On Becoming a Domestic and Laboratory Goddess

Wow. That's an amazing comments thread. I think I got the anti-feminist bingo card filled in about 10 comments.

You're a champion, Dr Isis. I love reading your blog, and I love the way you do your feminism, and I love your shoes.

Posted by: Deborah | May 30, 2009 6:32 AM

A little off topic, but I think you might like this article if you haven't already heard.

Remains of temple of Isis found:
http://www.ansa.it/site/notizie/awnplus/english/news/2009-05-28_128361264.html

p.s. I like your blog.

Posted by: Bryan Perkins | May 30, 2009 11:04 AM

Ah, StrongBad. Always the voice of reason. I've watched his guidelines on how to write an English paper so many times I have it memorized.

Posted by: Carlie | May 30, 2009 12:30 PM

How would someone critique the tactics or stratagic direction of a feminist viewpoint or feminism in general without being accused of misogyny (if male) or at best anti-feminist (if female)?

That question comes up on a regular basis. The short answer is, "you can't." The long answer is repeated all over the cited sources.

Posted by: D. C. Sessions | May 30, 2009 1:03 PM

How would someone critique the tactics or stratagic direction of a feminist viewpoint or feminism in general without being accused of misogyny (if male) or at best anti-feminist (if female)?

That question comes up on a regular basis. The short answer is, "you can't." The long answer is repeated all over the cited sources.

More seriously, since the original post is gone (prof. anon's, not Isis's) and I can only go by the quotes Isis made, what reason is there to think this is not a false positive?*

(yes, I am too lazy/busy to read the whole thread, but a link to an appropriate post there would work just as well)

Posted by: dreikin | May 30, 2009 1:08 PM

Damn. Thanks to the homestar runner link, I now really, really want some ice cream. Might actually help me make it through all the comments though.

Posted by: unbalanced reaction | May 30, 2009 2:58 PM

Yes, Nekohime (in agreement with #6). That is an amazing blogspot. My daughter pointed me to it. There is a lovely quotation this week from Florence Kennedy,in 'Sisterhood is Powerful', a collection originally published in 1970,which summarises it all:

"Just by nobody doing nothing the old bullshit mountain just grows and grows. Chocolate-covered, of course. We must take our little teaspoons and get to work. We can't wait for shovels."

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/06/teaspoons.html

Let's GO with the teaspoons (after all, isn't that just what we have been doing all our lives?). Moreover, let's CELEBRATE the teaspoon-efforts.

d.

Posted by: d. | May 30, 2009 6:50 PM

"How, can a non-Jew critize or critique Israel's actions without being perceived as anti-Semetic?"

Being an Israeli, I am aware how often this type of perception or accusation comes up. However, you will not hear such accusation from the more liberal, more educated Israelis. My point is, we need to listen to the criticism itself, rather than to focus on the person who criticizes us. Also, much criticism of Israeli policies in the occupied territories is coming from liberals and more educated Israelis, who cannot be perceived as anti-Semites.

Similarly, and especially since the topic here is perceived misogyny in the academic world, maybe women in science need to listen to the criticism rather than attack those who criticize them. Even more important is to listen to women who criticize the zealotry that can be seen in Isis's post and the many emotional comments on it.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 30, 2009 7:29 PM

Similarly, and especially since the topic here is perceived misogyny in the academic world, maybe women in science need to listen to the criticism rather than attack those who criticize them.

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt.

Posted by: dreikin | May 31, 2009 9:45 AM

@dreikin: what you seem to miss is that any and all organizations accept criticism on policy and implementation from *inside* but not from outside. Inside the organization, robust and even acrimonious debate over methods and goals are possible while still presenting a relatively united face to the outside. At the same time, while disagreeing on various topics, members will still accept that they are all still members with the same broad goals.

The same is not true of allies. The role of an ally is to support or not, but never ever attack. The fact is that you can be an ally of the feminist movement, meaning that you support the goals, but that still does not make you part of the feminist movement and, therefore free to comment on its methods without begin made to suffer. Your choices are limited to remaining silent when someone adopts a method that you do not support, or joining the other side. Frankly, it would take the adoption of indiscriminate physical violence to make me join the other side.

Personally, I think drisis was absolutely right to give it to prof anon with both barrels, and if she had a third barrel and perhaps some napalm, that would have been appropriate as well. You can make a simple substitution (women -> latino, heels to zoot suits for instance) and see just how appalled you would be at the post and following comments.

Posted by: laserboy | May 31, 2009 2:12 PM

@laserboy Perhaps we are unable to criticize feminists but since you are an "ally" I can certainly criticize YOU. The number of errors in your post is legion.

"any and all organizations accept criticism on policy and implementation from *inside* but not from outside."
This is obviously wrong as not "all" organizations accept criticism from inside (see religions and some political parties) and MANY organizations accept criticisms from outside, witness the extremely common practice of public apologies on behalf of companies, PR people, politicians, NGOs, and groups of all types. Why you even typed that inane sentence is beyond me. Furthermore, in this thread, the previous referenced thread, and the thread on PA's blog both contain many statements from women who disagree with Isis's comments yet here the radical feminists (of which you are one) do NOT accept this criticism "from the inside".

Secondly, regarding allies to feminist movements, who honestly cares? They don't want or need your help and you are disallowed to criticize or even comment. If your only role is to play water-boy instead of being treated as an equal then I shall treat you no better. The only requirement for evil to be done is for good to remain silent. You seem content with that. Fine but don't lecture us.

The feminists here make no distinction between willing deliberate misogyny and accidental and retracted statements. If you wish to wait until women rise up and physically attack all men, that's fine, but don't lecture others who would prefer equality.

I didn't realize that all you had to do was make a bingo card out of criticisms to your movement and they were all therefore invalidated. It's so easy. And DC and Carlie do seem to think it's fair to continue to attack all men, to silence comments, and that men deserve no voice at all due to their "privilege". Blaming it on the patriarchy, the perennial bogeyman.

Yes, people are allowed to criticize radical feminists. Yes men are people. We are for equality. I don't know wtf you are for or why.

Posted by: personne | May 31, 2009 3:29 PM

@personne: I never said that it was impossible to criticize the feminist movement. I simply said that if you do criticize it, don't expect a reception different from any other outside attack.

"any and all organizations accept criticism on policy and implementation from *inside* but not from outside." This is obviously wrong as not "all" organizations accept criticism from inside (see religions and some political parties) and MANY organizations accept criticisms from outside, witness the extremely common practice of public apologies on behalf of companies, PR people, politicians, NGOs, and groups of all types. Why you even typed that inane sentence is beyond me. Furthermore, in this thread, the previous referenced thread, and the thread on PA's blog both contain many statements from women who disagree with Isis's comments yet here the radical feminists (of which you are one) do NOT accept this criticism "from the inside"

My original wording here was a bit broad. Certainly there are limits to internal criticism, and depending on the organization the limits are different. However, you will note that within the catholic church there is debate about church policy and the implementation of policy. The same was and is true of communist parties. Now, I accept that there is a huge difference between how far acceptable criticism goes before you get tossed out between say, the Labour party and the Southern Baptist Church, but my point remains: as long as the broader goals (perhaps a more accurate description in some cases would be fundamental tenets) remain agreed upon then the debate should not result in anyone begin tossed out of the organization.

As for allies and their desirability and usefulness, well that depends on your point of view. I honestly don't care if feminists know or care that they have allies. I simply accept that gender discrimination exists, do what I can to not be a part of that. This does not require approval from either you or feminists. It does not even require that anyone even notices.

I think it is interesting that most of the negative comments were along the lines of "it is such a small thing, why make such a fuss." My answer to that is: "who are you to decide what is a small issue for someone else?" The point is that if it is such a small issue for you or the person doing what they did, it should be no big deal to stop it and solve a big issue for someone else.

Posted by: laserboy | May 31, 2009 4:01 PM

Oops sorry DC, I think I meant "jc".

Fascinating that laserboy and the others have successfully moved the discussion from whether Isis's comments were deserved or an overreaction. Then to whether her comments can be criticized, eventually making it to the realization, via Carlie and jc, that indeed feminism is unquestionable.

That tenet should be particularly galling to a scientist like Isis.

I'm fascinated by this phenomenon of black and white, with us or against us, fundamentalist, in/out/other groupthink. I've picked up quite a bit from feminist critics, learning about disingenuous tactics such as this bingo card and the concept of male feminist allies, unvalued. It seems that to speak your opinion is equivalent to trying to "dominate the conversation" and to be proud of helping in the struggle for equality, as a male, is "asking for a cookie". The whole bit is just incredibly amusing or insulting, depending on my feelings at the time.

Regardless, it would have been nice for Isis to accept PA's apology. She never has.

Posted by: personne | June 1, 2009 8:53 AM

It is unfortunate that many women subscribe to Bush's philosophy of "you either with us or you against us." There are hords of men in all walks of life who absolutely support gender equality and who are turned off by the zealotry of the extreme feminists. The expectation by many feminists for men to not criticize false accusation of misogyny and to shut off those who dare doing so work against the feminists's cause. Therefore, commenters like laserboy do more harm to the feminists's struggle than good.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 1, 2009 11:07 AM

I give up. I'm obviously an irredeemable misogynist according to Isis, and I can't continue to argue with all the yes-women on this blog. Good luck trying to convince them, Hope, and other sensible moderates.

Posted by: Katherine | June 1, 2009 6:33 PM

It's reasonably simple. If you are male and support gender equality, and come onto a blog to show support and maybe offer a perspective of your own, you may be flamed by, apparently, a hardcore feminista to whom all men are a waste of air. Or maybe it's some potty mouthed fuctard pretending to be one, to fuck things up for everyone.

Posted by: eddie | June 2, 2009 2:28 AM

Carlie do seem to think it's fair to continue to attack all men, to silence comments, and that men deserve no voice at all due to their "privilege".

Please show me where I directly attacked all men. Citation needed.

Please also show where I I said that men deserve no voice at all. What I said was they should shut up until they understand the subject, and give the women who are actually experiencing the conditions being discussed room to talk about it.

Posted by: Carlie | June 2, 2009 5:32 PM

I suppose it would be 'privileged' and 'speaking from a position of power' and on and on ad nauseam to suggest that a public, commercial blog is

(...just maybe ...perhaps, just a wee bit of a thought,)

...perhaps that public, for-profit web-space is not the place to have that 'room to talk about it'. Especially if that 'talking about it' essentially alienates and silences a large segment of the readers of that blog.

However, it might be nice to let the out-group know that, preferably before they get to the comments part.

Posted by: dreikin | June 2, 2009 8:03 PM

Oh my god. So, tom, are you suggesting that women only have the ability to speak without having the conversation interrupted with inane basic questions and dismissive refutations when they're in private? Do you go up to clusters of people at parties and butt in to tell the group what they ought to be talking about and why before even checking to see what they're discussing first? I bet everyone loves to see you coming their way.

In an overarching way I'm talking about basic netiquette. Don't derail the thread just because you have failed to learn the basics and you want to demand that everyone else fill you in. Don't immediately dismiss and confront the experiences of other people you know nothing about. Don't try and pretend you get where someone is coming from if you don't. Don't interrupt and try and make it all about you and how you feel. That goes for any type of conversation, any time.
More specifically, in a discussion about feminism and the effects of society on women, if you're a man, don't presume that you know how women are affected. Don't think that just because you don't see sexism it isn't there. Don't assume when you hear criticism of patriarchal elements of society that they are talking about YOU and you must jump in and defend yourself right now !!eleventy!!
Don't assume that your input is so essential and revolutionary to everyone present that you must express yourself immediately before bothering to check out what's going on and see if it's actually relevant.

Why is this all so threatening?

Posted by: Carlie | June 2, 2009 9:41 PM

PhilB:
On the whole, yes, since this is a commercial site and the Seed overlords prolly wouldn't look fondly on that being done very often. I meant for one or a few posts, not the entire blog.

Posted by: dreikin | June 3, 2009 1:24 PM