Cause That's What Grrrls Like That Do. Yeah.
1. A 19-year-old gay Iranian boy was denied asylum by the Netherlands. Now he's getting shipped to the UK, which will probably send him back to Iran, where he will probably be killed. Way to go, Europe. I think I'm gonna throw up.
2. La John Joseph posted a link to this intensely necessary blog: IRAQI LGBT UK. Sexual minoritarians in Iraq (as in Iran) are being systematically harassed and killed. The only big difference is that the United States is directly responsible for the Iraqi government, and has done nothing to prevent these anti-gay pogroms. Yes, pogroms - I'm not afraid to use the word.
3. A family member, as a joke, sent us a link to the "Hillary Nutcracker," which looks like this:
I am angry. I don't support Clinton's candidacy, but I'm amazed at how casually people resort to this kind of misogynistic attack.
The Obama vs. Clinton phenomenon has a lot of people arguing about racism and sexism, and "which is worse." Comparing the isms on a "better/worse" level will never be productive. But it's worth pointing out the various differences between them.
For instance, I'd wager to say that overt racism has always been a very public affair. The major circumstances and events in the history of American racism have been right out there in the open: slavery, Jim Crow, the civil rights movement, race riots, Rodney King, etc. The history of sexism, however, has been largely private. Violence against women happens behind closed doors. It's not so much in the streets, but in bedrooms and kitchens where women are beaten, raped, robbed of their agency, treated as vessels for sex and childbirth.
And so it's perhaps unsurprising that people don't take sexism so seriously. It's because they so rarely have to face its demons. They so rarely have to confront the brutal realities of this kind of violence.
And so Hillary Clinton becomes a "nut-cracker" - a threat to the testicles of men everywhere. People forward the image to their friends and family. They laugh. I am told, in defense, that many "liberal-leaning women think it's funny."
Can you imagine the racial equivalent? Can you even imagine the queer equivalent? People would be outraged! It might even be LESS ACCEPTABLE to say homophobic things in the United States than it is to spew misogyny. Even as a very paranoid queer person, I am willing to consider this possibility.
Anyway. Back to work.
Love
Dan
2. La John Joseph posted a link to this intensely necessary blog: IRAQI LGBT UK. Sexual minoritarians in Iraq (as in Iran) are being systematically harassed and killed. The only big difference is that the United States is directly responsible for the Iraqi government, and has done nothing to prevent these anti-gay pogroms. Yes, pogroms - I'm not afraid to use the word.
3. A family member, as a joke, sent us a link to the "Hillary Nutcracker," which looks like this:
I am angry. I don't support Clinton's candidacy, but I'm amazed at how casually people resort to this kind of misogynistic attack.
The Obama vs. Clinton phenomenon has a lot of people arguing about racism and sexism, and "which is worse." Comparing the isms on a "better/worse" level will never be productive. But it's worth pointing out the various differences between them.
For instance, I'd wager to say that overt racism has always been a very public affair. The major circumstances and events in the history of American racism have been right out there in the open: slavery, Jim Crow, the civil rights movement, race riots, Rodney King, etc. The history of sexism, however, has been largely private. Violence against women happens behind closed doors. It's not so much in the streets, but in bedrooms and kitchens where women are beaten, raped, robbed of their agency, treated as vessels for sex and childbirth.
And so it's perhaps unsurprising that people don't take sexism so seriously. It's because they so rarely have to face its demons. They so rarely have to confront the brutal realities of this kind of violence.
And so Hillary Clinton becomes a "nut-cracker" - a threat to the testicles of men everywhere. People forward the image to their friends and family. They laugh. I am told, in defense, that many "liberal-leaning women think it's funny."
Can you imagine the racial equivalent? Can you even imagine the queer equivalent? People would be outraged! It might even be LESS ACCEPTABLE to say homophobic things in the United States than it is to spew misogyny. Even as a very paranoid queer person, I am willing to consider this possibility.
Anyway. Back to work.
Love
Dan
1 Comments
Leave a comment
Tax Deductible Donations
Dan Fishback is a sponsored project of Fractured Atlas, a non-profit arts service organization. Contributions in behalf of Dan Fishback may be made payable to Fractured Atlas and are tax-deductible to the extent permitted by law.
Would You Like To Shop?
The Search for Colonel Mustard
Maybe Maybe Maybe Baby
Hey Dan,
I'm friends with you on Myspace (but we've never actually communicated) and I found your blog from your bulletin. I totally agree with you that it's never productive to try to figure out which form of oppression is worse. There's an Audre Lorde quote I really like that is something like "There is no hierarchy of oppressions."
I think though that, while violence against women is often done in private, there is a history of public sexism. There was the issue of women's voting rights (which, granted, was resolved a long time ago), and the more recent/ongoing struggles about abortion and the Equal Rights Amendment, and the workplace issue of unequal pay (which I suppose is somewhat in between private and public.) Oh, and also problems with media representation of women, like the Hillary nutcracker, which I agree is really disgusting and messed up. It seems to me that the biggest difference between racism and sexism actually somewhat the opposite of what you suggest. I mean, virtually everyone interacts with both men and women in their daily lives, and most people have intimate emotional connections to both men and women (or at least did at some point in time) but the same is not true for nearly as many people regarding people of different races. So I think it's harder for people to see the subtle power dynamics they're complicit in because it's too close, and they've learned to be in denial about it. Not to suggest that people don't also have a lot of denial about racism, because, clearly they do.
Willow