Feminism: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes- Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
"The women's effort has never been anything more than a symbolic agitation. They have only gained what men have been willing to grant; they have taken nothing, they have only received."- Simone De Beauvoir in The Second Sex, 1989
Feminism was not always a trendy identity; much like Women’s Studies was not always a step to something else. Obviously, today’s feminism is not the same as the feminism in the early 20th century, and in most respects, I am thankful for that. However, I am not thankful for this comfy pre-packaged, and entirely situational, neoliberalist feminism that is currently plaguing us. The “feminism is for everyone” mentality, often represented by such things as “This is what a feminist looks like” merchandise, is a dangerous one, because it at once depoliticizes the movement – and it is a movement – while simultaneously ensures that feminists take a passive approach to their politics. When did feminism become concerned with societal acceptance? Good thing Obama wears his t-shirt, because now I can? Feminism was meant to resist oppression, not to conform to it.
My manifesto challenges those who have the power to enact change but choose not to. Constant resistance to both privilege and power is essential in obtaining equality between the genders, ethnicities, cultures, classes, sexual identifications, the environment - and everything else that is squashed into this social hierarchy. This hierarchy must not be reformed or revolutionized, but dismantled. Critical thinking is necessary, but not sufficient. Comfort is the enemy for feminists, for activists, for everyone: it contributes to complacency and is the destroyer of change and growth.
Engage in critical thinking; search for both shared experiences, as well as for those stories which contradict my own - it is in this way that I can grow and advocate in a just way.
Defensiveness of one's “feminism” or “politics” is a possible result of an underlying insecurity. If the first response is defensiveness, or the need for validation or justification, explore the reasons why.
Hold myself and others accountable for their actions.
I must fight for my own rights - and the rights of others - to live free of violence, and stand with those who would do the same: “Until we are all strong together, a strong woman is a woman strongly afraid” (M. Piercy, 1980)
Remain critical of my own politics to ensure that I am not contributing to another’s oppression, and to explore the criticisms others may have. Acknowledging an injustice, and to be critical of it, is not enough; change must take place.
Look for potential allies - not enemies - in others and appreciate the differences that may exist between us. Appreciation, however, is not synonymous with “blind acceptance.” Always remain critical, as it encourages growth.
Not advocating against issues that don’t necessarily affect me ultimately condones the injustice. It is the fastest way to contribute to someone else’s oppression. Make time to care for others.
However unfair, we must actively fight for our rights, not passively hope for them. It hasn’t been in the past, it isn’t presently, and it won’t be in the future, an easy battle to win. The intersectionality of oppression and their potential interactions must be examined and challenged. Understanding how we relate to these oppressions, and potentially contribute to them (including the destruction of the environment) is the only way to avoid doing so
Too advocate feminism means to engage in a life-long struggle with patriarchy and oppression; it means to constantly question yourself and others. To be feminist is to be political.
Response to Meghan Mills Blog-
ReplyDeleteOne thing is for sure, there is no membership card or pledge of allegiance to the cause, there is no limulus test or any sort of test actually. Perhaps the way we might answer that to be a feminist one merely has to claim it as an identity. But identity is itself a troubling word. If I say I’m a feminist does that mean that everything I do will be as a feminist? Does it mean that I have to dress, act, and speak like others who also say they are feminists? Do I have to follow a feminist dogma? And what about this notion of an individual claiming an identity? What could that mean and do all individuals have the freedom and power to do so such claiming? For the matter, why would we want to say being a feminist is merely a choice for an individual? Clearly there is a lot to think about regarding these terms as feminist as an identity and feminism as a politic.
I disagree with your notion that feminism is a politic and not an identity. I think it is both. I think the best slogan to represent feminism is ‘the personal is political’ suggesting that feminism is a politics that has personal effects on the way people construct an identity. What I am having hard time grappling with is what gives people the right to decipher what feminism is as either an identity or politic. I thought feminism was about eliminating the hierarchy of who belongs and who doesn’t. In this case when you argue that “Feminism was meant to resist oppression, not to conform to it”, but aren’t you conforming to patriarchal power and privilege. What gives people the right to decipher who can be feminist or not? Again I think you are suggesting that one person can be a feminist more than another person is indeed creating a hierarchy which they essentially decided it would be horizontal because it is a process but if you turn the horizontal hierarchy around what does it look like, it’s a vertical hierarchy! I think it’s an individual’s personal politics to claim feminism or not, and the way they claim feminism whether it be a lifestyle, politic or identity shouldn’t be criticized. I think you’re trying to reinforce your idea of what the right way of feminism is. But how can you do feminism wrong?
I think you arguing that “feminism is for everyone mentality” is incorrect and unfair. I think you are just creating a hierarchy of who is allowed to be and who isn’t allowed to be a feminist. I thought the priority behind feminism was to deconstruct and de-essentialize labels and difference. In this case, I think you are reinforcing and perpetuating the patriarchal norm that someone is allowed to decide others participation. I do not think merchandizing the feminist movement is a wrong one, I think this is just a creative outlet for individuals to be proud of an identity, that is rightfully theirs claim.
One thing is for sure, Ashley, is that I never claimed there to be a membership card or pledge of allegiance to “the cause” or any sort of “test” in order to be a feminist. I think these purposeful exaggerations to not only be over dramatic, but also unnecessary.
ReplyDelete“If I say I’m a feminist does that mean that everything I do will be as a feminist?” Absolutely not! I think that it is impossible for one to do so, and I certainly never suggested the contrary to this anywhere in my manifesta. Can you please provide the excerpt that is responsible for making you feel this way?
You suggest in your question “do all individuals have the freedom and power to do such claiming” that I am assuming everyone to have the same privilege and power. I clearly stated in my manifesta, however, that it was meant to challenge “… those who have the power to enact change ….” So, I guess I’m not sure what you’re really getting at here. Could you, again, provide the excerpt that made you feel this way?
Your question “does it mean that I have to dress, act, and speak like others who also say they are feminists?” definitely surprised me, as I’m not sure how you could infer this from my manifesta (since I didn’t mention any of those things within it). I understand that you may disagree with my principles, but please provide the reasons why, or your arguments will only be brushed off as defensive.
My piece should have been interpreted as me attempting to convey my opinions on the depoliticization of feminism since, most importantly, it’s a personal manifesta, but also: if I were attempting to pass my beliefs off as, how did you say it, “the right way of feminism,” wouldn’t I have made my statements a little less personal and not use “I,” “I think,” or “I would argue.”
These are the principles that I live by, Ashley, and I’m not sure how or why you’ve interpreted messages beyond what is clearly stated. For instance, the references to me thinking feminists should dress, and speak the same way, or governing people’s “participation” in feminism weren’t brought up in my manifesta at all! To clear up any misunderstandings that you clearly have, I assure you, I don’t think all feminists should act, dress, and speak the same way. In fact, I think your inference is in clear contradiction to my saying “….appreciate the differences that may exist between us…” Although I am suggesting that we remain different and appreciate those differences, my argument is that we should always remain political, regardless of our personal beliefs.
Clearly there is a lot to think about.
You ask “What gives people the right to ‘decipher’ what feminism is as either an identity or politic?” Wasn’t that the assignment, Ashley? So, I suppose the same person who gave you the right to “decipher” feminism also gave me that same right (i.e., Dr. Hartley).
In regards to your belief that feminism was about “eliminating the hierarchy of who belongs and who doesn’t” - despite my wanting to point out to you that this argument is incredibly irrelevant to my manifesta, since it was based on “feminism as politic, not identity” as opposed to “who can be a feminist” – I will address it.
Perhaps that is in fact a “priority” of feminism (again, we won’t get into individual priorities here…), but I have mentioned many many many times in class about my own discomfort with my high level of conformity and privilege. I never indicated in my manifesta or at any other point in time that I was free of these constraints. In fact, my manifesta was based on challenging these privileges. In case you missed this section: “My manifesto challenges those who have the power to enact change but choose not to. Constant resistance to both privilege and power is essential in obtaining equality between the genders, ethnicities, cultures, classes, sexual identifications, the environment - and everything else that is squashed into this social hierarchy.” I would not have included this in my manifesta if I didn’t believe my own need to challenge conformity and privilege to be important.
“What gives people the right to ‘decipher’ who can be a feminist or not?” That question(again) is entirely irrelevant to my manifesta. Maybe you misunderstood? My manifesta wasn’t based on who can or cannot be a feminist, it was on how feminism has been depoliticized, and the importance of constantly challenging yourself.
ReplyDeleteYour argument “I think it’s an individual’s personal politics to claim feminism or not, and the way they claim feminism whether it be a lifestyle, politic or identity shouldn’t be criticized” to be hypocritical, and to be frank, terrifying. An individual’s interpretation of feminism shouldn’t be criticized or how they “claim” feminism shouldn’t be? How are we to grow as feminists? How will we learn to defend our politics and/or beliefs? What will stop feminists from being racist, sexist, or homophobic if we are to never be critical of one another? How will the movement even survive? Not to mention, what would you call your “comments” to my manifesta, if not “criticism?”
In response to your “…But how can you do feminism wrong? “ - two words: Sarah. Palin.
“I think you’re trying to reinforce your idea of what the right way of feminism is.” I think you’re being defensive. I completed the assignment as required, Ashley: to write about my own feminist principles. However, if you have something a little less general and perhaps a little less attacking that could potentially be put toward correcting this issue of me coming off as superior, feel free to discuss it with me.
“I think you arguing that ‘feminism is for everyone mentality’ is incorrect and unfair” How so? How can I help this? How do I make you feel this way? Should I point out again that this contradicts your argument that we shouldn’t criticize others’ “claims”?
Throughout this lengthy commentary on my manifesto, you have yet to propose one useful suggestion or constructive criticism on how I could make positive changes to my feminism. Unfortunately, Ashley, suggesting that I feel “superior” and that I am “oppressing other feminists” doesn’t help me to respond to the issues you find to exist in my manifesta.
Also, I find it incredibly ironic that you wrote “I thought the priority….” and “I don’t think merchanidizing….” in addition to “I think it’s a creative outlet for individual” as well as “that is rightfully their claim” while simultaneously telling me that I shouldn’t be telling people how to define their feminism. I would also recommend reviewing your own manifesta, if this is truly one of your principles.
Ashley, you’re not the first – or the last one – to challenge my feminism. I think it’s great! My friends and I all have very different feminisms, and often engage in debate – Cassandra, Nicole, and Rachel, I am sure, could provide more details, should you be interested - but we respect one another enough to provide constructive criticisms and/or potential solutions. When you can provide those, I will be happy to discuss this further with you.