i don't read jimformation very much. i enjoy his writing, but his views, when he writes about politics, are just a little bit too centric for me.. a little bit too much of towing the line. i happened upon his site yesterday because i saw referance from todd, aka the ripperman.. so, i read the post, and then i continued to read down.. he mentions firefighters.. he does a whole piece on firefighters and calls them firemen.. he doesn't want to use the pc term of firefighters.. he'd rather refer to them as men. well, as you can imagine, that went over really well with me.. so, there were women firefighters on the scene. and by using the term men you are neglecting them.. if you feel the need to use a gender, why not use firewomen? or is jim just one of the many in our society who feels that its a lot more of a compliment to refer to someone, regardless of their, as men?
you see folks. we live in a patriarchy. and in a patriarchy anything that has to do with womyn is considered second class. if a woman acts like a man she is celebrated.. if a man acts like a woman she is degraded.
this spring i was at the state pflag conference. the main speaker was the western person for the national pflag office, ron schlittler. he gave a really long, yet pretty good, speech. at one point he referred to tom boys and jane girls. i forget the context, but i do remember him not having a reason why tom boys are celebrated and jane girls are not. i walked up to him afterwards and gave him, what i felt (and was backed up by other folks later as being right) the answer to his question. it was literally there in front of his face, and he didn't see it. i explained to him that tom boys are girls acting like boys.. and jane girls are boys acting like girls.. and you see, since we live in a society that generally feels that men are superior to women, of course if a boy is acting like a girl we aren't going to like it. its sexism being applied to men.
so, by jim making a point to refer to the firefolks on the scene as firemen.. well.. its just amazing that someone that smart can be so ignorant..
oh wait. don't forget. he's a man. a white man. a heterosexual man. and, like the vast majority of them, he's not going to look past his own dick and he's going to lay down this patriarchial bullshit. he's going to sit and enjoy it and reap all the benefits.
Replies: 15 comments
So.... are you gonna show us your tits, Toots?
Posted by Randy @ 10/20/2001 12:11 AM PST
Jo...perhaps I'm missing something here, so do accept my apologies if I've overlooked something that Jim's said elsewhere, but I don't see where Jim has said ANYTHING about discouraging his daughter from feeling or expressing emotions. He's encouraging her to be strong. A trait that's generally considered a masculine one - but strength is a positive trait!
And I'd have to disagree about warning one's daughter that she's going to make less money for the same job a man is doing, etc. I know that there are inequalities in pay out there, but they're certainly not everywhere, in every field, and they're NOT inevitable. If my parents had raised me with such a fatalistic attitude, I might have given up on my own dreams a long time ago.
Posted by B @ 10/17/2001 06:30 PM PST
I was reading Jimformation today and I happened upon a link to this site after reviewing Jim's whining about being misrepresented for writing his piece/peace on Firemen. I happen to know Jim personally. You are right on Honey, he is a sexist pig! Hell, he sends his wife out at 9:45pm before the liquor store closes to buy beer and chips because he's too lazy to get off the couch. As far as his reference to Firemen which he just stole from some other broad, I don't know where you are from sweetheart but around here in Northern New Jersey and New York, Firemen are referred to as Firemen. Policemen are referred to as cops and ems workers are referred to as first aid squads. I didn't appreciate the personal attack on Jim but he deserves it nonetheless the louse that he is! Now if I could only figure out just what the hell your website is all about..... although I do like the poetry. Sweet Dreams Babe!!
Posted by Big JT @ 10/15/2001 08:08 PM PST
Brooke, it was completely unfair of you to attack Jim without doing proper research first. Shame on you. Choose your battles carefully and do your homework, and the results will increase thousandfold. Working with the Jims will be more fruitful than attacking them.
Amy, even "guys like jim" are not immune to subtle espressions of sexism and discrimination, not to mention the Peggy Noonans who fall lockstep into the partiarchal ideal. Nothing against Jim- I completely disagree with most of his politics, but he seems like a nice guy overall. Again, the problem isn't the Jims- it's society's tacit acceptance that it's ok to discriminate against women in insidious ways, often in the guise of "for their own good".
If you've ever walked in to get your car repaired with a male friend and had the repairperson completely ignore you, choosing to instead speak to the guy, you've experienced it. If you've had a male coworker with roughly the same responsibilities and duties as you (and saved his ass on several occasions), and watched him get accolades and raises while you are ignored, you've seen it. The hardest part is doing a "reality check" to make sure you are seeing it, and aren't imagining things. People will always tell you you're imagining it.
I am still treated as the "cute little girl" at work because I look so much younger (and small and delicate) than I really am. I am not given responsbility commeasurate with my experience and proven abilities, let alone talents and ambitions. Instead I'm babied and given a strange form of "special treatment" I don't want.
All my life, I've had to fight for respect and acceptance in this male-dominated world. I've been sexually harassed numerous times- and filing a complaint is a termination sentence.
No, we still have a LONG way to go. I do not advocate treating men and women identically. However, all people, regardless of race, background, or gender (and sexual orientation, et al), should be treated as unique individuals according to their talents, abilities, and achievements. Amy, if you feel that is and has been the story of your life, I applaud you on staying so firmly fixed in your cocoon. It's probably just as hard to do that as it is to be angry at the injustice and yet persevere for change.
And Jim, if you're telling your daughter to be "strong" and saying or intimating it's not ok for her to feel and express her emotions, you're propogating the male ideals. If you don't prepare her for the fact that she WILL experience hurdles because she is a woman, that she WILL have to work harder than men for less money, you're setting her up for a rude awakening. The truth is harsh, but if you break it gently over time it will help her in the long run. Oh, and if you tell your son "big boys don't cry"- well, that's another one.
Posted by jo @ 10/15/2001 03:18 PM PST
oh yeah.. and while i've got the floor in my own weblog.. peggy noonan.. she's a hard core right winger.. she was a speech writer for bush #1. hard core right wing women, well.. more often than not they are anti-woman. just as anti-woman as the men they hang out with. no, i don't know why, i don't understand it.. but its true.
Posted by brooke @ 10/15/2001 08:37 AM PST
btw. if you think that staying home and having a baby would make ME sick.. you obviously haven't been reading my weblog, nor paying attention to the links i have. i want a baby. and did you know i spend time over at the new homemaker.com? no. i'm sure you don't know either of those.
i expect folks who come and comment on this forum, who make personal jabs at me, to know me better. my life is here for you to read all about it. and the baby post.. its from a week ago.
Posted by brooke @ 10/15/2001 08:33 AM PST
but the dismantling of the patriarchial system in which we live goes beyond being able to go to college, being able to work, etc.. it goes to the point of women not being seen as second class citizens in this society. the beauty industry.. the beauty industry is huge. the fact that i'm told that i can't walk someplace at night, but men can. those are just two of the many. plus, work.. getting back to what you mentioned.. women are still not getting equal pay for equal work. and the abortion issue.. if you've not noticed, we've got a very republican government in place right now, and the first instance they get, they'll take away our right to choose. heads are in the sand if folks think that the right too choose is a guaranteed thing.
as far as my brand of feminism.. radical feminism. well, it just means that i'm watching your back a lot harder than you are watching mine.. it was the radical feminists that got you what rights you have in this country.. and it will be the radical feminists that get this place to the point where you are no longer worried about the size of your body, your age, whether you can be safe in your own home.
if you think there isn't further work to do, then, again.. heads are in the sand. there is more work to do than one can ever imagine.
Posted by brooke @ 10/15/2001 08:29 AM PST
Your post reminds me of those two women on this season's Real World who do a lot of yelling and not much listening.
I suggest that you read Stepen Covey's Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. Pay close attention to the Seek First To Understand Chapter.
Posted by Creepy Steve @ 10/15/2001 08:27 AM PST
this is the sort of thing that makes me ashamed to be a woman sometimes. other woman who go to the absolute extreme and refuse to think with their heads. for the most part i applaud feminists, they have made great advances in our society. they have made it possible for me to have the job i have today. but these days it just seems like they are fighting in the dark. there is no big 'thing' to go for anymore, so instead they go for everything. women can vote, women can have abortions, women can go to college and get any job they please, and they can also stay home and make babies their whole lives (i'm sure that sort of thing just makes you sick, but it's still a right we have as women.) so what exactly are you fighting for as an extreme feminist? because i don't see it. sure there are some sexist bastards out there, but there are far fewer of them then there are of guys like jim.
Posted by amy @ 10/15/2001 06:56 AM PST
this is the sort of thing that makes me ashamed to be a woman sometimes. other woman who go to the absolute extreme and refuse to think with their heads. for the most part i applaud feminists, they have made great advances in our society. they have made it possible for me to have the job i have today. but these days it just seems like they are fighting in the dark. there is no big 'thing' to go for anymore, so instead they go for everything. women can vote, women can have abortions, women can go to college and get any job they please, and they can also stay home and make babies their whole lives (i'm sure that sort of thing just makes you sick, but it's still a right we have as women.) so what exactly are you fighting for as an extreme feminist? because i don't see it. sure there are some sexist bastards out there, but there are far fewer of them then there are of guys like jim.
Posted by amy @ 10/15/2001 06:38 AM PST
yes. polarized view.. very much so. the polarized view that is my unique view. and at jim's site you'll find another polarized one.. the one through his eyes.. and every other place on the web.. all very polarized through the many different lenses.
Posted by brooke @ 10/12/2001 09:43 PM PST
Hi, my name is Jim. I'm a white, heterosexual man. Around here, I believe I should feel ashamed. But there's something that needs to be addressed:
I didn't write the piece that Brooke references. Not a word of it.
It was written by a woman: Peggy Noonan.
Peggy Noonan, for the record, goes out of her way to use the the term fireMEN. It was a small part of the thesis of her column. Though it wasn't why I quoted it: I was using it to celebrate and honor heroism. And, regardless of her use of the term "firemen", Ms. Noonan does a hell of a job honoring those that died rescuing people.
I think if someone takes the time to read my posts about the attack on the World Trade Center, you'll find that I use the term "firefighter" throughout (at least I think I do). Go ahead, check it out. Get back to me if you want.
:::
Brooke, I understand your point of view point. I understand that you look at the world through a polarized lense. I'm okay with that. People who read Rivervision know what they're getting. They know why they're here.
I don't mind that you disagree with my politics (though I doubt you know my politics -- conservatives have called me liberal and liberals have called me conservative -- I've called myself a "radical Constitutionalist" and, at one point, was a card carrying member of the Libertarian Party). Frankly, I welcome difference. I regail in it. I'm more tolerant of other people's views than most anyone I know.
For the most part, my writings at JimFormation don't attempt to change minds or press an ideology. Usually, I only hope to have people scratch their heads or laugh or cry. At my best, I hope to do all of the above.
I don't mind you slamming me the way you have. Or at least attempting to. You don't have to apologize for it, but read the piece again. Understand that I didn't write it -- Peggy Noonan did -- I just referenced it. Direct your rhetoric where it belongs: the Wall Street Journal.
:::
Me? Paternalistic? My oldest child is a girl. Since the day she was born I've dedicated her part of my life (which is a HUGE part) to teaching her that she is strong, smart and capable. That she can do anything. That she (cliche alert) doesn't need a man.
I've worked my entire life in a woman dominated field. I'm a registered nurse -- BIG MAN NURSE. I've worked elbow-to-elbow with more women than most, have made real, professional bonds with more women than most, have had more female supervisors than most. Paternalistic? Hardly.
(cliche alert II) I don't care if a person is man or woman, gay or straight, black or white.
:::
You lose credibility when you make statements like "he's not going to look past his own dick and he's going to lay down this patriarchial bullshit". Just as I would if I responded in kind by saying that "she's not going to crawl out of her (insert any slang for vagina) and lay down this feminist bullshit". I think you were trying to convey anger. Maybe to some you have. To me it showed a smallness.
:::
For the record, I accept your apology. Though I think you're apologizing for the wrong thing. I don't mind getting knocked down. God knows, I need it from time to time. But knock me down for something I said!
:::
In summary, you would do a better job of advancing your cause by fighting the real demons rather than by creating and burning down straw dogs.
Posted by Jim @ 10/12/2001 07:34 PM PST
i was actually coming here to remove this post, cause, well.. its really controversial, and i wrote it in a way of attacking jimformation.. which, what i should have done instead, was remove referance to him and just referance what he wrote as an article i read somewhere.. you see, after i thought about it for some hours i realized i was, in fact, probably being rather shallow for attacking him personally. i tried to make a point about living in a patriarchial society and i did it rather meanly. seriously, i mean that.
so, i apologize to jim.. but i do not apologize for the point i made i my post.
I am a RADICAL feminist.
that means that my brand of feminism.. well, its a lot more in your face than the brand of feminism you see most people expressing..
expect radical feminist views posted here. and expect no apologies to ANYONE for my views. the only apologies you will get here is when i hurt an individual, unintentionally, by something i've written.
Posted by brooke @ 10/12/2001 03:47 PM PST
everyone has to be taken for who they are. brooke is a marvelously passionate young feminist who abhors sexism in any form. to be such an ass and not be able to look past her *one* post to her general gist in life is, imo, rude as all hell, and just as ignorant as those who ignore fire*women*.
Posted by cal @ 10/12/2001 02:46 PM PST
Someone posts a touching (if linguistically unenlightened) tribute to a group of people (the vast majority if not all of whom, as he points out, were men) and you totally ignore the content of that post, choosing instead to rant about sexism, and then you claim that that he's not looking past his own dick?
Replacing genitalia references as appropriate, all I can say is: Pot. Kettle. Black.
Posted by B @ 10/12/2001 02:33 PM PST
