Ms Magazine have put Barak on their cover in a photo shopped pic of him posed as superman opening his shirt to reveal a ‘This is what a feminist looks like’ top below.
How naïve can these people be? Barak is not going to be in any way pro-women at least in the form that I would judge it. He is a male politician endowed with all the privileges that enabled him to claw his way to the top.
I’m willing to accede he is likely to be less bad than his rivals, but no one has the power to turn their country around and make it women-friendly in four short years, or 8 if he gets a second term.
Shades methinks, of the unrealistic expectations many people had in 1997 and all we got were patronising pictures of Blair’s Babes and illegal wars. Ok, we got some excellent equalities legislation, but that is under constant attack and is not balanced out by the loss of civil liberties.
The Huffington Post link has Eleanor Smeal’s explanation:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eleanor-smeal/this-is-what-a-feminist-l_b_157531.html
(As it’s H.P. there are fewer frothing at the mouth commenters than on other sites, but there are still the predictable numpties.)
A sensible analysis here:
http://guerillawomentn.blogspot.com/2009/01/ms-magazine-trades-in-wonder-woman-for.html
And a new ranty blog for me to read:
http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/
3 comments:
I wasn't so outraged by Barak on Ms more worried that feminism is allying itself so much with one party in the US.
I too am concerned about the high hopes that were dashed with TBlair... but then maybe Obama is made of finer stuff.
Well...
I know that as a radical feminist Obama is hardly going to cut the mustard for you, but for lots of less radical women I would imagine he's a hope and a promise of better things, and MS Magazine are reflecting the expectations of their readership.
Yes, I know their hopes are pitched too low, and yes I know they're probably going to be disappointed. But allow them (and indeed me) my dreams for the moment; we'll face the disappointments later.
And you never know, there's a (good) chance Obama won't be the craven neo-liberal coward Blair was, but will actually do something.
Note, for example, Hilary 'promised to step up efforts to end sex trafficking of women' in her Senate confirmation hearings
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/14/hillary-clinton-senate-confirmation.
She needn't have done so; hardly going to impress the Senate committee or the press. But she knows lots of women voted for her, and that the Obama would be accepting.
I expect lots of little improvements, not much noted, much unheralded. But you might find that Obama by non-radical feminist standards may actually part that mustard, even if he only uses a finger to divide it.
PS as much as he used the sexist card, which wasn't as virulent as Dr. Violet Socks at Reclusive Leftist makes out, Hilary did play the race card. They're both very strong give-no-quarter people.
PPS Loved Reclusive Leftist's page on Sarah Palin's feminist beliefs
http://www.reclusiveleftist.com/2008/09/15/sarah-palin-and-feminism/
I'm not outraged at Ms, so much as disappointed and like M. says, aware that allying themselves with one party/person is possibly not very sensible. We'll see what happens in the long run.
I'm also understanding of the reality that politicians can only do so much in the face of their political opponents and world events interfering with their domestic policies. That's why I fear the hopes of many people are riding too high and too unrealistically.
Post a Comment