Seriously.
What is this?
You are reading I Blame The Patriarchy, the patriarchy-blaming blog that advances the radical feminist views of Twisty Faster, a gentleman farmer and spinster aunt eating dinner in Austin, Texas.
I Blame The Patriarchy is intended for advanced patriarchy-blamers. It is not a feminist primer. See Patriarchy-Blaming the Twisty Way for details.
"I couldn't get Twisty's point. It was so longwinded." -- The Blogosphere
Never view this blog using Internet Explorer.
Email Twisty.Faster at G mail
Should you wish to flatter me with theft
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
There is something very amusing about a post that says there will be no posts. It’s a delightful contradiction. Good luck with the move.
This comment is false.
Ceci n’est pas une comment.
no comment.
[snorfle]
I once saw a photo of a road sign that said “Ignore this sign”.
This page has been left blank intentionally.
That one has always been my favorite, Ron.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Woke up to snow - I’m sure there’s some sort of whited-out/blank joke in there somewhere.
So I guess we call this an “open thread”? I will not be a party to such shenanigans!
Disregard this play: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVtU5OS0c9A
“This page would be blank if I were not here telling you that this page would be blank if I were not here telling you that…”
(Andy Griffith)
Hmmm. I posted something here that then disappeared. Maybe there really is “no post today”.
The snow’s turned into rain, for those of you waiting upon the Tasmanian weather update.
Nice René Magritte reference Hanou - and they say a degree in Art History is useless.
“You couldn’t have it if you did want it,” the Queen said. “The rule is jam tomorrow and jam yesterday - but never jam today.”
“It must come sometimes to jam today,” Alice objected.
“No it can’t,” said the Queen. “It’s jam every other day: today isn’t any other day, you know.”
- Lewis Carroll Through the Looking Glass (19xx: xx)
And then, apropos of nothing, there’s the Queen’s pronouncement that seems most aptly applied to a religious upbringing:
“Alice laughed: “There’s no use trying,” she said; “one can’t believe impossible things.”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
- Alice in Wonderland.
I wish that school hours ran from 8am to 4pm. All homework and assignments would be done in the extra hours. No work to be done at home. EVER! I tells ya what. If men were the primary caregivers of children this would be law.
I’m still not sure how many fingers I’m holding up.
In my school system, Shelby, that only works out to one extra hour a day, and would never have been enough time to complete interesting projects.
interesting projects?
is that secret code for projects done by mom?
Open thread? Cool! Then I submit this: one of my new favorite blogs, Language Log, covers a topic today that tangentially has to do with feminism.
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=479
Caught on-screen in an episode (set in Namibia, a re-run from some years ago) of Anthony Bourdain’s No Reservations, a travel-and-food television show:
“This program contains indigenous nudity. Parental discretion is advised.”
It’s a warning that there were be (female) breasts and (male) penises on display, though surely only fleetingly or out of the main focus of the camera, combined with the reassurance that the people whose bodies are (however negligently) on display are indigenous peoples — “primitives” and not “full people” like you and me, the viewers (or like Janet Jackson).
Good points. In the rest of the post, the blogger describes pseudo-adjectives and the use of “indigenous”, and it’s a fascinating discussion if you’re into linguistics.
But on to the feminism part: how interesting that the TV show felt the need to describe what kind of nudity was happening in the first place. I presume they added the modifier “indigenous” to point out that this was not the pornified, prurient kind of bodily display that is expected of, and used to shame, the sex class. Instead, “indigenous nudity” is just good ole wholesome nudity encountered as men and women who don’t typically wear clothes go about their daily business. This makes it “better” nudity, “family-friendly” nudity, the kind that’s less likely to drive away viewers.
On the other hand, would “indigenous” nudity, when applied to dominant American cultures, be more like a Playboy spread?
If you’d care to expound, I’d love to hear people’s thoughts on “indigenous” nudity vs. other kinds of nudity, how this relates to feminism, how we analyze and make judgments about different kinds of nudity.
Error: please type a comment
This is not a comment.
And perhaps more to the point, this - This is not a comment - is not packing.
How’s that going, by the way.
More horse, less yak.
Indigenous nudity is the difference between Playboy and National Geographic. I’ve never understood our nudity taboo. It would go a long way to reduce the pornification of the female form, I’m sure.
I agree with you, Sylvanite, re: the nudity taboo.
However, the point is that this is pretty obvious racism.
I am really not sure why they felt the need to use the word “indigenous” though. “Non-sexual nudity” or something would have done to indicate it wasn’t porn if they had to say so.
Of course it’s only because we live in pornified world that all nudity is sexualised anyway.
Yeah the National Geographic is “ooooh look at those weird primitive people!” - yet nudity occurs in white cultures e.g. Sweden, Germany, Denmark, Slovenia and so on where there is less of a nudity taboo, e.g. it’s quite normal to go into the sauna naked.
Hell no! What would be the fun in that? Why should I enjoy history class if my mom gets to make my scale replica of the pyramids?