Re: the men's rights "pioneer"

As disgusted as I am with everything he said, the christian in me feels sorry for him. How can someone live with so much hate? It makes me wonder what happened in his life to make him turn out that way.

I've seen some posts and comments here before about sexism in SF/fantasy/anime/manga/comics/RPG fandom, so this link may be relevant:

http://www.cahp.girl-wonder.org/

"The Con Anti-Harassment Project is a grass-roots campaign designed to help make conventions safer for everyone. Our aims are to encourage fandom, geek community and other non-business conventions to establish, articulate and act upon anti-harassment policies, especially sexual harassment policies, and to encourage mutual respect among con-goers, guests and staff..."

Oops, I read the post too fast and didn't realize you already had the link! Sorry!

Bush: Also swore to uphold the constitution on at least three different occasions. It's not a "timetable" it's a "horizon", it's not "civil war" it's "sectarian violence", with regards to The Daily Show.

Short Shorts: The verbiage the judge used was out of line, but there is a dress code for going to court. It's court, not Southwest Airlines. Here is an article about a man who got 24 hours for wearing a Sex-Pistols T-Shirt: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/77280

Judges are the monarch of their court in terms of conduct. Do a search for "courtroom dress code", the no-shorts policy is pretty uniform (no pun intended).

Women In Rock: No "I'm With The Band"? No, I'm not trying to be funny, Ms. Des Barres really discovers her own self and reconciles her own wants with her sense of self-respect in this book.

I heart Buffy: Top 10 Willow moments please. Favorite Buffy series quote "What's that?" From the unstoppable demon who has apparently never seen a rocket launcher before.

Advertising: Yay for real people!

-Yeah, the woman who was jailed for wearing shorts to court: The manner of your dress is a way of respecting or disrespecting an event (remember when Jon Stewart went on Crossfire in jeans and a pull-over). It's not slut shaming when the judge gave her two warnings that shorts are not appropriate court wear (and they're not, the judge wasn't being unreasonable). When you show up to court in shorts and a tank top, you are not taking the occasion seriously--no matter how "cute" you think your outfit is. A line has to be drawn somewhere about what the courts feel is appropriate dress. Plus this woman had two warnings as to what this judge viewed as disrespectful dress. She had her warning and blew it. I've also seen men in court with shorts and flip-flops. They get scolded, though I wonder if they get the same attention that women who dress down do...

-I'm not even going to waste my time reading the article on the ass-hat who's suing Columbia.

-I *love* the print ad redo with real women. When you see the ads next to each other you can see how unreal and fake the original ads are when compared to real people. It just shows how beautiful reality can be. XD

Those sorts of MRA are one of the more dangerous threats to equality, because they might seem, at first, to be even-handed. Proposing a meritocracy, for example. Okay, that's good stuff. But how can he not see how that ties into feminism? Feminists want a meritocracy. Doesn't he see that's exactly the problem? Part of being a feminist or pro-feminist (which some prefer to call themselves) is understanding that you never will have the experience of the other gender but trying to understand their perspective and find middle ground. I've seen absolutely nothing from these MRAs except that they're bitter they only have 75% of the privilege, instead of 100% of it.

I am reading The F Word which talks about how young women aren't voting so it's great to see efforts to get young women more politically involved. With how many people don't vote, the candidates should really pay attention to convincing people to vote.

I was expecting to see bright fluorescent pink hair on that girl but no, her hair doesn't stand out that much.

Do they really think those models sell things best? It is refreshing to see people of average or above average size.

"As disgusted as I am with everything he said, the christian in me feels sorry for him. How can someone live with so much hate? It makes me wonder what happened in his life to make him turn out that way."

Amen.

I imagine that it has something to do with the 'Russian mafia stripper' though (although I have no idea what, exactly). He seems to have this obsession with talking about her in interviews.

Also, why does a guy who wants casual sex hate women's night at clubs??!

The men's right's article was worth reading for his endorsement of presidential candidate of somebody named "O'Bama." I didn't know there were any Irish dudes running for president, who'd of thunk it? Maybe he's the nominee of the Idiot Woman-haters of America party.

feminanimal: black-Irish.

I am in court 4 days a week, and I would be thrilled to see a judge do something about the way people dress in court.

I doubt that the short shorts issue was slut-shaming. I think it was demanding the proper decorum for a court of law.

My problem with conventional feminist groups like "Feminists for Obama" is that they, like many activist groups, often revert to a kind of navel-gazing echo chamber that, mirrored by every member involved, creates a tremendous amount of controversy but alienates as many people as it attracts to the fold.

I believe in the ideals of feminism particularly as expressed by this group, but it's no wonder that small niche gatherings like these get marginalized by the powers that be. Seems to me as though feminism needs to find a way to repackage itself in ways that that go well beyond semantics.

Leonard Sax: "...despite all the indoctrination they’ve received to the contrary, most of the hundreds of teenage girls... adore the traditional male and female roles and relationships in the “Twilight” saga."

Because the overwhelming influence of centuries of patriarchy doesn't "indoctrinate" them at all. Riiiiiiight.

Wow, that Roy Den Hollander made me really sad for him. I'm not crazy about the patriarchy (duh) and I dislike the way some men and women behave but he seems to carry a lot of hate with him. I'm guessing his "Chechen prostitute stripper" ex-wife has something to do with it, I'd like to hear her side of the story.
And I'm really pissed that he's tying up the courts with this frivolous lawsuit. There are people with genuine legal grievances and this takes time away from them. I just don't see how he can prove that men are discriminated againt by women's studies.

Renee had a point about classism when it comes to courtroom attire--many people don't own suits or even "business casual" and can't afford to buy clothes for a courtroom appearance--but her complaints seemed unwarranted for this situation. Like it or not, the only time it's acceptable to be showing leg in a formal environment is when it's a woman wearing a skirt. It isn't unreasonable to expect someone to at least own pants. That woman clearly didn't do her best to appear presentable in the courtroom and get punished for not being able to buy expensive clothes, she was punished because she wore clothes that wouldn't be acceptable in a nice restaurant, much less where you go after you hit a tombstone and flee the scene of the crime.

OMG, Sax.

Cause "Twilight" was created whole cloth and in a vacuum.

Renee had a point about classism when it comes to courtroom attire--many people don't own suits or even "business casual" and can't afford to buy clothes for a courtroom appearance

Defense attorneys will often buy formal attire for their clients. Lousy dress can unfairly influence the jury. Even if the woman in this case can't afford representation, it's possible that the state is required to provide her with appropriate clothing.

You don't need business casual attire for court. What you do need is a shirt and long pants. I served on a crack cocaine jury and the defendant wore jeans and a collared polo. All you need is a pair of long pants and a shirt. This isn't a class issue or a slut-shaming issue, it's a proper attire issue.

Courts require a certain modicum of decorum, and this woman (who was warned twice about her attire) wore short shorts to trial. That is contempt of court given the prior warnings. And everyone, be they jurors, defendants, or plaintiffs, are made aware on their summonses that the required attire is long pants and no tank tops.

Calling something like that slut-shaming is really reaching at straws. Sometimes people are just dumb and wear inappropriate attire to court. Given that she was found with prescription meds on her person that may have had something to do with it, but contempt is contempt.

Ann,
Just wanted to thank you for linking to my site. It is awesome to see my little blog on a website that gets this much traffic!

davenj, if I am not mistaken, women are allowed to wear skirts in the courtroom, no?

This story has stirred some questions in my mind which I've been struggling to answer. Jailing someone simply because they are wearing shorts is downright ridiculous. But at what point would it not become ridiculous? If she was wearing a pair of shorts no larger than a pair of underwear would it be ridiculous? What if she was wearing only a thong? What if she was entirely naked?
I'm just wondering what most people who are indignant about this story feel would be an unacceptable line to cross when it comes to courtroom attire.

I don't perceive the shorts case as being a sexist issue unless the judge allows men to wear shorts in her courtroom. Sort of ridiculous, yes, but not sexist. I do think that dress codes that require people to "cover up" as in not wearing tank tops or shorts have roots in some of the puritanical views on nudity and sex that this country was founded on though.

"I'm just wondering what most people who are indignant about this story feel would be an unacceptable line to cross when it comes to courtroom attire."

I don't know but how about fining her? Why is the first reaction to put her in jail? I know it's not a lot but how about getting money from her instead of spending money on her in jail.

lyndorr: It wasn't the "first reaction". She'd been given two warnings prior. The first time no fine, the second time it was a $50.00 fine.

This person was jailed for being a stubborn idiot.

Here's a handy guide to women's achievements in Beijing. They include some real underdog achievements and upset wins.

http://results.beijing2008.cn/WRM/ENG/INF/GL/92A/USA_T.shtml

"Here's a handy guide to women's achievements in Beijing. They include some real underdog achievements and upset wins."

^^ I agree with this sarcasm!

My only regret is missing the softball final. I got much love for Ueno (Japanese pitcher) in the Japan-Australia game.

I have some sympathy for the 12-year-old with the pink hair, just because she's 12 and she's grieving...but the school really seems to be in the right about suspending her. It's analogous to a school dress code saying everybody has to wear white or light blue shirts every day, and one grieving student showing up in black.

I'm amazed at all the adults supporting the student. The whole point of a school dress code is to limit how students can express themselves. Maybe that's not obvious to adults who went to schools with dress code rules on the order of "skirts or shorts cannot be shorter than X" or "no offensive printing on shirts." But the idea of a dress code also includes rules like "shirts must be white, blue, or yellow, and must have a collar." I was a high school student with the first kind of dress code rules, and after I graduated, the school gradually shifted to the second kind of rules, so maybe I'm more aware than most of the continuum.

I've got to add my voice to those saying that the "short shorts" story is not slut-shaming in the least. There is nothing wrong with proper attire being required in court, and there is also nothing wrong with tiny shorts not being considered "proper". This woman had been warned twice that she needed to dress appropriately, and she blatantly ignored those warnings and then wanted yet another warning instead of a punishment. Contempt of court is contempt of court, no matter what it takes shape as - dressing inappropriately, talking back to the judge, showing up late, etc. If a male showed up to court twice in a tank top and was told to wear proper attire, and then showed up a third time in a tank top and was put in jail...would we be decrying it as wrong and discriminatory?

If this woman had been wearing, say, a form-fitting top and the judge called her out for it and specifically used slut-shaming language, that would be different. There are times when it is not okay to dress however one pleases, and it has nothing to do with people wanting to make the female body seem "dirty" and wanting it to be covered up. It has to do with proper behavior. We can't be so quick to label any sort of punishment give to a woman as being anti-woman...that will really take the wind out of the sails on legitimate complaints. Let's not cry wolf, please.