Celie's Revenge: more on "Feminist" Men

Although we had learned to approach most things political with tentative enthusiasm and trust, it really never occurred to us that men could use feminism and their claimed repentance for being a past misogynist as just another way to exercise power over women and our movement. Because once you’ve confessed you have nothing left to hide? Once you’ve come clean, you are just that, right? Innocent and trustworthy? After you’ve aired your dirty laundry, your drawers are clean and no one can come back at you and say there’s more dirt or new dirt on you. If you’ve admitted to the “worst” form of misogyny which is physical abuse, like Kevin Powell did, you can only get better from there, right? Next to admitting to being a batterer, most other misogynistic behavior automatically makes you a combination of comrade and choirboy. Telling women the worst of what you’ve done takes you a step up from being the unconscious prick you were before; it’s supposed to be a step in the right direction, a direction down a path without the residue or repackaging of the same old woman-hating. You might call those of us women who have held these assumptions woefully naïve, but this expectation doesn’t come out of nowhere. It comes from the proclamations of these radically “reborn” men. They’ll tell you what they once did, back in the day, before they saw the feminist light, but they are less likely to tell you how they continue to act out their male privileges and power, in newly cultivated and highly manipulative ways.
-- Celie's Revenge

It is with great respect and appreciation that I present that portion and link to the whole of the latest essay by radical feminist Celie's Revenge. (See *here* for the first post on her writing about "feminist" men.)

A man who I consider to be profeminist is Byron Hurt, and I wish far more men were far more like Byron. In a comment he made to Jennifer on her Facebook page, he noted how he's been challenged by feminists to also identify himself as a feminist because, for them, the term "profeminist" makes it seem like the man is not really willing to stand up with feminists, but rather will find it sufficient to somewhat passively support feminists, applauding from the sidelines. (I see the argument here, and once upon a time called myself "feminist" for precisely that reason.) Other feminists have challenged him to call himself profeminist, noting that men who call themselves "feminist" are far too often attempting to co-opt the various women's movements and struggles toward Women's Liberation.

I think Celie's essay gets to the heart of the matter: how do men who call themselves feminist BEHAVE towards Womanist and feminist women--and every woman, regardless of their politics and worldview? What do these men DO that they call "being a feminist man"?

In my experience there are so few men who call themselves either that we really needn't take much time debating this. When (very rarely) pressed on the matter, I prefer to say "I'm a white man who actively supports and defends radical feminist and Womanist policies and practices as well as radical feminists and Womanists. I do this in part by being actively pro-Women's Liberation every day, by owning my privilege, by not being in denial that I can be a white male supremacist and otherwise oppressive to women at any moment, and by maintaining interpersonal and social relationships through which I am held to account for my actions by women who demonstrate a commitment to call men, including good friends, out on our CRAP, without "taking care of me" in the process. I also support a radical agenda for Women's Liberation by being a white man who interpersonally supports women of any color in ways women welcome and want to be supported to end racist patriarchy".

But that would be a bit wordy for a blog name.

Please click on the title to link to the full text of Celie's essay, which appears on her blog of the same name, Celie's Revenge: With Friends Like These... or The ReTOOLed Misogyny of Feminist Dudes.


END OF POST.

Looking for a Rabbi? Don't forget to seek Judaic counsel from Alysa Stanton-Ogulnick

Alysa Stanton-Ogulnick. Photo by Janine Spang

From the JewishJournal.com:

L.A. Woman

May 15, 2008
Student on track to become first black female rabbi

By Sue Fishkoff

Alysa Stanton-Ogulnick isn't particularly interested in being a standard-bearer.

She's proud to be black, proud to be a woman and proud to be a 45-year-old single mother who raised her adopted child on her own.

And when she says that next year, following her ordination as a Reform rabbi, she will become the first black female rabbi, the huge grin on her face lets folks know she feels pretty good about that, too.

But Stanton-Ogulnick, who is studying at the Cincinnati campus of the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion (HUC-JIR), didn't set out to be the first. It just kind of happened, like so much else in her life.

"If I were the 50,000th, I'd still be doing what I do, trying to live my life with kavanah and kedusha," she said, using the Hebrew words for intentionality and holiness. "Me being first was just the luck of the draw."

Stanton-Ogulnick -- she's still getting used to the second part of her hyphenated last name, the product of a recent marriage -- was recently in San Francisco for a conference of ethnically and racially diverse Jews and Jewish communities sponsored by Be'chol Lashon, an organization that supports their efforts to enter the Jewish mainstream.

That's something the future rabbi knows a great deal about -- as a woman, as a convert and as a Jew of color. She's had to fight for success and acceptance in a world that wasn't always welcoming.

"At this conference there are people from all over looking for their identity," Stanton-Ogulnick said. "Maybe I can help them on the path by breaking down barriers."

That's among her goals as a rabbi, she says: breaking barriers, building bridges and giving hope.

Like many rabbinic students now, Stanton-Ogulnick is on her second career. She came to the rabbinate as a licensed psychotherapist specializing in grief and loss issues.

Stanton-Ogulnick has worked with trauma victims in Colorado for the past 16 years, at the same time becoming more active in Denver's Temple Emanuel. She has served the synagogue as a para-chaplain, religious-school teacher and cantorial soloist.

Raised by Pentacostal parents, Stanton-Ogulnick spent her childhood and young adulthood as a spiritual seeker, making the rounds of various Christian denominations before finding her home in Judaism. She converted more than 20 years ago.

"People look at me and ask if I was born Jewish," she said. "I say yes, but not to a Jewish womb. I believe I was at Sinai. It's not as if one day I scratched my head and said, hmm, now how can I make my life more difficult? I know -- I'll become Jewish!"

Stanton-Ogulnick made her choice to join the Jewish community as an adult, well aware of the difficulties that might arise. Her daughter Shana, now 13, didn't get to choose; she was dipped in the mikvah (ritual bath) as an infant.

The year they spent in Jerusalem, Stanton-Ogulnick's first year as an HUC-JIR student, was the most difficult. Shana, then 7, faced daily prejudice at school.

"She was beat up, and once was literally kicked off the bus," her mother said with quiet anger. "We'd been in Israel three months and her only friend was a cat."

One day, Shana came home from camp beaming because one of the other children held her hand.

"'Nobody ever holds my hand, Mommy,' she said to me," Stanton-Ogulnick recounted. "I said, 'Why?' She said, 'Because I'm shochor,'" or black.

"Ani lo tov, ani lo yafah," the little girl told her mother, using the Hebrew for "I'm no good, I'm not pretty."

Even telling the story now, six years later, Stanton-Ogulnick shakes her head.

"Sometimes I've been in tears with what I have put this child through," she says.

Stanton-Ogulnick relates some of the difficulties of her life's journey in a monologue she created last fall called "Layers."

First performed at a conference of Reform religious-school educators in October, the piece opens with her standing on stage with her head in a noose, a shocking evocation of slavery. The monologue deals with her journey to Judaism and other major changes in her life, including a recent weight loss of 122 pounds.

Pulling out an old picture of herself at her former weight, Stanton-Ogulnick shakes her head again. Is she really no longer that person? Is she really about to become a rabbi?

It's all so remarkable, she muses.

At the end of one performance, she says, a woman came up to her in tears, saying, "You told my story, thank you."

"It's those moments," Stanton-Ogulnick said. "Even though the journey is long and the path difficult, if I can provide someone with a little hope and a sense of purpose, it's worthwhile."

It's experiencing those moments that she is most looking forward to as a rabbi, whether she ends up in a pulpit, working as a chaplain or in some other position.

"That moment, that 'a-ha, I'm not alone' that comes when I'm talking with a congregant or an individual struggling with something and I'm helping them find a solution," she said, "that a-ha moment is what it's about for me."
END OF POST.

Percentage of Jews in the World, relative to Other World Religions/Spiritual Ethnic Groups

[Click on image to enlarge. The website where I found this pie-chart is linked to just below.]

For more on these statistics, see: http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

Over there, on the far left, below other and above Buddhism and Sikhism--that's my people. I was suprised to realise, as someone who has practiced a form of grossly Westernised Buddhism in the past, for several years--a BuJew if you will, that there are approximately 27 times as many Buddhists on the Earth as there are Jews. Who knew? Even more surprising to me, and evidence of my lack of knowledge of the world beyond the wild West, the population of Sikhs is not quite double the population of Jews worldwide.

This chart reminds me of how VERY few of us Jews there are in the world. And the number is getting smaller year by year. Is this cultural/religious genocide? Or is it a willful, uncoerced "leaving behind of the faith" by secular Jews en masse? My answer: both--except there's not much that happens in the world by way of "cultural change", that I can see, that can honestly be termed "uncoerced", most often by Western white Christian male supremacist forces.END OF POST.

A Timeline of Anti-Jewish Persecution, primarily in Europe

[Image is from here.]

I expect that this list is heavily focused on what has happened to what are now termed "white" Jews. Racism lives everywhere there is race. Not on this list, for example, is the current persecution of Black Jews inside and outside of Israel by non-Black Jews and Christians. Absent from this list is also the particular ways Jewish women are persecuted and oppressed for being women and Jews.

But for those who don't know the abridged history of anti-Semitic persecution, here's a chart of it from this online source. I prefer the more historically specific "Era of Christian Domination (E.C.D.)" to rather innocuous and benign "Common Era (C.E.) but am grateful that the list isn't chronicled in terms of when Jesus of Narazeth lived.

Jewish Persecution | Timeline of Judaism | History of AntiSemitism
Lesser Known Highlights of Jewish International Relations In The Common Era (an Abbreviated sampling)

DATE PLACE EVENT
250 C.E. Canhage Expulsion
224 C.E. Italy Forced Conversion
325 C.E. Jerusalem Expulsion
351 C.E Persia Book Burning
357 C.E. Italy Property Confiscation
379 C.E. Milan Synagogue Burning
415 C.E. Alexandria Expulsion
418 C.E. Minorca Forced Conversion
469 C.E. Ipahan Holocaust
489 C.E. Antioch Synagogue Burning
506 C.E. Daphne Synagogue Burning
519 C.E. Ravenna Synagogue Burning
554 C.E. Diocese of Clement (France) Expulsion
561 C.E. Diocese of Uzes (France) Expulsion
582 C.E Merovingia Forced Conversion
612 C.E. Visigoth Spain Expulsion
628 C.E. Byzantium Forced Conversion
629 C.E. Merovingia Forced Conversion
633 C.E. Toledo Forced Conversion
638 C.E. Toledo Stake Burnings
642 C.E. Visigothic Empire Expulsion
653 C.E. Toledo Expulsion
681 C.E. Spain Forced Conversion
693 C.E. Toledo Jews Enslaved
722 C.E. Byzantium Judaism Outlawed
855 C.E. Italy Expulsion
876 C.E. Sens Expulsion
897 C.E. Narbonne Land Confiscation
945 C.E. Venice Ban on Sea Travel
1009 C.E. Orleans Massacre
1012 C.E. Rouen, Limoges & Rome Massacre
1012 C.E. Mayence Expulsion
1021 C.E. Rome Jews Burned Alive
1063 C.E. Spain Massacre
1095 C.E. Lorraine Massacre
1096 C.E. No. France & Germany 1/3 of Jewish Population Massacred
1096 C.E. Hungary Massacre
1096 C.E. Ralisbon Massacre
1099 C.E. Jerusalem Jews Burned Alive
1100 C.E. Kiev Pogrom
1140 C.E. Germany Massacres
1146 C.E. Rhine Valley Massacre
1147 C.E. Wurzburg Massacre
1147 C.E. Belitz (Germany) Jews Burned Alive
1147 C.E. Carenton, Ramenu & Sully (France) Massacres
1171 C.E. Blois Stake Burnings
1181 C.E. France Expulsion
1181 C.E. England Property Confiscation
1188 C.E. London & York Mob Attacks
1190 C.E. Norfolk Jews Burned Alive
1191 C.E. Bray (France) Jews Burned Alive
1195 C.E. France Property Confiscation
1209 C.E. Beziers Massacre
1212 C.E. Spain Rioting and blood bath against the Jews of Toledo.
1215 C.E. Rome Lateran Council of Rome decrees that Jews must wear the "badge of shame" in all Christian countries. Jews are denied all public sector employment, and are burdened with extra taxes.
1215 C.E. Toulouse (France) Mass Arrests
1218 C.E. England Jews Forced to Wear Badges
1231 C.E. Rome Inquisition Established
1236 C.E. France Forced Conversion/Massacre
1239 C.E. London Massacre & Property Confiscation
1240 C.E. Austria Property confiscation. Jews either imprisoned, converted, expelled, or burned.
1240 C.E. France Talmud Confiscated
1240 C.E. England Book Burning
1240 C.E. Spain Forced Conversion
1242 C.E. Paris Talmud Burned
1244 C.E. Oxford Mob Attacks
1255 C.E. England Blood libel in Lincoln results in the burning / torture of many Jews & public hangings.
1261 C.E. Canterbury Mob Attacks
1262 C.E. London Mob Attacks
1264 C.E. London Mob Attacks
1264 C.E. Germany Council of Vienna declares that all Jews must wear a "pointed dunce cap." Thousands murdered.
1267 C.E. Vienna Jews Forced to Wear Horned Hats
1270 C.E. Weissenberg, Magdeburg, Arnstadt, Coblenz, Singzig, and Erfurt
Jews Burned Alive
1270 C.E. England The libel of the "counterfeit coins" -
all Jewish men, women and children in England imprisoned. Hundreds are hung.
1276 C.E. Bavaria Expulsion
1278 C.E. Genoa (Spain) Mob Attacks
1279 C.E. Hungary & Poland The Council of Offon denies Jews the right to all civic positions. The Jews of Hungary & Poland are forced to wear the "red badge of shame."
1283 C.E. Mayence & Bacharach Mob Attacks
1285 C.E. Munich Jews Burned Alive
1290 C.E. England King Edward I issues an edict banishing all Jews from England. Many drowned.
1291 C.E. France The Jewish refugees from England are promptly expelled from France.
1292 C.E. Italy Forced conversions & expulsion of the Italian Jewish community.
1298 C.E. Germany The libel of the "Desecrated Host" is perpetrated against the Jews of Germany. Approximately 150 Jewish communities undergo forced conversion.
1298 C.E. Franconia, Bavaria & Austria Reindfel's Decree is propagated against the Jews of Franconia and Bavarai. Riots against these Jewish communities, as well as those in Austria, result in the massacre of 100,000 Jews over a six-month period.
1306 C.E. France Expulsion
1308 C.E. Strasbourg Jews Burned Alive
1320 C.E. Toulouse & Perpigon 120 Communities Massacred & Talmud Burned
1321 C.E. Teruel Public Executions
1328 C.E. Estella 5,000 Jews Slaughtered
1348 C.E. France & Spain Jews Burned Alive
1348 C.E. Switzerland Expulsion
1349 C.E. Worms, Strasbourg, Oppenheim, Mayence, Erfurt, Bavaria & Swabia Jews Burned Alive
1349 C.E. Heilbronn (Germany) Expulsion
1349 C.E. Hungary Expulsion
1354 C.E. Castile (Spain) 12,000 Jews Slaughtered
1368 C.E. Toledo 8,000 Jews Slaughtered
1370 C.E. Majorca., Penignon & Barcelona Mob Attack
1377 C.E. Huesca (Spain) Jews Burned Alive
1380 C.E. Paris Mob Attack
1384 C.E. Nordlingen Mass Murder
1388 C.E. Strasbourg Expulsion
1389 C.E. Prague Mass Slaughter & Book Burning
1391 C.E. Castille, Toledo, Madrid, Seville, Cordova, Cuenca & Barcelona
Forced Conversions & Mass Murder
1394 C.E. Germany Expulsion
1394 C.E. France Expulsion
1399 C.E. Posen (Poland) Jews Burned Alive
1400 C.E. Prague Stake Burnings
1407 C.E. Cracow Mob Attack
1415 C.E. Rome Talmud Confiscated
1422 C.E. Austria Jews Burned Alive
1422 C.E. Austria Expulsion
1424 C.E. Fribourg & Zurich Expulsion
1426 C.E. Cologne Expulsion
1431 C.E. Southern Germany Jews Burned Alive
1432 C.E. Savory Expulsion
1438 C.E. Mainz Expulsion
1439 C.E. Augsburg Expulsion
1449 C.E. Toledo Public Torture &. Burnings
1456 C.E. Bavaria Expulsion
1453 C.E. Franconia Expulsion
1453 C.E. Breslau Expulsion
1454 C.E. Wurzburg Expulsion
1463 C.E. Cracow Mob Attack
1473 C.E. Andalusia Mob Attack
1480 C.E. Venice Jews Burned Alive
1481 C.E. Seville Stake Burnings
1484 C.E. Cuidad Real, Guadalupe, Saragossa & Teruel
Jews Burned Alive
1485 C.E. Vincenza (Italy) Expulsion
1486 C.E. Toledo Jews Burned Alive
1488 C.E. Toledo Stake Burnings
1490 C.E. Toledo Public Executions
1491 C.E. Astorga Public Torture & Execution
1492 C.E. Spain Expulsion
1495 C.E. Lithuania Expulsion
1497 C.E. Portugal Expulsion
1499 C.E. Germany Expulsion
1506 C.E. Lisbon Mob Attack
1510 C.E. Berlin Public Torture & Execution
1514 C.E. Strasbourg Expulsion
1519 C.E. Regensburg Expulsion
1539 C.E. Cracow & Portugal Stake Burnings
1540 C.E. Naples Expulsion
1542 C.E. Bohemia Expulsion
1550 C.E. Genoa Expulsion
1551 C.E. Bavaria Expulsion
1555 C.E. Pesaro Expulsion
1556 C.E. Sokhachev (Poland) Public Torture & Execution
1559 C.E. Austria Expulsion
1561 C.E. Prague Expulsion
1567 C.E. Wurzburg Expulsion
1569 C.E. Papal States Expulsion
1571 C.E. Brandenburg Expulsion
1582 C.E. Netherlands Expulsion
1593 C.E. Brunswick Expulsion
1597 C.E. Cremona, Pavia & Lodi Expulsion
1614 C.E. Frankfort Expulsion
1615 C.E. Worms Expulsion
1619 C.E. Kiev Expulsion
1635 C.E. Vilna Mob Attack
1637 C.E. Cracow Public Torture & Execution
1647 C.E. Lisbon Jews Burned Alive
1648 C.E. Poland 1/3 of Jewry Slaughtered
1649 C.E. Ukraine Expulsion
1649 C.E. Hamburg Expulsion
1652 C.E. Lisbon Stake Burnings
1654 C.E. Little Russia Expulsion
1656 C.E. Lithuania Expulsion
1660 C.E. Seville Jews Burned Alive
1663 C.E Cracow Public Torture &. Execution
1664 C.E. Lemberg Mob Attack
1669 C.E. Oran (North Africa) Expulsion
1670 C.E. Vienna Expulsion
1671 C.E. Minsk Mob Attacks
1681 C.E. Vilna Mob Attacks
1682 C.E. Cracow Mob Attacks
1687 C.E. Posen Mob Attacks
1712 C.E. Sandomir Expulsion
1727 C.E. Russia Expulsion
1738 C.E. Wurtemburg Expulsion
1740 C.E. Liule Russia Expulsion
1744 C.E Bohemia Expulsion
1744 C.E. Livonia Expulsion
1745 C.E. Moravia Expulsion
1753 C.E. Kovad (Lithuania) Expulsion
1757 C.E. Kamenetz Talmud Burning
1761 C.E. Bordeaux Expulsion
1768 C.E. Kiev 3,000 Jews Slaughtered
1772 C.E. Russia Expulsion
1775 C.E. Warsaw Expulsion
1789 C.E. Alsace Expulsion
1801 C.E. Bucharest Mob Attack
1804 C.E. Russian Villages Expulsion
1808 C.E. Russian Countryside Expulsion
1815 C.E. Lubeck & Bremen Expulsion
1820 C.E. Bremes Expulsion
1843 C.E. Austria & Prussia Expulsion
1850 C.E. New York City 500 People, Led by Police, Attacked & Wrecked Jewish Synagogue
1862 C.E. Area under General Grant's Jurisdiction in the United States Expulsion
1866 C.E Galatz (Romania) Expulsion
1871 C.E. Odena Mob Attack
1887 C.E. Slovakia Mob Attacks
1897 C.E. Kantakuzenka (Russia) Mob Attacks
1898 C.E. Rennes (France) Mob Attack
1899 C.E. Nicholayev Mob Attack
1900 C.E. Konitz (Prussia) Mob Attack
1902 C.E. Poland Widespread Pogroms
1904 C.E. Manchuria, Kiev & Volhynia Widespread Pogroms
1905 C.E. Zhitomir (Yolhynia) Mob Attacks
1919 C.E Bavaria Expulsion
1915 C.E. Georgia (U.S.A.) Leo Frank Lynched
1919 C.E. Prague Wide Spread Pogroms
1920 C.E. Munich & Breslau Mob Attacks
1922 C.E. Boston, MA Lawrence Lowell, President of Harvard, calls for Quota Restrictions on Jewish Admission
1926 C.E. Uzbekistan Pogrom
1928 C.E. Hungary Widespread Anti-Semitic Riots on University Campuses
1929 C.E. Lemberg (Poland) Mob Attacks
1930 C.E. Berlin Mob Attack
1933 C.E. Bucharest Mob Attacks
1938-45 C.E. Europe Holocaust

Jewish persecution source:
P.E. Grosser & E.G. Halperin, Anti-Semitism: Causes and Effects, New York: Philosophical Library, 1978
END OF POST.

The Blood on Our Hands is the Blood of the Land: On Misogyny, Misopedia, Racism, Homophobia, Anti-Semitism, and Misogeoia

[This river of blood image is from here.]

My hands have blood on them, no matter how many times I wash them. The blood is from the Earth, and its inhabitants, human and nonhuman.

What does it mean to "hate the Earth"? Do heterosexual male batterers of women really hate women? Do child molesters love or hate children (are they pedophilic or misopedic)?

In conversation, I came across a critique of Derrick Jensen's book Endgame (vol. 1), which I strongly recommend reading, along with Derrick's other books, including vol. 2 of Endgame. The critic said they did not really believe people "hate the Earth" as Derrick claims.

This brought to mind many related matters: hatred of people of color by whites, hatred of women by men, hatred of children by adults, and hatred of the Earth by "civilised" humans.

What does it mean to "hate the Earth"? Is gross negligence, callous disregard, and active destruction the same thing as hatred?

A radical feminist friend of mine once pointed out how whites don't have to "hate" people of color, and she, an African American woman, doubts a lot of white folks do. She argues that "hatred" may be a requirement for some whites to feel superior to and in great opposition with people of color, but many whites are simply ignorant and arrogant, living out entitlements and privileges that come with being perceived and treated as a white person in a context in which people of color are treated as lesser-than or subordinate to whites. These whites may feel nothing in particular for people of color. Some liberal whites may say they feel "love" for "all people" claiming they are "color-blind". Ableist language problem aside, I am reminded of something I recently read on Heart's blog by lesbian feminist Pat Parker. Below are the first two lines of her poem "For the White Person Who Wants to Know How to Be My Friend".

The first thing you do is to forget that i’m Black.
Second, you must never forget that i’m Black.

Exactly. I feel the same way about being a white Jew, and a white gay man.

Don't pretend I'm not raced, don't pretend I don't have a minority ethnicity that has been under attack for millennia, don't pretend anti-Semitism and heterosexism don't impact me negatively every day of my life: each one does. Don't pretend white and gender privilege don't benefit me every day of my life: they do.

And skip all your assumptions about what it means to be a white Jew and a white gay man when approaching me with your projected version about who I am. Please. Along with most Indigenous and some non-Indigenous peoples, Jews have a very long history of persecution, and worse,; this history is part of what I carry with me; this awareness is in me, and doesn't disappear whenever someone stupid white Gentile tells a "Jew joke". Some of this history is vague in my mind. Some aspects of this history are mostly unknown to me. But what is bone-clear is the knowledge that my people, Jews of all colors, have been persecuted, and worse, for hundreds and thousands of years.

The impact of heterosexism on queer folks is something I have come to realise is simply not fully comprehensible to non-queer people, in much the same way I cannot really know what it is to be a heterosexual woman. Every incident of heterosexism (and heterosexual display that is not violent) that appears loving, is not an act of love to me. It is an act of invisibilisation and marginalisation of my people, queer folks.

This is not to say that I believe women who identify as heterosexual, and who may also practice heterosexuality (out of obligation, law, custom, compulsory requirement, threat of force, desire, or choice) are not oppressed due to sexual orientation--and gender. I believe they are. And I have had long conversations with a lesbian woman whose grandparents were American Indian and white, who grew up in poverty, about the degree to which heterosexual women have "privilege" when they are a population so intimately and privately at risk of daily interpersonal denigration and violence due to being "partnered" with men as their husbands and boyfriends. She was the first person to get me to think very seriously about the "privilege" of being a heterosexual woman. This is not to say that lesbophobia is not also harmful and deadly. I have learned from other lesbian feminist friends just how socially invisibilised and marginalised lesbians are, including by many heterosexual men's, pimps', and prostitutors' absurd assumptions, too often pornographically depicted or misogynistically discussed, of what it is to be a lesbian. Boys, please. Shut the fuck up, and tear of that shit, and for those of you with savvy computer hacking skills, take down those stupid sites.

Did all the older males who sexually abused me hate me? Did the man who sexually assaulted me hate me?

I think the answer is yes and no. In a piece I wrote here a while ago about misopedia, I argued that the term for child molester ought not be "pedophile" as that term means "lover of children" and whatever the man who sexually assaulted me did, "love" was not a part of it.

Do men hate women?

I think when women call men misogynistic, and the men doth protest too much, it is because we men don't necessarily experience ourselves as actively hating women, the way some of us hate, say, a particular "enemy" sports team and its fans. I'm not a man who is into male team sports--in any way, so I'm just recalling here how some (not all) heterosexual men (and many women) in and outside of my family have expressed rage, disgust, or disappointment when "their" team loses a crucial point or an important game against "that other team".

But the point--and this is one point that oppressors seem to actively wipe clean out of our minds every time we sleep--is that the experience of oppression, including whether it is experienced as hate, is for the oppressed to name, not the oppressor. We've heard it a nauseating and lethal number of times that the damned compulsive battering straight male bastard "loves" her and won't ever do it again. (Wrong.) We know that some men who sexually assault dozens to hundreds of children claim either to truly, deep down, love children, or to identify with them and believe they are engaging in "peer" relationships. (Um, sorry. No you're not. Ever.)

When we understand it in terms of its individual and social impact to the members of the class who are treated in these and other atrocious ways the battery of women by men is virulent misogyny, and the sexual assault of children is misopedia (and disproportionately is also direct misogyny).

Which brings me back to the Earth. The reader of D. Jensen was arguing something that I think misses the point. That reader may not experience what they feel for "the Earth" as hatred. But if they believe it exists for "civilised" humans to appreciate, and if those of us who are "civilised" humans believe we have dominion over the Earth, and if we trash the place, "litterally", in what sense is such behavior "loving"?

The issue, getting back to what my friend said about whites, is that we white folks can feel any number of things for people of color--whether targeting one or more oppressed ethnic groups at a time, or on a more individual scale. Did Miss Daisy Werthan "hate" her driver, Mr. Hoke Colburn? (Did she ever address him as "Mr. Colburn"? Was he ever not her employee? Did he really have the economic option of saying "Thanks, but no thanks, Miss Daisy: I'm done being your driver, but we can be friends if you want." Did (and do) Black and Brown women who are caring for white folks' children really have the option of saying, "You know what? You raise your own brats. I'm going home to take care of my own children, or help my neighbor do the same."

What did Howard K. Stern feel for Anna Nicole Smith? What does Chris Brown feel for Rihanna? Of course as humans, and perhaps as mammals too, we are capable of feeling a great many things, in succession or even simultaneously, which is brings us to the problem of liberal individualism.

The issue at hand, for those of us who are radical activists, is not exactly what individuals feel, at any given moment, for those we oppress. It is what the cumulative impact is of what we do collectively and individually, regardless of what we feel. This is why, for me, I don't particularly give a shit if some husband says he "loves" his wife, sometimes to death. I do care if he kills her. I don't care if some emotionally/psychologically child-like adult only finds comfort by fondling children. What oppressors feel doesn't change what the actions do, to the class of people for sure, and also, often enough, for the individual survivor or victim.

If what we do is harmful and oppressive, destructive and subordinating, toxic and lethal, then those so harmed get to call that "hate", in my view, without being challenged by the oppressors as to "the legitimacy of that truth claim". Sure, some child molesters really do "love" their victims, as do some battering husbands. People are complicated; we feel lots of things that are often in paradoxical conflict with one another. But social reality isn't SO complicated that we can postmodernise our way out of seeing structural, systemic harm for what it is because of what it does, tangibly.

If it is the case that ever since "civilised" humans have been on the Earth, the Earth has been in a slow or rapid state of disease and dying, then we who call ourselves civilised are not "loving" the Earth. We're killing it. There's a difference.

If men, collectively--while some do actually love women-as-humans (at least allegedly)--are also degrading and exploiting women in selfish, narcissistic, and callous ways, that is "hateful" not "loving", if "felt" or understood in terms of the harm done.

If wealthy whites are living well at the expense of poor people of color, if the Global North is grotesquely exploiting the Global South, if the West is colonising the East, that's not love or respect, that's hate and derision.

This is why I consider any white Christian missionary to be doing "the Devil's work". There's nothing even close to "Jesus's love" going down when one is part of a group committing cultural/spiritual genocide--no matter which recorded interpretation or misinterpretation is being referred to about how he loved others. When other white EFL folks (English as a First Language) tell me of their plans to go to places where people of color live who don't speak English, in order to teach them English, I wonder if they are aware they are, among other things, practicing genocide. I'll often raise this as a probability, which is usually met with a "you're over-reacting again*" attitude on the part of the young white person who thinks this'll be a great way to earn money, travel, and do "good". (*Can one actually "over-react" to witnessing genocide? Not this Jew.)

Yes, some of us really do "love trees" (and there are some I have loved, down to touching them gently and saying hello, to counting the rings of the stump after a hurricane force wind blew a 60 year old spruce over, a spruce I had understood as my neighbor. And the way I live, in a suburban environment, is also simultaneously wiping the Earth clear of rain forests, and the plants, nonhuman animals, and human beings who once populated the areas free of the misogeoic, misopedic, misogynistic, anti-gay and lesbian, and anti-Jewish Western cultural imperialism, exploitation, and globalisation.

R-E-S-P-E-C-T: just a little bit, or just a lot

Happy Birthday to two women who have been working for at least a little bit of respect for womankind for several decades, Aretha Franklin and Gloria Steinem:
[Photo of Aretha Franklin, found here.]

Please scroll down a bit on this related web page for biographical information about her, as well as her discography.

[Above: Aretha Franklin, "Respect"]

Here, [c]ommentator Evelyn C. White describes the life-affirming effect Aretha Franklin's powerful anthem, Respect, had on her and other young black women growing up in the turbulent 1960s. Respect is one of NPR's 100 Most Important American Musical Works of the 20th Century.


[Gloria Steinem and Dorothy Pitman Hughes, circa 1970. Photograph by Dan Wynn]

"For the four or five years surrounding the birth of Ms., I was traveling and speaking as a team with a black feminist partner: first Dorothy Pitman Hughes, a child-care pioneer, then lawyer Florynce Kennedy, and finally activist Margaret Sloan. By speaking together at hundreds of public meetings, we hoped to widen a public image of the women's movement created largely by its first homegrown media event, The Feminine Mystique.... Despite the many early reformist virtues of The Feminine Mystique, it had managed to appear at the height of the civil rights movement with almost no reference to black women or other women of color. It was most relevant to the problems of the white well-educated suburban homemakers who were standing by their kitchen sinks justifiably wondering if there weren't 'more to life than this.' As a result, white-middle-class movement had become the catch phrase of journalists describing feminism in the United States..., and divisions among women were still deep."
Gloria Steinem, Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions (1983), pp. 5-6

See this autobiographical essay by Gloria Steinem, for more of herstory.
END OF POST.

Celie's Revenge on "Feminist" Men

[The image above, of a radical Muslim feminist woman, was found here.]

(See also, this post: *here*)

What follows is by a non-religious and aetheist radical feminist.

"It's so convenient and the very epitome of privilege to only hear and consider what you want to hear and consider: that which reinforces your privilege. All else is put on mute." -- Celie's Revenge

Here is some of the latest radical feminist writing by Celie's Revenge, which she welcome me to share here. This was originally written in response to a discussion at a social networking site about the issue of whether there is, really, such as thing as a "feminist" man. I fully concur with Celie, that while "in theory" there could be such men, "in reality" we don't exist. And to those who name John Stoltenberg, or even me, as "examples" I'd say we're not examples. And even if we were, "two" does not a phenomenon make. Sorry. When there are several hundred, or thousand, we can all point to and say, "YES, he's been solidly in support of feminism and feminist issues without also being a misogynist jerk, a rapist, a sexual exploiter of young people, among other things that are anti-feminist practices", THEN we might be able to say "Yes, there is such a thing as a Feminist Man". I don't believe in concepts being presented as socially present if I and every radical feminist I know hasn't witnessed the reality, which necessarily means "more than two".

With Friends Like These or The Myth of Feminist Men
by Celie's Revenge, posted to a social networking site on March 22, 2009

The reasons I don't believe men can be feminist:

1) I'm so glad you've had wonderful experiences with dudes who call themselves feminist. I have not. Just the opposite in fact. It’s gotten to the point where if meet a dude who calls himself feminist I run for the hills. If it's has gotten that far--personally or politically, we’re through romantically or even as allies. Seriously. I just don’t trust feminist men. I do love and respect the work of many men who are doing anti-sexism work but I’ve never met them personally; these guys are writers or filmmakers--almost mythic like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny…LOL. They exist to me in a land far, far away….but the actually feminist men I meet and deal with in the non-virtual world have all, without exception, been pricks. Sorry.

2) Feminist men are self-righteous. Look at how your friend reacted? Even a hint a criticism causes them to get defensive and self-righteous and hostile to the point of attacking a woman personally AND asking her to give HIM an apology? LOL. This is a feminist male ally who has TRULY interrogated his male privilege? Not in my book! Notice how your friend called me a bigot because I dare critique his views on BDSM as being sexist? What social or structural power do I as a black woman have over men when I express an opinion or perception about them as sexist? But I’m a bigot? Anyways, it’s always interesting how the oppressor uses the language of the oppressed against them to claim MEN are being victimized by WOMEN when they are “falsely” accused of sexism. As if being "falsely" accused of sexism is ever nearly as bad being the victim of sexism?

3) The feminist men I’ve encountered often times try to co-op feminism. I actually want to do a paper on the co-optation of Black feminist theory by the likes of Michael Eric Dyson and others who call themselves feminist men. They co-opt and DE-FANG feminism. They also try to make feminism into “humanism” by taking the focus off women. Yes, liberal women often do this too but it’s particularly galling when men try to do it!

4) Feminist men try to tell feminist women who the “good” feminists are. And these good feminists are rarely the radical ones, but are the ones that offer a user-friendly, male-rewarding agenda that coddles men and gives them equal standing in a movement women created and work so hard to keep alive.

5) Feminist men can use being feminist to excuse their sexism. Feminist men still don’t know how to listen to women. It’s the feminist men who tell me they love listening to women even as they cut me off, assume to know what I’m saying before I finish, and talk the most in an effort to impress me with the feminism. Feminist men are often just as sexist as non-feminist men but they can use the intellectual pretense of embracing feminism to justify their sexism and misogyny. How many times have I called a feminist dude out on his sexism only to hear him bark back, “Do you know how much work I do on behalf of women?!?” (I've yet to meet a "feminist" man who thanks ME for all the work I'VE done on behalf of women!) Feminist men rarely acknowledge that they still have male privilege whether they want it or not. So by they will be heard above women, will get more visibility and understanding than women among other perks when they call themselves feminist.

Feminist men want to be THANKED or applauded for being feminist as if doing right by women should be rewarded, rather than status quo behavior that is completely unremarkable. Feminist men do not respect women’s anger or women leadership or women’s space anymore than non-feminist men. Feminist men often use calling themselves feminist to get women to let down their guard, trust them, and then we regret it later because we are emotionally, verbally, or even physically assaulted by men we would normally not trust. And one of my favorite feminist male tactics is to get the stamp of approval from one or two very “important” feminists and then use that to silence critiques of their sexism from all other feminists. It’s like feminist men create a resume and get reference from women they only show one side to and then all other women are expected to trust and believe in their good intentions and this makes them immune to any accusation of sexism.

To be fair, yes, I have met men who are doing amazing work on behalf of women and towards ending patriarchy. But are they feminist men? Or are they just decent men? Much less rare than a dude calling himself a feminist is a just, good man doing the right thing by women and working towards the awe inspiring goal which is for men to want for women what they receive by "virtue" of being born male.

So no, I don’t believe men can be feminist. It’s a nice gesture, but as the saying goes: "With friends like these……."

END OF POST. Comments below:

Anonymous said...

I've never met any men that I would call feminist. Men think they are feminists, but this is their own self-evaluation. Jennifer's comment that they seem like the easter bunny or Santa Claus is quite accurate, or indie filmakers on Sundance. It seems that men pretend to be feminists for suspect reasons. And they don't seem to know that if a woman says they are being sexist, that the woman's opinion is actually true. Men can organize on their own to end porn, prostituion and violence against women, and they should be doing this. I'd rather work in all women's groups on projects of collective interest. It is a waste of time to engage men, they need to engage each other and let the real feminists work on women's revolution.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009 12:58:00 AM EDT  

 

Valerie said...

I think the label is the problem. The dudes I have met who want to tell me about how empowering it would be if I hit them before I let them fuck me tend to identify proudly as feminists every ten seconds, but random decent guys who haven't bothered to think up swanky a label for themselves don't. I have mixed feelings about saying this on your blog, as you seem pretty solid.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009 9:42:00 AM EDT