First of all, this is a day late. It seems to be my trend to forget to post on dead week, which I think is understandable, but not excusable. Hence, a certain somebody should take me up on lunch before I leave for Spain. (Oh, by the way, I'm going to Spain! I see your Puerto Rico and raise you bullfighters, Asterisk!)
So, I rarely write opinion blogs. Mostly because I tend not to have really strong opinions, and I'm really not all that politically or socially active. But this one is an opinion post, because I've had things on my mind.
I have some issues with the exclusivity of the feminist and gay rights movements. Let me preface this by saying I am a staunch feminist, and a pretty damn gay girl. I'm not an expert on anything. This has just been my experience. And I know I'm generalizing, but it's to make a point.
Let's start with the feminists. Feminism is a beautiful thing. It got us the right to vote, (almost) equal pay, and so many more opportunities. But a lot of feminists have a strikingly strict view on what makes a feminist. As a sex-positive woman, it's a bit hard to feel included in a community that so glaringly attacks sex practices that do not fit the rigid hardcore feminist ideals. We forget, again and again, that the point of feminism is to create a world in which women are free to do what they want. We cannot condemn a woman as anti-feminist simply for being into S&M, for doing porn, for deciding to quit her job and raise a family. It's a woman's right to choose her own path in life, whatever gets her off, whatever makes her happy.
I've heard, again and again, women say things like "Giving blow jobs is anti-feminist", or "S&M is just an extension of the patriarchal control", or "Porn always subjugates women", or "Housewives give up control over their lives." Why? Who says? These huge binaries, these strict lines, exclude so many women who are just as self-possessed, just as full of agency and power as the woman who has a corporate job and no kids. As long as the woman is not forced to do something she doesn't want to, as long as she is doing what brings her joy, who are you to say it's anti-feminist? We get so caught up in the semantics, in the theory and the rhetoric, that we forget that feminism is about people, and people are incredibly variable.
Take the movie Sucker Punch, for example. A lot of women complained that it was anti-feminist because of the scanty costumes, the overt sexualization of the main characters, and how "Babydoll" was made to look like a schoolgirl, a patriarchal male fantasy. What they overlooked, however, is that the main characters use their (yes, overt, heavens no) sexuality to their own advantage, for their own power and freedom. Babydoll, despite the fact that she is forced into a schoolgirl costume, is the strongest person in the movie, and reaches her freedom through her own agency, defying all the patriarchal institutions that seek to cage her. By focusing on and being offended by the sexuality of the movie, you lose the actual feminist power of it.
Okay, so switching gears to the gay community, but on a similar note. When did we get so damn fussy? Used to be that all the queers and transgenders and intersex and bisexuals and everybody all stuck together. Now we're categorized and sectioned off and no one wants to sit by each other at lunch. More than most minority groups, we get mired in words and names and rhetoric, and forget that we're all just there because our sexual identities fall outside the norm in some way or another.
When did we get so cliquey? There's a hierarchy in the gay community now, with gay males on top, lesbians after, and then the bis, the queers, the transgenders, and everyone else sort of skirted off to the side. Maybe it's a symptom of media exposure. I don't know. But the second I stopped dating girls and started dating a guy, I couldn't pass for a lesbian anymore, and suddenly it seemed like my gay card got revoked. From experience, there's a lot of snide comments that come from the gay community when you're bi, especially if, at the moment, you're dating the opposite sex. A lot of "can't you just pick sides" and "not really gay" rhetoric. Being part of the gay community formed so much of my identity, and it was strange to no longer feel as welcome. As a community based on acceptance and composed of people who are continually marginalized by mainstream society, we cannot afford to alienate our own members. It just doesn't make sense.
Additionally, I've heard so many people alienate potential allies just because the poor guy got a term wrong, called you "gay" instead of "queer" (and what straight guy, trying to be sensitive, is going to call you queer? Yeah, we've reclaimed the word, but it still sounds derogatory coming from a stranger), or didn't know the difference between "transgender" and "drag queen". Give them a break, explain it nicely, and move on. Don't call them out for being ignorant; they'll be embarrassed and probably stop trying to make the effort to try and understand the community. They're people too, and no matter how back-assed what they say may seem to you, it's pretty easy to tell when someone is being intentionally offensive and when they're just stumbling over sincere efforts.
For both the feminist and gay communities, I think the most important thing is that we remember why we're there in the first place. These are communities based on individual choice and happiness, not rhetoric or strict guidelines for "how to be". Choice is choice, love is love, and agency is agency, no matter if you like the manner in which it is exercised. We have too much progress to make in mainstream society to be attacking people within the community.
Just...be a little kinder, guys.
Anyways, that's my spiel for today.
-- Jazz
Hear hear, excellently put!
ReplyDeleteTrue that. When Chaucer wrote the Canterbury tales in the late 14th century, he proposed that what all women truly value most is autonomy. While I don't mean to suggest that the feminist movement model themselves after a medieval poet, it seems strange to me that feminism, for all of the evolution it has undergone, should ever stray from this basic idea. I agree with you that a lot of people get so involved in the theory that they feel primed for reaction to minor issues, but the critical theory that I've read has always come down to autonomy at the end of the day. Perhaps there is too much interpretation; Jesus Christ is an inspiring figure and was a staunch humanist, and yet people went off to the crusades in his name. crazy.
ReplyDeleteI get why women are making claims that women are acting in an anti-feminist way. After all, it's hard to determine what really "makes another person happy," and we all internalize the other in such a way that we want to believe that what makes us happy should apply to everyone else. Where feminism really needs more reach is in men, in my opinion. I realize the thin ice I tread on by proposing men as the answer in a traditionally patriarchal culture, but hear me out. Lets use your example that blow jobs have become rather stigmatized as anti-feminist. Feel free to disagree, but I see two components required for an empowered blowjob (this needs to become a real term, if it isn't already). One, the girl needs to want to do it, out of love or lust or curiosity or boredom or whatever. Back to autonomy here. Secondly, I personally believe the receiving party needs to understand and respect that autonomy. Without both components, there is a lot of gray area that can be harmful. Men who truly believe that women are inferior only have their world-view encouraged when women engage in traditionally female activities in general, and I believe that this is where the frustration comes into play as feminists see women being housewives, even if completely happy. Obviously, it's important to stress that these women have choices, but never to make the decisions for them. Better to focus, perhaps, on the men who refuse to examine the binaries of their world because they aren't the ones at a disadvantage.
On that topic, I remember arguing on the Western Forums that yelling at women out of cars at night was really reprehensible, and arguing with this particularly close-minded individual who seemed to be trying to suggest that women should just be flattered if guys cat call them as they speed by in a car.
I omitted my gender because I didn't think it mattered, and he referred to me as female the entire discussion.
I hope that one day, whoever is arguing in his place will feel uncomfortable making that assumption.
Gosh, empowered blowjob is such a great term.
ReplyDeleteAnd I agree, Ian. Respect needs to be present on both sides, and there needs to be less leniency with the whole "boys will be boys" idea. Feminism, to be truly effective, needs the support of both women and men. Hopefully, eventually, it would indeed turn into a kind of humanism.
Absolutely. A movement only ever completely succeeds when it becomes unnecessary. Humanism is a beautiful end goal for all struggles.
ReplyDelete