queerbychoice | Sexist Biological Essentialism on AlterNet

Current Mood: betrayed by AlterNet
Current Music: none

Sexist Biological Essentialism on AlterNet

I just submitted the following to AlterNet's feedback form:

The reason I started reading AlterNet was to see articles written from a pro-equality perspective. The new article "My Problem with Her Anger" by Eric Bartels, however, instead assaulted my eyes with sexist claims about "the degree of intuition and empathy that seem an integral (natural) part of a woman's nurturing instinct." It's a betrayal of everything that AlterNet supposedly stands for when AlterNet actively helps perpetuate the patriarchal myth that biology rather than patriarchy is what stuck women with an unequal share of the childcare, that women posses some fictional "nurturing instinct" beyond what men possess that causes having an unequal share of these chores forced upon them to just magically not really be as unpleasant for them as men know perfectly well that it would be if they men were stuck doing it.

If I cannot receive any assurance that AlterNet is a forum I can read without its writers actively oppressing me in their writings here, the unnecessary stress added to my life by encountering such statements here will cause me to stop reading AlterNet at all.

I can't imagine why they ever published that article in the first place. It's just some guy complaining for several pages that his wife complains too much, and although I can agree with him that based on the quotes he provided it seems that the tone of the conversations in their household would make their household an unpleasant place to live, the question of exactly how the anger level in their household escalated to the point of such rudeness and to what extent the fault lies with her or with him is very difficult to determine when we only hear his own version of it in this article. As a result, the political analysis viability of the article is pretty much zero, and then he makes it even worse when the ridiculous "Men Are from Mars"-style of gender-relations "analysis" he attempts to tack on is just blatantly sexist and insulting.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Evolutionary commentary aside, that is easily one of the most boring articles I've read recently. It really is just garden-variety whining about how his wife annoys him and this gives him some inexplicable right to extend the situation to the plight of all modern mothers, and then suggest exactly what women in general should do about it. If I lived with that kind of overgeneralizing asshole who kept telling me what "women" (read: "you") should do, I think I'd lose my temper a lot as well.

Yes, and not only that, but AlterNet even managed to repeat nearly all the same failings (other than the sexist biological essentialism) in yet another whiny apolitical article they also just published today, the moral of which can be summed up something like this: "I have an anger problem, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with how I was raised, and also it's not really that much of a problem at all so stop looking at me like that, because really it's just that flying into a rage is often the only possible way to react to stupid annoying children. And I don't hit them, so you should praise me for not hitting them. Although I did throw a shoe at my husband once in a restaurant, and I make strange vague references to having also done unspecified 'worse things,' but let's not get into that."

I don't view this a really an issue of sexism, and biological essentialism, and I don't think you really need to be offended. It's really more of a few articles that open up the forum for discussion on marriage disputes. Marriages aren't perfect, and the man is trying to present one viewpoint, perhaps skewed and sexist, but one viewpoint often shared by men in marriages. The grouping of articles seem to be about dealing with women's anger, and the man's article seems harsh, but somewhat based on reality.

If you don't consider it offensive for people to go wround claiming that that biology rather than patriarchy is what stuck women with an unequal share of the childcare and that women posses some fictional "nurturing instinct" beyond what men possess, all I can say in reply is that you need to think long and hard about the effects that such statements have on society.

While I would be and am offended by this view, I'm just trying to say that the purpose of this essay wasn't supposed to be a non-sexist fair view of things. It's supposed to be an opinion by one person, an exerpt from a collection. What these people say are skewed by their own emotions and their own situations. I think we are supposed to do is use our own judgement, and try to understand the primary frustrations by these people and learn from them. These essays are different than if the essay was just a single article in a newspaper; it's from a series of different essays discussing very difficult issues that have ambiguous answers.

And the sexist comments are just a reflection on some of the personal views by this man, which do contribute to some of the frustations he is feeling in his marriage. But I think the editors wanted to present his essay because they want to explore whether it was the ONLY reason for it. Is there a another reason, I think it is asking.

Anyways, I think the editors of the books INTENDED these essays to be inflamatory, by their titles "Bastard on the Couch" and "Bitch in the House," and for us to understand that to understand people we have to understand the different predujices everyone has and how it impacts marriages.

On the other hand, I feel mostly pity for this poor sap with his faulty traditionalist views. It's not making for a very happy marriage for him :)

The issue is that it was published on AlterNet, and I have a problem with AlterNet publishing things that aren't "supposed to be a non-sexist fair view of things." If it had been published on, say, MSN, I would consider it totally standard MSN crap that I just have to put up with. But AlterNet bills itself as a pro-equality website working to put an end to war, hatred, class oppression, and discrimination. When AlterNet starts publishing pieces that aren't "supposed to be a non-sexist fair view of things," that's like if Alan Keyes's senate campaign suddenly turned out to be financed by the NAACP.

Except the actual article, I feel, isn't sexist. What you cited wasn't an article, it was an exerpt from two books. The actual article was the interview of the editors, which I thought was fair and insightful.

Nothing in the interview apologized for or retracted the sexist biological essentialism statement made in the excerpt, and I do not find it acceptable for alternet to publish statements like that (regardless of whether the statements appear in "articles" or "book excepts") unless it is for the purpose of actively and specifically criticizing those statements.

Nothing there did, but I believe, when I looked up to two books, that they are essays by many different people with many different extreme and different viewpoints.

I think you are missing the point of the essay. It is an "example." It is pretty obviously an example of how traditionalist views make it difficult for men to understand the frustration a woman feels in child rearing and marriage sometimes.

I think they do deal with it, although indirectly in the interview

"Often they aren't the bad guys so much as they're the most convenient recipients of their wives' frustrations. But also, traditional role models are hard to shake. No matter how enlightened we all try to be, many of us spent our entire childhoods absorbing the often more traditional roles of our parents. So it's not so surprising, to me at least, that we lapse into those roles every now and then."

"CATHI: I'm not advocating a return to traditional roles"

I think by those comments, and the rest of their interviews, they make it clear that their essays are "studies of behaviors" and that they don't support all of the views presented. I don't think they could since those views are conflicting.

For example, there's an essay of a stay at home father, whom I'm sure doesn't share the kind of opinion that this fellow does. Altnet probably picked this as an except because it was so inflammatory.

If they were going to pick an excerpt because it was inflammatory and offensive, they should have refuted the inflammatory statements. They did not. The fact that not all the essays say such things is not good enough for me. I do not believe AlterNet should publish sexist statements unless they simultaneously publish a specific refutation of those statements. Nothing whatsoever in the interview quote that you cited here clarified that the notion that women are born with a biological 'nurturing instinct' that men are not is sexist nor that it is incorrect. For that reason, the interview does not constitute a refutation. By "specific refutation" I mean an asterisk after the statement, followed by a notation at the bottom of the page stating: "AlterNet absolutely does not support this sexist notion of that women are born with a biological 'nurturing instinct' that men are not." If they fail to publish such a statement or to email me promising never to publish sexist assertions of biological determinism again, I'm not going to continue reading their RSS feed.

The link to the interview is on the front page of Altnet. And the two articles you've listed are exerpts.

If he'd just think about it a little harder, he's got all the answers right in front of him in his essay for why she's probably so angry!

His schema looks like this: biological justification ----> female emotional responses to lot in life.

When really, it's more like: male dominance ----> female lot in life ---> emotional response ----> justified w/biological essentialism.

One thing to note is that these aren't articles, but both essays from a book where ordinary people discuss their feelings, and should be seen as such. I don't know if you've noticed this, but there's an interview with the editors of the two books posted too, and it's quite good and shows how the essays should really be viewed.

Anyways, I hope I'm not annoying you by my repeated comments... I just have too much free time tonight :) I also enjoyed reading these articles, and just diagree that they are in support of "Sexist Biological Essentialism"

People have to be able to leave disagreeing comments in order for the issues to be explored properly. That's what the comment function is for, so don't worry about it.

*spits* what a misogynist, sexist, hypocritical, irrational, conceited, egotistical, vain, whiny, self-contradictory windbag. i'm sure the alternet editors published his blathering, reactionary, insulting, offensive male-apologism for the benefit of poor liberal men everywhere, long oppressed by their wives not "bucking up" for them and accepting their biology as a legitimate excuse for second-class status.

Thank you, Mikie. I knew you'd come through for me on this one. :)

i think this article is just another example of how women complain too much.

:p just kidding, really.

i don't like biological explainations for behavior, like being gay because of the gay gene or being "whiney" because you're a woman. maybe there is some biological factor, but there are also biological factors for being big and strong, but nobody dismisses big strong men for being big and strong. big strong men are rewarded in soceity, almost across the board. if women are whiney and weak genetically, so we just dismiss that, then we too should dismiss the achievements of big strong men, because they didn't earn it.

it's ridiculous, though, because if you just blame it all on biology, then nobody is responsible for their actions. whiney people, man woman or otherwise, should have to deal with the fact that they are whiney. their partner(s)/spouse(s)/etc should have to deal with it too.

i mean, i'm not going to debate the merits of biology and evolution vs social molding and so forth. i don't really know. but either way, it's a ridiculous notion to just say "my wife complains too much, but it's just because of her chromosomes." i mean, there are better ways to foster understanding and sympathy in a relationship than dismissing conflict as a product of biological factors.

that's just my take though.

Right on.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Sexist Biological Essentialism on AlterNet

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject