The “Expert” Behind the CBA Feminism Ruling
if you’re reading this, you probably know the background already. Briefly, the folks at the Canadian Blog Awards introduced a “Best Feminist Blog” category. Predictably, the first round was swarmed by Freeping Tories, who gleefully nominated a slew of anti-feminists to make a mockery of the category. The CBA asked an “expert” to review the nominees and distinguish the Fems from the Faux.
Inexplicably, based on the recommendation of this “expert”, one of the best bloggers under any heading, JJ the Unrepentant, was somehow judged Non-Feminist, and kicked out of the nominations. Even more inexplicably, “Choice for Childcare” was judged more feminist than JJ, and was predictably freeped into second place.
Many of us have been speculating, humorously or otherwise, about the identity of this “expert”. All we were told is that they had a degree of some sort in “Women’s Studies”. And then yesterday, they spoke.
I felt the reason’s that Choice for Childcare was initially considered a feminist blog was because it pertained the issue of both choice for women, and for dealing with daycare (an issue that affects both single and married women). Unlike Small Dead Animals or some of the other conservative ‘feminist’ blogs, the arguments were based on economic principals under the assumption that these would benefit women, not something like religious reasons (that Suzanne provided for her arguments about abortion) or the simple fact that she was a woman. In fact, some of the ones eliminated were women, but appeared to me to be anti-feminist (a contradiction for the category they appeared in). One was a stripper, the others argued for free speech – which may have been a compelling argument for having them included in the feminist category if it was so heavily in favour of hate speech. Many didn’t seem to display an understanding of feminist logic. Choice for Childcare was using economic arguments for her position. In many of the classes I’ve attended, both in economic and women’s studies, this was the single most advancing portion of the feminist movement other than historical arguments themselves.
A number of other bloggers have already dissected the substance of this apologia, so there’s no need to point out its astonishing non-sequiturs (a stripper can’t be a feminist? Or support free speech?), and meaningless turns of phrase (”feminist logic”? Is that like “Jewish physics”?), and incoherent definition of “feminism”.
I will simply point out that the judgement appears to have been rendered by someone whose literacy skills would place them around grade eight. That’s not a pointless insult: it’s an accurate observation. There is barely a sentence in the brief excerpt above that does not contain spelling errors, bad grammar, appalling syntax, or, at the very least, clumsy phrasing. I’ve highlighted the most obvious offenses against the language.
I’m not a language fascist. But if you’re going to present me with an “expert” who you feel is qualified to slap one of Canada’s better bloggers in the face, then please have the courtesy to find someone who can actually write a coherent paragraph.
I don’t know who told you “they had a degree of some sort in “Women’s Studies””
As it turned out they have a minor in Women’s Studies. The issue as I see it at this point has more to do with poor sportsmanship over legitimate complaints.
By all means expand on that point, Sask. To whose “poor sportsmanship” are you referring?
I won’t speak for any of the other complainants. My personal complaint is that a fine feminist blogger was deemed insufficiently feminist to be allowed on the list, while a blogger who stated – listen carefully – “I AM NO FEMINIST” – ran.
Do you view that “complaint” as “illegitimate”?
The Flesch-Kincaid grade level is 15.1 for the comment. That’s university level. Unfortunately, the F-Kin’ measurement doesn’t work very well when there are spelling and grammar errors. I would rate this a grade-eight level comment with a mark of 65% due to unclear and unorganized arguments, plus grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
I do think that all the categories need simple and clear requirement for eligibility. Also, some of the categories may need to be revised. For the Best Feminist Blog, I don’t think there is a clear definition of what feminism is. One “expert” with grammar and spelling errors is not good enough to define feminism. Maybe the Best Feminist Blog should be changed to Best Women’s Issues Blog or something similar. This way, we should not get people nominating frivilous blogs just to discredit the category. I would think that people with different political and social views would like to maintain and improve the credibility of the Canadian Blog Awards.
Saskboy explains what he meant about “poor sportsmanship” here. I understand what he’s saying, I sympathize, and I responded with the following:
I agree with Balbulican on reshaping the feminist/women’s category to make the CBA’s more credible to all. Start working on it now.
@Skinny Dipper – Maybe the Best Feminist Blog should be changed to Best Women’s Issues Blog or something similar. This way, we should not get people nominating frivilous blogs just to discredit the category.
You do realize that such a modification would, in fact, fully legitimize the inclusion of explicitly non/anti-feminist sites like Big Blue Wave or Choice For Childcare that primarily deal with issues pertaining to women (and, under the new ‘women’s issues’ criteria, still exclude JJ, since the objection raised by Mr (yes, Mr) Gender Studies Expert was her lack of emphasis on ‘women’s issues’)?
Feminism isn’t the problem, Skinny Dipper. The problem is that the CBA operators would rather dismiss legitimate concerns about the integrity of the feminist category as merely being ’sour grapes’ from ’sore losers’ than admit that they (once again) screwed the pooch, no lube. That, in my estimation, is especially telling of what little regard they hold for feminist bloggers and feminism(s) in general.
And as for this oh-so-mysterious ‘expert’ of theirs, well, anyone who arbitrarily dismisses the perspective of sex workers as automatically ‘not feminist’ was obviously sleepwalking his (yes, his) way through gender studies class. Balbulican’s suggestions warrant serious consideration so that we don’t see a repeat of this clusterfuck next year (and so that actual feminist blogs–not talking about JJ, but rather others who actually fit the stated criteria but didn’t make it to the second round thanks to the inexplicable inclusion of C4C–aren’t eliminated from contention by bloggers who, y’know, outright reject feminism.)
First of all, there shouldn’t be some anonymous judge.
Second, if an external judge of feminism is brought in, I demand better than a Women’s Studies minor.
Third, most feminist academics would tell you than Women’ Studies is the liberal capitalist co-option of feminism.
Fourth, any feminist judge should be able to identify her particular feminist orientation. Liberal feminist? Radical? Postcolonial? Socialist? I demand that s/he does. If the judge can’t, s/he are in no position to evaluate blogs as they have not explicitly laid out his/her orientation and, therefore, related criteria.
Fifth, my entire master’s thesis is around childcare, capitalism and labour.
Choice for Childcare could technically represent a maternal feminist position, but her rhetoric puts her firmly in the neo-con, anti-feminist camp.
Sixth, I demand transparency…but I suppose that Scott and Saskboy must hide their complete lack of competence.
MORONS!
“Feminism isn’t the problem, Skinny Dipper. The problem is that the CBA operators would rather dismiss legitimate concerns about the integrity of the feminist category as merely being ’sour grapes’ from ’sore losers’ than admit that they (once again) screwed the pooch, no lube. That, in my estimation, is especially telling of what little regard they hold for feminist bloggers and feminism(s) in general.”
To add to this point, I was not nominated…I did not vote. I am arriving to this issue after the fact. My sour grapes are that I resent some little twits judging something of such personal value to me and importance to our collective histories and futures.
I demand…
You demand????
What ownership or other criteria relative to the awards would place you in a proper position for that?
Put a different way, if this category and its winner and runners-up are to have credibility in Polly’s eyes, she demands transparency and a competent judge.
I feel exactly the same. I couldn’t believe my eyes reading that “judge”’s words. Illiterate, ignorant and condescending, all for one low price. If I were asked to take this “Best Feminist Blog” contest seriously, I too would have some demands before doing so.
Put in a different way it becomes a different thing.
I don’t disagree with any of this: “Illiterate, ignorant and condescending, all for one low price” but “I repectfully request”, “strongly suggest” or a host of other ways of putting it would be more in keeping with the who’s who and what’s what about the CBA.
My strong suggestion to those who disagree about how CBA awards are decided would be to become involved in the existing process with a view to improving things for next year, or to suggest (or, better, create) alternatives.
My strong suggestion to those who disagree about how CBA awards are decided would be to become involved in the existing process with a view to improving things for next year, or to suggest (or, better, create) alternatives.
My strong suggestion is to just simply ignore the CBA’s. Like all ‘awards shows’ they are completely meaningless. Seriously. Keep in mind I am a Groucho Marxist about this. But still…
To Mattbastard et al.
I’ll play the blue devil’s advocate and state that those on the right didin’t like the interpretation of the Best Feminist Blog category because it created another award for so-called “lefties.” Can someone be a right-wing conservative and also be a feminist? I only suggested that the CBA could have a Best Women’s Issues Blog because it will allow bloggers with different political and social views to participate in this category. If a pro-life/anti-choice woman wins 1st place for Best Women’s Issues Blog, I hope it is because her blogging/writing will be excellent. Heck, if a man wants to write mainly about women’s issues, then he could possibly win such an award.
When I voted for the blogs in different categories, I didn’t necessarily choose the ones with which I agreed. I chose the ones that inspired me to challenge my thinking about the world. I also chose blogs that could provide me with new information. That sometimes means doing research and investigations. One doesn’t need to be a paid blogger to provide me with new information. Sometimes a blogger can provide existing information, but also provide a unique interpretation of that information. I also looked to see if bloggers allowed for meaningful and timely discussions through a comment section. If it looked like a blogger was only approving comments with which he or she agreed, then that blogger did not get my vote.
I didn’t make any open comments about bloggers that I voted for this year. Next year, I will make recommendations either at the CBA website or on my own blog. I want to see excellent blogs win.
They’re meaningless as a measure of merit. They are in some cases accurate indices of the degree to which a blogger or group of bloggers can canvass for votes, and in other cases indicators of popularity (not to be confused with value – Macdonalds sells more burgers than Beckta’s).
But they’re fun, they entertain, they introduce us to new blogs, and they occasionally spark interesting debates like this one. I strongly regret the insult to JJ, but I think perhaps we’re talking this a bit too seriously.
I stand by my use of ‘meaningless’, Balby, because they are meaningless to me. I mean that in the sense of any type of ‘awards show’. Unfortunately I’m in a spot (workplace PC with nasty IT network restrictions) right now where I can’t copy and paste/or link to my comment on this at ACR.
Basically, I ignore, and avoid like the plague, anything to do with awards (Oscars, Grammys, Junos, People’s Choice… name it, I avoid it). I say that even as someone who actually has won awards. I just personally dislike having anything to with them.
With respect, Docter, there’s a world of difference between the phrases “completely meaningless” and “meaningless to me”.
OK, “completely meaningless to me”
And vacuous. (lol)
I’m sorry, Balby. Just call me grumpy. Anytime I hear the word ‘awards’ my eyes roll right back into my head.
(heading quietly off into a corner where I’ll say no more)
[...] invitation links (some were sent by email): I really must know what the consensus is on stripper bloggers… Possibly related posts: (automatically [...]
[...] invitation links (some were sent by email): Because I really must know what the consensus is on stripper bloggers… Possibly related posts: (automatically [...]
I don’t like awards of any kind either…On the other hand, women are under-represented in the blogosphere and particularly in the political blogosphere…
This is a situation where the commitment of feminist bloggers could and should be recognized…We have some superb ones…The awards were not only disrespectful to JJ, but all feminist bloggers and indeed all feminists…
I was not nominated and that’s OK…but I could sure tell you that Choice for Childcare does not belong there…and some of these women make consistent and admirable contributions…and the awards should at least attempt to honour that.
So, take issue with my rhetoric or what have you…
But, I think that those who run things should be held to a higher standard.
I mean really…some of these women spill blood, sweat and tears into their blogs and their commitment to feminism and it sickens me that so little effort was taken to find a suitable external judge.
My hero!
(Seriously, balb, I’m blushing. What kind words. Thank you.)
I think the CBA guys tried, they really did, but there’s no template for this category so they’ve had to improvise a lot. It shouldn’t be necessary — you’re progressive or you’re not, you’re conservative or you’re not, you’re a feminist or you’re not, etc., it should be that easy. It’s too bad that for *whatever* reason this category sends righties into such paroxysms of outrage that they feel driven to try and screw it up.
But they’ll do the same thing next year, guaranteed.
Oh well. On a positive note, NBCDipper told me that the Womens Studies person apologized for giving me the boot. Ha!
Mattt as usual you make an ass out of yourself, calling into question my commitment to feminist goals.
Anyway
“Maybe the Best Feminist Blog should be changed to Best Women’s Issues Blog or something similar. ”
As mattt doesn’t incorrectly point out (amazing), that has been suggested before, and won’t work if the idea is to honour the best blog devoted to “feminism” because it does permit anti-feminists to participate. It’s also why some decided to label NBCD and I of being afraid of the word feminism (I’m not, and proudly call myself a feminist) and started the “f-word awards”.
That’s why it’s difficult to solve this problem. I want to run an inclusive blog awards so that all Canadians feel they can fairly participate, but some want to run simply for political reasons, and some to only offend another group of bloggers they don’t like (politically or otherwise).
Mattt is right (again, wow!) that bloggers who don’t want to be labeled Best Feminist Blog, should not be eligible. To fix that we’ll have to double check with all nominated bloggers that they want the title. Any volunteers to work on that next year? Keep in mind there are deadlines to this work, it’s unpaid, and if you don’t get it done, then you leave your team mates in a bind where they have to go ahead with the blogs suggested or delay things. We delayed the feminist category with some success by doing so, and didn’t in the Sci-Tech and got chewed out over that problem there. Bottom line, is if there are open nominations, then we need a BIG team of fair judges to work on all new rules created for next year.
Sorry about the double pingback there, I had some confusion with the address. I don’t understand how both links work… but I meant to just mention that they’re “invitation links” because I’m a dork and I really love the question of whether stripper-bloggers are feminist.
Oh here I go philosophizing, re “there’s a world of difference between the phrases ‘completely meaningless’ and ‘meaningless to me’…”
Is it possible to talk intelligently about values at all without the *valuer* being taken into necessary account?
Feminists are abandoning Liberals in droves and are moving to NDP.
Kinsella got new marching orders from Ignatieff.
Liberals are told to abandon “the Bully” epithet when referring to PM Stephen Harper.
This is major shift in Liberal policy.
Ignatieff’s message to Liberal followers; no more girly stuff, stop whining, grow some balls, get testosterone pumping and take in on a chest like a real man.
All feminists started to panic as this kind of behaviour is what they detest the most in Conservative ranks.
Lesbians at HoC were first to suggest that all feminists in House of Commons pack their bags and move over to NDP camp.
Jack Layton got so excited at this prospect that he is considering sex change surgery. Now, he is in a process of discussing this new idea with his wife Olivia.
He wants to continue their marriage and enter Guinness Book of World Records as first lesbian couple in National Parliament.
I am not making it up, just read Kinsella’s Blog
http://warrenkinsella.com/
Quote:
BULLY FOR YOU
——————————————————————————–
Saturday, December 20, 2008, 05:13 PM
Is the Conservative leader a bully?
He certainly gets called one often enough, but not ever by me. Two reasons.
One, in politics at least, calling one’s opponent a “bully” implicitly suggests he or she has bested you. That you are indeed weak, and that you want the rules of the game rewritten. In politics, it sounds sucky.
Besides, you need only take a gander at the titles of a couple of the books I’ve cobbled together – ‘Kicking Ass,’ ‘The War Room’ – to know that I don’t think anything is wrong with being tough with a political equal during an election campaign. (Playing partisan games during a massive economic crisis, meanwhile, isn’t bullying. It’s stupid and self-defeating and bad for the country.)
Two, I don’t think Stephen Harper, the man, is a bully. I’ve personally experienced the man’s willingness to reach across the aisle – with me, an opponent who had been very critical of him and his party, and for years, too. …..
@Ron Good – Ron, it was a fair comment, and quite true. I don’t feel chastised or ‘taken into account’. Acknowledge that it is my personal opinion which may or may not be shared by others.
Maybe there is a deeper philosophical discussion to be had on the nature of ‘award’ in respect to values, but probably not here and now.
Damn. We’re such a bloody reasonable little neighbourhood here.
Ron, I would certainly never dare chasten any man whose musical repertoire includes a reggae version of the Immigrant Song. You don’t frink around with people like that.
Frank: that’s what i get for posting in the wee hours….I didn’t think Balb was taking you to account, wasn’t even thinking about that, or even about awards, and I wasn’t meaning to chasten Balb either.
I was just making a general observation, meaning only to point out how often folks assert this or that being “important” or “necessary” or “worthwhile” or “essential” (well, you get my drift…) as if the adjective rests on its own all self-evident-like, always and for everyone.
Wildly off-topic example: “It’s essential to bail out the auto industry” leaving totally aside “essential to whom“?
That’s all I meant.
@Ron Good – Gotcha! Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
I heard that next year CBA was going to roll-out a whole new category: Best Socialist Blog. But I also heard it was going to be awarded to Worthwhile Canadian because in someone’s introduction to economics class it was explained that liberal economists are just really trying to make everyone better-off. And, really, what could be a more satisfying definition of liberal economic theory and socialism?
All of this ignores the only important fact about the CBAs:
I didn’t win.
That is all.