If you have "no place to go," come here!

Lest we forget

Yes, I'd say Violet sums it all up nicely.

Just for the record.

Of course, that was the campaign. I'm sure everything will change, now.

No votes yet


Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

How could a movement incorporating bigotry against you, possibly help you? Jesus. My family is white-skinned, well-educated, and well-off and yet because of our surnames and the fact my parents are immigrants with thick accents, we have not been remotely immune to the horrible racism against Latinos these past few years. Sure these racists say that they're not bigots, that they're not even anti-immigrant, just anti-illegal immigration and yet we'd be fools to to trust them. Even if their intentions are pure, their effects are distinctly racist. Obviously, no one in our family would ever support such anti-Latino bullshit and yet women not only voted for Obama because of the collapsing economy but honestly think Obama's win, which was dependent on bigotry against them, will help them--as women!

These women think somehow bigotry against their very gender won't affect them personally. Unreal.

Again, what's the point of all the policies in the world benefiting women and girls to the hilt if you live in a country that openly worships at the Church of Misogyny and the president is a known believer? Rape is "illegal" and yet you'd be hard-pressed to actually gain a conviction. That's the power of culture. Child rape is supposedly denounced by the public and yet it's at epidemic levels because it's profoundly misogynistic violence (hate crimes): gender is the determining factor (i.e. the target) and girls are overwhelmingly the victims. If women are acceptable rape targets because of their gender, then why not girls? They're just going to grow up to be women anyway.

Damon's picture
Submitted by Damon on

I'd save that page for the incredible amount of linky goodness crammed into it. It's definitely going to be a great reference for the coming years.

Mandos's picture
Submitted by Mandos on

I used to be a fan of Violet's (still am, to some extent), and I thought she used to be a fan of mine, but you do realize that she is now kind of a odd sort of wingnut? It's very sad.

Submitted by lambert on

I poked around, can't find anything that says it is. Am I wrong? What are you seeing?

Mandos's picture
Submitted by Mandos on

...of some of her recent work, and the current and...interesting cast of characters that currently populates her site. Very different from the past, alas. It's a case of CDSDS (Clinton Derangement Syndrome Derangement Syndrome). I am not saying that CDS doesn't exist, but it's possible to take criticism of it to the point where it ruins your sense of proportion.

Submitted by lambert on

So she's not responsible for the content. A quick scan of her site shows no derangement. What exactly are you talking about, then?

Mandos's picture
Submitted by Mandos on

A quick scan of her site shows a *lot* of derangement. The whole "has feminism crashed and burned" business is pretty much deranged. None of the reasons why Robin Morgan, etc, disliked Sarah Palin are given any credence whatsoever, and indeed, there's an immense grasping at straws to find reasons why Sarah Palin is NOT the Wonder Woman of James Dobson, or twisting herself into pretzels to show that even *though* she is the Wonder Woman of James Dobson, she's still the harbinger of global feminism.

That's the point of the PalinPumaWatch site. Her blog is a place where Freepers can hang around, but relatively reliable Standard American Liberals are not at all welcome because they question her wisdom on Sarah Palin. That's the definition of derangement.

You know, her...issues have a root in old flamewars and wounds from the history of the feminist blogosphere, and I think that some of it has interfered with her judgement. But she's chosen this road, so whatever.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

are all the sites who hate and dismiss and denounce that Daily Howler repeatedly goes back to the 90s treatment of Clinton, and the 2000 race to show that just because the media is treating Obama good now like they did Dubya they're not suddenly better or even different at all or suddenly telling us truth?

isn't that his "issue"?

why is the treatment of Palin by all different from the treatment of Hillary? and just as valid as the treatment of all women who have or want power and/or are in the public eye or in "traditionally male" jobs?

because she's a Republican woman it's "derangement" to speak of horrible sexism and misogyny? (and class issues as well--bigtime)

And how all this behavior affects all society and all women too--no matter what party they are, or what they believe in?

it seems that just like many denounce and attack all who dare critically assess Obama--anyone who even tries to talk about Palin without demonizing her in the accepted ways gets denounced and attacked--and called "deranged".

It's absolutely horrible--and compounds the actual damage done to her and other women in the first place.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

linked is criticizing Violet's recent call for a Tax Protest, since women aren't properly represented in government, because they are shamed out of contention for office.

It's not because her preferred candidate didn't win, which is what the linked post implies. And a lot of people who are uncomfortable with the inconvenient truths Violet is posting, have a lot to say about the current company she is keeping, i.e. Right wing and Pro life feminists.

I don't agree that someone who is anti-choice can necessarily be feminist, since that person is denying women their essential humanity by limiting their ability to make their own medical decisions, but I totally agree(because it's true) that feminism cannot triumph when only women inside the Democratic party are "allowed" to join. Especially since plenty of "feminists" in the Dem party were A'OK with the blatant women hating we saw this election(I'm thinking the "Palin is a Cunt" T shirts, worn predominantly by women in the pics I've seen). If we are expected to ally with women who think treating women politicians like that is OK, why shouldn't we also be allying with women who call themselves feminist(like Palin did), but also are against abortion.

Submitted by lambert on

It's like the Zen saying, "The way out is the door." Well, if you walk through the door out of the Democratic Party, then you're going to meet a variety of people who aren't nearly as principled as, say, Steney Hoyer. Why not let it play out, say I. Experiment!

Seriously, if we're in the post-partisan future where torturers aren't held accountable, how on earth is that better than hanging out with right wing feminists? Cf. Matthew 7:3.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

who explicitly and repeatedly say they're personally anti-choice, and/or would never lift a finger to help equality genderwise or otherwise?

unless the non-Dem people are demonstrably working to harm opportunity and equality, are they really that different?

and many people believe that it's actually worse -- and more damaging to progress -- that people like Lieberman (who is horrendous genderwise) and Casey and other pro-life Dems -- are given power and highlighted and held up as something "good" or "moral" or demonstrative of how welcoming the party is -- that just like recruiting and helping conservatives and bluedogs, it can only hurt and prevent progress and stop equality.

Iridescence's picture
Submitted by Iridescence on

I'm a big fan of Violet's writing and I think that PalinPumaWatch site is unfair to her. Particularly when they accuse her of racism. Violet's position, as I understand it, is that racism and sexism are equally bad but sexism is treated much more dismissively by the media. She questions why many in society (and the media especially) are dismissive or openly accepting of sexism while decrying racism at every turn. She is not questioning why racism is decried but why sexism ISN'T. She also dislikes Obama but I don't think that's at all based on his race but rather his character and tactics.

I disagree with Violet on some things and some of her commenters can get pretty extreme sometimes but I also think she is right about a lot of things and asks a lot of good insightful questions in her writing.

What I've read of the PPW site is either extremely cherry-picked or it is criticizing Violet based on things her commenters say which I think is unfair.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

i posted one of her posts here the other day --
The New Feminism (pt. 1) --

she's been very good at keeping the focus on sexism, misogyny, and women and politics.

many if not most bloggers who used to focus on all that don't anymore--as we've seen, tragically.