What's worse than a man bitching and moaning about the "objectification of women" blah, blah, blah?
When the person bitching about that is a woman.
Don't get me wrong, I could care less about whether or not women wear make-up, or who's on the cover of Cosmopolitan. But after reading Jenna's post, I was curious as to how exactly she would define "feminist rhetoric." That's a pretty large term, I think, and it covers a lot of ground. In fact, it covers so much ground that I felt compelled to write this post.
I believe that almost any cause can be taken to an extreme that makes it ridiculous (and maybe that's the point she was trying to make). And I do know a fair share of feminists I would classify as absurd, same with pro-lifers. However, I think one should take care when throwing around notions like, "the "objectification of women" blah, blah, blah..."
Have you forgotten our Afghanistan sisters? Our African sisters? The women of Bosnia? How about our Indian sisters who face death for shaming the family? To believe that the state of women in the world is even comparable to the state of women in the US is to be ignorant of the reality. And to count the objectification of women as "feminist rhetoric" is to severely underestimate its power.
It is argued that because of the objectification of women, our sisters in Iran are forced to cover, for example. It is also the reason women around the world are claimed as property. How about the status of Asian female babies? Is that such a trivial notion that it can be laughed off?
I guess my point is, sometimes there's a fine line between sounding like a big, bad Republican and sounding like this guy.