<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sexism vs. Racism: Where Are We?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://moddparker.wordpress.com/2008/04/22/sexism-vs-racism-where-are-we/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://moddparker.wordpress.com/2008/04/22/sexism-vs-racism-where-are-we/</link>
	<description>Feminism, history, and life in flux.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:58:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Colin</title>
		<link>http://moddparker.wordpress.com/2008/04/22/sexism-vs-racism-where-are-we/#comment-112</link>
		<dc:creator>Colin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:56:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://moddparker.wordpress.com/?p=71#comment-112</guid>
		<description>maybe it's just me, but i think that american society (or should i say media) pushes an ideal onto anyone who will listen of the nuclear family, with the father as the breadwinner and the mother the stay-at-home mom (there's your sexism). anyone who doesn't fit neatly into this 'perfect' - generally church-going and white (and your racism) - family structure is marginalised/gently mocked/looked down upon.

with race, if you're not white you're breaking out of the ideal and you'll have to work hard to prove you're still 'normal' (e.g. by making sure you tick all the other nuclear family boxes). however no one would ever think of saying 'yes, they're nice and everything, but they're black/brown/purple' (except behind closed doors) because of the taboos you describe. this racism is not vocalised.

however if you're promiscuous (and female, obviously - if you're male promiscuity is positively encouraged) and hence again breaking this ideal ('how will you ever start a family if you keep sleeping with different men?' ) then people can say whatever they want (maybe because promiscuity is to a certain extent chosen behaviour? 'she's breaking the nuclear family - on purpose!'), out come the cries of 'ho' and 'slut'. finally the insanity does work in a different way for men - it is the male's duty to be an absolute stud until he marries and then forever be faithful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>maybe it&#8217;s just me, but i think that american society (or should i say media) pushes an ideal onto anyone who will listen of the nuclear family, with the father as the breadwinner and the mother the stay-at-home mom (there&#8217;s your sexism). anyone who doesn&#8217;t fit neatly into this &#8216;perfect&#8217; - generally church-going and white (and your racism) - family structure is marginalised/gently mocked/looked down upon.</p>
<p>with race, if you&#8217;re not white you&#8217;re breaking out of the ideal and you&#8217;ll have to work hard to prove you&#8217;re still &#8216;normal&#8217; (e.g. by making sure you tick all the other nuclear family boxes). however no one would ever think of saying &#8216;yes, they&#8217;re nice and everything, but they&#8217;re black/brown/purple&#8217; (except behind closed doors) because of the taboos you describe. this racism is not vocalised.</p>
<p>however if you&#8217;re promiscuous (and female, obviously - if you&#8217;re male promiscuity is positively encouraged) and hence again breaking this ideal (&#8217;how will you ever start a family if you keep sleeping with different men?&#8217; ) then people can say whatever they want (maybe because promiscuity is to a certain extent chosen behaviour? &#8217;she&#8217;s breaking the nuclear family - on purpose!&#8217;), out come the cries of &#8216;ho&#8217; and &#8217;slut&#8217;. finally the insanity does work in a different way for men - it is the male&#8217;s duty to be an absolute stud until he marries and then forever be faithful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
