The Heretic and the Inquisitor

Today's Object of Ridicule and Scorn (and it's always a hard-fought battle on Sundays) is Jessica Valenti, whose opinion piece ran today in the Washington Post.

I’ve always been amazed at how liberals have been able to sell the march towards massive government control with the rhetoric of liberty. Normally I’d be impressed, but Jessica Valenti is a leading intellectual within the feminist movement, and she isn’t even close to compelling here.

In a country where women are in many positions of authority across both the public and private spheres and a basic cable package boasts no fewer than three channels programmed explicitly for women, the relevance of the march of feminism is severely limited. So Valenti and her ilk are relegated to peddling the politics of division. Much like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton act as poverty pimps for the black community, Valenti aspires to act as a discrimination pimp for women. Sarah Palin is dangerous because she is a model of astronomical female success built outside of the feminist framework of support.

Valenti leans heavily—though unintentionally—on the motif of the Church of Feminism, drawing a sharp line between “us” and “them.” Valenti casts herself as inquisitor. Feminist leaders like Gloria Steinem are like a council of elders. Sarah Palin is the heretic who has turned from the good word. Even the language of “the movement” is sacrosanct. The dogma is not open for adaptation or interpretation—only the elders can be entrusted with that responsibility.


Also notice what Valenti defines as the objects of feminist ire: abortion and the salary gap. She doesn’t mention a single other issue.

THE FAKE FEMINISM OF SARAH PALIN by Jessica Valenti 

In a widely noted speech this month to the Susan B. Anthony List, an anti-abortion-rights group, 

Also a feminist group insofar as they exclusively fund women who are running for Congress.

Palin invoked the words "feminism" and "feminist" no less than a dozen times. She called for a "pro-woman sisterhood" and addressed the "sisters" in the audience. 

Valenti just figured out how to use the find/replace function in Microsoft Word.

If it weren't for the regular references to gun rights, 

There’s nothing more empowering than a slug leaving the muzzle at over a thousand feet per second.

you might have thought you were listening to Gloria Steinem. 

Nah. Palin doesn’t advocate forced castration.

If this rhetoric seems uncharacteristic of the former governor of Alaska, 

It doesn’t.

that's because it is. 

What about that “what’s the difference between a hockey mom and a Pit Bull” thing?

When running for vice president in 2008, 

Oh, you remember the Pit Bull thing.

Palin flip-flopped on the feminist question, telling CBS's Katie Couric  that she is one, but later telling NBC's Brian Williams, "I'm not going to label myself anything." 

All of which means…precisely nothing. In the context of a political campaign, Palin was backtracking from Valenti’s style of femi-crazy. I would too.

Today, however, Palin is happily adopting the feminist label. 

More accurately, she is adapting the feminist label. Isn’t that the type of empowerment that Women’s Rights activists dream of?

She's throwing support behind "mama grizzly" candidates, describing the large number of women in the "tea party" 

This is a massive political force that’s been around for over a year. It’s time to drop the quotation marks.

as evidence of a "mom awakening"

Isn’t it?

and preaching girl power 

Jesus. She’s not a Powerpuff Girl.

on her Facebook page. 

Facebook: yet another tool of patriarchal oppression.

It's not a realization of the importance of women's rights that's inspired the change. 

She’s an unbeliever!

It's strategy. 

She’s speaking to a fund that exclusively finances pro-life women in Congress. Of course it’s a strategy. What’s got Valenti’s panties in a bunch is that it’s a good strategy.

Palin's sisterly speechifying is part of a larger conservative move to woo women 

Dastardly!

by appropriating feminist language. 

Words conservatives shouldn’t be allowed to steal: feminist, sister, empower, sexist, glass ceiling, oppression, suffrage, flapjack, and flacid.

Just as consumer culture tries to sell "Girls Gone Wild"-style sexism as "empowerment," 

“Consumer culture” doesn’t try to sell Girls Gone Wild at all. The producers of Girls Gone Wild try to sell Girls Gone Wild as a collection of some pretty nice breasts.

conservatives are trying to sell anti-women policies shrouded in pro-women rhetoric. 

Valenti to conservative women: Shut up! Get in line with the feminist establishment!

Several years ago, when antiabortion protesters realized that screaming "Murderer!" at women wasn't winning hearts and minds, they launched more palatable campaigns claiming that abortion hurts women -- their new protest signs read "Women Deserve Better." 

Kind of like how feminists stopped screaming “men are evil” and started producing episodes of Sex and the City?

(Not surprisingly, this message is much more effective than spitting invective at emotionally vulnerable women.) 

Most effective tactic around emotionally vulnerable women: pick-up lines.

When members of the conservative Independent Women's Forum argue against efforts to address pay inequity, they say the salary gap is a result of women's informed choices -- motherhood, for example 

That, along with a reluctance among women to actively negotiate salaries is almost exclusively responsible for the salary gap. I don’t see a need to upend capitalism just to de-bunch Valenti’s panties.

-- and that claims of discrimination turn women into victims. 

It does. Valenti is claiming to be a victim of both the patriarchal military-industrial complex and the gender-traitor Palin.

Conservatives have realized that women respond to seemingly feminist arguments. 

Conservatives have realized that everyone responds to the language of liberty and empowerment. Feminism is precisely the opposite.

But, of course, Palin isn't a feminist -- not in the slightest. 

Shun the idolater! Rebuke the iconoclast! Burn the heretic!

What she calls "the emerging conservative feminist identity" isn't the product of a political movement or a fight for social justice. 

Of course the emerging conservative feminist identity isn’t the result of a fight for social justice. The concept of Social justice has been twisted into liberalese for an excuse to tinker with freedoms.

It isn't a structural analysis 

An “emerging conservative feminist identity” can’t be a structural analysis. Analysis is not identity.

of patriarchal norms, power dynamics or systemic inequities. 

Behold: the dogmas of feminism.

It's an empty rallying call to other women who are as disdainful of or apathetic to women's rights as Palin herself: 

The heretic is preaching a false gospel!

women who want to make abortion and emergency contraception illegal 

For it is foretold that after the tribulations of a less civilized era of heretics, a hero shall rise. She shall make the legislative restrictions on partial birth abortions recede and usher in an era of unprecedented sexual liberty for the movement’s chosen few. After a millennium of Her enlightened rule, she and her faithful shall ascend to sit at the right hand of the Mother.

and who fight same-sex marriage rights. 

What on earth does gay marriage have to do with feminism or women's rights?

As Kate Harding wrote on Jezebel.com:  "What comes next? 'Phyllis Schlafly feminism?' 

Phyllis Schlafly is the original heretic. Feminists like Valenti regard her with the reverent fear that National League pitchers used to have for Barry Bonds. (Or, for those of you who aren't hardwired for sports metaphors, the wide-eyed awe American Idol contestants have for Simon Cowell.)

'Patriarchal feminism?' 

That doesn’t make any sense.

'He-Man Woman Hater Feminism?' " 

Just throw some random sexist words in front of feminism and call it an ironic argument.

Given that so-called conservative feminists don't support women's rights, how can they paint their movement as pro-woman? 

As Ayn Rand—who by rights should be the most revered author in the feminist tradition--said, “The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”

Why are they not being laughed out of the room? 

Palin is embraced because she recognizes the feminist agenda as one of positive liberties requiring the imposition of restrictions and regulations upon others. As such, feminism is hostile to the fights for freedom as it was defined by our founding fathers. Yes. Fathers.

Easy: They preempt criticism of their lack of bona fides 

Infidels!

by aligning themselves with a history that most women are proud of -- the fight for suffrage. 

Heretics!

They claim they're the real feminists, 

Idolaters!

as Palin did in her speech lauding the Susan B. Anthony List for "returning the women's movement back to its original roots." (She wasn't talking about voting rights; she was referring to the debated notion that first-wave feminists were antiabortion.) 

True-ish. She was more talking about reviving a version of feminism that didn’t require women to be hostile to men. She envisioned a movement that acknowledges the liberation of maternity and the revered role of mothers in the American family. All of this is encapsulated by the idea that women like Valenti, who coddle the delusion that the world revolves around their vaginas, are not the guardians of the tradition of women’s liberty. Women like Palin—who view their femininity as a complement to masculinity (and vice-versa), who cherish their identities as caring mothers, and who refuse to blame the challenges they face on a shadowy, nebulous patriarchy—are the rightful custodians of the tradition of women’s empowerment.

It may seem odd to argue that for women to make progress, they should ground their movement in the past -- but it's appropriate, given the beliefs of conservative "feminists." 

False prophets!

They don't want to move forward; instead they knock 1960s-era feminism as hooey while claiming to support equality. 

This is largely because 1960’s-era feminism didn’t support equality. It supported female empowerment, often at the expense of male empowerment. For women who don’t hate or resent men, this type of ideology is repugnant.

In her book "Going Rogue," for example, Palin writes that she doesn't agree with "the radical mantras of that early feminist era, but reasoned arguments for equal opportunity definitely resonated with me." 

That sounds like a perfectly well-reasoned position.

Of course, by dismissing the past 40 years of feminism, women such as Palin disparage the very movement that made it possible for them to be public figures. 

The Nineteenth Amendment was ratified in 1920. Female empowerment was vastly furthered in the 1940’s during the war movement. The modern feminist movement isn’t nearly as responsible for female empowerment as they claim.

After all, would Palin be addressing tea party rallies if Betty Friedan had never talked about the "problem that has no name?" 

Probably.

By tying their "feminism" to the suffragists, whose goal was realized nearly 100 years ago, they're not-so-subtly saying that women in America have achieved equality. 

Uh…Exactly.

In fact, they don't believe that systemic sexism exists. The conservative writer Christina Hoff Sommers,  for example, says that women aren't oppressed and that "it is no longer reasonable to say that as a group, women are worse off than men." 

Uh….Exactly.

If you believe women have made it, you're not going to fight very hard on their behalf. 

Does that mean that if you’re entire career is made out of fighting on women’s behalf, you’re not very likely to accede that they’ve “made it?”

But it's difficult to rally women's support behind a message of inaction, so Palin is doing her best to frame this nonmovement as proactive and, of course, "empowering." 

Apostate!

"More young women agree with these feminist foremothers [on abortion] than ever before," Palin said in her Susan B. Anthony List speech. "And believe in that culture of life, empowering women by offering them a real choice." (Exactly what said choice would be once abortion is illegal went unmentioned.) 

Roe v. Wade specifically bars states from making abortion illegal. Overturning Roe would allow states to decide. Abortion would then become a legislative issue that voters could choose every election cycle. For someone so mired in the abortion argument, that seems like an awfully important distinction to gloss over.

A related strategy for Palin and fellow conservatives is to paint actual feminists 

True believers.

as condescending hypocrites who simply don't believe in young women: 

They aren’t?

"[They] send this message, that 'Nope, you're not capable of doing both. You can't give your child life and still pursue career and education. You're not strong enough; you're not capable.' So it's very hypocritical," she told the anti-abortion-rights crowd. Palin's "pro-woman sisterhood," however, "is telling these young women that they're strong enough and smart enough, they are capable to be able to handle an unintended pregnancy and still be able to . . . handle that [and] give that child life." 

Wow. Right on. I like this new conservative feminism.

(Unless of course, these young women were unlucky enough to live in Alaska when then-Gov. Palin cut funding for an Anchorage shelter for teenage moms.) 

This is absolutely hilarious. Valenti uses parentheses because she’s taking a swipe at Palin’s coarse, heartless style of unsympathetic governance, completely missing the point of Palin’s argument. Clearly Valenti doesn’t believe that women are strong, smart, and capable enough to care for unwanted children without the funding of the state. Female empowerment is not the same thing as siphoning money from the state. It’s forging your own way. Sometimes the situation requires that women are strong enough to do so with baby in tow.

So Palin's "feminism" isn't just co-opting the language of the feminist movement, 

Blasphemer!

it's deliberately misrepresenting real feminism 

Heretic!

to distract from the fact that she supports policies that limit women's rights. 

Rights to do what? By supporting the repeal of Roe v. Wade, conservatives support a woman’s right to elect a legislature that is empowered to represent her beliefs on abortion. By cutting funding from shelters, conservatives support a woman’s rights to determine efficient uses of her money through less taxation and more emphasis on charitable giving.

Of course, deciding who gets to call themselves feminists is a tricky business. Even some people who seem to generally disagree with Palin have found it difficult to bar her from the feminist ranks. 

These are women who are foolish enough to still view feminism as a political movement instead of a religion.

Cleveland Plain Dealer columnist Connie Schultz wrote that she won't "quibble with her" over the label, and Meghan Daum said in the Los Angeles Times that if Palin "has the guts to call herself a feminist, then she's entitled to be accepted as one." 

Right on.

Now, there's no grand arbiter of the label, 

But I bet Valenti’s going to inject herself in there as some sort of arbiter.

and the tremendous range of thought in the movement means there isn't a singular platform one can look to as a reference point. 

Are you kidding? This entire article has been about abortion.

And the sad reality is that there are plenty of self-identified liberal 

This is the first time Valenti uses the word liberal in this column…interesting.

feminists who exhibit not-so-egalitarian ideals, such as racism or homophobia. 

This is what's known as the “pre-emptive self-immolation” school of diplomacy, exhibited beatifully by Michael Posner.

So is it possible to exclude women such as Palin from feminism if we don't have a conclusive definition? 

I’m going to go out on a limb and say that Valenti thinks it is.

Absolutely. 

I love being right.

If anyone -- even someone who actively fights against women's rights -- can call herself a feminist, the word and the movement lose all meaning. 

Set-ups like this are just too easy. I almost feel guilty saying that the feminist movement has already lost all meaning.

And while part of the power of feminism is its intellectual diversity, certain things are inarguable. 

Excellent. Here we are, about five pages in, and finally we get a manifesto!

Feminism is a social justice movement with values and goals that benefit women. 

It’s interesting that need for a benefit to women is established before the source of the alleged inequity.

It's a structural analysis 

I’m starting to wonder if Valenti excretes waste entirely in the form pseudo-intellectual jargon.

of a world that oppresses women, an ideology based on the notion that patriarchy exists and that it needs to end. 

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I was under the impression that female empowerment meant not adopting the mantle of victimhood.

What Palin is peddling isn't feminism – 

A semicolon would be more appropriate here.

it's a manipulated buzzword 

Feminism is a buzzword?

being used to garner support for a party that time and time again votes against women's rights. 

And there it is. Republicanism is incongruent with feminism. If “part of the power of feminism is its intellectual diversity” then isn’t Valenti, the dogmatic arbiter of real feminism, destructive to the power of the movement?

Palin isn't trying to further a movement for justice or equality; 

Separate sentences whould be more appropriate than a semicolon here.

she's shilling for women's votes -- a "stampede of pink elephants," she says -- for the midterm elections. 

And it's working. 

Hence, the panty-bunching.

The conservative "sisterhood" responded passionately to Palin's call. Blogger Lori Ziganto swooned 

Hey, I’m all for the woman-on-woman swooning.

over Palin and the other "true feminist" candidates she's supporting. "They are the new faces of feminism," she wrote. And Kathryn Jean Lopez at the National Review criticized those who would doubt Palin's feminist credentials. 

But feminists -- or anyone who cares about women's progress -- need to stop Palin 

Take a look at this sentence for a moment. This is a noted feminist leader advocating an attack against the freedom of speech of a probably the most politically powerful woman in the country based exclusively on the evidence that Palin is pro-choice.

from turning feminism into yet another empty slogan. Because "sisterhood" and meaningless rallying cries aside, American women need real feminism 

I suspect that, given her career choice, Valenti needs “real feminism” to be relevant a lot more than American women need Valenti’s feminism in their lives.

in their lives, not just the f-bomb. 

Either Valenti actually wants feminism to be profane, or she simply wants the word to have the rhetorical impact of profanity. Either idea is absurd. Palin and the other heretics are right. Women do have rights equivalent and, in many cases superior to men (check out the odds of paternal custody in divorce court if you doubt me). The fight is over. A great “patriarchy” doesn’t exist. Feminism today is a desperate gasp for the attention that comes with relevance.