In America today, the modern liberal feminist has a strange problem on her hands — the United States is light years ahead of much of the rest of the world when it comes to women’s rights. Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Sarah Palin, Condoleezza Rice, Meg Whitman, Nancy Pelosi, Ruth Bater Ginsburg, Janet Yellen, Sonya Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres, Megyn Kelly, Sheryl Sandberg, Michelle Obama, and Melinda Gates barely scratch the surface of the endless list of female role models — living proof of just how much progress America has made since its inception. The tendency of the modern American feminist to inflate legitimate concerns into insurmountable obstacles often makes them look silly.
Take for instance, feminist Suey Park. After recently calling her out for seeing white boogeymen where they don’t exist it was then intimated online and in the comments section of this blog that I was racist. What I didn’t get a chance to do while discussing Ms. Park’s fears of “structural whiteness” was to zoom out to 30,000 feet. Pulling back allows readers to compare Ms. Park’s problems with those of women around the globe. It allows us to see if limited time and resources are being allocated properly.
An example of what the modern American liberal feminist spends her time talking about:
But I also saw a lot of pressure to dye my hair lighter, wear color contacts, to wear Abercrombie jeans, to wear Ugg boots and Northface and it was all these symbols to make me look more white but could never make me white enough, which was really frustrating, so of course I took that out on my body.
As an Asian American woman you’re told that you have to be smart and pretty to be heard. And you have to be exceptional, and of course people want us to be exceptional, so it was hard for me because I did struggle with math and science and I couldn’t live up to the ideals of what my sister could.
And now, off to India:
Ms. [Preeti] Dhaka’s training as one of the capital’s nearly 1,000 female investigators couldn’t insulate her from Indian traditions that often conspire against laws meant to enforce women’s rights. After a day of protest duty on New Year’s Eve, she wrote a despairing note: Her new husband, unhappy that her dowry hadn’t included a car, “tried to motivate me to die.” …
Pressuring a bride or her family for wedding gifts is against a 1961 law passed in an effort to end dowry abuses. The dowry tradition persists, with a woman’s family often giving lavish gifts to her fiancé’s family.
Dowry disputes remain a prevalent cause of violence against women, usually by husbands or in-laws who think a dowry was too small. According to government crime statistics, nearly one woman was killed every hour in India last year over dowries. In Delhi, “dowry comes a lot” in police complaints by women, says Ms. Insan. “In the village, the girls don’t come forward. They prefer to protect the home.” …
On Jan. 12, her body was discovered hanging by a scarf from a ceiling fan in her husband’s quarters, according to a police report.
Police charged Mr. Mund, his mother and his sister with harassing Ms. Dhaka into killing herself and inflicting cruelty on her. They are awaiting trial.
The dowry persists. It looks like for all the legitimate complaints about the British Empire, India could use some more “structural whiteness” when it comes to women’s rights. (I would replace “structural whiteness” with “Western Civilization,” but for the purposes of this blog post we’ll stick with feminist jargon.)
In America, “pressure” to “wear Ugg boots” makes it into fawning Washington Post pieces on upstart feminists. In India, women still die over dowry disputes.
In America, “structural whiteness” causes so much pressure to be “exceptional” that feminists have turned it into an issue; in the Middle East, Islamic clerics issue fatwas on the legitimacy of raping non-Muslims in Syria:
An Islamic cleric has cleared the path for rebels in Syria, who are trying to oust President Bashar Assad, to rape women, so long as they’re non-Sunni.
Salafi Sheikh Yasir al-Ajlawni, who hails from Jordan but who lived in Damascus for 17 years, sent a message via YouTube: It’s a “legitimate fatwa” for Muslims waging war against Mr. Assad and trying to put in place a Sharia government to “capture and have sex with” Alawites and other non-Sunni, non-Muslim women, Human Events reports. Mr. Assad is part of the Alawites sect.
Americans should always strive to form a more perfect union, but it is also important for us to acknowledge that the system of governance put in place by our founding fathers is exceptional. Liberal U.S. feminists struggle (in large part because they’ve formed coalitions with perpetual race-baiters) to admit the greatness of the American experiment and, as a result, the credibility of their own cause continues to take a hits.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’ll think I’ll read up on Policymic’s “Top 28 Iconic Feminist Moments of 2013.” Beyonce made the list. Who knew that prancing around as a sex object now constitutes coming out as a “proud feminist.”
Related: Quintessential feminist Suey Park blames ‘structural whiteness’ for her personal problems
Related: ‘Tiger mom’ Amy Chua touts U.S. minority success; feminist Suey Park raises the flag for mediocrity
Related: Argentina’s animalistic feminists assault, sexually molest praying Catholic men
again with using voices of woman of color to shut up park
don’t be surprised with my tone because I’ve seen/commented in the other post and it’s very obvious you do not want to examine your gendered racist ideas, nor your white male privilege, (by putting “everything” in “scare quotes”) or colonialist ideas or even your own american history…..
you’re obviously trying a false equivalence of Park’s upbringing and white women in other countries deal with, not because you actually care -because then you’d have to examine said things about your self – but simply to shut her up. like why are you even doing this. did she hurt you??
Please, do talk about “white male privilege.” I’d love to hear your thoughts. Colonialist ideas? Well, I am a big fan of the pillars of Western Civilization. If you want to accuse me of that, then guilty as charged. And American history? I’m more than happy to discuss it — at length. Anyone who has read this blog regularly knows that.
How am I trying to shut Suey Park up? I thought you guys were all about having open and honest debate? Am I somehow infringing upon her First Amendment rights? I fail to see how anything I’ve said on my blog silences her ability to start trending feminist hashtags or to give interviews with publications like the Washington Post, among others. Care to explain that to me?
Why am I “doing this”? Doing what? Ms. Park’s “NotYourAsianSideKick” and the interviews that followed were in the news, and I responded to it. I’ve been writing on stories I find interesting for years now, so I’m not sure where you’re coming from. I suppose if I started a weekly piece dedicated to Ms. Park you’d have a case. Two posts while her hashtag is trending? No.
Ms. Park is a big girl. If she wants to put herself out there and say her plan is to “take down…corporate America,” then she’s going to get push back. You just don’t like it that guys like me are more than willing to step up to the plate.
Anna: You and cogent responses are obviously thousands of miles apart. Anyone who agrees with the idiotic statement “Only whites can be racist” is either 1) dumb as a brick, 2) possesses a prodigious victim mentality, and/or 3) attended a college whose professors are to the left of Karl Marx.
Hube, one would think that before the Washington Post writes glowing pieces on young feminists that they would find if if those feminists, ummm, think only white people are capable of being racist. That one seems to be a key piece of information that readers would want to know. I guess not. 😉
My comment is two-fold, but I am going to start off by saying “mic drop.” Full marks, and bravo!
My other part is that I can hear my girlfriend and my other troupe of friends, all women and “feminist” (but in the sense of “equality” not “superiority” as most people mistake and not for the better.) just screaming at you right now and the more and more I think of it, I have to laugh myself silly. Not at your comment, but at the spark war it would cost. It’s “boys vs. girls” in the purest of senses, but only in terms of North America and not the rest of the world like India, which they would agree with you is simply just wrong. It would spark a debate but to me as a spectator, I would have to ask myself how much popcorn I would need before someone on either side cracks and pulls a Dan Slott xD.
Once more, cheers!
Matt, if you look at Anna’s reply she asks: “Like, why are you even doing this?” Answer: See Matt Robert McKenzie’s response.
Call it a “spark war,” or stirring up a hornet’s nest, the main point is that a discussion is generated that wouldn’t otherwise exist. Feminists only want to talk about what they want to talk about. Women like Anna want to talk about “white privilege” or to pretend that only white people are capable of being racists…and so I like to expose that sort of thing. By zooming out, we can see that the screeches and howls of many feminists are often the result of individuals who need a reality check.
As usual, these feminists have nothing to offer but name-calling and throwing out the race card. To quote Hube in the other thread, this “Anna” is exceedingly boring already.
Only white people can be racist?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Here are a few derogatory and racist terms Koreans have for Japanese people:
Jjokbari (Korean: 쪽발이)
Ban-jjokbari (Korean: 반쪽바리)
Wae-in (Korean: 왜인, 倭人)
Wae-nom (Korean: 왜놈)
Wae-gu (Korean: 왜구, 倭寇)
Wonsung-i (Korean: 원숭이)
Seomnara Wonsung-i (섬나라 원숭이)
Seong-jinguk (Korean: 성진국)
You can almost never go wrong with an old clip of Mike Tyson’s Punch Out. In this case, I’d agree without hesitation — that was a knock-out blow.
Dare I say it? Your comment was “Fantastic Baby.”
Suey Park doesn’t want to mess with me. If she wants to crack about “structural whiteness,” then let it be known that I have a well of Korean Boy Band knowledge at my disposal. 😉 I will use it to make “structural Korean” jokes without mercy.
Anyone can be racist or prejudiced. Every country has slurs for someone they view as “inferior.” It’s not limited to one culture or race. Remember the Rwandan Genocide of the 1990s? Or Saddam Hussein’s extermination of the Kurds?
I’m sure you can find activists who blame white people for both instances you just brought up. You see, if it wasn’t for colonialism, magical unicorns would come out of hiding and the world would live in peace and harmony.
Since you are a fan…
By the way, our pal Gail Simone on Twitter is upset because people are “trolling, insulting, criticizing, etc.” Park because “she dared to ask a few questions.” Gad, it’s one thing to be a shill “progressive,” but Simone really is thick.
You know me, Hube, which means you knew I was going to respond to Gail. 😉
Why the need to imply, all over your writing, that this is a problem with liberalism? Rather, it is a problem with stupidity and isolation, just as gun extremists and take-no-prisoners teaparty people struggle with those problems. Further, look at all the liberal sites that have taken Ms. Park to task. Yes, I agree that most feminism comes from liberal-oriented people, but the real problem with Ms. Park is that she just is not equal to the task of handling what she thinks is her crusade. Her thoughts are not backed up by fact and often she seems incoherent. Those are problems not characteristic of one political stance or the other.
Thanks for the laugh, chuckles. (I couldn’t resist.) The “take no prisoners” Tea Party (i.e., Taxed Enough Already) and “gun extremists” (I’ll refer to them as ardent Second Amendment advocates) are fighting over principles, the proper size and scope of the federal government, rights codified into law by the Constitution, etc. Those things generate debates that we’ve had since the our nation’s founding. That is normal. That is sane.
Modern liberalism, on the other hand, brings together a random mish-mash of professional victims and special interests groups all vying for their own piece of pie under the guise of “diversity.” As a result, you wind up with CNN segments where white gay men argue with black women over who is stealing whose culture. You get women like Suey Park politically cannibalizing the Colbert crowd (and then backtracking when it blows up in her face). You get white people scrawling all sorts of self-loathing messages on their face with Sharpie markers. The list of bizarre behavior that springs forth from the moral relativism and perpetual-victim mentality peddled by modern liberalism never ends.
There is a big difference between arguments that stem from a conservative man’s belief that limited government maximizes individual liberty, and those that spring forth from a liberal woman’s belief that men shouldn’t talk about abortion because they go through life without a vagina.
I still believe that your arguments would have more persuasive power if they avoided huge brushstroke generalities. I lean “liberal”, but have no time for such nonsense as that perpetuated by Suey. She doesn’t even have enough perspective to sometimes be silent. I also think that p.c. nonsense at universities is counterproductive, at least. However, I also believe that the gun extremists (please note, again, the use of “extremist” here) who bring a bunch of long guns into a family restaurant are counterproductive. I might even agree with you that ‘liberal” as a word is quite tarnished. I am just advocating for balance. We live in a society that is highly polarized and that is not a good thing for societal or democratic advancement. I say that as privilege of my age (as in, Nixon would be a Democrat by today’s standards).
Chuckles, if something is generally true (e.g., modern liberals favor a kind of moral relativism that logically leads to the kind of weird behavior you see in Suey Park and many others), then there is nothing wrong with pointing that out. The mere fact that you are able to acknowledge that “P.C. non-sense” exists, or that Suey Park is ideologically in a sad state of affairs, indicates that you are probably not “liberal” in the sense I’m using it. Perhaps a JFK Democrat? Those, my friend, are on the verge of extinction.
For my old job I used to travel around the country quite a bit, talking to students, teachers, and others about public policy. I’d often run across older individuals who really believed that the Democratic Party of today has a resemblance to the Democratic Party of JFK. They really had no clue that individuals like Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi would turn JFK’s stomach.
I’m glad you brought up the guys carrying guns into family restaurants, because we can compare the numbers. If you go on any college campus across the country you will find countless students who think exactly like Suey Park, and professors who agree with them. By contrast, how many idiots are walking into Applebees with a stupid grin on their face and an AR-15 in their hand? Not many. Those are pretty isolated incidents that are given a ton of media exposure because there is nothing that gun control activists would like more than to convince you that millions of American gun owners are loose cannons. And those that do pull the Applebees-with-an-AR-15 stunt have typically been in gun-friendly states, districts, etc.
I have a feeling that if we kept talking, you might very well realize that these days you’re seen as someone who “leans conservative” by an uncomfortable margin of Democrats.
I love how liberals hate being called liberal and whine about generalizations when people call them out on their behavior, but they have no problem making generalizations about conservatives.
Typically, the liberal thing to do is to paint conservative outliers (e.g., guys prancing into Chili’s with an AR-15 slung over their shoulder) as the norm, while the norm for liberals (e.g., college campuses filled with moral-relativist professors trying to inculcate students) is denied, downplayed or ignored.
“Typically, the liberal thing to do is to paint conservative outliers (e.g., guys prancing into Chili’s with an AR-15 slung over their shoulder) as the norm, while the norm for liberals (e.g., college campuses filled with moral-relativist professors trying to inculcate students) is denied, downplayed or ignored.”
True. Many of the recent mass shootings were carried out…. by leftists. Loughner was a leftist. So was Holmes, and I heard he’s converted to Islam in the time he’s been in prison. Liberals always try and downplay/ignore this stuff and try to morph the shooters into conservatives.
Only liberals tend to get hung up on the “no labels” thing.