An Op-Ed by Catherine Rottenberg: “Hijacking feminism”
“Yet the ideal for both women [Sheryl Sandberg and Anne-Marie Slaughter] remains the same – having a very successful career and a heteronormative family and being able to enjoy them both.
This, unfortunately, is how the “truly liberated” woman of the 21st century is increasingly being construed. What is particularly troubling about this feminist moment – especially since both women espouse liberal ideals – is exactly how little emphasis either Slaughter or Sandberg ultimately places on equal rights, justice or emancipation as the end goals for feminism.”
” Zillah Eisenstein calls this imperial and trickle-down feminism.”
Feminist Philosophers 
I read that article a few days ago by chance and what struck me is that Al Jazeera runs an article with more feminist content than would most U.S. media, including so-called liberal media like the NY Times.
It’s time to rid oneself of lots of stupid, imperialistic stereotypes about the Middle East.
Al Jazeera is my go-to international news source (it usurped BBC in my RSS reader): it is encompassing but mostly dry–the way news should be, dammit.
Also, I think a chunk of their Op-Eds in general are further to the left than what would be allowable at the big US papers. For example: “Scientific racism, militarism, and the new atheists”
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/04/20134210413618256.html
(And when I look at the list of columnists on the right side of the page, my heart does a little post-revolutionary utopian back flip of joy.)
Thank you, Stacey.
I wandered into Al Jazeera after seeing an interview with Chomsky in Youtube from Al Jazeera.
I usually use the BBC myself for a quick glance into the international news, but I’ll give Al Jazeera a try now.
Good points here. I think you’d do well to look outside the US, too. You might choose to consider the female face of farming http://www.farmingfirst.org/women/
I am becoming more enamored by Al Jazeera, but that article relies largely on Chris Hedges’ misreadings of Harris, rather than on Harris’ words in context (and I’m not uncritical of Harris on lots of issues). Harris makes some hypothetical statements meant to show the unlikelihood of justifying some acts, and Hedges takes it as justifying anti-Islamic actions right now. Here is an interesting analysis of the article: http://saiu.org/2013/04/03/greenwald-and-hussain-on-sam-harris-and-racism/
I still disagree with Harris on much of this, but I don’t like how his words are being taken out of context.
I find Al Jazeera a refreshing news source as well. But there’s still way too much knee-jerk, gratuitous, anti-American hyperbole. As when Eisenstein speaks of Madre’s reporting of the
“Widespread use of rape and torture against women detainees by U.S. and Iraqi forces”
Really? Widespread use of rape by U.S forces against women detainees?
Plenty about U.S. involvement to criticize without making stuff up.