Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: The big 4-5 Previous entry: Things That Will Win Over Regular White People

Fine, I’ll write about the Jezebel video

BloggingFeminism

Because I’ve been doing D.C. stuff all day and thus have only had time to follow this blow-up.  I’ll admit; when I first read the quotes Lizz put up at HuffPo, I was appalled at Moe and Tracie.  But then I actually got some decent wi-fi speed and watched the videos and felt, okay, they were trying to be outrageous and funny.  And considering the fact that alcohol was flowing freely, it’s hard for me to get upset that they weren’t dazzling wits and instead going for shock value.  Tracie affirms as much.  I can’t even get upset that they failed to be sober on a TV show, which strikes me as a bare minimum thing to do, because the show is about drinking.  The jokes about pulling out especially didn’t deserve the moralistic shaming, because when you watch the videos, it’s clear that they’re jokes that only work because it’s so wrong.  The joking about rape was an attempt at more of the same, but even more inept. It’s easy to wave your hands and say that jokes about rape are categorically wrong, but I refuse on principle to believe that jokes about anything are categorically wrong, if told correctly.  They just failed.  But they didn’t fail, I think, from a baseline of cruelty that characterizes the offensive jokes about rape, and so I think the rending of garments is a bit misplaced.

Look, I can tell when watching it that what’s going on is two women who are at odds with a hipster culture that plays at men and women being equals, but still makes women tap dance and submit like performing monkeys begging for cookies.  The jokes about pulling out?  The denial (from Tracie) and joking around (Moe) about rape?  These were all coming from that place that I know so well.  It reminds me of the jokes that women back home would make about living under their male lords and masters, though those jokes were often more about housekeeping and more mundane sexual topics.  There’s a tendency, when one thinks of one’s self as a spicy and bold woman, to exhibit a lot of bravado when you have to reconcile that with the ugly fact that dudes are pushing you around.  If you’ve ever seen a cat lose its cool, you know what I mean.  Like it falls in the toilet while trying to drink from it, and walks away sopping wet like, “Yeah, I meant to do that.”  Letting a guy come in you without a condom because he whined and you wanted him to like you is a lot like that, I guess.  You say, “Oh, I meant to do that.  It was sexier.  Yeah.  For me.  Really.  Ha.”  Women make excuses for bending to their own oppression all the time.  I’ve done it.  We all do it.  And sometimes we make really dark jokes about it, as Moe and Tracie did. 


Still, I feel Lizz’s disappointment.  I’m not mad at Moe and Tracie.  I’m not even disappointed in them, exactly.  I am to the extent that they’re very privileged young women who have a lot of influence by virtue of being a part of a coddled middle class that can even afford to live in the hip parts of of New York, which to me means that they should own more responsibility to use their glamorous images for the good of young women who look up to that, instead of coddling the men who roam around taking advantage of their even greater advantages to guilt women into having sex with them against their will, or not using condoms, or doing whatever other thing you can get a woman to do by disdaining her with the full knowledge that your penis gives you more right to say what’s cool and what’s not than she has.  I’m not mad at them; I’ve definitely seen the same game play out in hip scenes in Austin, and I’ve felt the sharp pain of knowing that even though we’re all supposed to be liberated and shit, men just have more social capital in hipster circles.  Or any circles that women have to jockey for status, and men can often hurt that by saying all sorts of things about you if they ever got you in a vulnerable position, such as fooling around.  Things are better than they used to be—-I suspect the scene of selling a groupie for a 6 pack of beer in the movie “Almost Famous” was no exaggeration, and now you get to be in your own band and everything, where you may even get more social capital than some men.  But we’re still far away from that day, and we’re still where a lot of women feel that they have to roll with routine degradations and laugh them off in order to stay on the inside. 

No, I’m just disappointed in the whole fucking world when I see something like this.  To me, that hip, rock and roll world out there was an escape hatch.  Of course, when I was plotting my escape, Kim Gordon and Kathleen Hanna were greasing the path for me, and they really didn’t seem to have any desire to bend over for any man.  Then again, we also had hot mess Courtney Love, so I shouldn’t put on rose-colored glasses.  But while I learned that things were far from perfect in the world I reached out for, I felt grounded in the images of feminist anger that initially attracted me.  If in fact Moe and Tracie are that to young women in Podunk now—-images of urban glamor and sexual liberation to emulate—-then it’s worrying that they’re sending out a positive message about just rolling over to men’s petulant demands out of fear of men’s social power to disgrace your reputation by not liking you enough. I mean, I laughed sometimes during their performance.  But I found myself questioning their exalted irreverence.  It’s one thing to be irreverent about male power while accepting it, and another to be irreverent about it while pulling a riot girl and throwing the finger at it.  But it’s also worth noting that the latter might feel like a pipe dream when you get into the real world and find yourself compromising with men all the time on the basic issue of your dignity because they have certain outside powers to bring into the situation.

It’s never as easy as it sounds to just liberate yourself is all I’m saying.  I’m often asked when I speak in public why young women don’t call themselves feminists that much. And I say honestly, young straight women are afraid that they’ll never get laid again, that their fragile dependence on men’s good will is threatened by the word “feminism”.  And that’s actually true. Young women aren’t stupid when they perceive this.  What they don’t perceive, and where older feminists can step in and offer reassurance, is that there are good men out there if you clear out the ugly ones by getting a spine.  But it’s hard to see the good apples when bad ones clutter the room.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 09:57 PM • (48) Comments

The whole thing makes me sad, since I avidly read and usually enjoy everything that goes up at Jezebel.  I think the Jezebelles made a Grave Tactical Error by going into that interview wasted, but I don’t see this (as I read someone calling it earlier today) “the apocalypse of feminism”.  Calm down, people.  It’s a stupid internet-only chat show that you would never have heard of at all if it wasn’t for this incident.  Everybody involved made mistakes, some more cringe-worthy than others.

Frankly, I’m riveted to the unfolding spectacle.  Cut-throat Scandals of Teh Feminizt Blogosfeere can be hugely entertaining if your name isn’t one of the ones in the middle.

Comment #1: TRex  on  07/08  at  11:24 PM

I’ve always been amazed by the virtual drinking culture over at Jezebel, and the overwhelmingly positive references to drinking that posters and commenters make.  I guess I’m thinking a lot about addiction these days, but I have to wonder about the ways in which Moe and Tracie are using alcohol to compensate for discomfort with sex, or power, or feminism, or fame, or something.

Comment #2: BetsyD  on  07/08  at  11:45 PM

Oh, that was so painful to watch. Not because I feel like they did something wrong, but because you can just see how weak those defenses are in relation to what they’re up against. Bad jokes and denial adding up to a freakishly sunny attitude about things that really aren’t cheery. I know it all too well. At least in hipster scenes you get to temper the denial with bravado and dark humor.

The problem here is, there’s no easy answer to something like date rape. Its not like Tracie and Moe are holding out on us with the answer. Its fine to say don’t bring a stranger home, but if you’re ever going to date someone new, eventually you will have to bring that person home for the first time. And the thirtieth time. And he may, but probably will not be a rapist. So, you live with it. What can you do?

Comment #3: brklyngrl  on  07/09  at  12:08 AM

So far as I have seen, there’s a difference between Tracie and Moe, at least in what they write for Jezebel.  Tracie has resorted before to the kind of “irreverence” Amanda bemoans, which is not actually a kind of irreverence at all.  For at bottom it is just a matter of explicitly acknowledging, and then happily endorsing, the status quo in sexual and other personal relationships—albeit misogynistic or otherwise ugly aspects of the status quo.  (This is also the currency of “irreverent” stand-up comics of both genders at the present time.)  Moe, at least on the blog posts I’ve read, doesn’t go in for this.

Comment #4: Jason  on  07/09  at  12:27 AM

This sort of thing gives sex positivity a bad name, because it affirms suspicions that it’s about saying that you’ve completely ceded control of your sex life and all the stuff that clings to it, including your social life, to men.  But I think there’s a way to frame it that it’s not that way, but I’m suspicious that sex positivity will always be kidnapped by those who just want to be liked not just by the boys, but by the worst of the boys.

Comment #5: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/09  at  12:47 AM

Amanda - I like this paragraph:

“It’s never as easy as it sounds to just liberate yourself is all I’m saying.  I’m often asked when I speak in public why young women don’t call themselves feminists that much. And I say honestly, young straight women are afraid that they’ll never get laid again, that their fragile dependence on men’s good will is threatened by the word “feminism”.  And that’s actually true. Young women aren’t stupid when they perceive this.  What they don’t perceive, and where older feminists can step in and offer reassurance, is that there are good men out there if you clear out the ugly ones by getting a spine.  But it’s hard to see the good apples when bad ones clutter the room.”

I’m older and I’m a woman but I hesitate to call myself a feminist because I’m really just exploring that as a formal concept etc. for lots of reasons no one probably cares about at the moment.

So here’s what I’d want to say in stepping in:

First, I agree 100% with you re: it’s never as easy as it sounds to liberate yourself.  I’ve worked with domestic violence programs and in other situations that work with women who wrangle with that reality every hour of every day.  And I would agree with you in applying that to this situation too.  I think it’s a really astute and clearly stated observation.

I don’t feel as strongly about the next couple of sentences because I think that that perception about “I’ll never get laid again” is real to the women who perceive it, but the fact that they hold that perception can have to do with a lot of different things.

Finally, it’s fine to have women step in to say that there are good men out there.

But more importantly, I think we need each other to step in and say that we are strong enough and can be prescient enough to look at any man and say, and believe, that he can BE that “good man.”  No one necessarily starts out that way nor do we get to meet them in that state of perfection.  Sure - you should never be with someone with the belief that you can change them.

But I would love to step in to say, you can demand better treatment and STILL get laid.  Maybe even get laid more often and with more satisfaction, TO YOU. 

I just don’t want it to be about us not changing and them not changing and only about finding the good ones.  That doesn’t seem to be progressive at all, in a world that needs us to progress these relationships.

Otherwise - nice grappling.  This is very tough.

Comment #6: Jill  on  07/09  at  12:49 AM

I couldn’t even bear to watch the video clips. The transcripts alone made me cringe. I wanted to give Moe and Tracie the benefit of the doubt, for many of the reasons Amanda outlines in her post. They were nervous and drunk, etc., etc. I’m now convinced that Tracie, at least, is a vapid self-induglent cretin, in addition to being a 30-something hipster struggling to make it in a patriarchal society.

It’s one thing to go along to get along, it’s quite another to choose that weird mixture of self-abasement and bravado as a public persona in a culture where you have options. New media in NYC in 2008 is a rare milieu where young privileged women can shake off so much of the bullshit that the patriarchy tries to foist upon us without committing social or professional suicide. Sure, there are retrograde pressures and perverse incentives, but it’s no longer a command performance.

Women like Tracie are choosing to play a certain role to the hilt as a career move because they know that it sells.

Comment #7: Lindsay Beyerstein  on  07/09  at  12:58 AM

Their work on Jezebel has made them role models for young women everywhere.

Bloggers and rolemodels shouldn’t go together.

Comment #8: Sirkowski  on  07/09  at  01:15 AM

I’m now convinced that Tracie, at least, is a vapid self-induglent cretin, in addition to being a 30-something hipster struggling to make it in a patriarchal society.

Oh my gosh, Lindsay, that may be the single harshest thing I’ve ever heard you say about anyone, ever.

And Tracie is TWENTY NINE, dammit.  TWENTY-NINE!

(These distinctions are funny when you’ve just had your 40th birthday.)

Bloggers and rolemodels shouldn’t go together.

Amen!  You have to wonder at what point people volunteered to be Spokespersons for The Movement, or if they even knew about it when they did.

Comment #9: TRex  on  07/09  at  01:29 AM

The trouble with being a young woman with a spine (let alone a young feminist) is that if you display the slightest inkling that you’re ticked off about something, you’re immediately labeled as crazy, tempestuous, or “on the rag”. Myself being a 21-year-old “crazy. tempestuous, hag or shrew”, I’m acutely aware of the pressure that youth across the gender lines have towards either being irreverent or outright prickish. There is tremendous pressure on male youth to buy into the sexist material, even by those who would never consider themselves as sexist. Even friends who are your ex-lovers and know you well will step aside when it comes to the peer pressure to label and ostracize the shrew. Taking on the mantle of “feminist” automatically nets you the label of crazy man-hater who will fly off the handle at the slightest, “most insignificant” situation. They find it necessary to (like Marcotte mentioned in her book), play the Nice Guy and demand that until they enlist women in the draft, acts of chivalry and overall kindness are no longer PC, and so on… that ALL feminists are out for gender superiority.
It’s sort of difficult to reason with a room full of irrational, boisterous, young men who normally are somewhat sane when they drown out your voice or hardly give you pause to breathe. Of course, storming off automatically makes you an irrational feminazi, too.
Furthermore, the pressure to compete for Best Girl is so overwhelming that you’ll hardly find any female friends with similar interests (especially if you’re into gaming, comics, etc) who doesn’t buy into the whole Girl Wars thing.

Comment #10: The Mad Child  on  07/09  at  01:33 AM

I have to agree with Lindsay B. I mean—if you read Jezebel, is there anything that they say (drunkenly) in the video clips that they don’t say on the site whilst sober? Take a look at the recent Roman Polanski post if you have any doubts. And, of course, there is always Moe’s “grey rape” post.

Comment #11: autrement qu'etre  on  07/09  at  01:36 AM

Look, I can tell when watching it that what’s going on is two women who are at odds with a hipster culture that plays at men and women being equals, but still makes women tap dance and submit like performing monkeys begging for cookies.

The angle about male-dominated hipster culture caught me WAY off guard.  How can you tell that’s the context?  Is this related to the whole Nice Guy thing?

Comment #12: FlipYrWhig  on  07/09  at  01:47 AM

Maybe it’s obvious.  I’ve never heard of Jezebel before.  I am not aware of all Internet traditions.

Comment #13: FlipYrWhig  on  07/09  at  01:56 AM

FlipYrWhig - Amanda has hipster culture absolutely dead-to-rights here. Nailed it 100%. It’s extremely male-dominated, only the hipster men get this great narrative where they are very socially progressive because they don’t consume meat or dairy products and think racism is wrong, and therefore there isn’t a critical part of the picture that they are missing… it’s frankly embarrassing to be a feminist man on the edge of hipster culture. Suffice it to say that positive values within the culture remain very macho (especially in the bicycle side of hipster culture, with which I have a close connection) and the cultural shots on what’s cool and what’s not are VERY much called by those young, sensitive, art-degree-earning hipster men. It’s pretty hard for women to be taken seriously here, and yet we as a culture are so insistent that we are equals. Reality doesn’t appear to line up with that fantasy.

Comment #14: grolby  on  07/09  at  02:40 AM

Role models. Yikes. I was just listening to a couple different film podcasts featuring women analyzing Kurosawa films and somehow the role models are the women who play-act as dumb girls?

That said, the moderator was fucking awful, led the conversation into a really stupid place and was passive-aggressive. She talks about fucking random strangers for favors, then tries to start a serious conversation about how hooking up with strange men isn’t safe…the fuck? Then she has the gall to moralize about it later? It’s pretty clear that the Jezebel girls were not taking it at all seriously, while Lizz inexplicably went into very special episode mode. And the clips she extracted were an absolute hit-job.

Lizz came off as bad or worse than the two Jezebel twits. She really got pissy when the blonde one had the nerve to say that well-to-do white women are not the most oppressed class. (News flash!) From that point on she was looking for reasons to attack.

That was the wrong damn format to work through someone’s date rape issues and it was moronic to even try. That was just painful to watch. Someone not reporting a date rape is a faily common occurrence, I don’t see how bitching them out and blaming them for future rapes accomplishes anything, otehr than encouraging people to *never* to discuss that very human reaction.


I couldn’t even bear to watch the video clips. The transcripts alone made me cringe. I wanted to give Moe and Tracie the benefit of the doubt, for many of the reasons Amanda outlines in her post.

Lindsay clearly you *aren’t* willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if you are willing to judge without watching. The transcripts and clips purposefully paint the Jezebel girls in the worst possible light. A lot of what they said was clearly a reaction to the moderator being obnoxious and pulling a bait and switch. Let’s joke about fucking anything that moves - ha ha ok now give me a serious speech about safety!

They all came off as blithering idiots for the most part, but the notion that Lizz was some sort of bastion of feminist responsibility while the Jezebel tarts were cruel ogres doesn’t square with the reality. If anything Lizz should be the most embarrassed because she’s old enough to know better and wasn’t drunk. (Although they should *all* be old enough to know better)

Comment #15: Margalis  on  07/09  at  02:58 AM

I want to clarify one part of my wall of text above. This is how the date rape part of the conversation went (rough paraphrase):

Blonde Broad: “So blah blah, I was date raped, I didn’t report him, and I later even hung out with him still…”
Moderator: “You didn’t report him?”
Blond Broad: “No, I figured he wouldn’t rape again, and that I was some sort of special case…it was 10 years ago, I was young.”
Moderator: “So thanks to you he went free and was able to rape someone else.”

Seriously. I’m not an expert on date rape but even I know that many (most) women don’t turn in the rapist for a variety of reasons and very often there is some sort of post facto rationalization. For the moderator to try to make it a clear black and white issue and blame the girl for allowing other women to be raped is both disgusting and counter-productive.

It’s hard to overstate how idiotic Lizz’s response was. Clearly three drunk rambling idiots is the wrong format for producing profound teachable moments, but if she was so intent on trying she could have brought up the fact that many women don’t report rapes and then rationalize them. But instead she went for a riff on “anyone who doesn’t report a date rape is an acomplice to rape themselves.”

Comment #16: Margalis  on  07/09  at  03:10 AM

I think one thing that people have to realize is that the whole Gawker network has a reputation in some circles of going towards sensationalist/controversial material for its own sake. (I.E. Page Views).

So this sort of thing doesn’t surprise me. I’ve seen some really dumb stuff on both Kotaku and Consumerist as well.

Comment #17: Karmakin  on  07/09  at  09:02 AM

But Jill, that’s exactly where I have a serious problem.  If you told me now, “Yes, I know you’re afraid of being alone and that a man will never want you again, but don’t worry, you don’t need to be wanted,” I would have thrown myself on my bed in despair.  The idea that kissing off a romantic future that quickly is demanding that young women be superheroes.  I want feminism to be for women—-human beings, not superhumans with no real need for sexual attention, much less to say the genuine pleasures that come from having social circles.

With the requirement of superhuman strength to get in the door, no wonder so many young women say feminism is not for them. That, I think, is why I liked Full Frontal Feminism so much.  Jessica got that and addressed young women where they are, by saying not, “You need to be superhuman, because anything less means you’ve failed,” but, “Look, feminism is great not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because it’s fun and makes your life better, not worse.”

Comment #18: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/09  at  09:17 AM

Which isn’t to say that you should say that a good man is guaranteed or something.  But I would say with a straight face, because it’s true, that a good man is actually easier to find when you become an outspoken feminist and clear the bad ones out of the room.  I’ve definitely seen it happen to a lot of women—-you come into your own, and that’s when sexual relationship stuff starts getting better for you.

Comment #19: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/09  at  09:20 AM

Hmm. Interesting.

Definitely didn’t intend for you to infer that I am writing about life without sexual attention!  The effort it takes to be treated well shouldn’t even be connected to getting or not getting sexual attention, to be honest.  But of course, if we think we can only get sexual attention when we’re treated poorly - there’s something really wrong there - and that’s not anything anyone hasn’t said before, I’m sure!

I appreciate the sense I think you’re comment has that it can be really hard to stand up and demand better treatment in a relationship. Communicating that, worrying about which arguments or feelings are the ones that it’s safe to express and which ones aren’t. That’s the stuff that relationships are made of, of any kind - regular and romantic.

But this idea that you say - that it requires superhuman abilities?  In my experience, it’s been a matter of survival and worse choices if the communication wasn’t pushed (to say, you’re treating me like shit, I don’t deserve it, you need to do better or else).

I consider the treatment of people in this vein as emotional or mental abuse because, as with domestic violence, the resolve required to liberate ourselves -as you really aptly say - is intense - no question.

But, again, based on real-life experiences of my own and others I’ve worked with or known?  The alternative is soooo bad for so many reasons.

Not the least of which the people behaving badly never are placed in a position to evolve.

Comment #20: Jill  on  07/09  at  09:48 AM

“With the requirement of superhuman strength to get in the door, no wonder so many young women say feminism is not for them. That, I think, is why I liked Full Frontal Feminism so much.  Jessica got that and addressed young women where they are, by saying not, “You need to be superhuman, because anything less means you’ve failed,” but, “Look, feminism is great not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because it’s fun and makes your life better, not worse.””

This is a really great point that’s applicable to a lot of things beyond what you’re talking about here. Being against expecting people to live up to superhuman standards is probably a decent basis for an across the board ideology. I’m a non-superhumanexpectanarianist!

Comment #21: witless chum  on  07/09  at  10:00 AM

I haven’t seen the video in question, and I have to say that from the gist I’m getting, I don’t approve and would probably have the same reactions a lot of you guys are having.

My main opinion on the matter is this, though.  Why is it that, when you’re a woman, you constantly have to deal with “being role model” and “setting a good example” and all that?  Give me a fucking break.  A part of this full humanity we feminists are working toward is the freedom to fuck up sometimes, be wrong, and have unpopular opinions.  I guess it’s embarrassing to fuck up so publicly, but you know that’s a part of being human, too. 

I feel similarly about what BetsyD said above about the drinking culture of Jezebel.  Dude, women drink now.  Real drinks.  While I’m obviously not in favor of alcoholism, or even of using alcohol as a way to compensate for thing guess what, women drink, and I think it’s fucking ridiculous (not to mention completely anti-feminist) to start clutching pearls anytime women openly admit such a thing.

Comment #22: The Opoponax  on  07/09  at  10:56 AM

As someone who recently spent a couple of years living in Williamsburg among the hipsters, I’d say that the culture has a mostly, but not completely, salutary effect on the political attitudes of its members. The political consensus of the group (or at least the subgroup I spent the most time among) goes something like this:

1. We’re living in a country dominated by cultural forces we find terrifying and barbaric, and they are killing thousands of innocent people every month in our name. (true)

2. We are powerless to do anything meaningful about this, and those who think otherwise are delusional egomaniacs. (true)

3. We are dependent on these despicable powers for our livelihoods and our social privilege, and we are very limited in our ability even to renounce this privilege, much less to build a parallel economy in which we could survive but not be complicit in atrocities. (true)

4. Most people in the world have serious problems. We, on the other hand, are enormously privileged in almost every respect, and lead lives almost entirely free from discomfort. Any time one of us whines about anything at all, it should be treated with derision. (mostly true, at least)

This (again, mostly salutary) tendency to mock anyone voicing a political grievance sometimes collides with genuine efforts to address a problem that the community actually might be able to affect in some way. Political activism is still practiced widely—many people I knew there were, like myself, active in the peace movement and other leftist movements, and others were politically active artists—but although such efforts were usually lauded on a fairly deep level, they were understood to merit mockery as quixotic and pompous when addressed publicly.

Thus, when the community confronts a problem like misogyny, it has a difficult time talking about it openly. New York City has a very high straight-female-to-straight-male ratio, and the women are on average better-looking than the men. This skews the heterosexual marketplace dynamics significantly in favor of men, which means they can get away with more than they might elsewhere, and they get into bad habits. There is almost no “slut-shaming” in the hipster culture as I encountered it: men and women are genuinely seen as being out for more or less the same thing. This actually delivers significant sexual freedom to women, and compensates significantly for the skewed marketplace dynamics (e.g., because women are free to sleep around with the much-in-demand attractive men without angling for commitment). But the nature of male sexual aggression, and the skewed marketplace dynamics, mean that women end up putting up with a lot more crap than men and shouldering a lot more risk. There is, perhaps, some recognition in the culture that this is unfair, but here the prohibition on whining comes into play: the culture recognizes unfairness as ubiquitous, and to complain about any unfairness is taboo because it would open the floodgates to discourse about all the other, muchgreater injustices in the world, and addressing all of those would transform the entire community into something else much less interesting (i.e., pompous, smarmy, earnest, ineffectual and therefore irrelevant hippies).

Admittedly, the attitude I describe here was by no means universal, and I have heard horror stories about much more toxic and mean hipster subcultures. But I suspect the Jezebels are part of a similar group, and their sensibilities are probably similar to what I describe above, with the added caveat that they probably rub shoulders with more toxic elements on the dating scene and have to be wary of them.

Comment #23: Picador  on  07/09  at  11:30 AM

TRex, between Tracy Egan and Jesse Helms, I’ve been a total bitch this week. It must be my impending 30th birthday.

Margalis, I gave them the benefit of the doubt by assuming that whatever they said on “Shoot the Messenger” could be safely chalked up to drunken silliness.  Tracy was admirably candid about what a terrible screwup the whole performance was on her own blog. She didn’t try to make excuses or defend any of the stuff she said. That seemed like a good sign. So, I decided to check out her other writing, only to find to my dismay, that it’s all the same schtick.

Anyone can have too much to drink and act silly. It’s human.

It’s quite a different thing to make a career out of being drunk and acting stupid, which is what Egan is doing. It wasn’t funny when Dean Martin did it, and Egan is no Dean Martin. Given that Egan’s carefully constructed persona is “drunken crazy slut”, I she can’t just disown her STM performance as an aberration. That’s what she’s famous for.

Here’s her introduction on Jezebel.

Almost every autobiographical piece she writes is a story about something stupid she did when she was totally wasted and now feels kind of stupid about. At a certain point, I have to conclude that she is either stupid, or playing stupid as a career move. Neither alternative makes me feel warmly towards her.

Comment #24: Lindsay Beyerstein  on  07/09  at  11:42 AM

Wow, that is a fascinating comment.  I’m going to have to read it a couple of more times, but if I could just offer one reaction, because I think it helps put my perspective in its context (because I am keenly aware of how embryonic my understanding of women in their 20s and 30s is):

I was 20-something living in the East Coast and going into NYC to hang with friends every other week during high profile incidents like Robert Chambers/Jennifer Levin and Hedda Nussbaum/Joel Steinberg and the Central Park Jogger assault (she didn’t name herself until 2003, the attack was in 1989).  I cannot speak for anyone else, but I absolutely believe that these cases significantly impacted many women in and around my age.

It’s difficult to describe that impact in the short moment I have right now, but I would just ask that for those readers who aren’t familiar with those cases, maybe read a bit about them and for those who are, try to realize how they set the backdrop for how someone like myself might say - it’s a matter of survival, and not about being superhuman although if that’s what it takes, it still doesn’t seem unreasonable in the face of the reality those women faced.  Add to this that 20 years later, I’m a mom and those cases stay with me as a woman in a marriage as well as a mother to a daughter. 

As for being all too human, my biggest fear is that I can never run for office at any level because of the judgements I made in my late teens and 20s.  So I’m only able to write from the perspective of doing better, being better - not being superhuman - that would be horribly disingenuous.

Comment #25: Jill  on  07/09  at  11:52 AM

This skews the heterosexual marketplace dynamics significantly in favor of men, which means they can get away with more than they might elsewhere, and they get into bad habits.

I beg to differ.  Straight men in New York, especially bohemian, artistic, and politically active circles, for reasons I’ve not entirely figured out yet, get away with a lot less than straight men in the rest of the USA.  When male family members come to visit me from the outer rings of Dude Nation, they always comment on how much more physically fit men here are, how much better their dress and grooming is (even hipsters!), and how many very seriously taken “rules” of Dude Nation are openly flouted here (straight men have tiny yappy dogs, ride vespas, care about home decor, read books, openly participate in childcare, etc etc etc). 

Believe me, for all the improvement still ahead of Brooklyn Hipster Men, they’re lightyears ahead of men in most other parts of the country.  Which is probably why it’s so noticeable that they’re conspicuously not feminist (or at least don’t tend to be - I have met a small number of convincingly feminist men who really do act on seriously held convictions about gender).  We don’t expect citizens of Dude Nation to be feminist.  In urban bohemian circles, we see all this evidence of men being more liberal, less confined in ridiculous gender roles, etc - except they just haven’t made that final leap yet.

Or, to distill that long blather, I think the problem with hipster men is pretty much the same problem as the one second wave countercultural feminists had with   male hippies and leftists of the time.  Leftist Bohemia does not always produce feminism. 

I, for one, am more worried about the percentage of hipster women who aren’t feminist and constantly go out of their way to undermine feminism (of which Tracey Egan is probably a good example). There’s just no excuse for that, in my opinion, and I think that hipster men are probably way ahead of hipster women in the Challenging Gender Conformity Bullshit sense.

Comment #26: The Opoponax  on  07/09  at  12:13 PM

I don’t have much to add to the discussion, except to say that Amanda’s right about feminism being a great way to clear the idiots out of the room so you can get to the guys who are worth hanging out with.  It’s easier for me to believe Amanda at the age of 45, though, than it would have been when I was in my 20s (even though I was pretty unabashedly feminist back then), since I now have the proof of a couple of decades of experience.

Oh, and the reflections on hipster culture don’t surprise me one bit.  It sounds like the same dynamic that existed among the hip “progressive” crowds in the ‘60s.  The young men got cred for being against the war, for civil rights, what have you, while the girls who wouldn’t put out on demand got dissed for not being “liberated” enough.  Seems like nothing changes.

Comment #27: nolo  on  07/09  at  12:14 PM

. . . Opoponax beat me to it.

Comment #28: nolo  on  07/09  at  12:15 PM

Jill, now you’re bashing a strawman.  All I am saying is that when young women feel that they can’t be feminists because that means they won’t get a good man, we have a choice.  We can say, as you initially said, “Well, you don’t need a man, anyway!”  Which of course requires a superhuman ability to relinquish sexual hope and desire.  Or you could say, “Actually, feminism makes the man-getting process less complicated, I’ve found.” 

What I’m saying is that by telling women, “You don’t need a man,” you’re asking them to give up on us and run straight into the arms of a society that tells them that in order to get a man, you have to be submissive.  By acknowledging the validity of desire, that yes we do need what we need when it comes to heterosexual desires.  The fear is real, and I don’t think feminists are necessarily doing a great job of addressing it.

Comment #29: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/09  at  01:04 PM

I find the unwillingness of certain hipsters to take absolutely anything seriously to be incredibly noxious. Irreverance is great, snark is great, but you can take this so far that you don’t believe in anything and anyone who does believe in something is a fool and an object of mockery and all that matters is style and outward presentation and that is poisonous and shallow and also, conveniently, makes you immune from any legitimate critcism of anything you do. (This, actually, is my biggest beef with Maureen Dowd, who probably is too old and not hip enough to be a hipster, but she displays those qualities in spades.)

I’m mostly talking out my ass here, because I’m not a regular reader of Jezebel and so don’t have a lot of context, but the whole thing seems like a hideous car crash of too-much-sincerity/self-righteousness meets worst-elements-of-hipster-culture. They don’t come off well, but neither does Lizz. She might have a lot of legitimate problems with how they present themselves but the way to address those is not to invite them on a show that they think is supposed to be funny and then call them out publically for how they chose to deal with being raped or for not being role models for young women. That’s pretty messed up, too.

I know everyone and their sister is posting about this, but if you haven’t seen it yet, there are two good posts up at Bitch PhD on the whole fracas, with somewhat different takes on it.

Comment #30: chingona  on  07/09  at  01:38 PM

@ opoponax and nolo ... That’s cause if you identify as feminist it means you actually believe in something and that is strictly verboten.

Comment #31: chingona  on  07/09  at  01:45 PM

Someday there will be a statue in tribute to Ana Marie Cox as large as the Statue of Liberty, if not larger.

Comment #32: norbizness  on  07/09  at  01:55 PM

There is, perhaps, some recognition in the culture that this is unfair, but here the prohibition on whining comes into play: the culture recognizes unfairness as ubiquitous, and to complain about any unfairness is taboo because it would open the floodgates to discourse about all the other, much greater injustices in the world, and addressing all of those would transform the entire community into something else much less interesting (i.e., pompous, smarmy, earnest, ineffectual and therefore irrelevant hippies).

Picador, please bear in mind that I am not picking on you.  That having been said…

When I read this I can’t help but ask myself whether “hipsters” differ from “mashers” and “flappers” in any respect other than that they demand that their ‘leggers provide them with organic dope instead of Canadian rye and that they’d turn up their noses at the idea of wearing coats stitched out of the skins of dead raccoons.  I’ve always been mystified at the way hipsters tend to gravitate toward the political left and I’ve always wondered what motivates that attraction.  It sure can’t be the hipster ethic, to the extent that there is such a thing.  Your description of the mindset you encountered (participated in?) during your hipster days in Williamsburg (a description which certainly resonates with me since it corresponds to much of the hipster behavior I observed years ago when I lived near the Great Lakes) fails to reduce my mystification but does intensify my wonder.  Maybe the cognitive dissonance which is being experienced here (dissonance which appears to be brought on by the sight of women who call themselves “feminist” assuring each other in boozy voices that this is a world in which a woman’s gotta hustle to get anywhe-ah, dahling) is, instead, the kind of cognitive dissonance that comes about when a person or a group maintains a loyalty to a political philosophy which that person or group doesn’t actually hold.

What are hipsters doing on the left?  I’ve asked myself that question for yonks.  Not that I’d want to discourage anyone from sending Obama money or from giving to worthy causes or from voting for a lefty every time the opportunity to do so arises, but still.  Wouldn’t these people be more consistent if they sent their money to McCain?  “We can’t do anything about anything anyway and it only looks stupid to try” is a right-wing philosophical tenet of great age.  It’s been repeated down through the eons by people who were opposed to change on principle, and it’s still being repeated today.  By hipsters, as it happens, though they’re not the only ones who recite it.  Two hundred years ago, give or take a decade here and there, Edmund Burke was busy cocking a snoot at the hopelessly uncool and at the terminally earnest, while muttering under his breath that politics was for statesmen and that when ordinary folk presumed to get involved in matters of governance they only succeeded in making themselves ridiculous.  Righties are correct about one thing: absolutes exist; some things genuinely don’t ever change.  We know this because we can see that the line unreeled by Edmund Burke is substantially the line taken up by John McCain.  That, and it’s substantially identical to the position adopted by hipsters.

Maybe it’s only that hipsters are involved in music and art…maybe it’s just that there aren’t that many poli-sci majors to be found in the hipster ranks.  Maybe hipsters don’t understand that they’re not lefties.  People who are not hipsters but whose views closely match the views expounded by hipsters are, in the civilian world, generally identified as “Libertarians”, and they’re generally understood to be adherents of the political right.  But…heck.  I’m exhausted, and if the ghost of Jesse Helms himself were to appear to me at midnight and inform me that he was anxious to reduce his karmic burden by campaigning for Obama, I’d zealously pressure him to do it.  That’s how desperate I am.  So it’s not like I object to hipster leftish affectations (I admit that I experience them as such).  Shoot, anything for a vote.  But I can see where the hipster pose of I’m-a-lefty might end up confusing people, hip and non-hip.  I think that that’s what may have happened here.

Comment #33: bekabot  on  07/09  at  02:04 PM

(Not that it matters, but the source of my bewilderment was that I hadn’t realized that Jezebel is a hipster-ish community.  All I had gathered was that it was a _feminist_ community.  I wasn’t reacting out of surprise that hipsterdom could still be sexist.  That doesn’t surprise me in the least.)

Comment #34: FlipYrWhig  on  07/09  at  02:07 PM

Amanda - 

I don’t know what strawman you’re referring to.  I’m writing from my experience. If I’m at the wrong place to do that, then…now I know.

As for your reaction to my last comment, I’m assuming that you came up with the notion of “you don’t need a man” and all that implies for you from…I’m not sure where.  I don’t get the connection to anything I’ve written because I don’t believe that, and I haven’t written that - here or anywhere.  But your comments indicate that that’s what you’re reading.

My life - which I know you don’t know much about because we don’t know each other personally - is a testament to figuring out how to make relationships work in a way where fear, such as you suggest exists, has no place.  If we get a chance to meet in person sometime, I would love to have more of a conversation about this.

But still, I’m baffled as to why you keep trying to cast my comments in a way that I don’t even recognize as being remotely related to what I’m trying to say, let alone the words I’ve actually written down.  I’m not writing in code.

Anyway - I don’t comment to antagonize - I was commenting to offer another perspective from someone really mesmerized by these conversations.  And the last notion I’d offer is that women - feminists or otherwise - should relinquish sexual desire.

Comment #35: Jill  on  07/09  at  02:11 PM

bekabot, I think the hipsters vote Democratic when they vote at all because the religious right has so completely taken over the Republican Party. The religous right is worse for them because it is both earnest and would call upon them not to get laid or do drugs. The political left is just earnest, and hence lesser of two evils. I think they really could care less about homosexuality and all those old-fashioned bogeymen, but I also see, frequently, a rejection of collective solutions. It’s not uncommon to see commenters at places like Feministing say things like “Well, if you wanted to have a career, maybe you should have thought of that before you had kids” or “I don’t want to pay for fat sick people’s health care when I’m young and healthy and take care of myself.” (Not that Feministing is explicitly hipster, but I think they attract a different sort of commenter, a less politically sophisticated/explicitly progressive sort of commenter.) I think nearly 30 years of Republican rule really has infiltrated the psyches of an entire generation. Also, they’re mostly young, and when you’re young, you’ve had less time for shitty stuff to happen to you (not always, of course).

Comment #36: chingona  on  07/09  at  02:33 PM

I’ve always been mystified at the way hipsters tend to gravitate toward the political left and I’ve always wondered what motivates that attraction.

I’m not quite sure either, but it’s an attraction of long standing.  Think of the people in the 1930s who joined the Communist Party, or the 1960s “radicals” who became stockbrokers. 

I’m guessing it’s plain old rebellion against your conservative parents, followed by returning to those conservative ideas once you grow up/settle down/have kids because you never genuinely discarded them or critiqued them beyond, “My parents are lame.”

Comment #37: Mnemosyne  on  07/09  at  02:34 PM

I’m just saying that I have no idea why you’re arguing with my belief that telling young women to be brave and get over “needing” a man might backfire.  If we told lesbians they get suck it up and get over needing a woman, we’d be rightfully vivisected.  I’m just arguing—-and I don’t know where your disagreement is—-that it’s fatal to feminism to just tell women that we can stiffen our backs and empty our beds until we get real equality. 

All—-all—-I’m saying is that young women want two things: Equality and acceptance into a social community/a real sex life.  For a lot of young women, these things are presented as fundamentally at odds.  Men have the real power in social circumstances, and certainly they have the power to mark you as sexually attractive/a sexual reject in your social circles.  Depending on how much jockeying for position there is in any subculture, a certain man can run you completely out of the sexual running by slurring your reputation. Women aren’t fools if they see how much men control their access to the society they want to be in and roll over to the men’s demands. 

What is hard to see without assistance is that a lot of this is a matter of perception.  Once you actually close your eyes and jump into the abyss, allow certain men to just hate you and mock you, you often find that it wasn’t only not as bad as you feared, but better.  That the people exerting pressure on you to submit were never going to really like you anyway.  They liked themselves for being able to make you dance.  And now you’re free to make friends/take lovers who are not nearly the same bad news.

That’s all.  Maybe you can clarify what part you disagree with?

Comment #38: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/09  at  02:37 PM

Most people in the world have serious problems. We, on the other hand, are enormously privileged in almost every respect, and lead lives almost entirely free from discomfort. Any time one of us whines about anything at all, it should be treated with derision

I don’t buy it.  I’ve heard way too many hipster men whine about unfair treatment.  Hipster women aren’t allowed to complain, hipster men are.

Comment #39: keshmeshi  on  07/09  at  02:40 PM

Amanda - that is a really helpful comment re: me understanding what you’re saying, but I’d been reading that you somehow got the idea that I am in fact pushing the notion that we can do without men if they’re just being shitty to us.  I do not support that, push that, want that etc.  Not at all. 

I only want to push the notion of what I’d love to see more of - which is behavior, efforts intended to help men and women do better all around.  Realistic or not, that’s my hope.

I love your last paragraph - part of what I’m trying to push is the idea that we need to advance the age and stage at which we all realize this, learn this.  I mean, what if men realized the jig was up and they’d get no satisfaction from controlling us in the way you describe?  Why do we have to put ourselves through shit to get there? Why not get the message earlier?

I’m not saying that’s realistic - I’m just saying that from where I am now? That’s sure what I’d like to work toward helping others understand, earlier rather than later.

Now that I’ve got kids and I think back on my Moe and Tracie days (and I really had years of it) and the seminal events of my 20s, when I was single (I didn’t marry until I was 29) and I read about these scenarios - honestly - all I want to do is reach in and say - no one should have to take it. 

But also, maybe it’s important to point out: these dilemmas you raise? Even in monogomous relationships that go on for decades - guess what? There’s a lot of the dynamic you’re talking about in those relationships too - to wit, the industry of marriage counseling.  I know couples in my parents’ generation who stand tall and proud saying they’ve been married for more than 50 years. 

But you know what - I could tell stories - and maybe everyone has some of these they’ve observed too - about how incredibly nasty, rude and demanding the husbands are on the women, for any number of reasons, and I listen and observe that and I think, oh no.  No one should treat someone like that, ever, let alone for 50 years.

Anyway - I get the dilemma you describe.  I have not lived a life that escaped such dilemmas.  I work very hard in my little neck of the blogosphere to get men to recognize the hurt their behavior causes, in addition to the destruction we can do to ourselves by not pointing out that hurtful behavior.  Maybe I just have a very high level of cognitive dissonance on this subject - I see the dilemma as existing, but I still want to move in yet a different direction.

Thanks.  I’ll keep reading.

Comment #40: Jill  on  07/09  at  03:13 PM

Why do we have to put ourselves through shit to get there? Why not get the message earlier?

Not to be overly snarky but ... because we’re human.

Think about how many kids are absolutely convinced that high school goes on forever and that the crappy things that happen to them in high school mean that they will never, ever be able to find friends again.  It takes a couple of years in college or the workforce to realize that, yes, high school does come to an end and you can move past those crappy experiences.

That’s not to say that we shouldn’t be emphasizing to young women that they don’t have to put up with crap just to be liked.  It’s just that pretty much our entire social structure is that kids have to put up with enormous amounts of pressure to conform, and trying to reverse that conditioning is REALLY hard for both boys and girls.

Comment #41: Mnemosyne  on  07/09  at  03:54 PM

Mnemosyne - thanks for the gentle “not to be overly snarky.”

Totally agree with your comment.  Just deleted all the too-mommy-focused stuff i’d written but yeah - with a daughter entering middle school? I get how hard it is.

Comment #42: Jill  on  07/09  at  04:06 PM

Some of it was them trying to be funny, some of it was just ignorance, some of it reflected un dealt with trauma. Liz sucks too for tying rape to promiscuity and blaming slutty girls for putting themselves in danger.

Mostly this just seemed really sad. Tracie is in some kind of weird denial about sexism and power and Moe still has much to work out wrt her rape. I know how it feels to be that drunk girl saying heavy things about my rape in inappropriate settings. ouch.

Comment #43: aroundthebend213  on  07/09  at  06:41 PM

‘hipster’ is just a nice word for ‘poser’.

Comment #44: lathan  on  07/09  at  07:33 PM

Part of my concern with the “superhuman” stuff is also that it pressures already-declared feminists to conceal our problems, because we don’t want to be judged for not having it all figured out the second we say we’re feminists.  Real life feminists let men overpower us all the time, because we have to or feel we have to in order to reach certain goals all the time.  We need to talk about this more openly to help find solutions, but instead, I think the pressure is to be glib and hide it. 

I got a disquieting reminder that beneath feminist masks are often women struggling with male abuse they know is wrong, but have an equal amount of trouble escaping as women who don’t have that consciousness.  I think it colored my reactions to Moe and Tracie’s bravado about date rapists and giving into guys who don’t want to use condoms and who shame you because you would.  I’ve taken degrading treatment or comments quietly because that was a battle I didn’t want to fight and was scared of the consequences.  Sometimes that’s surviving.  Sometimes that’s just digging a hole for yourself.  It’s really fucking hard to tell the difference sometimes. 

I’ve seen women that were smart, beautiful, kind, giving, ambitious—-pining over guys that live in ratholes, that “forget” to call when they said they would, that cheat on them, that berate them pointlessly, that mock them behind their backs or to their faces, etc.  The whole litany.  I’ve been that girl sometimes.  And you put up with it, and it’s plain as day why, because you don’t see that you have much of a choice.  There aren’t better options laying around for you, and pushing back has consequences.

I think offering that this feeling is valid will go a long way to getting us to the next step, which is saying, “And feminist thought gave me a way to crawl out of that cycle.”

Comment #45: Amanda Marcotte  on  07/09  at  08:43 PM

1. yes - I can see what you’re saying re: why thinking about having to be superhuman is so problematic.  My experience doesn’t jive with the idea that women let men overpower them all the time but I think this notion is subject to variation depending on settings, age etc.  It definitely can and does happen.

2. I agree with your evaluation here: “I’ve taken degrading treatment or comments quietly because that was a battle I didn’t want to fight and was scared of the consequences.  Sometimes that’s surviving.  Sometimes that’s just digging a hole for yourself.  It’s really fucking hard to tell the difference sometimes.”

Not regarding a sexual relation but still the overpowering thing: I took on a powerful guy at a meeting that I was conducting for a board I’m on and getting the cold shoulder from him in the middle of 50 other people (the majority of whom were men) was very frightening re: consequences - to the point where I felt I had to publicly apologize - and then, I regretted doing that.  This was just a couple of months ago.  And during the same meeting - the president and exec director both shushed me and pulled back my elbow to get me to not speak up! I was angry and humiliated.  I admonished both of them afterwards - but sure - I couldn’t do anything during the meeting and I end up getting labeled as difficult.  So, yeah this happens and it can really stymy.

3. About this: “And you put up with it, and it’s plain as day why, because you don’t see that you have much of a choice.  There aren’t better options laying around for you, and pushing back has consequences.”

I know that feeling - I remember that feeling and in marriage? Well, you can still get that feeling - maybe even more intensely I’m afraid to admit!

I’ll e-mail you off list for a bit of other info about my feelings here Amanda but I don’t think we’re so far apart.

Comment #46: Jill  on  07/09  at  09:22 PM

On Tracey and Moe’s lackadaisical attitude:

So supposedly white-male-conservative a writer as Jonathan Yardley fingered this phenomenon in his review of one of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood novels: the flip, don’t-care attitude adopted by some women to cope with traditional middle-class marriages in the South. I think he also mentioned the drinking.

But flipping the bird while you remain in the birdcage is pathetic, especially when you could fly away, as is true for most American women today (perhaps not for the women in the Sisterhood novels).

Correct me, please; my only impression of these novels is from their reviews. I tend to read geeky SF: in Charles Stross’s Glasshouse, set in a far future, deranged experimenters recreate 1950s small-town America and patriarchal marriage with the protocols of the Stanford Prison Experiment, with advanced brainwashing techniques thrown in. We know that the heroine has been subjected to this brainwashing when she doesn’t care about anything.

To switch topics slightly: on libertarian attitudes:

I think nearly 30 years of Republican rule really has infiltrated the psyches of an entire generation.

I think the rabid competition for schools and jobs among the upper percentiles of American youth has also promoted this attitude.

When I was still immersed in it, in college, I was a little Objectivist, who just hadn’t read Ayn Rand yet. One can be competitive and career-focused to the point of autism. I realized much later how very stupid I am at other things.

Comment #47: sara  on  07/09  at  09:42 PM

if you can’t get off w/o booze or drugs, you ain’t no slut machine or freak.  anyone can blow someone in the bathroom at the AVN awards after doing an eight-ball or a slew of jagerbombs.  when the jezebelles get their freak on while sober, I’ll believe they’re hipsters, not posers.  until then, they just seem like some lost little girls trying way to hard to be “realer” than the assholes they’re fucking & sucking.

Comment #48: mofo  on  07/09  at  10:36 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.