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 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 Karla on 2004-07-19 17:27:09
Post Subject:
I simply believe that women should have the freedom to make the same choices as men. I have not yet met a woman who didn't feel the same way. We shouldn't have our choices limited because of our gender. I think homemakers should be homemakers and politicians be politicians (and so on). We should be judged where we fit based on our abilities and talents. And so should men. I think any woman or any man should be able to buy a car for the same price, work the same job for the same wage, wear eyeliner, raise a baby, be a doctor or a gourmet chef.
Women shouldn't have to prove that they can do it all. They should have the freedom and the support of women, men and their governnment to follow their own instincts and obey their own will.
We don't need to immasculate men or de-feminize women to prove we are equal. Our differences enhance each other and our sameness unites us. I don't want to become a man or take away his freedom. I just want to be allowed to live the life I choose and be judged by my actions, not my boobies.
I think men can hold feminist beliefs, too. My boyfriend believes all of these things as well.
Posted by xuli on 2004-07-08 21:28:29
Post Subject:
The point I would make on educating people on what feminism is...my interpretation of feminism is very different to another feminist. On a previous glitter thread about feminism, Xuli, Kungfugirl and I all have the same core feminist beliefs, but the smaller aspects of it vary wildly.
I actually do think it would be patronising to post something on a forum as a Beginners Guide to Feminism, it makes the assumption that *I* am the holder of knowledge on that subject and am deigning to share it with you.
Hear hear, Notmarcie. And not only that, but there *can* be tremendous growth that comes from talking with people who agree with you, as illustrated by the above example of Notmarcie, Xuli, and Kungfugirl occasionally disagreeing on the details of feminism. (Isn't it pretentious when people talk about themselves in the third person?) I really have to say that I learned a lot more from discussions with those two ladies than I did from other discussions where there wasn't any common ground to start with. Yes, you learn from disagreement, probably all disagreement, but sometimes you learn more from disagreement where there's a fundamental common ground.
When you're talking to people who disagree with you on very basic points, you end up having the same conversation over, and over, and over -- or else you end up not understanding each other, and having to repeat the same thing over, and over, and over. And where's the growth in that?
Posted by Anonymous on 2004-07-08 18:42:55
Post Subject:
The point I would make on educating people on what feminism is...my interpretation of feminism is very different to another feminist. On a previous glitter thread about feminism, Xuli, Kungfugirl and I all have the same core feminist beliefs, but the smaller aspects of it vary wildly. So what I might tell somebody about feminism would reflect my interpretation of it, and not give that person the whole picture of feminism. People can tell you the very basics but the rest of it is upto the individual. It's not even as simple as recommending a book as a starting point, I might recommend one author, but Xuli might disagree eg I might love Camille Paglia, but Xuli could hate her and regard her as an anti-woman feminist.
Feminism is a deeply personal thing, and whilst the base of it is equality for all, regardless of gender, that can be interpretted in so many ways that a few people on a message board simply cannot educate anybody about it. Not because we don't want to, but because the subject is so vast. It's incredibly easy to type feminst theory into google if you really are interested in learning about it, and to assess what, if any, feminist theories appeal to you.
Furthermore, in the PC thread specifically, and when it was discussed in one of the other threads, there were two groups of thought as to the purpose of "educating" others. Those who thought it was the job of the "open minded liberals" to do that to those who aren't as aware, and those who thought that it was either showing off on the part of the liberals, or patronising.
I actually do think it would be patronising to post something on a forum as a Beginners Guide to Feminism, it makes the assumption that *I* am the holder of knowledge on that subject and am deigning to share it with you.
Edited to add-
Also considering that you can study feminism (Women's Studies) at degree level and there are whole websites devoted to the subject as well as groups like NOW, it would be impossible to even cover the basic of feminism on a message board unless that way the only subject matter for around 3 months, the same time it takes for "gender studies" level 1 at my old university.
Posted by HeatherC on 2005-09-23 17:24:00
Post Subject:
How does blindly attacking another woman's "feminist credentials" simply on the basis that she reads theory qualify as promoting/practicing YOUR feminist beliefs? "Profound" and "productive" are not the two adjectives I would choose for such an attack.
Or hey, maybe those ARE your feminist beliefs, and I just come from a different, more polite school of thought.
Posted by brdgt on 2005-09-23 16:00:32
Post Subject: Re: Not to get all Elizabethan, but seriously.
If it's really important to your partner, I say change it. Don't kid yourself that keeping it is an effective way to promote/practice your feminist beliefs; there are much more profound and effective ways to do that.
Such as?
Seriously. What happened to "the personal IS political?" If your name, the most personal thing in the world, isn't political I don't know what is.
Posted by Stegosaurus on 2005-09-23 15:33:51
Post Subject: Not to get all Elizabethan, but seriously.
What's in a name? All this talk about being owned, feeling owned because your name changes to his.
Here's the thing. You're only owned if you think you are.
You're only opressed if you let them opress you.
And someone asking you to change your name? That's not oppression. By all means, keep it if you like the way it sounds. But it doesn't define your "self", only you define your self.
If it's really important to your partner, I say change it. Don't kid yourself that keeping it is an effective way to promote/practice your feminist beliefs; there are much more profound and effective ways to do that.
Posted by nucular on 2005-09-24 02:44:13
Post Subject: Re: Not to get all Elizabethan, but seriously.
Don't kid yourself that keeping it is an effective way to promote/practice your feminist beliefs; there are much more profound and effective ways to do that.
the problem i see with that statement is that challenging unquestioned traditions is an incredibly effective way of promoting and practicing feminism. if we just accept all the crap that people do just because that's the way people have done it for a long time without thinking about why we do it, we're doing a great disservice to ourselves and (cliche as it sounds) future generations. while i agree that feminism is choice, i also think that it requires a kind of informed and active choice that you don't seem to be advocating in that statement.
Posted by susan*s on 2005-09-24 15:33:13
Post Subject: Re: Not to get all Elizabethan, but seriously.
Don't kid yourself that keeping it is an effective way to promote/practice your feminist beliefs; there are much more profound and effective ways to do that.
the problem i see with that statement is that challenging unquestioned traditions is an incredibly effective way of promoting and practicing feminism. if we just accept all the crap that people do just because that's the way people have done it for a long time without thinking about why we do it, we're doing a great disservice to ourselves and (cliche as it sounds) future generations. while i agree that feminism is choice, i also think that it requires a kind of informed and active choice that you don't seem to be advocating in that statement.
I couldn't agree more, nucular. I really appreciate your post.
Speaking for myself, I got married last month and didn't change my name. Neither did my husband. While no one has commented on his choice (since it is very typical), I have ended up with some irritating assumptions, like...
•Our online registry at Macy's "updating" our info by changing my last name to his as of our wedding day.
•When I tried to explain to the bank teller just after our wedding that I needed to deposit a check wrongly made out to Myfirst Hislast, though my last name hadn't changed, and showing proof, she repeatedly tried to give me the paperwork to change my last name on my account. Several long minutes later I got my point across and successfully deposited my money.
I could go on, but this is getting long!
I'll add that I chose not to change it for a lot of reasons, but my main one was that as a writer who publishes under my own name, I really feel like I've made it mine and I don't want to "start over" at age 31 as Ms. Susan Somebodyelse. My husband is an artist and filmmaker, and he would similarly lose all name recognition if he chose to change his. So there you go. Somehow it still bothers the hell out of me that of the two of us, I'm the only one getting shit for it, but as a recently married friend said to me, "The only guarantee is that whether you change or not, somebody's going to give you a hard time." :)
So I do find it annoying to constantly fight with Macy's and the bank, but hopefully at some point it will become less of the default reaction, and people won't make the assumption as quickly.
susan
p.s. I hope none of this is interpreted as critical of women who do change their names, it's certainly not meant to be.
