This is both in reply to Val Demos and some general thoughts on the topic of the Women’s March and sexism in our society.
I’ve read your blog with interest. I do find it odd, though, that you take such a measured, thoughtful tone and yet happen to fall in line (ideologically) with the new/alt-right on almost every issue. That would imply, to me at least, that your politics aren’t guided by what is logical, you’re just smarter than the average partisan. That is the problem with intelligent bigots. They’re able to so effectively argue points that — in the end — are still based in fear, hatred and misinformation.
Regarding your response to the other post: I was also not a feminist at 14. But as I’ve gotten older I realize that large movements don’t have rigid requirements. I can identify as a feminist and express solidarity with women without necessarily agreeing with every sign that went up at the women’s march. After all, the sister marches that happened in other countries — ones that no one will argue have oppressive policies and where it is dangerous to be born and live as a woman — were inspired by what happened in DC.
It is true that we are light years ahead of others in the US, but no women and men are still not seen as equal. I think the best objective demonstrations of this are not in the results of the sexism (things like the wage gap, how women are presented in media and culture, etc) is to actually discuss people’s beliefs. And we have plenty of that to go on. I’d encourage you to look more closely into studies that use Implicit Association Tests. Or studies that don’t ask someone whether they are sexist, but instead determine it with specific sets of questions. We are at a period now where most gender bias is unconscious, but it still has real consequences.
I thought to myself, just the other day, that when I was younger it was natural for me be talked down to and trivialized by men — I wasn’t as wise as they were. But you know something funny? It doesn’t actually end when you get older, when you’re outwardly knowledgeable and intelligent. And you’ll find yourself making excuses, assuming that you are being treated the way you *will* be treated for a number of reasons. But the best data you’ll get on the subject will be the longest social experiment you’ll ever undertake. You’re too smart not to see it in the end. When you no longer have to rely on the data of people less objective and less able to think critically than yourself, you will see it.
Some parting food for thought: imagine a woman who has built an empire but has somewhat of a sleazy reputation. She’s on her third marriage after cheating on a few husbands, she’s overweight, not very likeable. She wears ill fitting clothes and has a tendency to scowl all the time. She yells, curses, is at times vulgar. But she is a businesswoman. She’s been bankrupt a few times, but managed to come back. Most people know her from a reality TV show and she got her start from the help of others, but now she’s a mogul, her own person. She is gaudy, controversial, To give an example, if you can’t come up with one — Kim Kardashian in 60 years.
Do you truly believe Trump could be everything he is and still have won the presidency if he weren’t male? Do you think there could be an audio of Misses Trump playfully joking about grabbing married men by their cocks? You don’t need to reply to that part. We both know the answer.