The Authentic Argument Advancer Attack (4A)

Over on another blog, a rather long comment thread has developed relating to a recent bloggers' meeting with former President Bill Clinton in Harlem.

Summary of Sorts:

• A large stink erupted about the whitewashed representation of political/social bloggers in attendance, a particularly odious incident arose where a conservative female blogger ridiculed a younger feminist blogger because of her pose. (Essentially, you're not supposed to be young, female, and stand in front of Clinton in a picture; if you do, it's a given that the former President's slept with you. And for God's love, don't look HAPPY about it.)
• Another blogger photoshops a picture of a burqa over the feminist blogger to make a point about the conservative blogger's attack.
• Women of color -- I believe rightfully -- take offense to the commandeering of the burqa to make this point about the conservative blogger's hang-ups about a young woman...looking like a young woman.
  
• The defenders of the photoshopping bloggers ask authentic followers of Islam if they were offended, they proclaimed the burqa an official "symbol of oppression," and they wrote the use of the burqa off as an exemplary testament to the oppressive comments and treatment of the young feminist blogger's objectification.

In other words: her knit sweater apparently wasn't enough covering; hell, they'd probably even criticize her wearing a burqa! Laughs presumedly to be had by all! It's humor, people! A joke! A joke of humorous, jokey, hi-lar-i-tay at the expense of this demanding conservative blogger!

...And the women who are forced to wear full body covering burqas in Afghanistan. Or was it the broader category of the Arab world? Or was it the even broader category of followers of Islam in general? I don't remember. One of those. Doesn't matter, right? No one chooses to wear a burqa. This official symbol of oppression is universal. Doesn't matter the reasons for it! It's a full body covering, and we want to make the point that Clinton would leer at anything!

See a problem arising here? (If you're on the other side, probably not.) And...to mitigate the problematic appropriation of burqa-hate...we learn that the photoshopped burqa does not even have a woman under it! It's a burqa on a stick! So women of color are very crazy for even getting offended, thinking a woman wearing a burqa was photoshopped in this picture! They couldn't see the stick for the burqa! Burqa burqa burqa -- canned laughter by all (who matter!) who are present.

So the women of color persist in discussing the implications of using a burqa for this catch-all joke, and how the perceptions of Westernized feminists rear its ugly heads in this display of humor. Which is when the women of color lose their sense of humor and are just trying to find ways to be upset. We're reaching. We can't speak for every woman of color; we're not the specific woman of color being held up to scorn. One particular commenter even said that if the person using the photoshopped picture needed to apologize, it would be to an actual Afghani woman who wears burquas. But until that person surfaces, the blogger can't apologize -- in fact, she's even absolved from issuing an apology. These women of color don't fit the target audience, after all.

I wrote the following reply to this assertion, whose framework I've christened as the Authentic Argument Advancer Attack (AAAA, or 4A):

I find this search for authenticity amusing, as if you cannot call a spade a spade without being a Card-Carrying Spade Identifier(TM).

The argument essentially runs like this:

1) A man reveals his penis in a park.

2) Groups of women notice that the man is showing his penis, bringing up other penis sightings in fields, near streams, on rollercoasters -- they're very certain it's a penis.

3) Other groups disagree with the women, saying it is his appendage he's displaying in the park.

4) Women point to more reasons why they think it is a penis and why it's not just any mere appendage. More parallel penis sightings in books, on television, on playgrounds, during honeymoons...more sightings.

5) Other groups tell the women that since they don't have penises, despite having seen them and having experienced them in different contexts, that their claim lacks validity, and that only a man or a person from the park can identify that particular penis, and until a man or a park representative identifies it as a penis, it remains an appendage.

Do you see how the merits of the claim aren't actually disputed -- there's just nitpicking at the people advancing its merits? The "calm down, it's just a joke" group seems to be operating from a pack mentality of well, I don't care what YOU think, but if someone I think is important tells me the same thing you're telling me, then maybe I'll listen. This line of argumentation does nothing but shut down the dialogue and generate animosity.