Down with pants Up with skirts

chang

what is the meaning of this?

billzhao

意义想歪的人，尤其是男生，去面壁

billzhao

UP WITH SKIRTS, DOWN WITH PANTS
By jono marcus

% v7 u/ J' k3 v" i5 \
I went to the Green Party’s campaign headquarters on Valencia street last night, walked into a big room with all kinds of interesting people exchanging ideas, effecting real change.  The place was alive with such heartfelt political spirit that for the first time in my life I felt part of something american, something big and american.  I don’t have a great capacity for politics, never really have, perhaps I don’t take life seriously enough.  For that, of course, I apologize.
1 I- y: `% s! o+ ?9 _2 F8 L4 }0 V
; `8 O) z2 O8 Z. g6 P! I    Talking with one woman a little bit about Green Party prospects, I shared with her in jest the placard idea I had.
; P3 J7 O: n* F  D  
    “I wanted to bring this placard, but I feel it might be too late.”  I said.

    “Oh, really!  What does it say?” She responded.
, A0 G/ e9 f+ q, G: W4 z
“Well, my placard says on one side: UP WITH SKIRTS !!  and on the other side it would say: DOWN WITH PANTS !!” I paused for comedic intent.
  G. i" U& G" `4 W  
   She looked at me with disgust, “That is sexist!”

, \- E& O  Q: |0 u0 sIs it possible all politicos talk with exclamation points?
3 A1 m* x* |9 G* A( X. U6 `/ D2 A  
   “Sexist?!” I retort, “how is that sexist?”
! r* S# t. C+ e% i6 z
    “Its misogynist, you assume all women wear skirts!”
9 H: c5 n! U, S: v
% w$ l/ b$ _; v9 E& N8 l    “How the hell can you read that into UP WITH SKIRTS?

She looked at me again, in disdain, riveting me up and down.

: l- H: T4 g6 w3 V    “Trust me.  Its misogynist!”

2 F0 v" ?0 k) d% hShe turned away then, not wanting to associate with the misogynist, the purveyor of the sexist message, “UP WITH SKIRTS / DOWN WITH PANTS!”
, R& l, c$ V+ O1 T% [9 Z- S- H8 h
5 o& W6 d9 Q# B2 X5 N    How the hell could she see that satirically simple set of slogans as sexist.
    Perhaps I should’ve consulted my collection of Luce Irigaray texts, or the big fat book called Feminisms, but I just didn’t think such fun witticisms warranted such work.

I think she would rather I’d come up with the idea of writing a placard that said,
5 ^4 l' {. _. e3 D7 U  R5 T& J# ~“UP WITH SKIRTS /  DOWN WITH PANTS -- though not all women wear skirts, nor men pants, and I don’t mean to offend, and I am sorry if anyone thinks they are being verbally violated.”
) k# q6 J3 Y9 i9 m: s
OH!  My god, hold on, what was I thinking, I get it now.  Since I say, UP WITH SKIRTS and not DOWN WITH SKIRTS I am creating an inequality and hierarchy in the movement needed to actually get the pants or skirts off, so there is that implied difference between those who would take off skirts and those who would take off pants and since all women wear skirts and all men wear pants, that would mean that I intend to say women are different than men.  And since men are strong, that would mean that women are something different than strong, and that could only mean one thing—weak.
2 p  l, T9 r7 P) N
I certainly don’t mean to imply that.

But wait, perhaps what she meant is that UP WITH SKIRTS is a second option to DOWN WITH PANTS and since we all know that to have a second option implies a duality to the first and since duality here would challenge the authority of the singleness of the ONE, the option of the second, a mere marginalization to the theory of the ONE, then I see how my slogans are misogynist, because I imply that people who wear skirts are second class citizens not worthy of wearing pants.  So when I say, ”DOWN WITH PANTS / UP WITH SKIRTS”  I am really saying “DOWN WITH PANTS and for all of those other people who don’t wear pants, i.e. women, you can just consider yourselves not dignified enough to wear said pants, and so I shall deem you second class skirt wearing citizens.”

Or could it be that if a woman was to lift up her skirt, and assuming she was a woman wearing a skirt, though not implying necessarily that all women wear skirts, (I am just using that example because it is convenient for this here discussion), but if she were to lift up her skirt, and as compared to the man who would be wearing pants because he is a man (though not necessarily despite the statistical data which merely suggests that a man will wear pants more often than a skirt), but if a woman pulls up her skirt, she would be effectively blinded, her agency taken away because she would not be able to see with her skirt up in front of her face, so she would be vulnerable and since she couldn’t speak, the skirt blocking her mouth, she would be therefore silenced yet put in the place of value in the social and sexual market, her nickered body taking the place of her voice as if the body of the woman was all that mattered.  
' h: h5 {1 p$ \
Why didn’t I think of this when I came up with those silly slogans.  Of course this makes sense, and in this way I can totally see how that woman would think that my slogans, UP WITH SKIRTS / DOWN WITH PANTS would be misogynist.
% _% {7 y- ^' G" G& h+ o; N
/ U: c. j8 Z7 V$ \! l2 T Its obvious now.  UP WITH SKIRTS actually means, WOMEN, UP WITH SKIRTS,  and to suggest that if you wear a skirt then you are a woman, is to say that women = skirts, and by default, men = pants and when we say, “oh, she wears the pants in the family” we really mean, “she has the power in the family,” which is to imply that pants = power and therefore, by default, skirts = powerless.  So to say”UP WITH SKIRTS,” is also to say, “Women, you are powerless in your position as mere marketable exchange commodities amongst the power elite of men whose pants, while down, trade you on the basis of your upskirted self and not the real woman which is covered by the skirt which you are lifting.”
; b+ Q3 p0 j0 h1 K4 ?' l  M' G7 p" c
; J+ n: y4 x( F% j5 EUP WITH SKIRTS / DOWN WITH PANTS! the whole idea was wrong from the start and I was foolish to think that such a comical approach to the sensitivites of serious politics would weigh so heavily in the hearts of the Greater Naders.  But here I do offend, for I don’t intend to criticize all members of the Green Party, nor the supporters of Nader and Benjamin (because they had a nice hummus and pita spread that hit the spot) nor would I want to offend women in the plural.  However, I would like to offend that one woman and only that one woman, if I might be so bold to say,
7 @% r# F! V5 b8 ]. A' `
5 k7 w) W: E- s“Lighten up, I was only joking!”

雲吞

先回帖，后面壁

billzhao

大家不知道看过two and half man没有。Alan 说 Charlie 是一个misogynist。charlie查了字典才知道这个词的意思是：厌恶女人的人。
! y9 B* x" x- U% O楼主所提出的这个slogan. 根据二楼的文章，是说，女人不应该象男人那样穿裤子，要穿裙子。因为裤子在这里代表的是power。
  X! I" P6 x" L7 _+ r& e' Q所以，这句话，在一定程度上，和“女人回厨房”类似。