So, yeah.
Sady wrote a piece over at Feministe about Tina Fey's feminism, or, you know, lack thereof, in her appearance on Saturday night live. And I totally encourage you to go read the post, because it is awesome, but something about this segment really struck me:
Because Tina Fey just called me a whore.
And let's get this out of the way first: if you are a feminist worth your weight in bras to burn, you do not use the word "whore." No, you do not, and you can try to use it ironically, but I will reserve the right to think you are are an asshole because: using women's sexuality as a way to insult them is just really misogynistic. I don't care if you also call men "whores" - you know what it means, and you cannot divorce it from the history of what it has meant, and as long as women are called whores as if their sexuality is for public comment and they can be judged on their decisions to basically NOT BE PURE VIRGINAL VIRGINS, you suck, and you are not in my feminist club. I hear there's a fauxgressive club across the street that will let you in.
So, that being said, essentially, again, Tina Fey called me whore.
As far as I can tell, according to Tina Fey, if you are not a married woman, and dare to, I don't know, leave your home with your breasts and attract a man who may be married, you are now a whore. Because the only people she actually sticks up for in this segment are wives.
Ok, let's back up: the idea that there are two kinds of women here - the successful ones and the ostensibly stupid ones with boob jobs, is already problematic. Tina Fey, god, there are smart women with boob jobs and accomplished women with tattoos and clever women who work at Hooters. Stop creating a binary between the "good" women and the "whores," because there is none, and you have just given an awful lot of people, men and women, a foundation to feel justified in treating a whole category of women, like women who work at Hooters maybe who probably don't make much money but have a job (which is kinda like an endangered species recently, I hear) and have to pay the bills just like the rest of us, inhumanely.
Women come in two species, in Tina Fey's world: there are the "good" wives, and the Hooters waitresses. And the Hooters waitresses/whores deserve to be abused. Tina Fey, way to embody the virgin/whore dichotomy! The Catholic Church called and wants its centuries old concept back!
But of course, the whores are to blame for the cheating husbands! Why? Gosh, because women are supposed to defend their sexuality from men who just can't help themselves! They must maintain their "goodness"! And everyone else's! This is their responsibility! Like, if you are guilty of having a vagina and wearing clothing that shows that you have skin? YOU HUSSY! It is your fault that men cannot apparently control their sexual appetites!
See, and now the rape culture AND like every abstinence-only education program in the U.S. want THEIR foundational premises back, too! Tina Fey, you are stealing shamelessly from the patriarchy. You are going to owe mad royalties.
And, but here's where it's personal: I am that whore.
I am not married. Sometimes, when I am in the mood, I like attracting men. Sometimes, I like sleeping with men. But none of this takes place without the consent of the men. And only one of us, if said man is married, can make the decision to cheat on Tina Fey. And I can't (at least in a majority of states). So . . . why am I getting the full brunt of the blame?
Because when Tina Fey says all is not lost for wives, she is saying that wives? Can't be whores (apparently also, in Tina Fey's universe? Wives never cheat). But the way she talks about Bombshell McGee (is this a woman's real name? Or like a joke? I do not read tabloids, Readers, I have no idea) is that BMcG's main problem (other than the anti-semitism/racism thing, which is not the point of this post, although Tina Fey makes being a whore out as worse than racism, which, WTF?) is having breasts. And flaunting them. And being sexual. And what BMcG really did was be a non-married woman (or at least a willing partner) in a space where Jesse James then decided he wanted to sleep with her. Her crime, essentially, was being perceived as sexy by a married man. And she got called a "whore" for that, while he gets off totally free of blame.
So, ladies, I think this means that our options are, if we do not want to be labeled whores, to get married tout suite, or never leave our homes with anything other than burlap sacks on. Because if all cheating is NOT going to be blamed on men but on us, well, we don't want to be whores, now do we? And what exactly can our defense be? "It's not my fault the married man tried to cheat on his wife with me, Your Honor - I was wearing my burlap sack! I tried to stop him!"
Yeah, no. Burlap is itchy.
Honestly, also, I am especially sensitive to the word, "whore." I have been called one MANY A TIME. And it never had anything to do with who or what I was actually doing with anyone else. It was about my perceived transgression into sexual agency - I owned my sexuality. I talked about it. I admitted that I liked sex, I masturbated, I was into non-vanilla things. And so people would assume, without ANY actual basis in fact, that I was sleeping with someone, that I was a whore. A slut. I must have been sleeping around! One summer, when I was a camp counselor, the rumors about my alleged sexual voraciousness got so ridiculous that a friend and I started making up rumors to spread that were just completely unhinged, to see if people believed them. They always did (one of the rumors we spread was that I slept with FIVE MEN AT ONCE. Like, all at the same time, they were fucking me. Which is not even physically possible, I am pretty sure, but no one questioned the veracity in passing that rumor on in a manner that did indeed resemble wildfire). Folks loved talking shit about me, even though it was silly and false, because as one of those "bad" women, I deserved that kind of abuse. There's nothing a group of people would rather do than be a judge-y and women-bashing around a couple of beers together, apparently!
Or get on Saturday Night Live, throw a picture of a woman's body up like she is public property, insult her, blame women for the actions and choices of fully functional and capable men, and call me a whore.
Tina Fey, I am not a whore. But you are a really, really shitty feminist.
I'm not in the US so I can't watch that video, but I read also Sady's post and you both point out what's wrong with many women who proclaim themselves feminists - they see feminism, and use bits and pieces of it they like, as a way to empower themselves, but not as a way to empower all women. So they use their "feminism" to oppress other women who are different than them for whatever way, or they only use their "feminism" in ways that advance the fight for the particular things that they experience, while the experiences of many other women are ignored and dismissed.
ReplyDeleteAs for this particular thing, Tina Fey is obviously guilty of displaying the widely held belief that if you're not a virgin and yet you're single - you're a whore. People love to use it to shame women into silence and marginalize them. Men, it would be reasonable to assume, do it because it's a way to control women's sexuality and behaviour. But why do women do it to their fellow women? Is there an element of jealousy involved? Is it the consequence of internalized inhibitions against which a person is unable to rebel, and feels the need to punish those who display blatantly unihibited behaviour? Or could we think that, in this particular case, the whole bashing of the mistress stems from some deep internal insecurity of Tina Fey who is afraid she can't control her husband's behaviour and therefore feels the need to try to control the behaviour of other women, who are seen as potential competition?
I don't know. But it's fucking annoying every time these things are promoted, and it's even more annoying when an alleged feminist woman does it. I mean, for fuck's sake. How much more of this shit we have to take? Fuck you, Tina Fey, and everyone like you. Fuck you.
I'm pretty sure that there's some gray area between "whores" and "PURE VIRGINAL VIRGINS". I'm also pretty sure that Jesse James wasn't deemed to be free of blame in this situation by anybody worth listening to. Tina Fey's performance was less than inspiring and not funny, but is it worth the amount of attention you are giving it? Going to extremes in either direction doesn't tend to be very helpful when it comes to living in the world.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteYou are new here, apparently?
We discuss feminist issues here. We (meaning I) do feminist theory-ish deconstructions of things. We look at things, such as Tina Fey's routine, and link them to larger patterns and narratives in society that end up oppressing women. Because if you had read the post carefully, you would have recognized that Tina Fey was just another symptom, not the problem. I was using Tina Fey to bring up some larger issues - which ASP, in her first comment, brought out.
So, Anonymous, as this is my space, and you have nothing to add to the discussion, except hinting that I am perhaps being hysterical (you know us ladies!), if you concern-troll again, I am deleting your comments.
Love & kisses,
Gayle
I was not intending to violate your space, and of course I understand if you want to delete my comments. I know that you were using Tina Fey as a springboard, I just didn't think that it was a very useful one, since it was clearly poorly done. It just didn't seem worth the time to deconstruct.
ReplyDeleteDeconstruction, by definition, reduces a text to the point where there exist irreconcilable differences within it. It would take a lot more than your post to show this in Tina Fey's script. I assume that by deconstruction you mean extrapolation or something like it.
I would have addressed more of your post, but you went from Tina Fey's segment to addressing several other extreme and generally throw-away opinions (women can be good wives or whores, women who work at Hooters are stupid, it is the woman's fault when a man cheats with her, etc). I don't see how you linked Tina Fey to larger patterns. Unless you seriously think you are up against people who want you to wear a burlap sack, then your arguments say little to challenge the patriarchy.
I don't see why challenging you here is detrimental to your cause. What chance does feminism have if feminists only argue against people who have no interest in hearing them (I know that not all your posts have been this way, I am just referring to this one).
Anonymous! You are my first concern troll! I really feel like I've made it as a feminist blogger now!
ReplyDeleteThanks! Wooohooo! I am awesome!
Well, I'm off to troll elsewhere. Continue preaching, the choir is listening.
ReplyDelete"I don't see why challenging you here is detrimental to your cause."
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous,
Did you read the purpose of this blog? The author, Gayle Force has courageously stated many times that the intention is to keep a public journal on her RAPE RECOVERY.
Have you ever known someone who is recovering from sexual violence? Well, I am sure you have, given the fact that anywhere between 33-60% of women are survivors of sexual violence...so I guess then the question is, have you ever provided a safe space for someone to disclose this situation to you and to share some of the problematic, difficult inner dialogues that cause em day-to-day reiterations of trauma?
If not, reading Gayle Force is a good idea, if you can be humble enough to listen. Listening does not mean reading words on a screen and then constructing a philosophic response that reiterates a binary of you/me, right/wrong, or a spectrum of A+/F of theory. See, Gayle Force is a human being. She saw something about Tina Fey and it resonated with her. It resonated with her pain as a rape survivor in a culture that sends terrible messages to women about sexuality. She wanted to write about it. She has a blog which is a location for her thoughts and responses. Responses are neither correct or incorrect, but they can be insensitive or inappropriately directed, as I feel yours legitimately is.
Your pontification on how to properly deconstruct from your point of view, for example, may be an acceptable reply if Gayle had written the above as a academic article, although I assure you if she was to do an article on Tina Fey, it would be "on topic" and amazing...That is not the mission of this space.
Gayle's writing on this topic reveals her feelings that the recent sketches demonstrate: blame of women's sexual agency, disgust for women who are free with their sexuality, and disgust directed at women who adopt ways of dressing that could be construed as provocative.
These are all things that set me off too, after I was raped. Because survivors have been documented to wonder, even WHEN THEY KNOW BETTER: "Did I cause this to happen? How did I allow myself to become a victim? Did I invite this through my own sexuality? Did I send a mixed message? Is this my fault?" This is part of recovery. So is trusting yourself and talking out loud and hearing others. So, these things are very much relevant and connected to me and in no way "sloppy theory" as is implied in your comment.
Hope this helps.
That does help, actually, and quite a lot. I appreciate your not completely dismissing me (or at least not acting like it) because I took issue with something here.
ReplyDeleteNo, I didn't see that rape recovery was the purpose of the blog (where is that? I didn't see it under the profile... sorry I seriously don't see a purpose written somewhere). Though, I did notice that it was something Gayle Force deals with on a regular basis. So, no, I didn't know that this was meant to be a place where I shouldn't respond in the way that I did. This particular post really seemed to be more about people demonizing female sexuality in general than any specific personal issue (though I realize personal things are bound to come through).
I personally get frustrated when feminist issues are simplified in the way I thought Gayle Force was doing here, because (for ME), it has led to isolation and constant anger. I am not intending to philosophize or write an academic critique, and I only leaned that way when challenged that I wasn't seeing the deconstruction going on in this post.
So I apologize to Gayle for challenging you in a forum that was not meant for argument. I really did not think this was the case.