Saturday, June 20, 2009

Estimated Prophetess

Purple and red angelonia, and other purty plants at the South Carolina Farmer's market. (from my Flickr page)


I am one of those lifelong weirdo-hippies that enjoys talking to strangers, and so the article titled Happinomics in Adbusters totally vindicates me. I do think I am happier when I exchange pleasantries with other people, and I enjoy the warm fuzzy feeling of connection/communion that results from it...it's not (only) because I am a nosyparker! Random social exchanges are good for our well-being! And now I have this hotshot happiness-researcher to back me up in my random babbling in restrooms and checkout lines. Alright!

I have long noticed that friendly chit-chat increases the possibility of sales in a retail environment, just as familiar, fast-paced music does.

~*~

I am about to get banned, at long last, from FEMINIST CRITICS, the argumentative blog dedicated to criticizing feminism. I am already on the "watch list"--even though one guy who throws around the word "skanks" (and authoritatively announced that the Southern USA is a "shithole") is on no such watch list. I guess it depends on who you know and who you blow, as the expression goes.

In any event, the version of women's lives propagated at FC is a sharp contrast to the version offered at No Longer Quivering, a blog started by ex-Quiverfull women that I have been visiting regularly. On FEMINIST CRITICS, feminism is presented as a blight, blunting the happiness of our society, making people (read: men) totally miserable and altering the course of natural desire, blah blah blah. On NLQ, I see what our world would be WITHOUT feminism, and I feel like getting down on my knees before Almighty God and giving thanks for being born into a world that has finally been given the possibility of WOMEN'S FULL HUMANITY. Hallelujah and praise GOD for FEMINISM!

Graphic grabbed from Cyborg Mommy.



The guys at FEMINIST CRITICS (along with their trusty anti-feminist female mascot/hench(wo)man, TyphonBlue), would be totally at home in the Quiverfull movement... in fact, I don't understand why these anti-feminist malcontents aren't jumping on the bandwagon to find them a proper Quiverfull wife who will shut up and not argue.

Then, of course, it dawns on me: they'd have to support all those kids! LOL--obedience comes at a high price, dudes.

Meanwhile, TyphonBlue continues her complaint that her husband has been greatly harmed by the loss of his Bodily Integrity (FC lingo = circumcision) and resultant male sex-Godhood, or she'd be in the secular-Quiverfull movement for sure. [Caution: second link contains ableist language, the term "crippled sexuality"--which is horrendously gross, but I linked it to make a point. And TyphonBlue wonders why hubby has issues? I certainly don't.]

And you know, that's the thing...Quiverfull is a religious movement. IS there a secular equivalent? Absolutely.

The constant, worshipful fetishizing of the large family (Jon & Kate Plus 8, Nadia Suleman) is everywhere in our culture. It's been going on since the Osmonds, the Jacksons, The Brady Bunch and The King Family. And in these enlightened times (cough) you don't need religion to be radically natalist. In fact, I found the Quiverfull blog when one of their readers linked my Surfwise review to their message board, offering the wise observation that it sounded the same as the Quiverfull life, only no surfing.

The Quiverfull women are awesome in their self-analysis and truth-telling, one speaking openly about what it was like when her husband no longer desired her. (And what happens to these wives then? Are they simply supposed to ACCEPT loveless marriages? Apparently.) These women ain't a bit shy regarding the use of that much-maligned word PATRIARCHY; in fact, they are very clear about the usage. Unlike some of us, they don't throw the word around in a meaningless mish-mash of theory, they are quite specific: a patriarchal household is one in which the husband/father rules. After all, patriarchy is literally defined as "rule of the fathers"--and that is the life they have escaped from, the life they are warning us about. They know what patriarchy is.

PATRIARCHY is that which would exist, if feminism had not challenged it, if feminism did not continue to challenge it throughout the world.

PATRIARCHY is that state of affairs championed on FEMINIST CRITICS. And the Quiverfull women come forward to say, very plainly, NO. NO. NO.

I am now addicted to the blog, and the eye-opening spiritual witness of powerhouse-survivors Vyckie and Laura, also very descriptive and talented writers. God bless you strong womyn, and I love you. I am waiting for the special moment, here in Bob Jones University-land, to give your website-address to women who truly NEED it. I meet Quiverfull wives every day, I know it will happen eventually, so stay tuned. (((blows copious kisses)))

~*~

And speaking of patriarchy, dig THIS! It made me somewhat dizzy, but you know how cognitive dissonance is. Lord have mercy!

Kittywampus writes about Masters and Johnson, reviewing a review (we are somewhat derivative here in Blogdonia, you may have noticed) about the new biography of the duo, titled Masters of Sex.

Dana Goldstein's review on The American Prospect:


The truth of the Masters-Johnson partnership, however, was far more sordid. By Johnson’s own account, and that of friends and colleagues, Masters hired the divorced mother of two under the implicit understanding that she would become his sexual partner — for the purposes of research, Masters claimed. “Sex for Virginia Johnson would become part of her job,” Maier writes matter-of-factly. And indeed, Johnson told Maier herself in an interview, “No — I was not comfortable with it, particularly. I didn’t want him at all, and had no interest in him.” Johnson engaged in sex with Masters, she claimed decades later, because as a single-mother, “I had a job and I wanted it.”
She said what?!

Is this Virginia Johnson we are talking about?!

Well, damn, who knew.

Kittywampus writes:

Of course, when Masters hired Johnson in 1957, Catharine MacKinnon was still in grade school. No one had dreamed up a name for sexual harassment, though it occurred commonly, and women certainly knew it was wrong when they experienced it. And yes, sexual harassment is the right word for what Masters imposed on Johnson. She very clearly states that she had no interest in him. She was living a hardscrabble life as a single mother, and her other options appeared worse.

This is the couple whose work overturned the oppressive Freudian conceit of the vaginal orgasm as essential to mature femininity. They proved that clitoral and vaginal orgasms didn’t differ, physiologically. How ironic that this liberatory insight flowed from a partnership that began as sexual exploitation.
As I said over on her blog, all you can say is WOW.

I am really quite stunned.

~*~

At left: Close-up of red and purple angelonia. (I love them!)


I'm always glad to hear that there are more feminists in South Carolina (this rates another strong hallelujah! from me)... and Moody Springs is Rachel's relatively new blog. She writes about Ellen DeGeneres' new 'funny' commercial in which Ellen announces 'ironically' (and watch out for that free-floating irony, folks!), "Inner beauty is important, but not nearly as important as outer beauty.":

It's funny, I guess. Or...supposed to be. See, because she is a comedienne, and she makes jokes. And she uses verbal irony here...everyone knows that inner beauty actually is more important than outer beauty, but it doesn't hurt to enhance one's outer beauty. But instead of saying that, she says the opposite of what we all know to be true....

Or do we?

Actually, what she is saying is very "true." Outer beauty is more important than inner beauty. Or rather, that one must do everything she* can to hide her outer ugliness. Or in other words, her wrinkles; the fact she is old...or the fact that she didn't die young and is still alive. Oh, the situational irony is just as rich as the verbal irony...the fact that you have the vitality in you to live long, and that you have been blessed for many years with the good luck to not have been involved in some circumstance that resulted in your death, makes you ugly. So if you use this makeup, it will lie flat over those wrinkles. Hide them. Your potent life force that led you to be wrinkled will be your secret.
Rachel, may your new blog live long and prosper, girlfriend! Welcome to wacky Blogdonia.

And BTW: YES!--as several have asked, I did coin the word Blogdonia, with considerable help from Groucho Marx. Unfortuntely, the graphic in that link, featuring the mercurial Rufus T. Firefly, has now evaporated into the cyber-ether. (My advice to new bloggers regarding images is: always copy and download your own, because other people's stuff comes and goes like summer sitcoms, and frequently does not even last out the week.)

~*~

More stuff you should check out:

Politico on Obama's persistent gay problem.

Angry Black Bitch is hilarious on the subject of Senator John Ensign, violating the sanctity of man-woman opposite marriage.

The New Agenda's Urban Girls: The Have-Nots of Sports

Mr Daisy has deserted me on this sultry, sauna-like day, to go to HeroesCon in Charlotte. I assigned him Dead Air photography duties, so let's hope he returns with some proper Superhero photos to celebrate the Solstice!

And now, signing off to sizzle...

~*~

Estimated Prophet - Grateful Dead (jump to 1:31; they diddle with chords for a whole minute and a half!)



Like an angel
Standing in a shaft of light
Rising up to paradise
I know I'm gonna shine

14 comments:

Owen said...

Nice Estimated here...

As for the feminism subject (I did go to the other blog you suggested, but got bogged down somewhere about 50 comments into the exchange, but clearly it was going hot and heavy there) I belong to the school of thought best summarized in another song by our favorite band "The Women Are Smarter"...
Peace and Happy Father's Day to the guys in your life :-D

ballgame said...

FTR, the reason you have been placed on my "watch list" is simply that you do not argue in good faith. You come in, misinterpret and/or misrepresent what people say, and when people rebut you, you either switch to a different subject or invent new misinterpretations. It is exceedingly tiresome. (The fact that you've embarked on a smear campaign against FC is not particularly endearing, either.)

As a consequence of being placed on the "watch list", you are allowed to comment only on one of the two comment threads we generally create for most posts. Clearly we at FC are merciless monsters to impose such a draconian punishment on you. (Admittedly, there remains the possibility of your becoming the first feminist we've ever banned if you flout even the looser guidelines of respectful blog commenting that we impose on everyone in the RP comment threads.)

I notice you're continuing your campaign of misrepresenting FC in your OP:

On FEMINIST CRITICS, feminism is presented as a blight, blunting the happiness of our society, making people (read: men) totally miserable and altering the course of natural desire, blah blah blah.

No. As far as FC bloggers are concerned, our main beef with gynocentric feminism is that it presents a one-sided picture of how gender affects society, and tends to ignore or minimize the ways that gender adversely affects men.

The guys at FEMINIST CRITICS (along with their trusty anti-feminist female mascot/hench(wo)man, TyphonBlue), would be totally at home in the Quiverfull movement

I admit it, this assertion makes me laugh. If you think the Quiverfull movement would rush to embrace me, an agnostic gender egalitarian democratic socialist who strongly believes in birth control and sees overpopulation as one of the biggest threats to humanity, then your assessment of reality is, um, unique.

PATRIARCHY is that state of affairs championed on FEMINIST CRITICS.

This is a strawman argument. You will search in vain for a post at FC endorsing the existence of "patriarchy". What you will find is a struggle to pinpoint what is meant by this ill-defined and often misleading term.

I'm sorry to see that you apparently are also lagging behind many of your feminist sisters in recognizing how circumcision without consent is a violation of a person's bodily integrity, even when it's done to boys.

DaisyDeadhead said...

ballgame, equal time. I will leave it to the reader to decide for themselves. The links are there and they, too, speak for themselves.

The content at FC is frequently shockingly misogynist, as in the "skanks" outburst. One never knows when one will be hit with flying debris of that sort, which is a whole lot different than "arguing in bad faith"...

ballgame: If you think the Quiverfull movement would rush to embrace me...

As I said (did you even read it?)-- one does not need to be religious or Christian, to subscribe to strict gender-role standards.

ballgame: As far as FC bloggers are concerned, our main beef with gynocentric feminism is that it presents a one-sided picture of how gender affects society, and tends to ignore or minimize the ways that gender adversely affects men.

The catch here is your cagey use of the word "bloggers"...true, bg, but this is not the overwhelming view of the entirety of the Feminist Critics community and commentariat, many of whom subscribe to the view that feminism has been an antagonistic, negative and pernicious force. Feminism is pretty openly regarded as THE ENEMY.

Stop playing innocent on this score, please, I know you are well aware of this.

As for circumcision,

I'm not necessarily anti- anti-circumcision. What I am anti is all the penis-obsession, which starts to sound kinda weird after awhile. Also, as I have stated before, I find an element/overtone of antisemitism in the anti-circumcision movement that disturbs me, and I want to see this addressed properly from within the movement. That will be the factor that changes my mind. But in the alternative medicine community, for example, I continue to hear things that disturb me.

***And no one, not a single person, should EVER, EVER be referred to as having a "crippled sexuality". This offensive, ableist, unstriken remark from months ago, is really quite horrible and from one of your regulars, too.

Also, note that this is a woman talking about men. I am shocked you don't see this for what it is. But I wonder what the subject of this discussion would think if he knew his private sexual business was being bandied about as discussion fodder/horror story on an anti-feminist blog, made a poster-boy for anti-circumcision? You seem concerned about the exploitation of men, yet don't seem to notice it when it occurs right on your own blog.

Renee said...

I have to say bless you for engaging as long as you have on feminist critics. I have visited the site a few times and for my mental health I have run screaming. Those men are no interested in engagement, they are interested in demeaning women at every turn to make themselves feel better.
As far as the the Quiverfull movement I could not agree with you more. I just lose my mind every time I see some of these families promoted on television. The Duggars are a particular sore point with me. Praising this as a natural way of living when it amounts to the subordination of women and children, poverty in many cases and unchecked abuse is wrong. Shame on the MSM for making a buck off of this.

Sungold said...

First, Daisy, that title is *awesomest.* I love that song but you just made it a little better.

I've had my own conversations in the past week with people from FC (Daran) on my blog. He too came at me with similar statements - saying it was unfair to paint FC as populated with MRAs - and I replied that the bloggers are capable of more nuance, but the commenters can be really crassly anti-woman.

Sorry, I just don't see feminism as a zero-sum game. I'd love to see the guys at FC start tracing out some of the ways that the current system of power (running along lines of sex/gender, class, race, age, sexual orientation, health/ability, etc.) hurts men too. I'm not unsympathetic to that idea. Not at all. I just don't think we need to get caught up in portraying one sex as victimizing the other (one reason I love bell hooks, btw) and I see too much of the discourse at FC as simply reversing the most reactive, oversimplified "radfem" victim narratives.

Thanks, also, for the linky love! I was surprised at that sordid chapter in the history of sexuality, and surprised, too, that it wasn't already circulating widely in Blogdonia.

Oh, and I *totally* talk to strangers - to the point that my 9-year-old son wonders what's wrong with me. But I love it.

Rachel said...

Thanks for the warm welcome to Blogdonia, Daisy!! :-* Thanks as well for all the interesting links and info.

ballgame said...

[ballgame:] If you think the Quiverfull movement would rush to embrace me...

[DDH:] As I said (did you even read it?)-- one does not need to be religious or Christian, to subscribe to strict gender-role standards.


Once again, I am amused that you think I subscribe to strict gender-role standards.

The catch here is your cagey use of the word "bloggers"...true, bg, but this is not the overwhelming view of the entirety of the Feminist Critics community and commentariat, many of whom subscribe to the view that feminism has been an antagonistic, negative and pernicious force. Feminism is pretty openly regarded as THE ENEMY.

We have a few MRAs, but I disagree that they comprise the majority of commenters, or that they are as extreme as you paint them. I would certainly distinguish between folks who think "feminism" is the enemy and those who think "feminist hypocrisy" is the enemy. (We have a few of both kinds, though more of the latter.)

The ones that have been extreme have gotten swatted down; the four people we've either banned or placed on permanent moderation have all been either strict gender role types or obnoxious anti-feminist shit-stirrers. As for the rest, well, we're not an echo chamber. We welcome people with contrarian views, if they are willing to discuss things in a respectful manner. I once had a very long and intellectually challenging comment exchange with one of our commenters who seemed to be pretty clearly on the opposite side of the fence from me on most major issues. (He was on the right, I was on the left, he believed in restoring sex roles, I want to eliminate them, etc.)

It isn't fair to paint Feminist Critics as being either X or Y when you're really referring to some FC commenters, who we often express disagreement with anyway. And it's extremely unfair to paint us with the insulting term "misogyny central."

Coffee Messiah said...

Hey, thanks for 4 your recent visit.

And yes, civility and speaking and listening, seems to be a lost art these days.

Especially in public and stores.

As you stated though, once you do, it's a win/win most of the time.

Good Luck with the rest of it.

La Lubu said...

Great post! Thanks for the reading tips!

I especially like the Urban Girls and Masters and Johnson stories--I probably wouldn't have found those on my own. Thanks, Daisy.

Mama Moretti said...

OMG - that comic is soo perfect.

sheila said...

Wow. I was just going to comment that I, like you, am a yacker...in the supermarket, bathroom, etc...I can strike up a conversation anywhere, lol. I think it's good for the soul to be friendly. And sometimes a smile from a stranger is all someone needs to perk up their day.

I wasn't even going to comment on the FC thing. But then I got to the comments. Ughhh. Why do you subject yourself to this? Why Daisy? lol.

First off, I cannot believe there are actually people out there STILL with these attitudes/ beliefs/views. What century is this anyhow?

It's like arguing politics or religion. A no compromise situation.

And as for misinterpreting? isn't the point of posting an article generally to give an opinion and let the reader take away their OWN opinion of what you said? Maybe listen to another side of an argument - truly listen?

At any rate, if my husband EVER treated me (or any other woman)like that, I'd leave. Although I would have never married let alone dated someone like that in the first place.

I don't know why you even waste your breath. You have so much to say...why waste it on someone who is unwilling and unable to even listen to it?

white rabbit said...

Daisy - Have you checked out the Burning Spear cover of estimated prophet?

http://new.music.yahoo.com/burning-spear/tracks/estimated-prophet--488438

Amber Rhea said...

If you ask me, getting banned from Feminist Critics is a point of pride. Of course, I think you have nerves of steel for venturing over there at all. What a headfuck that place is.

www.muebles-camobel.es said...

Thanks for the post, pretty worthwhile info.