Sunday, February 21, 2016

Two first class feminists versus the pro-penis Paglia

Clinton (HR) and Steinem versus Paglia 

Camille Paglia writes here: 'It's not about sexism', referring to the Clinton versus Sanders battle, and refers to herself as a 'pro-sex feminist'...

My Life on the Road (2015)
Brilliant! She's done everything - all for the cause.
... but it IS about sexism. If you've read as much feminist literature as I have (I have a PhD in justice for battered women defendants), then you know, without any equivocation or doubt, that the battle for the first female president of the United States is fundamentally about overcoming sexism.

And the fact that young men are leaping for this alternative to the first woman is evidence of this sexism alive and well in modern day America. The fact that young women are, 50 to 30, leaning in towards Sanders and against Clinton, is a sign of the same, with the 'I don't want to be labelled a feminist (the first F-word), I don't want to be reduced to a female' age-old cry added for extra umph. The wild swing support for Sanders proves exactly what he counts on proving doesn't exist and isn't important: sexism. Sexism opposition to Hillary Clinton.

Provided she's not a Maggie Thatcher trying to prove she's a man by cutting spending, introducing new taxes and starting a war (in other words, a right-wing woman), then the election of any woman to the top political job in any country, never mind a politically experienced woman like Hillary, is a major move towards gender equality and justice for girls and women, and a major obstacle to the continuation of the systemic oppressions of patriarchal sexism perpetuated through the church, state and family. If you don't support that, you are not a feminist. That's the new definition of what a feminist is.

Paglia is no feminist.

So yes it IS about sexism. What else is not allowing women to be president until now, and maybe not even now, about if not sexism? What is more important than sending an unambiguous and unprecedented signal to the world that women are the equal of men and given the chance, can rule effectively as well as if not better than any man? Nothing is more important. Our own Helen Clark here in New Zealand, has already proven just that. But ours is a small country.

If Sanders wants a revolution, he can find one right here. But no. He wants a different kind of revolution - of the people. Sure he does, just not of those people who think sexism matters and, moreover, that sexism can be substantially fought, unlike the battles of capitalism, by changing the constant symbol of male rule by electing Hillary Clinton to rule the United States. Sanders is an idealist, exactly like my father. He is not going to start shit.

Paglia envies Sander's dick, essentially. She likes what his dick symbolises, power and invention - to her, and much of he world - even if it also symbolised once the burning at the stake of women who spoke out against the authorities, most of whom were probably lesbian, certainly women, like her.

Paglia derides Gloria Steinem (whose brilliant book I've just finished, a birthday gift from my daughter) as the "crafty, childless, dowager empress of feminism". Dowager? What an old word.

"Dowager: A widow with a title or property derived from her late husband" (OED).

So a crafty, clichéd, sponge then. Perfect. Steinem was never married and worked all her life as a serious, underpaid because she was a woman, journalist and activist. She almost single-handedly started the women's liberation movement in America. She founded Ms magazine. She did not have children because the cause never sleeps.

Paglia blames Steinem for doing more than any other person to drive away potential feminists with her activism on women's reproduction rights. Paglia claims that the she turned away from feminism all the religious women who have a genuine 'moral' objection to abortion. But women who have a moral objection to abortion are not feminists, by definition. End of story. We don't want you. Those who object to abortion rights for women lose their feminist privileges - should they want them, which is Paglia's dubious, finger-pointing, claim.

If you're in any doubt about Hillary v. Sanders, read Steinem's latest book. It's almost a pity that she - backed by Hillary -  didn't stand for president against Sanders. Steinem versus Sanders, it has a ring to it. The battle would be openly about sexism then and there'd be no Clinton (mostly Bill) baggage to get in her way. Though she is older than Sanders, so perhaps not. The world would never elect an older woman over a younger man to rule.

No comments:

Post a Comment