“Chill out, dear”: An open letter to the New Age Dude

Many of you have probably had the misfortune of meeting one of these dudes. They come from the island. They grew up in some hippie community. They live in a bus. They are sooooo free that they don’t even see gender! Only humans. These dudes are so progressive you it’s beyond your comprehension, little lady.

While many of us see red as soon as the New Age Dude starts talking about “all the beautiful women of the woooorld,” many women and men alike, somehow, fall for it. Maybe we’ve even fallen for it at one time or another, thinking, “Hey! He seems like a nice guy! He isn’t in a fraternity and he claims to be ‘sensitive.’ He says he loves women and hates Maxim. What a treat!” Unfortunately we often learn the hard way that this seemingly progressive, sensitive guy is a misogynist in disguise.

Maybe you dated one, maybe they’re a friend of a friend, maybe you met one on the ferry. Maaaaaybe he had drum? A more innocuous guitar? Liked surfing? Trees? Gardening, even? It’s possible you crossed paths with him at a festival and he tried to give you a massage. They’re everywhere these days and sometimes hard to spot.

At times the red flag will go up when he starts talking about how women were so beeeautiful and nuuuurturing and in touch with the cycles of the moon, but the trouble with the subtlety of the New Age Dude is that they tend not to come out of the closet as the insidious sexists they truly are until you actually call them on it. But when that happens be sure to take a step back. Because this is when they snap.

These men are used getting pats on the back on account of their “open-mindedness.” They are absolutely convinced that saying things like “all women are beautiful” or “I’m just so jealous that women are able to give birth. TO HUMANS.” makes them the most progressive men in the universe, deserving of female adoration and love. I mean, they like their women “all-natural” (but thin, shaved, plucked, and young, mind you. Just NO CHEMICALS PLEEZ.) and have spent years telling themselves they are open-minded because they are into girls who wear flat shoes too (but, you know, if she wants to wear stilettos, for her, he will “appreciate” her hot ass, also. Because the New Age Dude doesn’t discriminate).

When you don’t buy their little persona they’ve become so proud of, they usually freak the fuck out. That’s when all the true and magical colours of their misogyny really start to shine through.

Because he really, truly believes that seeing all women as beautiful things for him to look at or molest in his tent (because he’s at peace with that so you should be too! Just relaaaaax, prude.) is a compliment, this New Age Dude (these dudes are usually white too and conveniently, their open-mindedness also allows them not to see race. Handy, right?) usually snaps back hard if you mention to him that women don’t actually exist for his boner stoner fantasies.

In fact, if you do mention to him some fairly obvious, feminism 101 facts such as: we live in a patriarchy, or, it isn’t a compliment to talk only and obsessively about how “beautiful” women are (because, hey! Our end all be all isn’t that *squee!* you want to hump us), or that, just because you, as an individual have decided you have mysteriously escaped the white male privilege that all other white males experience (it’s the magic of the new age lobotomy! I’m not like other men! I’m above all that. And if you tell me differently I’ll probably call you a bitch.), it doesn’t make it so, the dude will attack.

He will likely engage in gaslighting, tell you to “calm down” or “relax” and then, possibly explain to you that actually it is YOU who is the sexist (see how that works? Twisty!) or the racist! HA. Bet you didn’t see that one coming!  Because actually if you were really, truly, evolved like this New Age Dude you would get over all this systematic oppression crap and just relax and enjoy life (read: play nice and keep quiet unless you’re agreeing with him or showing him your boobs. Because that’s what forward-thinking ladies do).

As you may have guessed, I encountered another one of these fine men just the other day. His response to my (very brief) attempt to explain that women are, in fact, more than just beautiful ‘things’ and that, alas, society is actually very limited in terms of who they deem ‘beautiful,’ was, surprise, surprise, some classic crazy-making maneuvers, including that which was recently outlined by as a special form of emotional manipulation reserved for women and used by the men who want to silence them called gaslighting.

His response to me?

“Chill out, dear.”

Truth be told, I was feeling pretty relaxed up until that moment.

The rest of his response was a humorous romp through New Age Dude manipulation. He told me I was “shallow and sexist” for “only thinking about physical beauty” (because, you know, he was actually talking about women’s inner beauty, stupid) and that he didn’t only like “barbies” (dingdingdingding! He’s progressive ladiez!! Sometimes he likes women with real boobs! Swoon.), and finally, that if he is “not allowed to salute” women’s beauty, “then the world really is a sad place.”

It’s always a fun time being called a sexist by a man who uses porn, frequents strip clubs, and thinks that buying sex from women is totally cool. Mostly though, it’s fun to be told to “chill out” for mentioning that, indeed, out there in the big, bad world, sexism does exist and society tends to value women, primarily, for their physical appearances and their ability to be sexually appealing to men.

In conclusion, New Age Dudes, I have a message for you: telling women who name sexism, or racism, or privilege to “chill out” makes you an asshole. Not only that! But it also makes you a grade A sexist.

Yes, your other New Age Dude-bros (and, sadly, some of your new age lady friends who find it easier to function in this life by pretending that everything is just peachy as is. Possibly because if they felt otherwise you and your dude-friends would shame, attack, and humiliate them for daring to question your progressive righteousness but also, possibly, because these ladies have also drank the feminists-are-the-real-sexists kool-aid) will cheer you on for these kinds of responses, because they, like you, want to be considered sensitive and progressive without having to actually consider how your own behaviour might be perpetuating inequality.

But their support, nor your success at shutting women up by condescending to them, nor the simple fact that you’ve elected to deny that systematic oppression exists and then deny your own, very active, role in perpetuating sexism, does not make you progressive. It makes you an idiot. And it makes you part of the problem. You feign concern for OHTHAWORLDITSSOSAD, and yet you can’t see past your own nose to address the role you play in all this.

Next time try this: “Oh hey? A woman is pointing out how she sees and experiences sexism in this world, as discussed by many other feminists for the past four decades or so. Instead of getting my boner into a knot and attacking her, I suppose I could use my big old new age brain to, for once, shut up and listen.”

Yes, New Age Dude, that would be the most progressive and least oppressive thing you could do.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

105 Comments | Comment on This Post

Who gets a say? The sex work lobby & the silencing of feminist voices.

It’s become so predictable that, now, I just sit back and wait. I’ve written several pieces about prostitution and the abolitionist movement, and several more that don’t directly address these issues, but perhaps mention the word “prostitution.” And really, that’s all it takes these days.

What I’ve come to realize is, no matter what I write, no matter what argument I make, no matter the points I bring up, the sex work lobby doesn’t care. Because if you aren’t agreeing with them, you must be stopped.

Public use of the word “prostitution” is enough to justify skimming right past the contents of any article and heading straight to the silencing. The silencing is the most important work, after all. It is the goal. “If we can bully them into shutting up, maybe we’ll win,” is what they seem to be thinking.

In October, I wrote a piece exploring, what I saw as a neoliberalist take-over of the feminist movement. I argued that we needed to focus our efforts on building a progressive feminist movement that looked at freedom and empowerment for women as a collective effort, rather than focusing on individual (and temporary) feelings of empowerment or catharsis. Real change means liberation for all, not a privileged few.

I mentioned the efforts to decriminalize (I realized, after I wrote the piece, that it is probably more accurate to name these efforts as efforts at legalization as, really, it is the abolitionists who are fighting for decriminalization of prostituted women, whereas so-called decriminalization advocates argue for the legalization of pimps and johns as well as prostituted women) as an example of, and a manifestation of,  American neoliberalism’s impact on the feminist movement. And, according to the sex work lobby, that’s all she wrote.

Almost every comment was the same (and, of course, these comments are nothing new, it’s as though they came from a script):

“I cannot believe that [this site] continues to allow non-sex workers with absolutely no experience of working in the sex trade, let alone working the streets to speak on their behalf. “

“I demand that as a feminist organization, you remove this article and commission a sex worker with experience of the streets to write about why sex workers are demanding their rights and how real feminists can support their self-determination.”

“It’s also amazing to me that [this site] would let some non sex worker write a lot of stuff with zero evidence or research when there are hundreds of incredibly skilled, gifted sex work organizers with decades of experience in Canada.”

“I am shocked and appalled that the author of this article was published on this site,and discouraged that she controls a site that calls itself feminist. this is feminism at its coldest and does not deserve to be promoted.”

 

And this goes on. Not only did these commenters refuse to engage with any one of arguments being made (I am almost positive that none of them actually read the piece, if they had, I doubt they would have focused all their efforts on trying to censor an entire article on account of there being one paragraph they didn’t agree with), but the only response they could muster was to try to bully the site upon which the piece was published into removing the article. Because, you know, if you don’t agree with an argument, best-practice is to ensure that it is erased.

And this is far from abnormal. I doubt there is a feminist out there who has managed to avoid these kinds of attempts at silencing if they dare to challenge the idea that prostitution works against equality.

What is obvious is that the sex work lobby realizes it’s position is weak and, therefore, the only way they can succeed is to bully and attack those who present challenges to their arguments. Less obvious is WHY those who present themselves as feminist (as many of the sex work lobbyists do), are so heavily focused on this idea that only *certain* women may speak about the exploitation of women. Since when is feminism about erasing the voices of feminists?

All women have the right to speak out against the exploitation and objectification of women. Every single one of them. Certainly the voices of the marginalized must be privileged, and certainly many, many voices are silenced, but that isn’t what the sex work lobby is speaking to. This isn’t about listening to the voices of the women out on the streets, hiding in the shadows, getting into cars on the Downtown Eastside. Nope. This is about letting just a few, specially selected voices, be heard. They’ve chosen their spokespeople (and believe me, those voices are louder than anyone elses, and they are not, in any way, the voices of the marginalized) and they’ve decided that these are the only ones who may speak. Because they agree with them.

Not only do they refuse to acknowledge the many women who have exited the sex trade who continue to speak out against prostitution and the Aboriginal women’s organizations who name prostitution as a colonial practice and name Aboriginal women as Canada’s first prostituted women, but they are blind (perhaps intentionally blind, but blind nonetheless) to the ways in which ALL women are impacted by patriarchal systems.

As my incredible ally, Easily Riled, wrote, in post titled “December 6, 1989″:

“Those women, the women in prostitution, the women on the streets, were and are the ‘public women’ that we do not see. We do not see them as the women we are, the women we could be. We do not see them at all. They were and are for sale on the street because we are all commodified. Because they are for sale on the street, the men who put them there think we are all for sale. The men who put them and keep them there drive around and check them out. They ask every woman they see “how much?”  Especially the women on the dark streets, near the quiet warehouses.”

We are, as she says, all commodified. So long as men think women are for sale, we are all considered, “for sale.” So long as men see us as orifices which exist to be penetrated, so long as they see us as things for them to look at, as pretty objects (whether we are objects on the streets, on film, behind glass, or on stage), or things that they are entitled to have access to, none of us are free. There is no class of women who deserve to take the brunt of male privilege. There is no ‘us’ and ‘them’ (though, of course, we are told there is). The women who are privileged enough *not* to have to prostitute themselves, as Trisha Baptie says, have a responsibility here as well:

 “we abandon a class of women who, because of circumstance, because of systemic oppression don’t have a choice. This is also why women who have liberty and are of a privileged class need to own that and say: “this is why I’m not a prostitute” and then look at the women who are and say: ‘why are you?’”

So, while on one hand, the incredibly determined efforts to silence women and feminists who speak out against exploitation and inequity are telling, as the inability to engage speaks to, perhaps, a fear that we might not actually be the enemies they’ve made us out to be and a fear that engagement might highlight holes in their argument, on the other hand, the bullying is completely out of control.

It’s one thing to disagree and to challenge and it is another, entirely, to perpetuate untruths and exaggerations in order to discredit an argument, as we witnessed recently in John Lowman’s response to a piece by Lee Lakeman, who claimed that, at an event at UBC back in March:

“… the student organizers had to call Campus Security and close down a debate on prostitution law when a group of demand-side prohibitionists, including several former “prostituted women,” all but physically assaulted sex worker Susan Davis for suggesting that consensual adult prostitution be decriminalized.”

Several women who were in attendance at this event made clear that nothing near physical assault took place. No violence. Just one angry woman who was a little louder than Lowman would have liked her to be. It’s seems cliched at this point, but clearly many are still working with the idea that, when women get angry, the easiest way to dismiss their arguments is to accuse them of being out-of-control or crazy. Why not go one step further and accuse them of being ‘violent’? Similar accusations were made of abolitionists at this summer’s Women’s Worlds 2011 conference, also refuted by those who were in attendance.

People don’t like it when women get angry. Women are meant to be pleasant. Subdued. Passive. Feminists aren’t following the rules.

LaCles, a feminist organization working out of Quebec, wrote an open letter addressing these kinds of attacks back in June, asking Quebecois feminists to react to the “series of targeted attacks–sometimes subtle, other times blatant–aimed at abolitionist feminists.” They pointed out that which is true:

“Feminists who take the risk of naming and denouncing men’s violence, and feminists who have endured the violence of thousands of men in prostitution for periods of 10, 20, even 30 years or more–sometimes from the age of 2–are accused of committing violence against other women. Regardless of our past or our experience as feminists, we believe that it is always, and has always been, unacceptable to tolerate feminists’ use of tactics designed to silence other feminists, even when we are in disagreement. Yet, that is exactly what is happening right now.”

In September, Stella, a sex work lobby group framed feminist protest as violence. This disturbingly ironic (and common) misplacement of blame (let’s stop, just for a moment, and look at WHO is actually perpetrating violence against women) is not only untrue but is dangerous. When we frame protest and feminist action against violence and against the exploitation of women as ‘violence’, we perpetuate a million stereotypes about women who get “too angry,” “too emotional,” and “too loud,” i.e. women who are stepping out of line. This silences women. Or tries to anyway. The real abusers remain hidden, protected, and justified. “It isn’t me who is wrong, it is feminists, for trying to take away my God-given right to pussy,” is what is reinforced to men.

Women getting angry about violence against women is not violence. In fact, if you aren’t angry about the state of women in this world, it’s probably because you, in one way or another, are turning a blind eye to violence, remaining silent when you witness abuse, or maybe you are just ok with the violence. Maybe it’s become so normal that you actually believe women deserve to be treated in this way. However it’s been justified, pointing the finger at those who fight it is sick. But it is the sickness of a patriarchal society. It is that contagious disease we keep passing around because we just can’t imagine a cure. We can’t imagine healing from this mass abuse. And so we tell ourselves it is normal. And those say, “hey, wait a minute – this isn’t normal, we don’t have to live like this,” must be silenced. Because to live another way is unimaginable.

Sheila Jeffreys, renowned academic and radical feminist, has been subjected to slander of this nature for years. Accused of violence which never took place, these accusations come from MRA‘s and sex work lobbyists, alike. It’s nothing new. And it is a tactic that works, to a certain extent. People who hate feminists are more than willing to believe the hype.

These efforts to silence feminist critiques of the sex industry were in full force at the Feminist Futures conference in Melbourne, which took place in May 2011. When the sex work lobbyists found that there were feminists on panels at the conference who were critical of the sex industry they made it their goal to ensure those women were not allowed to speak. The conference organizers were bullied into altering panels and, as a result of this campaigning,  Sheila Jeffreys was forced to back out of the conference and Melinda Tankhard Reist was disinvited. The conference provided zero safe space for radical feminists and, with the exception of Kathleen Maltzahn, who was completely disrespected at the conference, feminist critiques of the sex industry were silenced.

It’s sad, yes, but it’s also frightening to witness the lengths people will go to ensure their voices are the only voices heard.

More recently I covered an incredibly powerful event organized by Vancouver Rape Relief & Shelter which looked at the issue of violence against women. One panel out of four addressed prostitution as violence against women. Predictably, the first comment on the article was a comment on language, arguing that I was being disrespectful by not using the term “sex worker” instead of prostitute. So not only are all the points in the piece ignored, but now the sex work lobby has gone so far as to demand we alter facts and quotes in order to placate them. We must lie in order not to be censored. The bullying exists to erase the truth.

Feminism is about women. It is about ending patriarchy. It is about ending violence against women. It is about liberation and equality. I realize this is a scary idea to many people. We’ve only known patriarchy. The unknown is scary. And the bullying gets real bad when you start threatening the status quo. But the feminist movement has never been about placating the masses and we will not be intimidated or threatened into silence. The feminists who have been working tirelessly in this movement for decades are used to it at this point, and I’ve learned the routine quickly. We get it. But we are women and we have a right to speak out against our own oppression and a responsibility to speak out against the oppression of our sisters. The privilege is in witnessing abuse and then saying nothing. Because it’s easier to just remain silent. But nobody said this would be easy.

One thing we can be sure of is this: you know there is a powerful movement afoot when the opposition becomes incapable of engaging and resorts to bullying and silencing tactics. In desperation, this is all they can come up with.

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

343 Comments | Comment on This Post

Blog Categories

RSSTwitterFacebook

Support The F Word and Vancouver's Co-op Radio

The purpose of the blog is to create dialogue and debate around current issues related to women, feminism, and social justice.
We enjoy active participation in the blog, however, we reserve the discretion to remove any comments that are threatening or promote hate speech.

Search This Blog:


Site by Anne Emberline