01.14.08

Sicko and the Guerilla Girls

Posted in U.S. politics, social justice at 3:40 am by lindabeth

I ran across this Guerilla Girls poster, and I was reminded how the social welfare policies in the U.S. run counter to our rhetoric regarding POW’s/”enemy combatants”…we defend ourselves as humane because we “take good care of” our “foreign” prisoners, providing them with food, shelter, and health care (as is so poignantly addressed in Michael Moore’s recent Sicko), but how humane can we really be when we don’t extend those same provisions to our own citizens? Some thoughts…


image credit: Guerilla Girls

From the post title you may think this is going to be a rant on advocating “national” or “government-run” heathcare for the U.S.: it’s not. Discussions about private vs. government care tend to frustrate me to no end because arguments are often caught up in the specifics. I am not by any means an expert in Health Management. What I am interested in is social justice. And one scene from Sicko (below) and the Guerilla Girls poster I recently saw (above) both discuss social issues in terms of social justice, not policy specifics. Propose a policy, and I’ll form an opinion on it and ask for yours. But please, don’t make arguments “for” or “against” specifics of non-existent policies when we need to come to an understand about the concept at hand.

Namely, there is a problem in the U.S. with:

a) the incredible number of uninsured (and mostly middle-class!) people;

b) the denial of health services in order to maximize profit;

c) U.S. officials are quick to defend the treatment of prisoners, etc. (and rightly so, with all the scandal over torture and unjust treatment-they outta be defensive right about now!), yet what does it mean when the treatment they claim they are not giving to prisoners is what we inflict on our own citizens in the name of “free enterprise”!

What does it mean when we give more rights to “life” to criminals than we do our citizens? Whether we’re talking about health care, food, or shelter…

So, I don’t know if we should have “government-run” health care. But I’ll say this: health care, in the U.S., as a for-profit system, has screwed the American public royally to the benefit of shareholders and campaign warchests-typically wealthier people who couldn’t give more of a damn. Heath care should be a right of citizenship-not of employment, not of class, and not of marriage.

And we need to start talking to each other in this fashion when we talk about social welfare of any kind-not in terms of how it’s abused and therefore inherently a bad idea. We need to start agreeing on the problems, and committing to their solutions, instead of denying the problems based on inadequate solutions.

(shameless plug for Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Democratic nominee hopeful who advocates universal health care. Oh, and did I mention he doesn’t accept lobbyists’ money?)

OK, so check this trailer from Michael Moore’s Sicko, since I couldn’t get the movie clip to work (the scene that was so moving for me was the one where he determined that the only place in America where you are guaranteed quality health care is….Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and took the 9/11 volunteers who weren’t getting their medical needs me to Guantanamo Bay, to ask for the same care the “terrorist” detainees were getting. Made. me. cry.)

01.12.08

the problem with ‘pussy’

Posted in gender stereotypes, ideology, language politics at 1:25 am by lindabeth

I am particularly troubled by the word “pussy” being used as an insult where I find other terms for (female and male) genitalia used as insults as less problematic. The difference, as I see it, is in the particularly gendered meaning of “pussy”; it is an insult because of its explicit (negative) link to femininity by the definitions of both slang usages (vagina, and also weak, wimpy, etc.) . The denigration of the female is what makes it insulting, and I don’t find this to be the case with other genital-based insults.

my first blog post is dedicated to patty:

Consider: scene from South Park, “Fun with Veal”

Doctor: He’s very luck you got him here when you did. He was in a very advanced state of vaginitis.

Randy: Vaginitis?

Doctor: It occurs when a person stops eating meat. Those sores on his skin were actually small vaginas. If we hadn’t stopped it in time, Stan would have eventually just become one great big giant pussy. [ed: become attached to a cause for injustice, have compassion for the oppressed, and turn into an emotional wimp]

Stan: Well, I guess we learned something today: it’s wrong to eat veal because the animals are so horribly mistreated, but if you don’t eat meat at all you break out in vaginas.

[I also can't help but see a-perhaps unintentional-insinuation toward 'meat' as penis-in not eating meat, Stan was acquiescing his masculinity by disposessing himself of meat-the penis, the symbol of male power . As in, cease to be/have a man (read: be a non-heteronormative man or a lesbian), and you become like a woman-a pussy-which clearly isn't a good thing. Also, as in: "don't be a pussy, grow some balls."]

Keep this scene in the back of your mind as you read.

I am prompted to write this posting from recent conversations with people about the politics of words, and more specifically, slang (for more on this topic, look for my future posting about the “naggers” South Park episode). I am writing specifically on my distaste for the word “pussy” in it’s secondary slang sense (as an insult meaning weak, wimpy, or to define slang with slang, without “balls,” it’s first slang definition being vagina). Further, I want to explain how I see this particular word functioning differently than other derogatory terms for sex organs, male or female.

First, what does “pussy” mean? Weak, wimpy, passive, gutless, spineless, able to be “fucked over”, one who just “takes it”; it tends to be used when someone is seen as “overly” (whatever that means!) sensitive or emotional or caring, or is unable to “handle it”-stress, pressure, etc. Do we see a pattern? Yes!-these are all traits that are traditionally associated with women. When has pussy traditionally been used? As an insult to men-not that unlike “stop acting like a girl.” However, as feminism has pushed society into recognizing that, hello!, these are not traits of women by nature, Western culture still recognized these traits as feminine even if they no longer are necessarily considered traits of females. And subsequently, “pussy” as an insult is now directed at women as well. To have called a woman a pussy in earlier times would have been redundant.

Why is “pussy” as an insult offensive? Well, I think that is self-evident: using a part of the female anatomy as an insult for someone is degrading, especially when said anatomy has been thoroughly denigrated by Western cultural ideology as ugly, unclean, smelly, who in its adult form is deficient and whose role in sexual practice is considered to be passive and secondary. I am not saying this is what everyone thinks as individuals, but this is our ideology-our system of cultural values that reinforces existing ways of thinking and presents them as natural-”the way things are.” Not only is “pussy” an actual insult, but we find actual pussies (meaning, vaginas) to be plain icky and in need of physical and chemical alteration.

So what do I think of other anatomical terms used as insults-dick? cock? and the motherload-cunt? The bottom line for me is that I typically don’t use any of these terms as insults. One exception I can think of is a strategic/political one: I will sometimes call a sexist man a “dick.” I use it rhetorically because of the phallocentric nature of sexism, where power comes by (seeming to) possess the phallus, which is not literally the penis, but rather is symbolized by the penis. Thus, I may refer to a misogynist, phallocentric, sexist man as a “dick.” In that way, I’m being ironic. But I digress…

While I choose to not use the body’s sexuality as an insult to anyone, I still maintain a qualitative difference between how pussy vs. cock, dick, and yes, even cunt, function. Sure, they are all negative, insulting slang terms. Dick means something like jerk, and cock usually indicates an excess of assertion, aggression, self-centeredness; I think of them in similar meaning and usage to the term “bitch,” which also makes a reference to gender (a female dog), and is usually the word of choice when referring to women (it seems odd to me to think of a woman being called a “dick”). And I can’t think of a definition of the word cunt, but to me, that is the worst possible insult you can give a person. And while I am less than thrilled that a term for vagina is also the ultimate insult, it and the male terms do not trouble me like pussy does.

Why is that? Do I have a double standard? Not really. I do not see the insulting quality of dick, cock, or cunt to be in their negative reference to said gender. Is cock an insult because its meaning is linked to the derogation of it’s referent-the penis, or being male? How about for dick? And I’m unsure abot cunt, but for right now I’ll err on the side of saying no, it doesn’t either. The very thing that makes pussy an insult is its explicit link to femininity. It is insulting because it ‘feminizes’ its recipient, and being feminized is a bad thing because being female and traits associated with femininity are bad! negative! insulting! And not just for men, as an affront to their masculinity, like it used to be (think: army trainees). Under liberal feminism, women have gained equal rights and respect in that women are seen to be able to behave “like men,” rejecting those oh-so-terrible traits simultaneously produced and denigrated by Western culture as “feminine”. So, now the pussy insult for women too, whose excessive display of certain “female” traits is seen as a bad thing (unless, of course, “excessive femininity” involves sexual exhibitionism). The insulting term loses its force if it changes to something other than pussy; it has particular meaning only because of the affiliation between women, and-quite literally-their vaginas, and what pussy as an insult is meant to convey. And that simply is not the case for dick, cock, and cunt. Pussy is an insult because of its gender connotation, the others are in spite of their gender connotation.

Food for thought: what other term might we use in place of pussy to insult someone for weakness/wimpiness? Oh I know, fag! And that’s a related topic for another day…

Oh, and the next time someone calls you a pussy, consider replying:

Wow, thanks! I didn’t realize you thought I was a sensuous, aromatic, pleasurable, warm, delicious, sexy, exciting, sensitive, pleasing, responsive, channel of life?! I appreciate you sharing that with me!

and tell them why using sexist and offensive language makes you an, er, um, dick. :-P

 

UPDATE 2/15/08: from feministing.com:
Time magazine’s Mark Halperin recently said, in an interview for a Sirius satellite radio show,

And I can tell you, [John Edwards is] really skeptical of her ability to be the kind of president he wants. But, he kinda thinks Obama is..he thinks Obama is kind of a pussy. He has real questions about Obama’s toughness, his readiness for the office.

Halperin has since apologized for his oh-so-creative, junior-high-level insult. He really used “pussy” in the classic derogatory sense: men trying to show they’re more masculine by using derogatory feminine terms to describe other men. So it’s offensive not only to women (way to use a term for our anatomy as an insult! awesome!) but also to men (mocking them for not conforming to male stereotypes).
Case in point!