Dahlia, it's nice that you don't feel that you encountered much sexism in your (relatively privileged) life. But you and your fairy godmother miss the point of feminism entirely -- in a way that's quite painful to listen to. True enough, in the 1970s, feminism tended to be about middle-class and affluent white women and the ways they were very severely confined. But the movement did get the message more than twenty years ago that that was a very, very narrow form of feminism indeed -- and yet you still seem to think that's all it's about. The fact that you're comfy doesn't mean we don't still live in a world, and even a nation, where there is a huge amount of sex trafficking (including of very young girls); where rape is still a tactic of war; where women who go into the U.S. military academies (not exactly the whining type) subjected to awful sexual harassment, even rape; where health insurance (including that provided for many federal and state employees) is more likely to cover Viagra than prescription contraceptives (a great way to reduce the number of abortions!); where the infant mortality rate in the U.S. (a good indicator of maternal health) is on a par with that in Cuba; or where the U.S. lags behind Europe on most measures of gender equality. There are, since you didn't seem to notice, many poor girls and women who are not thinking about "glass ceilings" and corporate position. What is just as obtuse (and offensive) about your posts is that you seem to think that a lot of women favor HRC solely because she is a woman, that we are silly little things unlike yourself (who can't seem to see beyond your own tiny little circle). Some women do indeed think that women have accomplished a huge amount in the last 40 years, but because we may be comfortable personally doesn't mean we sign off on other women. HRC is one of the people who helped create those changes and that's one reason that we find it so silly to say she's "the same old thing"and that's one reason we have no interest, unlike you XX kids, in "turning the page" on women's rights. As one woman put it: What incentive does anyone have to give a human rights speech like HRC did in Beijing if there is no constituency that will support women's rights? How will anyone who supports women's rights ever get elected? Finally, I can hardly imagine a worse slap in the face to the women who did the hard labor before you than repudiating it as something we should get beyond. (Does anyone in the African-American community ever talk about getting "beyond" Martin Luther King or Thurgood Marshall ?)

Thank you. Nothing irritates me more than smug, affluent privileged women talking about how feminism is passe and unnecessary. Not only are they wrong, but their idiocies are used to continue the oppression of women who are not privileged as they are.

The women who comprise this round table are an awfully narrow subsection of women and they all are amazingly oblivious of their personal class privilege. Like all privileged people, they also assume that their experience is either universal, or if not universal, then the only meaningful and relevant experience. They dismiss all other women's experiences as ephemera that shouldn't impose on their precious time.

I only continue to read XX factor to remind myself that women don't need men to keep them oppressed, they have plenty of upper-income, well-educated, privileged women who are so much more concerned with being cool than being honest and relevant that they will happily screw over every woman on earth if it gets them a smile from their menfolk

I find it intersting that many of the old school feminists here on the Fray seem to relish talking about how "well, when you're rich like these spoiled pansy XX writers, you may not have to worry about success, but as for the rest of us . . . "

Isn't this a excellent example of how feminism has succeeded? Mysogyny is NOT such a huge problem that women are left unable to advance.

The bigger problem is definately class based. A poor woman is screwed in life, not because she's a woman, but because she's poor. And bitching about the evil patriarchy will not fix it! Telling me how "ungrateful" I am because I don't bow down and worship Stienem and the rest of the hags is not going to win me over.

Note: I have never, NEVER, been discriminated against because I'm a woman. Even when I was in engineering classes outnumber 15-1. I have never heard that I couldn't do something because I was a woman. (except when Dad explained that girls couldn't go topless in the summer. I was 7.)

....Illuminating to see that the Marxist/collectivist soul of feminism is still intact.

Most of Ms Jong's article is merely strident; where it veers into the actively repulsive is the implication that nominating Obama to be the first black president of the US would actually be a sign of social regression, and the bizarre idea that his race protects him from criticism. If Ms Jong had the social conscience you speak of, surely she'd be celebrating the fact that whoever gets the nomination, it's a victory. Instead we get a paranoid farrago of self-pity.

Imagine her piece as written by Farrakhan, with Obama, black, etc swapped out for Clinton, woman, etc. Plus I suppose that castration joke would become an equally charming joke about rape. Ugh.

You give me second class houses
And second class schools
Do you think that alla colored folks
Are just second class fools
Mr. backlash, Im gonna leave you
With the backlash blues

When I try to find a job
To earn a little cash
All you got to offer
Is your mean old white backlash
But the world is big
Big and bright and round
And its full of folks like me
Who are black, yellow, beige and brown
Mr. backlash, Im gonna leave you
With the backlash blues

Cam,

I am split on this issue. I half agree with you and half agree with Dahlia. This isn't really "owning" an opinion but let me explain my retisence.

I'm 23. (I was born in 1984, the first year of generation Y.) I grew up learning about the heroes of the civil rights movement and the heroes of the feminist movement, who were all idolized for their respective bravery and insights. So I can't pretend to understand what the 60s or 70s were like; I'll never have first hand knowledge of how those times felt. I can watch the Mailor video that was mentioned. I can read books or articles. But I've never experienced serious overt sexism--like being passed over for a job, so I can't truly internalize those feelings, although I can do my best to imagine.

Where I agree with Dahlia and others, is my personal negative reaction to some feminist icons' most recent writings. They are so Sharpton-esque that I totally roll my eyes. It makes me sad, because I don't want to devalue the contributions their hard work made to giving me a better life, but it does cause me to question where their minds are at this point.

I agree with you that these women are iconic and deserve respect, but not if they go too far. The problem with prominent figures, especially those who "represent" a group, is that the media portrays their opinions in such a way that it seems as though they speak for every member of that group. And I just don't feel that way. Maybe I am a silly kid who just doesn't understand the pain of the past, but I find some of their language divisive and counter to our mission, which is to see HRC elected as the next President. We can't argue with people into voting for her--and we especially can't guilt women into voting for her.

Perhaps it's lazy to admit, but I haven't devoted amazing amounts of time to analyzing my role as a young woman in this new post-feminist society, but maybe that was the point. Those before me fought so the next generation was on such equal footing that they don't give their differences another thought. That's why I think some of that rhetoric sounds so crazy--not because I want 'turn the page' on womens rights, but because I want to start a whole new chapter.

And while there are many injustices and problems in today's world, it's going to take both genders to solve them--not just one angry one. We all come from mothers, and I think the new equality conversation should begin in the home with children. My mother never uttered the words "you can't do that" to me, and so I went into the world with self-confidence. And you know? The more I believed in myself, the more others, male and female, believed in me too. Today, I work in a male dominated industry in a 95% male office, with coworkers who are twice my age or more. My contributions to the company are recognized and I am given the same professional respect as anyone else. But I've achieve this because I am self assured, educated and willing to call others out when they are wrong. If we teach our girls to respect and value themselves, they will be valued and respected by others--and our goal is achieved without playing the gender card.

Dear ASlyJD,

"Note: I have never, NEVER, been discriminated against because I'm a woman. Even when I was in engineering classes outnumber 15-1. I have never heard that I couldn't do something because I was a woman."

I'm happy for you - but your life experience is not universal -and it certainly wasn't mine.

Your name calling - "Stienem (sic) and the rest of the hags" - doesn't advance your theory of economics as being the only thing holding women back. As you have demonstrated, pseudo-intellectualism, misogyny and the resulting nastiness can be bigger issues.

Winstonsmommy,

Do you know if you were ever passed over for a job because you were a woman? Or because you were winston's mommy? No - you wouldn't have gotten the job and they wouldn't have had to tell you.

Also when your industry is predominantly male, and you are qualified and competent you are more likely to get hired if you have a specialty like engineering wher they can finally get some estrogen in the room because good current management appreciates the benefits ofa diverse workforce. So you're lucky. At one job so was I. But it wasn't all of them, and I clearly remember one management meeting where a woman they wanted to "move up" in the company was going to be sent to "modeling school" so she could learn to present better - they couldn't figure out any other way to help her improve.

So let me explain this once quietly - they don't have to be mean to be sexist, it wasn't suggested to that woman because I was the estrogen in the boardroom, and explained to them that perhaps a professional development course at college might be a better choice.

Also don't be so sure that you're not being discriminated against unless you happen to know your male co-workers take home pay and bonus. Sexisim doesn't have to be intentional and loud to be there, and if it's not your problem great - but other women who are not necessarily poor are having these issues.

Winstonsmommie,

Thanks for sharing your experience without taking an affronted or reactionary tone (a la "hags" references).

I don't quite understand the notion that because one has not experienced or witnessed something, it does not exist (as some European-Americans have argued about discrimination toward ethnic minority groups. Nothing drives discriminated-against [by employers; shop clerks] minorities mroe nuts than this.)

More disturbing, though, is the underlying mindset that unconsciously sorts different experiences into the "Discrimination" and "not discrimination" bins based on a majority-defined view of what discrimination is. (and here, we are referring to "majority" as either numerical or as in the historically dominant power group).

For example, a European-American may view a cutting comment from a store clerk to a Hispanic or Native as an isolated incident based on that clerk's bad temper, whereas a person from one of those minority groups may have a much more intimate, detailed, and observant understanding of the other factors at play e.g. an attuned sense of how (differently) the store clerk treats the European-American customers; knowledge of the specific region or neighborhood, in which racial tensions may have long been at a high; an ear for "code language" or catchphrases through which unwitting racists often (unwittingly) reveal a negative preconception.

So I would hesitate to discount a person's experience simply because it doesn't "seem" like discrimination or bias to me. Discrimination comes in many forms: some good-natured; some happily oblivious; some consciously hidden or discguised; some propogated via a cynical or backwards media and entertainment industry.

I would appreciate someone explaining how a vote for obama constitutes misogyny. I can be active and informed when it comes to issues of women's rights, but according to the pro-hillary voices here, I'm not a feminist.

yes, I'm a woman. but I'm also an intelligent, educated woman who is capable of analyzing candidates based on their positions, past actions, and experience. how is it in any way feminist for me to allow my judgment of the leading dem. candidates to be clouded by the gender of one of them? there's this condescending attitude coming from many older women who support hillary. it conveys that we who support obama are incapable of understanding the suffering of generations of women who came before us and it implies that our ignorance, rather than our intelligence and ability to make reasoned decisions, is what is guiding our political choices. it certainly doesn't incline me towards hillary.

I have yet to hear a feminist argument for how hillary will improve the rights of women in ways that obama won't. the main point seems to be that her election would be "historic" and that she would make a good role model. what can she do for the rights of women, both domestically and abroad, that obama can't? in particular, her take on gay marriage should be immensely troubling to any person who purports to support equal rights for all people.

ASlyJD,

I wonder how long you have been in your profession. In my own case, three or four years out of graduate school in a male-dominated profession (Wall St. trading floor) I would have said what you did...I had never been discriminated against, in school or in hiring. Funny thing happened, though, when I started moving up in the ranks and the corporate pyramid started narrowing; suddenly I was in competition for a limited number of higher level roles, and sudddenly there was a club that I wasn't a member of, the one with balls physically not just figuratively, and not being one of the guys was a huge impediment to further progress. The glass ceiling isn't between the first and second floor, or the second and third, it's at the upper floors and definitely between the next-to-top floor and the penthouse. You may just not be far enough along in your career to have bumped into it, but I assure you it is not completely gone. It's good news that the impediments have moved to higher floors, and the glass is no longer impermeable, but don't kid yourself that it's gone. Sure, there are some women CEO's, board members, etc....but let's look at the percentages, and the fact that women in large numbers have now been in the work force 25+ years. We ain't there.

I don't think Steinem and the rest of the hags want your worship, but I don't really get why you think they deserve your scorn. You owe them a lot and you just display your ignorance when you trash them.

And Marx was largely correct. Much of what we take for granted today in the workplace were the "radical" ideas of the Marxist and Communist party of the 1930s.

Drinne,

I appreciate the point you are trying to make, but I just can't agree with you. Wondering about my male colleague's pay structure and analyzing regular interactions as potentially discriminatory seems like a very paranoid way to go through life.

I can't speak for all women, but I was able to leverage two different job offers to negotiate the best salary for my level of education and experience. And I know I was never passed over for a job, because I've been lucky enough to be offered every major position I went after.

You do ask valid questions, but they hint at a person who is highly skeptical or possibly jaded. You quickly inferred that my handle's namesake, Winston, was a human child. While I do treat him as one, Winston is a Great Dane. And I am very sure I have never had employment conflicts because of a dog.

That is not to say that mothers are not punished in the workforce. I firmly believe that 3 months of fully-paid maternity leave should be mandatory, and I completely support the theories in "The Feminine Mistake". But many of the issues surrounding childcare start in the home with a dedicated and supportive spouse who will equitably contribute to the rearing. It might seem unfair, but biology delegated female mammals to carry and deliver offspring, to which there are variable lists of pros and cons. The children or career issue is not new, but I don't think it's as sexist as it's painted. In traditional family structures with two adults in the home, I think the spouse who forces the other to abandon their ambitions to raise children is more selfish or unfair than society at large. Put into a context of 'If I have children, I can't go out drinking every night like I did in college', the children vs. free time to purse one's goals or whims simply becomes a responsibility issue, not a sexist one.

All I am trying to say is that I believe that women should pick their battles. Freaking out over every little perceived injustice is a waste of our time and talents. It also cheapens our argument when it's time to really take a stand against something more substantive, like the mandatory maternity leave issue, or making birth control more easily accessible.

Thank you, WinstonsMommie for such a reasoned position.

Winstonsmommie,

Thank you for responding, so politely, I am a dog mommie as well although mine is a golden retriever - however I would point out that the issues of salary and promotion were not a paranoid way of looking at life but a fact on the ground for me and others who work with me currently. That does not mean it is universal it just means that it's real and still out there, I'm glad it hasn't happened to you and I don't want it to happen to my daughter and it hasn't happened everywhere I've worked I would say it's probably about 60/40 with 60 being the good side.

But let me just be clear - it's not paranoia if you watch all the women at the company fail to return from maternity leave. Or if you find out you make less than everyone on the floor because they all believed you were making more, and they were trying to hold that against you. Or if you have to remove your employer's hand from pieces of your anatomy and figure out whether to

A. explain to him that he can't behave that way,

B. sue, or

C. shut your recently-divorced-full-time-st­udent-single-mother mouth up and collect the paycheck until you have the next job lined up

That one I'll cop to specifically. I chose a and c and not a darn person in my current career knows about it. I don't dwell on it. It doesn't define my life but it was real. It was within the last half decade and not the distant unenlightend past. To get to this career I was in that circumstance fist. Which is really my point - neither candidate is going to fix the dysfunction that put that man's hand on me in the first place - that was his problem, not the country's or yours. However, we as women need to recognize that it's still happening. It's not mysogynistic to vote for Obama. It's not necessary to minimize real problems in order to vote for him either.

All I'm asking is for women to recognize each woman brings different experiences to the table, and it doesn't make me bitter or jaded just because I experienced them - using those words makes it seem as though there is judgement being passed and the judgement is this:

"My life isn't like that, I don't think it's real - you must be exaggerating, if you say it's real."

You're not dismissing Erica Jong, or Hillary or Steinem - you're dismissing me. The difference is you don't realize it because you think they are writing about the past. I'm sure those women would not have picked C. They cry out on behalf of those women. perhaps too shrilly, and women who feel like it's part of the past silence thos women, perhaps to quickly.

How about a compromise - If it weren't for the feminists I wouldn't have been able to be a single mother with a job where my boss could have the opportunity to put his hands on me, and because of the women of XX factor I have the right to handle it quietly.

If I were jaded I wouldn't believe that your experience, or Dahlia's was true - but I do believe you : )