OPINION & EDITORIAL
Feminists tip ‘scale’ of absurdity
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Sam Clegg:
- Multicultural organizations emphasize politics of difference (April 9, 2008)
- Tomah ignores student's rights (April 3, 2008)
- Manning or O'Hagan: Do you want apathy or lies? (March 27, 2008)
- Nuclear plant ban ridiculous (March 14, 2008)
- No movie plotline: Iraqi plan won't fly (March 6, 2008)
Related Stories:
- Some feminists go too far blaming men (April 14, 2005)
- Feminists represent everyone (April 4, 2002)
- Men can be feminists too (September 30, 2002)
- Who's representing whom? (April 1, 2002)
- Letter to Editor (March 10, 2005)
by Sam Clegg
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Taking up the mantle of feminist heroes such as Betty Friedan and Susan B. Anthony is no easy task.
And judging from the recent antics of the Campus Women’s Center, in order to continue the revolution initiated by those luminaries of centuries past, it is necessary that the original ideals of feminism, rooted in common sense and liberty, be discarded in favor of a distinctly radical brand of social betterment.
CWC has drawn the lines of battle along the dimensions of a weighing scale, once located in a woman’s bathroom in the Memorial Union, which a handful of activists stole in 2005. The women, claiming they were “liberating” the scale, took it from the bathroom and placed it in CWC offices. It resided there until a few weeks ago, when the Union decided to rightfully take back its property.
During a Union subcommittee meeting and a subsequent interview, Chynna Haas of CWC argued the scale was both a trigger for weight loss disorders and a symbol of oppression for women.
The scale will likely be transferred to ASM, which will then proceed to place it in the CWC offices, according to Wisconsin Union President John Barnhardt.
Haas and the CWC are correct — the scale did need to be removed. But their justifications border on the ridiculous. Simply because an inanimate object makes one uncomfortable, it does not necessarily follow that said object is in any way malignant or indicative of some larger bogeyman, as the CWC suggests.
Haas is also correct in arguing the scales serve as triggers for weight loss disorders. Her experience with women who have suffered from such illnesses is an unimpeachable argument in her favor. However, according to the National Women’s Health Resource Center, weight loss disorders can be encouraged simply by “the pressure of living in a culture where self-worth is equated with unattainable standards of slimness and beauty.” And that standard of what qualifies as a trigger begs the question: How does moving a scale address the far more urgent matter, the detriments of the aforementioned culture?
The scale also may be a manifestation of a society that values physical standards of beauty over personal ones, but that same scale is certainly not the cause. The cause of weight insecurity is exactly what the NWHRC indicates — a society that judges beauty in an astoundingly particular way. And it is farfetched for CWC to assume that by eradicating a superficial representation of a much larger societal problem it can manage to solve the problem itself. Just because one relegates the symbol of an upraised fist to the basement of Humanities, it does not necessarily follow that the absurdity of the ISO’s politics would disappear with it.Â
It is also difficult to reconcile the basic feminist ideal of living on equal terms with the CWC’s position — that women need to be shielded from every aspect of society that could potentially do them harm.
But the most disturbing element of the whole situation is the language the CWC used to justify its theft. Haas and her predecessors claim to have “liberated” the scale.
Speaking about stupid misdeeds in the language of revolutionary heroism always lends itself to convenient euphemisms: I didn’t steal a slice of pizza from Ian’s, I “liberated” it. I didn’t punch my roommate, but rather “overthrew” him. In the face.
But no matter how cleverly Ms. Haas may disguise the actions of past CWC members, it is an unavoidable fact that in this case, “liberation” is really just a beautification of theft.
The CWC does have an undeniable role to perform at this university, and with events such as the current “Take Back the Night” week, it fulfills its organizational objectives without making arguments that are unnecessarily provocative and contrary to the original objectives of the feminist movement. The argument can be made that critiquing the language of the CWC, but not its actions, amounts to semantics. But no matter how correct CWC was in deciding to “liberate” the scale, in this case, the thought counts just as much as the deed itself.
Â
Sam Clegg (sclegg@badgerherald.com) is a freshman majoring in economics and political science.
Paul Heideman (April 17, 2008 @ 9:40am):
What preposterous blather. This article should win straw man of the year. No one ever argued that removing the scale would erase gender inequality in America. It would remove one particularly egregious representation of that inequality. I wonder if Mr. Clegg would similarly argue that we shouldn't punish police officers guilty of racial misconduct, simply because it won't solve "the much larger societal problem."
Anonymous (April 17, 2008 @ 11:09am):
"I didn’t punch my roommate, but rather 'overthrew' him. In the face."
That's the first thing you've ever said that was legitimately funny, and that didn't make me want to "overthrow" you (in the face).
Anonymous (April 17, 2008 @ 11:47am):
geesh, its going to be hard for such uppity women to find husbands!
Perhaps we should stop letting women into the SERF too - how dare women try to monitor their weight or stay healthy! Obesity is a much bigger problem in this country than eating disorders. Maybe we should get the UW Dietetics and Nutrition Club to go head to head with the CWC on the scales issue - then we can see if anybody cares.
I'm a feminist. Part of that entails letting women make their own choices. I believe that women are intelligent enough to make the decision as to whether they would like to step on the scale. If women aspire to emulate society's interpretation of beauty that is her own decision. Why should I interfere? That's what we're working for - freedom of choice. I love how instead of men telling women what to do, third wave feminism is women telling other women what to do. That's bunk!
On a related note, maybe the CWC could help me get the condom machines out of the Pub men's room. The machines are encouraging me to have safe sex, and there is nothing I love more than fucking a fat chick without protection! -MJ
Anonymous (April 17, 2008 @ 12:48pm):
All skinny girls should be required to fatten up!
Anonymous (April 17, 2008 @ 5:42pm):
Well done sam! What's next...removing mirrors from public restrooms so people with low self esteem won't have to look at themselves??
Anonymous (April 17, 2008 @ 7:48pm):
When the CWC is done "liberating" scales, they can start working on getting Women signed up for the Selective Service (i.e. draft)...if they are truly concerned about feminism and equal rights
Anonymous (April 25, 2008 @ 4:02pm):
"And it is farfetched for CWC to assume that by eradicating a superficial representation of a much larger societal problem it can manage to solve the problem itself."
they're not, moron, it was symbolic. to draw attention to the issue. did they say: removing scale --> eradication of the problem? NO.
you are a tool.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
