What’s Current: Jaymes Todd pleads guilty to murdering Eurydice Dixon

What’s Current is Feminist Current’s daily news roundup.

  • On Thursday, Jaymes Todd pled guilty to raping and murdering comedian Eurydice Dixon earlier this year. The death of Dixon, 22, caused national outcry in Australia about men’s violence against women.
  • West Virginia and Alabama are taking steps towards banning abortion for all residents.
  • The average number sexual assaults reported to police in Canada has increased by 25 per cent since the #MeToo movement began, though this has not led to a corresponding increase in criminal charges.
  • Google will end its policy of forcing employees to sign away their right to take sexual harassment cases to court, a win for 20,000 workers who staged a walkout last week in protest of how the company has handled sexual misconduct.
  • On Tuesday, the Girl Scouts of America filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against the Boy Scouts of America in order to prevent membership and brand loss, after the Boy Scouts decided to drop “Boy” from its title and allow older girls to join. The Boy Scouts said in a statement:

“We applaud every organization that builds character and leadership in children, including the Girl Scouts of the USA, and believe that there is an opportunity for both organizations to serve girls and boys in our communities.”

Meghan McCarty

Meghan McCarty is an undergraduate student and aspiring journalist living in the United States.

Like this article? Tip Feminist Current!

$
Personal Info

Donation Total: $1

  • Nadja Penaluna

    The article that details the rise in sexual violence despite the popularity of the MeToo “movement”, is a reminder that the movement has been, from the outset, about a clique of Hollywood elites fishing for a better social position amidst the chaos and turbulence that plagues the liberal Left. The basic demands put forth by this apparent revolution focus on the sensitivities around the professional workplace, policies that would have no impact on working-class and marginalized women. Removing Cosmo Mag from the Walmart shelves (one of the great achievements of MeToo) is a feeble and ineffectual reform. Most women can’t afford the $6 price tag anyway, and have bigger issues to think about such as health insurance, poverty wages, labour casualization, housing costs, inflation, etc.

    • unfashionable

      Most women have no bigger issues, nor more woman-centered issues, than sexual harassment on the job, in school, in the street; and the pressure to exchange sex for food, clothing and shelter. This is true for all economic and educational classes of women.

      I don’t see the utility for women of centering class warfare.

    • Meghan Murphy

      Cosmo being removed from Walmart stands (near the cashier) had nothing to do with #metoo….

    • Omzig Online

      You don’t think improving working conditions will improve the lives of working class women????

    • wasnamesareirrelevant

      This was a very funny read. Cheers.

    • acommentator

      “The basic demands put forth by this apparent revolution focus on the sensitivities around the professional workplace, policies that would have no impact on working-class and marginalized women.”

      Do you think that everyone in the “professional workplace” is the holder of a professional degree? Many of the women I work with are lawyers, but there are a number of non-lawyers, including people with no degrees at all.

      Further, legal standards and “best practices policies” developed in the context of the professional workplace, or lawsuits involving the professional workplace, do not stay confined to the professional workplace. They get applied in other settings as well.

      I can tell you that “me too” has had a practical effect on how sexual harassment claims are valued by insurance companies. That is because the insurance companies think it has had an impact on how juries see these claims. This is one of the ways change gets made in our society. It is not a small thing. It is real.

      • Nadja Penaluna

        My comment mentioned nothing about the percentage of degree holders in the professional workplace.

        Yes, I will concede that modest reforms may be made. It’s good for the “Left” brand.

        But the reforms are hardly significant in the general context of escalating war, social inequality, private ownership, and the concentration of the world’s wealth into the coffers of the few. These are the salient issues in our lives that shape our views and behaviour. Until we address them, efforts for minor reforms and pressure from the left will only serve to prolong the current political and social situation.

    • Robert Gonzalez

      Can you give a clear answer as to whether you are in fact White and/or a working class woman? That would add some credibility to your words here, if you answer that question. Thank you.

      • Nadja Penaluna

        Based on your logic that credibility stems from one’s identity, I can write off your participation on this feminist website, as you are, in fact, a male. And after all, what do men know about the lived experience of women? See, the logic is incorrect.

        You should be arguing against the substance of my perspective, and not seek to judge it arbitrarily against some general assumptions about identity.

        What would change about my argument once you have the knowledge that I’m a rich white woman, or a poor black man?

        Just because Obama is a black man, doesn’t mean he advocates for better living standards of black Americans or for other marginalized people. Just because Hilary Clinton and Margaret Thatcher are women, it doesn’t mean they care more about women and girls. It is their capitalist policies that need to held to account, not their race or gender. IMO it would be difficult not to agree on this salient point.

    • Bleeps3

      Lol. Yeah, Rose McGowan clearly was fishing for a better social position by coming out about one of the most powerful men in Hollywood, and continuing to do so despite being outcast as a nut job. The TimesUp movement has actually raised money for low-income women and is taking on cases pro-bono, with help of experts (many who are women of color).
      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/21/metoo-revolution-times-up-roberta-kaplan

  • lk

    “Alabama and West Virginia moved one step closer to banning abortion for all residents on Tuesday.”

    I can only hope that Roe v. Wade is NEVER overturned, so that these kinds of “trigger bans” do not result in abortion becoming illegal in these states. (Though with the changes to the Supreme Court, this could be a real possibility).

    Alabama and West Virginia are among two of the poorest states in the US. They are also both heavily republican and critical of birth control and public assistance. So essentially, they want women who are already in poverty to give birth to children and have bother mother and child suffer in poverty.

    I will never understand this disconnect: being opposed to abortion while also being opposed to supporting children. There is something so not right about demonizing women who use birth control or have abortions, while also not wanting to help support (financially, socially, etc) these women and children.

  • Retorter

    Men exploit and dehumanize women because they are exploited and dehumanized? If this is happening to men, it’s at the hands of other men, anyway, so male violence is still the issue. And what of elite, exceedingly wealthy and socially and professionally powerful men who exploit and assault women? What’s their excuse?

    • Nadja Penaluna

      The capitalist system starves everyone of their humanity, and rewards the pursuit of individual wealth, power, and ownership. The system dehumanizes life, and eroticizes capital. It is under these social conditions that men from all social-economic layers behave in depraved ways towards women. Working class men also suffer from the additional dimensions of alienation and poverty, perpetual wars, etc.

  • acommentator

    “Exploited and alienated men, in turn, exploit and dehumanize women.”

    Some do. Some don’t. Same with men from other social or economic classes.

    “My point is that violence itself is a product of a cruel capitalist society which prioritizes private profit over public need, and creates the conditions for exploitation and dehumanization.”

    You have to be kidding. However you trace the origins of capitalism, you are at best going back a few hundred years. The archeological record would seem to date violence back a long way farther than that. Human nature has not changed because of capitalism.

    • Nadja Penaluna

      There is no such thing as human nature, just social nature. At present, our political economy is a capitalist one. In the west, prior to that was a feudal one, where people were living as peasants in squalor and social destitution under the thumb of a ruling coterie of absolute monarchies and nobilty. Of course women suffered greatly under that archaic regime, but so did most men. Exploitation did not originated under capitalism, but it is rooted in the relationship between economic forces of the day, and has certainly been exacerbated under the capitalist system.

      • acommentator

        “There is no such thing as human nature, just social nature.”

        I disagree. Which is not to say that social conditions are not a major factor. I don’t claim to be able to disentangle nature and nurture, but that does not mean nature does not exist.

  • Nadja Penaluna

    Since the agency feels that the jury is out on whether there is a material rise in abuse or just an increase in reporting, I’m choosing to offer a perspective based on the former. Based on the pervasive evisceration of our living standards and democratic rights which lead to an escalation in violence generally, there is good reason for me to take this position.

    • wasnamesareirrelevant

      No, there isn’t.

  • Robert Gonzalez

    In my view, you have it backwards. We exist under a patriarchal society. The exploitive capitalism you speak of is merely a symptom of what it is like to exist under a male dominated society. Most men are socialized to be “inherently violent and repressive.” We cannot change our current situation in the way you suggest by ridding ourselces of just capitalism. To say it again, capitalism is a natural extension of male attitudes and norms. This goes much deeper than just issues of class or even race. Even the demonized White upper class women benefit only as much as men decide they can benefit. It is not up to them. Men will continue to behave in this “kill or be killed” manner for as long as the patriarchy remains intact. We’re better off focusing on liberating ALL
    natal women than focusing on fighting capitalism alone.

    • Nadja Penaluna

      Where do you imagine this particular form of male socialization into violence and repression comes from? What social forces is it motivated by? In other words, what do you consider the origins of the patriarchal social structure to be? I imagine you may think that it stems from men’s inherent need to control the weaker species based on relations of reproduction, or some other inherently pessimistic perspective on humanity. But do tell!

      • marv

        Gerda Lerner’s book, The Creation of Patriarchy, is a starter.

        If you care to further investigate the relationship between patriarchy, capitalism and Marxism, see Catharine MacKinnon’s, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State.

  • Robert Gonzalez

    I’m skeptical of anyone, male or female, that says “giving them (women) more privileges is a problem.” Why? Because we “cannot lift the most vulnerable sections of society out of social misery?” How does that help women, if you’re apparently fine with certain women having less privileges? Wouldn’t having some women with more privileges at least give women a fighting chance of accomplishing their goals? Isn’t that the point Cindy was making with the suffragettes? You talk as if feminists aren’t aware of class as a problem. What radical feminists on here realize is that issues with class are largely a result of the patriarchy. You seem to suggest that all of this would just go away if we fixed the big, bad problem of the c-word (capitalism).

    I’m also very skeptical of the fact that you attempted to take away from the accomplishments of other women (middle-class, upper-class or otherwise) who have positively contributed to womankind, like the suffragettes. Cindy was trying to make the point that we can’t simply write off women just because they have, as you put it, “blood on their hands,” or come from anything than the working class. That’s definitely an obvious attempt to make “heroines” seem like lesser figures. Blah, blah, we know “They’re just people.” Fine, yes, they were just women. But for many women they were more than just that. They represent the potential to enact real change within the male-dominated society.

    Maybe I missed it, Nadja, but you said that the system is “beyond reform.” I take that to mean that we must completely destroy the current system. Yes? What are you suggesting that put in its place? What’s your logical conclusion?

    • Nadja Penaluna

      Robert, pointing out female political activists and politicians social crimes does not negate their accomplishments. It does, however, point out their class interests, which is oriented to the further privileges of an upper middle social milieu, who are in the minority. The women’s movement fought for political reforms, which was important for middle class women (usually non-working) whose husbands owned and controlled the family wealth and property, but it was simply not important for working women, who, along with their property less male comrades, fought a different political line. They struggled, often at the risk of their own lives, for better labour standards, and against imperialist aggression through war. One can place the women’s movement squarely in the middle class politics of the day, which was wed to the needs of capitalism (under a national program) and ultimately advocated for war. It’s not a question of denying the successes of the suffragettes, but rather, exposing their predilection towards their own minority class interests of wealth acquisition and preservation of their social position, which is entirely hostile to the needs of the majority in the working class, as evidenced by the outbreak of the first world war, which claimed the lives of millions.

      About Hilary Clinton, well, you’d have to sell me on her political achievements. Whatever they may be, and I doubt there are any, are totally eclipsed by her belligerent foreign policies while in office.

      Yes, the system is beyond reform. The Left is impotent, and has been since the end of WW2. A culture of pessimism, incoherence, and hopelessness pervades academia, political discourse, and the liberal arts.

      In terms of our particular region, we must raise the political awareness of the masses, and relearn how to think critically, which means adopting a historical perspective. We must fight against the left tendency towards nihilism, cynicism and despair and replace it will an international socialist perspective which recognizes the social and political power of the working class and its revolutionary potential independent of the capitalist class.

  • Nadja Penaluna

    MeToo is not about Hollywood evidences by the fact that you organized a huge rally in…Hollywood?

    • Jani

      Most women here are well aware that the MeToo Movement began with Tarana Burke, a survivor of sexual assault, who sought to give voice and support to marginalised girls and women of colour who were experiencing sexual harassment, abuse and assault. It just so happened that there was not much press coverage until Hollywood actresses began using the hashtag #MeToo at the time of the Weinstein allegations. The MeToo movement is still very much a live issue around the world, but the press coverage isn’t as evident because Hollywood actresses sell stories and impoverished women in the global south don’t, nor do poor women in affluent western nations. That in itself only demonstrates that only a certain type of woman (who complies the western sexualised male gaze) is ever going to be newsworthy — and who decides what’s newsworthy? Whoever owns the news corporations, so there’s another part of the problem that needs to be addressed.

      With regard to class issues, I understand where you’re coming from and I agree with at least some of what you say. I’m part of the Irish diaspora in the UK and I have a solidly working class background, from a mining family and grew up in council housing. We’re more familiar with class politics in the UK, although these days it’s everyone for themselves and collectivism isn’t a thing since the Thatcher era. I do get what you are saying in that the man (or woman) on a minimum wage or working a zero hours contract does not enjoy the lifestyle of a woman barrister educated at Oxford. That’s the blinsdpot with the third wave faux fun “feminists” who would far rather blog about choosing a shade of lipstick as an act of “empowerment” — they don’t seem to get that feminism is about supporting the rights of Bangladeshi garment workers (mostly women) who are working for nowhere near what would be a living wage in their country by campaigning against fast fashion brands (for example) rather than blogging about “feeling sexy” in their plastic heels and sweatshop tat. However, you will find there are many shades of feminism but the more radical feminisms have their roots in class politics and civil rights, depending on where you are in the world. That’s not to discount the experiences of affluent professional women or Hollywood actresses. Those who have used their position to speak out against rape and sexual assault have far greater reach than a 60 year old grey-haired woman working on a supermarket checkout. It’s not right that some voices are listened to and not others, but once again, who decides and why?

    • wasnamesareirrelevant

      So fucking what?

  • Nadja Penaluna

    No single individual man, rich or poor, is beyond the system of corruption, which corrupts. Trump isn’t monstrous because he is a man, but because he has certain class interests that work against the vast majority of people.

    I’m not advocating for a “better deal” for men, I support better quality living standards for both men and women. But men will not be compelled to be “nicer” to women under a system where exploitation and alienation predominate.

    • FierceMild

      But your comments tend toward a general justification of male pattern violence based on their relative economic and political status. That’s what is coming through most clearly. You seem to believe that if men have their social and economical needs met they will stop raping, beating, harassing and hating women. This has never happened in any form of governmental or economic regime the world has ever scene and it is beyond unreasonable to think that if we just hit upon the right form of government men will stop acting out male supremacy on women.

  • lk

    “It’s literally got nothing to do with babies.They don’t give a shit about foetuses or actual babies they just want to control women’s sexuality/”

    True, but I think antiabortion activists have done a great job of presenting themselves as people who really care about unborn babies and paint people who support access to birth control and abortion as evil people who hate babies.

    Trump has been appointing Republican anti-abortion federal judges and will probably continue to do so throughout his presidency and this is going to have a huge impact on family planning and abortion rights. My suspicion is that Roe V. Wade will not be overturned but that t government will do everything it can to make birth control and abortion difficult to get.

    How many unwanted children are going to suffer in poverty, from neglect, from being shuffled to foster home to foster home because their mothers were denied birth control or abortions?

    When these unwanted children are born, I’m sure that the same people who were against abortion will also be against government programs that help these mothers and children be fed, have medical care, have affordable housing and so on…they will be angry that their tax dollars are making sure these children have decent schools, free lunches and etc..

  • FierceMild

    You say that: “social inequality…provides the context for sexual violence” this is absolutely true. But you appear to be implying that under a communist or socialist regime there would be no sexual violence and this is demonstrably untrue. Therefore it cannot be economic structure that causes male sexual violence. So why are you objecting to an analysis that places male supremacy at the heart of the problem and injurious social systems as secondary to and springing from male supremacy? We tried the other way around first. It didn’t work to end male pattern violence so we needed a new analysis.

  • acommentator

    “How many farm workers, immigrants, and poor women have come forward with sexual harassment claims under the banner of MeToo?”

    Well, just off the top of my head, I have read more than one article about harassment in the restaurant industry, both white table cloth and fast food. I have read more than one article about harassment in the hotel industry, and how hotels are starting to (by regulation in some places, and as a best practice in others) be required to, or voluntarily, equip maids with panic alarms.

    The focus is not all on movies and network television studios.

  • Nadja Penaluna

    I’m just not particularly concerned with indulging the psychological discomfort of a few upper middle class women. If only they could direct their energy from their own personal crisis and onto the wider social misery women experience. They are entirely reluctant to do so, as they have well-heeled careers that rely on the system of oppression.

    What does this coterie have to say about the bombing of innocents in Yemen, ongoing intervention in Syria, Iraq, Libya. What do they have to say about the quality of life for the elderly, youth and immigrant women in America? How do they propose to lift the marginalized out of their circumstances? One media spectacle at a time?

    Sure, Asia Argentio and Rose McGowan are victims of bad male behaviour, and also victims the exploitative system of hollywood.
    But they are incapable of leading a movement that helps the vast majority of women, as they can’t be bothered to identify what other issues may be at stake, beyond the bad man that touched my bottom.

    I repeat, they are victims, but more than that, they are short-sighted opportunists. A typical outlook of their particular class, men and women alike.

  • Nadja Penaluna

    As you know, no argument is beyond debate.

    That you’ve reduced abhorrent behaviour down to the strict matter of individual choice falls into the camp of cynicism and demorilization that has plagues the “progressive” left for decades.

    Yes, captilism uses men as a sex differently from women. Hence the immediate socialization into emotional alienation and violence. Capitalism needs foot soldiers.

    Save your nausea for the devastation wrought by fires, war, poverty, child concentration camps, police brutality (which includes the rape of women) forced adoption, cultural genocide and sterilization.

  • Nadja Penaluna

    Identifying the political nature of a class or movement of people has nothing to do with blaming individuals within it. I certainly never suggested that women deserve to be sexually abused, or are somehow responsible for the abuse. But upper middle class women feeling obliged to watch a man masturbate, or put up with inappropriate behaviour in order to advance their social position, as repellent as all of it is, is not the most pressing issue of the day. Police rape, poverty, and the sharp decline in women’s living standards are.

  • Nadja Penaluna

    Economic class analysis is not pursued at the expense of sexual harassment, but forms the very foundation of our social understanding of such issues.

  • wasnamesareirrelevant

    No. They’re not. Your point is moot.

  • wasnamesareirrelevant

    Working class women need men to leave them the fuck alone. As do all women. As one who was raised in a Glaswegian slum and who posted my own Me Too moments I can stste that your deeply offensive middle class prejudices about the class i was born and raised in are fucking ridiculous and utterly irrelevant. Now piss off.

  • Omzig Online

    You are incorrect when you say that it’s mostly upper/middle class or privileged women reporting their rape.

    In my area, there has been a huge influx of patients reporting sexual assault, and most of them are WOC, homeless women, and women living with government assistance (“food stamps” and MedicAid).

    Our hospital Emergency Departments are no longer able to keep up with the demand. This overflow of patients needing forensic exams has led to the opening of 2 mobile forensic clinics, one set up outside of a domestic violence shelter, and another outside of a homeless shelter in my area. This has all happened within the last year.

    So I am grateful to those “elite” Hollywood women, as well as Tarana Burke, for their contribution to the MeToo movement. The change in public awareness is palpable, and it’s led to meaningful changes in my local medical/forensic department.

  • Meghan Murphy

    MeToo saw thousands upon thousands of ‘regular women’ coming out with stories of sexual harassment and abuse, in all industries, including just in their regular day to day lives.

  • Bleeps3

    They also really like the idea of women being enslaved to a man until one of them died. They would absolutely go back to when women had no legal rights, weren’t allowed to own property (or vote), to when working women didn’t own their own money, to when there was no system to support even widows (this is part of their hatred of Social Security — it freed up some women). It’s not just about sex or reproduction, and no, they certainly have never given a flying donkey about children, as they would go back to children having full time jobs if they could get away with it, and have no problem sacrificing teenagers in war or school shootings or environmental disasters.

    Vampires can’t be pro-life.

  • Omzig Online

    That’s probably because the MeToo movement does not exist to secure job benefits or set labor standards. It’s not a labor union. It’s not a job placement program.

    MeToo is a global movement that seeks to draw attention to sexual harassment and sexual assault. But more importantly, it provides solidarity to the victims of assault. That’s it. That’s all. And to that end, it’s been wildly successful.

    Since sexual assault is not limited to any socioeconomic status, criticizing the MeToo movement from a class warfare perspective is not very useful, quite frankly.

    Perhaps if you stopped expecting the MeToo movement to function as a labor union, you would be better able to appreciate some of the positive changes it’s been able to set into motion.

  • Meghan Murphy

    It’s true… We have to start accepting the fact that many people on the right hold the views they do because they are well intentioned and believe it is what’s right and good for people. Not all, of course, but many. We won’t get anywhere by vilifying right wing women imo, because they hold what seem to us to be sexist or regressive views.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Sexual harassment is part of a larger problem in society — that is, male dominance, the objectification of women, the notion that women are things that exist for men. Sexual harassment functions as a means for men to remind women of their status, and that they are rapeable/fuckable.

    Considering that you complained on another post that I decontextualized Dennis Hof’s misogyny/abuse (which I certainly did not), it seems odd you would decontextualize sexual harassment from the broader context of patriarchy. It doesn’t lend credibility to your analysis or sincerity.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I’m sure there are lots of people like this. Many people are self-interested and ignorant. That said, it is clearly not useful for liberals or the left to position themselves as righteous and all those on the other end of the political spectrum as evil. Have we not seen the consequences of this already? People are more nuanced, in general, than this analysis allows for.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I fail to see how we will change society if we refuse to even try to understand why people hold the beliefs they do… It appears to me that Trump was elected, in part, because liberals completely dismiss/ignore/vilify anyone who doesn’t agree with their perspectives, then are blindsided. I have long been one of those leftists who did exactly this — dismissing and vilifying all those on the other end of the political spectrum, and am only recently beginning to question this approach, so am still exploring, but am, in general, less and less interested in painting ‘the right’ with a broad brush. There are many, many regular, working class people who support right wing ideas, and I’m not sure it’s in our best interest to write them off as evil.

    • wasnamesareirrelevant

      We change it by preventing less evolved people from stealing human rights by any means possible. In time when these chimps are forced to behave like human beings they’ll move on to the next dark ages belief.

      • Meghan Murphy

        I’m honestly not trying to be rude, and I genuinely use these words sparingly, but this attitude sounds quite bigoted and elitist… Who gets to determine who is a ‘chimp’ (subhuman) and who is a human being? Can you see this gets into dangerous territory?

  • Meghan Murphy

    There’s a lot of bad info out there and plenty of manipulative studies that support their opinions, though… I think they probably believe they have ‘facts’ to support their position. I can’t support silencing people because we disagree. I think it’s unhelpful and clearly comes back to bite us in the ass.

    • wasnamesareirrelevant

      I definitely support silencing anyone who’s lying and thereby stealing women’s human rights. Not all opinions are created equal. Anti choicers are wrong, dangerous and should be treated as such.

      • Meghan Murphy

        I agree that these perspectives harm women and believe it is completely unethical and dehumanizing to force a woman to go through child birth against her will. I nonetheless also support free speech….

  • acommentator

    “Yes,agreed. But human nature is not a separate category of analysis, as it is intrinsically nested within our social nature.”

    Agreed as well.

  • wasnamesareirrelevant

    You are once again irredeemably wrong. Rape and murder by men starts with sexual harassment. But you already know this.

  • cindy0827

    Nadja — If you aren’t out celebrating the Montreal Massacre because some white middle-class women were murdered; and if you don’t believe in locking up Hillary Clinton without a trial, then that’s fine. It sounds as if you don’t hate all white middle-class women, so that’s fine. However, my comments were directed towards Leftists who hate white middle-class women, and even support violence towards them. But, guess what? They themselves are white and middle-class!

    And what I wrote about white m/c Leftists hating Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro (because they had some white m/c women supporting them) is true. I didn’t make up the examples. It sounds as if you are a sensible Leftist who doesn’t hate m/c women, but I ask you to think about this: just because the MeTOO and TimesUp movements (and the Suffragette movement) are led primarily by white wealthy women is not a reason to discount it.

  • Jani

    Who decides can be identified by who owns these corporations and who the major stakeholders are, and who makes the editorial decisions — and those decisions have to be those that create more profit for the stakeholders. The power and profits are concentrated in the hands of very few people and I think you’ll find they are mostly very rich men like Murdoch. Their agenda doesn’t give a stuff about who has access to healthcare and education, or the conditions of workers in impoverished countries. They support right wing parties and politicians because their interests will be better served and in return they give overwhelmingly favourable coverage to right wing campaigns whilst denigrating the opposition. Who controls the media and news corporations isn’t exactly a secret. They are publicly known figures. And very, very rich. The fact is, at this point in our culture, Hollywood actresses sell stories. 45 year old, slightly overweight office cleaners who can’t afford Versace dresses and Manolo Blahnik shoes, or have the opportunity to spend 2 hours in the hair chair don’t get on the front covers, regardless of how relentless or horrific the acts of sexualised violence committed against them. MeToo and Times Up did at least acknowledge that ALL women experience sexual intrusion regardless of social class.

  • cindy0827

    Nadja – the suffragettes weren’t perfect. How could they be when they supported WWI? I like the suffragettes and think they were great, but they weren’t perfect. It really upsets me when people bash the suffragettes. Maybe you don’t hate the suffragettes, but I have met a lot of Leftists who do, and it’s upsetting. By the way, suffragettes were anti-prostitution, anti-burlesque and anti-pornography.

  • Meghan Murphy

    The mainstream media in the US ALWAYS pays more attention to celebrities than anything else. And of course are pro-capitalist. But what the media covers doesn’t necessarily encapsulate the movement itself. If we only paid attention to what US media said, we’d have to assume that feminist was mainly about the freedom to self objectify.

  • Meghan Murphy

    My argument is that things are more complex than ‘good’ vs ‘evil’. I’m not defending the beliefs you speak of, I’m saying that everyone on the right is not ‘bad’ and everyone on the left is not ‘good’. There should be much, much more nuance in these conversations, and the lack of nuance is not helping. Painting people we disagree with with broad brushes does not help. You would be surprised at the people who you might meet who were opposed to abortion, I guarantee it. If people spoke honestly, you would be surprised at what they actually say and think. I’m talking about people you might assume to be feminist or progressive, even. I feel, in general, it’s better to have open conversations than to vilify and silence. Lest we end up shocked at how many people vote Trump, for example.

  • Meghan Murphy

    See, I have personal experience talking to people who believe things that you might qualify as ‘evil’ who are not ‘evil’. People talk to me honestly — my friends, feminists, random people at the bar. This is how I’ve come to make the arguments I am making here. By talking to real people, honestly. When I was younger (or maybe even a couple of years ago!) I, too, maybe have called these people ‘evil’, but having met so many people in real life with divergent politics, I can no longer do that in good faith.

  • Meghan Murphy

    NONE OF YOUR COMMENTS ARE BEING BLOCKED. I’ve explained this to you many time over. Comments are moderated and it takes time to get through them all.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I agree that sexual harassment is not rape. But whether or not it is ‘the biggest issue facing most women today’ is not a necessary distinction to make. Women who are poor and suffer sexual harassment on the way to the toilet, for example, are indeed often raped. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-november-15-2016-1.3850427/it-s-not-safe-south-africans-fear-using-public-toilets-after-woman-murdered-1.3850509

    Issues are not as easily compartmentalized as you would like. Prostitution is not disconnected from rape, sexual harassment, and objectification, for example. Many on the left and in the third wave would like to pretend it is, but it isn’t. Let’s not repeat those mistakes.

  • Meghan Murphy

    The exact same arguments can be used (and are being used) against us.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Do you know that there are feminists you likely know and respect who do not support abortion?

  • marv

    Male power is the material basis that created gender, the political economy and its economic base. Masculinity is the preexisting condition forming other conditions and in turn is informed by them. This turns your schema on its head – feminist socialism not socialist feminism.

  • will

    There is no culture, even considering matrilineal cultures, that does not subjugate the female to the male.

    https://www.uio.no/studier/emner/sv/sai/SOSANT1600/v12/Ortner_Is_female_to_male.pdf

  • will

    You are not clearly articulating “concern for women’s issues” at all. Your comments follow the pattern of left-leaning MRAs who show up here leaving a proportionately large number of comments, hectoring regular commenters with straw arguments about their incorrect class consciousness and their failure to live up to whatever imaginary version of revolutionary socialism you’ve got in your head (and leaning on “no true Marxist” fallacies in support of that). Your fairy-tale socialist vision seems to posit that capitalism rose up a few centuries ago, bringing along male domination of women as a byproduct. You are AGAINST centring male domination and exploitation of women in favour of emancipating economically compromised men, which you seem to think will magically undo men’s propensity to other, to fear and to demonize, and ultimately to exploit women.