Sometimes feminists outdo themselves. They descend to a
level of stupidity that is below what even I imagine.
It is often noted that teenage girls in America are out of
control. Many of them think it’s cool to dress like prostitutes. Many think
that the best way to show their love is to sext a picture of their genitals. Far
too many of them suffer from eating disorders and other psychological problems.
If you ask who is leading them to these self-destructive
behaviors, the answer does not lie in the home. Their mothers are most often
horrified by what they see.
Young girls and women no longer pay attention to their parents. They allow themselves to be led around by the Pied Pipers
of feminism.
Feminist thinkers are telling young girls that they can
dress as they please, revealing any or all of their intimacy, to whomever they
please, and that anyone who does not like it is a repressive patriarch.
It sounds like I am caricaturing feminist thinking, but in
the hands of one Lindy West, feminist thinking has become self-parody.
Yesterday on Jezebel, West declared war on modesty. To no
one’s surprise she believes that the concept of modesty was invented to
subjugate women. Being modest means not having the right to own property and
not having the right to an abortion.
So says Lindy West.
The term modesty dates from Roman times, but during the
sixteenth century it was extended to refer to female propriety.
To West, it’s a smoking gun. As you know, feminists abhor female
propriety; they detest decorum, humility, temperance and dignity too.
Since modesty involves moderation and self-control, the feminist alternative must
see moral value in immoderate rants, being out of control, and being a drama queen.
If West is any indication, feminists are selling shamelessness. The best evidence is West’s
column: it’s nothing more than a mindless, intemperate rant. Unfortunately, it is likely to exercise some influence.
When it comes to reality, everyone but Lindy West knows that
covering the external genitalia is universal among human beings. So is the
sense of shame.
It is also true that rules about covering up are more strict
for men than for women. Male sexuality has consistently been more hidden
than female sexuality.
Allow West to express herself:
It just
means that you get to do whatever
you want with them [your breasts], regardless of any and all
400-year-old notions about "womanly propriety." Barring public nudity
laws (which are also
kind of silly, but whatevs), the idea that society can tell you how much of
your body to reveal or hide implies that your body does not belong to you. The concept of modesty is
proprietary and patriarchal and ancient. I'm pretty sure that even the most
hardline anti-feminist can admit who owned women's bodies in the 1560s, when
the term came plopping out of the etymological birth canal. Hint: it wasn't
women.
Ignore the fact that West has confused the meaning of the
term with an association that it picked up in 1560.
By her lights, women can walk around naked and no one should
notice or draw any inferences. Allow me to mention that if a woman walks around
naked or even half-naked and no one notices she will feel seriously offended and demoralized.
West believes that women’s bodies are theirs and theirs alone.
They are, dare I say, a woman's private property.
West wants women to be able to do whatever they want with
their bodies. But she also insists that no one has a right to form an opinion
about the way a woman has chosen to present in public.
Note well: a woman’s body is her private property, and the minds of those who see her are also her private property. If you should witness her voluntary self-exposure, you are NOT free to draw a conclusion.
West is correct to say that a woman’s excessively
revealing attire does not give a man a right to rape her, but that is
ultimately a defense attorney’s ploy.
Girls who sext photos of their private parts to boys are not
getting hurt because anyone thinks they are inviting rape. They are getting
hurt because everyone around them starts thinking differently of them. They get
hurt by being shunned, not because anyone believes that they are asking to be
raped. And they are hurt because they often do not have the emotional resources to deal with the shame.
West does not seem to understand that both women and men
make statements with the way they choose to dress. By her principles, professional women can dress as
prostitutes and not be penalized for disrupting the workplace.
Leave it to feminists to undermine women in the workplace.
Since West has no real notion of ethics, she confuses what a
woman can do with what she should do.
If a woman does not want to have sex with a man she can of
course go home with him, get naked with him, get into bed with him, and say No. If he does not respect
her wishes he will be guilty of rape.
No dispute there.
But, what kind of idiot believes that just because she can,
she should. An adult female ought to know better. She ought not to put herself
in risky and dangerous situations.
When you are the victim of a crime, punishing the perpetrator does not make it all go away. It's better to avoid being a crime victim than to engage in risky behaviors that make you more likely to become one.
A woman does have a constitutional right to be
stupid, but I would hope that she knows the difference between an unnecessary risk and a wise course of action. If her moral sense has not been addled by feminism, she probably does.
You can play with fire, if you wish, but it is not something
you should do.
Having no sense of shame West also has no sense of
responsibility for what her dreadful advice might produce.
When a teenage girl takes Lindy West’s advice to heart and
sexts picture of her breasts to her boyfriend, her biggest problem is not what
some defense attorney might cook up in a courtroom.
Girls who expose
themselves through sexting suffer some extremely serious mental health issue.
Immodesty contributes to the emotional distress that many
young women are suffering and to the self-destructive behaviors that many of
them use as self-medication.
Lindy West stated her principle:
I am a
person. I'll dress the way I want and act the way I want, and if I want to show
all of my boobs that is not an invitation or a justification to rape me.
For my part I am glad to know that she is a person. I was beginning to have some doubts.
If this is what West believes then she should be willing to
accept responsibility for the damage that this advice will produce.
Telling girls and young women that they can go through life
dressing the way you want and acting the way you want without suffering
consequences is mindless and dangerous.
5 comments:
They encourage women to dress like true sluts, but then /RAGE fiercely when Redditors have a forum for sharing pictures of women dressed like sluts in public.
The cognitive dissonance is astounding.
I just don't understand so many of these feminist writers. So much absolute nonsense and drivel comes out of them and yet they are still taken seriously. There is no depth of thought at all in Lindy Wests' piece and yet it got 196,000 Facebook 'likes' and 255 comments, undoubtedly the majority of which are affirmative. And this is just one of countless articles by feminist writers that are equally vapid and exalted. It just makes no sense to me.
Stuart - if you haven't already seen it, perhaps you might find Dalrock's take on this interesting:
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/slut/
I find it interesting that a 15 year old gets it on a deeper level then the supposedly mature woman.
Saige Hatch, 15, launched the South Pasadena High School Modesty Club in September to combat the proliferation of short shorts, miniskirts and bare midriffs. Hatch blames popular culture and peer pressure for sexualizing women and girls.
"Women have fought for their rights, liberty, and honor more in the past 200 years than in all recorded history," reads a statement on the club's website, www.modestyclub.com. "Our bright, heroic women are being made the fool. A fool to think that to be loved they must be naked. To be noticed they must be sexualized. To be admired they must be objectified."
more from the chorus..www.alternet.org/gender/why-critics-shouldnt-be-so-quick-shame-katy-perry?paging=off
Post a Comment