There are moments
when I don’t really know what is happening, so I sit back and watch till I get
an idea of what's up. Well, as of this morning, Kate Harding and Jill
Filipovic are suggesting that there is nothing wrong with Lena Dunham behavior
toward her sister when they were children, which sounds borderline abusive (we’ll come back
here). And Jessica Valenti is advocating (albeit in a jesting way) for lower
wages for men because it will take 81 years for women to close the pay gap. At
this point, all I have to say is nothing, but quietly walk toward the door.
Guys, this is why people think we’re a joke.
So on Lena
Dunham. I have yet to read the book. It was supposed to be the next book
club book, but I don’t know if the ladies will still want to read it now. My
understanding is Dunham discusses how weird she was as a child by recounting
some stories from her relationship with her sister. The behavior is really coercive
for example giving her sister candy for kisses. However, some of the stories are much more
overtly predatory. For example, Dunham would masturbate in bed with her sister
or she touched her sister as a small child. Now, yes, all children are curious
about their bodies and the bodies of the children around them. But this is not
ok. First, in the book Dunham compares her behavior to that of a predator.
Second, even kids need to understand boundaries. I am hesitant to say much in
respect to Dunham’s sister’s experience, except that this sort of behavior
(writing about these situations years later) could be perceived as a control
tactic used by an abuser on their victim to revictimize. I’m also really
concerned that no one seemed to mention this in the numerous reviews of the
book. Dunham might be admitting to abusing a child, not relevant in the book
reviews? Finally, Filipovic seems to be thinking that Dunham’s behavior might
be explained by understanding what happened to Dunham to cause this behavior.
Umm, why? Sure if Dunham was abused that sucks. But I don’t need to know that a
rapist’s mom abused him. Abuse doesn’t create abusers, and in this case this
assertion seems to come out of nowhere. Or more specifically, out of a defense for
and apologetic response to Dunham.
In summary, I’m not
going to condemn Dunham as an abuser, but I’m also not going to absolve her.
Now, I have issues
with Valenti. I like her, I do, but she says and does things that aren’t
inclusive. It annoys me to no end that she collects a paycheck for suggesting
we pay people
less. Now don’t get me wrong, I want to pay CEOs less. Paying people less
doesn’t fix the problem of pay inequity. Fixing the gender pay gap doesn’t fix
the problem of pay inequity. We need a market overhaul. We need an economic
revolution. We need to pay people a living wage, and yeah if some people have
to take a pay cut to accommodate that then we can talk about it. Paying men
less isn’t going to fix anything just result in an even more underpaid
workforce. See that’s the problem Valenti seems to be operating on the
impression people are paid a legitimate and fair wage, well men. However, men
of color aren’t, and women aren’t (obviously), but white men who work for low-wages
aren’t making a fair wage either. This is the problem when people start talking
about the pay gap. We use the average figure when talking about it as if all
women make 71 cents on the dollar when in reality white men are the standard by
which we measure with white women behind them, and Hispanic women making the
least in comparison to white men. Honestly, we’re past this superficial
conversation. We need pay equity, but we need to recognize that we need it
across classes, races, sexual orientations, and gender among many, many more.
This is a lazy and offensive article.
I expect better
form Valenti. Honestly, I expect better from anyone who has a basic
understanding on the economy, pay disparities, and gender.
Anyone arguing that
things are getting out of hand for a potential abuser or that we should pay
everyone less does not speak for me. We’re already fighting on every front
between the stripping of voting and reproductive rights, access to food and
water, and the criminalization of poverty, think we can all get on board with
not supporting abusers and exploitative pay?
Tonight, I vote then I craft. I
expect everyone who reads this to vote. Sure, it feels like my vote matters
very little in Baltimore, after all this isn’t Ohio. But we have leadership
getting in bed with developers so yeah, it matters. In fact I’d argue that
local elections matter way more than the national ones in respect to concrete
changes.
