a congressional candidate. He sounds like a progressive- he is antiwar and talks about getting health care for everyone. Well, I also found out that he was pro-life. I mused over this for a while and decided I was ok with it for the following reasons: 1} the district he is in is heavily pro-life-Republican and has a lot of one issue voters 2) I understood his reason for this to be basically religious- he is Catholic. I have come to understand that there are a lot of quietly pro-life people in the Democratic party who don't say much because they are in the minority. 3) He is not against Roe v. Wade. If you are running for Congress there isn't that much damage you can do anyway because you don't get to approve Supreme Court appointees.

Then I found out that he is in favor of "Men's Rights". What the hell does that mean? Well some of you remember I posted a poll about this last week. It means that a man who impregnates a woman gets to make decisions about the fetus. So a pregnant woman has no control over her body. Its worse than overturning Roe v. Wade. We're like slaves to men.

I can't imagine how this view goes along with the Democratic party. Maybe it would go over in Saudi Arabia. I don't think he should be on our party's ticket unless he stops talking about this. I am horrified.

[niyad]

15. thank you for sharing this. for me, a candidate MUST be pro-choice.

everything else is pointless if the person doesn't recognize a woman's right to her own body, period.

[undeterred]

17. Well, I work on Congressional races

There are two districts in WI that are impossibly Republican because of that issue. Last time I worked for a pro-choice candidate. He spent over 3 years of his life, missing important time with his family, raised over $600,000 and ended up with less than 36% of the vote the second run. This time no Dem is running in that district. Basically, it is impossible for a progressive/pro-choice Dem to win. I would still rather have a moderate Dem who is against the war than someone who is on the right (we're talking about Sensenbrenner here) on every single issue.

So for this person I was willing to make an exception, especially seeing as he didn't put it on his website, he wasn't against Roe v. Wade, and he wasn't making a big deal about it.

But Men's Rights? Give me a break. The whole world is MEN'S RIGHTS. They don't need rights over our bodies too.

[niyad]

18. agreed. every time I hear that phrase, I want to do a reverse protein spill.

I love it when men talk about how THEY are oppressed by the system. THEY created it, THEY can fix it.

as susan b anthony said, "men, their rights and nothing more. women, their rights, and nothing less"

[Fleshdancer]

19. same here

I will not vote for an anti-choice candidate. Period. I will also not feel guilty about it because I SHOULD vote for my best interest and for the best interest of my daughter and her future daughter and her future daughter, etc.

[Der Blaue Engel]

20. That's the slippery slope you've heard tell about

To me, there is no such thing as an acceptable "pro-life" position. To be more concerned about potential life than about real, live human beings is actually anti-life. There is no way to spin it as anything other than misogyny. It should be called pro-forced birth and outed for what it really means.

[femrap]

38. I like pro-fetus, anti-child.

I also like Compulsory Motherhood.

eta: I should say that I like these as terms to be used against the anti-choice idiots.

[Kitty Herder]

21. It's scary that a Democrat would support something like that. nt

[undeterred]

23. Yes it is.

Its weird that someone can have a combination of positions that are progressive and far right. It puts people who support him in an odd position. I mean, there are things like gun rights in Wisconsin that I have to decide not to care about because (its Wisconsin and) all the men are gun nuts and theres no way to change it. But once he came out with this I called someone higher up in the Dem party and they didn't know he was saying this stuff. And he said that really hurts the party.

[lumberjack_jeff]

31. Is this the poll of which you speak?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2982607

Then I found out that he is in favor of "Men's Rights". What the hell does that mean? Well some of you remember I posted a poll about this last week. It means that a man who impregnates a woman gets to make decisions about the fetus. So a pregnant woman has no control over her body. Its worse than overturning Roe v. Wade. We're like slaves to men.

This is a definition of "men's rights" of which I'm unfamiliar. The poll you posted has nothing to do with its definition.

They call this a straw man, where you create an argument and then shoot it down. No man should have veto authority over a woman's medical decisions. The opposing (minority) view which you're addressing is no more definitive of "men's rights" than Lorena Bobbitt defines what it means to be a feminist.

[undeterred]

43. You haven't explained anything to me.

There is no basis for anyone to claim a right over someone else's body (unless its as property or a minor child) and a girlfriend or wife doesn't fit the bill. I don't understand why any man should think he has this right, but apparently a lot of them think they have a paternity right over the fetus. Since the fetus is indistinguishable from the pregnant woman, there is no practical difference between giving a man control over a woman and over a fetus.

There is no practical way of implementing this anyway. Under the best of circumstances a woman tells her lover that she is pregnant and the decision is shared. If she does not tell him- she is either unsure whose child it is, unsure about keeping the child, or unsure about continuing the relationship. There is no way a man can compel a woman he is sleeping with to tell report to him that she is pregnant, that she is going to a doctor, that she is going to have an abortion, or that she is going to carry a child. And during the first trimester, when abortion is legal, I do not believe that a paternity test is possible. So- a man who would want to stop a woman from aborting "his" child (which is the right in question here) can't really even do so.

[hfojvt]

45. but I cannot find this philosophy or issue discussed

on any of the men's rights websites I just searched for. So what you are describing is a very extreme wing of men's rights, a group which is itself almost unknown to the M$M.

[undeterred]

46. this is all I could find

http://www.menweb.org/abortion.htm

Its not men claiming a right to decide so much as saying that they would like to be more involved.

I think the particular person I am dealing with has some "baggage" that has no place on the campaign.

[JerseygirlCT]

32. On any party's ticket, in any position in which he has responsibility

over other people's lives!

That's disgusting.

[galledgoblin]

33. I think a number of people who are anti-choice

just haven't fully studied the issue.

it's one thing to dislike and oppose abortions, it's another to completely remove the option.

by pro-choice but anti-abortion I mean legally you can still get an abortion, but a number of pregnancy prevention options and programs also are heavily enforced, and a support structure is available for women who choose to carry to term and beyond.

if you're simply anti-choice, you're saying that legally my body is not my own and any choices I make have to go through Uncle Sam.

but it's easier for people to understand it as pro-life and pro-choice, a black and white issue.

[femrap]

36. Who is it? nt

[Kitty Herder]

22. I don't understand how people can deny that sexism exists in this county. It's an

ever-present undercurrent in every society, in our workplaces, our places of worship, our homes, everywhere. I think some are blind to it for that very reason. It's so ubiquitous that it becomes as invisible as the air around us, until it hurts us personally. We can never rest on our laurels and think that since women have made some gains that sexism is gone. There is still a great deal of work to do.

[niyad]

25. I know, it boggles my mind sometimes. yet, even here on DU--the denial is, at times,

nearly hysterical. you are right, it is so prevalent as to be almost invisible.

[Kitty Herder]

27. Here is a simple, common, overlooked example of sexism, right here on today's DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3014680#3014755

The "piece of ass" comment.

[undeterred]

44. I remember someone making a remark on DU about

Rudi Guliani "pussying" in the Hamptons. Geez, was there any more to her body?

[uppityperson]

24. Being a rapid pro-choice supporting and worker for yrs, must k&r&disagree.

Of course sexism is real in the USA. End of that message.

I disagree that "each and every anti-choice argument has, as its core, a deep and profound hatred for women, for each of those arguments, whether religious, or secular, says that some THING, or some ONE, whether it is the sperm, the sperm donor, the church or the state, is more important than the woman." That is too simplistic as no, not each and every anti-choice argument has this as its core. Simplifying to this misses out on a wider knowledge and understanding of the issue and makes it less likely that we pro-choice people will ever be able to discuss this with anti-choice people. It makes sure that there will be little change as there are other reasons, not the core of hatred for women.

[undeterred]

26. you're right

I am a religious person- and I became pro-choice after nearlly being raped on my way to church. I do regard the fetus as a life. I understand why people who are religious would object to abortion and want to protect the life of the fetus. However, since I have worked with rape victims and am well aware of the disadvantages of women in our society - I think abortion needs to be safe and available and legal.

I do not think women who are against abortion hate women. I just think there are a lot of people who really don't understand what womens lives are like. I used to be able to say I would never have an abortion- but after a stranger tried to rape me and I was rescued- hey nobody can say that.

People do change their minds.

[lumberjack_jeff]

39. Yes. It's reductionism to fit it into a preexisting world-view. n/t

[uppityperson]

40. Which is somewhat amusing and saddening. Gotta keep trying though. nt

[varkam]

28. I agree with you, though I'm not sure your arguments would persuade...

those who don't already agree with you. For instance:

Today, I simply want to say that all one has to do is look at the battle over reproductive rights. WHO is making the laws about women's bodies? men, for the most part. WHO truly runs the anti-choice groups, such as operation rescue? men, for the most part. WHO are the clinic bombers and murderers of clinic workers and doctors? men. WHO runs the religious groups that are so vehemently anti-choice? men.

This strikes me as a sort of circumstantial ad hominem. Just because men are doing these things doesn't necessarily make them (the men or the things that they are doing).

[Spiffarino]

29. Yes it is.

So is racism. So is class inequality before the law. And I've never seen anything on DU that would discount any of those truths unless it was posted by a Reichwing mole.

Next.

[lumberjack_jeff]

34. Absolutely correct. Misandry, misogyny and homophobia are all real.

I know you're only addressing one kind of sexism.

[selador]

48. rubbish

"remember this: each and every anti-choice argument has, as its core, a deep and profound hatred for women"

bull.

first of all, *i* used to be anti-choice. it had nothing to do with any religion, nor did it have to do with hatred of women.

there are certainly SOME who are anti-choice who hate women. and there are many many many who are anti-choice who simply think that the "right" of the fetus to live exceeds the right of the woman to abort it.

for that reason, despite the fact that i am pro-choice, i accept that many of good conscience and who strongly respect and love women are not.

demonizing the opposition is wrong, both factually, and because it isn't fruitful in convincing people to change their positions

i was convinced to change to pro-choice NOT because of vitriolic hatefilled arguments like this, but because of thoughtful discussion with people who were pro-choice.

and i *know* that i didn't (and don't) hate women when i was anti-choice, and i know there are scores of millions of others who are in the same situation.


these types of rah-rah arguments are great for rallying da troops, but do little to actually understand the opinions of others. and here's a hint: understanding WHY people disagree with you helps you make a more compelling argument against their position

[BoneDaddy]

51. Excellent

perspective and thanks for some rationality. The left and people a part of it, make the same kind of mistakes that the right does. Because of some fundamental difference in perspective it seems to give them permission to demonize the other side.

[madisongrace]

50. Agree. n/t