Gender studies in the Guardian (be careful, the comments may anger you)

[NessCathy]

There's an interesting article in the Guardian talking about Gender Studies. What's sad, but interesting, are the comments

here

[KRICRI]

I only had the briefest of peeks last night Ness Cathy. I've come to expect very few enlightened comments on the Guardian CIF site when it comes to an article about gender. It's as bad, if not worse than comments on the Daily Mail site (except that some of the worst sometimes get deleted on CIF.)

I think there alot of people who target CIF specifically to make provocative comments about all sorts of things - you know, the short, hairy Norwegian types with tails. But, I've also been deeply disappointed to see contributors that I rate for their views on most other issues come out with some of the most ghastly, unreconstructed codswollop when it comes to articles about gender.

[LRDTheFeministDragon]

Good article, though. I was just coming to link to it!

[aliceliddell]

KRICRI this is very often the weak spot for the left; men seem genuinely affronted to be told that they 1, do not understand the problem of sexism, and even worse, are actually part of that problem themselves. In fairness, they are just as crap on disability. For example, all lefties add on the equal opps statement, but then book meetings in rooms accessible only by stairs and see no contradiction. Roll on the revolution.

[aliceliddell]

The CiF pages are a joy. Truly, a joy.

[joaninha]

The comments are depressing. I feel like everything's going backwards.

[BirdOfPassage]

Everything going backwards along with Nadine Dorries' bandwagon. Heard it described as 'Dorries Day' on Radio4 today, though, which was at least a laugh.

[KRICRI]

Alice - you are so right. It seems bizarre that the same people who will call out other forms of oppression at 100 paces seem to be oblivious to the very same tactics and mechanisms of oppression in a gender context. In fact, they will even trot out the same justifications for sexism that they would blast if suggested by someone else in the contest of say heterosexism or class bias.

I have a little theory that perhaps the political is a little too personal for many left of centre men (and women.) It's relatively easy to call out injustice when you can put lots of fresh air between yourself and whoever it is you see doing the oppression. But, they eschew the idea that they themselves could be at the very least colluding with if not actively perpetuating oppression of women because well, they often share their lives with them.

So, they will go through all sorts of contortions to either a.) minimise the impact of gender oppression on women, to show it's not that big a deal, it doesn't effect all women, it's not done by "good men" like them, or that popular line now, that women make different "choices" so it's not really oppression, or b.) flatly deny that gender oppression exists, often drawing on the most far out logic, dodgy evidence and anecdotes to prove that it's a figment of women's imaginations.

Oh, and there's the old, "what about the menz?" curveball they sometimes through, which is a bit minimising (well, it affects men, too, so that negates whatever impact there is on women,) and a bit denial (well, it's actually worse for men, so no big deal for women.)

[Greythorne]

Sorry, please can someone explain to me why the CiF comments are so consistently misogynistic? The Graun is a lefty paper so presumably appeals to lefties.
Do MRAs frequent CiF just for fun?
I don't get it.

I have read about the Daily Mail baiting liberals just to get more click throughs.
But what's the point from the Graun's perspective of having these offensive comments?

[Greythorne]

Here's the blog about liberal baiting on the DM online:
themediablog.typepad.com/the-media-blog/2010/09/daily-mail-ipad-facebook-1843120910.html

[claig]

I think that blogger has got it wrong. The blogger is trying to understand the success of the Daily Mail and has concluded that it is partly due to baiting liberals. That is a wrong analysis. The Daily Mail's success is due to the fact that it tells the truth, which has the side effect of baiting liberals.

[KRICRI]

The Daily Mail's success is due to the fact that it tells the truth, which has the side effect of baiting liberals.

(Checks calendar, no, it's not April Fools Day. )

[GothAnneGeddes]

900+ comments, which I daren't read. It is the vitriol they use to tear down 'uppity women', while at the same time saying that nice, normal women are all happily, prettily post feminist.

[Beachcomber]

I had a similar reaction to dittany.

Which basically went "gender studies, what the fuck are gender studies when they are at home?".

And then the man came on to tell us that that was what we call women's studies now.

I also have my patriarchal bullshit detector bleeping at 'holistic' when applied to this. In fact I think I'm going to have to start using it sarcastically;

what about the menz a holistic approach to this?

[Devlin11]

A definition of what masculinity SHOULD be would help....at least for those men who cared enough to even listen.

[SnapesMistress]

claig

Are you unaware of the many many glaring inaccuracies in the Mail? The ignorance and rumour-mongering of its columnists? The racist and sexist editorial stance?