Before I say anything, I must begin with a caveat and say “What do I know?” I spent three weeks in the Pacific Northwest. It’s like someone visiting Goteborg for a weekend and then passing judgment on the identity, character and politics of Europe.
But I was reading about the phenomenon of abortion parties. And how in the experience of one writer, men weren’t especially welcome. Then I read this:
I did, however, think the extent to which Maggie’s friends were eager to vilify her partner was peculiar. These were liberal people, after all — people whose views on sex were worlds away from anything someone might consider “modest.”
Let’s leave aside the idea of a party to celebrate, fundraise or commiserate over an abortion, because well, that’s easy pickings.
Where by easy pickings I mean so fucked up there is no way in hell I am going to broach it in so undisciplined a medium as a blog.
But instead, let’s just look at this little quote up there about how peculiar it is that liberal people would respond angrily on an issue of gender identification. In my supremely limited exposure to America, and allegedly the cool liberal part of America, I was struck by how damn conservative the liberal wing in American culture is. They have defined themselves entirely as being not conservative. All that means is that they hold the opposite views to my friends in the evangelical churches in the south but they still occupy the same philosophy. They offer nothing new.
Liberal America is often parasitic on conservative America.
Which means that in America we see an amazing thing: a one party democracy. Republicans and Democrats believe the same fundamental things about the market and war and social policy. It is just that one wears make up that looks good under the lights of a megachurch and the other wears clothes that are comfortable when you want to go visit your local community garden.
The idea that holding “liberal” politics would produce a really nice laid back liberal person seems to basically misunderstand politics, humans and what the word liberal has meant down through the years. The idea that liberals are to be im-modest in some way reveals perhaps the place where all this uniformity in bi-valency comes from: the American refusal to deal with sex in a meaningful way.
But then again, I am Irish. We have spent the last 100 years letting sex abuse run rampant in our schools, orphanages and marriages so discard all this as the early morning ramblings of a man while he waits for his colleague to come into the office.
Also, just throwing it out there, if gender is a pure construct, why can men not have an equal opinion with respect to abortion or life issues?
Your Correspondent, The Temptations probably won’t provide a pro-choice anthem anytime soon
>>>Also, just throwing it out there, if gender is a pure construct, why can men not have an equal opinion with respect to abortion or life issues?
because men don’t have wombs or have the said item growing in their bodies?
just thinking that its more of a personal physical freedom than a gender issue. maybe. but even that isnt REALLY the issue. the argument is allll about the definition of human life. unless that’s agreed then the argument is moribund
“Because men don’t have wombs or have the said item growing in their bodies?”
Less to do with the nine months of being fat, more to do with the propensity to abdicate parental duties methinks.
Lads, if gender is a pure social construct… stick within the bounds of the hypothetical and play devil’s advocate from there outwards… capeesh?
“the argument is allll about the definition of human life”
I have always thought it came down to that, but I was very struck by comments by Jon Stewart (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-18-2009/mike-huckabee-extended-interview-pt–1). He makes the point that, at least for some people, the question of bodily sovereignty comes *before* the question of when life begins. Food for thought, and it will certainly inform any future discussions I have on the topic.
You wrote this in the morning after coffee and before work???? amazing.
I actually wrote it while having my morning coffee…
A) I love the temptations and when I saw the title I was hoping for something geared towards them… but whatever.
B) I agree that the “liberal” people here have defined themselves by being not conservative. Then it gets hairy when they are inconsistent with something like allowing men to enter into debates about something like abortion. Anger and defensive allegations immediately come forth. It’s sad. It stops the conversation is people are just decidedly anti someone else. There’s a lot of pain and fear involved when I chat with people around here about such issues…
C) I’m horrified that my country and the NW, being the liberal capitol, would be known by abortion parties. God have mercy.
a) I promise to write a Temptations post someday and next time we hang out we can get down on a dancefloor to the Tempts.
b) I suppose Obama is a very positive step forward in that he definitely articulates policy in a positive coherent framework. I’m not looking for the Age of Aquarius to dawn now that he is in power but he is definitely transcending the conservative/liberal dialectic that might have been our destiny had Hillary got the big(ger) job…
c) You know its serious when I am so appalled I can’t even bring myself to try and make jokes about it.
d) Thanks for not calling me out as patently unqualified to launch an attack on your political culture… ever gracious Taylor.