Comments

1. Redstar wrote:

   Oh, that is delicious…Chuckling…

   What’s perhaps most amusing though is that the male author is in a snit over the shocking notion of Oppression Olympics, dismissively sneers at a popular young feminist as the possible creator of the term, and doesn’t bother to uncover its origin – which from my understanding is with Chicana feminist Elizabeth Martinez.

   Ah, the irony.

   Gotta love my fellow HRC supporters. Oy.

   Posted 28 May 2008 at 7:04 pm ¶

2. Black Canseco wrote:

   i quit. there’s just no talking to/with or having coherent, cogent discussions with some folks.

   let ‘em rant, finger-point, co-opt till the cows come home. i’m through with it.

   Posted 28 May 2008 at 7:50 pm ¶

3. Kelvin wrote:

   “Is there racism in the Democratic party? Seems to me that that is a very minor problem in the Democratic party. You could make a strong argument that current Democrats self-select for the party because of its low racism quotient. ”

   O RLY? I guess I must have missed the memo. I’m not a Democrat but I’m pretty sure the statement I quoted above from that site is BS.

   Posted 28 May 2008 at 8:31 pm ¶

4. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

   Utterly. Ridiculous.

   Posted 28 May 2008 at 10:29 pm ¶

5. Falyne wrote:

   We self-select for the low-er racism quotient, sure, just like the lower sexism quotient. Lower bigotry than the Republican party, however, describes a whoooooooole lot of space that isn’t actually “low”.

   So, yeah, BS on that quote. And I’m surprised anyone who describes as feminist, no matter how white, would even make that argument, given that it’s a pretty blatant fallacy if you take even a moment to think about how, say, the fact that feminists tend to be Democratic doesn’t preclude a lot of liberal dudes from being douchehounds.

   Then again, speaking as a white feminist myself, we don’t always do the best job (yeah, something of an understatement) of extrapolating from the shit we face to empathize with the shit our neighbors face. Sigh…….

   Posted 29 May 2008 at 3:18 am ¶

6. gatamala wrote:

   After reading that post, I’m gonna log off for the day.

   I can’t wait till this mess is over.

   Posted 29 May 2008 at 9:28 am ¶

7. Kai wrote:

   White men who present themselves as being more expert on sexism and racism than women and persons of color….aren’t.

   Posted 29 May 2008 at 10:14 am ¶

8. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

   @ Kai–

   Oh SNAP!

   Posted 29 May 2008 at 11:16 am ¶

9. Persia wrote:

   Ah, thank goodness, a White Man has come from On High to tell us how things really are. Way to let the point fly right over your head.

   Posted 29 May 2008 at 12:03 pm ¶

10. Elizabeth Ann wrote:

    :/ We could be optimistic and hope they were challenging their own paradigms and encouraging their fans to do the same… maybe?

    Posted 29 May 2008 at 2:41 pm ¶

11. Mark wrote:

    Hi All: Sorry my post pushed so many buttons — I mean, it was supposed to push some buttons and be a bit “controversial,” but not to the point of obnoxious or hurtful or condescending… I am not sure where the interpretation of the condescending tone is coming from, except maybe because my tone is a bit angry?

    Elizabeth Ann is, I think, saying why Latoya’s post on re-examining the phrase “Oppression Olympics” was included as a reference point for further reading on the term.

    I included it NOT to justify my feelings about the term and how the term was, I felt (and still feel), being used as a speed bump to discussions of sexism during this campaign cycle.

    In fact, although my site is about declaring my support for Clinton, it is really more about calling out sexism and pushing back against the MSM and what I call “bully bloggers.” (I know, I come off a bit as a bully blogger too… but I just wasn’t raised to not push back — I didn’t start the pushing…).

    I invite you to correct me and challenge my statements at my site. I try to be fact-oriented and not just impression oriented, so I welcome feedback.

    I will look more at my statement about “Democrats self selecting for low racism quotient, etc.”, but, as you will note, I didn’t say it was a proven fact. I said “there is a strong argument.” If there isn’t a strong argument for that fact, then let me know about it.

    As for whether racism exists in Democrats, there is no doubt it exists everywhere. The issue for me is how much racism or sexism is used to diminish a person. I don’t see a lot of racial stereotyping being used in the MSM to demean or diminish Senator Obama. Correct me if I am wrong.

    IMHO, there is racism, but it is being manifested in a different way than diminishment of Obama’s person. It is being used to argue electability, which, again, tell me if I am wrong on this, is not the same as attempting to diminish the personhood of Obama. In fact, I see more gender-stereotyping being used with respect to Obama’s personhood (you know the “manly” stuff, which I find obnoxious no matter which way gender stereotyping is used, against men or against women to diminish them).

    I am NOT saying it is an acceptable tactic to emphasize racial issues when it comes to electability, I am just saying it is different than diminishment, which I find to be a very powerful form of psychological warfare.

    As for using Latoya’s re-examination post to “back up claims as to why HRC should be president” — that is NOT what I was doing. I was giving my readers the opportunity to link to discussions of the phrase.

    In fact, as much as I support Clinton, my real mission, as you can note from other posts at my site, is to try to be the best “recovering sexist” I can be and encourage others to do the same.

    The mission of the site is more for pushing back against sexism and sexists than it is for getting Hillary elected. You will note that I don’t even link to her campaign website other than her bio and the petition for Michigan and Florida (which you can interpret, I suppose as something other than my wish for democracy, but, that is what it is), and similarly with Obama, only to his bio.

    Take care. I am open for discussion and learning.

    Posted 29 May 2008 at 8:00 pm ¶

12. Colin A. B. wrote:

    Mark Mark Mark,

    “I will look more at my statement about “Democrats self selecting for low racism quotient, etc.”, but, as you will note, I didn’t say it was a proven fact. I said “there is a strong argument.” If there isn’t a strong argument for that fact, then let me know about it.”

    Those were weasel words my friend. Let’s try this on for size:

    “Obama got an endorsement from an ex-Klansman recently. Some people say that’s proof Obama is a closet racist.”

    That’s not ME saying Obama is a closet racist, just that some people say he is.

    Or what about:

    “There’s a strong argument that black men are more likely to support misogyny than white women are to support racism.”

    I’m not saying I KNOW black men are more misogynistic than white women are racist, I’m just throwing it out there.

    Now this is a tactic I use myself and so I give leniance with it often, but as an African American who considers himself an anti-racist activist, I feel compelled to push harder against anything that tries to diminsh the reality of racism within the current American political system of which the Democratic Party is a significant factor. I hope thusly, that you can at the very least explain what the “strong argument” is.

    Addendum to that:

    When you said that racism seemed like a minor problem in the Democratic Party, I wondered how you felt about the accusations of racism and racist undertones to the Clinton campaign. I believe, from Shaheen to Bob Johnson to Bill Clinton to Andrew Cuomo to Gerry Ferraro to Sen. Clinton herself and beyond, there has been a systematic onslaught of anti-black hatred streaming from the Clinton campaign that has been intentionally placed to destroy the likability of Sen. Obama on the basis of his background.

    Onto the idea about how racism is manifested in this election:

    The idea that racism can in any case NOT question one’s personhood strikes me as illogical. Racism denies the full humanity of a person based on their physical features and some certain behavioral patterns. How is that not diminshing their personhood? I just cannot comprehend how racism can be justly used, in a moral sense, to filter out candidates for President.

    Also:

    Your footnotes preceding the links, one of which was to Ms. Peterson’s post, said this,

    “Here are a few more resources for understanding the term “Oppression Olympics.” It is unfortunate that it has been taken out of context and is now being used to talk about who suffers the most, women or black men or black women, when, in fact, that is not what it is about. It is about “The Rules of Engagement” in this election cycle. ”

    This is a clear attempt to define the term Oppression Olympics on your own grounds, which is alright really, but you used, with those sentences as my proof, links like Ms. Peterson’s to prove your opinion valid and reasonable. While it doesn’t mean you’re defending Sen. Clinton’s claim to the White House with that quote, you did use it to defend her statements that she used to boost her campaign efforts, efforts Ms. Peterson, I believe, does not share your support of.

    Now, if you meant to start a discussion, say so. Say, “I believe….others say….here are some links of the discussion already going on in the blogosphere about this term” or something like that. That actually means, “I want to have a conversation” and not “I am right and these people agree”.

    It is possible that I am being too angry, too vitriolic, too verbose, too whatever. If so, please tell me. Otherwise, reply as you see fit, my friend.

    -Colin

    Posted 30 May 2008 at 12:28 am ¶

13. Willow wrote:

    IMHO, there is racism, but it is being manifested in a different way than diminishment of Obama’s person. It is being used to argue electability, which, again, tell me if I am wrong on this, is not the same as attempting to diminish the personhood of Obama.

    I thought of many ways to respond to the quoted section. And in the end all I can say is ‘Self Supported Ignorance on the topic of racism is a Sumbitch, isn’t it?‘

    Willow (NonMuslim, Only Partly Black, Elitist, girl who has listened to Rev. Wright Preach and likely doesn’t have the capacity to handle a 3am phone call.)

    Posted 30 May 2008 at 1:11 am ¶

14. Mark wrote:

    Hi All: Thank you for the time and effort you have put in responding to the post at http://www.hillarynowobamalater.org about “Oppression Olympics.”

    I have updated that post a bit, and will respond here more fully when I get to take a few breaths after my long shift-work for three days (Friday, Sat, and Sun.)

    Take care, Mark

    Posted 31 May 2008 at 10:24 am ¶

15. Mark wrote:

    Oh, and, it looks like we at agree on one thing for sure — how awful Nina Burleigh’s article is.

    Posted 31 May 2008 at 10:25 am ¶