an apt analogy

Forget the appeal to logic and reason and decency.

Nutshell: Supporting equal rights for women and saying you're not a feminist = supporting the right to abortion and saying you're not pro-choice.

Got it?

Eight-year-old girl pleads for divorce.

Found via Jezebel: http://yementimes.com/article.shtml?i=1145&p=front&a=2

I think it's this quote that really grabs people: "Whenever I wanted to play in the yard he beat me and asked me to go to the bedroom with him."

Dear Dar Al-Rahama and any pretense that there is Justice In This World, please, please, PLEASE make sure this child has a yard to play in without having to fear for her life. Kthxbai.

feminists

The definition of feminist: of or relating to or advocating equal rights for women

Simple, isn't it?

So, why, if you support equal rights for women, are you afraid to own what you believe in? Why shudder, "No, of course I'm not one of those feminists!" because of what you think it implies? And then there are those who are less dramatic about it, who just shake their heads and say, "Of course I support equal rights for women, but I'm not a feminist..."

Why?

It is still a world where people are judged largely by their looks and/or sexual history and/or sweetness-i.e.-willingness because they are female. Take it out of the relatively privileged United States, and it is a still a world where people are marginalized and attacked and raped and killed at birth for being female.

But forget the violent extremes for a moment. There are non-violent people who actively discriminate against women. They'd probably never rape or kill a woman. They're probably called good and upright citizens. But they see a skirt (and an emotional, unreasonable skirt) and not a human being when they look at a woman, and if it's ever in their power to keep her in "her place", whether it's denying her a deserved promotion or a raise, or vulgarly joking about a woman in the public eye (i.e., Hillary Clinton, Britney Spears, etc.) in a way they'd never joke about a man, or teaching a little girl that being pretty/sweet is the only goal that matters, they'd do it.

And when you say that you're not a feminist, you support them. You're saying you're on their side.

Sure, you may think you're just saying, "Oh, I'm just not militant about these issues..." (Some of us may say, why not? Some issues deserve militancy. The war isn't won yet. Ever count the number of women in the U.S. Senate? Ever talk to a six-year-old girl who worries about being fat?) But as long as you wave that term away from you--away with you, evil equal rights--the antifeminists get to think, yes, one more person that agrees with me about the way things should be, all normal people think this way, feminists are just whacked-out nutjobs that everyone hates.

And you ask, who are these antifeminists? They're on the Internet now, howling about "Feminazis" and how they're rebelling against God's authority/the natural order of things/basic biology. They're complaining that men have to live in fear because women are taking their jobs and trampling on all their rights. (Just the other day, I saw a flyer in a school that read, "If it's supposed to be a man's world, then why does it seem like women can do anything? Join the Boy's Club after school at 3:30...NO GIRLS ALLOWED!" The fear starts young.)

When you say you're not a feminist, you sound like the antifeminists.

If you support equal rights for women, hell, you can be lazy about it. You don't have to campaign or petition or march or write a letter to your senator, demanding equal rights for women. Just support them. Just answer yes when people ask if you're a feminist.

Don't imply that NOT supporting equal rights is acceptable.

Don't tacitly agree that being a feminist is something dirty or wrong.

Believe me, when you say you're not a feminist, you don't come with subtitles that helpfully add "but that's just because he's afraid that other people might think he's effeminate/but that's just because she's afraid other people might think she's a fanatic...but deep down inside they support equal rights for women, of course!"

"Yes, I'm a feminist."

Why is that so hard?

I have little or no sympathy for Kyla Ebbert, the new champion for the right to wear four-inch skirts on airplanes.

Yes, Southwest Airlines handled the situation badly, and for the sake of PR, if nothing else, some apology was called for. That said, I hardly think that their failure to publish an official dress code means it is appropriate to dress like this for a plane ride.

It's not that her microminiskirt is all THAT provocative. (Yes, I know that some might say it is, especially on a plane with small children and those who blush easily. And I do think that to some extent, occupying a shared, cramped space demands a little more regard for others.)

But that's not my point. Dressing provocatively is quite within her rights. My point is that her choice was STUPID.

Dressing with a modicum of dignity for airplane travel is an intelligent thing to do, because:
1) there is the possibility of upgrades, which generally come more frequently to those who look accustomed to them;
2) a skirt that short will need constant adjusting, which is not comfortable at the best of times, and certainly impractical for maneuvering around an airplane in. Incidentally, I avoided watching her TV interview, where she modelled the outfit to prove its innocence, because I'm not into panty shots. I hear the clips are on Youtube if you are, though.
3) you may sit next to someone interesting (soul mate? important business contact? possible future employer? Neil Gaiman?), and why be caught in an outfit that would speak more loudly (and less respectably) than your wit and intellect?
4) not to be Gloomy Gus, but emergencies do happen, and that is not an outfit that would be helpful in one.
5) "they" have found hideous things on surfaces in planes and airports, not excluding bedbugs in the plane seats. I know that not everyone shares my OCD, but all things being equal, wouldn't you prefer to have a layer of ANYTHING between your bare thighs and a seat that probably hasn't been cleaned in the past decade?

Besides, I have a fondness for miniskirts myself (in their place), but not miniskirts that look like they were made from an old pair of jeans and hedgeclippers. Seriously, that thing's just ugly.

A few weeks ago, there was a whirl of frustration and jealousy and narrow-minded self-righteousness on the slightly creepy spy site "I Saw Your Nanny".

Well, then again, there usually is. The "nanny sightings" range from the legitimately alarming (where actual physical or verbal abuse has occurred) to the stunningly stupid. I.e., "OMG I saw a nanny with hair give her charge (who was wearing a pink shirt) a brownie CALL THE POLICE." The comments on nearly all posts degenerate into hysteria and wild accusations of classism, racism, ageism, ugliness, etc.

Anyway, in this particular case, there were screams of Puritan horror at this outfit. How dare she wear something revealing, think of the children who will have to see this shocking instance of sluthood, she is responsible for the decay of morality in this world, etc.

All I have to say is, as much as I hate skorts on principle, I have no problem with this one because 1) it is sporty, and not inappropriate for running around the park with a child on a warm summer day; 2) this anonymous nanny is just that hot; and 3) anything that makes the self-righteous Nanny-Sighters that wretchedly and obviously jealous brings me unholy glee.

It used to be the case that skirts were considered a modest form of attire. (Exclude mini-skirts for the nonce.) Some of the more conservative institutions of higher education went so far as to insist that young women wear nothing but skirts and dresses. I suppose their objection to pants was along the line of Papa's in My Sweet Audrina--something like "No pants! They show too much."

But now, according to one person I spoke with recently, the pants have become the norm and the skirt has become the provocative. The skirt hints at a traditional, old-fashioned mindset and vulnerability to attack.

All I have to say to that is, that MIGHT be true in some cases--but I'd advise one and all to regard the skirt-wearer with a healthy amount of respect. It's much easier for her to hide the weapon strapped to her thigh.

Even raging feminists aren't immune.

I recently went to a children's end-of-the-year dance recital, consisting mostly of group performances, roughly divided by level. I.e., Adv. Ballet 4.

Now, as each group performs, there's some vague unity in the sequence of steps, but not that much. As one might expect in any group of performers that range so widely in age and talent and commitment. So I usually pick out the most promising dancer and watch her. The Posy, if you will--or you would if you've read Noel Streatfeild. The one with a little more precision and poetry in her steps.

Suddenly, I realized that I was picking out the dancer to watch before the music started--before any of them moved a muscle. And how was I doing this?

I was always looking at the slimmest girl.

I felt so dirty.