Fighting for "feminism"

[Caliman73]

Here is a Salon article regarding the Weasel from Wasilla's continuing attempts to frame the debate over what feminism is and what it means for women in particular but also for society. It is a call on Progressives, women and men to fight for the the term by defining it and embracing so to protect it from corruption.

http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/2010/06/01/palin_feminism?source=newsletter

[Heidi]

1. Her understanding of feminism is as one-dimensional as she is.

No big surprise there.

[Caliman73]

3. True

But the point is that while she continues to talk about it (and yes we have to grant that she has a pulpit from which to speak) she is helping to define feminism for those who have not been directly involved in the movement to gain true equality for women. The point is that we all have to fight back as loudly as we can in our daily lives against the nonsense she and her contemporaries like Coulter and Malkin are spreading.

[saracat]

2. Most here will not care but this is extremely important to over 50% of Americans.

We must defeat the right on this issue.there is no such thing as anti-choice, pro-life feminism.

[Caliman73]

4. Agreed

Each person must be free to make their own choice about their body and reproduction, but as you say, these so called Palin feminists are using the term to define a movement that removes those choices. Feminism is all about choice, whether you choose to work outside the home or within it, whether you choose to get pregnant or not, or to carry a pregnancy to term or not. Choice, freedom, self determination, and equal dignity and respect that is what I think of when I think of feminism.

Palin and her ilk are not about that and they cannot be allowed to muddy the waters.

[saracat]

5. But it is very sad that many do not care. But yet will classify themselves as liberals.

hat is a mystery to me.

[LooseWilly]

6. Welcome to the Democratic Party.

Leftists/Unionists & the LGBT community aren't the only ones who are de-prioritized in the reach "across the aisle". Maybe "liberal" doesn't mean what everyone seems to think it means... or maybe it just doesn't apply to the Democratic Party.

I think they're gonna need more busses soon... there's a lot of women and teachers looking scheduled for a tossing.

Funny how Wall St. still hasn't a worry about any involvement with busses...

The important thing to remember though, is to continue to worry only about your own concerns, and not pay any attention to the fact "that many do not care" about any of the other factions supposedly included in "the tent". That way it will continue to be everyone else's fault for not helping "you"... rather than equally "your fault" for not having helped them when their time came...

[LooseWilly]

7. Democratic Party operatives have spent the last 30 years running away from the Left/progressivism...

Whatever you want to call it, from the Left to progressivism to hippy idealism to punk rock anarchism... the Democratic Party has been running away from the lot since Reagan handed them their asses in '80, '82, '84... The call for the Democratic Party to step up to hold the rhetorical/linguistic ground of feminism is like trying to call on the Catholic Church to draft policy for child safety...

It is guffaw-worthy.

The article talks about the Democratic Party as being poor at winning the war of language... but it misses a critical detail— the Democratic Party hasn't been losing the war of language to the Republicans so much as they have been retreating from the field of battle, routed and terrified, as a result of what seems to be terror that winning that "war of language" was causing them to lose politically (see above mention of Reagan the ass-hander).

The Democrats aren't losing the war of language... they're running in terror at the thought of what might happen if they were to win the war of language. Their advisors seem to have convinced them that the language of the progressivism of the 60's and 70's caused the Reagan debacle... so now the strategy seems to be retreat and let the Republicans take over the chore of defining the terms of the language, and then fight on their terms.

Sure, it makes no sense... but think about the last three decades of politics and see if it doesn't seem accurate.

If feminists want to hold on to the tenets of equality as a cornerstone of the meaning of "feminism" then I suggest they not wait around for the Democratic Party to step up for them. It might cost some of the same votes that the Party worries about losing if they were to step up for LGBT equality. Better that some voices step up and grab some air time to make their case, and not worry about stepping on Party toes in the process.

[Caliman73]

8. This is not just about the Democratic party

It is about people who are interested in civil rights and equality. The reason the article focuses on the Democratic party is that focusing on Republicans is like MLK focusing on the KKK to push Black Civil rights Rather than working with people who were more open to the message. Most feminists and people who believe in the equality of women belong to or identify with the Democratic Party. The point of the OP is to remind fellow DUers that this fight like all other civil rights struggles has not been won. It is constantly under attack and like sarcat says, it affects over 50% of the population.