Okay...off topic, but I just finished reading "He's a Stud, She's a Slut" and I LOVED IT. Full Frontal Feminism made me an active feminist, and this book is a perfect follow-up.

"The 'Like all men he’s not great with pain' line isn’t funny."

Right on! Sexism and gender stereotyping are wrong, regardless of the target of the insult, and you are to be commended for noting this -- dissing "men" in general is a stereotype that too many people improperly associate with feminism.

I actually thought the 'Like all men...' line was absolutely hilarious and spot on. I'm an avid cyclist and my first thought was my (male) cycling friends who shave their legs because other methods are too painful.

I defintely shared the first reaction that Julia had. And I really appreciate the rest of her thoughts because knowing how transwomen process this and how it hurts/helps them is really great and necessary.

Did this actually air on TV somewhere?

It seems really trivializing to say that "The toughest part about looking like a woman would have to be all my hair."

Really? Hair removal is the toughest part? Not street harassment or job discrimination or coming out or....

They might as well say "Phillips makes being transgendered easy and fun!"

"Memo to Phillips: The “Like all men he’s not great with pain” line isn’t funny. Making fun of men is just as sexist as making fun of women."

Right on. Sexism is sexism, period.

and yeah, femqueer, I thought that was really fucked up too.

As a female who doesn't shave, but is still very much a lady..I find the "toughest part of looking like a woman" line pretty offensive as well.

Hair removal isn't what makes you a woman.

I'm with Serano on just about everything, except:

Making fun of men is just as sexist as making fun of women.

No. It's not. Patriarchal stereotypes do hurt men, but it is decidedly not the same.

The toughest part of being a woman, if you were unfortunately issued with the wrong body, is the way people like to make it obvious when they don't believe you.
Trans women are either pathetic fakes - if they think they can tell - or evil deceivers who will lead good men into homosexuality if they can't.
I'm just a human being trying to get on with my life. Hair removal is tough - 200 hours of electrolysis is no picnic.

Wow! I actually think the ad was innovative, and actually more innovative than doing bio transgender because it expands on male identity. As an advertising major (one of my emphasis areas) I got a little excited watching this commercial. I think media can change stereotypes about gender, and I think this commercial totally can do that.

"“Like all men he’s not great with pain” line isn’t funny. Making fun of men is just as sexist as making fun of women. "

Yeah right! Making fun of men is nothing compared to DISCRIMINATING against women. When commercials "make fun" of women, it is actually discrimination. Men have it coming as misandry is impossible to sincerely have in this world where men openly ask to be hated with appropriate consequences to appropriate actions. Misandry is not the same as misogyny.

....Waiting for the 'what about the menz' string of comments....

I'm with serano that making fun of men is as bad as making fun of women. Sexism is sexism is sexism. Perhaps it would be accurate to suggest that sexism against women is more pervasive historically, but it is important to recognize that maleness and masculinity comes with it's own set of expectations, standards, and roles (such as being indifferent to pain, etc) that affect the daily lives of men psychologically, socially, and emotionally. Go ahead and criticize me as a "what about the menz" person (which even saying to begin with *discourages* open discussion), but to ignore the implications of masculinity and masculine identity in our culture is to refuse to acknowledge how patriarchal and ideological notions affect half of our society.

"It is important to recognize that maleness and masculinity comes with it's own set of expectations, standards, and roles (such as being indifferent to pain, etc) that affect the daily lives of men psychologically, socially, and emotionally."

All of what you believe they have to indure socially, psychically, physically, ect was as a way to bolster their delusions of superiority over women. For example, if a man cried he was (and still is unfortunetly)called a 'girl.' Men were privileged in the past and given status and power that was fueled by their projections of superiority as men. Today, even though things have thankfully changed, what was traditionally established about mens roles, ect still applies to distant echoes of believing oneself superior to women. So how can struggling with these distortions ever make him a societal sufferer if these identity constructs he wants to achieve (and fails in todays society making him feel disordered)is based on sexism, and oppression? If he wouldnt buy into this crap he wouldnt have to struggle with some sort of inability to project these gender superior delusions about himself, and would save himself problems. In summary, he only "suffers" because he cannot have the old male identity without running into contradiction in a changed world. So he is not truly suffering in our society.

Dear GopherII,

i believe that somewhere inside of feminism is the idea that men do not know how to interpret the expereinces of women, and why, because they are not women. It is the same as how being a black/white person I cannot tell white/black people what they are experiencing. But I am so glad that you have decided that men are not suffering from anything involving traditional gender roles, even if men interpret their experiences as suffering. On the slim chance that you are a man, I am glad you have learned to deny that you are ever suffering for anything. I just think it is so ironic that you somehow have the ability to deny men the ability to interpret their own experiences, I feel like somewhere in history there were some women once who were denied the ability to interpret their own expereinces and got a little POed about that?? Is that true?

1) I generally don't like any statement that claims all people of any group have a matched set of experiences or traits, unless it's specifically overdone for the sake of comedy alone (like an SNL sketch or stand-up comedian). So the "men can't handle pain" bit is off-putting.

2) I think it's cool that the ad used a female impersonator (I hope this is an OK term to use--obviously the guy has a female stage persona but identifies as a male) without resorting to shock value or passing judgment.

3) Following on #2, this ad is trying to sell a product typically marketed specifically to women. The point is probably not to change the gender composition of the product's consumer base, but in the end, I found this commercial a lot more interesting than the typical hair-removal commercial, which usually features a skinny, barely-legal girl cuddling with her masculine (often, ironically, unshaven) partner in a strange display of heterosexuality (I don't find issue with the heterosexuality, it's just that I don't think many people, gay or straight, spend all day rubbing their faces on one another's hairless legs).

david,
For example, denying a job to a man is justified to me because whenever a man gets a position of power he fucks women over with it. Its out of self-preservation and awareness of the precedent established by men to uphold this oppressive (since the dawn of time) status quo. Due to this commonly held practice I have reason to suspect either A. its impossible for a man to quell ignorant impulses, or B. he will perpetuate the status quo which is discrimination against me due to my gender. Maybe there is something biological to mens misogyny, maybe science should look into it. I think it has something to do with mens maturational levels being more underdeveloped than women. Either way, I'm not risking the oppression of another woman, or myself with a mans presence holding power in society. However, if a man were to deny a woman a job, or position it would be because he feels women are inferior and therefore it would be discriminatory.

BTW, I'm a woman, and if a black woman wanted to hire another black woman over me (if we had similar resumes) simply so she could have an ally and bigger representation for her culture, then tha'd be fine by me, at least for the most part.

I, too, felt that this ad was pretty innovative. It's not perfect, and it's not completely inoffensive to every person who will see it, but it's an ad, which means it is trying to sell a product. Hair removal isn't what makes you a woman, but they are selling a hair removal product and trying a different way of doing it. I don't know, I thought it was a good thing that they used the perspective of a transgendered person for an ad at all...seems like a step in the right direction.

"Its out of self-preservation and awareness of the precedent established by men to uphold this oppressive (since the dawn of time) status quo."

Whoops! I wrote that part wrong. I meant:

'Its out of self-preservation and awareness of the precedent established by men of oppressing women that I would not be acting out of misandry.'

A few things, in response to the other comments:

- I don't see what the problem is with asserting that jokes stereotyping men are as sexist as jokes stereotyping women. Julia didn't say they're as oppressive, or that they carry the same force behind them. She said they're as sexist. Sexism does just mean sexism. That's what more specific terms like "patriarchy" and "misogyny" and "misandry" are for.

And surely thinking that any joke that relies on gender stereotypes is "hilarious and spot on" goes against the most basic beliefs of feminism, no matter what anyone's personal experiences are.

- I think the narrator of the video meant "the hardest thing about looking like a woman" in the sense of "the hardest thing about making myself appear to be a woman," not "the hardest thing about my life when I look like a woman to other people." In other words, hair removal is harder than wearing a wig or applying makeup, not harder than dealing with transphobia and sexism.

GopherII:

Men have it coming as misandry is impossible to sincerely have in this world where men openly ask to be hated with appropriate consequences to appropriate actions.

Um, holy shit. I hope I'm reading that wrong.

Hating all men is only an appropriate response if all men have done something hateful and hurtful to you. I really doubt that's the case.

And hating all men = misandry, whether the environment is patriarchal, matriarchal or honest-to-God gender-neutral. It's not okay.

All of what you believe they have to indure socially, psychically, physically, ect was as a way to bolster their delusions of superiority over women.

And that's supposed to be a comforting fallback for those who regard themselves as female or identify with some aspects of femaleness, but are prevented from pursuing that and being happy? Do you think it's as easy as turning around and saying, "Well, apparently it's disgusting and wrong of me to want to wear my hair long, but at least now that I know that, I can forget all about it and turn my attention to bullying everybody who does wear their hair long! Hooray"?

That said, Julia, thanks for writing this, and your essay is great.

I'm with Catherine that this ad isn't perfect -- not for women in general, trans women, or trans people in general -- but it's still good in many respects. It's true that the image still seems to be of a man in drag as opposed to a fully transgendered woman, and that that image is being used to sell a product, and that the product in question is all about the feminine beauty standard... but it can't hurt that the circle's opening a little bit.

"A. its impossible for a man to quell ignorant impulses, or B. he will perpetuate the status quo which is discrimination against me due to my gender. Maybe there is something biological to mens misogyny, maybe science should look into it. I think it has something to do with mens maturational levels being more underdeveloped than women."

Looks to me like the only real option we have to make the world a better place is to get rid of all the men, is that what you are telling me? Sounds kind of like misandry to me.

And, if there is something biological to why men are less mature and misogynistic thus allowing you to discriminate against them, then shouldn't we be able to make biological arguments for being able to discrimnate against women???

And doesn't that overturn the whole idea of ending sexual discrimination in hiring for companies?

i'm definitely also caught up in concerns that this comes off as equating transness with fakery...

a friend of mine suggested that, as the ad's subject identifies as a boy, this ad would be more challenging of gender norms if it was trying to sell a razor to men.

"There is something biological to why men are less mature and misogynistic thus allowing you to discriminate against them, then shouldn't we be able to make biological arguments for being able to discrimnate against women??? "

No. Why? Because men asserted FIRST the irrationality of hating women. When women were simply 'minding their own business,' it was men who came out with 'gender differences' to base womens inferiority on. Therefore they have shown themselves to be less competent in respecting my rights. They are the only gender to have done this kind of gender hate. Why would anyone feel the need to irrationally hate womankind? There has to be some biological fallability, coupled with womens indoctrination as inferior for thousands of years along with unplanned maternity that men felt they needed to exploit, probably to cover for some incompetency he carries, limits he knows he has but doesnt want to admit. I am basing my theory on bazillions of years of misogyny with no RATIONAL basis for inspiring it, other than some missing piece in a mans brain. No one should trust their very freedoms to someone who has so openly displayed lack of ability in that area.

"There is something biological to why men are less mature and misogynistic"

Then what is your explanation? What need first made man feel he needed to suppress womankind? Was there ever a time when misogyny didnt exist? Was there a BM (before misogyny)? Every woman whose come in contact with a man knows theyre developmentally more limited than women. I saw it all the time as a girl, and now I see it in the classrooms all the time today.

That ain't no razor - it's an epilator. They are notoriously painful to use. My guess is that Gillette (or whoever) wanted to take a completely different marketing approach to make the product seem new and innovative so people would avoid associating it with the Epilady. I guess you're supposed to think that if a wimpy tranny can use it, you can too. Either that, or it's the first hair removal system made especially to meet the needs of drag queens.

From my perspective, as a cisgendered woman with a lot of genderqueer people in my social circles -- I love this ad. "Now she steals my makeup..." not all my friends have supportive parents, so it's nice to have that line in there.

And, as someone who DOES remove body hair... wow, I wish I hadn't already bought a similar product, because that ice pack sounds brilliant.

*I* experience a lot of my femininity as performance (the opening getting-dressed sequence in Transamerica? How much of that do I do if I want to present a mainstream feminine appearance? Lots) so I find it reassuring, not alienating, to hear it from a trans perspective.

Maybe the ad's not perfect, but I still like it a lot.

Dear everyone on this blog,

If I came out and said something the things Gopher has said, but about women, I would be recieving more angry posts than ever posted before. But for some reason, I feel like only myself and one other person has actually come out to say that what Gopher is saying is a little inaccurate, possibly misandrist. If by the silence of this blog you are condoning and supporting gopher, then I have some major rethinking to do about everyone one on this blog. Why is there so much silence? And if people do support her, please let me know and I will stop considering myself a feminist.

*I* experience a lot of my femininity as performance (the opening getting-dressed sequence in Transamerica? How much of that do I do if I want to present a mainstream feminine appearance? Lots) so I find it reassuring, not alienating, to hear it from a trans perspective.

First of all, it's not entirely accurate to describe an ad featuring a drag performer as being from a "trans perspective". A queer perspective, perhaps, but not a trans perspective.

Second of all, as Julia has pointed out much better than I ever could, there is an obsession in the media with showing trans women engaging in stereotypically feminine daily rituals, even when such images have nothing to do with the alleged subject matter of the program. There seems to be a need in the mainstream media to portray trans women as uniformly hyper feminine, even though trans women's gender expression (and "performance") range just as widely as non trans women's.

If I came out and said something the things Gopher has said, but about women, I would be recieving more angry posts than ever posted before. But for some reason, I feel like only myself and one other person has actually come out to say that what Gopher is saying is a little inaccurate, possibly misandrist.

Actually, david, that couldn't be farther from the truth. In other threads, quite a few people, myself included, have vehemently and articulately taken GopherII to task for her misandry and her bigotry towards trans people (see the pregnant trans man post for an example). I think most of us are just exhausted and are loath to allow her bigotry to derail discussions by replacing the actual topic at hand.

Dear Elise,
thank you for your remark, I must admit that I have not seen her posts before, and so the silence scared me a little. but seeing that people are just tired, which is totally understandable, I feel a lot better. Also, I don't think she was posting about trans people here, I think it was about men in general, but oh well.

I too take issue with the "like all men he's not great with pain" line.

Personally, I'm not great with pain, especially when it comes to ripping out body hairs from intimate places en masse. The final straw was when I had the side of my clitoris torn open during a brazillian wax last year. It wasn't the initial pain that bothered me so much, it was the fact that I couldn't have sex for a week or so after because it was so tender and I was worried the tear would have trouble healing. I'm sure there are plenty of women who love their regular brazillian wax, for whatever reason, but I'm never having it done again. The whole experience was painful.

Fortunately, my lady bits are fine now, but does the fact that I'm 'not great with pain' make me less of a woman? Or does it mean I am too 'masculine'?

David please do not think that at all. I've been fuming for awhile trying to think of where to even begin to respond to the ridiculousness of Gopher's posts.

What gopher posted is actually possibly worst then any misogeny i've ever seen. Definitely worse then any i've experienced first hand.

They are the only gender to have done this kind of gender hate. Why would anyone feel the need to irrationally hate womankind?

Oh really - men are the only gender?? So no women ever have hated men? What about yourself. Get over yourself already.

There has to be some biological fallability

Be careful what you say. If there was indeed a biological reason - that would imply that it is not men's fault, which implies we can't possibly get angry at them and we should just give-up on feminism right now. Is that the world you believe in and want to live in? I don't.

Gopher I don't know what happened to you in your life, but get a grip. There's no place for your misandry on this site.

Oh, and as a freshly-de-lurked individual, I meant to add that I have been reading this blog for quite some time now and it really is the first thing I look forward to in the mornings.

Hi David,
This is not the first time GopherII has shown her hatred towards men or transfolk. And yes, others who do not agree with her view have admonished her for her views. I'm not even sure why she's allowed here since she displayed such hatred towards men or transfolk. I guess it's because misandry is more permissible in our society than misogyny. I guess it's the whole if men complain about stuff, then it's just men being whiny and "what about the menz", *shrug*

I agree with Misspelled, who said that sexism is sexism. Sure, women have it much much tougher, but the thought of "it's okay to be sexist to men because women face much much more sexism in life" seems a bit off. It would be just like me saying I'm Asian, so it's okay for me to be racist towards white folk.

Emz: "The final straw was when I had the side of my clitoris torn open during a brazillian wax last year."

Holy mother of !@#$. I'm cringing just reading that. Gah. *shivers*

david,

i think you already know that i agree entirely with your point of view, but just in case i wanted to reaffirm that. i also didn't realize that gopher has been a problem poster on other threads and was worries as well, but i also haven't been abl to check all day because i've been moving (in 100dg heat no less). i wanted to thank you for asking others to speak up, because that also reaffirmed my faith in the posters here. :)

on another note = about the performativity angle, i (very quickly) scanned through the comments, so i'm sorry if someone already has said this, but my personal take on the person in the commercial was an uncertainty of whether or not i was watching a transgendered person or watching a man who uses trans identity in performance - ie, the references to "my routine" and the fact that he refered to himself as a boy.. i also agree with Elise who said,

"Second of all, as Julia has pointed out much better than I ever could, there is an obsession in the media with showing trans women engaging in stereotypically feminine daily rituals, even when such images have nothing to do with the alleged subject matter of the program. There seems to be a need in the mainstream media to portray trans women as uniformly hyper feminine, even though trans women's gender expression (and "performance") range just as widely as non trans women's."

but again, i wonder (in this particular case) if the gender performance of hyperfeminity is *central* to identity in this case..

am i the only one who found this kind of ambiguity?

oh, and lastly, i would like to say that i was extremely happy to see this attention to the representaion of trans folk on feministing!

but again, i wonder (in this particular case) if the gender performance of hyperfeminity is *central* to identity in this case..

In which case? In the case of trans women, it certainly isn't. There are some really femme trans women, and some middle-of-the-road trans women, and some butch trans women. That is to say, the spectrum of gender expression is not significantly different from that of non-trans women.

If, on the other hand, you mean the case of drag performers, I think you're quite right. Drag is in a way a parody of the -inities, and so it tends to push them to the limits of the absurd quite self-consciously.

"What gopher posted is actually possibly worst then any misogeny i've ever seen. Definitely worse then any i've experienced first hand."

Now thats just weird. Where do you live? Most certaintly not on Planet Earth. Whatever. I can have my opinions. Theres always a group that agrees with the same opinions and has the same ones as well. No loss.

"There's no place for your misandry on this site."

Alright, alright! I looove menzfolk! Kisses david, I hope your not crying er nothing. Actions speak louder than words anywayz, what I say has no implications in my real life actions anywayz.

"I guess it's because misandry is more permissible in our society than misogyny"

Timothynakayama,
Hows about going back to your Mens Rights website TIMOTHYnakayama. NO ONE on this site would agree with that statement.

"....Waiting for the 'what about the menz' string of comments...."

...And that prediction was fulfilled. It would be nice if there was a new feminist website where members would pay and then you would get a membership number to sign up with an individualized identity number so only ACTUAL feminists could post. None of this 'what about the menz' invasion crap.

"And if people do support her, please let me know and I will stop considering myself a feminist."

Lastly david, if you want to seriously reevaluate your participation as one of the many "faux feminist menzfolk," then by all means, please revoke your card. Feminists hardly need this dilettante effort from yourself.

I mean if your participation as a "male" feminist is only on the basis that we absolutely looove and adore malefolk, and always uphold this silence about real feelings men inspire due to their actions torwards women then by all means, ciao!

"So no women ever have hated men? "

Honeybee,
No. It would never be construed as the same type of hate men spew torwards women. Anyone that has practiced unprovoked oppression against one half of the gender for thousands of years, across race and culture does not earn embracive attitudes. Believing that men are possibly biologically more prone to these kinds of behavior is not in opposition to feminism because feminism is about tending to the welfare of women in society and ensuring that she does not have to endure misogyny. If theres a biological factor in male misogyny then we should fix it. Feminism is about righting the societal ruin that has happened because of mens oppression, however, we do not know its origin. It would be like curing the symptom but overlooking the cause.

Just wanted to agree with other posters that I in no way endorse GopherII views and apologize if our silence was seen as endorsement. I was just at a loss for how to respond.

"What gopher posted is actually possibly worst then any misogeny i've ever seen."

Seriously? Worse than a woman being kept as a sex slave by her father in his basement dungeon for 24 years, sexually abused since she was 11, and forced to bear him seven children, three of whom have never seen the light of day their entire lives?

Just sayin'

>>Making fun of men is just as sexist as making fun of women.

April, I have to agree with you on your comment that it is decidedly not.

While I do think feminism is for everyone's benefit, and I do think patriarchy hurts men and all genders, I do not think that "making fun of men" is sexist.

Ideas such as "reverse racism" and sexism in which women are making fun of men cannot exist bc of the power currently at hand. Literally they cannot exist. If the oppressor (the male, or the white person) is being discriminated by the oppressed (female, or person of color) it cannot be racism or sexism bc those concepts *function* on the role of the oppressor within our society (being both white and male). To "reverse" that would mean that the same phenomenon could occur, just backwards, and it cannot. Discrimination and gender stereotyping, can occur, and indeed, they have the potential to do harm, but it is not the same as, and it is not as harmful as sexism or reverse racism.

When women make fun of men, perhaps it is an escape from the violence, harassment, objectification, etc. they are subjected to by men all of the time. Perhaps it is a way for women to unite against a group of people that are potentially harmful.

Women should talk shit about men.
And women should not feel bad about it either.
Men should talk shit about men too.
And everyone should consider what the implications are for all genders and sexes and what this means in terms of power in a sexist society.

I typed the wrong word above...

What previously read:
"Discrimination and gender stereotyping, can occur, and indeed, they have the potential to do harm, but it is not the same as, and it is not as harmful as sexism or reverse racism"

Should read:
"Discrimination and gender stereotyping, can occur, and indeed, they have the potential to do harm, but it is not the same as, and it is not as harmful as sexism or RACISM."

I typed the wrong word above...

What previously read:
"Discrimination and gender stereotyping, can occur, and indeed, they have the potential to do harm, but it is not the same as, and it is not as harmful as sexism or reverse racism"

Should read:
"Discrimination and gender stereotyping, can occur, and indeed, they have the potential to do harm, but it is not the same as, and it is not as harmful as sexism or RACISM."

I agree that sexism is sexism, regardless of who it's aimed at, but I don't actually think what is basically "men are wusses" is actually a good example of this. This goes to the formulation of sexism as prejudice plus power, which in the case of sexism is the set of sex-based prejudices that are backed by patriarchy.

So yeah, I think that there is sexism that affects men, which is generally effected against men who break the patriarchal ideal of masculinity in one way or another.

The 'stereotype' of "men are wusses" though, I read as a subversion of that same patriarchal ideal, promulgated as a stereotype. I think the actual prevalence of belief in this stereotype is fairly low, and more critically, it doesn't really have the weight of patriarchy behind it, even in the case where it is actually held as belief.

I want to, however, bracket this by saying that I don't think that this is the only worthwhile analysis of that statement. The treatment of 'sexism' as meaning any sex-backed prejudice is also a useful one, as is the analysis upthread of the effect of stereotypes of masculinity on the construction of femininity. Multiple analyses are a good thing here, even if you get seemingly contradictory outcomes, these are bracketed by different contexts and aspects of the effect of the statement.

And I'm finding GopherII a bit over the top and essentializing too. There's definitely misandry there too, but I'm not really as bothered by that, if you take out the hyperbolics and the essentialist viewpoints, what you're left with seems to be a pretty basic "I don't trust men" statement, which could stand to be addressed and remediated but which doesn't seem all that horrible to me. The essentializing though... eek. And attached to a post about trans* issues?

Hairs grown in a high testosterone environment tend to be deeper rooted and more substantial than those in a low t environment. Male leg and beard hair in particular. So using an epilator on male legs actually does create significantly more pain than on female ones - more hairs, deeper rooted and tougher. I've done it, pre hormones & transition, and decided that shaving was better.. better results too - you tend to get ingrowing hairs with epilation, which doesn't look good

I cannot believe that anyone other than Gopher (who up until a few months ago I had some respect for but DAMN out came the crazy comments) actually endorses the view that any kind of sexism/sexual stereotyping is OK because it's not as oppressive as x/y/z. What the fuck?

You know what? No matter how small the reason for person a's pain may be compared to person b's, I still happen to think that causing someone else pain sucks.

And every time someone allows themselves to stereotype men they are reinforcing stereotypes about women. It's part of the same thing.

I've had many people forward jokes about how stupid men are and it just makes me angry. Writing the same bullshit about men doesn't erase the way women are treated, nor does it even it out. It's like women who buy into gender roles so much that they become the stereotypical controlling wife because (in my opinion) they see that as the only thing they can control. Of course the kind of man who puts up with that shit was never going to have a wife he viewed a partner anyway.

I'm going to stop before I rant more.

"For this reason, this video will likely annoy a lot of transsexuals because it forwards the 'trans = fake' trope that is too often used to marginalize us."

Yeah, some idiots don't seem to realize that transsexual and transvestite don't mean the same thing.

GopherII - "No. It would never be construed as the same type of hate men spew torwards women. Anyone that has practiced unprovoked oppression against one half of the gender for thousands of years, across race and culture does not earn embracive attitudes. Believing that men are possibly biologically more prone to these kinds of behavior is not in opposition to feminism because feminism is about tending to the welfare of women in society and ensuring that she does not have to endure misogyny. If theres a biological factor in male misogyny then we should fix it. Feminism is about righting the societal ruin that has happened because of mens oppression, however, we do not know its origin. It would be like curing the symptom but overlooking the cause."

Replace Men in the above paragraph with Whites. White people have enslaved, killed, colonized, etc many other races in the world since time immemorial, when they were seen as the Civilized Ones and all others were seen as Heathen Barbarians and not as smart or as cultured.

Does this mean that Whites have this biological impulse to enslave, kill, colonize, etc? Does this mean all the other races should unite and somehow, as you mention, "fix" this problem?

Sorry, but I am not going to go around stereotyping every white person I see as an imperialistic, power-hungry, aggressive, ignorant racist simply just because there are a handful of them who are. Nor do I judge a woman, man, child, homosexual, transsexual, etc to be the same as every demographic that they come from.

What, I should gather my Asian, African, Indian friends and start talking shit about Whites and this is somehow okay, because we've been oppressed by white people both physically, mentally and economically?

If you want to talk shit, talk shit about individuals, not a demographic. Afterall, isnt that what feminism and other liberal movements are all about, we are all individuals?

I hate it when people stereotype all Asians are nerdy, scrawny, hardworking people with no social skills so in my turn, I am not going to perpetuate any stereotype against any other person I deal with.

Sure, I may be idealistic,but having walked this Earth for more than 3 decades, I have no wish to let so much negativity into my life, as it is not conducive to a rich and meaningful life. People are individuals first, and will be treated on a case by case basis.

I appreciate all of the comments and apologize for not responding until now (I had to deal with a pesky thing called my day job yesterday...)

I have to say that I disagreed with almost everything GopherII had to say. Your perspective is very unilateral—i.e., you seem to think that the only type of sexism is men oppressing women. Sexism is far more complicated and intersectional than you seem to think. I encourage you to read my book Whipping Girl (you don’t have to but it – you can borrow it or check it out from a library) if you want to understand what I mean by sexisms - both traditional sexism and oppositional sexisms (such as heterosexism, transphobia, etc.) and how each of us is negatively impacted by them to varying degrees.

As someone who transitioned from male to female, I experienced a huge loss of privilege when the world started seeing me and treating me as female – men taking me less seriously or talking over me, dealing with cat calls and such, etc. (I talk about this in depth in the book). But honestly (and some non-trans women hate when I say this) some things got easier for me. Trans men often describe a similar experience of both gaining male privilege but also finding many aspects of navigating one’s way thru the world as a man difficult or even dangerous – this is especially true if one is a queer or gender-variant man. Sexism, at its roots, is about expectations and assumptions that people have to navigate based on the superficial criteria of how they appear to other people. Therefore all of us face sexism in one way or another.

Male privilege is very real, but it is not the only gendered privilege. Furthermore, sexism intersects with other isms (racism, classism, ableism, etc.) in profound ways. In our society, rich white women wield far more power and privilege than poor black men do. Given that you see sexism as unilateral form of oppression, I highly suggest that you read the works of feminist women of color such as bell hooks, Patricia Hill Collins, Audre Lorde, and many others...

Next, a lot of comments were related to how innovative the commercial was. I completely agree (see point #1 in my post). But I also think that while many pro-trans folks who are not trans women themselves may see the ad in solely positive terms (as it seems to embrace gender variance), those of us who have had a transsexual experience are more likely to be ambivalent about it (see point #5). We deal with the trope of being “fakes” who merely imitate, impersonate, etc. non-trans women and men. While I enjoy drag and respect it as a form of gender expression, it unfortunately sometimes enables trans-ignorant people to view all people as “fakes”.

I really liked this quote from sarahp:

“a friend of mine suggested that, as the ad's subject identifies as a boy, this ad would be more challenging of gender norms if it was trying to sell a razor to men.”

This is *so* true and is pertinent to my point. The commercial works for audiences because the person’s gender is seen as “fake” and occupying a middle ground outside of maleness or femaleness. This allows audiences to view the ad without feeling like their own identity as a woman or man has been brought into question. Being that the ad is targeted to women, I bet you that many women would be very turned off if the subject of the ad was a trans woman such as myself. It would suggest that their femaleness and my femaleness exist on an equal plane. In my experience, most non-trans people would be bothered by this suggestion.

Similarly, given that the subject is boy-identified but very feminine, non-trans men would likely be turned off if he was pitching men’s grooming products. Again, the implication would be that his maleness is on an equal plane with that of non-trans men.

As long as trans people are safely tucked away into our own “third gender” category, the non-trans majority can still maintain their sense of difference from, and superiority over, trans people...

Anyway, thanks again for all the comments!
-julia

>> >>Making fun of men is just as sexist as making fun of women.

>> April, I have to agree with you on your comment that it is decidedly not.

>> While I do think feminism is for everyone's benefit, and I do think patriarchy hurts men and all genders, I do not think that "making fun of men" is sexist.

I agree, and disagree. Making fun without the power to inflict real harm isn't really sexism. But at the same time, the joke makes fun of men who can't handle pain because men are supposed to be these macho things that are incapable of feeling pain. And that feeds oppositional sexism where women are the opposite and ever so sensitive and can't handle any pain and need to be protected and coddled. Sexual stereotypes of men end up hurting women too.

linzeyinfynity, danadocus,
Exactly.

"Replace Men in the above paragraph with Whites. White people have enslaved, killed, colonized, etc many other races in the world since time immemorial, when they were seen as the Civilized Ones and all others were seen as Heathen Barbarians and not as smart or as cultured"

Timothynakayama,
Or replace it with Arab,(janjaweed) African (Rwanda), Asian,(WWII) Eastern European (Bosnia)...ect Get it? ALL races have oppressed, damaged, enslavered or hurt one another. However, in difference to race, only men have oppressed women. When was the last time a man had to wear a burqa?

"I encourage you to read my book Whipping Girl "

Julia,
Absolutely! Looking forward to it!! Its in my wish list on amazon. I think it will provide an invaluable perspective from a person who was treated in the world formerly as a man, and then was perceived as a woman. I think it exposes alot of the unseen sexism against women that is not normally acknowledged but commonly experienced. I dont think we would be able to identify it unless a scenario like this were to occur. I see it as a "Black Like Me" type of book except about gender rather than race.

"Rich white women wield far more power and privilege than poor black men do. "

Then how is it that Obama can talk about race and everyone applauds him, but when Hillary discusses gender she is accused of playing the gender card? Have you not seen the coverage of Hillary in the news - especially by Chris Matthews? I have never seen him talk about race in the same negative way he does about females and Hillary Clinton.

Finally,
david - you revoked your feminism card yet? I mean, you said you would if some of the posters here supported my comments that making "fun" of men is not the same as making "fun" of women. Its not uncommon for a supposed "feminist" man to simply be a dilenttante. I wouldnt not support civil rights simply because Malcolm X had some negative views about white people.I guess you would? It just shows you werent in it anyways - so its not a loss. Ciao!

Gopher, it's lovely that you'd like to compare racism and sexism but please stop.

They are both oppressions, and they are both part of the same system. But they act in different ways. Yes, men of any race can oppress women. But whites of any gender can also oppress people of colour. And cis people of all genders and races can oppress trans people. There is no hierarchy of oppressions, there are only differences of power between groups and individuals, and they are too complex to call out like that. And how you think people aren't making an issue of Obama's blackness is entirely beyond me..

Question:

You make a joke about men. The man/men hearing the joke are hurt and think it is sexists. You reply it is not sexist and totally ok to hurt them because men have the power.

This sounds like victim blaming. The men get hurt, then we blame them for having power and use this to justify our actions. Or the other alternative is that we are not victim blaming and it is just ok to hurt men (because they have hurt women for thousands of years, oh wait, that is stereotyping all men and victim blaming again, sorry).

Come again, why is it ok to throw hurtful stereotyping jokes at me? Why is it ok to through hurtful stereotyping jokes at anyone for that matter?