Ha, so I just read this.
We usually try not to talk about Jezebel too much on here, but because many of our readers met us as Jezebel commenters, I felt like I had to speak up on this particular topic, and the other Harpies are gonna weigh in in the comments. I’ll probably have more articulate thoughts on this later.
It’s a funny thing that in this day and age of only-the-media-cares, navel-gazing, solipsistic journalism one can write an entire article about a blog while having only passing familiarity with it. Linda Hirshman (she of “pull yourself out of your violent relationship by your own bootstraps” fame) calls Emily Gould an “occasional Jezebel contributor” – I think Emily’s maybe had a byline or two in the entire, year-long history of the site of which I have read nearly every post. She talks about an incident (Thinking and Drinking – Google if you happened to miss that bit of fun) that is now nearly a year old. So, safe to say that this woman has a highly selective view of what Jezebel is and does.
My suspicion is that to people like Hirshman, Jezebel represents an opportunity to generation-bash, without much cause or sense. If Hirshman is looking to be the Better Feminist (TM) by thumbing her nose from on high, I suppose she’s being successful at it. It’s not much worth the trouble, it seems to me, but hey, everyone needs a cause, and if Hirshman’s is to spend her time bitching about an internet website… well, Fight The Power, Sister! I’ll be over here caring about actual problems.
Now, I’m not gonna lie. I have definitely had my… issues with different writers at the site over the year or so I’ve been there regularly, some on grounds of mediocrity, others on grounds of sheer offensiveness. This, to me, seems like the case in any kind of collaborative media publication; not even the New Yorker (hell, much less the New Yorker) is on one hundred percent of the time.
I have even, of late, been a bit concerned about the commenting community there, and have gotten myself in trouble there for saying so. I do think that the commenters there, which, as anyone who reads Jezebel knows, can dominate the tone of the site even to the editors’ dismay at times, have taken a turn for the “no judgment!” worst. And I am definitely in the camp of thinking that feminism as empowerfulment is deeply problematic as a creed for young women.
But is Jezebel “hurting women”? Well, Mary, Jesus and Joseph, I tend to think that the only people “hurt” by asshattery and stupidity are the asses and idiots themselves. And everybody’s an ass sometimes; Ceiling Cat knows I am. I admit I would be happier if everyone owned up to their mistakes and apologized, all the time, but the fact that they don’t is a human problem, not a Jezebel problem. (Note: I didn’t see Ms. Hirshman apologizing for completely misquoting Katha Pollitt in her last debacle, myself, even after she was called on it.)
Moreover Hirshman fails to recognize that she too is falling prey to the persistent media trend is often “worried” about young women in the same way that the patriarchy is – in a sense, you want to damn us to save us. And sometimes, in the process, people forget that young women are not drones. We are not without the ability to react, and to think critically. The commenting community at Jez can often feel like a boxing ring (or at least it did until recently) where you cannot get away with saying things without being able to articulate some reason behind it. And that? Is refreshing in an age where young people are encouraged to have strong opinions, but actively discouraged from examining the reasons behind them.
Thus, for all my occasional issues with Jez, I can respect it because it has, overall, been a force in my life that forced me to think harder about why I believe what I do, and what that means. Twisty once called Feministing a feminism “gateway drug,” and while Jezebel is less obviously so, there’s some truth to that. I don’t love everything that’s written there, and I don’t love everything that’s granted the label “feminism” there, but by being there, I have been forced to explain why. And that is something. And that something is bringing far, far more young women to feminism than Hirshman’s finger-waggy, ill-informed, poorly-fact-checked screeds. Et tu, Linda?
***Note: we realize our commenters may have tons to say on this subject, but let’s try to keep this discussion from being linked to in future as a repository of internal Jez gossip, yes? Keep the critiques and thoughts abstract, please.
Everything I have to say about this issue has already been noted by the rest of you.
Just want to echo what others have already said, that the slut shaming in this article is really low and that she seems to have only a passing acquaintance with the actual website which just makes her looks like a jackass. Also, someone (emilyanne??) commented on the irony of this article being written for a website that was designed to compete with Jez and employs former Jez editors and yes.
@Khrushchev: Same. Everything is pretty much covered.
I second the wish that Dodai, Megan, and hortense, who consistently write thought-provoking well-reasoned pieces would get a little bit more love from the rest of the media. But it’s much easier/more sensationalistic to tear people down and wring collective hands over young women than to praise those who are helping, so it’s not like I’m surprised.
I, too, wish that Jez commenters still held to the same thinking before speaking standard that they seemed to when I first started reading, but it’s really difficult to impose unwritten standards like that when a site gets as big and unwieldy as it has.
So I come here and read the comments instead. Hooray for the Harpies in that regard!
As well as the slut shaming that has been pointed out, I have a serious issue with this point:
“How can writers who justify not reporting rape criticize the military for not controlling…rape?”
One does not equal the other! An individual not reporting her rape, for whatever reason, cannot be compared to an institution ignoring and enabling rape!!
To say that a writer who didn’t report her rape has therefor no right to comment on the culpability of the military (and the patriarchy at large) is to imply that women who don’t report rape are culpable for the the incidence of rape in society. Which, as far as I’m concerned, demonizes the victim and puts a responsibility, that is not hers or his, on their shoulders.
I understand that Hirshman has a bee in her bonnet when it comes to women reporting rape, but I just couldn’t let this comment go without a rant.
*hopefully all of this made sense as I’m a bit wound up and in a different time-zone so also quite tired…
I’ve mostly left off commenting at Jez, as there are only so many hours in the day and I’m vested in this site, but regardless, Hirshman’s critique is mis-founded. Her reduction of a community of thousands (and hundreds of regular commenters) to two former employees tells me that she’s spoiling for a fight. But to what ends? Is the new Double X aiming for an older demo? That they would start out with a post on “kids today…” makes me wonder. And vomit a little.
I’m also seriously disappointed at how little critique Denton gets, apart from the Dickens comment. If there’s a critique about Jez I can get behind, it’s that the relentless pace of posting and commenting required by Denton can mean brief, glib, and sometimes sloppy writing (and I say that, standing here in my glass house). She’s looking at the symptoms, not the cause. Way to NOT blame the Patriarchy, Linda.
@Kethry: WORD. I got so twitchy when I read that–how, please, is a woman, who was just a victim of a violent crime, choosing to not submit to further psychological torture and pain in a probably futile attempt to find “justice” the same thing as the military silently condoning the rapes of it’s own soldiers? The fact that she compares a civilian fucking BLOGGER to the US military is just evidence that she wrote this in 20 minutes as a way to get hits and have Jezebel link to her. She knows that they’ll have to respond, then thousands of their readers will click over to her and read her shit writing.
Goddamn it now I’m really mad. I hate it when women who are public feminists pull some woman-hating bullshit. I have to deal with my father repeatedly telling me, “Some feminists are ok. I like that Camille Paglia–she really knows what she’s talking about she’s a feminist.” I don’t need more people assuming that I am like this asswipe when I tell them that I’m a feminist who spends far too much time and energy on the internet.
Cimorene, I have the same problem, and I hate spending half my life explaining that while I guess my sensibilities hew closer to second-wave than to third-wave feminism, that doesn’t make me this Hirshman person or, for that matter, Geraldine Ferraro, who can eternally kiss my ass for turning up the fires in the racism vs. sexism sweepstakes.
Good catch Kethry. Gah, she’s defending rape culture.
Linda’s assessment of Jezebel just stunk of bitter. She referenced a post where Megan called her out on domestic abuse as being hypocritical and “judgmental” and then calls Megan a drunk party girl because of some professional photo taken of her?
What I want to know is: why is no one talking about the fact that the managing editor of Double X is a former Jezebel editor? I guess Linda probably thinks she must be a bad feminist as well, seeing as how everyone on Jezebel is represented by two writers who spoke at a non-Jezebel event.
Marbles, I am curious about that as well, but I suspect all it indicates is that Jessica Grose (the former Jez editor who is now Managing Editor at XX) is little more than an administrator.
@Pilgrim Soul: There should be a new term from those of us who find ourselves floating in-between the second and third waves of feminism. I guess everyone takes different bits from each school of thought, so that might be a pipe dream, but I just wish there was a recognized place where I felt like I really fit in.
Whoops, I meant “a new term FOR those of us…”
@Cimorene, PilgrimSoul
As the daughter, granddaughter and niece of some amazing second wavers (who also fully understood the negative impact that class and race have alone and in conjunction with gender FWIW) it really, really upsets me that people like Geraldine Ferraro and Linda Hirshman have become the public face of the second wave for many people out there.
@Kethry: Yep, infuriating. Not to mention that that variety of woman also spends half her time calling Andrea Dworkin a loony.
Ugh. I don’t even know where to begin and I’ll attempt to keep this succinct, but if you could even agree with Linda’s nonsensical argument that not reporting rape can actually be equated with raping someone and that providing women with stories of why you didnt report a rape (very detailed stories in some cases) and then have the audacity to call out the prosecution or lack of for the US military makes you a bad feminist, in fact a dangerous one, what does that say about Linda?
She condemns an entire site of women for issues only about 5% of them have dealt with on a personal level, yet cut them all down. She went beyond personal attacks and drudged up comments made while two of the editors were wasted. She provided no articulate reasoning for her site to be better, nor herself. So if the ladies of Jezebel are bad feminists, what the hell is this crackpot?
@PHdork
Denton is actually linking to this on his Twitter. Anything that brings his brands recognition he loves.
@ HistoricUpstart–I call myself a radical feminist.
On the gateway topic: it’s true, feministing was my gateway to this website. I respect the people who run feministing, but I think that this site is written a lot more intelligently and with a sense of humor and irony that I appreciate. But I still appreciate feministing for leading me here and to places like feministe and Kate Harding’s blog.
Jezebel was my feminist gateway drug. I fully agree it has it’s flaws, but that’s partially why I like it. I don’t care what some slut-shaming, holier-than-thou-”feminist”, windbag says, Jezebel has mad feminist street cred. XX might have considered that before posting that article.
I really like Jezebel – it’s one of my favourite websites. I don’t agree with everything it says, but it’s consistently interesting, usually intelligent, and covers the topics I’m interested in reading about.
I like the analogy of it as a “gateway drug” to feminism. In many ways it reminds me of old-school Bust magazine, my own gateway into feminism circa 2000 or so, when I stumbled across The Bust Guide To The New Girl Order in a bookstore.
[...] the view of the content, all of the articles acknowledge that many to be feminist view Jezebel. In her article on “The Pursuit of Harpyness” write Pilgrim Soul uses the metaphor can be used that in some [...]