Skip to main content

View Diary: Bachmann delivers with insane rantings against women's history museum (188 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  "women's" anything = feminism = liberalism (9+ / 0-)

    Few people would object to a dignified display of American women's accomplishments and strength in the face of adversity, but folks like Bachmann think that's not what's going to get built.

    Instead, they think it'll be like a caricature of a Holocaust museum: not about what women have done but rather all about what has been done to women.  Then there will be the non-exhibit spaces where feminists will allegedly meet to reaffirm their eternal victimhood and plot to remake America and the world in their angry and confused image.

    Domestic politics is the continuation of civil war by other means.

    by Visceral on Thu May 08, 2014 at 10:12:10 AM PDT

    •  Any museum of victimhood will find many enthu- (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      siastic supporters here, I'm afraid.

      •  All things considered.... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FogCityJohn, Greenfinches, cai

        ....victimhood will be rather a difficult topic to avoid, don'cha think?

        This is the landscape that we understand, -
        And till the principle of things takes root,
        How shall examples move us from our calm?

        (Mary Oliver, "Beyond the Snow Belt.")

        by sagesource on Thu May 08, 2014 at 11:11:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  liberalism is premised upon victimhood (0+ / 0-)

        Our entire purpose is to advocate for the weak, the deprived, the despised, etc. and promote their interests against the inertia of power.

        However, I could argue that there's a subtle but profound difference between a victim narrative that assumes progress out of victimhood ... versus a victim narrative that paradoxically denies the agency of the victim, admits no possibility except that of victimhood, and in impotent rage eventually prolapses itself to become all about the victimizer.  You see it with minority narratives where the only actor on the stage seems to be white people, who are held both solely responsible for everything bad that happens and solely responsible for fixing it.

        Hence the distinction between a women's history museum that is truly about women as philosophical agents and their history of agency - the exercise of their physical and mental faculties and yes, the good and bad consequences of it ... versus a women's history museum that operates in an ironically objectifying frame where women are always and everywhere helpless victims of men's lust and hatred.  Such a museum would fail at its stated mission by leaving women both unexamined and uncelebrated.

        Domestic politics is the continuation of civil war by other means.

        by Visceral on Thu May 08, 2014 at 11:18:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You do understand ... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          that if we are ever going to "fix" racism, it will be done because white people finally decide to change, right?

          So yes, in a very real sense, white people are solely responsible for fixing racism because we're the ones who have the problem.  African-Americans and other nonwhites can talk to us until they're blue in the face, but until we decide to change, racism will continue to be a problem.  That's a necessary consequence of the power relationships that exist between the races in this country.

          "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

          by FogCityJohn on Thu May 08, 2014 at 12:18:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And then those who hate whites can work on their (0+ / 0-)

            own racism. It's not a whites-only phenomenon.

            •  Yes, we poor white people. (0+ / 0-)

              We're so oppressed, aren't we?

              Maybe this is what Kipling meant by the white man's burden.

              "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

              by FogCityJohn on Thu May 08, 2014 at 11:05:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You won't even admit that racism exists against (0+ / 0-)

                whites. There are no non-whites out there saying "Those white folks are all the same," eh? There was some black alderman in Chicago when I was growing up who hated whites like death. Can't recall his name, but he made no bones about his feelings.

                •  Sigh. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  Why do you insist on comparing apples and oranges?  Even if we assume that there are people of color who think all white folks are the same, that does nothing to change the power relationships among races in this country.  Simply put, white people have an almost complete monopoly on power.  Because of this, white racism has consequences that racism among nonwhites does not.  

                  Systemic racism is what helps maintain those power relationships.  White people enjoy a relative advantage in all aspects of American life, whether it's education, employment, or access to housing, credit, and services.  And white people would enjoy those advantages even if people of color actually did despise us in the way you imagine, since nonwhites simply lack the clout to do much of anything about it.

                  "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

                  by FogCityJohn on Fri May 09, 2014 at 10:45:03 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  where whites came from : (0+ / 0-)

            There is a very interesting theory that "whiteness" came from the condition of albinism - which is fine with me (I am white) - theory goes that humans were originally black/brown and then albinos (present in all societies) got thrown out (they were) and moved away and then founded their own little societies - this makes so much sense to me since it explains much more simply how this split of the 'races' could have happened. BUT even more convenient is that all of you out there who think you are 'special' because you are 'white' - you could actually be just a bunch of albinos who were evicted from your tribes !
            Hah - I love this theory. Maybe that lack of melanin wasn't the great 'specialness' that the white race likes to think of itself ??  Don't know how the concept stacks up genetically, I would love to see the evidence.

        •  I don't even know how to respond to that. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          raincrow, kfunk937, Yonit

          I would say that advocating for the weak is premised on a civil society that cares for people who fall on hard times.

          A party premised on victimhood would be the ones that constantly compare having to pay taxes or allow poor people affordable healthcare to slavery or the Holocaust, since we are talking professional victims and all.

          "It were a thousand times better for the land if all Witches, but especially the blessing Witch, might suffer death." qtd by Ehrenreich & English. For Her Own Good, Two Centuries of Expert's Advice to Women pp 40

          by GreenMother on Thu May 08, 2014 at 04:10:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  where women will meet (0+ / 0-)

      To learn that that if all that is available is a gay man, maybe they can just go without or wonder why they are attracted to gay man, maybe because a gay women would be a better choice?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site