I agree with Amanda Hess at The Sexist

Amanda Hess covers Hollaback DC, and I agree with her. She shares a negative experience of a police officer intimidating her from a car while she was running alone.Unfortunately, there are cops out there who use their positions of power to intimidate women. Normally, I disagree with Hess, but she’s right on this issue.

About a year after I graduated from college, a cop in Tennessee pulled me over for tailgating. Yes, tailgating. (I think I passed a car with less than one car-length in front of me.) I was driving back to my parents house for Good Friday, so I knew that I had not run a red light or failed to stop at a crosswalk. The cop took my name and information and gave me a written warning.

When I told my family, something bothered my Dad about it. He happened to know the officer in charge of all traffic cops  and asked his opinion.  The officer told my dad that pulling over young women for tailgating is a cover for stopping female drivers in order to check them out. Since I was driving a little Honda covered in sorority stickers, I was a prime target. My dad’s acquaintance was extremely upset that someone working for him would pull such a stunt and wanted me to complain. I debated reporting the offending cop’s badge number, but ultimately decided against it. If he was willing to use his position to intimidate women, what would he do in retaliation? It’s not a very big town.

As Hess notes, it might not seem like a big deal when a guy shouts out “Hey Baby!” on the street, but you never know where that guy will stop. Most women have had negative experiences with skeezy guys and are wary. If you’re enough of a jerk to shout at us from the street, how do we know you’re not going to do more?

However, an element of personal responsibility is required. We are adults. In Hess’ case, I would recommend not running alone. In a city like DC, every other person is a runner*. It’s not difficult to find a partner or join a gym. Women should also use common sense. It doesn’t matter if you feel empowered from holding up a Take Back the Night sign. Chances are, it’s not safe to walk around at 2 a.m. by yourself. There will always be bad people out there in the world (both male and female) and no well-intentioned law or protest walk can protect us enough. Ultimately, we must use good judgment and protect ourselves.

I sort of agree with Feministing

Sometime last week, my mom sent me a photo of Angelina Jolie’s daughter, Shiloh, with the commment, “You had that haircut as a little kid.” I replied, “Me and almost every other kid from the 80s.” It’s true. The bowl cut that little Shiloh Jolie-Pitt is sporting was immensely popular with the under-10 crowd during the 1980s.

Last night at the grocery store, I noticed Life & Style with the headline, “Is Angelina Turning Shiloh into a Boy?” and rolled my eyes. Immediately I thought, “Some gender blog is going to cover that tomorrow.” (If only I could monetize my gift for anticipating the reaction of feminists.) Feministing rarely fails to disappoint in expected liberal outrage.

The article is immensely stupid and attacks Angelina Jolie because she’s been cast into the “other woman” narrative since tabloids can’t move past the Brad Pitt/Jennifer Anniston break-up. (If Jolie broke up a marriage, she must be a bad mother!) The haircut is not masculine, nor is Shiloh dressed like a little boy. If anything, she’s displaying some serious prep for a three-year-old.

Feministing, of course, goes off on the other end.

First of all, the gendering of kids’ clothing for a three year old like Shiloh is utter bullshit. There is little to no difference between the body of a young girl and the body of a young boy–the norms we hold around clothing and hairstyles at that age are pretty much made up. There is little difference in kids’ bodies until puberty.

Well, actually that’s wrong. Gender differences are part of our DNA, and toddlers actually go through a pre-pubescence phase. Little boys’ minds are washed with testosterone, which makes them more aggressive, and little girls are washed with estrogen, which makes them more sensitive and observant.

According to The Female Brain by Dr. Louann Brizendine, babies and toddlers go through infantile puberty, which starts at about 18 months. It only lasts for 9 months for boys, but 24 months for girls. Brizendine writes:

During this time, the ovaries begin producing huge amounts of estrogen–comparable to the level of an adult female–that marinate the little girls’ brain. Scientists believe these infantile estrogen surges are needed to prompt the development of the ovaries and brain for reproductive purposes. but this high quanity of estrogen also stimulates the brain circuits that are rapidly becoming built. It spurs the growth and development of neurons, further enhancing the female brain circuits and centers for observation, communication, gut feelings, even tending and caring. Estrogen is priming these innate female brain circuits so that this little girl can master her skills in social nuance and promote her fertility. That’s why she was able to be so emotionally adept while still in diapers.

As much as the left doesn’t want to admit, there are strong arguments that gender is imprinted in our DNA and hormonal make-up. Some factors are socially constructed, but many are a result of our brain chemistry or are reactions triggered by brain chemistry. However, the Feministing post continues:

But what if Shiloh was exploring their gender identity? What if Shiloh wanted to be a boy, or wear “boy’s” clothes, or go by male pronouns? That of course, would be unacceptable, according to Life & Style magazine. It might even harm the child. Such a typical narrative around gender variance in the mainstream media.

While this cover is an extreme example, it’s indicative of larger norms that exist around gender. These norms are real, and alive, and affect us from the the moment we are a bump in our parent’s belly to the day we die.

Say what? Isn’t Shiloh three? What toddler is exploring gender-bending? Most three-year-olds are consumed by toys, naps and their families. According to the left’s beloved Maslow, they aren’t self-aware enough at the tender age of three to comprehend the concept of gender. It makes me wonder if the writer, Miriam, has ever encountered a three-year-old before.

So I agree with Feministing that Life & Style was stupid for mocking a little girl, but they went way too far into liberal psychobabble. But be careful. According to Miriam, if you are so inclined to not abort your in utero “bump,” you may be causing gender confusion if you invoke the “larger norms that exist around gender.”

*Someone once told me that you can judge the amount of type-A people in a geographic area by the number of runners. DC has to be in the top 3 for the U.S.

That lovely blog that started the maelstrom against Taylor Swift decided to go interview women waiting in line for the Palin book signing in Fairfax, Va. and incorporate the cover article on feminism in Newsmax this month. The author, Amanda Hess, forgot to mention that the Newsmax article was written by S.E. Cupp, a young female conservative. Since young, female conservatives don’t exist in feminist-land and are only the creation of old, white men in the GOP, she had to  snidely attack the women waiting in line:

In “newer feminism,” every woman’s choices are valued—no matter what those choices mean for other women. Schlessinger isn’t an enforcer of rigid gender roles; she’s a facilitator of women’s choices. Palin’s opposition to abortion rights and comprehensive sex education isn’t anti-feminist; it is her choice to deny reproductive choices to other women. Under this model, Girls Gone Wild founder Joe Francis isn’t an exploiter; he’s a liberator of women’s breasts.

Umm…no. Joe Francis is a pornographer and will be to the vast majority of conservative women. But ladies — and I sincerely hope that Amanda Hess and her colleagues find this post– let me spell it out for you. Sarah Palin is simply a marriage of conservative values with the watered-down version of feminism that you gals sold in the 90s in order to save a crippled and dying movement. Until Palin appeared, no one on the right had represented a liberated woman “making choices for herself,” successfully balancing the family and a career, and enjoying a modern marriage with her not-so-metrosexual husband. You were operating under the assumption that the Gloria Steinem vs. Phyllis Schafly dynamic still worked.

Despite my staunchly anti-feminist upbringing, I’ve gotten familiar with the f-word. I worked for a quasi-feminist organization. Well, it’s an organization determined to train little feminists, but it gave me a solid crash course in all things liberal women. After I left that job, I decided to get to the bottom of this feminist issue. I had been blogging anonymously for nearly a year but had danced around the subject. After I moved back to the DC area, I dove into reading feminist theory, history and anything from the women’s studies genre. I was determined to understand what feminism was. The only problem was that feminists were asking that too.  Sadly for them, Palin arrived on the scene before they could reach an answer.

To understand it, let’s go back to the beginning. Hopefully, this history is familiar to most of you.

Feminism got its start on the radical left. It grew directly out of the the civil rights movement. However, these weren’t the average people who wanted to see racial equality, but a complete restructuring of our country. Many of them were children of Communist Party of America members and had grown up as “red diaper babies” as Susan Brownmiller lavishes in her memoirs, In Our Own Time.

From the earliest moments, which could be traced back to Simone de Beauvoir, a radical leftist and often-abused significant other of Jean-Paul Sartre, when she penned the Second Sex in 1949 or even when Mary Wollstonecraft wrote A Vindication on the Rights of Women in 1792, the women’s rights movement was aligned with the political left. A little-known fact about Betty Friedan–when she wasn’t pining away at the “problem with no name,” she was active in Communist Party activities and had been since her student days at Smith. In fact, she joined the party in 1940.

Thus, feminism wasn’t this nice, “lets talk about our click moments and fight for equality” but a movement that desired to reshape our entire culture, society and economic systems into something that eliminated the vague “patriarchy” and the evils of capitalism. Essentially, feminism is the gender version of Marxism.

Almost immediately, the women’s liberation movement started splintering. The radical feminist wanted nothing less than a societal revolution. The liberal feminists were much more content with fighting for abortion on demand, workplace discrimination and liberating those beleaguered housewives. However, they were a rather homogeneous group of females. Anytime someone from the outside tried to join — and  outside being anyone who wasn’t white, middle class,  heterosexual,  bi-coastal, highly educated, professional and with an axe to grind against men due to daddy issues or boyfriends unwilling to commit — ultimately left. Early divisions were painstakingly  marked by African-American women and lesbians starting their own versions of the movement.

Later on when multiculturalism got popular in the 1980s, feminists embraced it because the philosophy fit them so well. It covered a multitude of sins, namely that at no point had they been able to unify all women simply by being women. No women’s movement has ever been able to do that, even suffragists who fought for the 19th Amendment were split across numerous issues. However, issues with identity politics are for another post.

Somehow, small groups of noisy women managed to make policy changes.  By infiltrating the Federal government through the EEOC, academia and the media (a large number of the early leaders were writers and journalists), they made sweeping changes through sheer willpower, litigation and scare tactics.

However, where they failed and continue to fail was winning the hearts and opinions of American women.

When the Equal Rights Agenda failed after the beginning of the Reagan Revolution, feminists were at a loss. Much soul-searching went on. Numerous books were written, including Andrea Dworkin’s Right-Wing Women, which asserted that conservative women were under the thumbs of their men, had no minds of their own and as slaves to their Bibles and kitchens, would advocate against anything Phyliss Schafly described as “anti-family.”

They never stopped to think that conservative women actually believed that they were already equal, relished being mothers and caretakers and were quite happy with the capitalistic system that made America great. The women’s movement never even contemplated that a large voting bloc of women were more concerned liberty and the individual than tolerance and the collective.

Conservative women were lamented and dismissed, not to be contemplated again until the rise of Sarah Palin. Maybe if they had been a bit more intellectually honest and circumspect, today’s problems wouldn’t be going on.

Nevertheless, the feminists shifted agendas and went to work on issues relating to higher education and did some good things with domestic violence and rape issues. However, by the late 80s, the movement had lost steam. Feminist debates were dragged into mommywars, the myth of the Supermom and the wailing of single women with ticking biological clocks.

They didn’t realize that a new generation of women had grown up without gender discrimination and really didn’t identify with the second-wave grand dames. Instead, they had grown up with MTV and decided to somehow merge feminism with raunch culture.

This third-wave that sprung up in the 90s had a lot of public fights with the old school, namely over sexual liberation. Since they wanted to appeal to young women, they watered down the message that their mothers had told them. For example, in Manifesta, Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards define feminism as:

Of course the goals of feminism are carried out by every day women themselves. Maybe you aren’t sure you need feminism, or you’re not sure it needs you. You’re sexy, a wallflower, you shop at Calvin Klein, you are a stay-at-home mom, a big Hollywood producer, a beautiful bride all in white, an ex-wife raising three kids, or you shave, pluck, and wax. In reality, feminism wants you to be whoever you are-but with a political consciousness. And, vice versa: You want to be a feminist because you want to be exactly who you are.

The 3rd wavers consisted of sexually liberated women, riot grrls and women who loved to create ‘zines. All political movements– no matter the issue– always lose nuances in the media, and the media was rather silly with third wave women. Images such as the Spice Girls, Ally McBeal and “girl power” came to capture what feminism meant to modern women. The watershed momement of the third wave was the Clarence Thomas hearings that catapulted sexual harassment to the front page. However, when a liberal Democrat with a penchant for oral sex in the Oval Office took over, feminists completely sold out and lost their remaining strand of credibility with Gloria Steinem famously declaring “it was consensual!”

Between the late 90s and now, not much happened. Compared to terrorism, feminism just wasn’t that important. Then John McCain picked La Palin, and the head-spinning started.

You see ladies, what the feminism movement missed was that a lot had changed in conservative politics. Conservative women weren’t doormats, we just never had anyone that espoused our values with the “picture” of feminism before. As Leslie Sanchez notes, women will only vote for candidates who share their own views. The concept that women will vote for another women simply due to shared chromosomes is ridiculous. If Geraldine Ferraro had been conservative in the 80s, we would have supported her. The nice thing about basing your values on invididuality, merit and talent is that you don’t have to promote superficial labels.

For us, Palin was the real deal. By 2008, most women worked outside the home and led very similar lives to the Governor. Again, they were very different from the still white, middle class, highly educated, bi-coastal feminists. When you combine the fact that many of us grew up with thirdd-wave “you go girl!” feminism, it made sense that Palin ushered in a era of conservative or libertarian-leaning feminism.

Is it really that hard to understand that the American women rejected your politics in the 1980s, so you massaged the message in the 90s and now have to live with the consequences? Had the movement not changed its views so much, not many of you would exist, but you’d have some credibility left.