Tag Archives: Feministe

A Father’s Rights

I just watched a movie trailer at Feministe for a film called A Father’s Rights. More disturbing than the video were the comments under it. These people seem so blinded by hatred of everything male that they seem to think there’s a misogynist behind every bush.

This appears to be a story about a man fighting to be in his daughter’s life and wanting to protect her from what seems to be an abusive mother. Only he can’t – he has no legal rights to the child because he wasn’t married to her mother when the child was born. Despite the adamant denial that this could ever happen, I know for a fact that it can and does. These kinds of cases are not all the same across the board. Insisting that one’s own experience represents every other case is not only ignorant, it’s also rather immature.

I would like to take a quick detour, just to mention for the benefit of those currently studying law, that I think they will find, as they grow up in their careers, that what they have learned in the classroom about how the legal system is supposed to work isn’t always how it actually does work. It’s more than a little irritating to have some arrogant law student telling people that their experiences aren’t real just because they don’t line up with what the textbooks and law journals have to say on the subject. I’m afraid someone is in for a very rude awakening.

Now, back to the topic at hand:

Continue reading

A Few Clarifications

There appears to be some confusion about the intent of my recent post, Victims Wanted, and I would like to try and clarify a few things.

First I would like to call your attention to the opening paragraph:

[…] in pondering the unrelenting claim by Feministe bloggers and readers that asking why victims and survivors of domestic violence stay is always victim-blaming, a few other why? questions occurred to me and I had to get them out of my head and on the page:

You see, Victims Wanted is really just a brainstorm that I wrote in a state of bewilderment over the unwillingness of certain feminists to even consider a perspective that doesn’t line up with most everyone else’s. But it seems the questions that were spinning around in my head that day have been mistaken for assertions and/or conclusions. So I would like to try and make a few clarifications:

Continue reading

Victims Wanted

I’ll try not to ramble on too much here; I’m really pressed for time. But in pondering the unrelenting claim by Feministe bloggers and readers that asking why victims and survivors of domestic violence stay is always victim-blaming, a few other why? questions occurred to me and I had to get them out of my head and on the page:

Why do they so desperately need victims and survivors to be offended by this question?

I’ve said numerous times over the past week, that I am a survivor of three decades of abuse, and I am not always offended by the question. I don’t believe it’s always intended to blame me. Doesn’t my perspective count for anything? If so, why is everyone frothing at the mouth over it? And if not, why not? Because it doesn’t fit their agenda?

Why do they insist on imposing this doctrine on people? Because where there’s no victim there’s no cause? The more victims they have and the more ways they can invent for us to be re-victimized (and brainwashed into believing it) the more stuff they have to rally around and shout about?

Why is it so difficult for them to think outside the box? Why, as so-called advocates for the abused, can’t they just be happy that I’m OK; that I’ve moved beyond being a victim and encourage other people to do the same? Why do they insist on trying to steal my agency; on telling me what to think, how to feel and how I should express it?

Isn’t there enough actual abuse taking place in the world? Do they really need a Victims Wanted sign in the window?

Now I’m braced for the onslaught. Thinking for one’s self and asking uncomfortable questions which challenge people’s thinking, gets you into very deep, hot water with these people.

Now let the frothing begin.

By the way, here’s another genius who admits to not reading all the material, but yet has the nerve to assume that I have no experience with domestic violence. Par for the course. Like I’ve said before, if it doesn’t line up with their preconceived ideas, it can’t possibly exist.

That’s Just Crazy!

In Fighting Ableist Language, Jill of Feministe makes the following statement:

I often use words like “crazy,” “insane,” and “nutbag” to describe people whose views I think I bizarre, illogical or bigoted. But as Tekanji points out, words mean things. And while words like “crazy” are pretty steeped in my vocabulary, it really isn’t all that hard to make an effort to purge them. Consider this Step 1.

Well, that’s just crazy! But I don’t mean Jill. I’m talking about the notion that we can’t say “crazy” anymore without offending someone we weren’t even talking about. It’s insane!

Look, I don’t usually set out to offend people, but my life does not revolve around avoiding it either. Sure, there are certain sensitive situations, “a time and a place”, etc. I care about other people’s feelings and take them into account whenever possible. But when I look at the Bush Administration, for instance, I think “crazy”, and that’s what I’m going to call it. When I heard McCain say that he would keep troops in Iraq for a hundred years, I thought “insane”. And it is. And that’s what I’m going to call it.

In response to someone who suggested that not being offended by the use of these words is possibly a result of privilege (i.e. never having been affected by mental illness) I posted the following comment on Feministe. It sums up my thoughts on the subject quite nicely.

Continue reading