Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
School me! Topic--feminism
So, my exposure to academic feminist theory is limited to what I gleaned after four years on the college rugby team and by reading The Feminine Mystique. Considering the recent posts on here (mommy war ideology, working vs. SAH), I think it might be time for a discussion. My questions:
1. The phrase "it's about choices" often comes up when discussing feminism. However, many say that that is not enough (major, I think you said that very thing in Pamela's post). When does one woman's choice impact an entire ideology?
2. Who can or cannot be a feminist? For example, I consider myself one, though I should probably do more reading. However, if I choose to breastfeed into toddlerhood or stay at home, am I impacting the movement adversely?
3. What are the biggest differences between the first and second waves of feminism? (This is a massive question with tons of context behind it, I realize, so feel free to frame it at will).
The point of this post, for me, is to hear from women who know more about feminist theory than I do.
Re: School me! Topic--feminism
I could go on for awhile about this (used to teach women's studies), but I've got a billion and one things to do today, so I'll throw out something quick and let the others with more time add or subtract from it.
1) Feminism is all about social, political, and economic equality between the sexes. I'm not exactly sure what Major was getting at, but for me, feminism IS all about choice. It's about recognizing that each individual woman should be able to choose for herself how to live her life, free from coercion (social, political, economic, etc coercion). I'm not sure that one woman's choice is capable, in general, of impacting the entire ideology. However, when one woman's choice is held up as THE choice for women, that's when there's a problem.
2) I think anyone who believes in social, political, and economic equality between the sexes can be a feminist. Further, being a woman doesn't automatically qualify you as a feminist (in fact, I can think of quite a few prominent women who aren't feminists - Phyllis Schlafely comes immediately to mind), and you don't need to be a woman to be a feminist.
Whether you choose extended breastfeeding, or to stay at home, or choose to bottle feed, or go back to work at six weeks, none of that makes you or doesn't make you a feminist. One of the goals of feminism is to make sure that you actually HAVE those choices. If you were to suddenly start spouting that REAL women breastfeed, or REAL women stay home (or insert your own nonsensical comment here), then I might be tempted to take away your feminist card.
3) (VERY) Simplified, first wave feminism was primarily about suffrage (especially towards the end of the wave), and second-wave feminism was primarily about women's liberation (primarily legal and social equality).
"You don't get to be all puke-face about your kid shooting your undead baby daddy when all you had to do was KEEP HIM IN THE FLUCKING HOUSE, LORI!" - doctorwho
Thanks for this! I think Major was saying that anybody who simply boils feminism down to the right to make choices doesn't understand what the movement is all about (and Major, if I'm getting this wrong, please explain--I'd love to hear your thoughts on the other questions, too).
But....but....feminism DID give me choices, Major!
Really, though, glad you clarified. That makes sense, and I see the perversion of feminist concepts frequently, as well.
"You don't get to be all puke-face about your kid shooting your undead baby daddy when all you had to do was KEEP HIM IN THE FLUCKING HOUSE, LORI!" - doctorwho
I agree with Arbor 100%.
I'd like to add, though, that the "choice" part isn't enough. Because simply saying, "Feminism is about women choosing what they want to do" puts all of the onus for equality on individual women. Aren't earning as much as your male colleagues? Too bad you didn't choose to negotiate as hard. Complaining about little access to affordable birth control? You can choose to keep your legs closed. In a developing country and not getting as much scarce food or education as your brothers? Just choose to pack up and move to a better place! Worried it's not safe to walk the streets at night without fear of sexual assault? Choose to stay home and definitely don't wear a short skirt!
Feminists are interested in micro level choices, sure. BUT, more important is creating equal opportunities in macro level social, economic, and political institutions so that all reasonable choices are seen as equally valid (e.g., no more SAHM/working mom wars) and accessible.
Yes. Feminism isn't everything you want it to be. Feminism is about creating a society whereby real choice is not an option between the lesser of two evils.
It never has been about the 'right' to be a Stay at home mom. Not everyone gets that right. That's not a right. It's a privilege, therefore putting in a feminist discussion about the place of women in society is strangely disconcerting to me. You can be a feminist stay at home mom. My mom was. That has nothing to do with feminism.
Feminism is about social, political, and economic equality between the sexes.
And there's no one feminist theory. There are thousands. Second wave, third wave, no wave. First wave was about the right to be a person and vote, Second wave was about the right to own your body (abortion) and 3rd wave isn't sure yet but I think we've passed them by already and are onto a fourth.
I think that we'll see more pro fetus feminists emerging when you start blaming women for the birth of children who are "defective''as that's a huge debate right now in both critical disability theory and feminist theory. Its a huge part of the pro fetus feminist movement/concern. very interesting group and very interesting, and pro women theories!
Here's the beginning and the end of defining feminism, right here:
On the other questions...
The history, particularly the economic history, is fascinating to me.
There are all these conversations about economic equality for women, but I think for many self-proclaimed feminists that boils down to saying that if a man and a woman are doing the same job, at the same quality level for the same time, they should be paid the same. That's the basis for equal pay laws, and I totally get how it's first-level important.
But one thing that people don't talk too much about is how work that has become, through the years, work done predominantly by women has become economically devalued. Secretaries, for instance, for decades, were positions held by men, and they were paid very well. Women became secretaries in large numbers, and the pay dropped like a rock. Ditto teachers.
...things like this establish for me that it's not simply about "equality". If it were, we'd stop the conversation with the equal pay law and that would be that. Why is it, do you think, that jobs become "pink collar ghettos".
Here's where I get controversial, so stay with me... I think it goes to devaluing what women do. And that part of that is devaluing things that only women can do - having babies, breastfeeding. For many women, it's something to get out of the way so we can get "on with our lives" being good money earners. How much of that mind-set is because we've bought into a male-centered view of what's valuable?
I have to say, as somebody who made the choice to leave work and stay at home with young children, it's been really really difficult to switch off that mindset, and equally value "womens' work" with renumerative employment.
I am the 99%.
Damn arbor you put it out there so eloquently, it makes things easy for the rest of us.
My personal belief about feminism is this - men and women are different but one is not inferior to the other.
my read shelf:
I think you're spot on here. I think it is a shame that women's work is so devalued both in unpaid roles and in paid roles. In fact I think its a shame that careers in which women dominate are so devalued be that a SAHM or teacher role. My husband is a nurse. Do you know how much crap I get dripping with "he must be the most phenomenal man. I love male nurses. Male nurses are something special." I mean, yes he is. He's a great guy and whatnot but seriously? Because he has apenis his caregiving role is a magnificent testiment to his winning personality?
I find this bizarre.
I fully admit that I am having a reading comprehension problem today, but I'm not following this, could you elaborate? It seems like an interesting argument, but I'm just not getting it.
I'm team Major (and I've said this before) that feminism isn't about "choices." I agree that people use it to justify their ostensibly non-feminist choices. I do think there are individual actions that might be seen as non-feminist, depending.
Yes, women have more choices today due to the feminist movement, but that's due to the goal of equality. Both women and men can choose to be astronauts, lawyers, doctors, teachers, politicians. But feminism as a movement isn't about the individual's right to choose. It's about the equalization of society, which is subtly different. Women are so diverse. There are women who have always had more choices than other women. That didn't mean that women were seen as equal. At all. Or that some women were and some weren't.
As for non-feminist actions, ideas or decisions, let's "go there" and talk about pro-choice v. pro-life. Some people who are anti-abortion might hold that belief because it controls women. I know we all know this. That would be a non-feminist way to think. Some people might be pro-life because their religion is more important to them than the feminist movement. And so while they consider themselves to be feminists, the right to life trumps the general belief of the feminist movement in that situation. These people aren't outright anti-feminist. However, the result is the same, despite the difference in the thought process.
And I know that previous paragraph might be really offensive. I don't mean it to be. I think there's a lot of gray area when it comes to what is "feminist" and what is anti-feminist because of the difference in thought process. BUT I do think people should keep in mind the end result of their decisions and what it looks like. However, I also think that there are certain things that might trump the general feminist movement for individuals, such as their own family life and what's best for their children, family, or career.
40/112
I agree the term "choice" is a loaded term based on who is saying it. Even segwaying to pro-choice for a second - its not really a choice to have an ectopic pg removed - nor is it really a choice to abort a baby if you'd be cast out of your community - but from a legal standpoint we label it "choice" since that takes the power away from the govt. to have a say.
So it's more accurately about freedom to choose atypical roles and not be criticized for those actions simply because you are a woman.
I'm not down with criticizing traditional roles for woman - BUT a trend of women choosing traditional dress/roles/attitude/etc. (see the Duggars) tends to be a symptom of something more going on behind the scenes or inside the home or say in community orgs that is about controlling and oppressing the entire community (see FLDS). So its not like "zomgs my neighbor is a SAHM" but more like "wow there are a lot of traditional woman roles going on here. I wonder what that means if a woman in this community needed to work or not be pg for a certain period of time - or didn't want/couldn't have kids?"
I don't know if choosing traditional gender roles necessarily indicates an anti-feminist trend. Like I said above, people make choices that do not take the greater feminist community into consideration. They don't have to. Maybe it's really the best decision for your family to stay at home and raise your children with a religiously-based home schooling curriculum. And some people doing that doesn't mean it's bad.
But a LOT of people doing that does mean our society isn't equal, or isn't feminist. In order to achieve the goals of the feminist movement, yes, you do need people moving into new an non-traditional roles.
40/112
All of what both of you has said is, IMO, spot on.
I think most of us have bought into the male-centered view of what's valuable. I know I sometimes think that I shouldn't look at jobs in certain industries because they're more pink collar and aren't as "respectable."
The male nurse thing is so irritating. They're no better or worse at the job than women. From my own perspective, when I worked as a nurse's aide I worked with all female nurses but 1/3 of the aides were male. The male patients all loved the male aides better unless it was time to be bathed or taken to the restroom. That was women's work. There were countless times where I was asked to get one of the men because I wasn't capable of helping them in and out of bed and some of the other tasks.
As far as theory and the like, I'm pretty much in the dark. What introductory books do you recommend to someone like me?
I'd like to add the temperance movement in with suffrage on the 1st wave.
A good book of primary articles on feminism (and a book I used in my 3 core curriculum classes for my women's studies degree) is called Feminist Frontiers . (That link takes you to a pretty old edition, because the new edition is about $80 on Amazon, and the older editions are much less expensive. If you want to read about the origins of the feminist movements, this is fine. Susan B. Anthony isn't writing anything new.)
I also like Personal Politics, which is about the 2nd Wave.
Thanks for the recs!
I am late to the party here and generally agree with what previous posters have said. I am also totally feeling MsMery's explanation about "feminist choices" and "choices."
From my perspective the standpoint that "feminism gave us choices" as an explanation for individual choices that do not reflect core feminist values (women's right to their own bodies, women's equality to men, women's social and legal equity) makes no sense. Feminism didn't give women the ability to stay home with their children. There is absolutely nothing wrong with stay at home moms or people whose sole work responsibilities are unpaid labor in the home. However, women had the ability to do that type of labor and NOT the ability to have equal opportunities to men in the paid workplace before feminism fought for those rights (those choices, I suppose)... that was a huge theme in 2nd wave feminism. Feminism gave women the opportunity (or "choice," although that is a silly way to phrase it) to be treated as equals in the workplace to men, to have legal autonomy over themselves and their property, and a whole host of other things. Feminism didn't really give women the choice to work per se, as historically many women, particularly poor women and women of color, had to work outside the home to start, but it did create the foundation upon which women's opportunity in the workplace became more equal to men's, even with the continuing issue of the devaluation of "women's work" both paid and unpaid referenced above.
But some choices are just not feminist choices. It is not advancing the goals of feminism to wear makeup, high heels, and feminine clothing, for example. That is not to say that individual women who do these things are anti-feminist, just that this particular choice is rather unrelated to feminism. Feminism did not give women the right to choose to wear makeup and high heels any more than it gave women the right to choose to stay at home - these were already things that were/are the norm for women to do. I suppose we could argue that feminism or feminist ideals are part of what allows some women to choose not to wear makeup with relative impunity, or which allow women to choose shoes other than high heels for the workplace, although I wouldn't say that choosing not to wear makeup or heels is necessarily a feminist choice (I think it would depend on why one chose not to - male gaze vs. comfort, for example.) It doesn't make you a bad person if you do those things but they are generally unrelated to feminism. In fact, many people make decisions about things like clothing style or whether to work outside of the home for reasons completely unrelated to feminism, like religious or cultural values or individual preferences about comfort.
Long story short: Not all choices are about feminism, and feminism has only really directly fought to protect choices about things that are central to feminist ideology.
I also thought since others explained the general trends of the 1st and 2nd waves of feminism that I'd give a shot at summarizing the 3rd wave. 3rd wave feminism evolved out of longstanding controversies about the ideologies of the 2nd wave. Specifically, out of perceptions that 2nd wave feminists by and large focused exclusively on "women's issues" as defined by a contingent of relatively privileged white, upper middle class, straight women. During that time women of color feminists and black feminists wrote extensively on the problems with divorcing gender from other issues such as racism and classism. Lesbian feminists were concerned about the lack of inclusion of issues relating to sexual orientation as it intersects with gender. Basically, since women are people with multiple identities - in addition to women they have a racial and/or ethnic status, a class status, a sexuality, etc. - "women's issues" cannot just be about gender and the shared experiences of women, but also must attune to the differences in experience between women who have different class/racial/sexuality backgrounds and identities. This is called "intersectionality" (see: Kimberle Crenshaw) and is one of the major underpinnings of the 3rd wave of feminism.
The other major theme of 3rd wave feminism is the theoretical tradition of post-structuralism and social constructionism, through which concepts such as gender/gender roles (and to some extent sexuality, race, and gender identity) are considered social constructs created by systems of power that advantage some people and disadvantage others according to certain dominant social norms. That is not to say that these concepts are not real or don't affect people, but that they are not inherently true. They exist only as products of what human beings create and enforce within societies. Blah blah blah. I could go on about this for hours.
My degree is in gender studies and my wife is a PhD student in a gender studies dept. (actually worked on the Feminist Frontiers book referenced above - her advisor is one of the editors) so I'm constantly having these conversations.
LisbnLlama - please tell me you (and your wife) find this as hilarious as I and the rest of my cohort do: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkbiB9kmF6I
"You don't get to be all puke-face about your kid shooting your undead baby daddy when all you had to do was KEEP HIM IN THE FLUCKING HOUSE, LORI!" - doctorwho
We LOVE that video! Hilarious. At the risk of outing my anonymity here, my wife and I both went to school with one of the people who made that video. It is basically a really accurate and highly amusing parody of our alma mater (which is similar to but not quite the same as the mug featured in the video - I think that is supposed to be a rivalry joke
)
I'd say it's a really accurate and highly amusing parody of just about any women / gender studies program.
"You don't get to be all puke-face about your kid shooting your undead baby daddy when all you had to do was KEEP HIM IN THE FLUCKING HOUSE, LORI!" - doctorwho
I second the Feminist Frontiers rec; I've my copy since my first women's studies class 20+ years ago and still go back to it.
I just about sh!t myself about 14 times. I really lost it at Simone de Bouvoir.
I agree completely, but there is something extra special and kind of creepy about that sort of language and attitude permeating every single academic department that happens at women's colleges. It's like gender studies on crack at every level of the college. Not that I am complaining.