Rebecca traister

A lot of us are angry right now. Luckily, we have Rebecca Traister to tell us we’re not alone. The author and journalist, whose most recent book Good and Mad explored the political power of female anger, has been a consistent voice of rhyme and reason for the culture, with a particular emphasis on the women who disrupt our system for the better (and the men —and women, and systems —who ... Rebecca Traister is writer at large for New York magazine and a contributing editor at Elle.A National Magazine Award finalist, she has written about women in politics, media, and entertainment from a feminist perspective for The New Republic and Salon and has also contributed to The Nation, The New York Observer, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Vogue, Glamour and Marie Claire. Rebecca Traister is a senior writer at Salon.com, where she has covered women in politics, media and entertainment since October of 2003. Prior to that, she was a reporter at the New York Observer ... Rebecca Traister was born in 1970s. The 1970s were a 'pivot of change', it was an era of economic struggle, cultural change, and technological innovation. The Seventies saw many women's rights, gay rights, and environmental movements. Discover what happened on this day. Rebecca Traister is part of the Baby boomers generation. The energy drink was especially dangerous for men with heart disease to take ED medication after hitting the pause button on nitrates. The price of Levitra at CVS has been unchanged at $56.59 for a 20-milligram tablet since August 2019. The Books That Inspired Rebecca Traister’s Good and MadIncluding a surprise appearance by Andrea Dworkin, plus two books the author wishes she’d read before finishing her own ... Rebecca Traister surveys how the 2008 election changed politics for women, Darin Strauss absorbs a classmate's death, and Hilary Spurling resurrects Pearl S. Buck's life and fiction.

Elizabeth Warren

2011.09.22 03:27 avnerd Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren is the senior senator from Massachusetts and was a 2020 candidate for President of the United States of America. If we organize together, if we fight together, if we persist together, we can win!
[link]


2012.02.03 12:54 dmpinder Sam Harris

A place to discuss Sam Harris and to have difficult conversations with civility.
[link]


2015.06.19 22:31 ThroneofGames The #1 source for all things Bill Maher on Reddit!

Welcome to /Maher!
[link]


2020.09.20 08:08 TweetArchiveBot Unathi Kwaza RT from Rebecca Traister: I wrote about RBG’s death, and how we’ve been left to focus on individual choices, instead of massive institutional failures:

Unathi Kwaza RT from Rebecca Traister: I wrote about RBG’s death, and how we’ve been left to focus on individual choices, instead of massive institutional failures: submitted by TweetArchiveBot to LibertyRSA [link] [comments]


2020.09.17 11:12 wizardse_throwaway Books about lives of women in India.

I have been reading these books, All the Single Ladies by Rebecca Traister, and Girl Trouble by Carol Dyhouse. They talk about how women's lives changed in the USA, and UK respectively after the world wars, and how 60s shaped new family dynamics. I think Indian women are somewhat in a rediscovery phrase with more of us leaving our homes not to get married but to get educated, more of us entering salaried work force etc. I'm not saying we are making amazing progress because no woman must be left behind, but we are making some progress. A large factor of this progress is female friendships, and when we are raised to think of friends as temporary, it becomes hard to sustain these very important bonds in our lives.
Have any of you felt this way? Do you know any books like the ones I mentioned from an Indian perspective?
submitted by wizardse_throwaway to TwoXIndia [link] [comments]


2020.09.09 17:38 finnagains What happened to the #MeToo witch-hunt? - NYT, Washington Post and Media Abandon Campaign (r/Socialist_) 8 Sept 2020

We have asked before, and we ask again: what has happened to the #MeToo campaign?
From October 2017 onward, through at least the first few months of 2020, the American media was alive—and one might say aglow—with lurid allegations of sexual misconduct directed against prominent figures in the arts and elsewhere. The savage witch-hunt made victims of such figures as Kevin Spacey, James Levine, Louis C.K., Charles Dutoit, Garrison Keillor, Jeffrey Tambor, Placido Domingo and numerous others.
On the basis of generally unsubstantiated claims, careers and lives were destroyed. None of the above figures has been convicted of a single crime, and only Spacey was charged with one (the Massachusetts case pathetically fell apart). The New York Times, Washington Post and the New Yorker and New York magazines regularly and gleefully participated in the evisceration of various personalities on the basis of shabby evidence, or no evidence at all. Time magazine bestowed its “Person of the Year” honor for 2017 on the “Silence Breakers.”
How and why did sexual misconduct in Hollywood in particular, one of the great social issues of our time, according to the media in 2017, 2018 and 2019, suddenly vanish from sight? Why has the “MeToo” fever suddenly broken?
First of all, its disappearance, temporary or otherwise, points to the highly manipulated character of such efforts. With great fanfare, the US media turns on a given tap at one instant, only to turn it off at the next. Everything is dictated by the needs of the ruling elite to shift public opinion in this direction or that, always with a larger political agenda in mind, above all, to confuse and deceive the people.
One of the primary roles of the press remains, in Lenin’s words, “to shout down the truth, to prevent it from being heard, to drown it in a torrent of invective and shouts, to prevent an earnest elucidation of the facts.” When the New York Times, effortlessly changing the subject, replaces its “Sex, Sex, Sex!” headlines with ones devoted almost exclusively to “Race, Race, Race!” and “Russia, Russia, Russia!” it can count on broad sections of the affluent middle class to be swept along.
In October 2017 and since, have pointed out that historically the “sex scandal,” as a technique by which to settle scores and regulate public affairs, has almost invariably been associated with the activity of reactionary elements determined to pollute the political atmosphere and push it to the right.
The #MeToo operation used intensely emotive language regarding very intimate issues and appealed to the public’s natural revulsion at the thought of sexual abuse and the victimization of vulnerable individuals. The sexual wrongdoing outcry was one of the means, along with the anti-Russia hysteria, of retaining a primarily upper middle class constituency, and whomever else could be persuaded to go along with it, within the Democratic Party’s orbit.
In regard to the so-called “rape culture,” the Democrats painted themselves as “progressives” who “defended women” against the abusers. There was much that was murky and dubious about the sordid claims, transmitted instantly by the Times and the rest or, worse still, made the subject of pseudo-in-depth features remarkably short on names and facts—but that there was a general attempt to obscure or diminish the burning questions of social inequality and class, along with the deteriorating conditions in which tens of millions were living, while playing up the supposedly universal and timeless struggle between “powerless” women and “powerful” men, was unmistakable.
The sexual misconduct campaign became an extension, by other means, of Democrat Hillary Clinton’s wretched 2016 presidential campaign, which was saturated with anti-working class identity politics, including the demonizing of the unfortunate 18-year-old Stanford University student Brock Turner.
In addition, of course, such operations also have the practical effect, from the point of view of their proponents, of seeing males ousted from top positions in the media, entertainment industry and academic world, to be replaced by females. This is part of the internecine gender warfare going on in such professional spheres, which does not have the slightest positive result for working class women.
Once former Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein was convicted and brutally sentenced in mid-March, the #MeToo campaign was effectively put away in a closet. As we argued in July, one of the principal factors dictating this change in tactics and tone was no doubt the 2020 electoral project of the Democratic Party and Joe Biden’s prospects in particular. In a March 25 radio interview, former Biden staffer Tara Reade claimed that the then-senator from Delaware had groped and digitally raped her in 1993. The charges were received coolly, even skeptically, by the New York Times and the media generally. The watchword “believe women” in this case obviously and dangerously cut across the plans and politics of the New York Times and the Democrats.
In mid-May, the Times gave the official signal that the campaign was no longer a fully approved concern by criticizing the New Yorker’s Ronan Farrow, one of the #MeToo heroes for his initial “exposé” of Weinstein in October 2017. Although the Times used relatively restrained language, its article, in effect, implied that Farrow was a dishonest fraud. And where has Farrow disappeared to?
Also hovering over events are the continued fallout and lingering effects of the seriously under-reported Jeffrey Epstein scandal. Epstein, the disgraced financier who was “suicided” in August 2019, had connections to many influential figures in the US and beyond. The case of an individual who appears to have been the whoremaster to the super-rich represents a continuing threat to important personages, no doubt including some in the upper echelons of the American media. All the more reason to rein in the wilder sex allegations. This helps explain, for example, why unstable #MeToo activist Rose McGowan, once the toast of the town for her “bravery,” has largely lost access to the “respectable” media for the time being.
Since March, leading #MeToo feminists have twisted themselves in knots seeking to justify their support for Biden in the light of Reade’s allegations. To make clear: they are not in a quandary because they find themselves endorsing a veteran servant of big business, a rotten wheeler-dealer who once allied himself in the Senate with ultra-reactionary segregationists such as James Eastland of Mississippi and Herman Talmadge of Georgia, a pro-corporate warmonger with the blood of countless thousands in Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan on his hands … no, such concerns do not trouble these well-to-do types.
Rather, they find Biden objectionable and their position disquieting because the former vice president, as Rebecca Traister of New York magazine’s The Cut phrased it in April, (“The Biden Trap”) is “an accused harasser who’s now been credibly accused of assault.” In August, as Biden’s nomination drew near, Traister referred to him (“Biden’s Fantasy of Female Submission”), as someone who “has made multiple women uncomfortable with his habit of nonconsensual touching.” That Biden would continue the massive crimes of American capitalism at home and abroad is not an issue that would occur to Traister and her ilk.
For her part, Jessica Valenti at Medium was only worried in early August about the “scrutiny” any female vice presidential candidate selected by Biden would have to undergo. “It’s bad enough,” Valenti commented, “that there’s another old white man representing Democrats in the presidential election, but now we have to watch again as smart, capable women are nitpicked over and dismissed—another reminder of just how misogynist this country is.” Valenti, of course, was including Biden’s eventual choice, right-wing, law-and-order former prosecutor Kamala Harris, in that grouping of “smart, capable women.”
These people are a thousand miles from the needs and problems of the working class, male and female, white, black and immigrant. Or, rather, their allegiance to the Democratic Party, obsession with their own advancement and privileges and attachment to the stock market and the entire parasitic American capitalist economy inevitably renders them ever more hostile to the mass of the population as it enters into opposition with the entire political establishment.
As for those who consider themselves on the left who supported the #MeToo fraud, they should give themselves a swift kick in their own asses and ask why they were so easily manipulated and swept along by this shameful and destructive witch-hunt.
https://redd.it/ipi7zr
submitted by finnagains to HarpiesBizarre [link] [comments]


2020.09.09 17:36 finnagains What happened to the #MeToo witch-hunt? - NYT, Washington Post and Media Abandon Campaign (r/Socialist_) 8 Sept 2020

We have asked before, and we ask again: what has happened to the #MeToo campaign?
From October 2017 onward, through at least the first few months of 2020, the American media was alive—and one might say aglow—with lurid allegations of sexual misconduct directed against prominent figures in the arts and elsewhere. The savage witch-hunt made victims of such figures as Kevin Spacey, James Levine, Louis C.K., Charles Dutoit, Garrison Keillor, Jeffrey Tambor, Placido Domingo and numerous others.
On the basis of generally unsubstantiated claims, careers and lives were destroyed. None of the above figures has been convicted of a single crime, and only Spacey was charged with one (the Massachusetts case pathetically fell apart). The New York Times, Washington Post and the New Yorker and New York magazines regularly and gleefully participated in the evisceration of various personalities on the basis of shabby evidence, or no evidence at all. Time magazine bestowed its “Person of the Year” honor for 2017 on the “Silence Breakers.”
How and why did sexual misconduct in Hollywood in particular, one of the great social issues of our time, according to the media in 2017, 2018 and 2019, suddenly vanish from sight? Why has the “MeToo” fever suddenly broken?
First of all, its disappearance, temporary or otherwise, points to the highly manipulated character of such efforts. With great fanfare, the US media turns on a given tap at one instant, only to turn it off at the next. Everything is dictated by the needs of the ruling elite to shift public opinion in this direction or that, always with a larger political agenda in mind, above all, to confuse and deceive the people.
One of the primary roles of the press remains, in Lenin’s words, “to shout down the truth, to prevent it from being heard, to drown it in a torrent of invective and shouts, to prevent an earnest elucidation of the facts.” When the New York Times, effortlessly changing the subject, replaces its “Sex, Sex, Sex!” headlines with ones devoted almost exclusively to “Race, Race, Race!” and “Russia, Russia, Russia!” it can count on broad sections of the affluent middle class to be swept along.
In October 2017 and since, have pointed out that historically the “sex scandal,” as a technique by which to settle scores and regulate public affairs, has almost invariably been associated with the activity of reactionary elements determined to pollute the political atmosphere and push it to the right.
The #MeToo operation used intensely emotive language regarding very intimate issues and appealed to the public’s natural revulsion at the thought of sexual abuse and the victimization of vulnerable individuals. The sexual wrongdoing outcry was one of the means, along with the anti-Russia hysteria, of retaining a primarily upper middle class constituency, and whomever else could be persuaded to go along with it, within the Democratic Party’s orbit.
In regard to the so-called “rape culture,” the Democrats painted themselves as “progressives” who “defended women” against the abusers. There was much that was murky and dubious about the sordid claims, transmitted instantly by the Times and the rest or, worse still, made the subject of pseudo-in-depth features remarkably short on names and facts—but that there was a general attempt to obscure or diminish the burning questions of social inequality and class, along with the deteriorating conditions in which tens of millions were living, while playing up the supposedly universal and timeless struggle between “powerless” women and “powerful” men, was unmistakable.
The sexual misconduct campaign became an extension, by other means, of Democrat Hillary Clinton’s wretched 2016 presidential campaign, which was saturated with anti-working class identity politics, including the demonizing of the unfortunate 18-year-old Stanford University student Brock Turner.
In addition, of course, such operations also have the practical effect, from the point of view of their proponents, of seeing males ousted from top positions in the media, entertainment industry and academic world, to be replaced by females. This is part of the internecine gender warfare going on in such professional spheres, which does not have the slightest positive result for working class women.
Once former Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein was convicted and brutally sentenced in mid-March, the #MeToo campaign was effectively put away in a closet. As we argued in July, one of the principal factors dictating this change in tactics and tone was no doubt the 2020 electoral project of the Democratic Party and Joe Biden’s prospects in particular. In a March 25 radio interview, former Biden staffer Tara Reade claimed that the then-senator from Delaware had groped and digitally raped her in 1993. The charges were received coolly, even skeptically, by the New York Times and the media generally. The watchword “believe women” in this case obviously and dangerously cut across the plans and politics of the New York Times and the Democrats.
In mid-May, the Times gave the official signal that the campaign was no longer a fully approved concern by criticizing the New Yorker’s Ronan Farrow, one of the #MeToo heroes for his initial “exposé” of Weinstein in October 2017. Although the Times used relatively restrained language, its article, in effect, implied that Farrow was a dishonest fraud. And where has Farrow disappeared to?
Also hovering over events are the continued fallout and lingering effects of the seriously under-reported Jeffrey Epstein scandal. Epstein, the disgraced financier who was “suicided” in August 2019, had connections to many influential figures in the US and beyond. The case of an individual who appears to have been the whoremaster to the super-rich represents a continuing threat to important personages, no doubt including some in the upper echelons of the American media. All the more reason to rein in the wilder sex allegations. This helps explain, for example, why unstable #MeToo activist Rose McGowan, once the toast of the town for her “bravery,” has largely lost access to the “respectable” media for the time being.
Since March, leading #MeToo feminists have twisted themselves in knots seeking to justify their support for Biden in the light of Reade’s allegations. To make clear: they are not in a quandary because they find themselves endorsing a veteran servant of big business, a rotten wheeler-dealer who once allied himself in the Senate with ultra-reactionary segregationists such as James Eastland of Mississippi and Herman Talmadge of Georgia, a pro-corporate warmonger with the blood of countless thousands in Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan on his hands … no, such concerns do not trouble these well-to-do types.
Rather, they find Biden objectionable and their position disquieting because the former vice president, as Rebecca Traister of New York magazine’s The Cut phrased it in April, (“The Biden Trap”) is “an accused harasser who’s now been credibly accused of assault.” In August, as Biden’s nomination drew near, Traister referred to him (“Biden’s Fantasy of Female Submission”), as someone who “has made multiple women uncomfortable with his habit of nonconsensual touching.” That Biden would continue the massive crimes of American capitalism at home and abroad is not an issue that would occur to Traister and her ilk.
For her part, Jessica Valenti at Medium was only worried in early August about the “scrutiny” any female vice presidential candidate selected by Biden would have to undergo. “It’s bad enough,” Valenti commented, “that there’s another old white man representing Democrats in the presidential election, but now we have to watch again as smart, capable women are nitpicked over and dismissed—another reminder of just how misogynist this country is.” Valenti, of course, was including Biden’s eventual choice, right-wing, law-and-order former prosecutor Kamala Harris, in that grouping of “smart, capable women.”
These people are a thousand miles from the needs and problems of the working class, male and female, white, black and immigrant. Or, rather, their allegiance to the Democratic Party, obsession with their own advancement and privileges and attachment to the stock market and the entire parasitic American capitalist economy inevitably renders them ever more hostile to the mass of the population as it enters into opposition with the entire political establishment.
As for those who consider themselves on the left who supported the #MeToo fraud, they should give themselves a swift kick in their own asses and ask why they were so easily manipulated and swept along by this shameful and destructive witch-hunt.
Socialist_
submitted by finnagains to Socialist_ [link] [comments]


2020.08.30 17:02 whethersweater "All The Single Ladies" by Rebecca Traister has been a treasure trove of CF female role models.

I'm not a member of this subreddit but I came looking for a book recommendation recently because I feel the need to bolster my list of CF female role models. I was surprised to find very few posts and a very sorry "book" section on the sidebar.
I want to recommend "All the Single Ladies: Unmarried Women and The Rise of an Independent Nation" by Rebecca Traister (2016). While the book focuses on unmarried women who may or may not have children, there are many many CF women featured. And they are so badass! The historical parts of the book give a great view of these women's contributions to American life and gives a very thorough history of the ways in which society and institutions of power have shaped women's lives/options/choices through the last couple hundred years. There is a significant focus on female friendship that is just great. It also covers stories of contemporary women, and has a lovely mix of journalism and pop culture writing. Importantly, it is very intersectional and examines influences of race, class, religion, urbanity, etc on ones personal expectations/options and societal trends.
As a partnered person I've really come to appreciate my unmarried foremothers (omg autocorrect literally just changed that to forefathers, the audacity!) and I think it would have a welcoming audience here.
submitted by whethersweater to childfree [link] [comments]


2020.08.16 05:40 fugginmywaydowntown Rebecca Traister having a normal one: Biden's Fantasy of Female Submission

Rebecca Traister having a normal one: Biden's Fantasy of Female Submission submitted by fugginmywaydowntown to Enough_Sanders_Spam [link] [comments]


2020.07.28 12:15 distractedbunny The poison of male incivility A great piece written by Rebecca Traister shines the light on how subtle sexism influences women's success to a great degree

The poison of male incivility A great piece written by Rebecca Traister shines the light on how subtle sexism influences women's success to a great degree submitted by distractedbunny to FemaleDatingStrategy [link] [comments]


2020.07.25 03:54 TweetArchiveBot Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez RT from Rebecca Traister: I wrote about the warped framing of @AOC as disruptive, norm-shattering and savvy and how it contrasts with the invisibility of Yoho’s opportunism and ambition:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez RT from Rebecca Traister: I wrote about the warped framing of @AOC as disruptive, norm-shattering and savvy and how it contrasts with the invisibility of Yoho’s opportunism and ambition: submitted by TweetArchiveBot to TweetArchiver [link] [comments]


2020.07.17 11:13 suchapain The Karen Meme and the Death of “Lean In” Feminism

How making a fuss went out of fashion
To get at why it seems so startling to hear progressives mocking women for being too demanding, it’s necessary to remember what mainstream feminism was, until about five minutes ago, and in some circles I suppose still is: a call to women to lean in — that is, to speak up for ourselves and stop being so deferential.
By “Lean In” feminism, I don’t just mean the feminism of the handful of women who personally identified with the struggles of Lean In author Sheryl Sandberg. I mean a phenomenon that predated that book’s 2013 publication (the writer Jonathan Malesic reminded me of the bumper sticker slogan, “Well-behaved women rarely make history”) and persisted (heh) into the years following Trump’s election. I mean nasty women, difficult women, and angry women, but also badass women, bossy women, and girlbosses, women who didn’t care what other people (men especially) thought about them. But also, individual assertiveness — the feminism of being a successful (maybe white, maybe middle-class or wealthy…) woman, within existing structures.
It was a central, nearly unquestioned tenet of this feminism that women should speak up. Speak up about injustice, but also about relatively trivial, personal matters: asking for a raise, not getting ripped off at a car-repair shop.
The impulse not to make a fuss, not to be the squeaky wheel, was in this interpretation internalized misogyny. To focus on people-pleasing, to listen rather than speaking — these were tendencies feminism asked women to overcome. The patriarchy wanted us to be seen, not heard.
The notion that making a fuss was heroic as long as a woman was doing it never quite added up. Sometimes women get political in a bigoted way, not a righteous one. Sometimes the boss is a woman and exploitative. And, on a more mundane level, sometimes women decide during a pandemic to return to the barista to say there was more milk than they’d wanted in a beverage they’d ordered (a thing I’m afraid I actually saw happen). Pushback was necessary. And pushback has, goodness knows, been abundant.
The “Karen” meme has no consistent meaning across all contexts. Sometimes it’s a racist white woman, other times a generically entitled one. Other times, it’s … all over the place. (“Karen,” an explicitly anti-racist white-appearing woman, putting herself in physical danger during the George Floyd protests, or Manhattan women whose misdeed is appearing “bourgeois.” She’s basic, or has the “Karen” haircut. “Karen” can just be a woman someone’s annoyed at.)
But if there’s one essential characteristic of The Karen, it’s that she is a woman who makes too much of a fuss, or makes a fuss for an inappropriate reason. She thinks highly of herself, but isn’t sufficiently concerned with how others see her. She’s out of touch, and stubbornly refuses to take the lead from young people who get it.
She’s difficult, nasty, assertive, and utterly unafraid of calling managers or other authorities to get her way. She has (long since) crossed the line from demure girlhood to DGAF womanhood, and this is not a good thing.
At most, Karen-ness is something that can be channeled into a force for good. A widely-shared tweet advises:
All the middle-aged white women out there that want to help…use that Karen energy and call up your city council members, mayors, sheriffs, etc and DEMAND to speak to their managers. Show up at their doorsteps. Make a scene. Fight as if they wouldn’t take your coupon at Kohl’s
It’s hard to know where to begin with this. The advice itself is sound, but gratuitously insulting of the (ostensible) target audience. There’s the assumption that members of that demographic who are so inclined are not already helping.
Add to this the undeniably sexist and classist reference to retail coupon usage. It’s a patronizing approach (women, always shopping, unless otherwise prompted), but with a jab at women who, heaven forbid, make a fuss over things that aren’t incredibly serious.
As corrections so often do, “Karen” addresses one set of ills while reinforcing another. No, it’s not always a good thing when a woman makes a fuss, but nor should women’s fuss-making be (further) stigmatized. Yes, white women can be racist, rich women classist, and yes, a ‘what if woman ruled the world?’ fantasy about women’s inherent goodness has a way of erasing these and other truths. It doesn’t follow that women’s assertiveness — even with whichever qualifiers (white, posh, etc.) — is inherently worse than men’s.
It seems as though it should be possible to abandon the notion of women-even-privileged-ones as pure victims while also refusing to return to a society where every time a woman raises her voice about something legitimate or innocuous, she needs to first cringe at herself and wonder if she is that.
I just read this article and I don't see any flaws. But is it true? Does the Karen meme contradict with, and end, lean in feminism? If so, what does this mean for the gender culture war?
Personally I think the Karen meme is fun but I suspect that a gendered insult becoming so popular for people to use probably isn't the best thing for gender equality in society. But what exactly can and should be done about this meme?
Say that mocking Karens is fine and everyone can do it as much as they want? Say that mocking Karens is fine in moderation but not too much because that could be a sign of bias against women? Say that Karen is a sexist slur that nobody should ever use under any circumstance? Introduce a male name insult that means the exact same thing and is used about as often? Change Karen into a gender neutral name or word that people use instead? Trade 'Karen' for 'fragile male ego' and 'mansplaining' and say all those words are now sexist slurs that should never be used and if you do you will be exiled from society?
submitted by suchapain to GGdiscussion [link] [comments]


2020.06.25 22:06 takenbywine From the book, Good and Mad: The Revolutionary Power of Women's Anger Book by Rebecca Traister

From the book, Good and Mad: The Revolutionary Power of Women's Anger Book by Rebecca Traister submitted by takenbywine to Feminism [link] [comments]


2020.05.31 14:40 snarkerposey11 Bourgeois Feminist Bullshit -- Rebecca Traister and Single Women

Bourgeois Feminist Bullshit -- Rebecca Traister and Single Women submitted by snarkerposey11 to SocialismAndFeminism [link] [comments]


2020.05.31 14:34 snarkerposey11 Bourgeois Feminist Bullshit - Rebecca Traister and Single Women

submitted by snarkerposey11 to anarchafeminism [link] [comments]


2020.05.05 20:56 0kieD0kieArtichokie Good article on the double bind that Warren and other feminists are facing as prospective VP's for Biden

Like many other people, I am crossing my fingers that Warren becomes VP or is offered a powerful cabinet position in the Biden administration. While initially I was a bit ambivalent because we'd be losing one of our best advocates in the Senate, ultimately I trust Senator Warren to determine what position will enable her to do the most good. I was just starting to get excited for a potential Biden administration (something I never thought I'd say), when more information began to come out about Tara Reade. I am voting for Biden regardless - too many lives are at stake for any of us to sit out this election or vote third party - but nonetheless, I do worry that us as Democrats could lose the moral upperhand as a result of Biden's alleged actions. Now more than ever, we need an incredible VP - in the event there is validity to Reade's accusations, Biden could be impeached or forced to resign. I believe Elizabeth Warren is the most qualified candidate, and as someone whose intersectional feminism guides her leadership, she is most equipped to heal the country from the trauma of a president(s)' sexual assault case. I am adding the (s) in there deliberately, since we already have someone accused of multiple sexual assaults in the White House - whether or not Biden is guilty does not change that. Yet I do worry that if there is a smoking gun in Biden's case, that Warren's association with him could undermine public support for her agenda and a potential 2024 and/or 2028 candidacy.
I am a pragmatist and believe that action is more important than virtue signaling. Sometimes to implement change, we have to do it within the system - which may mean associating with people who are controversial at best, criminal at worst. Purity politics can result in progressives sidelining themselves for the purpose of public disavowal, and in the process we lose out on opportunities to make tangible changes in the lives of fellow Americans. Still, I feel conflicted, because I would hate to see a significant number of feminists turn on Elizabeth Warren if she accepts a position as Biden's VP. As we've seen time and time again, it's not the men behaving badly who get the brunt of the blame, but the women who associate with them (Hillary Clinton, Monica Lewinsky). I was so happy at the prospect of a woman being one heartbeat away from the presidency, but now I worry if it could damage her career - and galvanize the public against progressive measures that she is seeking to implement.
Rebecca Traister's article put into words my current feelings: " in accepting an invitation that he might extend, or even in voicing their support for his campaign, these women wind up imperiling themselves by getting tied to him and the mess of his historical shortcomings, often on exactly the issues that have driven them into politics. In fact, they are quite likely to have their own history of righteous advocacy held up against them, used to make them look like hypocrites for agreeing to be on a ticket with a man who has been credibly accused of behavior they have aggressively condemned, and as sops to a system that they are in fact working hard to change. "
She goes on to say, " These kinds of turnarounds have been made by former male rivals all the time, and, in fact, Bernie Sanders has come in for some criticism for having endorsed Biden after Reade’s allegations were made public; but we have a higher tolerance for inconvenient hypocrisy when it comes from male politicians." Once again, rather than asking men to hold themselves to higher standards, it's women who are the ones who have to be held accountable.
I am seeing an awful lot of people online say that they cannot vote for Joe Biden due to the possibility he is a sex offender. Even though four more years of Trump would cause irreparable damage for victims of sex crimes, they still think this would be the lesser of the evils. Nevermind the fact that cutting food stamps makes it difficult for domestic violence victims to get back on their feet, undermining the ACA means rape victims may not be able to afford PTSD treatment, undocumented women are afraid to report sexual assault to the police...the list goes on and on. I am worried that "cancel culture" will come for Elizabeth Warren and the other progressive women who are our only hope of putting effective brakes on the dangerous Trump administration and rightwing movement. Does anyone have tips for dealing with people who don't understand the nuance of this?
submitted by 0kieD0kieArtichokie to ElizabethWarren [link] [comments]


2020.04.29 13:13 kittehgoesmeow What A Day: Commander In Beef by Sarah Lazarus & Crooked Media (04/28/20)

"No." - The New York Times, in reponse to Sean Hannity's 12-page tantrum

Meating The Moment

With over one million confirmed coronavirus cases in the United States, President Trump reportedly plans to use the Defense Production Act to force meat processing plants, which have incubated deadly outbreaks, to remain open. Trump said he will also sign an executive order to protect meatpacking plants from legal liabilities, should their workers get sick, which ought to put everyone’s biggest concerns to rest.
At least some wealthy CEOs, the real victims in all this, are finally catching a break.
Asked today why he thinks states should be reopening before we have a vaccine or even effective therapies, Trump replied, “I think what happens is it's going to go away.” Trump’s early refusal to acknowledge a problem has cost tens of thousands of Americans their lives, millions their jobs, and left most of us stuck in lockdown. His continued refusal to focus on the solution is what’s preventing us from getting out. While you’re inside, if you’re able, chip in to help to those who need it most

Look No Further Than The Crooked Media

As part of our push to call Congress about election safety, last week we asked you to send us videos telling us why you need safer voting options. A bunch of you have already sent videos in, but keep ‘em coming! We want to share your stories, and show everyone why this is so important. Text them over to your pals at Pod Save America at 323-405-994

Under The Radar

The Trump administration’s rollout of retail-based testing has left black communities behind. Back on March 13, the administration announced a partnership with Walgreens, Walmart, Target, and CVS to repurpose some of their parking lots as free drive-through test centers. The partner stores pledged to focus on “our most vulnerable citizens.” Not only has the rollout of the program been painfully slow, but it hasn’t lived up to that simple promise. Of the 63 sites in operation, only eight are in predominantly black neighborhoods. In Illinois, where black residents make up 37 percent of the state’s COVID-19 deaths, they received only 13 percent of the state’s tests, as of April 23. Trump has tried to distance himself from the program, saying that governors and companies are responsible for making retail testing more available, but the fact is that the administration’s partnership with private retail sites put minority communities at a huge disadvantage from the get-go.

What Else?

Hillary Clinton endorsed Joe Biden for president during a virtual “Women’s Town Hall.” (Biden did not address Tara Reade’s allegation during the event, so we will just recommend this very thoughtful Rebecca Traister piece in the meantime.)
A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration cannot distribute relief funds allocated for Native American tribes to Alaska Native Corporations. Tribal governments had sued to prevent the Treasury Department from making ANCs eligible for $8 billion in aid, which it did partially at the urging of an Interior Department official who used to work for one of those companies.
Vice President Mike Pence refused to wear a mask on his tour of a Mayo Clinic coronavirus testing facility, in violation of its policies. In Pence’s defense, you never know when the Lord will compel you to drink a glass of whole milk, and you gotta be ready.
The Justice Department argued in court that Congress has no check on the executive branch’s spending power (which, funny enough, the Constitution actually grants to Congress). During arguments pertaining to two major disputes between Trump and the House, U.S. appellate judge Merrick Garland cornered a DOJ lawyer into making the awkward claim that Congress couldn’t sue if, say, an administration decided to pay for uninsured people’s health care of its own accord.
Dr. Lorna Breen, a top emergency room doctor at New York City hospital that was hit hard by the coronavirus, died by suicide on Sunday. Breen’s father told the New York Times: “Make sure she’s praised as a hero, because she was. She’s a casualty just as much as anyone else who has died.”
A poll found that nearly half of New York City voters know someone who died of COVID-19, heavily skewed by race: Nearly 75 percent of white respondents said they didn’t know someone who had died, while 48 percent of black voters and 52 percent of Latino voters said they did.
Fox News cut ties with Diamond & Silk after they promoted bonkers conspiracy theories and disinformation about the coronavirus, which seems like a slippery slope for Fox News. (Trump leapt to the sisters’ defense, naturally.)
The Pentagon formally released three videos of “unidentified aerial phenomena.” You may have seen them when they leaked a few years ago, back when we all had the time and energy to be scared of aliens.
Gov. Andy Beshear (D-KY) has apologized to a man named Tupac Shakur for citing his unemployment claim as a prank by a “bad apple.” Tupac Shakur is in fact a Kentuckian who is waiting for his unemployment benefits, and Andy Beshear is very sorry.
A Vallejo, CA, city official has resigned after throwing his cat during a Zoom meeting. So first it was “you have to wear a shirt” and then it was “you can’t be in a hot tub” and now drinking alcohol, tossing cats, and using the word “bitch” are off the table? PC Zoom Culture is destroying America.

Be Smarter

The National Republican Senatorial Committee sent campaigns a memo advising GOP candidates to address the coronavirus crisis by slamming China and putting as much distance between themselves and President Trump as possible. The 57-page memo includes advice on tying Democratic candidates to China and repelling accusations of racism, and highlights three core talking points:
Revealingly, the document advises candidates to pivot swiftly to China if they’re asked about Trump’s coronavirus response: “Don’t defend Trump, other than the China Travel Ban — attack China.” Trump’s team has indicated it’ll be making China-related attacks a focus of his reelection campaign, and the NRSC memo signals that Republicans want to extend that strategy to down-ballot races.

Is That Hope I Feel?

Oxford University scientists have scheduled tests of their new coronavirus vaccine involving over 6,000 people by the end of next month. If it proves to be effective (as it has in monkeys), the first few million doses could be available by September.
Italy will begin lifting some social distancing restrictions next week, after nearly two months of lockdown.
Germany has seen an uptick in cases after loosening some social-distancing restrictions, but the number of new infections has stayed at a manageable level. People are going outside, and it’s not an unmitigated catastrophe! This could be us but you playing, etc.
Belgium, which is set to lift its lockdown as early as Saturday, has called on its citizens to eat french fries twice a week to address a potato surplus. Ask not what your country can do for you, etc.

Enjoy

Headless horse, man on Twitter: "When everyone is getting off the zoom call but you’re struggling to find the leave meeting button so then it’s just you and the host"
submitted by kittehgoesmeow to FriendsofthePod [link] [comments]


2020.04.13 14:37 cupofteaonme Rebecca Traister Sums Up the Dispiriting Matter of the Joe Biden Sexual Assault Allegation

Former "Making Sense" guest Rebecca Traister weighed in with her take on the defences of Joe Biden amid the allegation from a former staff member that he sexually assaulted her.
Traister said this on Twitter, responding to someone else who said "Now do each of the 25 individual Trump accusations in this much detail.":
"Without weighing in on whose sexual assault accusations have received more media attention, I just want to point out that the “other guy is accused of same but worse/more” defense is gonna be the most depressing, soul-crushing argument I hear in coming months."
She then followed it up:
Which, just for the record, is at the heart of the argument I made against Biden, in advance and irrespective of this assault claim, more than year ago.
Many on this sub have been on about the supposed hypocrisy of "the left" on this issue, and certainly there has been hypocrisy, but in that spirit it's worth pointing to prominent people like Traister (who is more moderate than left, really), who have been consistent on these issues for a long time.
And not only has Traister been consistent, her second point reflects precisely why, among other reasons, so many Democratic voters were worried about the prospect of nominating Biden in the first place.
submitted by cupofteaonme to samharris [link] [comments]


2020.03.14 18:07 PeDonne How associated is #MeToo with Me Too?

I am writing an essay on feminism and Me Too, and I can't find out which articles are written by independent sympathizers and advocates and which are affiliated with the organisation.
For example I am including Moria Donegan, but can I say that she represents the movement? Can I say that Rebecca Traister does?
On top of that I can't seem to find any public statements from Tarana Burke endorcing or condemming specific actors in the debate.
Some writers, both feminist and not are writing about how the movement has been hijacked by individual actors who make it out to be something it is not.
I hope this is clear, and that I can get som help with this.
submitted by PeDonne to meToo [link] [comments]


2020.01.27 00:03 AntonioOfVenice Felicia Sonmez, Washington Post 'journalist', pisses on Kobe Bryant's grave before it is dug

American basketball star Kobe Bryant died today in a plane crash, and Buzzfeed and the Washington Post thought this was the opportune moment to bring up some charges that were brought against him and dismissed in the 1990s.
Felicia Sonmez (Washington Post):
Kobe Bryant’s Disturbing Rape Case: The DNA Evidence, the Accuser’s Story, and the Half-Confession source
But wait, there's more. Mrs. Sonmez immediately played the victim. You see, after she smeared a man who was just dead, people messaged her, and she claimed these included 'death threats'. Well, I for one believe you.
Well, THAT was eye-opening. To the 10,000 people (literally) who have commented and emailed me with abuse and death threats, please take a moment and read the story — which was written 3+ years ago, and not by me. Any public figure is worth remembering in their totality 1/2
even if that public figure is beloved and that totality unsettling. That folks are responding with rage & threats toward me (someone who didn’t even write the piece but found it well-reported) speaks volumes about the pressure people come under to stay silent in these cases. 2/2 source
Donchasee, she didn't write the article. Note that there was no outrage about the article itself. The outrage is over you trying to boost your profile over a man's dead body.
Felicia Sonmez
So this woman is a Washington Post national political reporter, according to her Twitter profile, and previously wrote for Wall Street Journal and AFP. Straight up news. Not your dumb opinions. Yet she advocates for the female candidates and smears Bernie Sanders.
But Felicia Sonmez appears to not like men very much. She is also so troubled that a female journalist has labeled her as unbalanced, which is what she is. She has gotten another 'journalist' fired over what was called out as an imaginary offense, but which she describes as 'problematic' behavior. She got so angry that she has called for another female journalist to be fired for calling out her behavior.
As I write in my letter, I believe The Atlantic should reconsider its association with Ms. Flanagan in light of her unacceptable behavior, or at the very least, offer an explanation of any corrective measures it has taken to ensure such an incident does not happen again. 2/x source
Caitlin Flanagan is a writer for The Atlantic. But calling out your lies is sufficient to be fired.
This is an often-used tactic against women who report abuse. Last year, when I came forward with an allegation of sexual misconduct, a senior (female) American journalist in Beijing sent an email to my colleagues dismissing me as a "psychologically unbalanced individual." source
Sorry, but your behavior makes it obvious.
At the conclusion, the newspaper concluded Mr. Kaiman’s treatment of women was problematic, and he lost his job. source
Pieces like Ms. Yoffe's make it more difficult, but I'll keep moving on. And any more false claims of "mob justice," I'll continue to rebut. Mr. Kaiman had not one, but two, thorough investigations. He may not agree with the outcome, but his treatment of women had consequences. source
Felicia Sonmez: biased 'journalist'
She calls the professional victim Rebecca Traister 'great'. Note that this is talking about the lie Warren put out about Sanders telling her women cannot be elected president.
The great @rtraister on Sanders/Warren: “It was a reminder that among the many challenges facing female candidates in presidential politics is the fact that there remains absolutely no good way to describe the many challenges facing female candidates in presidential politics.” source
She denounces Michael Moore for criticizing Warren for making stuff up. Note that it is assumed that this was an actual 'experience', not a lie, which is what it was.
An example of the type of pressure women come under when they speak out about their experiences of sexism. Shorter Michael Moore to Warren: "You're ruining it for everybody." source
And here's another comment advocating for Elizabeth Warren and claiming sexism where non exists.
Klobuchar's remarks bring renewed attention to the hurdles female candidates face, following Joe Biden’s description last week of Elizabeth Warren as “angry." Warren responded Friday: "I’m angry and I own it. ... Over and over, we are told that women are not allowed to be angry." source
Felicia Sonmez: doesn't like men
Too many men on a panel. And the wrong skin color for this woman. Not enough:
No women onstage at Chamber event. Panel features five white men -- four governors & one moderator. source
Even Asians are not exempt from her dislike for men:
China's tech industry is as male-dominated as Silicon Valley: http://on.wsj.com/1Iqnesv by @LiYuan6 source
She has an emotional reaction to hearing that women are more emotional to men.
'Compared with male officials, females are more emotional..' Sexism alive and well in China state media source
She literally claims that not acting differently with women is having 'little regard' for them. She believes she is entitled to special protection.
After reading this excellent piece by @motokorich, there’s one thing I just keep coming back to: how little regard the male students interviewed have for their female classmates. source
Also, people should vote for people because they are female. Because that is to her advantage.
Unmentioned in these Cheney comments: What about getting Republican voters to vote for women? source
This is just the cursory background check on Mrs. Sonmez. Just because it won't take long for her to private her account, or delete her old tweets.
Note that she is now doxxing people who message her with criticism. Not threats, just criticism.
submitted by AntonioOfVenice to WashPost [link] [comments]


2020.01.16 09:21 kittehgoesmeow What A Day: Refer Madness by Sarah Lazarus & Crooked Media (01/15/20)

"It’s like a foreign language." - Trump, reading the United States Constitution

Nowhere To Hyde

The House has voted to transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate, legislatively slamming the big red button that activates the trial phase of the process. Buckle up.
And it really fucking needs to be. Take what we learned yesterday, from new documents turned over by former Rudy Giuliani associate and Guarantor of Fraud Lev Parnas:
Those texts represent just one sliver of the damning evidence in Parnas’s documents, and more information is bound to come to light. Thanks to the administration’s obstruction, we’re finding out about new people involved in the scheme just days before the trial begins, and senators preparing to vote in favor of McConnell’s coverup will have a hell of a time rationalizing it to the public.

Look No Further Than The Crooked Media

Pod Save America and Lovett or Leave It are going on tour!
Maybe to your city, and maybe to a nearby swing state where you'll ~ coincidentally ~ be in town, doing some canvassing?
Pre-sale tickets are available now, with code CROOKED2020. Come hang

Under The Radar

Last night was the final Democratic debate before the Iowa Caucuses, and it was...fine. Candidates rehashed familiar arguments about health care and education, without much back-and-forth, and without a particularly standout performance. In addressing the Iran conflict, Bernie Sanders drew a contrast between himself and Joe Biden over their judgment in the lead up to the Iraq War, while Pete Buttigieg made a direct case against President Trump. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders at first seemed to defuse the tension between them, stemming from reports that Sanders told Warren in 2018 that he didn’t think a woman could defeat Donald Trump. Asked about their conversation Warren pivoted to an electability case: “The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they've been in are the women: Amy [Klobuchar] and me.” But the tension returned with a short post-debate exchange that only Tom Steyer overheard, and refuses to spill the beans about. That moment reignited some brutal progressive infighting, so we’ll just leave this Rebecca Traister piece here. And as always, subscribe to our What A Debate newsletter for the full morning recap.

What Else?

The attorney general of the Virgin Islands has filed a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein’s estate, claiming new evidence shows that he was trafficking hundreds of women and girls through his private island as late as 2018.
President Trump has signed a “phase one” trade agreement with China, seemingly abandoning a years-long trade war that cost taxpayers billions, failed to yield substantive concessions from China, and hurt American farmers and manufacturers in the process. In fairness to Trump’s dealmaking skills, “phase one trade agreements” aren’t really a thing, so his climbdown could also fail big time.
The Virginia House has passed the Equal Rights Amendment. There are still big legal challenges to clear before the ERA can be added to the Constitution, but Virginia’s about to become the 38th state to ratify it.
Former national security advisor Michael Flynn has asked to withdraw his guilty plea after prosecutors recommended up to six months of jail time on account of Flynn’s unreliable cooperation with the government. Life comes at you fast.
A rough week for criminally-charged Michaels: former Stormy Daniels attorney Michael Avenatti got arrested again. Avenatti allegedly violated the terms of his bail by continuing to do crimes, and was arrested during a California State Bar hearing on whether he should be allowed to keep practicing law. Life continues coming at you fast.
Jay-Z and Yo Gotti have filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of 29 Mississippi prisoners, over prison violence that led to five inmate deaths. The prisoners have pointed to understaffing in state-operated prisons, and allege that correctional officers failed to address the outbreak of violence.
“OK, Boomer” has reached the highest court in the land. “Respect the drip Karen” is still working its way through the appellate system.

What In The World?

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has resigned, along with the rest of the government. Earlier on Wednesday, President Vladimir Putin proposed an overhaul of the constitution that would allow him to maintain power indefinitely, and the government’s mass resignation is likely a coordinated plan to make that political reshaping possible. The current Russian constitution limits a president to two consecutive terms, meaning Putin would have to leave office in 2024. He’s never made that look super likely, and today’s moves open up multiple routes for how he might remain in power.

Enjoy

David Roth on Twitter: "I would watch a cooking show called Ciao Avenatti! in which Michael Avenatti prepares the same meal each time—a grilled flatiron steak and sauteed broccoli rabe—but is arrested for a different bit of howlingly overt legal malfeasance during the 24th minute of every episode."
submitted by kittehgoesmeow to FriendsofthePod [link] [comments]


2020.01.14 19:08 NemoNescit Insightful piece by Rebecca Traister - "The Third Rail of Calling 'Sexism'"

Insightful piece by Rebecca Traister - submitted by NemoNescit to ElizabethWarren [link] [comments]


2020.01.05 00:34 CindyMorrisonwatts1 [DISCUSSION] Monsters, men and magic: why feminists turned to witchcraft to oppose Trump

[DISCUSSION] Monsters, men and magic: why feminists turned to witchcraft to oppose Trump
Monsters, men and magic: why feminists turned to witchcraft to oppose Trump
Whether it’s hexing the president, chatting in WhatsApp covens or featuring in TV reboots, radicalised women have been finding strength in the ancient pagan arts.
by Sady Doyle
https://preview.redd.it/10179y8qju841.png?width=2250&format=png&auto=webp&s=2b309e6bb27a3174131106f6169bdd8f7294ebe0
‘This is the time for getting scary,” the writer Andi Zeisler told Elle magazine on the eve of the 2017 Women’s March. “We need to go full witch.”
At the dawn of the Trump administration, witches were suddenly everywhere in the US. Neo-pagans used blogs and social media to circulate popular rituals for hexing Brock Turner (who served less than three months in jail after he was convicted of sexual assualt), the supreme court justice Brett Kavanaugh (accused of sexual assault, which he denies), and Donald Trump himself.
The Trump curse was enacted by thousands of people, including the singer Lana Del Rey. “I’m a witch and I’m hunting you,” declared Lindy West in the New York Times; Jess Zimmerman and Jaya Saxena wrote a self-help book, Basic Witches, in which they explained: “If you speak when you’re told to be quiet, take pride when you’re told to feel shame, love what and who you love whether or not others approve, you’re practising witchcraft.” Half the women I know called their group chats “covens”.
https://preview.redd.it/ztf9dy63ku841.png?width=1440&format=png&auto=webp&s=5b8aece2108ba5845006564c065c9557f3ac1059
Trump developed a penchant for tweeting the phrase “WITCH HUNT” in caps whenever he felt persecuted, which the conservative political cartoonist AF Branco dramatised exactly the wrong way around, with the Democratic leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi depicted as gun-toting witches on the hunt for a helpless mortal man.
Pop culture exhumed every witch it could find: in 2018 alone, there were high-profile reboots of Charmed, Sabrina the Teenage Witch (Sabrina worships the Devil now; it is very confusing), and Dario Argento’s Suspiria.
In the final days of her 2016 campaign, Trump’s opponent, Hillary Clinton – the first female Democratic nominee – had been accused of participating in ritual sex magic and attending a “witch’s church” with her female friends. By early 2019, rightwing religious groups were accusing Democratic congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of belonging to “a coven of witches that casts spells on Trump 24 hours a day”.
In a way, this was tradition. The witch has always been the feminist monster of choice. In 1968, the group WITCH descended upon Wall Street in black pointy hats and cloaks, semi-seriously intending to hex it. They also released hundreds of live mice into Madison Square Garden during a bridal fair. Marriage was a recurring target of ire; the leaflet announcing the action chummily invited women everywhere to “confront the whore-makers”.
https://preview.redd.it/mvrttmgtju841.png?width=1240&format=png&auto=webp&s=2e74a8af16298073c795a106ae811043f533202f
“Witches have always been women who dared to be: groovy, courageous, aggressive, intelligent, nonconformist, explorative, curious, independent, sexually liberated, revolutionary,” read the manifesto. “You are a witch by being female, untamed, angry, joyous and immortal.”
All that, and you didn’t even have to eat a baby. “Because WITCH actions could be done with a small group and were both fun and political, they quickly spread around the country. Boston women hexed bars. [Washington] DC women hexed the presidential inauguration. Chicago women zapped everything,” Jo Freeman wrote in her reckoning of the movement.
The subversive idea that powered both the witch-hunts and the 1990s wave of teen witches – the idea that, by gathering together and hatching plots, women might obtain heretofore unthinkable power – has also fuelled much feminist organising throughout history. Men were right to be worried. Feminists weren’t literally going to steal their dicks and hide them in trees, as medieval witches were said to do, but that did turn out to be a surprisingly apt metaphor for their work.
And, although the WITCHes were joking, the witches weren’t. Witchcraft and occultism really were heavily associated with a certain kind of mid-20th-century cool. The Beatles put Aleister Crowley on the cover of Sgt Pepper; David Bowie studied ceremonial magic and Kabbalah; Led Zeppelin incorporated tarot cards into their album artwork; Stevie Nicks sang about ancient Welsh fairy-brides and posed with a seemingly endless array of scrying crystals.
Most people’s interest was merely aesthetic (and still is) but, then as now, some found that witchcraft resonated on a much deeper level. The San Francisco Bay area – the centre of boomer youth culture in the US – saw an explosion of neo-pagan traditions, including the witches’ coven that initiated Miriam Simos, or, as she soon came to be known, Starhawk.
Members of the feminist group WITCH putting a hex on Wall Street on Halloween, 1968
Starhawk’s 1979 book The Spiral Dance quickly became the premier text for self-taught witches. As seen through Starhawk’s anarchist, ecofeminist lens, witchcraft was not just a way to acquire magical powers, but was a deeply political act. “The word witch carries so many negative connotations that people wonder why we use it at all,” she wrote. “Yet to reclaim the word witch is to reclaim our right, as women, to be powerful; as men, to know the feminine within as divine.” Some trashed The Spiral Dance for being a new age self-help manual disguised as a radical manifesto; others complained that it smeared its far-left feminist agenda all over what was supposed to be a spiritual text. Either way, The Spiral Dance sold vastly more copies than your average book on feminism, and had a far greater impact.
There is no way to know how many women stumbled across sentences such as, “Women are not encouraged to explore their own strengths and realisations; they are taught to submit to male authority, to identify masculine perceptions as their spiritual ideals, to deny their bodies and sexuality, to fit a male mould”, and emerged radicalised on the other end, but I do know one who did. The Spiral Dance was the book my friends and I moved on to when The Wicca Spellbook lost its allure, making it, by my count, the first book of feminist theory that I ever owned.
When the witch emerged as a contemporary figure of resistance, it was hard to tell where she came from; Hollywood iconography, feminist history, the coming of age of the Craft generation or just the optics of the 2016 election, in which a presumed-to-be-monstrous woman was ritually castigated by a man who led crowds in chants of “lock her up”.
Watching the chants take over the floor at the Republican national convention, Rebecca Traister wrote: “I was not the only person in the room to be reminded of 17th-century witch trials, the blustering magistrate and rowdy crowd condemning a woman to death for her crimes.” The new feminist identification with witches seemed to draw from every version of the myth at once: mystical and monstrous, feminist academia and horrorcore aesthetics, drawing them together in one angry, intentionally ugly repudiation of American patriarchy.
https://preview.redd.it/y67nyol9ku841.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=1bcc0fb5540665803d48cde328c053b88c91fe02
This is not to suggest that witch fever was always admirable or never silly. Witchcraft, like feminism itself, went mainstream, and in doing so, lost some of its vital power to shock and disturb oppressors. The “spirituality” tag of Gwyneth Paltrow’s online shop Goop contained articles on tarot. Urban Outfitters stocked spell books.
The makeup brand Urban Decay released an “Elements” eye-shadow palette decorated with alchemical sigils; Sephora briefly offered “witch kits” with tarot cards and bundles of sage inside, which were pulled due to public outcry. Pagans accused Sephora of trivialising their beliefs, but Native American protesters also pointed out that smudging with sage – a practice that comes attached to its own long history of religious persecution – wasn’t for witches or luxury beauty retailers to claim. At its lowest points, witchcraft stopped being subversive or frightening and became just another costume.
But the old, dark power – the choice to worship something other than patriarchy’s gods, to reject and read backward the narratives of the dominant culture – was still there. The Trump administration represented a breaking point for many women. After decades in which sophisticated thinkers dismissed patriarchy as simplistic or irrelevant, it was revealed to be alive, well and out for blood – the ethos which still ruled the US government and defined, or ended, countless women’s lives.
The resurgence of patriarchy was partly embodied by Trump himself, whose fear of women, and embrace of sexual violence as a means of correcting them, was never less than 100% obvious; Trump was not only repeatedly accused of sexual assault, he boasted about “pussy grabbing” on tape.
But, partly, this political awakening was just a matter of stripping back our denial to realise how we had always been living: yes, Trump was accused of sexual misconduct, but so were several previous presidents.
Yes, supreme court justice Kavanaugh was confirmed over reports of sexual assault, but the same thing had happened 30 years ago with Clarence Thomas. Yes, Roe v Wade was going to fall, but in most parts of the US, abortion access had been stripped so far down that it might as well be illegal. Patriarchy had been the truth all along. It was progress that was the phantom.
https://preview.redd.it/1cjzmgqfku841.png?width=371&format=png&auto=webp&s=36b950f01bead7482cdc8a37de44525a7d2e086a
The witch lives between dark and daylight, the safely settled village and the wild unknown of the woods beyond. The backlash years of the early 21st century revealed to many women something we had always suspected: we had never belonged to that daylight world. We had tried; we had worked; we had been loyal to the rules and values of society as we knew it.
But, no matter how far we thought we had come, or how often our mothers told us we could do anything, we still lived within a system that used female bodies as grist to maintain male rule. In the story that patriarchy told about itself, we were always going to be the villains. And if that was the case, we might as well make some magic out of it.
If the village didn’t want us, we might as well head out into the woods.
There is a fire on the horizon. You can see it burning, out on the edges of the world. The violence we have survived can be our guide to what needs to change. The fire that burned the witches can be the fire that lights our way. Our power is waiting for us, out in forbidden spaces, beyond the world of men. Step forward and claim it. Step forward into the boundless and female dark.
... in the coming year, and the results will define the country for a generation. These are perilous times. Over the last three years, much of what the Guardian holds dear has been threatened – democracy, civility, truth. This US administration is establishing new norms of behaviour.
Anger and cruelty disfigure public discourse and lying is commonplace. Truth is being chased away. But with your help we can continue to put it center stage. It will be a defining year and we’re asking for your help as we prepare for 2020.
Rampant disinformation, partisan news sources and social media's tsunami of fake news is no basis on which to inform the American public in 2020. The need for a robust, independent press has never been greater, and with your help we can continue to provide fact-based reporting that offers public scrutiny and oversight. Our journalism is free and open for all, but it's made possible thanks to the support we receive from readers like you across America in all 50 states.
https://preview.redd.it/we9pm05iku841.png?width=750&format=png&auto=webp&s=220cb67ecfb89358bdd9a9a084eea4241da5b830
"America is at a tipping point, finely balanced between truth and lies, hope and hate, civility and nastiness. Many vital aspects of American public life are in play – the Supreme Court, abortion rights, climate policy, wealth inequality, Big Tech and much more. The stakes could hardly be higher.
As that choice nears, the Guardian, as it has done for 200 years, and with your continued support, will continue to argue for the values we hold dear – facts, science, diversity, equality and fairness." – US editor, John Mulholland.
https://preview.redd.it/wlky6ztrku841.png?width=733&format=png&auto=webp&s=631efe3a72cf6562de13404b989e08b312a63ea7
On the occasion of its 100th birthday in 1921 the editor of the Guardian said, "Perhaps the chief virtue of a newspaper is its independence. It should have a soul of its own." That is more true than ever. Freed from the influence of an owner or shareholders, the Guardian's editorial independence is our unique driving force and guiding principle.
#witchcraftandpolitics #witcheryandpolitics #polticalwitchcraft
submitted by CindyMorrisonwatts1 to u/CindyMorrisonwatts1 [link] [comments]


2019.12.17 23:18 bitsonchips Elizabeth Warren's Greatest Hits: What are yours?

As I prepare for a lot of family time over the winter holidays, I am gearing up to open as many conversations as I can with my friends and family about why I support Elizabeth Warren. The more I speak to people about her, the more I realize how unfamiliar some people are with her story. (I have been an admirer since 2009.)
Since the holidays often involve more than usual amounts of sitting around, playing with phones, and hanging out, I decided to make a "playlist" of what I consider to be "Elizabeth Warren's Greatest Hits," a variety of videos, podcasts, an articles that shaped my respect and understanding of her candidacy. There is a lot of The Daily Show with John Stewart (the format is intimate, the duration is short, and it is really cool to watch her grow into her confidence as a public figure) but other stuff as well. If you have any key media pieces that shaped your Warren support, please share in the comments!
2009 - This is the year that Elizabeth Warren became a public figure to me. Her role in helping to oversee the Toxic Asset Relief program in the immediate aftermath of the subprime mortgage crisis and her first appearance on the Daily Show made her a recognizable player at the national level. She was the only person who really helped me to understand what had happened.
2011-2012 - Elizabeth Warren by this time has established the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau but is not invited to run it, so she runs for US Senate seat and wins.
2013-2017 - This was a blurry and busy time for me personally. Edward Snowden disclosed widespread government surveillance, Thomas Piketty published Capital in the 21st Century, #BlackLivesMatter made visible the depth and extent of systemic racism and police violence, the opioid epidemic rose to national attention, and the cracks in our social media experience were starting to show even if we did not fully understand the causes. Trump happens. Meanwhile Elizabeth Warren is establishing her principled toughness with her public interrogation of various political appointees and bank executives.
2018-2019 - I had hoped that Warren would run in 2016, so I was super excited when she announced her candidacy in early 2019. I have long been a fan of Robert Reich and really loved this video conversation that takes place before she announces her candidacy. In it Warren discusses her OTC hearing aid legislation which I think is a wonderful example of her pragmatism, compassion, and legislative smarts. I also included her Town Hall speech from Tempe Arizona since it's a good example of her early stump speech. It includes stories about her family, her marriages, and her path from teaching, law, and the US Senate. Rebecca Traister's in depth article on Elizabeth Warren the professor is one of my all time favorites because it shows how her foundation as an educator clearly informs her approach to politics and reveals so much about her integrity and character. I also included the only portion of her CNN Climate Town Hall I could find online. Not many people watched it and I think it's a great example of Warren's depth and commitment to addressing the climate crisis and the way all of her proposals integrate solutions for the climate, economy, democracy, education, social and economic justice. The last speech I have here is her wonderful Washington Square Park speech where Warren references the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire and connects her campaign to the history of women in the labor movement.
Happy holidays! LFG.

Edit- Added an article :)
submitted by bitsonchips to ElizabethWarren [link] [comments]


2019.12.12 01:07 smcoolsm Rebecca Traister tackles the hypocrisy and double standard Warren receives

Rebecca Traister tackles the hypocrisy and double standard Warren receives submitted by smcoolsm to ElizabethWarren [link] [comments]


Book TV: Rebecca Traister, 'Big Girls Don't Cry' Rebecca Traister  All the Single Ladies  Unmarried Women After Words with Rebecca Traister, 'Good and Mad' We Are EMILY: Rebecca Traister - YouTube Rebecca Traister - How “Good and Mad” Women Continually ... Rebbeca Traister All the Single Ladies: Unmarried Women and the Rise of an Independent Nat Rebecca Traister, 'All the Single Ladies'

Rebecca Traister : NPR

  1. Book TV: Rebecca Traister, 'Big Girls Don't Cry'
  2. Rebecca Traister All the Single Ladies Unmarried Women
  3. After Words with Rebecca Traister, 'Good and Mad'
  4. We Are EMILY: Rebecca Traister - YouTube
  5. Rebecca Traister - How “Good and Mad” Women Continually ...
  6. Rebbeca Traister All the Single Ladies: Unmarried Women and the Rise of an Independent Nat
  7. Rebecca Traister, 'All the Single Ladies'

In her provocative, groundbreaking new book, Rebecca Traister, called “the most brilliant voice on feminism in this country” by Anne Lamott, traces the history of . In her provocative ... Real Time with Bill Maher: Rebecca Traister Interview – June 17, 2016 (HBO) - Duration: 7:24. Real Time with Bill Maher 270,993 views. 7:24. Rebecca Traister, politics and gender writer for Salon, explores the influence women had on the 2008 Presidential election. The author argues that the election was a watershed moment for women in ... Rebecca Traister explains how women’s anger has historically been a catalyst for social change and how people can better listen and respond to women’s anger.... New York Magazine’s Rebecca Traister traces the history of female anger and how it has fueled political movements. Find the full program at: https://www.c-sp... Author Rebecca Traister talks about unmarried women, Hillary Clinton, sexism and her new book 'All the Single Ladies: Unmarried Women and the Rise of an Independent Nation.' »»» Subscribe to ... At nine years old, Salon.com writer Rebecca Traister joined her dad in the voting booth as he cast his ballot for vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferra...