Question of the Week: What (Who) is a Feminist?

In response to last week's post, "Confessions of a Child Feminist," Brett wrote the following comment:

"This is a funny title for me: I don't claim it, but others apply it to me. The first time I was called a feminist was by an ex-girlfriend's mother, who apparently thought some of my blog posts were very interesting. I know there's no litmus test required here, but what does the word feminist even mean?"


I'm not sure I'd ever considered what "feminist" means, in light of NAW's commitment to avoid litmus tests. Obviously, we don't want to be prescriptive around here. The contributors often disagree - you have a Mormon feminist like me, who thinks eliminating pornography and sex work would go a long way toward creating a more equal world; and alongside my feminism, you've got a bi-sexual, Catholic feminist like Erica, who believes that sex work and pornography can empower women. We have radically different views in that area, but we get along.


So, I'm going to throw this question back at our readers: what does the word feminist mean to you? Does it have a plurality of meanings that change depending on context, or do you have one steady, constant definition?

The Other Side of the Looking Glass

When I was growing up, I had limbs like toothpicks. I was a picky eater who preferred going hungry to eating something she didn't like, and I lacked the ability to eat large quantities of food. As I grew older, I found that I responded to stress or despair by eating less, if I ate at all. So as a high school student and as an undergrad at college, I had a BMI that fluctuated between the top of underweight and the bottom of a healthy weight range.

But even though I was skinny, I sympathized with others who weren't. I got upset with others for using the word, "fat," and I insisted that others who were skinny like me should be more understanding toward those who didn't have our fast metabolisms. And my fast metabolism drove me crazy. I seemed incapable of eating enough to satisfy my appetite. People tended to assume I was healthy because I was thin, but I didn't exercise, and I knew I wasn't consuming enough nutrients - at times, I wasn't consuming enough calories, either.

In grad school, though, things changed. My body changed in general - I went from vision that was better than 20/20 to an optional prescription for glasses - but I also noticed I was a little wider. My metabolism wasn't as fast as it had been before. I wasn't worried about my size, but it got me thinking that I really should start a more regular exercise routine, as I had long intended to do. So I began exercising 5 or 6 days a week, and while I probably didn't lose pounds, I developed muscle tone and felt a bit trimmer. The exercise routine seemed effective, so I stuck with it.

But I eventually settled into a routine of exercising only every other day, at the same time that I grew used to eating richer foods. My lifestyle changed for various reasons (mostly grad school stress, but also a string of seasonal bugs that prevented me from exercising regularly in the winter), and all those reasons were pretty understandable. But I still gained a few pounds, and suddenly I found myself in the uncomfortable position of worrying about my weight, for all the reasons I know are wrong.

I know my health isn't at risk - my BMI has changed from the bottom of a healthy weight range, to the middle, and in general I have an active, healthy lifestyle. My doctor isn't concerned either. But her nurse asked if my weight was something I wanted to discuss, and that question alone is enough to make me wonder what others see when they look at me.

I know I shouldn't care what others think of me, but I still do. It still bothers me that others say I "don't look big" now, instead of saying they wish they were my size, like they did in high school. It bothers me that the bathing suit I bought a year ago is now  a tad snug. And it bothers me that others think I look my age, instead of younger than my age like they used to say. Mostly, though, it bothers me that any of this bothers me. That I worry about my size for social and asthetic reasons, not for health reasons.

When so many other people face health challenges and significant discrimination for their size, it feels almost self-indulgent to worry because I'm in the middle of my healthy weight range. But it reminds me of something a guest on the Colbert Report said awhile ago: we all experience the stigma of fat on a psychological level, even if we merely experience it through the fear of gaining weight.

Yellowface, Rape as Comedy, 9/11 Racial Profiling and More, from the Blogosphere

This photo from the Toronto Slutwalk is courtesy of Anton Bielousov

First up, Racialicious has an article about the controversial practice where models tape their eyes to appear more Asian - a practice sometimes called "yellowface." While the model in question dismisses her decision as an attempt to simply create a different look, Racialicious considers it an act of consuming the Other. The basic idea here is that members of a dominant group enjoy fantasizing about belonging to a disadvantaged group.

Next, feminist Mormon housewives discusses ways in which women and other groups of oppressed people fight against their own interests. While I'm guessing readers will take issue with some of the authors' examples of oppressed people fighting against their own interests, this post raises some points that are well worth considering - there are aspects of life that we all take for granted, and it's easy to ignore even the oppression and discrimination that affects us, simply because it seems like a fact of life.

Then, we have a chilling tale of racial profiling on September 11. The story is a bit long, but the basic gist is that an entire row of people of color were removed from an airplane, handcuffed, and stuck in the back of a police car.

Among chilling tales, we've also got an article about sin culture, a term that the blog By Common Consent connects with rape culture. Essentially, BCC argues that when we counsel potential victims to follow a set of rules in order to avoid being victimized, we unwittingly encourage the stereotype that someone who breaks those rules is responsible for the behavior of his or her attacker. A friend of mine recently posted this link on facebook, and the ensuing discussion could have filled a set of encyclopaedias. Part of what makes this issue so disturbing is the rape-story-passed-off-as-comedy which BCC links in their article. While the men on stage listening to the rape confession acted uncomfortable, they cracked jokes about the questionable legality of his actions, rather than telling him to shut his stupid, rapist mouth.

And of course, we can't overlook the end of Don't Ask Don't Tell. It's been a long, hard fight to pull it down, so let's hope it stays dead.

Housekeeping

Hello dear readers!

As you may have noticed, our posting has been erratic and rather sparse lately. This hasn't escaped our notice, in spite of our busy lives, and we're working on creating a new schedule so that you get regular updates. We think this should be ready to go in a couple of weeks (by October first, if you MUST have a deadline), so please don't run away from us just yet!

Looking forward to continuing the conversation,
Emily and Erica

Confessions of a Child Feminist

I cannot remember a time before feminism. No, really. I was the kid who scandalized other first graders by saying, "sexist." The one who wrote to local clergy and asked if they were really listening to women - they didn't respond. I was the child who quietly instigated arguments in Sunday school by asking why the boys would all receive the Priesthood in a few years, while we never would. I was the child who associated masculinity with stupidity. And I was the child who bluntly shared stories about my aunt's abusive husband and couldn't understand why girl scout leaders wanted to pull me aside and talk to me individually after the lesson. After all, wasn't the oppression of women at the hands of men all out in the open?

As you might guess from those examples, I wasn't just a feminist as a child - I was a second wave feminist. To me, gender was all about oppression, and not just the kind that comes through cooties. I grew up with constant reminders that I was not, under any circumstances to call my aunt's husband Uncle. I heard stories of women, both in and out of the family, who were afraid to leave men who brutalized them. I watched grandparents focus all their attention on male cousins and heard friends and family asking my parents if it bothered them that they didn't have a son (my brother was only born when I was ten). So I felt as if I were at constant war with boys who kicked shins, pulled hair, and in general bewildered me by wrestling each other on the floor.

Since those childhood days of second wave feminism, I've revised my initial theories. I'm no longer bothered by LDS men holding the Priesthood while LDS women don't, because I recognize now that to hold the Priesthood is not to personally become more powerful than those who don't - it's to become responsible to serve others. I also recognize that there are many brilliant men in the world, no matter what their first grade handwriting led me to believe. All around, I'm a more moderate feminist than my childhood self.

But I still wonder, as I recall my childhood, when I first identified myself as a feminist. I can point to any number of influences that helped me become one. In addition to the many influences I've listed above, I happened to go to church in a ward (congregation) that was known for having many feminists. Many women in the ward were intellectuals, influenced by the local University of New Hampshire. Among the intellectuals, there was Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning Widwife's Tale. Certainly the author of such an openly feminist book as Well-behaved Women Seldom Make History influenced me indirectly, but I knew of her only as Sister Ulrich, the nice lady who sang in the choir and who once offered me homemade grape juice. (It was delicious). And who occasionally said remarkably frank things about LDS women, in public interviews.

So no, Sister Ulrich was not the reason I became a feminist, or at least not the primary reason. Others must have influenced me, from my grandmothers and mother to the friends I spent time with. Erica and I have been friends since kindergarten, and we influenced one another where feminism was concerned - but in what ways?  When I think back on that friendship, it's probably like wondering whether the chicken or the egg came first. Erica has always had a hankering for causes, and I've always had a lot of anger about injustices. In fact, I'm on skype with Erica right now, and neither of us can recall to what degree the other influenced our feminism - we simply know that we did.

I suppose what I'm discovering in all of this is that feminism is so deep in my bones that when others suggest I need to turn off my feminist lens for a moment, they ask something that is nigh on impossible. How can I deny my reality? But I'm curious what experiences others have had with feminism. How did you first come to the realization that you were a feminist?

A Glimmer of Hope

Image courtesy of Micky's Photostream

I'm still pretty horrified by the creepy, creepy blog that feminist Mormon housewives revealed a few days ago, but I believe in putting the horror behind me, so I've moved on. Monsieur Le Creep will get no new traffic from me! Still, the discussion has continued at fMh, via their comment section, and wow - has it ever become personal! First someone outed the misogynistic blogger as none other than Tanner Guzy, then people who know him and his survivor ex-wife started chiming in. Turns out he didn't leave his wife after she refused to submit and then later meet a new victim wife - no, he cheated on the poor woman he was married to, with the woman he is currently married to. His first wife forgave him and believed him when he told her the affair was her fault and did everything in her power to fix things. But he left her, which to him was evidence that she was in the wrong - he actually bragged on his blog about how he'd been the one who was wronged enough to leave. And his creepy little following of Game believers (the capitalization is his) all comforted him and told him it wasn't his fault that his first wife hadn't submitted. (Ironically, she says she submitted quite a bit and gave in on everything. I'm prone to believe her, given the abuse victim 101 rhetoric she was using when he first left her).

Where is the glimmer of hope in all this? Well, as much as it bothers me that this man hasn't been ex-communicated, he admitted that he faced disciplinary actions for his "mistakes," so that's something at least. And apparently he got into big trouble for refusing to follow through on the divorce agreements and was even found in contempt of court. But that's not even the best part. No, the best part is that someone at fMh shared the link to his ex-wife's blog, and not only is she amazing, but if you read her oldest post and then compare it to a more recent one, you can see the amazing journey this woman made, recovering from this man's verbal and emotional abuse. At first she blamed herself and wanted him back, but in the end she recognized that she was not responsible for his actions and that she is fortunate to be free of him. So yes, there is some hope.

Still, I'm disturbed by how many of the things that this man says sound similar to things I hear from people who aren't cheating liars. Things like, men are more logical than women, and women like a man who leads them, not to mention all his theories on manipulating people.

Relief Society Power, One Mormon Man's Misogyny, and So Much More: Links of Note

Alas, our usual excuse for not blogging won't work, seeing as how none of our regular contributors are currently enrolled in classes. So now I suppose we'll have to blame our negligence on work. Dirty, rotten work!


And now, to the links:


First up, a writer at foxnews.com warns parents not to let their kids watch Dancing with the Stars - at least, not the episode with a transman, Chaz Bono. Why is this Dr. Keith Ablow so concerned? Well, he's arguing that kids who watch a transman dancing on TV might decide to become transsexual too. While Ablow is absolutely right to point out that humans model behavior, I hardly think that pretending transsexual folks don't exist is a healthy response. I also find it very hard to buy Ablow's assertion that he wishes Bono well - when you wish someone well, you don't boycott their decision to dance on TV. If Ablow is really concerned about the way kids will respond to Bono's decision to become a man, he should encourage parents to have healthy and open discussions about these issues with their kids. You don't have to agree with sexual reassignment, but Bono is simply dancing on TV, so why encourage ignorance by refusing to watch him dance?


Next up, I have a couple items of note relating to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (commonly known as the Mormon Church). As a member of this faith, I was excited and thrilled by the release of Daughters in My Kingdom, a book that is all about the history of The Relief Society, which happens to be the world's oldest and largest women's organization. For those who are unfamiliar with it, The Relief Society is an organization that is part of the LDS church, and through it women teach and serve one another and their communities. It is an organization I have belonged to for more than seven years now and one which enriches my life more and more as time goes on. This book is historic, for all the reasons you'll find at the above link, but I want to point out something very unique about it: this book is written and designed by women and for women. Already the entire Relief Society in my ward (congregation) has received copies, and we're eager to study them. I'll probably blog about this book once I've read more of it.


On a much less inspiring note, feminist Mormon housewives has brought a rather horrifying blog to our attention. While I hate to add to this jackass's person's popularity by providing the above link, I see a lot of value in discussing the views he holds. As much I'd like to pretend jackasses individuals like this don't exist, they do, and ignoring them won't make them go away. If you don't have the stomach to read misogyny-disguised-as-equality, here's the basic gist. A man whose blog had the url of "mormonmen.wordpress.org" used this blog to share his story of how his first marriage didn't work. He decided that the problems in the marriage come from his failure to dominate lead his wife, and he tried to "fix" things. When his wife refused to accept him as an alpha male (his phrase), he divorced her and got into the theory of what he calls Game. What is Game? It's a theory where men are supposed to act like alpha dogs and chase women, and "Women are biologically/spiritually programmed to be led by a dominant man. " Yes, that's a direct quote, which the author wrote on his new blog,  in response to a question I asked him. Essentially, this creep individual posted an explanation of how a woman sometimes disagrees with her husband in order to test whether he's fit enough to shut her down. His example of such "fitness testing" was one day when his wife asked permission to go over her clothing budget and he told her 'no.' He admitted that his wife denied that it was fitness-testing, and when I asked how he was so sure when she said it wasn't, he told me the following:


"...men are more inclined to be objective about the reality of fitness tests. Tests are an aspect of a woman that are more ingrained and subconscious than a cognizant choice on her part. My wife saying she wasn’t testing me is a perfect example. Just because she doesn’t consciously believe she wasn’t, doesn’t make it objectively true."


At the risk of sounding pretentious, dare I mention hegemony? Anyway, as I've discussed with several female LDS friends, the thing that's so infuriating about this man's blogs is that he reinforces sexist, misogynist beliefs that in no way jive with current counsel from the president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Where President Thomas S. Monson warns against unrighteous dominion  and counsels couples to act as equal partners, this man has somehow interpreted the phrase "equal partners" to mean equal in worth but different in power. Please know, all readers who are not LDS, that I view this man as an aberration. His complaints about all the "beta males" in his ward (congregation) who disagree with him go a long way toward restoring my faith in LDS men. Know too that men like this exist, in so many organizations, and what they do to the women in their lives is unacceptable.  I'll just let the words of President Thomas S. Monson condemn this man:


Your wife is your equal. In marriage neither partner is superior nor inferior to the other. You walk side by side as a son and a daughter of God. She is not to be demeaned or insulted but should be respected and loved. Said President Gordon B. Hinckley: “Any man in this Church who … exercises unrighteous dominion over [his wife] is unworthy to hold the priesthood. Though he may have been ordained, the heavens will withdraw, the Spirit of the Lord will be grieved, and it will be amen to the authority of the priesthood of that man.”