Posted by craftylikeafox on 2006-04-03 14:23:41
Post Subject: I've been a busy Vixen! Crafty Like a Fox NEWS
Ok kids, come with me on my journey! I've started a blog:
craftyfox.blogspot.com
with the goal of making Craft the ultimate feminist/humanist/political art medium!
Also, craftylikeafox.ca has some news:
New stores in Canada, new websites in the states, new cross stitch patterns, new crafty ideas, oh my god, can you handle it?
And, coming soon:
The Softcore Chick series - cross stitch kits
The Archetypes - PAINT BY NUMBERS! It's true
Posted by beqi on 2006-01-14 10:16:57
Post Subject: want to swap links?
I'll be redoing my site for spring in February, and wanted to update my links page. Are there any crafty chicas who would like to swap links? If so, my email is beqi13@yahoo.com.
My site is Beqi Clothing, at http://www.beqiclothing.com. I can either furnish you a button to use as a link graphic, or you can make one of your own to fit your site. If you need a tagline, mine is "Good Clothes for Bad Girls".
All of the links on my page will get a custom button to fit my site. Expect this to go up in mid to late february. I'll link with anyone artsy, crafty, feisty, and feminist.
Posted by Ratti Pillo on 2006-01-24 13:20:35
Post Subject: New Jersey Zine Fest!
hey everybody. I'm part of a group at Rutgers university- the fabulous Radigals (the under grad women and gender studies assoc) and we are in charge with the help of other in hosting the annual NJ zine fest. this year we're pretty psyched because we got a bigger place to hold it at and we are continuing the tradition from years past (with the exception of last year) to hold a feminist conference and rock show that weekend too.
i'm posting this because even though it's a zine fest- a celebration of independent media, i was hoping that there were some zinester/craftsters (such as myself) that would be in the area interested in tabling.
It will be on March 26, 2006 (Sunday) most likely from noon-six @ the Douglass College Campus Center in New Brunswick NJ.
I'm not exactly sure if there will be a tabling fee, I will post if there is. Please message me if you're interested in tabling and I will keep you posted.
also, messageme if you just want to come. The zine fest and conference is free, and the rock show/dance party has a small entrance fee.
Posted by KonichiwaKay on 2008-09-23 17:48:07
Post Subject: Help! I''m writing a paper on crafting!
I''ve been glued to getcrafty for a few weeks now (I was just on Craftster until I found these forums), and this is my first post (what better time to register than now!?!)
I''m a college student and a crafter, so when I was assigned a research paper with a topic of my choice - I chose to write about \"The resurgence of Handcrafting\"! My assignment requires that I do a few interviews to supplement my research, so who better to interview than all of you expert crafters?
So here are my interview questions, and I''d really appreciate anyone who could take the time to answer them!
* What do you know about the history of crafting? (ie the arts and crafts movement in America in the 1890-1930s, crafting in the 1940s during WWII, etc.)
*What crafts do you do? Where did you learn them?
*Why do you craft?
*How do you think the internet has affected the popularity of crafting?
*Are you male or female? Do you think crafting tends to be more feminist?
*Do you sell your crafts? If yes, why? And where do you sell? (Craft fairs, Etsy? etc.)
*Do you think certain crafts are generation specific? (In other words, are there crafts that people of younger generations do that people in older generations don''t? Or vice versa)
Posted by amberbrook on 2006-10-14 00:51:41
Post Subject: AD:Happy Uterus Panties
Just out! Happy Uterus Panties available in S, M, & L. Larger sizes to come! http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/amberbrook/harveyandeileen/panties1.jpg
For sale on etsy: http://www.harveyandeileen.etsy.com $8
My website: http://www.harveyandeileen.com $8
And at In Other Words, a feminist non-profit bookstore in Portland, OR for $10
Posted by Anonymous on 2005-03-02 07:35:31
Post Subject: It's My Party and I'll Knit if I Want
Anybody else read this ? I know eximi has, but I'm not sure if she posts here.
I'd love to get some other opinions.
I read it on Saturday and my general feeling was one of being underwhelmed (although I got overly excited by the mentions of getcrafty.com and the interview with gadgetgirl). I was hoping for something along the lines of Hip Home Ec, but specifically focussed on knitting. The book seemed to be a book about writing the book and learning to knit. It was quite superficial in a lot of ways and I was quite saddened by the author's attitude to the older knitters, the guild members, although I can see why she felt unhappy with them. Nobody likes to have their choice of yarn looked down on (even if it is *gasp* acrylic !)
What I did find interesting was discovering just how much of the media coverage of Aussie "hip young knitters" was part of a PR campaign orchestrated by two women who were commissioned by Australian Country Spinners to keep knitting in the media and to keep sales up.
The Knitting is the New Feminism chapter seemed to have very little to say on feminism and where knitting may fit in with this, and this was probably the biggest let down. I love the fact that so many of use do see reclaiming women's traditional crafts as a feminist act and are so eloquent on the subject. I think I imagined how it could have been based on the women who post here and have written about the subject.
In short, borrow the book from somebody else.
(this is the first book review I've written in 12 years, I feel old now !)
Posted by mindshare on 2005-06-04 20:57:32
Post Subject: magazine for teens that doesn't suck!
I was so excited to see this magazine at my library this week called Shameless. It's for teen girls but unlike the other crap out there, it's written from a feminist/DIY perspective and it's just awesome! The issue I looked at had a feature article on the slut/virgin dichotomy, an article about DIY papermaking, an interview with Margaret Cho, and a piece about the idea of reclaiming words. And it doesn't dumb things down, either! Everything is written intelligently; they don't try to pander to the Vapids.
It's only available on bookshelves in Canada so far, but you can subscribe in the U.S. (I'm thinking of doing so even though I'm not a teen). Here's the website:
Posted by gladygirl on 2005-11-01 10:23:31
Post Subject:
Small world indeed...I went to CCAD and have taught there as an adjunct as well!
There is an annual event called the Quilt Surface Design Symposium (qsds.com) where art quilters come from all over the country and the world really for week-end and week-long classes. It was started about 15 years ago by Nancy Crow and Linda Fowler, who are big in the art quilt world.
I took a week-long class with Susan in 2004 and the whole thing was just amazing...the energy of all these creative women at different places in there lives was the most inspiring thing I've been involved with. Many of these people attend every year, and I probably will too.
Susan said that when she was an art student in the '70's a feminist speaker (I can't remember who) told her that women artists have a duty to tell women's stories, and I think that doing it in a traditionally "female" medium like sewing adds another layer. That's why I find it so cool that younger women are embracng things like sewing, quilting and knitting (and child rearing as well) and part of their feminist indentity. I don't remember that being the case so much when I was younger (I'm 37).
Posted by quaisior on 2008-05-12 13:39:42
Post Subject:
Grimspace by Ann Aguirre: I really wasn't sure if I would like it because of the writing style and the fact that it was inspired by the current crop of urban fantasy, which I hate, but I found it compulsively readable and I'm looking forward to the rest of the series.
Fruits Basket Vol. 17 by Natsuki Takaya: The usual combination of cute and angsty. I have enjoyed the direction this manga has taken and the de-emphasis on the love triangle it started out with.
Heaven Chronicles by Joan D. Vinge: Since this wasn't a whole novel, but two related novellas in one book, it didn't get quite as much into the angst and torture that some of her novels do and the characters weren't explored as in-depth as I was craving, but pretty much everything she's written rocks, so it was a good read. My favorite bits were the feminist aspects, the biological and reproductive rights questions asked, and the unique form of marriage her one society had to take up in order to survive.
Posted by sammycakes on 2005-04-08 18:22:55
Post Subject: Introduction
I came across this site quite by accident, and registered before I saw the distinctives...I am a *former* feminist, but a crafty one, who still has an interest in the lives of women.
I am a zine publisher, a doll maker, a maker of handmade cards and journals; I do these things sporadically in between being a wife and mother of three homeschooled children.
I have really enjoyed browsing all the blogs which show the wonderful things you make. I don't think I will ever use the blog on this site, since I have my own, but I do plan to read the forums and look at your new works as you update your blogs.
Posted by anthrogirl on 2006-11-04 13:36:38
Post Subject:
It's not wanky. I'm glad my ramblings were understood!
While I'm not quite ready to set up a spinning wheel in my apartment, I'm on the same wavelength. I want to make the period type items I need to bring my apartment back to 1890-1939. Part of it is a desire to be more self-sufficient. Part of it is a revolt against mindless and unfulfilling forms of consumerism. Part of it is a feminist commentary on women's work and art. And part of it is I don't have the money or time or desire to buy spotted and faded textiles from eBay that I could easily make myself. Plus, I like the challenge of doing this in an urban setting. My boyfriend is in favor of the idea too- We'll make some things ourselves, and buy other things we can't duplicate. But in the end, we will have a completely unique apartment that was completely designed by us and that reflects our personalities (he's a political scientist at heart, and I'm an urban anthropologist with an interest in New York City).
Posted by brdgt on 2006-01-01 13:14:31
Post Subject: 2005 reviews
I put together a little "best of" what I read this year - I'm curious if other people do this and what they liked and/or hated?
Best Non-Fiction:Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game by Michael Lewis – So readable, so interesting, and so important if you like baseball.
Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture by Ariel Levy – A few problems but overall one of the best feminist critiques, especially of pornography, that I’ve read recently.
Feminism is for Everybody by bell hooks – Perfect little book dispelling all the myths and lies about feminism.
Imperial Bodies: The Physical Experience of the Raj, C.1800-1947 by E. M. Collingham – If you are into colonialism or body politics, this is revolutionary.
The Deadly Truth: A History of Disease in America by Gerald N. Grob – Nothing mind blowing, just a good concise overview of my field.
Best Fiction:Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell – I can’t praise this book enough. It’s the sort of book that requires some work on the part of the reader, but the kind you are rewarded for.
Three Junes by Julia Glass – Surprisingly good and touching.
White Teeth by Zadie Smith – Like three amazing books in one.
The Heart is a Lonely Hunter by Carson McCullers – The only Modern Library top 100 book that actually made my favorite list. If you don’t cry by the end of this book, you’re not human.
The Foundation Trilogy by Isaac Asimov – I’m so glad I read these, entertaining and "foundational" to modern science fiction.
Best Graphic Novel/Trade Paperback:V for Vendetta – Not only is the story great, but there is some great pacing, structure and concepts in here.
Y the Last Man – I don’t know why you haven’t read this yet. Sure, the concept is amazing, but Brian Vaughn isn’t resting on his laurels and keeps pushing the story.
The Sandman: Preludes and Noctures by Neil Gaiman – Glad I finally got around to reading these, although it is amusing to read it after American Gods and see where all those ideas started.
Channel Zero by Brian Wood – Do yourself a favor and try this out, you won’t be sorry.
Watchmen by Alan Moore – Think Superheroes are played out? Try this.
Best Narration on an audio book:Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell – Somehow he made even the footnotes playful and interesting.
Series of Unfortunate Events – This whole series just has the best narration.
Ender’s Game – Used multiple voice actors (which a book like A Game of Thrones could really use).
A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man – There is just something about an Irish accent reading this book.
Honorable Mention:A Game of Thrones
Ender’s Game
American Gods
Close Range
Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell
All the Pretty Horses (which gave me my favorite line of the year: "In history there are no control groups.")
Posted by artemis.sun on 2005-04-21 07:54:45
Post Subject: If he isn't a feminist (long)
I wanted some input from you wise and wonderful feminist women (and men). Thank you for reading.
There was a time when I was spoke up whenever I saw sexism and injustice, I even founded a science mentoring program for girls and socio-economically challenged kids. Recently I've felt more and more stagnant, to the point of being jaded. It has gotten to the point where I'm worried that I believe in feminist principles but am not doing enough to apply them to my actual life.
The question - I'm starting to become interested in a guy who's said a few things that can be interpreted as sexist. He's well spoken and phrased them very politely so they're not immediately offensive, and he did listen to my points, and seemed to genuinely consider them. However, strip him of his manners, and the ideas are quite insulting, and there was a time when that would have been enough for me to write him off completely. Now, however, I'm wondering if I'm overreacting and if maybe I should cut him some slack. He is a product of (private) British boy's schools (but has been in the US for several years) if that affects anything.
One example is a discussion of the ratio of men and women in the science departments at universities. He supports a 50-50 ratio, one reason being that the social scene suffers when it is heavily male. There are women who "are far from Cindy Crawford", but because they're rare, men clamor to date them anyway, and these women "use it to their advantage" (quotes are his). He also mentioned that "romantic frustration" distracts people from their studies. I've heard a similar argument, from a Caltech survey which asked that Caltech "import" women for the men to date (sexual frustration was cited as a problem).
I always thought it was good to have women in the sciences because it was an equal rights issue; this is twisting it back to the objectification of women as primarily sexual objects. If it was a matter of saving time, a daily masturbation session takes much less upkeep than a relationship, if sexual frustration is an issue. And if it is a yearning for companionship, universities should not be obligated to play matchmaker.
On the other hand, he is honest, and at least he says what he things instead of sugarcoating them. So when he says that he's into equal partnerships, I'm more inclined to believe him. I dated someone who was a little in awe of the math-genius feminist, so he watched his words and seemed women's rights oriented on the surface. Later on, his secret sexist pockets came up and contributed to some of his actions that caused a lot of hurt.
This boy and I aren't nearly at that stage yet; I'm just a little infatuated at this point, and I don't even know if he's interested. But I feel that if I keep hanging out with him in a certain setting, something's going to develop.
Am I making too much out of something small? I'm not the best judge of character, and I don't trust myself on this matter. I'm afraid of letting past scars control what I do, but I'm also afraid of the status quo attitude that this infatuation seems to bring out.
I'm sorry that this ended up so long. I don't really have any friends who would understand the way the craftistas do. :)
Posted by Anonymous on 2005-12-30 16:32:32
Post Subject: Why should I read this?
A friend of mine, who knows I consider myself a feminist, told me about this book that just came out: Women Who Make the World Worse : and How Their Radical Feminist Assault Is Ruining Our Schools, Families, Military, and Sports by Kate O'Beirne. I am a little floored at the title, but I am considering checking it out of the library - I would like to know exactly why this woman thinks we are making the world "worse."
Posted by Mathias on 2004-05-18 13:46:33
Post Subject: Jaded Times
This is a webzine that a friend of mine started not quite a year ago. I contribute a column called 'Fervid Words' each month, which is basically a feminist-slanted editorial. It's updated on the first of the month. The zine has indie music reviews, comics and recipes as well.
If you get the notion, check it out... I'd warmly appreciate any feedback.
Posted by artemis.sun on 2005-04-21 15:54:00
Post Subject:
Thanks for your responses, it's helping me think through it.
To clarify, cackalackie: the discussion was respectful. I didn't actually counter the misogynistic statement with any logic, I was a little shocked and said something along the lines of, "that's not a very nice way to think of women". I think he got the point and won't be mentioning anything along those lines again, but I know that this is how he feels, so it isn't as if I can just ignore it.
I'm not used to someone being respectful of my feminist opinions and then turning around and saying something that seemed so misogynistic. I don't know what to make of that.
I know that there are certain core beliefs that we do not share, and I will not be able to convince him to change his mind, just as he wouldn't be able to convince me to change mine. I agree with h_pets360, in theory. That's actually why it's worrying me that perhaps I've become a feminist in name only, that my actions do not reflect my ideals. It used to be that I'd just lose interest in someone if he expressed a sexist belief, just like any other negative personality trait (arrogance, etc.). But in this case, I feel like it'd have to be a conscious decision.
belleepoque, it's not really "chemistry", but the first time we hung out one on one, we ended up spending about 12 hours straight together, eating and talking. We get along almost the way I did with some close (platonic male) friends, but then there's this undercurrent of attraction that might be superficial. The eyes and accent do help. What's funny is that we actually met once about a year and a half ago; I found him extremely irritating and didn't notice his accent or anything else at all.
Posted by soapandwater on 2005-08-12 17:56:41
Post Subject:
I understand the dairy thing (kind of) But... chickens make eggs. On their own. Without any help from even roosters.
Taking away the fact that females are the providers of these foods, you can still find feminist arguments for vegetarianism, as slowgraffiti220 provided.
In fact, my feminist reasons for vegetarianism have nothing to do with exploitation of female animals, though maybe they should. My feminist reasons concern the ideal of ending world hunger, of redistributing food and resources equally, of not spending so much freaking grain on animals, animals that get abused. It's like looking at a math equation that gives you an awful headache. It's all terribly connected.
Posted by katbot on 2005-08-14 11:14:26
Post Subject: Re: feminist arguments for vegetarianism?
This was brought up in another thread that of course I can't find now... but what are the feminist arguments for being vegetarian?
I can see how there is a feminist argument for going from vegetarian to vegan - all the products like milk and eggs are made by the female animals - but plain vegetarian?
I don't intend this to be a "justify yourself" accusation, I'm just curious.
You should check out a book called, "The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory". I have this book and it's quite interesting. The ISBN is 0826411843 if you're searching for it.
I would pull out a few factoids for you, unfortunately I've already packed it in a box (I'm moving soon!).
Posted by slowgraffiti220 on 2005-08-11 14:53:26
Post Subject:
i brought that up on the bust magazine thread and completely forgot to post a reply to your query there.
related to the milk and eggs reason for going vegan, all of the new cows that are bred for slaughter come from the females, who are raped pretty frequently by insemination machines to keep this going on. then, to add insult to injury, the baby cows are ripped away from their mothers pretty mcuh directly after birth.
also, there is the language issue. the same sorts of language that have been used to help subjugate women (and minorities) have been used to subjugate animals. there is an excellent book called "the sexual politics of meat: a feminist-vegetarian critical theory" that goes much more in depth than i can here, but consider the word "dehumanized". that is what sexist (or racist) language supposedly does to the slurred individual -- takes away their humanity, denotes them as a peice of meat or an animal, something to be objectified by and subjugated to the needs of the slurrer.
when someone is dehumanized, it takes away the imperitive to treat that person with respect. they become merely an object rather than a living being. i simply ask why is any living thing being treated that way? to me, if feminism hold up logically, then all living beings deserve at least respect...which, in this system of food allocation we have, animals are not getting. even though it is ::normal:: and ::natural:: for humans to eat meat, it is not normal or natural for us to treat them in such a manner in order to do this...breeding them at accelerated rates through mechanized insemination, keeping them locked in cramed pens, cutting off their body parts (beaks, toes) for our convenience. it is not a hard jump of the imagination to see this ideology at work in other arenas of society. there is nothing so wrong about women doing work or making babies...but when women are forced to do these things, when they are kept inside the home, forced to work continually throughout the day with no compensation (or even recognition that what their doing is, indeed, work), made to procreate whether willing or not by husbands and fathers, then it is a crap system. and eerily similar to what we still do to animals.
feminism, in my opinion, would do much better for itself trying to change this androcentric ideology than simply trying to change it for one class of being. just because a group is finally considered human does not mean that they always will be, and as long as this system of disregard and disrespect to non-human beings exists there will always be the threat of further subjugation. for another, minoritiy-centered takes on the subject, read "the dreaded comparison: human and animal slavery" by marjorie spiegel.
and finally, there is the food-supply issue. why some people have an abundance of food and others have none is a complex issue, related in part, at least, to our use of suitable crop farming land for the grazing of animal herds. now, i hear a lot of people argue that, well, do you just want the animals to starve? well, no. the things is, we breed animals at unnatural rates into unnaturally large herds, feed them large amounts of grain and legume crops all of their life, and then kill them for the meat. it probably goes without saying that for every pound of meat that we get off of that cow, we have fed that cow ::at least:: ten pounds of grain. chances are, without us having bred that cow through forced, mechanized insemination, it would not have existed in the first place. because some privledged people want to eat 1 ton of meat, we make an animal through artificial means and then feed that animal 10 tons of grain to get said ton of meat. i also know that much of the grain fed to animals is too low-grade for human-consumption...however, the land that was used to grow said feed was not to low-grade to grow a large abundance of food, which could have been, with a different harvesting technique, been perfectly suitable for human consumption.
how is this a feminist issue? well, firstly and most obviously feminist, it is widely documented by many scholars and orgainzations that when food supply is low, women and children suffer first. secondly, and this ties in with the who gets considered human argument, when world food supplies are low, tellingly is is third world nations that get hit with the burden of this. the ghost of imperialism is strong, and not to be too facetious, much like the ghost of lord voldermort in harry potter, is very possibly not quite really dead. when it is accepted to treat some beings with less respect than others, it hurts feminism.
so yeah, very long-winded, but like i've said, there are a few books on the subject, so i wanted to be sure to cover all of the many salient points. as for people here who eat meat, this is not an attack on you. just as people frequently share their reasons for eating meat with me, i share mine with other people. i am not trying to convert anyone, just share a not oft-heard viewpoint. as for hunting to get around these issues, i know many hunterts and i am not so sure that the way it is done in this country (typically...you, of course, might be the exception) is so very respectful to animals. plus, i hate guns (and really, most weapons).
and, full disclosure... i eat dairy. i'd like not to, but life is not always so cut-amd-dry even though critical theory is ;)
Posted by anthrogirl on 2006-01-12 13:25:31
Post Subject:
Her most famous/controversial book is called Intercourse. I haven't read it, but have read a lot of things where it is discussed.
Mostly I'm just bumping this thread because I'm interested in what people have to say. My view of Dworkin has always been that she was a great feminist thinker with a few misguided ideas. But I wonder, too, if she's been vilified precisely because she was a famous feminist activist. For instance, I'm deeply skeptical of her anti-porn and anti-sex-work activism -- but I think it's as dangerous to uncritically affirm the sex industry. And I worry about some of the more uncritical versions of "pro-sex feminism" that are out there.
It's all very complicated. And I think Dworkin made some really important contributions. And I wish that people had done more serious engagement with her ideas -- the positive and the negative -- rather than dismissing them out of hand,
Dworkin made very important contributions. Her work was used by the Canadian censorship people to block gay and lesbian porn from Canada, and to seize books on anal health a from small gay bookstore. Her work in the US has been good too- she was one of the people who promoted tolerance against differently-pleasured women (swingers, SMers) in the feminist movement, so that many of us are afraid to publically join our other feminist sisters for fear of being humiliated again. She promoted dialogue between men and women by making and insisting upon the unprovable assertion that at least 1/2 of all women have been raped, and by saying that all men are potential rapists. She claimed that all porn was evil and damaging, regardless of audience, purpose, or content; in other words, what you might do in your bedroom with a videocamera is equivalent to a snuff film or Devil in Miss Jones. She also said that all consensual sex between a man and a woman was rape because of the power differential.
Whatever I may think of the porn industry or some male sex fantasies, I don't think Ms. Dworkin was simply slightly misguided. I think she was a very sad, emotionally disturbed woman whose horrifying sexual experiences drove her to the brink- and I say that because I've read Intercourse and some of her other work. She horrifies me. She and Katherine McKinnon are the fundamentalist lunatic fringe of the feminist movement, and their works are filled with hypocrisy and willful myopia about real women and their lives. Women, in fact, do read porn all the time- they call it 'romance novels'. They watch porn- they call it 'Desperate Housewives', or reading up on what Brad and Angelina are doing. Porn isn't always about men dominating women, or about men at all.
I must say that I am not in favor of groups like Cake and Suicide Girls. I don't think Britney Spears and Jenna Jamison are good role models. I dislike mainstream porn because it's almost always insulting to both men and women, and refuses to see women's sexuality as fluid and not necessarily male-centered. However, the truth is most people watch porn because they think sex is dirty, not because they see it as life-affirming or beautiful. Many of my dominatrix friends try to get their clients to see that an exchange of power isn't role reversal- it means both people have something to bring to the table, and it doesn't have to be about pain or degradation.
Posted by kindarana on 2005-08-11 12:14:47
Post Subject: feminist arguments for vegetarianism?
This was brought up in another thread that of course I can't find now... but what are the feminist arguments for being vegetarian?
I can see how there is a feminist argument for going from vegetarian to vegan - all the products like milk and eggs are made by the female animals - but plain vegetarian?
I don't intend this to be a "justify yourself" accusation, I'm just curious.
Posted by april again on 2006-03-29 17:51:10
Post Subject: Re: Article on The Guardian - comments?
Today's ultimate feminists are the chicks in crop tops
True feminism should celebrate femininity, and make you feel wonderful to be born a woman.
The things that make me glad to be a woman have nothing to do with showing clevage...and I am sure the feminist leaders weren't thinking, we will disrupt our lives and put ourselves forward so that we can all wear belly shirts with mudflap girls on them proudly.
I hesitated to say much about this as I am hardly a women's studies scholar, but what the heck does dressing a certain way have to do with being a feminist? Am I less a feminist because I keep my boobs covered?
And I was just talking to some of the younger women at my college, they were going over some pictures of them kissing and such at a party, I said "oh I had no idea that you two were involved , how nice". They let me know they are not involved and they were sexually exploring each other "cause there were hot guys at the party"...what is feminist and empowering about that???
Flame me if you want, but I dont find being a person who exploits their sexuality for money empowering, it seems to me ( though correct me if I am wrong) a lot of the people doing so , do it because they have no marketable job skills otherwise.
Posted by Fonzarella on 2006-03-23 05:33:22
Post Subject: Article on The Guardian - comments?
Today's ultimate feminists are the chicks in crop tops
Raunch culture is not about liberation gone wrong; it's about rediscovering the joy of being loved for your body
Kate Taylor
Thursday March 23, 2006
The Guardian
Men, you can relax. You are no longer the enemy. Instead, judging by recent events in America, modern feminists have a much shapelier target in their sights - other women. Specifically, scantily clad women who use their sexuality to get ahead. I don't know if this is a PR campaign to get men to finally pay attention to the cause, but it's certainly stirring up trouble.
It all kicked off with the publication of Female Chauvinist Pigs, a rant against "raunch culture" by the New York magazine writer Ariel Levy. In the book, she argues that the recent trend for soft-porn styling in everything from music videos to popular TV is reducing female sexuality to its basest levels. In short: "A tawdry, tarty, cartoon-like version of female sexuality has become so ubiquitous, it no longer seems particular."
Which is all fair enough, until Levy starts to list the ways in which today's women are allowing their sexuality to be sold short. Thongs, for example. Crop tops. Lap-dancing classes. Maxim and FHM. Playboy T-shirts. The word "chick". Levy thinks raunch culture is a feminist movement gone terribly wrong. We are, in her eyes, doing all these things merely to show the men that we are "one of the guys" and "liberated and rebellious". Naturally, she finds this confusing. "Why is labouring to look like Pamela Anderson empowering?"
The answer is, labouring to look like Pamela Anderson is not empowering. We're not trying to be empowered. The twentysomething women I know don't care about old-style feminism. Partly this is because they already see themselves as equal to men: they can work, they can vote, they can bonk on the first date. For younger women, raunch is not about feminism, it's just about fashion.
Another reason for the rise of raunch is that women are rediscovering the joy of being loved for their bodies, not just their minds. Today sexes mix a lot more than they used to, so boys grow up having girls as friends. They tend to listen to what women have to say, and when they marry they don't consider sharing the housework to be castrating. Instead of desperately longing for the right to be seen as human beings, today's girls are playing with the old-fashioned notion of being seen as sex objects.
This is not terrible news. In fact, to me, this is the ultimate feminist ideal, which Levy would realise if she stopped shouting at MTV for a moment and thought about it. She proclaims that boob jobs and crop tops "don't bring us any closer to the fundamental feminist project of allowing every woman to be her own, specific self". But what if a woman's "own, specific self" is a thong-wearing, Playboy-T-shirted specific self who thinks lap-dancing is a laugh and likes getting wolf-whistled at by builders? What if a woman spends hours in the gym to create a body she is proud of? Is that a waste of time, time she should have spent in a university library? No.
Levy is not alone in raging against raunch. The f word, a British feminist website, last month launched a tirade against lads' magazines such as Loaded, Zoo and Nuts; they "relentlessly promote the message that women exist solely for the sexual gratification of men and boys", argued Rachel Bell. "By internalising this one-dimensional male construct of sexuality, both sexes are losing out; but it is girls and women who will pay the heavier price."
I've worked for GQ and the Sun, and in neither place did I see women being exploited. Does Bell have any idea how much money women make when they take their clothes off? How much freedom and independence these girls can earn in an hour? Abi Titmuss and the new breed of totty generally own the copyright to their naughtiest photos, so with each publication they rake it in. Look at lads' mags from a different perspective and you see that what's being exploited are men's sexual responses, to give money to women.
It has always been like this, and it always will be, because men's achilles heel is that they go to pieces when a woman drops her top. Old-style feminists never understood this, but their way is not the only way to achieve equality with men. The world is different now, and we should follow the trends instead of waving the banners of 20 years ago.
That version of feminism will never regain its popularity as long as its proponents insist on lecturing, instead of leading. We should be working together to support women in this country and across the world whose rights are still ignored, instead of squabbling and catfighting. Men are great at working together; they are self-congratulatory and supportive. We are not. That is our true weakness, and feminism exemplifies this flaw - witness the countless factions, all fighting for different things, from sex-positive feminists, who believe nudity is OK, to third-wave feminists, who think eyeliner is misogynistic.
If a thong makes you feel fabulous, wear it. For one thing, men in the office waste whole afternoons staring at your bottom, placing bets on whether you're wearing underwear. Let them. Use that time to take over the company. But even if you wear naughty lingerie for you, for no other reason than it makes you feel good, that is reason enough to keep it on. True feminism should celebrate femininity, and make you feel wonderful to be born a woman. It's a shame some feminists today can't do the same.
· Kate Taylor is the author of A Woman's Guide to Sex and formerly wrote the Sex Life column for GQ
kate@katetaylor.net
Posted by slowgraffiti220 on 2005-04-18 16:58:51
Post Subject:
for me, dworkin's main flaw was in being too absolutist. i have no doubt that for her, sex was a violation, etc. but it made me really angry when she presumed to be speaking up for all of woman kind with this view point. in the end i say, at least she got people riled up and maybe made some people think. she seems to be one of those people that you don't mind disagreeing with, because at least they're a worthy adversary and seem to be coming from a place of rationality and honesty, however much you dislike what they say and do.
thanks for all the link to susie bright's obit, the comment under which had links to many illuminating articles on and by dworkin. i had read intercourse and, like many, had just dismissed dworkin from thereonin as pretty much ahistorical and a little hysterical... i can see from interviews and letters (i.e. when she could be candid instead of dry, absolutist academic) that she was a bit more complex.
i do think it rather crappy that i hadn't seen anything about her death in the news, heard about it in any of my classes at uni, etc... and i was really suprised it hadn't gotten much attention on the crafty, feminist boards...so yeah, thanks for starting this thread.
Posted by zahmeece on 2005-07-19 16:45:15
Post Subject:
Plants and cat photos are everywhere. I'm always hot so I have a little fan. I even brought a computer chair from home since the chairs here suck and it keeps the cats from shredding it again (recovered it once). Longaberger baskets too. Oh and animal calendars and feminist stuff from the National Women's History Project. I have 3 great framed feminist posters from there but they are too big and won't fit on the cube walls. I brought them to put in the conference room and the guys were offended. Geeze, what babies.
Posted by xuli on 2006-01-04 16:29:21
Post Subject:
Her most famous/controversial book is called Intercourse. I haven't read it, but have read a lot of things where it is discussed.
Mostly I'm just bumping this thread because I'm interested in what people have to say. My view of Dworkin has always been that she was a great feminist thinker with a few misguided ideas. But I wonder, too, if she's been vilified precisely because she was a famous feminist activist. For instance, I'm deeply skeptical of her anti-porn and anti-sex-work activism -- but I think it's as dangerous to uncritically affirm the sex industry. And I worry about some of the more uncritical versions of "pro-sex feminism" that are out there.
It's all very complicated. And I think Dworkin made some really important contributions. And I wish that people had done more serious engagement with her ideas -- the positive and the negative -- rather than dismissing them out of hand,
Posted by soapandwater on 2005-02-20 20:10:23
Post Subject:
I just finished Our Band Could Be Your Life and he had some interesting comments in the epilogue on how indie rock changed the music industry and was, in turn changed by it.
He speculated that perhaps the next music revolution will involved the internet, as indie bands are more comfortable using technology to get their music out for free to anyone that will listen.
Thus, I will pimp my friend's record label, North of January
That sounds like a fun read. I wish I had time to read (although what can I say, you're in GRADUATE school).
I checked out North of January. Is that also the name of the band that plays on the jukebox? The songs were greaaat. I'm totally hooked in.
Since this thread has resurface, I'm going to call attention to a very big problem: Kill Rock Stars has been sucking lately. Baaaaaad. I don't know what it is, but all the bands that are currently signed to it are either defunct or just sucky. Is this the end of an era? They're all generic-sounding, and I can't stand it. With S-K gone to Subpop, I wonder what's going to become of KRS?
And Mr. Lady is officially dead. Ouch!
I guess they're not technically indie but more small label, which I'm fine with, and I guess if the money's not there, something's got to give. But it doesn't explain why KRS is so blah. They used to have more feminist stuff, too, but are there no more feminists in rock? Or have they all been signed to bigger labels?
It's funny.
I'm a music snob, but I want people to listen to feminist bands. But, oh, I'm already pissed that my friend gets to go to a Le Tigre concert and I don't. So it begins...
Posted by brdgt on 2006-06-19 15:24:52
Post Subject:
I catch up on books that I didn't get to during the school year (mostly christmas gifts). Next to my bed right now are:
Janes Sexes it Up: True Confessions of Feminist Desire
Ordermaster
Reload: Rethinking Women + Cyberculture
The Zombie Survival Guide
A Short History of Medicine
Posted by culinarymartyr on 2004-11-11 23:55:38
Post Subject:
I also suffer from depression, and I'm coming out the sunny end of a black hole at the moment - which is absolutely great. I don't think it would have happened if I hadn't gotten out of the job I hated. My job was just one aspect of my life I was unhappy with, but it seemed to swallow everything else. I quit the job, adjusted my lifestyle a bit, and I'm now trying to eke out a living doing things I enjoy. I'm lucky that my parents were able to help me out a bit, so I'm not quite at the ramen noodles every day stage of poverty. But I'd rather be there than in that job.
So basically, if you have a chance at happiness, go for it. Taking that chance is always scary, and the world of academia can seem a little intimidating, but in the end you've got what it takes!
"I'm 42. In college one of my professors thought I was nuts because I thought cooking was a blessing. I have been a self-declared feminist since 1976. I'm as proud of my quiche recipe as I am of my Ph.D."
This alone says it all - you've got the Ph.D., you know who you are, and what is important to you. And you've got enough sense to know that your quiche recipe is as important as your Ph.D. All you need to do now is believe in yourself and jump at this chance for happiness! Good luck!
Posted by Anonymous on 2005-12-30 20:43:24
Post Subject:
I haven't read it and I think your opinion of it might depend on your politics. Check out her bio on wikipedia and see if it's your bag:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kate_O'Beirne
I see that this isn't her first anti-feminist book. Hmm.
Posted by Fonzarella on 2007-02-06 08:50:09
Post Subject: Readable Feminist Theory
hi all,
i know some of you gals are very knowledgeable about the topic of feminism and feminist theory. i am really interested in getting a general understanding of the developments of feminist thinking over the past 50 years (i don't really care about the latest idea, i need to get a historical perspective). is there any book out there that is readable by non experts?
many thanks for any suggestions you may have.
p.
Posted by soapandwater on 2005-01-05 17:55:47
Post Subject:
it's more that i just read enough feminist stuff on my own that a WS major, combined with my double english and anthro major, would be a little freaking repetative.
I agree with you. I mean, hell, I would say that we need well-written feminist anthropologists out there. You don't have to major in everything to be well-rounded and have ideas. I'm just interested in women's studies because I couldn't fathom majoring in anything else that I love as much as English.
Like, I have a huge academic crush on sociology, but I couldn't throw myself full force into that. I like the women's studies because it's interdisciplinary, and it just helps me focus my own thoughts better.
Posted by jean on 2005-01-07 13:40:29
Post Subject:
i graduated from ucla in 1993 with a degree in women's studies. although the program had its limitations, mainly it didn't feel like much of a department, i think it taught me alot and it gave me some freedom to sutdy interdisciplinarily.
it's funny to me that people are so controlling of what other folks study. when i used to tell people i was a women's studies major, they would often make disparaging remarks similar to what soapandwater is experiencing. but i wasn't asing them to study feminist theory. college should be a time of intellectual engagement. i found so many authors who really inspired me from my women's studies days: bell hooks, sandra harding, the woman who wrote cyborg manifesto (what's her name?) and others. although i felt the department was sometimes quite conservative (to be a feminist you had to believe, talk and dress in a certain way), also found certain professors and the ideas we studying to be quite liberating.
what are other people's experiences of the actual classes they are taking in the women's studies department?
Posted by soapandwater on 2004-12-30 15:46:07
Post Subject: women's studies majors?
This is vaguely inspired by the feminist thread we have going on.
I'm wondering if anyone here completed a women's studies major. I recently declared my majors (English and, on almost on a whim, Women's Studies), and I'm very excited/horrified by my second major. I always knew I'd major in English (w/ creative writing), but one day I was pretty much talked into a second major at a party (it's that kind of college).
I'm horrified because I can tell I've become entirely irritating to some of my friends, and what's more is I don't mind! It's because I keep throwing in all the stuff I've learned from class into my conversations, and it's not necessarily forceful, just helpful/cheerful/feminist.
You know, things like this:
"Well, of course chivlary is relatively harmless, but it still reinforces gender roles--"
"Soapandwater, there's nothing wrong with my boyfriend opening the car door for me."
"Oh, in the BIGGER PICTURE, not REALLY. I was reading this Bitch article and--"
"I don't have to read Bitch to have an opinion about something."
"Pfft."
I think it's interesting how people view you differently once you say you're a women's studies major.
Posted by xuli on 2005-03-01 12:30:36
Post Subject:
I'm wondering, though, if I'm reading too deeply into "Eleven." I was struck by how true and well-done the piece was, but my first thought was, "A RED SWEATER? An ugly uncomfortable red sweater? Is that, like, WOMANHOOD?"
I never even thought of that! Wow -- I'm so embarrassed! I'm studying to be a feminist literary critic by profession and I never even thought of that!
I thought the sweater represented embarrassment about being poor, about the fact that everyone just assumed the sweater belonged to the narrator because it was old and ugly and uncomfortable, and when someone said it was hers everyone was just like, "Oh yeah, must be," including the teacher. And then the fact that the teacher was like, "I've seen you wear it," when it turned out it was another Latina who owned the sweater ... the teacher clearly was not paying attention to the kids as individuals, you know?
But that's what's cool about literature ... it could be *all* those things.
Wow -- womanhood. How did that escape me? (Still reeling.) I even wrote a paper once (that got me into grad school) on the meaning of the protagonist's *green* sweater in the short story by Achy Obejas called "We came all the way from Cuba so you could dress like this?". So not only am I a feminist literary critic, I'm a feminist literary critic specializing in SWEATER METAPHORS (obviously, I'm now being sarcastic) and I still didn't get it!
Posted by susan*s on 2004-04-19 23:36:42
Post Subject:
this isn't exactly clothing-related, but I saw something awesome online (hope to find a link for you) --- these cards that women handed out on the street to harassers or men who were aggressive.
They were hot pink and had a sexy silhoutte of a woman on the front & said "Hey Guys! Want to get laid?"
The back said "Then start respecting women! Nobody wants to get screamed at on the street! You'd get a lot more action if you didn't act like such an ass!" etc. etc.
So, something like that that's overtly sexy but has a serious/feminist edge might work well as clothes too--maybe screenprint or iron on phrases like those to tie in with the menacing textures/ingredients?
Posted by Marina-Trilobyte on 2005-07-03 10:21:19
Post Subject:
Thank you for the kind comments everyone!
What are her reasons for wanting to incorporate? Is it about funding?...Or is she more about doing it just 'cause it's "the thing to do?"
That's exactly it. I've since talked to her about it and her point is, "Well all the other bead societies do this". Well yes, all the highly visible bead societies are located in big urban centers and probably have membership in the hundreds.
We basically reached an impasse in our discussion. I said, "I really don't think that this works for us and I can't see us running a big event with the current number of people that we have interested." She's unwilling to let that go.
One thing we could both agree on is that we need more people who are involved in leadership decisions and in paticular, I want to tap one woman who is very sensible and practical and willing to tell the Emperor when he's naked.
The other thing and I'm not sure how to deal with this. The other woman is inclined to get judgemental and a bit mouthy with it. For example, she doesn't like the atmosphere of one bead shop because they're "not friendly enough" and thinks the owner of another shop is a jerk. This region is comprised of very small towns and if you say something about someone, it will get around.
I can REALLY see this causing a problem somewhere down the line and honestly, it kind of annoys me on a feminist level, it fits in with a bad stereotype of women always running each other down and unable to conduct business without getting emotional about it.
Posted by Lyssalicious on 2005-04-11 17:13:18
Post Subject:
I didn't read the whole thing because I'm lazy, but I read part of Feminist Theory: From the Margin to the Center, and I really liked what I read of it.
Posted by brdgt on 2005-10-31 14:15:18
Post Subject: What did you read in October 2005?
I'm up to 76 this year total :)
October:
Hellblazer: Original Sins by Jamie Delano - The comic that the movie "Constantine" was based on. I found the movie entertaining enough to look into its source.
Y the Last Man: Cycles by Brian K. Vaughan (writer) and Pia Guerra (artist) - Love this series
Masks of Conquest: Literary Study and British Rule in India by Gauri Viswanathan - For school. Yawn.
Marvel 1602 by Neil Gaiman (writer), Andy Kubert and Richard Isanove (Illustrators) - Very good, loved the Captain America twist.
Y the Last Man: One Small Step by Brian K. Vaughan (writer) and Pia Guerra (artist) - The best thus far, great humor and character development.
Imperial Bodies: The Physical Experience of the Raj, C.1800-1947 by E. M. Collingham - Excellent book using domestic manuals as sources to prove that the home and body were not only sites of colonization but also changed over time, reflecting the changes in colonial rule.
From Catharine Beecher to Martha Stewart: A Cultural History of Domestic Advice by Sarah A. Leavitt - Great book - although a chapter on Feminist Domesticity (like Jean's book ;) would have been a great epilogue.
The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of Feminist Designs for American Homes, Neighborhoods and Cities by Dolores Hayden - Is it just me or are people not as radical anymore? My favorite "characters" in this book were a group of women who formed a domestic co-op, in which they all did each others housework - and then charged their husbands.
A Game of Thrones (A Song of Ice and Fire, Book 1) by George R.R. Martin - Recommended here on the Book Worms forum :) I enjoyed it very much and look forward to reading the whole series.
Domesticity in Colonial India: What Women Learned When Men Gave Them Advice: What Women Learned When Men Gave Them Advice by Judith Walsh - A good book, but it would have been a better article (too much repetition of the same point).
Posted by soapandwater on 2005-07-25 14:56:50
Post Subject:
You didn't put "all of the above" for the poll's options! My sister taught me how to caulk a bathtub. My aunt taught me to knit. GetCrafty has taught me a ton. I've learned how to cook from watching my mother, food network, and reading about what other people cook and how other people combine ingredients.
A lot of my self-sufficiency has come from having to figure out most things on my own, if no one shows me. For instance, not many of my friends have to fill out their financial aid forms by themselves. I do. My mother certainly doesn't know how to do it. I figure it's just the type of person you are. If no one makes you do it yourself, you won't learn until you HAVE to, which results in more struggling because the stakes are higher, you're more alone.
It'd be nice if there were feminist empowered home ec classes taught in high schools, but the teachers would have to teach it from a feminist perspective, and in high school, I met so few feminist teachers! Would they really teach the class so that it didn't reinforce gender roles? I'm not sure about that.
I think experience paves the way for most of us, and if a friend is having some real trouble figuring things out, it's sort of our job to say, "No, no, you need to start that scarf over" or "No, no, reconsider how many payments you'll really be willing to make on a car."
We need guidance from everywhere. It's just difficult seeing people go through the same things you do without being as self-sufficient.
Posted by twilight on 2005-01-26 02:56:11
Post Subject: Re: language violence
What do you say to something like that? I waited a moment, and then said something to him about the severe inappropriateness of the comment. He was like, yeah, you're a feminist man-hater, get off my case.
I hate, hate, hate it when people dismiss something I say with the 'oh you're just a feminist man-hater.' It's infuriating.
I'm not sure what you could have done differently. I think it's good you said something even if he was dismissive. If more people did say something maybe these phrases wouldn't spread so much.
I have to say I agree. Although, my mind is drawing a blank for an example to add. Just this month I learned 'Hit me baby one more time' was referencing sex. (boy did I feel clueless)
Posted by Anonymous on 2005-01-26 07:40:42
Post Subject: Re: language violence
What do you say to something like that? I waited a moment, and then said something to him about the severe inappropriateness of the comment. He was like, yeah, you're a feminist man-hater, get off my case.
I hate, hate, hate it when people dismiss something I say with the 'oh you're just a feminist man-hater.' It's infuriating.
I don't know if it's just something I've noticed, but the term "man-hater" seems to get thrown very easily when a woman speaks up about sexism/patriachy etc, but for a man to be called a woman hater he has to actually commit physical acts of harm. It just seems to sum that anti-woman language is acceptable in the main.
As for violent language, I am so so tired of it. A friend of mine was talking about this the other day, about some kids she works with saying that their football coach was "gonna ass rape them", when they just meant he was going to train them hard. She tried to explain the difference between choosing to go to football practise and being raped, and the inappropriateness of the language, but it just didn't seem to sink it.
As for the phrase "I'd hit it", I'm not sure whether it is the word "it" that bothers me more, as if the other person involved is an inanimate object, just "it". Maybe I am understanding the phrase wrong. It's just a very ugly phrase in general.
I'm not sure how exactly we can change it, one person at a time I suppose. I know that once I am a teacher I will not allow language like that to fly in my classroom, and rather than just banning it, I will have my students consider why it is offensive rather than just making it verboten.
Posted by xuli on 2007-02-12 21:10:23
Post Subject:
oh, that's charming. i guess it's a good thing i got 6 months worth last time i went to the pharmacy.
I just found out about this last Wednesday because I tend to stock up! I'm so pissed. My doctor is pissed, too -- she spent a big part of our appointment together ranting against Bush. And she told me she's already written Nancy Pelosi about it.
I was thrilled to discover what a feminist my doctor is. Not so thrilled about the circumstances under which I found out.
Posted by berlinchick on 2005-08-13 15:05:52
Post Subject: Re: feminist arguments for vegetarianism?
slowgraffitti listed some excellent points. but if you are interested to look into it further you should read carol adams - she initiated feminist vegetarisim.
Posted by Nancy Flynn on 2005-04-21 13:51:00
Post Subject:
I guess it is also worth really thinking about what attracts you to him. If it is his cute accent (i'm extrapolating there), or some other factor to do with physical attraction, then it is not wise to overlook remarks that make you feel iffy.
However, if it is "chemistry" AND that you enjoy talking with him, and feel comfortable expressing your opinion (and feel that he is treating you as an equal, and with respect), then that might balance out what sound like somewhat thoughtless remarks on his part. It seems to me that the measure of a man is how he actually treats an intelligent, feminist woman who expresses herself. If he can handle a real discussion with someone like you-- who is clearly his equal (or superior) intellectually-- then he might just be worth it!
In 2000 the GetCrafty.com Web site offered a pattern for a crocheted skull (not for the faint of heart, or needle), recasting traditional “women’s work” for the post-riotgrrrl era. That same year groups of women and the occasional sensitive guy began gathering on Sundays to swap ideas and patterns in an organization called the Church of Craft.
Though needlework as politics may be new in the museum setting, in recent years “making things by hand has come back in a big way among younger people,” said Debbie Stoller, the author of a best-selling series of books, “Stitch ’n Bitch,” which extols the virtues of craft circles, and the editor of Bust magazine. “For a lot of people, it’s a way of rebelling against a larger consumer culture. You know where it’s made, and you know what goes into making it.”
Jean Railla, the author of “Get Crafty: Hip Home Ec” (Broadway Books, 2004) and founder of GetCrafty.com, agreed: “In a world of thousand-dollar ‘it’ bags, and hyperconsumerism, one of the most political things you can do is to make something yourself.”
Her site, which went online in 1997, is largely credited with inspiring the movement that turned “handmade” into bohemian chic, and propelling a formerly fusty hobby into a $30 billion business.
The Church of Craft now has outposts in nine cities, and the Museum of Arts and Design will most likely be overrun with its yarn-toting acolytes, primed for the idea that craft is the height of creativity.
Still, sometimes a spool is just a spool. “I think it’s awesome that people are using needlecraft as a medium,” Ms. Stoller said. “It has a lot of associations, from the cheesy to the feminist. But I don’t think every single scarf needs to be elevated to art.”
Posted by quaisior on 2005-09-13 12:23:11
Post Subject:
I don't read romance much because a lot of the books offend my feminist sensibilities, but there are a few authors I love: Julia Quinn, Pamela Morsi, Lorraine Heath, Penelope Williamson, Margot Early, Susan Krinard, and Mary Jo Putney.
Posted by cackalackie on 2006-02-28 14:37:27
Post Subject:
I think the problem is she never made it clear what the connection was between knitting and there not being very many female (or feminist) elected officials in this country.
It was a rather tenuous link - one that stood perhaps to confuse the reader and dilute the message she was trying to make?
Posted by xuli on 2005-03-04 12:51:06
Post Subject:
Thanks for posting that review! It's been a few years since I've read Manifesta!, and I'm not about to claim that it was the be-all, end-all of feminist reading material (I excitedly bought the book, and ended up selling it on Amazon.com). At the same time, I think the author of the review has an axe to grind with feminism (well, that's pretty explicit with the sentence "I tend not to like feminist writing as a whole", isn't it?). I mean, I don't understand the point of having someone hostile to feminism do a review of a feminist book, you know? Usually, with non-fiction book reviews, you have someone equipped to assess the book's contribution to its field -- someone who understands the field and is capable of understanding the critical debates within it. I don't find that to be the case with this review writer (I mean, she claims to know a lot about feminist writing/history, and then claims that a big problem with feminism is "man-hating" -- the most simplistic characterization of feminism imaginable!)
She raises a few good points: Manifesta! is gimmicky, it claims to offer a comprehensive view of feminism but it isn't particularly well-researched, comprehensive or scholarly. OK -- so what? I would not use Manifesta! to teach an Introduction to Women's Studies in a university setting, nor would I cite it in a scholarly paper or article on feminism. But I would totally give it to a young woman I'm mentoring, use it to introduce my little sister or young cousin to feminism, something like that. It seems to me like the author of this review is asking the book to be something it's not, and that isn't fair. The book should be assessed on its own terms.
And accusing the authors of man-hating? I'm sorry. That's a tactic that's been used to bait feminists since Susan B. Anthony, and it's boring. The anti-feminists just need to think of something new. There's a big difference between hating patriarchy, or hating the social construction of gender in our culture which puts women into certain narrow roles and puts men in to certain other narrow roles, and hating men. It's just not the same thing. If anything, feminism benefits men: How many men in the world don't fit into the narrow, socially-constructed category of ideal masculinity? They need feminism too, even if they stand to lose some level of unearned privilege from it.
With that said, I think the author of the review brings up two valid points:
* Inga Muscio. I'm sorry, I do have an axe to grind with Inga Muscio. I think her ideas are often dangerous to the feminist movement. She has an essentialist conception of gender, and her writings on abortion are dangerously close to anti-choice. It did annoy me that the writers of Manifesta! chose to give her so much credibility, because her writings are not the best example of feminist writing. At all.
* Racism. I agree that feminism needs to really take a long, hard look at itself on this question. Some kinds of feminism have been very good on race; many have not. Many feminist movements/groups/waves have incorporated token lip service to the concerns of women of color and working-class women without fully incorporating their perspectives, and that is a real problem that feminism needs to address. (Of course, it's a real problem in society in general.) Just as one example: I was shocked, reading recent threads here and on Glitter about the so-called Fourth Wave of feminism, to find that commonly-accepted understanding of feminism's waves is that the First Wave was the suffragists, the Second Wave was the women of the 1970's who made so many strides in ending employment discrimmination, passing Roe v. Wade, etc., and that the Third Wave is thought to be Riot Grrrl and other 1990's young/punk feminism. I've always thought of the Third Wave of feminism being launched when women of color like Barbara Smith, Cherrie Moraga, Gloria Anzaldua and the Combahee River Collective published their critiques of the racism of the Second Wave in the early 1980s. They wrote some amazing books (This Bridge Called My Back and All the Blacks Are Men, All the Women Are White, But Some of us Are Brave are the two big ones), and really took the first step in having race, class and sexuality incorporated into feminist perspectives in a sustained and substantive way. While Riot Grrrl was important to me personally as a teenager, I think that the work of these women was much more important to the sustained power of the movement as a whole, and it does upset me that their work continues to be given token lip service within the movement as a whole. Their work enriched the movement in a very important, powerful way. It does bother me that Riot Grrrl is presented as more important than this important turn in Manifesta!
So that's my two cents on the whole thing. Man, I can't be concise about anything! Sorry.
Posted by artgeek on 2006-02-20 11:01:09
Post Subject:
My personal take on things is that people have a deep desire to make something meaningful with their own two hands. Work these days is very service or administration oriented; very few people I know actually can point to an object that results from their 40-plus hours a week. They move paper around or provide information, not make cars or fix houses.
A couple of years ago, I was in grad school and my husband worked in luxury rentals. I would drive him to work every day and listen to him lament how his work didn't accomplish anything meaningful. As a result of a fellowship I was awarded, we picked up our lives and moved to Baltimore; now he's working for Habitat for Humanity and can walk anyone who cares up and down the streets of several neighborhoods and point to houses he's built. It's amazing to me how he was able to completely turn his career around to do something he's proud of, something he sees as meaningful. To me, crafting is part of that same urge. Not everyone is able to change tracks as he did or feels the same sense of despair about their work, but I do feel that my crafty friends have the same desire to actually make something, to have an object representing their work and skills.
I do also have a feminist slant on things, but I expect I'm not alone in that; if there's no feminist interpretation in a couple of days, I'll come back and add more. ;)
Posted by soapandwater on 2005-03-04 13:12:09
Post Subject:
I guess I need to read Manifesta soon.
Oooh, I love hating and loving Inga Muscio. I totally love the book Cunt even though it was one of the first books I've read and liked a lot that has made me also have to disagree with the author. That doesn't make sense, but what I mean is I'd read some of it and go, "That's amazing and dead on." And then I'd read other parts and go, "But that's not."
Inga Muscio also promotes myths about rape that pissed me off.
I give the book Cunt a lot of credit for half of the book, but I don't agree with going, "Oh, Inga Muscio. Feminist of feminists." She's not even a self-proclaimed feminist in the book.
I want to read Manifesta sometime, but I feel like it'd be rehashing stuff I already know (I could be wrong). I'd much rather get a bell hooks book to read, as I've only had the pleasure of reading an article of hers here and there.
I'm wondering-- who reads Ms. magazine? I don't connect with the magazine at all, really. Are they sort of the top experts on feminist lit?
Frankly, I want to read feminist fiction, but the only kinds my women's studies classes recommend are really poorly written ones that are great women's studies pieces (Stone Butch Blues made me wince).
Posted by brdgt on 2006-04-29 17:07:57
Post Subject: What is Trolling
The purpose of this thread is to establish some terminology and familiarity with internet "trolls."
If you are lucky, you may not have encountered trolls before, so hopefully this will help you out. Maybe someone has called you a troll and you wonder why? Hopefully this will help you understand why or why not your actions could be construed as "trolling." Maybe a thread makes you uncomfortable and you can't put your finger on it, hopefully this thread will help.
Feel free to add, expand, discuss, share experiences, etc. - this is just a basis for discussion, not a rule. While this includes a definition, this is not about defining "trolling" but to explore what behavior can be seen as "trolling" and what to do about it.
Wikipedia has a great entry on Internet Trolling, here are some key points relevant to our board:
Definition:
In Internet terminology, a troll is someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion.
On Labelling/Being Labelled a Troll:
The term troll is highly subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. The term is often used to discredit an opposing position, or its proponent, by argument ad hominem. When appropriately applied to purposefully disruptive online behavior, the word troll economically converts an abstract code of online manners into a concrete image.
Often, calling someone a troll makes assumptions about a writer's motives that may be incorrect. Regardless of the writer's motives, controversial posts are likely to attract a corrective or patronizing or outraged response by those who do not distinguish between real physical community (where people are actually exposed to some shared risk of bodily harm by their actions), and epistemic community (based on a mere exchange of words and ideas). Customs of discourse, or etiquette, originating in physical communities are often applied naively to online discourse by newcomers who are not used to the range of views expressed online, often anonymously. Hence, both users and posts are commonly, and sometimes inaccurately, labelled as trolls when their content upsets people — ironically, the accusatory labeling of a troll may be more disruptive than the original alleged offense itself. Also, people may be more inclined to use epithets like troll in online public discussion than they would be in person, because online forums may seem more impersonal.
"Feeding the Troll":
"...Experienced participants in online forums know that the most effective way to discourage a troll is usually to ignore him or her, because responding encourages a true troll to continue disruptive posts to that forum — hence the often-seen warning "Please do not feed the troll", for which PDNFTT is a common initialism. Posting this warning publicly, in reply to a troll's behavior to discourage further replies, may discourage the troll. However, it can also have the reverse effect, becoming itself food for the troll. Therefore, when a forum participant sees an apparently innocent answer to a troll as potential troll food, it may be more prudent to deliver the "Please do not feed the troll" warning in a private message to the answerer.
Examples:
One-shot trolls
One-shot troll messages are intended to be disruptive, and tend to be very obvious to ensure that they will receive annoyed replies.
Disruptive trolls
Off topic messages: Those that are irrelevant to the focus of the forum. This can also be done in the middle of an existing thread to attempt to hijack the thread, or otherwise change the topic at hand. Off topic messages usually occur when a member has been completely disproved in a serious debate thus, causing that member to use his or her other multiple pseudonyms for the purposes of changing the subject matter. These disruptions may result in the degeneration of a well informed thread into a heated juvenile exchange consisting of insults and childish accusations between multiple parties.
Inflammatory messages, including racist, sexist, classist or otherwise needlessly hateful comments.
Opinionated statements: Posting messages expressing their own opinions as generally accepted facts without offering any proof or analysis.
Spoiling: Deliberately revealing the ending or an important part of movie, book, game etc.
Bumping an old discussion, or rehashing a highly controversial past topic, particularly in smaller online communities.
Deliberate and repeated misspelling of other people's nicks in order to disturb or irritate them in a conversation.
Attention-seeking trolls:
This class of trolls seeks to incite as many responses as possible and to absorb a disproportionate share of the collective attention span.
Advertising another forum, especially a rival or a hated forum.
Claiming to be someone they cannot possibly be: "As an actual, real-life samurai, I have some problems with (the film) The Seven Samurai."
No longer having affiliation to or current knowledge of the subject at hand, yet continually posting opinions and commentary as "experts".
Messages containing a deliberate flaw or error: "I think 2001: A Space Odyssey is Roman Polanski's best film."
Asking for help with an implausible task or problem: "How do I season my Crock Pot? I don't want everything I cook in it to taste the same."
Intentionally naive questions: "Can I cook pasta in Evian instead of water?"
Intentional typos: "Does anyone have a copy of Super Maria Bras. for the Nintendo?"
Messages containing a self-referential appeal to status. "Pepsi is for white trash. I prefer a real soft drink like Coke."
Intentionally posting an outrageous argument, deliberately constructed around a fundamental but obfuscated flaw or error. Often the poster will become defensive when the argument is refuted, and may continue the thread through the use of further flawed arguments; this is referred to as "feeding" the troll.
Politically contentious messages: "Everyone knows that all Republicans/Democrats are evil."
Posting politically sensitive images in inappropriate places.
Feigning innocence, after a flamewar ensues.
Off-topic complaints about personal life, even threats of suicide: sometimes, this is the "cry for help" troll. In other instances, this type of trolling may be for amusement. If the motive is amusement, the troll may post ridiculous comments seemingly out of the blue. "I want to marry a hyena."
Plural or paranoid answers to personal opinions expressed by individuals: "I don't think that all of you really believe that -— you're just ganging up on me!"
A WONDERFUL article that is very relevant to GetCrafty is Searching for Safety Online: Managing "Trolling" in a Feminist Forum
Abstract:
A common phenomenon in online discussion groups is the individual who baits and provokes other group members, often with the result of drawing them into fruitless argument and diverting attention from the stated purposes of the group. This study documents a case in which the members of a vulnerable online community—a feminist web-based discussion forum—are targeted by a “troller” attempting to disrupt their discussion space. We analyze the strategies that make the troller successful and the targeted group largely ineffectual in responding to his attack, as a means to understand how such behavior might be minimized and managed in general. The analysis further suggests that feminist and other non-mainstream online forums are especially vulnerable, in that they must balance inclusive ideals against the need for protection and safety, a tension that can be exploited by disruptive elements to generate intragroup conflict.
Conclusions:
We conclude by suggesting several pro-active interventions that might help to forestall a vulnerable group from being harassed, yet not squelch debate. The first is to educate users about trolling. Trollers particularly prey on inexperienced Internet users, including populations that are often vulnerable for other reasons. Forum administrators might warn users about the patterns that trollers follow. Simply naming the danger would heighten people's awareness of it. Because the danger is emotional and not physical, we can imagine that warning about trolling might be similar to warning about phone pranks or sales scams, where awareness of the modus operandi is often sufficient to forestall the effect of the advantage-taking event.
Perhaps while we are educating users, we might also inform them of the lack of anonymity of Internet communication, no matter how safe and secure a discussion site may appear. Users need to be aware of the practice of archiving Internet transcripts, of how easily messages can be disseminated to other Internet venues, and of the fact that at least one systems administrator always has access privileges to the contents of their servers, even when messages have been deleted. Greater awareness might lead users to reflect before responding hastily
to provocative messages, since such messages could potentially come back to haunt them later.
This case also points to the need for online forums to articulate policies, guidelines for appropriate participation, and penalties for violating those guidelines, in advance of harassment episodes taking place. Public online spaces are likely to experience disruption from trolling and flaming unless policies and capabilities are implemented for excluding problem users. It is necessary in this regard to distinguish clearly between cooperative debate (however heated) and uncooperative provocation (however masked). Unambiguous and strong moderation from the start can avoid many problems. Some evidence suggests that groups vulnerable to harassment and trolling benefit especially from stricter centralized moderation.....
Posted by taciturn on 2004-05-20 21:25:52
Post Subject: creating a tattoo- need feminist clip art/ flash
I'm planning on getting a tattoo really soon-like maybe tonight and I still haven't got one designed quite yet. I'd like to be a celebration of 2 things
1. My college gradution last week and 2. My love of feminism.
any Ideas on where I could find some feminist, girl friendly clip art or flash art on the web? Or do you gals have some cool Idea as to how to combine the subjects of Math and Feminism into one uber-rad design?
Posted by xuli on 2005-03-01 21:02:36
Post Subject:
I haven't read any of those, however ...
... I regularly read Patricia J. Williams's column in the Nation (Diary of a Mad Law Professor) and absolutely adore it. Check it out at www.thenation.com if you'd like a taste -- her columns are usually no more than a page.
I also read Hard Core by Linda Williams, which was OK -- I read it for a paper on feminist film theory, and it was useful for my paper, but somewhat dense and didn't feel terribly original to me. If you're into feminist theorists looking at film genres not traditionally considered "feminist-friendly" (like porn), I do highly recommend the work of Carol Clover on horror/slasher films and the active roles played by female protagonists in them.
Posted by palegreen on 2005-03-04 11:38:26
Post Subject:
the bulk of those are just descriptions of dudes. men think about more than sports. my guy and i talk about everything. he read cunt before i did! maybe there aren't that many feminist guys out there or something.
but " I am in shape. Round is a shape." made me laugh
Posted by revafisheye on 2004-04-21 01:44:53
Post Subject:
Bitch is great. I always get so happy when it's in my mailbox!
I think they are doing a subscription drive right now to raise funds. I don't really understand the inner workings of a magazine, but, apparently, it helps them to have the money in advance, even though the subscription price is less than the cover price. By subscribing, you'd be saving money and helping spread the feminist love at the same time.
Posted by xuli on 2006-02-08 16:54:45
Post Subject:
Oh also, I recommend an awesome book called, "This Bridge Called My Back," ed. Gloria Anzaldua. It was a pretty eye-opening book for this white, middle class feminist!
Sorry to be slightly O/T, but that was edited by both Gloria Anzaldua and Cherrie Moraga. They both have other books of their own that are quite wonderful as well.
And Anthrogirl, I know what you mean. I find it quite saddening that when Anzaldua passed away two years ago there wasn't anything close to the response there has been to Friedan, because Anzaldua (and Moraga, who is still living) have done so much for the feminist movement in terms of guiding it towards being a movement of liberation for women of all races and social classes.
I have to admit I'm a little uncomfortable with your phrase "the Ayatollah Khomeini of feminism" though. Just because, well, it seems important to respect the specificity of the two situations.
Posted by anthrogirl on 2006-02-05 22:35:04
Post Subject:
I am sad that she's gone, but I think it's important to point out that she left a mixed legacy. Betty Friedan was at the forefront of chasing lesbians out of NOW, calling them a 'lavender menace'. she despised leatherwomen. While her book The Feminine Mystique still has validity, there was one thing she got terribly wrong- she didn't seem to realize that many women were already working- and most of those women were poor women who often worked cleaning the houses of other women who did a very limited amount of work inside or outside the home. My grandmother was a day-worker- she would have given anything to have stayed home while she was younger, to raise her own children instead of having to leave them with her own mother, to cook food only for her only family, to eat off the very plates she herself washed.
I live in New York, where many 'liberated' professional women pay other women- often poor women of color- to clean their apartments and raise their children for low wages, no health care, and extremely limited time off. Many of these women have to leave their children in their home countries or neighborhoods, and essntially live apart from them, especially if they work as nannies. In my neighborhood, they are often ignored, or treated as if they are invisible. They are not afforded opportunities or enough money for an education, and neither are their children. When my mother told me what day-work was like (she did it as a summer job while growing up), and how it felt to not be allowed to eat off the very plates she had washed, I understood why she had worked so hard to give me a good education.
While I am a feminist, I am still disturbed at how mainstream feminism, of which Fiedan was a stalwart, ignored the complexities of women's lives, and how many women exploit other women for their own purposes. Friedan's work for the most part did not trickle down to people like my grandmother and mother, who did not have the same choices available to them as others, or the leisure to read feminist literature and thought. At the same time I realize that women like my mother benefited from the idea that women are capable of more than cleaning a house, if they wish to do something other than that.
Posted by anthrogirl on 2006-02-07 09:42:46
Post Subject:
One other thing: by the time Betty Friedan wrote, black middle class women in cities had already started turning their Sundday social s and women's clubs into vehicles for change. Non-white women and poor white women already knew that it was extremely difficult to balance marriage, family, and outside work; it was Friedan's myth that women could 'have it all'. The truth is that no human being can have it all. Sacrifices and choices have to be made all the time. The only way any woman can have it all is if she hires another woman to do her cleaning and find help in the raising of children- in other words, the only way for a woman to not be a housewife is to hire a part-time surrogate, unless her husband is willing to stay home and do the work himself. But if housewives are viewed as neurotic, uneducated, simple-minded, and confused- what political and economic position does that give women who clean houses and act as nannies? And what does it say about most feminists that they aren't addressing the exploitation of women by other women?
Working at home is hard work. Even with timesavers, it often requires back-breaking labor that is boring and repetitious. Talking to children all day destroys the mind's ability to think, especially if women are discouraged by society at large and other women in their circle to keep their minds and ideas limber. But simply going out, becoming a lawyer, and hiring Jewel or Conchita or Gayle to clean your house or pick up your kids from nursery because you're too busy, and then feeling such contempt for the cleaner or nanny that you don't pay her what someone would have to pay you in order to do that kind of work- we already have one sex that's quite adept at that kind of exploitation. I'm a teacher, and I don't want to clean all day, either. But there are ways of making that job less miserable, just like there are ways of not exploiting other women. It's one of thereasons I don't have children, and why I'll have to make at least $100,000 a year before I can hire a cleaning lady- because I think the job is worth at least $100 an hour.
The reason I think these issues don't get addressed is because middle-class and wealthy white women have always had a dirty little secret- and that secret has been seeing some women as less human than others simply because they are poor. There is no other way to explain why many feminists have not defended the rights of women on welfare to raise their children safely, which otfen means staying home to keep them out of trouble, or why many feminists have not tackled the issue of what housework is really worth- and what they should pay their housekeepers. Is it truly feminist to breed like a bunny, use medications and in vitro fertilization to start your family late, insist that the world cough up enough raw resources for your little darling- and then deprive another woman of a decent living wage and in some cases the right to see her children? Micht it not be more feminist to discourage women above a certain economic line to stop having children, and to use that money to give health care and a pay raise to their housekeepers, who are often raising children on the poverty line and who do not have the same resouces for their kids? Perhaps some women could uplift other women by paying for a poor child's education, instead of spending ridiculous sums of money on breeding a child for someone else to raise. Women in the US have not fought as hard for daycare and work creches as they have in other countries, because they can hire someone to push the stroller. What if they showed their feminism by working for all children to be given a decent start in life, and for all women to be educated to whatever level they wished, without money being a problem? Then the women who stayed home or became housekeepers would be better educated people and probably more capable at their jobs- but then we'd have the problem of many of them getting uppity and not wanting to work for other women, right? Which is one reason the Civil Rights movement started.
Posted by Ratti Pillo on 2006-01-03 15:47:59
Post Subject: dirty Jersey?? anyone??
Hi, my name is Christine and i'm looking for any craftsters in the new jersey area...my location is new brunswick, and i'm attending Rutgers University. I do a fair amount with the activist/feminist groups on campus, and I'm an officer of Radigals; the Women and Gender Studies undergrad assoc. we're planning an annual feminist conference this march, as well as the NJ Zine fest . I'm looking to find other craftsters in the area, in school or not, to stitch and bitch with, swap, form business partnerships, etc etc etc. email me or post!!
Posted by rratstarr on 2005-02-22 11:04:35
Post Subject:
I'm going to have to bookmark this thread. I just wanted to chime in that Chicklit has two bundles of book recommendations as a sort of "intro to feminism."
Becoming a Feminist: A Bundle of Feminist Essentials, Part I
Becoming a Feminist: A Bundle of Feminist Essentials, Part II
I notice some of these books are already mentioned on this thread, but Chicklit gives a review of each one.
Posted by soapandwater on 2004-12-20 19:12:30
Post Subject:
So, I'm guessing you've already tried the grant search engine thing on the .gov site (ETA: or the british equivalent to it) ? I tried that once to do research for a school project, and that made my head spin as well.
I'd suggest getting articles published in the online crafting world so that you have some more creds? If you don't already? But with your education it sounds like you could easily write a feature article for any feminist-minded magazine like Bitch, Bust, Venus, etc.
They don't pay well, of course, but they do pay...
Posted by roxy_fondue on 2004-04-21 09:58:57
Post Subject:
Bitch is a fantastic magazine! i've had a subscription for a while now, and i've never been disappointed. I know that their new issue is out, but i haven't received it yet (i live in canada so it takes a bit longer). every day at approximately 2:15, i run out the mailbox with such anticipation. of course, i've been disappointed, but fingers crossed that today's the day. i love me some feminist literature, especially when it comes in magazine form (my ultimate guilty pleasure).
Posted by xuli on 2006-09-07 21:25:19
Post Subject:
i have the most trouble with the "catchy" part. i want to study public health because i find it interesting and i think it's important. i am afraid that if i get into the more political reasons i want to study public health, i will offend someone who is in a position to can my application. also, what's catchy? given that these people read hundreds of applications, how do i make mine less boring?
I'm in literature, not public health, so take this with a grain of salt, but in my field, an admissions committee would be delighted to hear your political reasons for wanting to study their field. It would make your application stand out and give them a real idea of how you'd fit into the culture of the department. You do need to be smart about how you do it, though. You want to make sure that the faculty at the school where you are working take a similar political view (and you've probably done that anyway, because there's a reason you are applying to that particular school to work with those particular people). When I did my grad school applications, I wrote a very feminist decolonial statement of purpose, and then I looked at some schools in geographic areas where I wanted to live and realized my statement of purpose wouldn't fit in with those departments at all. And then, of course, I realized that I wouldn't fit in with those departments either, so I said fuck it and didn't waste my money on the applications.
I mean, I'm guessing that the politics of the faculty are not quite so easy to discern in public health as they are in literature, but it's such a politicized area of knowledge that there should be something, right?
Posted by anthrogirl on 2006-02-10 07:28:11
Post Subject:
I actually think these discussions often get bogged down in stereotypes.
I think that's a really, really good observation.
The feminists I know, for instance, were really really upset about the passing of Mrs. King, more so than the passing of Betty Friedan, as was I.* So I was really surprised to learn from this thread that a lot of feminists weren't speaking out about it. But then I realized that it also has to do with who the press -- even the non-mainstream press -- is going to go to. I think it was a natural choice for every major news outlet to get quotes from high-profile feminists following the death of Betty Friedan, and not as natural a choice for them to get quotes from feminists following the death of Coretta Scott King. And it's probably true as well, unfortunately, that those same feminists who weren't contacted by the press probably didn't go out of their way to get into the news.
So I think stereotypes have a lot of complicated origins, and tend to propagate themselves too.
And I'm not denying that feminism in its early days involved a lot of racism and classism. And certainly there are still some people who subscribe to feminist beliefs that descend from those very, very flawed feminisms. But since I don't find those forms of feminism to be liberatory or interesting or helpful or, well, feminist, I wouldn't use those forms of feminism to characterize all feminist thought.
* And Soapandwater, I take your point about not comparing activists. But I never read The Feminine Mystique, and despite pursuing an advanced degree in feminist scholarship I don't tend to use work that cites Friedan or even locates the origins of feminism in her work. But I have lived for a long time in Atlanta, a city that really has been affected in profound ways by the life's work of the Rev. and Mrs. King, and spent a lot of time at the King Center, so their work has had more meaning in my life.The truth is, we don't know what Naomi Wolf thinks of King's death, because so far as I can tell, she hasn't been asked. But at the same time I have a funny feeling that she may not have bothered to say, either. That's what concerns me.
xuli, I think women who are there working in the vineyards may be very upset. But when I told my students about her, they just sort of shrugged. A few less shrugged over Betty Friedan, but there was not much reaction about her either. What's disturbing about King is that even the little liberal press that is left didn't connect the dots, as far as I can tell here in New York, which is a major media center.
But as for 'in the early days'- I'm sorry, but I don't see many shoutouts to poor women now, either. I don't see class being adressed in any appreciable way. I haven't seen proominent Third Wavers write about racism and race with the view that some people don't have the same needs as others. Again, if I was some cranky crunchy feminist spinster, I might say, 'hmm, maybe I don't know fuck-all about the modern world'. But I'm seeing students on a daily basis who aren't interested in feminism, don't know anything about modern feminism, don't feel liberated, and aren't posing for Girls Gone Wild or the Suicide Girls Calendar. And I still say that an objective glance shows that most of the women doing the writing, photographing, and all of that are white and come from middle class families, and have the attitudes that go along with that profile for the most part. That's not a stereotype. That's a walk through the bookstore. Do I think it might change? Yeah, eventually. But I'm not holding my breath right now.
Posted by anthrogirl on 2006-02-10 07:22:32
Post Subject:
Anthrogirl, I respect what you're saying, but I honestly don't feel that mainstream feminism necessarily reflects Ms. magazine and Betty Friedan. In fact, I'd argue that it reflects Third Wave feminism, which is chock full of its own problems. I'd say that the people who are getting attention as feminists are women like Amy Richards and Jennifer Baumgardner, who wrote Manifesta which allows for more people to be 1.) accepting of feminism and 2.) lax in how they approach feminism.
I'd say I 70% agree. The other 30% remembers that the fixation on sex started before the Third Wavers. The truth is, for most feminists, Friedan was irrelevant- many younger women had never even heard of her. But I would argue that hearing about her was less important than the fact that her work influenced Third Wavers, for both good and ill.
I think a lot of this is also a time factor. A lot of people suffered from battle fatigue after the 70s. This made it easier for those opposed to feminism to marsal their forces, and for many women to either become lax or not teach their children about feminism.
But one of the reasons I'm bringing up these earlier women is because when the Right talks about 'mainstream' feminism, these are some of the people on their minds- not Naomi Wolf.
In fact, I'd argue that most current feminist scholars agree with you on issues of looking at class, race, sexuality, gender, and NOT valorizing women over men-- that's an essentialist viewpoint, on that I disagree with vehemently. I think some mainstream feminists do it, but mostly not. Mostly I hear my fairly feminist (I use "fairly" as they won't identify as feminist, often) peers saying, "But it's bad for men, too." Of course, sexism is bad for men, but they are not oppressed by their own gender. They're oppressed by other factors. They just benefit negatively, as well.
Um- men are oppressed by their own gender. There's a very narrow definition of how to be a man, and that definition is often enforced by fathers and male peers. While the definition has enlarged somewhat, it's still very much there. For most men it might not be overly oppressive- but if you're an effeminitite man or just a bit outside the norm, it certainly is.
Most feminist scholars would agree with me- and then they write a few more books that only feminists read, instead of calling for action or forming alliances with others. But this is not just a feminist issue- most groups are polarized and insular right now. I remeber when gay men and lesbians had more of an alliance- an uneasy one to be sure, but it was there. While there is somewhat of an alliance on gay marriage and gays in uniform, you don't find very many gay men talking about women's uterine and breast cancer, which is particularly devastating for lesbians since many of them will not go to prejudiced doctors, and often suffer from lower income than their male counterparts.
I've read Naomi Wolf and some others. Some of what she says is true- ditto for others. But I don't think it goes far enough. I still think we need to ask prominent women how much they pay their housekeepers, and whether they think all women deserve health care and a living wage, and what they are actually going to DO to help women get it, which will benefit all women and their families, if they have families. I don't see that happening anytime soon.
I just feel that to try to compare women activists is not a good idea, as we all bring something different to the table, both good and bad. Betty Friedan did some pretty awesome things, and as she had her own prejudices and her own agenda, as she was a product of her times, I'm not surprised (though I am disappointed) that she was exclusive and at times bigoted. I don't think, though, that there's a whole movement of Betty Friedan followers. I'd say mainstream feminists have fled from the Second Wave to embrace the Third Wave, which includes being young, sex-positive, and embracing sexuality in all of its forms. It, too, can be exclusive in many different ways, and that's why feminism needs to be more all-encompassing than that.
We do all bring something different to the table. But if some are bringing fresh fruit and some are bringing spoiled fruit, and some are bringing lots of fruit but not sharing it, why can't we judge that? Because they're women? Because they're activists? Which one gets then the pass?
I don't see women 'embracing sexuality in all its forms'. Maybe I'm in a different place than you. I see a bit more polymorphous behavior than before- but it was hidden before. I don't really know if there's more of it, and I don't think anyone can tell, since most older women are not going to talk about having slept with women or engaging in threesomes. Yes, there are groups like Cake and Suicide Girls- and most women are not participating in that. There aren't tons of young women in the fetish shop. I don't see casual articles in Cosmo on how to properly perform a fisting, or why lesbian/bisexual sex is fun. When I go on craigslist in New York and LA, I see a lot of shame from women looking for female partners- most of them want to do it on the Q-T. And most of this 'freedom' is something I see among (surprise) white non-immigrant women. When the party for everyone else heats up, please send me an invite, because I'd like to go. Meanwhile, save for Tristan Taormino, I don't see lots of sexpositive young women putting their names out there and discussing some of the amazing variations in sexuality that are extant. Most of the books I've read by younger women seem to still be stuck on whether anal sex is ok or yucky. Fisting, roleplay, foodplay, threesomes, and all that don't get covered very much, or they get labeled as way kinky. You don't have to take my word for it, but those aren't even near 'way kinky'.
But I think Marina-Trilobyte is right, about how people approach activism. We're in a lull, we'll see.
I think we are. And I really hate to criticize. But we won't get out of this lull (which is there because it benefits a lot of people on both sides of the aisle) unless wee do more than write books and clever articles. I teach at two schools that are fairly ordinary, and most of my students wouldn't know who Naomi Wolf is, or what a Third Waver believes, if Maureen Dowd's book dropped from the sky and hit them in the head. They are working class kids- the spiritual grandchildren of all those maids I was talking about. They don't even know Betty Friedan is dead, orthat she ever lived. They're not taking part in these arguments. I think that's part of the problem- they're ignored, because for all intents, they're expected to be the next servant class by pretty much everyone above them, and for servats, it's dangerous to have a raised consciousness.
Posted by melonade83 on 2007-09-08 23:25:43
Post Subject: Not exactly feminist theory, but...
I know this thread is supposed to be about feminist theory, but this weekend I discovered \"The Paper Bag Princess,\" by Robert Munsch. I think hospitals should send it home with every new mother to read to her child. :-)
Posted by anthrogirl on 2006-10-24 12:26:56
Post Subject:
The movie might be great. That doesn't mean it necessary. It was necessary back in the 70s for All in the Family to be the first program in which a lead character had a breat cancer scare- because then, women weren't being given info on breast cancer. It was important for movies like Philadelphia to be made, because at one point, most people knew nothing about AIDS. Roots needed to be made because at the time, the only people who talked about slavery were wearing berets and talking revolution- no one else talked about the contributions blacks have made to America. But all of those were then. This is now.
Stop being complacent people. Stop asking for awareness or being satisfied with awareness. Take the next step. Get angry and fight. Fight for your right to live a healthy life, no matter how long you live. Fight for those who don't have the time or money to fight. Fight to stop disease and suffering before it stops. Don't buy another pink product made out of plastic in order to make donations- write checks to your local Women's Clinic, and write a letter to those greedy pro-consumer corporations and tell them how you won't be duped into buying corporate crap made out of materials that make humans get sick with cancer.
In some ways this thread is similar to the 'Yo mama' one- older women might look like fuddy-duddies to some of you, but 25 years ago when women like me were forming lesbian and feminist organizations, we looked up to our mothers who had taught us how to fight in the first place. My mother was at several civil rights marches- in the 60s she wasn't buying yogurt to increase her awareness and feel smug about 'supporting' something. Just because I am fast approaching the age where most of you might see me as being crusty, doesn't mean that women like myself are all stupid corporate sheep. Wearing piercings through your face doesn't make you cool or radical or sensitive, or even relevant (quite frankly, people who have time for all that piercing and preening seem more than a bit self-indulgent to me). Taking to the streets and kicking ass does. That's always been the hallmark of cool- not elaborate home and body decoration, or watching programs produced by corporate media to feel in 'support' of something.
Posted by xuli on 2006-02-09 10:09:18
Post Subject:
I actually think these discussions often get bogged down in stereotypes.
I think that's a really, really good observation.
The feminists I know, for instance, were really really upset about the passing of Mrs. King, more so than the passing of Betty Friedan, as was I.* So I was really surprised to learn from this thread that a lot of feminists weren't speaking out about it. But then I realized that it also has to do with who the press -- even the non-mainstream press -- is going to go to. I think it was a natural choice for every major news outlet to get quotes from high-profile feminists following the death of Betty Friedan, and not as natural a choice for them to get quotes from feminists following the death of Coretta Scott King. And it's probably true as well, unfortunately, that those same feminists who weren't contacted by the press probably didn't go out of their way to get into the news.
So I think stereotypes have a lot of complicated origins, and tend to propagate themselves too.
And I'm not denying that feminism in its early days involved a lot of racism and classism. And certainly there are still some people who subscribe to feminist beliefs that descend from those very, very flawed feminisms. But since I don't find those forms of feminism to be liberatory or interesting or helpful or, well, feminist, I wouldn't use those forms of feminism to characterize all feminist thought.
* And Soapandwater, I take your point about not comparing activists. But I never read The Feminine Mystique, and despite pursuing an advanced degree in feminist scholarship I don't tend to use work that cites Friedan or even locates the origins of feminism in her work. But I have lived for a long time in Atlanta, a city that really has been affected in profound ways by the life's work of the Rev. and Mrs. King, and spent a lot of time at the King Center, so their work has had more meaning in my life.
Posted by brdgt on 2005-04-19 09:21:22
Post Subject:
The thing to remember is that no matter what is "typical" if you felt uncomfortable then you should switch doctors.
If you have the ability to be choosey (I know with HMOs that isn't always easy) try to get a female nurse midwife (while they typically deal with pregnancies, they also do routine ob/gyn). My best experiences have always been with them. Tell her your experiences and what made you uncomfortable.
Alternately, there aren't many left in the country, but feminist health clinics were started on the premise that the doctor-patient relationship needs to be more egalitarian and may make you feel more comfortable. Here are some suggested by The Feminist Women's Health Center based in Washington state. They also have a great resource page with all sorts of information from how to do a self-cervical exam to what to expect during an routine exam.
Posted by letitiah on 2007-09-09 16:16:44
Post Subject:
well, my response isn''t exactly on-topic either, but once you get finished with that intro backgrounder, can I suggest the great feminist critic, Susan Sontag?
http://www.susansontag.com/biography.htm
She''s quite readable -- I especially like her \"On Photography\". I may not agree with all she has to say, but she poses great questions!
Posted by Jenny on 2004-04-21 17:21:53
Post Subject:
I would subscribe to Bitch even though it costs more than the cover price for me to subscribe here in Canada! (I'm moving soon, so I'm waiting until after that.)
I read the thing cover to cover, and I start with the letters -- I love how there are often discussions through those letters that span several issues.
I'm sickeningly fascinated by (most) things pop culture so it's so nice to have a place to read about such things without feeling guilty or used, like I do on the rare occasions when I give into checkout lust and spend $4.95 on People. (Though reading Us at the dentist feels pretty damn good.)
As for the Bust vs. Bitch thing, they really are different magazines and serve different purposes. Bitch is in many ways an academic publication (as Miss E said, perfectly quotable and legitimate for study!). I see Bust as a feminist version of your typical newsstand women's magazine. It's the smart alternative to Cosmopolitan. (And Venus often seems to be the smart alternative to Bust, but I digress.)
Like, when I'm in an airport wanting something easy-to-read and I look at a newsstand, it's so awesome to have Bust there so I don't end up buying a fashion rag. Bust isn't perfect, but it's got Ayun Halliday! And smut!
But still, I agree, if the choice is between Bust and Bitch, I'll take the latter.
Posted by soapandwater on 2006-02-09 09:36:15
Post Subject:
Anthrogirl, I respect what you're saying, but I honestly don't feel that mainstream feminism necessarily reflects Ms. magazine and Betty Friedan. In fact, I'd argue that it reflects Third Wave feminism, which is chock full of its own problems. I'd say that the people who are getting attention as feminists are women like Amy Richards and Jennifer Baumgardner, who wrote Manifesta which allows for more people to be 1.) accepting of feminism and 2.) lax in how they approach feminism.
In fact, I'd argue that most current feminist scholars agree with you on issues of looking at class, race, sexuality, gender, and NOT valorizing women over men-- that's an essentialist viewpoint, on that I disagree with vehemently. I think some mainstream feminists do it, but mostly not. Mostly I hear my fairly feminist (I use "fairly" as they won't identify as feminist, often) peers saying, "But it's bad for men, too." Of course, sexism is bad for men, but they are not oppressed by their own gender. They're oppressed by other factors. They just benefit negatively, as well.
I just feel that to try to compare women activists is not a good idea, as we all bring something different to the table, both good and bad. Betty Friedan did some pretty awesome things, and as she had her own prejudices and her own agenda, as she was a product of her times, I'm not surprised (though I am disappointed) that she was exclusive and at times bigoted. I don't think, though, that there's a whole movement of Betty Friedan followers. I'd say mainstream feminists have fled from the Second Wave to embrace the Third Wave, which includes being young, sex-positive, and embracing sexuality in all of its forms. It, too, can be exclusive in many different ways, and that's why feminism needs to be more all-encompassing than that.
But I think Marina-Trilobyte is right, about how people approach activism. We're in a lull, we'll see.
Posted by slowgraffiti220 on 2005-02-02 14:51:34
Post Subject: Re: Feminist knitters
I like these kinds of survey-for-my-possible-thesis topics that keep popping up...
How do women define 'feminist?'
I'm guessing that by this you mean you want to gather a variety of definitions from different women, so I will give you mine...I define femenism both by that all too familar and oft-quoted dictionary definition of "the beleif in the equailty of genders" and as a historically significant and ever-changing theoretical/philosophical lens, if you will, through which one can view the world around them.
Do most girls and women who take up knitting today do it with a "Stitch & Bitch" mentality (meaning associate it with girl power and feminism)?
I think that a lot of women do take up knitting with a sort of snb mentality, but I'm not sure how feminist that whole catchphrase-laden schpiel is. i don't feel like "celebrating women's culture" or "reconnecting with grandma" or whatever is particularly feminist. i do feel that the idea of asserting the value of all types of production is a very feminist notion, and that by knitting because you like it, refusing to be teased about it, doing it in public, teaching others to do it, and insisting that others recognize it as a complex and worthwhile activity worthy of some respect as such one commits a feminist act...i think however that when you start knitting ::because:: you are a woman and you feel like you should reconnect with women and share some kind of spiritual wah-wah with them -- well, that's all fine and dandy but not very feminist nor particularly historically aware. (disclaimer: i own both snb's and find them very useful!)
Why does knitting suddenly have the cult following that it does?
I really have no idea. Maybe because it's "the new yoga"?
Or has it always been like this and I just didnt realize it until the past few years?
I think it has increased in popularity and the people who are doing it because it's trendy certainly are making the whole community more visable. All this media and commercial notice has also had the effect of getting a bunch of people who once knit only casually or had not done it in a while to jump back into it, and so i think definately the number of serious knitters has kind of swollen compared to past years. However, I am constantly amazed at how many of my friends knit and I never knew...I always get really pissed at them when they tell me because it's sort of like if I find out they read some super cool book five years ago and never told me about it! The knitters who have been with it all along are very non-chalant about it, even when they're obsessed.
If you knit, why did you start?
I learned when I was 10 or so, knit a "baby scarf" (re: failed scarf for self) for my soon-to-be-born brother, and them kind of forgot how to knit soon after. I started again when the whole SnB thing got going because I wanted to learn it again and realized that it wasn't and old lady hobby, it was a cool and useful skill.
Do you identify as a feminist?
Yep, but not particularly first and foremost. I sort of consider that perspective to be subsumed by my more socialist leanings.
What does knitting do for you? Why do you like it?
It's interesting. I'm a product knitter primarily....never during the course of knitting something do I forget how close (or far) I am from the finished product. At the same time, as I get better at the technical stuff, i.e. knitting, purling, the one bazzilion cast-on methods, and other sundry needle moves, I am becoming a bit more process oriented. I like reading a pattern, imagining how it will look, and then seeing how it turns out with little unexpected textural things or weird problems like giant yarn strands or loops or whatever. It's sort of like sight-reading music -- at first it's daunting and you just will do whatever to play the song...then the challenge of reading it a few times and then trying to play it straight through and seeing how it goes is fun and exciting.
How do you communicate with other knitters (knitting group, online forums like this, etc)?
I'm on a listserv for the local SnB, which I sometimes read for hints and info about area yarns shoppes and whatnot. As for other knitters, I keep finding out more and more of my friends can knit, and so we just make time together for knitting and chetting and whatnot.
Why do you choose to connect in this way?
Well, knitting's a good excuse to get together and getting together is a good excuse to knit. In college, any form of multitasking is preferrable...it just happens to be knitting and hanging out go really well together.
Do you think knitting today is different than it was several generations ago? Does it serve a different function?
Yes and no...most people nowadays don't have to knit, at least in the "West." In other places, the various textile arts like knitting, weaving, embroidery, etc... are still vital and completely necessary work. They've undergone a lot of changes, which have been different depending on location, but I'd say a primary trend has been that products of these activities are now more a part of the market economy rather than the subsistence economy of a given area...I'd say overall, that has a been a negative shift. In the US and the rest of the "West" knitting has become a leisure activity and a creative outlet for people...I think that part of it is a drive in a lot of people to make something, physically -- not just type up reports and go to meetings and whatnot. I was raised in a tradition of make-it-because-I-have-to -- my mom made a lot of my clothes when I was younger and taught me to make little cotton items (like elastic-band pants and simple tank tops) for myself. Now I feel odd never making anything. I think that homes need to be producers and consumers for the world to work properly, and so I knit. Also, frankly, my knitted items are waaaayyyy better quality than store-bought machine-knit crap, so I prefer it anyhow.
Posted by fishfeet on 2005-02-01 13:28:43
Post Subject: Feminist knitters
Great topic for discussion. I myself am a relatively new knitter, but have crocheted for years. I think it is interesting that you bring up the relationship between knitting (and crafting in general) and feminism. Many of the "younger generation" knitting books address this phenomenom and refer to reclaiming knitting from being considered an anti feminist activity. I think it is also important to reclaim the word feminist, because I know many women (and men) who feel it has a negative conotation. Personally I define feminism as equality between the sexes, both economically and socially. To answer the rest of your questions:
What role does knitting play in a women's life?
- I think that knitting plays the role that any other hobby plays in peoples lives. It is something that interests them, gives them joy, it is a outlet of creativity and allows them to connect with others who enjoy the same activity.
Do most girls today take up knitting with the SnB mentality?
-I don't necessarily believe that girls take up knitting with the idea that it is a feminist thing to do, however I can't speak for most girls so I don't know what their motives are. For myself, as a relatively new knitter and a feminist, I did not take up knitting in order to reclaim the knitting as a feminist activity, I just like to do it.
Why does knitting have such a cult following?
- I definately think that the number of knitters has increased recently. There are many new yarn stores popping up, new books and magazines about the subject, etc. I don't know the exact reason, but I think that our societies wants and needs are cyclical. For example, after years of pre-packaged, preservative laden foods, people are starting to shift back to fresh, organic ingredients, and making their own food from scratch. I think the same is true with hobbies and crafts, people are knitting in order to find a way to cope with the rush rush lifestyle that everyone has grown accustomed to. I don't really know if this answers the question, but it is the only way I know how to explain it.
Why did I start knitting?
I actually learned to knit during a year I spent in a program called Americorps. For 10 months I was working with a group of other people on different volunteer projects. We traveled around the country and our accommodations were sparse. We didn't usually have a tv, and we didn't have access to a vehicle all of the time. In order to pass what little down time we did have many of the people in the program learned to knit and crochet. At the time it was a relatively inexpensive and portable hobby. During that time, I spent more time crocheting, mainly because it was easier for me (my mom had taught me years ago) but I just recently started knitting because of the versatility of the items you can create.
Do I identify as a feminist?
-yes
What does knitting do for me?
-I just really enjoy working with yarn and fibers, as well as the rhythmic motions of knitting and crocheting. It is relaxing as well as a way to do or make something. As a business student, I have very little opportunity throughout my day to actually make something with my hands, knitting gives me an outlet to do this.
Thanks for the discussion, and good luck on your thesis. I hope you get some valuable information that will assist in writing it.
Posted by moon_lemming on 2005-03-04 20:16:28
Post Subject:
Man, I can't be concise about anything! Sorry.
eeexcellent, thanks -- don't apologize! I learn a lot from your posts.
soapandwater, I tried to get into Ms. as a baby feminist but found too much of it went over my head. it does seem to skew older, but I guess I take their book suggestions seriously because they've always been a "serious" feminist magazine to me, and I suppose I figure they know what they're talking about, whether that's right or wrong, because I don't know enough to critique the mag. I know I connect more with Bitch (although it's gotten boring enough that I stopped my sub a few issues ago), but that mag doesn't cover the same things as Ms., so it's hard for me to compare/contrast.
and I'm not sure that last paragraph made a lot of sense, but I'll leave it in case it did.
Posted by thebossofyou on 2005-02-14 11:48:28
Post Subject:
i definitely identify as a feminist and a knitter. i am still pondering the first group of questions you asked but i figured i would go ahead and work on the ones below! hope this helps!!
If you knit, why did you start?
my grandmother always knit/crocheted/etc and i was always amazed at it. she taught me when i was very young but it took a friend refreshing my memory around 6 or 7 years ago to get me going again. the women's university i went to (hollins university) had a large population of knitters and you could pretty much guarantee to see someone doing it while you were walking around the campus.
Do you identify as a feminist?
absolutely. of course, i am of the mentality that there are more feminists out there than are willing to admit. i mean, by the loosest of definitions, if you are woman and wearing pants to work, you are a feminist (or at least should realize that you have a feminist to thank for that option). i wish people (men and women) owned this label more.
What does knitting do for you? Why do you like it?
knitting gives me a sense of tradition. i like it because it gives me a connection back to my grandmother and a greater appreciation of her skill. and a simple reason is because it is portable. i have knitting with me at all times - i never feel like my time is wasted when i have to wait in the doctor's office or i'm riding in the car. kitting has saved my sanity more than once!
How do you communicate with other knitters (knitting group, online forums like this, etc)?
i use online forums like this, but i would like to be more connected to other feminist knitters. it is an interesting combination. the knitters that i am closest to are my friends that knit or the ones that are learning. it tends to spread...
Do you think knitting today is different than it was several generations ago? Does it serve a different function? i think that, much like the roles that women play, the boundaries have loosened a bit. there are so many artists out there that are looking towards crafts like knitting as means to create their work. there are still purists out there (and a lot of them reside in my town's LYS) that seem threatened by this new resurgence in the popularity of knitting among young people. it’s too bad because there is so much knowledge to be gained from these women. not to say that there aren't women that are excited - a friend's grandmother thinks that it is awesome! despite all the differences and changes over the generations, i think that the foundation is still the same though - the simple satisfaction in producing something with your hands.
Posted by laurenbevin on 2005-01-31 18:52:41
Post Subject: Feminist knitters
As a woman who identifies as both a knitter and a feminist, I've been really excited with the growing popularity of Stitch & Bitch and the revival of knitting among young women. Because of this, and because I love to knit and be girly, I'm writing my thesis on knitting as a feminist activity. Does anybody else identify with this combination? I'd be interested to hear any thoughts on the topic. Some questions I've been considering:
How do women define 'feminist?'
What role does knitting play in a woman's life? What does it do for her?
Do most girls and women who take up knitting today do it with a "Stitch & Bitch" mentality (meaning associate it with girl power and feminism)?
Why does knitting suddenly have the cult following that it does? Or has it always been like this and I just didnt realize it until the past few years?
Some more questions I'd like answers to:
If you knit, why did you start?
Do you identify as a feminist?
What does knitting do for you? Why do you like it?
How do you communicate with other knitters (knitting group, online forums like this, etc)?
Why do you choose to connect in this way?
Do you think knitting today is different than it was several generations ago? Does it serve a different function?
If you feel like answering these questions, please please do! I'm really interested in this topic and I really need some honest feedback so I can take my thesis in the right direction. Also, if you don't identify as feminist but you knit, I really want to hear what you think of this idea I've posted. I feel like it's a trend that's catching on or something.
Posted by MlleEmily on 2004-08-21 03:50:16
Post Subject:
1. how did you learn to knit? how old were you then and old are you now?
My mother taught me when I was about ten years old.
2. knitting = nesting? is your knitting a way of getting back to simpler times?
It's very relaxing, I'll say that much... I'm not one for thinking that the so-called 'simpler times' were actually much simpler, or better in a lot of ways. I think that's a pretty romantic view, a myth that politicians are always keen on trotting out when they want to et more conservative.
3. in regards to the current resurgence in knitting, when do you think it started and why?
I was going to say this current world conflict thing making everyone want to stay indoors and do homey, crafty stuff... but the knitting resurgence occured before all that. People do seem to want the satisfaction of making something unique, in a kind of backlash to mass-produced consumer goods. Nothing you can buy seems really all that special when you see someone else wearing it on the bus... and the fact that something can be bought by anyone with the money makes it consequently less exclusive and appealing... the very thing a lot of mass-produced goods claim to be (ie labels, brands). It's like all the stores push this idea of exclusivity and how wonderful it is to have unique items... and then these very stores can't deliver on that promise, so people perhaps are trying to get the uniqueness that's been so exalted the only way they can... by creating something new themselves.
4. do you have a crafty group that you meet with? how often? why do you dig it?
I have been to a Meetup for knitting three times, and really like it. I go because I'm a knitting obsessive and talk about it with a vehemence that's very dificult for non-knitters to tolerate.
5. where do you go online to discuss/learn/share your craftiness? how do these sites inspire you in ways that real life conversations don't?
I go to supernaturale.com, crafster.org, and this site. I think being able to view a lot of different patterns and finished projects from people from very disparate geographical locations is cool-- it makes me feel connected to a larger knitting community, however illusory this may actually be.
6. is there a subversive element to knitting? a punk rock element? or simply a DIY smugness?
No. Are you kidding? This sort of talk's actually been pissing me off lately. The political status quo ain't changing 'cos you knitted something. That requires just a little more effort. There are those who'll tell you knitting is some sort of feminist act too, which is ludicrous. It's not feminist or anti-feminist- it's just bloody knitting!
There's a lot of talk among third wavers about the misguided second-wave feminists who bashed stay-at-home moms and homemakers, and I really just do not think that was ever the case. If anything, Betty Freidan at al were more about telling people to appreciate what women did and NOT dismiss it as mere 'women's (ie worthless) work'. They were never about the denigration of housework per se, just that it shouldn't just fall to women to take care of what is really very hard work and that women ought to be allowed to have equal say in political life and economic outside the domestic realm. The third-wavers attack on second-wavers on this particular point is completely unfounded.
But I digress...
Maybe knitting can be personally transforming, in that you learn to appreciate things in a more non-commercial way... although even that's suspect, given most people have to buy their wool at a store and there's a whole element of fibre snobbery. I'd go with the DIY smugness theory before I'd
say the other two.
7. why do you knit?
It's super fun! I love having made something myself! People tell me I'm clever (or tell me I must have too much time on my hands, nasties!). It's also a good way to watch a lot of television without feeling guilty- hey, as long as I'm knitting something, that's DOING something, so the guilt of spending six hours straight watching the Six Feet Under DVD set is assuaged. And it's just so relaxing and zen.
8. what other crafty things do you do besides knitting?
I love to sew my own clothes, fabric collage, decoupage, basically anything creative. I a bit of crochet too.
9. the future of knitting- is there one or are we just kidding ourselves?
Well, I don't think anyone will stop knitting... as far as craft fads go it will ebb and flow with the mainstream but people will always knit I think. I think it's relative simplicity augurs well for it's continuing practise, whereas some trraditional hand crafts have disappeared almost completely (I'm thinking of certain types of lacemaking, and embroideruie and passementerie) because they really require some pretty hard-core learning to be done well.
10. do you prefer to knit alone or with other people? why?
I can do either. Knitting in a group is fun more for the chatting about knitting and getting tips and seeing averyone elses project than actually getting much done!
11. true or false: can craft save us all? (elaboration here would be nice, but not necessary.)
Only Jesus can save us all... just kidding. But a critical look at consumerism and mass-production wouldn't do anybody any harm... although as I've said, hand-made stuff can be a source of just more competitiveness and snobbery, if you're that kinda person.
Posted by roxy_fondue on 2005-03-05 18:30:30
Post Subject:
after reading the Get Crafty book, I feel like so much of what i do is crafty, even though it doesn't technically fit under the official heading of "Crafty". But in no particular order, I love to:
go to the library and get books and magazines to read
walk around the city
window shop and browse bookstores
drink coffee, at home or in cafes
read feminist lit.
watch movies
surf the internet, especially get crafty, supernaturale and live journal
cook/bake
send and receive mail
take bubble baths
cuddle with my man on the couch on Thursday nights whilst watching Survivor and The Apprentice
in an ideal world - in which my shyness and laziness weren't so apparent - i'd like to join a bookclub, preferably one with a female/feminist emphasis to it, and i'd also like to volunteer at the humane society...will i do this? hopefully some day!
Posted by kateartichoke on 2005-02-14 01:53:47
Post Subject:
How do women define 'feminist?'
i think defining 'feminist' is almost impossible because the word can have different meanings to everyone. i guess in short i would define a feminist as someone who works to achieve equality between the sexes.
What role does knitting play in a woman's life?
anymore, the role knitting plays in a woman's life is completely up to the woman. it can be non-existant to some women, a hobby to others, and a symbol of opression to others.
What does it do for her?
some i'm sure take it up for relaxation, others becaus they're crafty and like to make things with their hands, others have to take it up because they're forced to. the answers could go on and on.
Do most girls and women who take up knitting today do it with a "Stitch & Bitch" mentality (meaning associate it with girl power and feminism)?
it seems like the groups that knitting is currently taking off with do identify themselves as feminists.
Why does knitting suddenly have the cult following that it does? Or has it always been like this and I just didnt realize it until the past few years?
it's been in the last 3-4 years that knitting has really taken off.
Some more questions I'd like answers to:
If you knit, why did you start?
i love working with my hands, and it seemed like a wonderful, crafy way to make myself clothing. i have very crafty parents, started doing cross stitch and sewing in elementary school, and knitting seemed like a natural progression.
Do you identify as a feminist?
yes
What does knitting do for you? Why do you like it?
it is a productive way to let out my nervous energy while being creative. knitting is something i do every day, and knowing that i am being crafty and making something makes me happy. i try to have as much of a diy lifestyle as i can, and all those things, plus making myself and the people i love scarfs and sweaters and all good knitty things, gives me a sense of satisfactiona and pride.
How do you communicate with other knitters (knitting group, online forums like this, etc)?
mainly online.
Why do you choose to connect in this way?
i live in a small north idaho town, and the other people my age have not caught on to knitting. so i either communicate with knitters who have my interests online, or not at all
Do you think knitting today is different than it was several generations ago? Does it serve a different function?
knitting today is all about fun. most of us don't have to knit, we aren't expected to knit or to even have a clue how. so yes, it is very different. fifty or 60 years ago women were expected not to have a career and stay home and take care of the family. a lot of the time knitting was another sign of the oppression women felt - it was part of the housework. when we knit today, we should remember that, and not forget that what we consider fun women not so long ago considered work.
Posted by h_pets360 on 2005-02-14 12:41:55
Post Subject:
How do women define 'feminist?'
I guess I've developed into an extreme distaste of ALL gender roles, stereotypes, etc. I still consider myself a feminist.
What role does knitting play in a woman's life? What does it do for her?
Depends on the woman.
Do most girls and women who take up knitting today do it with a "Stitch & Bitch" mentality (meaning associate it with girl power and feminism)?
Most girls, I don't know. Me, yes - pretty much everything I do I try to do with positive politics in mind.
Why does knitting suddenly have the cult following that it does?
A lot of mainstream fashion lately looks homemade-ish. I think that has something to do with it.
Or has it always been like this and I just didnt realize it until the past few years?
I don't know really ;)
If you knit, why did you start?
I've been crocheting pretty much forever. My grandma taught me: my mom and grandma are both pretty crafty. I learned how to knit about a year ago: my brother (i'm mentioning that he's bisexual because it's sort of related to politics and gender).
Do you identify as a feminist?
hell yes.
What does knitting do for you? Why do you like it?
knitting does the same thing that any other craft does - the finished object gives me so much joy to keep/share/donate. Plus it's therapeutic and gives me a creative outlet.
How do you communicate with other knitters (knitting group, online forums like this, etc)?
online, in real life. mostly i'm a solitaire though ;)
Why do you choose to connect in this way?
ease
Do you think knitting today is different than it was several generations ago? Does it serve a different function?
yes, it is different. i think - i don't know if people once viewed it as feminist. i'll be back to answer this better. i gotta run.
Posted by fairgreenlady on 2006-02-18 08:21:26
Post Subject:
I had an Ah-HA moment when one of my professors, a noted feminist studies writer/researcher, asked me to "man the table" at a tournament. I replied, "I'll be happy to WATCH the table, and I'll even PERSON the table, but there is no possible way I can MAN the table." We all enjoyed that for a good laugh.
Posted by pudding on 2005-03-15 06:12:08
Post Subject:
Finally, a book club.
i heart this site.
I feel the same way!
OK. Before I had a chance to post my thoughts on Woman Hollering Creek I went and read the whole of The House On Mango Street too.
I have heaps of thoughts swirling around in my head and I'm worried I won't do them justice. I'll just start by mentioning two thinks which strike me about both books.
Firstly, I like the way they are divided up into bite sized chunks. The chapters (in Mango Street) and stories (Women Hollering Creek) feel lovely and rounded and I loved being able to read small amounts and then stop and think.
Also, I thought Sandra Cisneros was really excellent in the way that she was able to say something without coming right out and spelling it out. She told stories which made a point: rather than saying "feminist women are powerful", she would weave a story about a powerful feminist women. You saw that the woman (women) was powerful, and dignified, and brave through the choices they made. (This hasn't come out exactly right, but I hope you understand).
OK, lastly (I know this is a third thought, but I'm on a roll), I loved the way she described women in love - descriptions of the physical sensations, emotions and thoughts of a woman consumed by love all mixed together.
I got the same sort of thing when I was an English major too (go creative writing majors!) as well as being in teacher school. God forbid they find out I have been doing martial arts since I was a child!
I think that people get defensive when someone questions their manner of thinking and they don't have a logical defense. It is easier for them to think a woman having feminist views is a "ball buster" with something against men than a woman who actually thinks about gender roles and their impact on our lives.
Posted by kohuether on 2005-02-10 12:29:23
Post Subject:
I don't knit, I crochet. Though, I think I am going to purchase some knitting needles today. But, I am going to answer these questions anyway.
I am going to answer the question about "my definition of being a feminist."
I am not a feminist. What I am, is a woman who takes pride in being a woman. I celebrate each season of the year as if it is another season of my life. I believe that it is a beautiful thing staying in touch with a rich history and tradition of culinary, nurturing, and herbal knowledge. I am an herbalist. I crochet. I cook. I own my own business, Persuasive Words creative copywriting. I do all these things and try to find balance between them. If the popular, accepted definition of feminism is "embracing life and the rich tradition of women who nurture and take pride in doing so" then I suppose I can start calling myself a feminist because that is what I believe.
I think people try too hard to define feminism when really, I think all we need to do is be true to ourselves.
Posted by amygdala on 2005-01-28 15:17:00
Post Subject:
I don't really consider this "feminist" per se, as it isn't feminist theory or anything, but I am always happy to put in a plug for Natalie Angier's "Woman: an Intimate Geography" as I consider knowledge of one's body and its workings to be extremely empowering.
Posted by stella on 2005-02-15 20:46:52
Post Subject:
my thing is, i don't give a crap whether someone has two X chromosomes or not when what they're doing is so deeply deceitful and fucked up. Condi may have a vagina, but she's still LYING (poorly, i might add) to protect a plutocratic regime that is just using her as a puppet.
i'm a die-hard feminist, but i think part of being a feminist is realizing that just being a certain gender doesn't excuse anyone's behavior.
Posted by delqc on 2005-01-28 13:11:33
Post Subject:
Simone de Beauvoir, The second sex (english translation of Le deuxieme sexe), for the beginnings of it all ... You can find a cheap copy in almost any second hand bookstore ...
BITCH magazine a feminist response to pop culture: for a more up to date take on feminist issues in the media
Anything by Audrey Lourdes for a more well-rounded approach of a critique of the social hierarchy, including racial and sexuality issues.
Kate Bornstein, Gender Outlaw or My Gender Workbook for a personal understanding of the impacts of the gender hierarchy.
Posted by Anonymous on 2005-01-28 11:32:27
Post Subject:
A lot of the texts I love are slightly old now, but they are still relevant.
The Beauty Myth by Naomi Wolf
Backlash By Susan Faludi (also Stiffed by Faludi about how the patriachy harms men)
Slut! Growing up femalel with a bad reputation by Leora Tanenbaum
Overloaded by Imelda Whelan
There are some good web resources eg http://www.feminist.com/ has a great list of websites. and book recommendations
If you have a livejournal there are many many feminist communities, some are quite frustrating at times, but I've learnt in all of them and even if it was tnohign new, having my view point challenged is good. They also tend to have a list of essential reading in the memories somewhere.
Posted by xuli on 2006-01-12 20:57:14
Post Subject:
I'm sorry what I said touched a nerve for you, anthrogirl. I am in no way trying to defend Dworkin uncritically, or to suggest that she got it all right. (I really meant what I said when I said I thought she had misguided ideas.) I have many, many problems with her. But I also think this part of your post raises some interesting questions:
Her work was used by the Canadian censorship people to block gay and lesbian porn from Canada, and to seize books on anal health a from small gay bookstore.
How much of a responsibility do writers/thinkers have in the way their work is used? I can think of some pretty nefarious uses of, say, Judith Butler too -- I've seen scholarship where Butler's ideas are used to argue that since gender is all a social construct anyway, there's no point in feminist activism at all! How much should I hold Butler responsible for others' careless readings of her work? And how much should we hold Dworkin responsible for the fact that her work, too, has been used very carelessly in extremely misguided activism? I mean, yes, there are horrible aspects of her work. I totally agree. But you also can't single-handedly walk into Canada and start making laws right and left because "Andrea Dworkin says so." So at some point we have to look at the fact that Andrea Dworkin put forth some ideas -- many of them deeply flawed -- in a flawed society, and put back some of the responsbility for the terrible ways in which her work was used on that society.
I'm really just talking off the cuff here. I might decide tomorrow I disagree with all of this! But I think it's a really interesting issue -- to what extent we hold individual thinkers/writers accountable when their work reveals in very emblematic ways deep injustices in the culture that they are writing from. And I continue to say I haven't read Dworkin, just read people who cite Dworkin (both pro and con). But I do have a hard time with the fact that Andrea Dworkin's name will unleash more vitriol in a room full of feminists than Rick Santorum's -- and Santorum is actively making harmful laws, which Dworkin never did! I do think there's a problem there, and I don't think one has to be an apologist for Dworkin to think so.
Posted by moon_lemming on 2005-01-28 09:35:43
Post Subject:
I haven't read much on feminism (having the same problem you do with not knowing what to read), but I recommend The BUST Guide to the New Girl Order as sort of a fluffy feminism book. It was the book that launched me into identifying myself as a feminist.
I really want to read some bell hooks, but am afraid I'll never actually read the books if I buy them. She's generally rec'd whenever I look into feminist literature. Jennifer (I want to say "Garner," but I know that's not right, hee) -- I can't remember her last name -- something's Manifesta is supposed to be a really fun read re: third wave feminism.
(Her name is Jennifer Baumgardner, I looked it up on Amazon. They rec'd Iron Jawed Angels as a related interest, and I have to say, I loved that movie. I had no idea what women went through to get the right to vote in this country before I saw it.)
Anyway, sorry for rambling, I'm interested to see recommendations, too!
Posted by slowgraffiti220 on 2005-01-05 16:36:53
Post Subject:
i always have this problem of people assuming that i'm a WS major or minor to the point of refusing to beleive/remember that i'm not.
one professor gave me so much crap about it...she's my advisor and everytime we had our little meeting to plan my classes she'd be like, "oh, you're a WS double major, right?"..."nope,"... "you should be, why aren't you?" until one semester i finally said, "because i think it's a stupid thing to major in since i'm a woman and me studying things from my own point of view won't really do much for me." she got kind of offended. heh. but then, i was frustrated and trying to tick her off. she's never asked me since at least.
it's not that i'm against women's studies entirely, it's more that i just read enough feminist stuff on my own that a WS major, combined with my double english and anthro major, would be a little freaking repetative.
it always makes me wonder though, how does one just like, look like a WS major to the point where most people just assume it without thinking about it?
Posted by Chelsea on 2005-08-25 08:24:25
Post Subject:
Jessica Simpson had never heard the song before either. She said "When I heard it I just HAD to do it!" lol. So sad.
I'll admit, I like Newlyweds, I think she's goofy/funny sometimes. But I've never liked her music, and the Boots video is hideous and annoying. And I'm not even talking about what the song MEANS and how they butchered that in the video.
And yes, when a feminist group associates itself with something not so feminist, that does bother me more than clueless pop music people giving a feminist song to someone who doesn't understand it.
Posted by anthrogirl on 2006-01-12 23:37:28
Post Subject:
I'm sorry what I said touched a nerve for you, anthrogirl. I am in no way trying to defend Dworkin uncritically, or to suggest that she got it all right. (I really meant what I said when I said I thought she had misguided ideas.) I have many, many problems with her. But I also think this part of your post raises some interesting questions:
Actually, it's not your fault, and I didn't at all think you were defending her. Like I said, I see her as a sad figure.
Her work was used by the Canadian censorship people to block gay and lesbian porn from Canada, and to seize books on anal health a from small gay bookstore.
How much of a responsibility do writers/thinkers have in the way their work is used?
A lot, if they were alive when people misused it, and they were warned that it could be misused. In her favor, Dworkin was upset that her work was used that way, only because she was dismayed by the i]politics of the people who used her work. She wasn't upset, so far as I can tell, by the content of their censorship- after all, she advocated censorship. McKinnon isn't at all sorry. She wishes they had gone further.
I can think of some pretty nefarious uses of, say, Judith Butler too -- I've seen scholarship where Butler's ideas are used to argue that since gender is all a social construct anyway, there's no point in feminist activism at all! How much should I hold Butler responsible for others' careless readings of her work?
Not at all, since that's what it is- careless reading. Dworkin's work wasn't carelessly read. It's quite clear- men are rapists, all porn hurts women, and so on. That's the problem- there's no nuance. During her lifetime, feminists tried to talk to Dworkin about her stance, but she wasn't interested. As for McKinnon- she's a law professor. She fully well understands civil liberties and how people can misuse people's right to them. She doesn't care, as long as it saves one woman from degradation. This is the same argument being used to keep gay lit out of schools, stop abortion, and a lot of other things.
I once had the displeasure of sitting next to one of McKinnon's law student/minions at dinner. I walked away feeling like a Jew sitting with a member of the Nazi Party in 1930- and that's not hyperbole. She sniffed at the idea of actually loking at porn. After all, she knew what it was. She told me women didn't watch porn, and she knew her Dworkin by heart. She came thisclose to calling me male-identified for saying that I had not only read porn and enjoyed it, but plenty of women had- they had read the Beauty books by Anne Rice, and romance novels. I knew this was true because I had worked in a bookstore for a while, and those novels had flown off the shelves. She essentially told me I didn't know what I was talking about. Whenever I've talked to hardcore Dworkinites, I've heard the same thing, even though not a single one has admitted to taking the time to speak to a porn producer/consumer or sex worker of any kind.
And how much should we hold Dworkin responsible for the fact that her work, too, has been used very carelessly in extremely misguided activism? I mean, yes, there are horrible aspects of her work. I totally agree. But you also can't single-handedly walk into Canada and start making laws right and left because "Andrea Dworkin says so." So at some point we have to look at the fact that Andrea Dworkin put forth some ideas -- many of them deeply flawed -- in a flawed society, and put back some of the responsbility for the terrible ways in which her work was used on that society.
No- but no one has made laws based on Judith Butler. They have made them based on Dworkin and McKinnon, in some cases with their blessing. That's what bothers me.
Going to bed now- and no, I'm not angry. It's a valid discussion. Feeling passionate about something isn't necessarily the same as being angry.
I'm really just talking off the cuff here. I might decide tomorrow I disagree with all of this! But I think it's a really interesting issue -- to what extent we hold individual thinkers/writers accountable when their work reveals in very emblematic ways deep injustices in the culture that they are writing from. And I continue to say I haven't read Dworkin, just read people who cite Dworkin (both pro and con). But I do have a hard time with the fact that Andrea Dworkin's name will unleash more vitriol in a room full of feminists than Rick Santorum's -- and Santorum is actively making harmful laws, which Dworkin never did! I do think there's a problem there, and I don't think one has to be an apologist for Dworkin to think so.
Posted by quaisior on 2007-01-03 11:56:20
Post Subject:
Fruits Basket Vols. 9-13 by Natsuki Takaya: This manga has gotten to be a lot more angsty and introspective rather than cute, but I still love it.
Silver's Edge and Silver's Bane by Anne Kelleher: Bad writing, too many characters, a magic system that offended my feminist sensibilities, graphic and disgusting scenes, and the story dragged so it could fill out two books. I liked a few characters though, so I kept reading for them.
Bleach Vols. 1 and 2 by Tite Kubo: I started watching the anime in the fall and I love it, so I had to read the manga too and I love that as well.
Alpha by Catherine Asaro: This is book four of her AI series and these just don't impress me as much as her Skolian series. The main story in this book annoyed me a bit and my favorite parts of the book were when the hero babysat his granddaughter.
Fullmetal Alchemist Vol. 10 by Hiromu Arakawa: This manga is so intense now- and so different from the anime, so I'm really enjoying the fresh story.
Posted by sara struever on 2005-11-04 18:00:39
Post Subject: this was a good month for reading
Stepmother Robert Coover- Great if you like fairy tales, kind of a dark, smart spoof on the traditional tale, with threads and characters from lots of tales thrown in.
The Distant Land by Wendell Berry- Lovely Stories about the lives of several generations of farmers in Kentucky, ending with people watching the end of thier way of life, seemingly. Great Folks.
Tooth and Claw by T C Boyle- one of my favorite short story writers, this is his newest collection. It doesn't disspoint.
The Push Man and Other Stories by Yoshihiro Tatsumi- This is a collection of some of tatsumi's early work. I had never read anything by him before- I think he is big in Japanese Comics- a father-figure type. Interesting, very sexual and twisted stories- not what I would call feminist either. But quality stuff.
Suddenly They heard footsteps by Dan Yashinski- Did you know there is a story-telling revolution going on? Well there is- its pretty cool stuff. also included are some kick-ass stories that the author tells.
The facts of Winter by Poissel & La Farge- This is a small book, made up of short vignettes- dreams that people are having during the long nights of winter, in Paris. Really dreamy. I really enjoyed this.
