29 July 2010 ECD IMPORTANT UPDATE:
I have seen excerpts from the following discussion on other websites, never shown in context. And, some of my comments below are misleading and not representative of my own personally and politically held views, and so I want to clarify where I stand on a few matters that are discussed in the comments section. I apologise for any confusion on this matter that I may have inadvertantly contributed to.
Here is where I stand:
1. I am opposed to any and all forms of genocide, including any that only targets men.
2. I do not endorse or support an effort to destroy 90% of men, or 80%, or any percent. Taken out of context, and also due to my own sloppy writing, something I said in response to someone could be wrongly interpreted to imply that I do endorse this.
3. I support people knowing how to defend themselves and get out of violent interpersonal situations and relationships, preferably without using lethal force.
4. I am basically a pacifist, and do not advocate the use of lethal force as a means of achieving peace, justice, or liberation for oppressed people.
5. I don't believe it is my place to tell women how best to defend themselves against male violence against women.
6. I WILL NOT accept comments, and WILL NOT POST ANY, that call for or advocate for men or women or transgender or intersex or intergender people being killed en masse, or being mass murdered, or being systematically slaughtered.
I hope that clears up some of what might be seen as confusing in the comments section below.
[4 November 2009 ECD update: I redid the link to the PDF file/document titled "Everyday Male Chauvinism" and so hopefully now it works when you click on it. I've put it in a new post, so as to give Johnetta Cole and company their own space!!!]
PLEASE NOTE: I took down the gross video made by two misogynistic white men, with thanks to Jennifer Drew for giving me some background information on who made it. In its place, I put the following video, the trailer to a film that all men need to see, called NO! The Rape Documentary:
For more on this film, please go to notherapedocumentary.org/.
END OF POST.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
UPDATED POST: I, Julian Real, do not support or advocate any form of genocide against men, or mass murder of men, including any percent of all men being systematically killed (details at the top of this post): No! means no. Something for Runaway1956 and other Liberal to Conservative Men who claim to love and respect the women they are with
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe one of the authors of this piece of misogyny masquerading as 'entertainment' is Harry Enfield, a UK commedian who specialises in alternative comedy.
ReplyDeleteFor a while Enfield had his own comedy show and this is where I believe the youtube video originates from. Nevertheless, this piece of garbage masquerading as 'humour' is in fact, what many men believe but commonly do not openly admit. Instead, such men engage in ignoring women's voices or drown them out by talking at them.
Any criticism of this blatant misogyny is commonly dismissed as 'women whining because we cannot supposedly understand humour!' Given we all supposedly live in a post-feminist world it has become acceptable for many male comedians to openly show their contempt and dismissal of women, whilst claiming 'yes I know it is not politically correct but what I am saying is okay because everyone now knows women have achieved full human status. Therefore this type of 'humour' is harmless because no one will believe it to be true. Clever is it not? On the one hand claiming to accept women should not be the target of men's jokes but simultaneously promoting misogyny.
Thanks so much, Jennifer, for filling me in on the background of one of the fools who made it.
ReplyDeleteI questioned whether I should even have posted it and am strongly considering taking it down.
In fact, I will.
It's just reprehensible, and that exact same phenomenon is wildly popular here as well. "Misogyny" in humour among men is "in" again. Not that it was ever out, exactly, but it's just like you say: men assume they can get away with it (again) now that we've clearly established that we, as a society, respect women. NOT.
I so appreciate your commentary and analysis.
Bye bye misogynistic video.
The video was excellent and to the point. We need to have these kinds of shows all over TV, and one thing that I thought would really help would be to train all girls in karate. Teaching girls to take out harassing boys on the play ground would be an excellent way to even up the war on girls and women.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what all those boys and men are thinking now as they sit in jail awaiting trial for their gang rape of that girl?
When I tried the link on "every day male chauvanism" it wouldn't connect. Did anyone else have this problem?
It's always interesting when I put a stop to male joking. They almost always act surprised that they have even insulted me. If it is a women controlled space, they do some fast back peddling. They shut up, and that's a victory.
Right now, men know how to shut up when I walk in the room. They are just as deadly as ever, but at least the jokes stop. Step one, shut them up, step two, teach the girls to fight back hard, step three execute all rapists, step four reduce the male worldwide population to say 10%. Maybe then we'd have peace in the world.
Hi Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI wish there was a way to have you be distinguished from all the other "anonymous" commenters here. Can we have a made up blog name for you? Whatever name you would like that in no way alludes to your own name, if you are seeking that level of anonymity (and I don't blame you one bit!!!!!!!)
So in your comments it could start with "This is [your made up name]. And then go on with the comment. Let me know if there are ways to make that work. There are so many asshole male "anonymous" commenters that I wouldn't want any of them to be confused with you.
The video was excellent and to the point. We need to have these kinds of shows all over TV, and one thing that I thought would really help would be to train all girls in karate. Teaching girls to take out harassing boys on the play ground would be an excellent way to even up the war on girls and women.
I agree about the video. The whole matter of girls' and women's self-defence classes is so controversial, in my view, but I'm sure open to discussing it and we could have a new post to do so!!!
Let me know if you'd like that. And then I'll reply more about girls' and women's karate classes. (I have organised this sort of thing with young women before, and so am going on what I learned from that experience, and their experiences.)
I wonder what all those boys and men are thinking now as they sit in jail awaiting trial for their gang rape of that girl?
I hope they are realising how badly they harmed someone, how grotesquely, how cruelly, and how they now can contemplate lives in jail where THEY will have to worry about being raped, if they are young men.
When I tried the link on "every day male chauvanism" it wouldn't connect. Did anyone else have this problem?
Thanks for letting me know, Anonymous!! I'll double check it and try and resolve it.
It's always interesting when I put a stop to male joking. They almost always act surprised that they have even insulted me. If it is a women controlled space, they do some fast back peddling. They shut up, and that's a victory.
This is a whole other discussion thread! Can I make this a post too?? I've had so much experience with this, and for me it's resulted in me not being invited anywhere, so I won't "ruin" a good time being had by the boys.
Right now, men know how to shut up when I walk in the room. They are just as deadly as ever, but at least the jokes stop. Step one, shut them up, step two, teach the girls to fight back hard, step three execute all rapists, step four reduce the male worldwide population to say 10%. Maybe then we'd have peace in the world.
I'm all for it, as long as that 90% isn't comprised of people who are facing genocide by whites, unless agreed upon by the women of that community, society, or nation.
Wait, seriously Julian? You are "all for" wiping out 90% of the men on the planet? Do you expect to be among those killed?
ReplyDelete90 percent. you son of a bitch. u first.
ReplyDeleteI'll have to think up some internet name, however, no man could possibly write the way I do.
ReplyDeleteMen can't duplicate a radical feminist argument ever. It's too over their heads. That said, I'll come up with something.
The reason I mentioned karate (as an example-there are other martial arts) was an interesting thing that happened with a relative. One of my relatives was raped by some guy when she was a freshman in college, and this one event made her fearful for the rest of her life. She died young, refused to tell me who'd done it, because she knew I'd hunt the guy down. I had a feeling I knew who it was...
Anyway, her brother had a daughter many years later, and at a young age, the daughter became a black belt in karate. The brother wanted to make sure that his own daughter would be able to take out any man on the planet should the need arise. I found it interesting how that one rape so long ago, led to another man teaching his daughter how to kill men. He was very matter of fact about all of this, and didn't even consciously link the rape and his daughter, interestingly enough. Men can forget anything sometimes, it's how they can live with themselves knowing what they know about men in general.
I have always been a strong advocate of girls beating the heck out of boys, and becoming brutal in their self-defense over ANY insult whatsoever. A boy calls a girl a b----, she kicks him in the head. Another boy pinches her butt, she throws him down a flight of stairs and stomps on him. Another boy tries a rape, and the girl kicks him in the back paralyzing him for life...no walking again ever...pretty good punishment I think.
I can't imagine why teaching girls to beat up boys and defend themselves would ever be met with objections. Never train boys in any fighting sport or martial arts, never teach men how to use guns, and never allow men to own weapons of any kind. Women could carry loaded guns, or knives or whatever, and all men would be made aware that women were always armed.
How would the world change then?
Early in the feminist movement, women were teaching self-defense classes everywhere. We have to get back to basics I guess.
I think this might be off topic...
I have always said that each group of women in every culture of the world decides how to silence it's own male population. Some women would cut men's tongues out, until they learned manners, some would publically chop their heads off, others would put them in prison... no culture would dicatate the choices of another women's culture.
ReplyDeleteI believe each race or culture of women has to determine its own rules for the end of male rule.
I'm very sure I could learn a lot from the revolution Baznian women would lead, for example. Or Serbian women. And what if Saudi women decided to kill every man in that kingdom overnight, and be the oil brokers of the world. They would cut of the oil supply until all the other countries sent women representatives to do the deals.
Good movie topics, any Indie film makers out there?
To Chris,
ReplyDeleteYou wrote:
Wait, seriously Julian? You are "all for" wiping out 90% of the men on the planet? Do you expect to be among those killed?
This is where people's histeria really kicks into high gear.
Chris, you get that genocide and rape-as-a-systematic-practice of subordinating and terrorising and violating women is happening RIGHT NOW, yes?
So WTF difference does it make WHAT I think? What are YOU doing to END the genocides and rapes? Please answer in great detail.
And, should the time come for women to take enough power that they CAN kill 90% of men, I'll answer your question at that time, ok? Check back in with me when that power shift has occurred.
To the Anonymous who wrote 90 percent. you son of a b*tch. u first.
ReplyDeleteDo you have any relation to something called REALITY? If so, you might note that MEN hold the power to kill women systematically (and do so), not the other way around. Women are raped systematically, not the other way around. Women are battered (BEATEN UP) systematically by men, not the other way around. Women are systematically sold into sexual slavery or are "just" pimped by men and procured by men, systematically, not the other way around. Misogynistic atrocities of all sorts are managed and maintained in male supremacist societies with men at the helm, with men in charge of all major institutions. There are no female supremacist societies.
You know that, right? OK, so now that you're in reality...
Why are your knickers all in a bunch because of a little exchange between two people on a blog? Is THAT what REALLY upsets you, of all the things to be upset about and go out of your way to comment about?
What are YOU doing to END rape and genocide.
I await your answer. And please give me all the details of your daily work to do so.
As for "u first"... I insist: After you.
In response to the female Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI'll have to think up some internet name, however, no man could possibly write the way I do.
I have come to realise that, tho at first was suspicious that you might be a male plant, taking positions like "All men are rapists" just to make it seem like that's what radical feminists believe. For the record, you are the only woman I've ever met in my life who thinks so. But I've met LOTS of men who think rape will never end and is inevitable. Funny how MRAs don't go after them for making men look bad.
[...]
The reason I mentioned karate [...] She died young, refused to tell me who'd done it, because she knew I'd hunt the guy down. I had a feeling I knew who it was...
I find it so refreshing when you speak about hunting men down. As long as you are totally careful, and cannot get seriously injured.
Anyway, her brother had a daughter many years later, and at a young age, the daughter became a black belt in karate. [...]
I have a male friend, heterosexual, American Indian, passes as white, who was raped at age two until the age of four by an older white boy.
He is the primary parent to his and his female partner's daughter, who is still young. They play dolls and he places two male dolls next to one another, like seated together, and let's her know they are a romantic couple. He does the same with two female dolls. He hopes his daughter grows up to be a lesbian (but will do his best to accept whatever she turns out to be), and is very worried about what some asshole man who dates her might try and do. I'm sure he will make sure she is well trained in martial arts.
My hesitancy about "the martial arts approach to deal with rapists" is two-fold:
--It puts all the responsibility on girls and women to have to defend themselves, not on men to stop rapists from raping.
--I believe it has been shown that even when girls and women learn these techniques, when it comes to rape from someone known and loved, such techniques prove not to be useful. Because many martial arts are not really created to deal with "intimate partner" rape. They are developed as means of fending off attacks. Many rapists don't "attack", the snuggle and manipulate women into doing things the women would rather not do. They are "lovingly" "pleadingly" coercive. They are dealing with women who have been drugged to unconsciousness, or who are too drunk to defend themselves even by saying no, or are dealing with women who are dissociated. I've heard this from many women.
As the Wicked Witch of the West said, "Something with poison in it!" and "Do what you like with the others, but keep the girl alive."
I get that the idea of martial arts might be viewed as women having all the responsibility for defending themselves, and for men not ending rape.
ReplyDeleteThere is a certain logic to that belief, but unfortunately, I cynically believe that men won't end rape, don't care about it, and are so filled with porn Internet conditioning now, that they actually create toxic environments now...mentally.
So the thing is, men aren't going to stop raping women ever in the foreseable future.
It's why I want the moral agency and the power of war. I told myself that I'll just kill them if push comes to shove. It's a simple thought, but one that gives me a certain mental power in the world.
I think women have to consider the thought that they will have to go to war with men, that they will have to end their association with all men until men change, and if they don't change, women have to say to themselves, time's up.
I'm not worried about male public opinion, have no desire to argue with them. To me, they no longer exist as a human or intelligent category, they have sunk to nothing, and continue to go down that road. Of course MRAs don't even know how bad they make men look, men don't care about their reputations at all. They simply want women to be their slaves.
Perhaps men have always been evil or degraded, it's just with modern technology they are revealing more of their slimy inner life than ever before in world history. They themselves I think want women to put a stop to them.
Hi V,
ReplyDelete(Lovin' the name!)
See the latest post made on Nov. 5th.
The MRAs are all histerical about our conversation, making threats and other CRAP.
As if they don't have anything better to do with their time.
Hey, I don't have to read MRA websites or blogs, because I know all men are guilty and think this of women in advance. It is these men who are unaccustomed to women hating them back, that is what is new under the sun.
ReplyDeleteWhen women attack men openly, watch them scream. What did they expect, that I'd just sit there while they made a sexist comment! No, there is pure joy in bashing men and fighting back every day in every way. Make my day Mr. Man!
Chris, you get that genocide and rape-as-a-systematic-practice of subordinating and terrorising and violating women is happening RIGHT NOW, yes?
ReplyDeleteYes, I'm quite aware of that. I don't think it justifies even more killing, though.
So WTF difference does it make WHAT I think? What are YOU doing to END the genocides and rapes? Please answer in great detail.
First of all, let me see if I understand what you're trying to say: If I'm not doing everything possible to stop genocide and rape, then I have no business asking why you advocate the murder of billions of people yourself?
Hmm.
What if I told you that I'm a white man who doesn't rape or kill anyone? Imagine if every man did only that? It would completely eradicate genocide and rape. If all I did was my one small part to make that happen, would that be enough?
What if I told you that I'm a white woman who has spent 4 of the last 5 years in Afghanistan as a teacher, trying to educate the women there, so they'll have options that don't involve being basically owned by a man. Would that be enough?
Maybe not. Maybe I should have done it for 5 of 5 - in Sudan.
What if I'm an Ojibwe man who doesn't have any resources to do much, but I spend as much time on the internet here at the library, trying to stop hate from spreading.
Maybe all I'm doing is talking to you. Reminding you that you aren't the first person in history to say, "If we just killed all of the X, there would finally be peace".
But where is that peace? Every genocide is begun with this same thought. Why do people keep falling for this flawed argument? Why do you?
And, should the time come for women to take enough power that they CAN kill 90% of men, I'll answer your question at that time, ok? Check back in with me when that power shift has occurred.
It'll be too late then. You'll be dead. The revolution will have turned again, and yet nothing fundamental will have changed.
Besides, we're not talking about women's power to kill men. We're talking about your desire to kill men. And, as a man, you have plenty of power, right?
Julian, you should check out The Myth of Male Power. It's an interview with a former Board Member of N.O.W. It's kinda long (that just links to the first part of the video), but it's worth it.
ReplyDeleteHi Chris,
ReplyDeleteI find your responses almost hopelessly liberal. That is not to say they don't have merit. It is to say that even the Dalai Lama has realised his preaching non-violence only is a failed message. That slaughter of Tibetan people, the mass rape of Tibetan women before being slaughtered, cannot HUMANELY be met with only non-violence.
The Buddha spoke of times when killing would be necessary. I encourage you to read Pacifism as Pathology by Ward Churchill.
[...] I don't think it justifies even more killing, though.
Do you believe in using violence in self-defence? For example, if someone were about to kill a loved one, would you use force to stop them, including deadly force, if it came to that? Because the statement you make is abstract. It doesn't have a location in the actual world of suffering, for me, at least. It is "dislocated" so to speak. It assumes that "the way things are" are, in any sense, tolerable. I think they are not tolerable, not even a little bit. More rapes today, more murders of women, more girls sold into sexual slavery to suck adult white men's penises. It is not acceptable to argue about whether violence should or shouldn't be used, in my opinion. Kill the fuckers. Shoot to death the men who rape girls... and women. Or find other ways to stop them from doing it. I welcome you proposing what you think will work to end rape. Not to help a few people, which hopefully we all do in the course of our lives. But to END RAPE.
First of all, let me see if I understand what you're trying to say: If I'm not doing everything possible to stop genocide and rape, then I have no business asking why you advocate the murder of billions of people yourself?
ReplyDeleteNo, Chris. I'm not saying that at all, not even a little bit. That you take my blog to be saying that to you is interesting to me, though. It tells me something. And we might want to discuss that something in more depth. But no, that's not at all what I'm saying. I don't know you, Chris. I don't know your gender, your race, your history, your story, your location, your class background or anything else about you. I'm in no position to tell YOU to do anything at all. I can tell what I think needs to be done. And you can decide if you want to participate in doing it. And you can decide not to participate. And that, of course, is your right and your responsibility, to be true to what you know and to your own values.
What if I told you that I'm a white man who doesn't rape or kill anyone? Imagine if every man did only that?
And what time is that happening? I'll set my alarm clock. Seriously, I don't mean to be flippant towards you, Chris. But I find most of what people have to say is designed to stop people from imagining what has to happen to end genocide and gynocide. In WWII, many men from many countries shot and killed Nazis in Europe. Do you think that was "wrong to do"? Should each individual have just decided to not harm a Jew, or a homosexual, and call it a day? I mean this to be a serious question.
It would completely eradicate genocide and rape.
ReplyDeleteIt would, if it happened. And there's absolutely no reason in this world to think every man will make choice, because men are raised to rape, Chris. They are raised to beat women. Misogyny is like water we all drink. There's no way around it. So you advocating that all men just stop doing violence to any woman around them, is, well, just as plausible (to me) as 90% of men disappearing off the face of the Earth through violent means by women.
If all I did was my one small part to make that happen, would that be enough?
The answer to that depends on what you know, and what your heart tells you must be done. I can't possibly answer that question for you.
What if I told you that I'm a white woman who has spent 4 of the last 5 years in Afghanistan as a teacher, trying to educate the women there, so they'll have options that don't involve being basically owned by a man. Would that be enough?
Maybe not. Maybe I should have done it for 5 of 5 - in Sudan.
What if I'm an Ojibwe man who doesn't have any resources to do much, but I spend as much time on the internet here at the library, trying to stop hate from spreading.
Rather than posing some questions hypothetically, why don't you tell me the actual circumstances of your life. Let's ground this conversation in reality. So who are you? What are your relationships to women like? How do you imagine stopping a very human machine, albeit one that has institutional backing and will defend itself with all manner of violence, like the pornography industry that chews up women and spits them out, dead or just gasping for breath.
Maybe all I'm doing is talking to you. Reminding you that you aren't the first person in history to say, "If we just killed all of the X, there would finally be peace".
I don't think that 90% of men are going anywhere soon, Chris. Really. Not in my lifetime, nor, probably, in anyone's lifetime, until all of humanity is done in by the ecocidal, genocidal, gynocidal practices of white male supremacy in all its many ugly manifestions. Surely you get that, or I hope you do.
But where is that peace? Every genocide is begun with this same thought. Why do people keep falling for this flawed argument? Why do you?
ReplyDeleteNo, it isn't. And if you knew the history of genocide you'd know that. It's not one man's idea that he sees through to "fruition". This notion that Hitler did what he did because he had this CRAZY idea to do away with Jews, and that, somehow, he got to almost do it, is nonsense. Of course he was a virulent anti-Semite, a fascist, and a genocidalist. But he alone could do nothing, except pick off a few Jews if he knew how to shoot a gun. And likely some Jews would have fired back, taking his sorry racist ass out of this world.
Do you think one white man came ashore here and said, "Hmmm. I realise there are many nations of people living here, and that for my people to be able to play golf, they will all have to be slaughtered"?
There wasn't a "plan". It happened over years, and during that time many things had to happen. Treaties had to be drafted and Indians had to be betrayed. French fought the English here. The Spanish fought as well. There was no "systemic plan". Some European invaders used Indians to fight along side them against a shared enemy. White men's laws, customs, and ways of doing society had to be created, remember. A few white men chartered a course, and much of it was left behind when the next group of men picked up the project. And lots of people had to vote in genocidalists as president of the United States, such as ol' Teddy Roosevelt. And lots of white people had to spread among themselves myths of savage Indians, and media had to reinforce those myths. And so the genocide continues, not because of anyone's "idea".
[JR wrote, before Chris's reply: And, should the time come for women to take enough power that they CAN kill 90% of men, I'll answer your question at that time, ok? Check back in with me when that power shift has occurred.]
ReplyDeleteChris responds:
It'll be too late then. You'll be dead. The revolution will have turned again, and yet nothing fundamental will have changed.
No, that won't happen. Because women will come up with a less ruthless way of obtaining power than men. Why do I say that? Because women are naturally more nurturing? No. Because no group could possibly do anything more atrocious than what men, globally, do to women and girls. Women could not be that vicious, because they are acting from a place of KNOWING what suffering is like. They are the RAPE SURVIVORS, so they will not rape systematically and think it's fun. They will not make an industry turning men into sexxx things, and sell men and boys into sexual slavery, and pimp boys across the globe. That's never been part of the plan, if we believe in "plans" being what causes revolutions to happen. Shaukat, please back me up here.
And the movement will likely not be motivated primarily from revenge. It will likely be motivated primarily by a desire for freedom, for liberation, for the world to be a better place because the oppressed know too much about what atrocity is. When Jews were freed from the Egyptians, they didn't slaughter the Egyptions. When Africans and African Americans freed themselves through decades of action, they did not slaughter whites. When American Indians faced and still face genocide, they don't slaughter whites. Why? Because the oppressed know too much about the pain of atrocity.
Besides, we're not talking about women's power to kill men. We're talking about your desire to kill men. And, as a man, you have plenty of power, right?
I have limited powers, Chris. Very limited powers. Let's start with the fact that I'm a pacifist, in my personal life. I have never struck any human being except accidentally, once or twice. I'm not part of any institution like a university through which to teach "my ideas". I don't have books published, and so my words will reach a very limited audience. I have no delusions of grandeur. I'm a very marginalised white gay Jewish man in the U.S., who will get written up as a lunatic, more or less, if the MRAs, who DO have power, have their way. I know men will likely keep winning the war. But I hope for something else to happen.
To an Anonymous male commenter,
ReplyDeleteJulian, you should check out The Myth of Male Power. It's an interview with a former Board Member of N.O.W. It's kinda long (that just links to the first part of the video), but it's worth it.
I am quite familiar with Mr. Warren Farrell. Try The Liberated Man, by Warren Farrell instead.
His work is so deeply racist and classist, as well as increasingly in denial about how patriarchies work to oppress women for men's benefit, it's not worth discussing.
To Chris,
ReplyDeleteHave you read A Language Older Than Words, by Derrick Jensen.
I recommend it.
Julian wrote:"I am quite familiar with Mr. Warren Farrell. Try The Liberated Man, by Warren Farrell instead.
ReplyDeleteHis work is so deeply racist and classist, as well as increasingly in denial about how patriarchies work to oppress women for men's benefit, it's not worth discussing."
Could you unpack that last statement a little? I thought the stuff he said in the interview made a lot of sense, but I'm open to seeing how I'm wrong. Thanks.
Oh, and were you genuinely suggesting "The Liberated Man", or was that a joke?
Could you unpack that last statement a little? I thought the stuff he said in the interview made a lot of sense, but I'm open to seeing how I'm wrong. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteI don't determine the ethics and values of a person from one interview. He has done a great deal to maintain harm of women by men. His earlier book, The Liberated Man, was actually useful, and was appreciated by John Lennon. So, yes, that was a sincere recommendation, although there's far better stuff written about manhood and oppression than anything he's turned out. Read Robert Jensen's work, for example. All of it is worthwhile, and ethically sound.
What I mean is that his "man" is set as white and middle class, as is his "woman". Everything about "[only] men working outside the home" only applies to middle class and wealthy families, which are overwhelmingly white. Black women in the U.S. have NEVER only worked at home. So which "women" is he speaking of? White middle class ones. As if they are ALL women? How is that helpful? How does that do anything but reinforce the harmful notion that a minority group in the U.S. (middle class white people) = all of humanity (in the U.S.)?