LOL. I agree though, the sight of him and Ampersand over at the Seal Press blog magnanimously accepting an apology that wasn’t even directed at them was pretty sickening. As was Hugo’s initial support of the book and dismissal of women of colour who criticised it.

BTW, I feel uncomfortable that Twisty keeps getting the props as writing the best commentary on this situation. It wouldn’t fly if a man was being congratulated for his masterful overview of a situation involving sexism where a number of women had already said their piece. (Not implying that Twisty wants these props of course, it’s pretty clear from her original post that that isn’t the case).

There’s something that’s been bothering me about the comment threads, mostly on Feministe, but on other response posts as well… it keeps devolving from “Marcotte made a mistake and she should re-examine her professional habits and outlook” to “Well, Marcotte’s a meanie-weenie and she deserves it ! She’s a divider and her posts make people mad ! She thinks she’s so funny but she’s not so there and the boys like her too much !”

..It’s kind of messing with me. That’s one of the reasons I appreciated this post so much; and the comments here that have been very articulate and sensible; because I’m not comfortable with throwing Marcotte under the wagon.

I think white feminist bloggers are writing from a position of privilege, and if this has opened some eyes, that can only be a good thing. But Marcotte’s a writer I admire in many ways, with a strong commitment to her issues; and I would hope that this is a situation in which she could get perspective and advice from her peers, rather than getting burned in effigy.

To wit: thanks.

That was me. They won’t stop being feminists, but they will stop supporting groups or individuals that it has become clear to them do not walk their talk. I’m not sure what else they or we can be expected to do.
I didn’t get the part where anyone was blaming the feminist movement or blaming all white feminists. I thought it was a more interwebs specific issue. What with the kewel kids klub and power to the korrect people shenanigans. Perhaps I am wrong.

Certainly this divisiveness serves the P, I suspect that is the purpose of some, like Hugego, who fan the flames.

I think this is self-defeating and wrong. Let’s stay strong, and address the problem directly, (which many of you are doing, so that’s good) but not throw everything under the bus. This is extremist thinking, and it’s beginning to freak me out.

If people are taking breaks from their blogs, that’s fine. But blaming feminism is wrong. We’re supposed to be blaming the patriarchy, y’all! Let’s not lose focus, and destroy ourselves from the inside out.

whew, i’m spent.

I forget who above, who responded to me saying that it’s about WOC withdrawing *support* from feminism, as vegetarians might do from PETA. This is the problem! That is, conceiving of it this way.

Feminism is NOT a monolithic organization like PETA. In fact, it’s much more like vegetarianism itself, an ideology, a lifestyle, a belief system. There are elitist and racist elements in vegetarianism too, but no one blames vegetarianism itself (as far as I know).

Just like we shouldn’t blame feminism. Those white elitist feminists who are messing up DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME, NOR DO THEY SPEAK FOR FEMINISM.

These issues need to be examined, so they stop being perpetuated, but let’s not blame feminism per se. These individuals need to be called to task. But let’s not seek to vilify the title, as the Right does. Feminism is not an “F” word.

And I, nor should anyone, be ashamed to be a feminist.

The reason I/we/some had a problem with the cover was because the image presented was sexist. The cover image is yet another version of the ‘perfect woman’ ideal that is constantly pushed down our throat: white, blonde, large breasted and scantily clad. I thought feminists were meant to be fighting again being objectified in this way, not putting reprsentative images on the covers of our books. Further, it is a book that dubs itself as ‘the feminist survival guide’, juxtaposing itself with this image seems to imply that the woman featured is ‘the feminist’. My own personal uproar was: Why is a feminist book implying on the first page that to be a feminist I should look a certain way? Clearly this is a wholly simplistic way of approaching it and clearly Marcotte meant it to be far more ironic, a ‘let’s laugh at the world that thinks we should be this’. But unfortunately, i’m not laughing. Perpetuating sexist imagery, perpetuates sexism. Perhaps if she’d used an image of a woman chained to the stove I might laugh more, indulge in the irony to a greater extent because I personally believe that we’ve managed to move past that female ideal. Yet I recognise that others would disagree. The depiction of women in the media/everywhere is inherently sexualised. It is still far too big a battleground for irony. Gah: Octogalore probably says it all better than me. (http://octogalore.blogspot.com/2008/04/no-sexism-in-jungle.html)

To me it doesn’t matter who the book was being marketed to or for or what the rest of the book contained image wise. That single image itself was unsettling and frustrating - particularly when Marcotte didn’t seem to be willing to understand why i or others like me who attempted to address it with her had such issue with it. What I anticipated as her niche market seems irrelevant. I don’t really care how many people were going to read the book or if they were in on the joke - I found the image sexist. Even if only one other person ever saw the image it would still be sexist. Unless the image was going to be presented with THIS IS SEXIST, FUCK THE PATRIARCHY it was going to be exploitative, regardless of how many clever things Marcotte had to say afterwards.

Sorry, I’m tired and I hope I’ve responded vaguely to what I’ve tried to figure out as your original point, eek. I think Lara has done an excellent job on the Amandagate/WOC and feminism explanations and agree with her wholey.