Posted by soapandwater on 2004-12-23 16:55:11
Post Subject:
i've been looking at some of those mags, but i'm just concerned (probably overly so) that i'll just be rehashing the same ideas and won't have anything new to add!
Well, actually, I haven't seen a lot of pieces on how crafting DOES relate to activism. In fact, I'm struggling with that right now because I'm scared that people don't see it that way. There's been a lot of focus on how crafting is a liberating, third wave feminism sort of thing, but I haven't actually seen many things on subjects like "bake back the white house" and fundraising through crafts, etc.
So, is that something to consider, maybe? Siiince you've got the website down and all?
Posted by ambelina on 2004-12-29 15:04:35
Post Subject:
In many ways, I think "third wave feminism" is a bit of a tricky concept, because giving it a name implies that there's a cohesive movement of "third-wave feminists," just like there's NOW and other groups that are about getting certain agendas across.
But I think "third wave feminism" is sort of a generic way of describing any number of individuals and groups who have not forgotten that people are treated differently, still, according to gender. Some 3rd-w-fems are claiming feminist power by making use and making claim to their sexual powers. Some 3rd-wavers are claiming feminist power by tearing open the gates of male-only institutions, like West Point or various gentlemen's clubs. Some 3rd-wavers are claiming feminist power by demanding respect for the work they do as wives and mothers, work that has traditionally assigned to them and devalued, but that they are now choosing and embracing and valuing. There are some 3rd-wavers who are trying to deal with gender issues by making things better for women AND men, to improve society by getting us past some of our gender hang-ups (not only can women be power execs, men can also make throw pillows, and men can marry men and women can marry women). Or fighting to get better birth control or a national daycare system or to get women to vote or run for office or study science.
So, I think it's easy to say "3rd-wave feminism" doesn't really mean ANYTHING if it means ALL those things, or that there's no such thing as a "(3rd-wave) feminist" anymore, because that's just one person or one small group that doesn't belong to a movement.
BUT I think the fact that there ARE so many people doing things or even thinking things with the basic premise that there's something unequal about genders means yes - there really are feminists. And maybe the term "3rd-wave feminism" isn't really a description of a particular, specific political or social or economic agenda, but it does indicate that there are people, and lots of them, who think that something should be done about gender inequality.
An "environmentalist" is someone who cares about the environment, but could also describe a lot of different agendas. Some environmentalists think that nuclear power is better than fossil fuel, some think that nuclear power is mankind's greatest horror. Same with many environmental issues like whether the forest service should allow some timber harvest or none at all, whether having windmills in an otherwise uninhabited area is good for the environment because it's a clean, renewable power source, or is bad, because it ruins the natural surroundings.
Still, I think "environmentalist" is a useful term - it describes people who are concerned with issues of our interaction with the natural world.
In the same way, I think "feminist" is still a useful term. I suppose you could argue that if it's issues of gender, you could argue that we should be called "genderists," though that sounds more like "gender-biased" or "racist." Maybe some of us ARE gender biased, but "feminism" includes, by its history, people who are also gender-conscious or gender-concerned. And, to be honest, most of the people who would identify as gender-conscious or gender-concerned ARE women or tran/bi/gay/other non-traditional gender. And for the numbers, I think it's safe to say, more women than anyone else.
Lots of men are involved, and women's studies has made some motion towards becoming "gender studies." Even Susan Faludi, who wrote Backlash, that great feminist tome, has now written Stiffed, about how men are being screwed by the gender roles we assign them and also by our society in general.
And I say, as a final, feminist, thought, that when enough men are interested in equal gender rights and gender issues, they'll come up with their own damned term to describe their struggles. All the guys who say "I'm not feminist because I want equal rights for everybody" are really saying "I'm not feminist because I don't care about gender issues" OR "I'm not feminist because I really do care about gender issues as a whole, and I'm part of a movement called _________ (gay pride? gender rights? gender equality?)" When enough have them have said it, they'll have a name for it.
In the meantime, I'm a feminist, and if it makes it easier for someone to analyze or write about in the newspaper, you can call me a "3rd-wave" feminist.
Posted by Athos on 2005-02-01 02:04:18
Post Subject:
great thread!
i would also suggest "listen up: voices from the next generation of feminism" - it's an easy read - essays by women, but the narrative structure is a great entry point into third wave feminism and feminist history.
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 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 siouxsie_homemaker on 2004-08-20 19:52:04
Post Subject:
1. how did you learn to knit? how old were you then and old are you now?
I learned to knit about 9 months ago. I am 24, and neither my mother or my grandmother are knitters or even into any kinds of crafts.
2. knitting = nesting? is your knitting a way of getting back to simpler times?
Sort of. I am really into learning how to do basic things for myself instead of having to depend on our consumer culture to feed and clothe me. I also think that because of this heavy consumerism, traditional women's crafts are dying out. I think this is terrible, and that women need to reclaim them and keep them going for future generations.
I also think knitting is a wonderful outlet for artistic expression, for rejecting cookie-cutter pre-made clothes, and as a fun way to pass the time.
It's sad that unless you're very resourceful, that it can actually be more expensive to make things for yourself than it is to buy all your clothes at chain stores. The fact that these companies employ children and adults for pennies an hour to make their clothing and products is sickening, and our finacial dependence on it is put upon us and is also self-created. I would rather scrape-up some yarn and needles to make myself my own blankets and sweaters and hats so I don't have to buy sweat-shop made products.
3. in regards to the current resurgence in knitting, when do you think it started and why?
I think part of it is the idealic "new domesticity", and part of it is sort of the post-riot grrrl DIY movement. Third wave feminism sort of open the gates for girls to get into makeing things for themselves and let them do "girlie" things and let them know that it was okay.
4. do you have a crafty group that you meet with? how often? why do you dig it?
I go to a knitting group at a local bar twice a month, and I helped organize a ladies social group that meets once a motnh and we do crafts and have a feminist book club. I love love love it. Not only is it fun, but it gives me a great feeling of community and a wonderful place to teach others and learn new skills.
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 on this site, and the craftster site. I find that there's a bigger world wide community that's on the net. it's neat. I love real life groups and on-line groups.
6. is there a subversive element to knitting? a punk rock element? or simply a DIY smugness?
For me, doing crafts felt very subversive in a way. My mother is a total tomboy, and growing up I never learned to sew or cook. I had to teach myself everything when I got older. I feel like I kind of missed out a bit because of this.
I also feel that durring the heyday of 2nd wave feminism (60's-80's) that women were focused on breaking out of traditional women's gender roles in order to assert their idependence and gain more civil rights for themselves. They did wonders for women, and I don't want to trash on them in the least, ebcause I highly repect those women, but I don't totally agree with how they went about things. Unfortunately, in this quest of breaking out of their bonds, I think it went a bit too far in rejecting everything classically "feminine".
I am all for re-claiming femininity and finding power in it, not just opression. Make-up, heels, knitting, sewing, baking, can all be wonderfully empowering and fun for women.
I think there's been more of a focus in modern feminism is accepting a variety of women and lifestyles.
In rejecting baking and sewing and going for ready made items, we've becomes horribly dependent on consumerism to take care of us. It's in no way liberating to me.
7. why do you knit?
It's sort of meditative, it gets my creative juices flowing, and it's wonderfully useful.
8. what other crafty things do you do besides knitting?
I make rugs and quilts out of recycled and new fabric.
I want to learn to make toys, improve my knitting and sewing skills, and learn to spin yarn.
I also can't wait to have some land in order to grow my own produce.
9. the future of knitting- is there one or are we just kidding ourselves?
I think their absolutely is a furture to knitting. We can't rely on our country to forever be the rich super power that it is. Once day Americans will need to be more self-sufficient and rescourceful.
Also, I think that knitting is univerally appealing to all generations.
10. do you prefer to knit alone or with other people? why?
Either is wonderful.
11. true or false: can craft save us all? (elaboration here would be nice, but not necessary.)
Certainly. Because crafts aren't just silly instructions on how to decoupage everything, or make decorative items alone. Crafts are making things that our the foundations of our daily lives.
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.
