The Girls

We're White Guys... And We Take No Crap...

But now there are two and we're facing Pennsylvania and whom are we kidding? This is an election about whether the people of Pennsylvania hate blacks more than they hate women. And when I say people, I don't mean people, I mean white men. How ironic is this? After all this time, after all these stupid articles about how powerless white men are and how they can't even get into college because of overachieving women and affirmative action and mean lady teachers who expected them to sit still in the third grade even though they were all suffering from terminal attention deficit disorder -- after all this, they turn out (surprise!) to have all the power. (As they always did, by the way; I hope you didn't believe any of those articles.)

To put it bluntly, the next president will be elected by them: the outcome of Tuesday's primary will depend on whether they go for Hillary or Obama, and the outcome of the general election will depend on whether enough of them vote for McCain. A lot of them will: white men cannot be relied on, as all of us know who have spent a lifetime dating them. And McCain is a compelling candidate, particularly because of the Torture Thing. As for the Democratic hope that McCain's temper will be a problem, don't bet on it. A lot of white men have terrible tempers, and what's more, they think it's normal.

Wouldn't It Be Loverly

Tim Russert:] Senator Clinton, Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer has proposed giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. [You] told the Nashua, New Hampshire, Editorial Board it makes a lot of sense.

Why does it make a lot of sense to give an illegal immigrant a driver's license?

Clinton: Well, what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform. We know in New York we have several million at any one time who are in New York illegally. They are undocumented workers. They are driving on our roads. The possibility of them having an accident that harms themselves or others is just a matter of the odds. It's probability.

So what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is to fill the vacuum. I believe we need to get back to comprehensive immigration reform because no state, no matter how well intentioned, can fill this gap. There needs to be federal action on immigration reform.

Russert: Does anyone here believe an illegal immigrant should not have a driver's license?

(Unknown): Believe what?

Russert: An illegal immigrant should not have a driver's license.

Dodd: This is a privilege. And, look, I'm as forthright and progressive on immigration policy as anyone here. But we're dealing with a serious problem here, we need to have people come forward. The idea that we're going to extend this privilege here of a driver's license I think is troublesome, and I think the American people are reacting to it. We need to deal with security on our borders. We need to deal with the attraction that draws people here. We need to deal fairly with those who are here.

But this is a privilege. Talk about health care, I have a different opinion. That affects the public health of all of us.

But a license is a privilege, and that ought not to be extended, in my view.

Clinton: Well, I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do...

(Unknown): Wait a minute...

Clinton: And we have failed. We have failed.

Dodd: No, no, no. You said -- you said yes...

Clinton: No.

Dodd: ... you thought it made sense to do it.

Clinton: No, I didn't, Chris. But the point is, what are we going to do with all these illegal immigrants who are driving...

Dodd: That's a legitimate issue. But driver's license goes too far, in my view.

Clinton: Well, you may say that, but what is the identification?

If somebody runs into you today who is an undocumented worker...

Dodd: There's ways of dealing with that.

Clinton: Well...

Dodd: This is a privilege, not a right.

Clinton: Well, what Governor Spitzer has agreed to do is to have three different licenses, one that provides identification for actually going onto airplanes and other kinds of security issues, another which is another ordinary driver's license, and then a special card that identifies the people who would be on the road, so...

Dodd: That's a bureaucratic nightmare.

Clinton: ... it's not the full privilege.

Russert: Senator Clinton, I just want to make sure of what I heard. Do you, the New York senator, Hillary Clinton, support the New York governor's plan to give illegal immigrants a driver's license?

You told the New Hampshire paper that it made a lot of sense. Do you support his plan?

Clinton: You know, Tim, this is where everybody plays "gotcha." It makes a lot of sense. What is the governor supposed to do? He is dealing with a serious problems. We have failed. And George Bush has failed. Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No. But do I understand the sense of real desperation, trying to get a handle on this? Remember, in New York, we want to know who's in New York. We want people to come out of the shadows.

He's making an honest effort to do it. We should have passed immigration reform.

Fred spoke to reporters in San Jose today:

As far as I’m concerned, I think giving drivers licenses to illegals is a bad idea for a lot of reasons. I think we have to quit inducing people to come and stay if they’re illegal. I think it’s a disservice to the millions of people who stood in long lines around the world at American embassies to come here and play by the rules and become American citizens and become productive and great parts of our society. But when you’re making it easier, when you’re providing sanctuary cities and telling your local officials that they can’t even cooperate with federal authorities, and then saying its a federal responsibility, I think that’s an irresponsible way to go,

Drivers licenses are the nearest thing to an ID card that we’ve got in this country. Your need your drivers license for everything. Why aren’t they being apprehended and sent home if they come in and announce that they’re illegal? We’ve either got to be serious enforcing our laws or not. I don’t think we can afford to be selective in that regard.

A Look Inside Pandagon

News Flash! Women Have Breasts!

The first commenter, Goesh, picks up on my prompt -- "Let's just array these bloggers... randomly" -- and wisecracks: "Who is the Intern directly in front of him with the black hair?

Eventually, Jessica from a blog called Feministing, shows up and says: "The, um, 'intern' is me. It's so nice to see women being judged by more than their looks. Oh, wait..."

Snarky but somewhat conciliatory, I say: "Well, Jessica, you do appear to be 'posing.' Maybe it's just an accident."

Jessica Feministing returns and says:

It's a picture; people pose. And I'm not sure I understand your logic anyway. If I "pose" for a picture (as opposed to sulking and hunching over?) then I deserve to be judged for my looks? I don't see anyone talking *bleep* about the other bloggers smiling pretty for the camera.

Provoked, I decide to actually give her a small dose of the kind of judgment for brains she seems to demanding:

Jessica: I'm not judging you by your looks. (Don't flatter yourself.) I'm judging you by your apparent behavior. It's not about the smiling, but the three-quarter pose and related posturing, the sort of thing people razz Katherine Harris about. I really don't know why people who care about feminism don't have any edge against Clinton for the harm he did to the cause of taking sexual harrassment seriously, and posing in front of him like that irks me, as a feminist. So don't assume you're the one representing feminist values here. Whatever you call your blog....

My Name Is Tony, And I'm An Anti-Neo-Feminist

Feminist-minded people who won't use the label "feminist" have nothing on the sexist folks out there who run like the wind from the word "anti-feminist". I don't blame them. The word "anti-feminist" sounds ugly, like the person wearing the labeled is opposed to women. Unfortunately for them, what it sounds like is what it is.

The desperation to avoid the label "anti-feminist" reaches pretty silly levels, as this post at IWF demonstrates today. (Hat tip, PA.) The story is about a group of Notre Dame anti-feminists who claim that they are "reclaiming" the label "feminist" according to Pope John Paul II's instructions. Because nothing says "feminist" like the head of a group that petulantly refuses to accept female membership, due to the cooties factor.

The group calls themselves the Edith Stein Project, and naturally the flashpoint for the organizing is to oppose the showing of "The Vagina Monologues" on campus. IWF may not have any obsessions bigger than hating this play, which says to me that they view making women feel shame about our bodies as the linchpin in their anti-feminist worldview.

This Edith Stein Project is one of the more common flavors of anti-feminists pretending to be feminist by co-opting the language but not understanding the concepts. This effort to "reclaim" feminism is the same one as Feminists for Life, they happened upon the term "sex object" and assumed, wrongly, that the problem with being a sex object is the sex part, not the object part. Contraceptive use and abortion are offered up assaults on women's dignity.

The purpose of the conference is two-fold. The conference will begin by discussing ways in which our dignity as women is under attack in our culture, featuring presentations on eating disorders, violence against women, contraception, abortion, and other issues.

Interestingly, one of the common complaints on IWF is that "The Vagina Monologues" reduces women to our vaginas, which means that merely admitting you have one in public somehow erases the rest of your being. Clearly, they're trying to confuse people on what the feminist concept of objectification is. Objectification is reducing someone to an object, end of story. Allowing that women are full human beings with desires and bodily functions that they have the agency to control, which is what reproductive rights advocates do, is not objectification.

However, slapping a purity ring on a girl's finger and telling her that she should only "give herself" to her husband is in fact sexual objectification. Having sex with someone is not the same as "giving yourself". The concept of giving is that one person transfers ownership of their property to someone else, who is free to do with it as they see fit. So the phrasing then means that the woman who gives herself is transferring ownership of her entire being over to her husband's use as if she were nothing but an object, and the sexual contact is just the ceremony of his taking use and enjoying his brand new warm sex toy/breeding machine.

Having sex with someone and being able to do so without him gaining control over you as if you were a piece of property is anti-objectification. Having the government, your husband, or some mysterious god lay claim to your uterus and tell you that it will be used as he sees fit instead of how you see fit is objectification. Having sex with 100 men because you want to is anti-objectification. Hanging onto your virginity because you know your entire worth to your future husband is based only on the nature of your hymen instead of the content of your character is objectification. Any use of the term "sex object" that implies that the way out of being a sex object is to relinquish power or control over your life and become a breeding machine is misdirection. Being told to give up control over yourself for the use of someone else is being objectified.

Jessica Valenti has a new article out in the Guardian about the attempts to turn a philosophy that is fundamentally disempowering and objectifying into a new form of feminism, with the modesty movement. Jessica and I talked some about her article when I was in NYC and she said that while it was fun to write, it was depressing to talk to some of the women who were pushing this movement because they somehow had convinced themselves that playing what Jill Soloway calls "hide the bunny" with men is empowering.