Well, I certainly didn’t believe that my little blog would create the furor it has over the past couple of days.
First, I need to say a couple of things about the intent of my original post, because as its contents were spread without context in some cases, the intent may have been lost. What I did not intend was to browbeat anyone into giving me a link or to embarrass anyone. My intent was to address the intellectual dishonesty of those who will privately espouse sexist views, and mask them in public with explorations of the disparity between male and female bloggers in the upper ranks without addressing their own complicity in that disparity.
[...]
The truth is, the whole “what are women’s issues and who should be talking about them” debate is specious, and is in fact little more than a red herring designed to deflect attention from the real issue—that sexism is still alive and well, even among some men who fancy themselves feminists. The contention that we must first define “women’s issues” belittles this entire quandary to a semantic argument. The truth is, women’s voices are still not heard in the upper echelons on most issues; suggesting they must be incorporated simply so that “women’s issues” are effectively addressed conveniently ignores that fact.
Read the rest at Big Brass Blog.
Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus