Den kända amerikanska författaren Susan Faludi kommer till Stockholm. På kulturhuset den 30/9 kl 19.00 talar hon om bla 911.

Daniel Sandström, Sydsvenska Dagbladet, möter den feministiska provokatören Susan Faludi som i sin senaste bok tar upp konsekvenserna av 11 september för kvinnorörelsen i USA.

Blev attacken mot World Trade Center 2001 en förevändning för att återupprätta förlegade hemmafruideal? Ja, säger Susan Faludi.

I ”Den amerikanska mardrömmen. Bakhållet mot kvinnorörelsen” beskriver hon hur politiker, media och populärkultur i en tid av nationellt hot väckte liv i en falsk myt och undvek en seriös debatt om 11 septembers orsaker och långtgående konsekvenser.

”En obeveklig reporter, en kompromisslös feminist och ett briljant plågoris … Feminismen är hennes kompass och riktmärke, hennes smältugn och hennes eld. Och feminismen har möjliggjort denna bok, denna storartade provokation.” /New York Times Book Review

Susan Faludi är författare till de feministiska klassikerna ”Backlash. Kriget mot kvinnorna” och ”Ställd. Sveket mot männen.” Hon har belönats med Pulitzerpriset.

http://www.kulturhuset.stockholm.se/d ... =default.asp%3Fid%3D23828

Detta kunde vara ett tillfälle att sprida lite ljus runt orsakerna!

Det vore intressant att se bennybear på detta föredrag

Well fy faaaan!

Jag bara säger:

Kontakta henne då och sammarbetar!

Eller MÅSTE ni väntar tills någon UTANFÖR gör detta, någon AMERIKAN? haha!

Hmmm jo kan vara bra tillfälle då att dela ut information, ställa frågor osv under hennes questions and answers...

NWO eliten HATA kvinnor.. ; )

Bohemian Grove,,, makt eliten..

NWO Rockefeller Ms Magazin, women in the work place false freedom increased taxes fall of family etc.....

Lorax!

Vet du om hon är på "vår" sida? Känner du till vad hon brukar tala om när det gäller politik?

I do not know.

It is a good angle in and to be there.

She probably understands it quite well, here is an interview:

Susan Faludi speaks about how women, in general, suffered more than men due to 911.
From www.democracynow.org Oct 4, 2007

Six years ago this Sunday, the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan began. Fifty cruise missiles were launched from submarines in the Arabian Sea. B52 and B2 Stealth bombers began air strikes.The Pentagon called the attack Operation Enduring Freedom. The invasion came less than a month after 9/11. Among the Bush administration’s goals were the capture of Osama bin Laden and the dismantling of the Taliban.

Six years later, neither objective has been realized. 40,000 U.S. and NATO forces remain in Afghanistan, and the United Nations recently revealed violence has reached a new high. Another stated objective of the war was the liberation of Afghani women. Shortly after the war began, Laura Bush became the only first lady in history to record a full presidential radio address. She addressed the plight of women in Afghanistan.
Laura Bush, speaking in November of 2001.

The Bush administration's use of feminists to help make the case for the war in Afghanistan is one of many topics examined in a new book titled “The Terror Dream: Fear and Fantasy in Post-9/11 America.” It is written by one of the country's leading social critics, Susan Faludi.

Faludi examines the cultural impact of the 9/11 attacks and concludes that the United States has been living in a myth since 9/11, and she explores how the attacks led to the denigration of women here in the United States, the magnification of manly men and the call for greater domesticity.

Susan Faludi is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist. Her previous books include “Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women” and “Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man.” She us joins us in the firehouse studio.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Six years ago this Sunday, the US invasion of Afghanistan began. Fifty cruise missiles were launched from submarines in the Arabian Sea. B52 and B2 Stealth bombers began air strikes. The Pentagon called the attack Operation Enduring Freedom. The invasion came less than a month after 9/11. Among the Bush administration’s goals were the capture of Osama bin Laden and the dismantling of the Taliban.

Six years later, neither objective has been realized. 40,000 US and NATO forces remain in Afghanistan, and the United Nations recently revealed violence has reached a new high.

Another objective of the war was the liberation of Afghani women. Shortly after the war began, Laura Bush became the only first lady in history to record a full presidential radio address. She addressed the plight of women in Afghanistan.

LAURA BUSH: Good morning. I’m Laura Bush, and I’m delivering this week's radio address to kick off a worldwide effort to focus on the brutality against women and children by the al-Qaeda terrorist network and the regime it supports in Afghanistan, the Taliban. That regime is now in retreat across much of the country, and the people of Afghanistan, especially women, are rejoicing. Afghan women know through hard experience what the rest of the world is discovering: the brutal oppression of women is a central goal of the terrorists. The fight against terrorism is also a fight for the rights and dignity of women.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Laura Bush, speaking in November of 2001. The Bush administration’s use of feminists to help make the case for the war in Afghanistan is one of the many topics examined in a new book titled The Terror Dream: Fear and Fantasy in Post-9/11 America. It is written by one of the country's leading social critics, Susan Faludi.

Faludi examines the current cultural impact of the 9/11 attacks and concludes that the United States has been living in a myth since 9/11, and she explores how the attacks led to the denigration of women here in the United States, the magnifying of manly men and the call for greater domesticity.

AMY GOODMAN: Susan Faludi is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist. Her previous books include Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women and Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man. She joins us in her first national broadcast interview today in our firehouse studio, as she begins a many-week tour around the country. Welcome, Susan.

SUSAN FALUDI: Thank you. Thank you for having me here.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about the dream you had on September 11. Where were you?

SUSAN FALUDI: Well, I was in Los Angeles, so I was three hours behind the events. And very early in the morning, I had this peculiar dream, where in the dream I was sitting on an airplane next to another woman, and a young man came up to us and shot two bullets. One went into my throat at a sort of odd angle, and one into her throat at an odd angle. And I realized that we were both alive, but we couldn’t speak.

Now, I don’t pretend to be a psychic. I don’t know why I had this dream. But later it struck me that it had this remarkable metaphorical quality to it, because when I began to look at our response to 9/11, what repeated over and over was the silence, of the way that women were silenced and, more generally, the way our culture silenced any kind of questioning or examination of our reactions.

JUAN GONZALEZ: You say the silencing of women. You attempt to document what happened in news coverage after that. Could you explain that further?

SUSAN FALUDI: That, well, with women, Geneva Overholser, who was the former ombudsman -- ombudswoman of the Washington Post, described how she picked up the Washington Post the next day, and they had expanded the opinion page from five to ten columns, so there would be, you know, a supposed diversity of opinions. But even then, there were ten male opinion makers and no women. And this was, as it turned out, no anomaly. In the first week, the major newspapers -- the Post, the Times and the LA Times -- had eighty-eight op-eds; only five were by women. Meanwhile, on the Sunday morning -- in the, you know, the important Sunday morning talk shows, there was a -- in the first seven weeks after 9/11, there was a 40% plunge in representation of women guests, even women who you would think would be rather essential. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer both had subcommittees of terrorism, made no appearance on these shows.

AMY GOODMAN: You did mention Peggy Noonan had an op-ed piece -- what was it -- in the Wall Street Journal?

SUSAN FALUDI: That’s right. Well, “Welcome Back, Duke,” I think it was called, in which she said, “From the ashes of [Sept. 11] arise the manly virtues […] men who push things and pull things.” And this is only the most famous of scads of stories about the supposed return of John Wayne in the post-9/11 era.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Your book -- I was fascinated by the way you connect what’s happened in 9/11 and through sort of the trend throughout the American psychology or American history, of -- going back to the captivity literature and how the first colonists dealt with the whole issue of being attacked. And could you talk about that some?

SUSAN FALUDI: Right. Well, I’m trying to figure out why we reacted to 9/11 in this peculiar and particular way we did. You know, why was it all about home and hearth? Why was it about sort of artificially inflating men into superheroes and insisting that women go back to the home, because there were many stories after 9/11 making that argument?

And I ultimately traced this peculiarity into our earliest history, because as much as we kept hearing after 9/11 these attacks like this have never happened to us before, if you look at our earliest history, you see a very different story. First of all, you see that this has happened to us over and over again. For the first 200 years, the main feature of American life, early American life, was being attacked on, quote/unquote, “home soil.” Now, granted, this was land that the settlers took from the Indians. But from the settlers point of view, they regarded these attacks as assaults by people they demonized as non-white, non-Christian, quote/unquote, “terrorists.” That was actually the term used sometimes.

And in reaction to -- and in these attacks in the first 200 years -- forget about the Great Plains, but the early, you know, New England and Northeaster colonies -- over and over again, leaders, militia, husbands, were not able to protect families in frontier towns. And out of that experience of feelings of vulnerability and humiliation, our culture, over a long period of time, starting in the eighteenth century and really culminating in the Victorian era, created a myth to paper over this vulnerability, and it was a -- the myth is the myth of American invincibility based on a kind of domestic drama.

AMY GOODMAN: In your piece in the Times, “America’s Guardian Myths,” you start with Mary Rowlandson. Talk about the significance of her.

SUSAN FALUDI: Mary Rowlandson wrote probably the most famous captivity narrative. Captivity narratives originally in the Puritan times were, more often than not, told from the woman's point of view. And Mary Rowlandson described how she was taken captive. Actually, it’s a kind of eerie and sort of hair-raising parallel to 9/11 in one way, in that, you know, at dawn this raid came on her little village of Lancaster, Massachusetts, and they all went into this garrison, a sort of supposedly fortified house.

JUAN GONZALEZ: A raid by Native Americans.

SUSAN FALUDI: Exactly, I’m sorry. And this was in King Philip's War, which the settlers had much to do with provoking in the first place, but that’s another story. And the house was set on fire. And so, Mary Rowlandson and the others had the choice of, do we stay inside and burn, or do we go out into what looked like certain death, which certainly will ring a bell with those who watched TV on the morning of 9/11. But Mary Rowlandson was taken captive, and she wrote about her eleven weeks of captivity.

And what’s significant is, as much she was a, you know, traditional Puritan woman, seeping into the account over and over is her annoyance at the male militia for failing to rescue them, even at one point where the militia came within yards and then decided they couldn’t cross a river that the Indian party had crossed with no problem. And then she rather shrewdly negotiated with her captors, bartered using her knitting needles to get food and ultimately to win their approbation, and named her own ransom. And this is not that unusual. There were a number of women captives who either defended themselves, negotiated, or, extraordinarily, about a third of female captives actually chose to stay with their Indian captors, preferred the Indian life. So there was a lot of sort of gender confusion and gender reversals going on here, that the myth we created sort of turned around.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And you continue to trace that, obviously, through the period of American slavery, and the particular topic that I’m especially dealing with now, as I’m trying to complete a book on the history of racism in the American media and how the press and the media again sought to create an image of protection of women against, in this case, Africans and black slaves in the country.

SUSAN FALUDI: Well, after the Civil War, again -- you know, these are moments, whether it’s after 9/11, where we felt we were vulnerable on home soil, or after the Civil War, when the defeated South felt that they were -- you know, had been incapable of protecting their, you know, quote/unquote, "homeland" from incursion by Yankees. And as a response, there was a sort of resorting to this drama, much like the drama we saw after 9/11, of rescuing -- of these rescue fantasies. And in the case of the post-Civil War era, it was a rescue drama of supposed white virgins from supposed, you know, savage freed black men who were alleged, completely wrongly, to have perpetrated an epidemic of rape. What’s interesting, in the -- the Klan, obviously, built -- you know, was the main perpetrator of this notion, which attracted at its heyday about five million men.

But when you go back and you look at the late nineteenth century, when this myth first, you know, finally evolved, particularly in the second half of the nineteenth century, one of its hallmarks was the idea that women -- you know, because women must be vulnerable in order for -- women's weakness was required to shore up male strength, and the most sort of dramatic form of female vulnerability is sexual defilement, so these images of rape were all over popular culture in the second half of the nineteenth century.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Susan Faludi, the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist. Her third book is out; it’s called The Terror Dream: Fear and Fantasy in Post-9/11 America. When we come back from break, we’re going to talk about the images today. We’ll talk about the renaming of the pile as Ground Zero. We’ll talk about the case of Jessica Lynch, the US soldier, and the myth that was built around her.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/12040

Interpret how you want:

My Brief Interview With Susan Faludi, journalist and author of "The Terror Dream: Fear and Fantasy in Post 9/11 America"
( Home » blogs » Shumonik's blog » My Brief Interview... )
Entries in this section are created by individual users who register with this site and are largely unmoderated. Content in this section should not be interpreted as being supported by 911blogger.com, or by any other members of this site, and should only be viewed as a posting of the individual who created it. Please contact a team member if you notice a post which violates our general rules.
Submitted by Shumonik on Wed, 10/17/2007 - 5:07am.
mythos | Neo-Cons | Nietszche | post-9/11 America | Susan Faludi | The Terror Dream

Last night, Susan Faludi was in Los Angles, speaking at the LA Central Library about her new book, "The Terror Dream: Fear and Fantasy in Post 9/11 America." After an interesting discussion ranging from the stifling of women's voices immediately after 9-11 to the recapitulation of the "lone cowboy" version of hyper-masculinity, there was a question and answer period, during which I had hoped to ask a question about the nature of the mythic origin event itself. I had also hoped to weave in a glance at the philosophical heritage of the neo-cons that pointed to "creating reality" and some of the most nihilistic aspects of Nietszche's "superman" (ubermensch) concept. But my hand didn't get picked. So, I waited afterwards for everybody to get their book signed and then asked her for a brief interview, which she graciously accepted to do. Afterwards, I handed her a DVD (Zeitgeist is what I had in my bag at the time) and a 9-11truth.org pamphlet. Here is the transcript (I'm J (for Jeremy) and she's S (for Susan):

J: I first wanted to thank you for your analysis of the post 9-11 mythos, of your powerful critique of it really. And then I just wanted to quickly acknowledge that some of the fiercest skeptics and whistleblowers of this post-9-11 era are women, such as the Jersey Girls-we wouldn’t have even had an investigation without them- Colleen Rowley and Sibel Edmonds from the FBI…

S: Yeah, I know there are a whole series of women who…

-side chatter about signing books-

J: So then my question has to do with looking into the origin myth of the mythos, which is the 9-11 story itself, and then also the philosophical construct of the men who have decided how we are going to react to that, the neocons. Because they hearken back to the worst, the nihilist in Nietszche, the “Superman” concept. So I think that relates to what you are talking about. Rove, I think, said, “we are an empire now, when we act we create our own reality.” And then Zelikow, when approached by a professor who was bringing up all these facts from the people who don’t believe the government’s story behind 9-11, he said “well that’s an alternative universe, and we don’t think that alternative universe, or other reality exists.” So there’s a sort of sense that maybe these men are not actually the kind of men that wait for reality to happen. They create it. So I was wondering whether you have done any analysis of that origin event. And how finding out that 9-11 was not what they told us, that maybe it was a self-inflicted wound to wake the sleeping giant, how that might inform your analysis of the post-9-11 era?

S: … no…no. You know I am not a believer. I know that there are those that feel that there was some kind of government…

Man next to her: Conspiracy stuff.

S: …conspiracy, but you know, I just don’t have that much faith in the Bush administration [laughing] to get anything right, demonstrated in buckets by the reaction to Hurricane Katrina. But, you know, you don’t have to, you know, buy into the conspiracy idea to see that, surely Karl Rove is brilliant at spinning. Karl Rove, several weeks after 9-11, started paying visits, repeated visits, to movie moguls to conduct a campaign to create propaganda, or what do you call it, communicated, to present America in a certain way. If you don’t shut up in Hollywood [inaudible]… gave a Powerpoint presentation about, you know- use the word “eagle.” You know there’s a certain amount of conscious…

J: Manipulation?

S: Manipulation. But it also falls on fertile ground. And we live in a country that wants to believe this kind of instruction.

J: Well, I appreciate your response. And I would encourage you to go look at where some of these guys come from. They come from Leo Strauss, who pulled some of his stuff from the Nazis and the Big Lie. The bigger the lie the more people will believe it, you know. And yes, Bush clearly did not architect anything, but…

-At that point a woman from foundation that put on the event interrupted and said they needed to close up-

J: But there are parallel structures. So I just wanted to give you a DVD and then a little pamphlet too…

S: Great.

J: …so you could look into it.

S: Terrific.

J: Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

S: No problem.

J: Ok, bye bye.

S: Good luck.

J: Thank you.


Perhaps Weden Truth can continue the interview...

Ja, men det verkar inte helt lätt att få henne att säga något kontroversiellt... Hon kör väl samma taktik som Moore och andra.
Fast det kan ju vara bra att vara där och ställa lite frågor och dela ut info till andra...