Why I AM what a Feminist looks like!
So! A whole freakin' week later, I'm finally going to share with y'all about my experience at the FWSA's Feminism and Pop Culture conference.
Just so we're all clear, I'm not writing this to try and say FUCK YOU to the FWSA or to the speakers there. However, I am here to say Fuck You to anybody who tries to pigeon hole me and my beliefs and tells me what I can or cannot do as a feminist.
So, for all of you feminists and women out there who have been told you can't wear makeup and be a feminist, or have dirty sex if you're a feminist, or even shave your fucking legs. This is for you.
I didn't necessarily learn anything new about Feminism at the conference. However, I did learn a shit load of things about feminists.
Before I begin...I just need to make something clear. Since my original Gaping Vagina post, I've put a lot of thought into such things like stripping, and porn...things that are very much controversial subjects on their own, and especially in the feminist community.
I would just like to apologize to anyone who I've offended with that post. Not that I suddenly think that stripping or pornography are empowering...but I know that there are a lot of fabulous women out there who are a lot more, um, open about their sexuality than I, and sometimes their behaviour can be confused with being GV, when really, they're actually making informed decisions about their life and their sexuality, and it's not my place to judge them and say that I know better than them.
I'll go more into this in another post. Not to say I retract everything in my GV post, because I sure as fuck don't. I just know that I've opened my eyes a little bit, and am trying to be less judgemental about stuff.
So. I have heard lots of talk about how the older, "hardcore feminists" can be a *bit* judgemental of us third wavers, for many many reasons, (think lipstick, heels, and raunch culture) and I'm sad to report, the Feminist and Women's Studies Alliance conference confirmed whatever rumours I had heard.
I sat through an hour of pointless jabber about how women are objectified in advertising, because clearly, none of us had ever thought about that before. Or taken a fucking class about it.
But, I was trying to be open and patient of The Sisterhood...but then the woman speaking about about women in advertising said that she didn't think the"This is What a Feminist Looks Like" t-shirt campaign was "effective" because only "certain types" of women would wear that.
Certain types meaning Ashley Judd or those who are young and what society says is "pretty".
That statement really pissed me off, especially considering it came from a woman who looked like a stereotypical feminist. Sorry, but there are feminists who have short hair and don't wear makeup; that's not a secret and that's where the stereotype came from. And let's be honest, the reason she didn't think it was "effective" was because if a woman with clear characteristics of what a feminist is said to look like, and she wears that specific shirt, it wouldn't be effective, would it? It's like, "No shit you're what a feminist looks like."
However, because there is that stereotype, women of color, who are young, or old, or have long hair, or look anything other than a white, middle aged, short haired member of the upper-middle class and are wearing a shirt that declares in big, bold letters THIS IS WHAT A FEMINIST LOOKS LIKE is pretty damn affective.
There's a reason everyone paid attention to Ashley Judd when she wore that shirt, because to the rest of the world, she didn't look like a feminist.
Moments after that comment was made, a rather irritatingly perky professor from the back of the room stood up and said, "I find it very discouraging that my female students read magazines and go shopping after one of my women's studies classes".
In response to the woman's *concern*, a younger feminist that was speaking about outdoor advertisement in Australia at the conference, responded by saying, ""Well, that's what I do on my lunch breaks, as well..." but she seemed to go unheard.
Unheard because a woman who was as intelligent and as well spoken as she was couldn't POSSIBLY read Marie Claire on her break. Because that would make her one of those sheep-like idiot girls that are ruining everything, and completely cancel out what she said.
After learning about how degrading advertisements can be against women - I know, you're shocked right now aren't you! It's true! They are! - I'm sad to say, I was just a little pissed off.
I already felt as though I stood out like a sore thumb: American, probably the youngest one there, and I soon discovered, probably the most "uneducated" person in the whole conference:
I met a very nice German professor who, after asking me where I was from (to which I said "California" and then quickly realized she was expecting me to say, "Yale.") then asked me,
"So, what is your paper on?"
"My who?"
"Your paper."
"Oh. No. I don't have a paper..."
"So you're not speaking?"
"Oh no! I'm just hear to listen! Learn! To be a sponge!...Are you speaking?"
"Oh yes, I'm doing a bllaaahh blaaaah confusing blaaaaaah speech on theory of blaaaaaaah."
"...OH!."
It then became very obvious I was in a room of academics and scholars,
and was more than likely, the only person without a college degree
there.
Next was presentation from the keynote speaker Pamela Church Gibson, who provided us with the most awkward and blatant disapproval of younger feminists (and perhaps any feminist that wasn't an academic or a scholar). Apparently I should "have undoubtedly heard of or read her" but because I'm an uneducated, makeup wearing FOOL of a feminist, I had no idea who she was.
I quickly learned that she is an incredibly dynamic, articulate woman, with a half thousand credentials, but who is also completely frightening. She spoke with such conviction, that it was easy to just listen to her voice or her witty jokes, and ignore the true context of what she was saying.
She also did this irritating thing where, because she's quite aware of her precence in the room and how comanding her voice is, she'd interrupt herself and say,
"And if anyone disagrees with me, PLEASE, speak up. I would LOVE to hear from you!" And everyone would laugh, and she'd say, "No, really. I would! PLEASE DO."
aka: "I DARE YOU to disagree with! I welcome you to challenge
THE POWER that is PAMELA. I will put you to SHAME, child. Shame. BRING
IT! WHAT!"
Aside from using distracting clips from Mean Girls
and Bring it On she used to show how Hollywood is trying to
be feminist (ahahahaha), this quote from her stuck out in my mind the
most:
"In Oxford, you know, where I live, I look out my window at night, and see these drunk young girls out in the streets, getting arrested. And I can't help thinking to myself, is this what I marched to Take Back The Night for? No. It's not."
While her statement wasn't meant to be harmful, I think it just reeked
of her disgust for younger women, and younger feminists. She might as
well have said, "Look what you're doing with this freedom I gave you,
you ungrateful cow!"
Apparently marching for freedom so women could walk freely at night without fear of rape means that we're only allowed to behave as those before us would have wished. Not that drinking until you turn into a belligerent asshole and start raving in the street about your ex and wind up getting arrested is a great idea, but I'm more than positive not everyone does that.
Granted, she did follow her statement up with, "Well, I'm not saying that you can't drink." But clearly, we're only supposed to drink as much as they say is okay. I suppose a thimble of gin and tonic is acceptable.
Was there a big, international feminist meeting where our foremothers handed out codes of dress and conduct booklets? Did I miss that?
Yet, despite all this crazy feminist talk, apparently Pamela thought it was cool to talk about the breast size of the FWSA member who introduced her, in front of the entire audience.
Now the FWSA member who introduced her was young, and blond, and yet despite her conservative sense of style, she couldn't hide the fact that she -MY GOD- had tits.
Let's face it, when you're over a B cup, it's sort of difficult to hide your breasts. And really, why the fuck should we have to disguise the fact that our we have "dirty pillows"?
When the Busty Lady mentioned something in passing about breast implants and plastic surgery, Ye Old Powerful Pamela pshawed, and said: "Oh honey, you don't need that. Trust me."
Not that the woman was saying she did need breast enhancement surgery, she was simply just talking about it. But I guess it's okay for Pamela to point out the fact that she has boobs.
'Scuse me for asking, but, like, isn't that the sort of comment that if a man made in the same context, we'd burn him at the stake?
What I found amazing, was despite hearing a woman who we're apparently all supposed to look up to, say something like that, a woman had the nerve to speak up, and quite angrily announce,
"Actually, I don't know why we're so keen on blaming that, a lady at the back of the room still women, and making women accountable. We should be holding The Men accountable."
Yes. Because clearly, women are treating themselves and each other so well. You're right. It is just The Men's fault.
...Fuck off.
By the end of Friday's session, I was feeling more than a little preached at, and as if I should be apologizing for being born after 1970; like I should have skipped lunch and gone to Boots instead to buy some makeup remover.
Or perhaps I should be even taking it a step further, and should have started asking around for the the name of a good plastic surgeon to help me get a new, less socially acceptable face.
Bitching aside, I really do think the FWSA have truly genuine intentions.
However, for an organization that declares: "Whatever your Feminism, you'll find growing networks or dedicated researchers and activists with membership in the Feminst and Women's Studies Association" on their posters, you'd think they'd be a little less, I dunno, judgemental and preachy.
"Whatever your feminism" my ass.
It would be one thing if it was an association exclusive to scholars or professors, but its not, and they claim to be so welcoming. Not so "elitists".
Perhaps I chose the wrong sessions to go to, or had too high of expectations. But I highly doubt it.
I went in with an open mind, and was left feeling like I could never be feminist enough for almost all of the women in that room.
What worried me, as well, is that no one ONCE brought up abortion. Or women's rights. Or equal pay. Aren't these things a little important? How about how analyzing why these things aren't really discussed within pop culture?
But no. Let's sit around talking about Chick Lit and why Kirsten Dunst feeling about how her old cheer leading captain stole the other squad's dance moves in Bring It On represents how Hollywood warming up to feminism. Jesus. CHRIST.
While I do know that feminist scholars and academics do serve a role and are important in feminism, (or so I'm guessing) I just can't help but wonder if the money we all spent to attend the conference, eat mini-spring rolls, and sit around listening to a bunch of white women discuss obscure feminist theories, wouldn't have been more useful going to organizations like Planned Parenthood.
Instead of congratulating each other on have 5 different credentials after your name and discussing how mad Paris Hilton makes us...why not fucking DO something?
Is writing an extensive paper on a theory to get your PhD really doing something?
I'm not saying that it isn'tt...I'm just not entirely sure it is.
Yvonne Tasker, another keynote speaker, explained how the military spends unbelievable amounts of time and effort in designing the female soldiers uniforms to look just the right amount of "feminine" (read: just the right amount of tit), and I couldn't help but wonder how the second wavers seemed to have a problem with female soldiers being made to hide their curves, yet think a young feminist doing anything other than taping down her chest, and, god forbid, showing a bit of
I've heard the argument way too many times that young feminists who buy make-up, read women's magazines, and go shopping, are buying into the institutions that want to keep women in subservient roles. As one male commenter on Dollymix said to me, "So, how is your perusal of those magazines or your shopping in those fashionable boutiques challenging that?" Wow! Excellent generalizations there, smartass!
Not all of us who "shop", are buying Dior or Kate Moss for Topshop, or are even shopping in "fashionable boutiques".
We're not obsessing in front of the mirror and telling ourselves we're ugly, just because we're putting on makeup. (Or trying to look like Barbie, for that matter.)
We're not eating salads or drinking water because we're anorexic, or throwing up our meals afterwards. I don't have gym membership because I think I'm not worthy of love, unless I'm a size 4. I do it to stay mentally and physically healthy because HEY! endorphins are good for you.
Not all of us who do things that "don't challenge women's roles", are idiots, or don't know what we're doing.
I know why I wear makeup. I know why I've dieted in the past, and I know why I've stopped. Just because many feminists my age enjoy high heels and lipstick, doesn't mean that we're not doing a TON of positive things for feminism along the way.
We're not fucking stupid, and just because we're doing something that other feminists, or men, disagree with doesn't make us wrong, and it doesn't mean that you "know better" than us.
And while I'm at it, let's talk women's magazines real fast.
Sometimes when I go to the store, I want to buy a magazine. Unfortunately , most supermarkets don't carry Bust or Bitch or How To Not Me a Bad Feminist Magazine. What do they have? Heat! Hello! Marie Claire! Cosmopolitan!
Most of the time, I'll chose Timeout, but really, if I were to buy Marie Claire, my brain isn't going to start melting, and I'm not going to suddenly stop what I'm doing, rush to the toilet and throw up my lunch because of the advertisements that *objectify women*.
I doubt other women who consider themselves feminists are doing that either.
A lot of us do know better, and rarely buy those shit piles of advertisements and lame advise known as women's magazine. But you CANNOT TELL ME that I'm killing feminism by buying one.
People and "real" feminist generalizing and saying that feminist who wear makeup, shop, and read those magazines aren't challenging the institutions that want to keep women subservient, are dead fucking wrong. Wrong because it suggests that we're just blindly going through our lives and aren't making informed decisions; wrong as it just further perpetuates female stereotypes, and stereotypes about feminists.
But I guess if we're not being subservient to the likes of Cosmopolitan and Girls Gone Wild, our only other option would be to pigeon hole ourselves and be subservient to the traditional feminist values of our foremothers and academic feminists.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
The original and work friendly version of this post can be found over at Dollymix:
Comments
Fuck a box. Of any kind.
What she said! :)
I was born in 1964 and as a child I watched the older women around me struggle for things you rightly identified as being important (jobs, abortion rights, equal pay). One of my biggest concerns as I got older came from watching younger women distance themselves from the term "feminist." They were doing it mostly because they didn't want to be defined as militant, man-hating lesbians.
Why did they have to distance themselves from that? Because the term feminist was redefined by people who hated the movement. To make things worse, groups like the one you describe above reveled in the negativity and used it as an excuse to separate themselves from the majority of women, saying ridiculous things like "People hate us because we refuse to give in to the despicable stereotypes of women. You women who do give in, by wearing girly clothes and make-up are weak. We are superior."
These rightous women can take this tact this because they are spoiled brats who have the luxury of education and privilege. If they had to work in a restaurant, a meat processing plant, a market, or god forbid, in waste management etc., they might spend more time worrying about the things that really matter. Women's rights (around the world). Equal pay. Access to education. Child care. Women's health. The list is long.
That said, changing definitions is a very effective and increasingly popular way to control groups. Characterize environmentalists as crazy, hemp-wearing tree-huggers and wham, over time it becomes unfashionable to take care of the earth (happily this is starting to change again). Characterize liberals as pot-smoking proponents of gay marriage and like rats off a ship, people redefine themselves to get away from that.
I am raising my girls to be feminists. At nine and four years old they wear glittery lip gloss, lust after high heels and own several furry tiaras. And they are learning that they have a responsibility to educate themselves, get jobs doing whatever makes them happy and not to let boys (or anyone, really) tell them what they can and can't do with their lives.
As they get older they'll learn that there are things worth fighting for and rights we have to be vigilant about protecting. That there are millions of people in the world who think female circumcision is good thing. That women should not be educated, allowed access to birth control, own property or even allowed to show their faces in public.
Now please excuse me while I go relax with a copy of US magazine, I need to escape the real world for a minute and see if the stick figure formerly known as Nicole Ritchie really is pregnant.
These rightous women can take this tact this because they are spoiled brats who have the luxury of education and privilege. If they had to work in a restaurant, a meat processing plant, a market, or god forbid, in waste management etc., they might spend more time worrying about the things that really matter.
Holy god, YES. YES. YES. Exactly. Thank you so much for this! :)
And I love you back.
Keep writing smart stuff like this.
It's wonderful.
Ah, one of Sheila Kelley's fav topics. She prefers to refer to herself - and the S Factor women - as "neo feminists"... the generation of women choosing to have OPTIONS and DIVERSITY instead of the old-skool, nazi-feminists who want us all to reach some form of "equality" by looking and behaving like men.
Sorry the conference was so negative. At least it was an education - perhaps a bit like time traveling to the 60s.
And your post exhausted me. I'm going to take a nap now.
I was born in 1965 and a lot of the women I came into contact with put me off women completely as humans. Of course I need them, but most of my bosses have been women so on a personal level I don't know what the hell people are talking about when they say women are still not equal. So many laws are stacked in favour of women esp custody of kids, rape etc. What happened? We went from Emily Pankhurst to domineering women with a grudge against men getting into power and wrecking destruction with long term effects.
To be honest the only chauvinistic behaviour Iv seen has been from ppl from other cultures where women are still treated as sub human. Im sure your pseudo feminists didnt mention the veil furore, or arranged marriages.
As for British women needing liberation, these people at the FWSA have some kind of a mental illness. I too was lured into the far left where I existed for a period of 10 years until I escaped. They develop in some kind of a void/vacum, faraway from reality. They debate issues that cannot be verified. I found myself standing up for a woman at work who was being chauvinistically dismissed for the wrong reason(she wasnt pretty enough) and I did it automatically, not because fo these screwball theories but because it was the right thing to do. I know it happens everywhere in all walks of life.
It is not just in relation to womens rights, these academically inclined people with some kind of a pioneering 'light in the head' mentality have infiltrated the whole of society and can currently be observed righteously preaching to the masses on such matters as religion, race, politics, ecology, waste disposal, smoking, eating chololate, downloading things you're not supposed to download and recently buying the correct type of lightbulb.
I concur, FUCK them.
Sorry, but that picture looks more like a constipated person than a feminist. Maybe a constipated feminist? I dunno. LOL
I agree with a lot of what the feminist movement is for, better working conditions, same pay for same work, do not legislate my vagina and other equally important items, but as with any group of people, I cannot see stacking things in favor for them by developing things like hiring quotas, discrimination of others to favor their group and all things generally that throw the balance beam off balance. Remove the hinderances yes, but do not create new ones. Let's just all be equal, shall we?
In a true and just society these things would be a non-issue. Unfortunately we do not live in one of those yet, so I am glad that where there is a cause such as this, there are people such as yourself not afraid to step up, be heard and stand fast for their convictions. You go Cate! We'll be here to read about it in detail and throw our $0.02 in there with you! Execllent post.
I had to think about this one for a while before commenting.
It seems to me that feminism - "a doctrine that advocates equal rights for women" - means just that, equal rights, including the right to be dumb. Hell, us men have been and continue to take advantage of the right to be dumb every day.
I can understand the frustration of older feminists when they say, "Is this what we created Take Back the Night For?", while pointing at some dumb tart passed out in the gutter. I'd probably be pissed off too, if I were them. Unfortunately, that's what they were fighting for - the right for women everywhere to be just as dumb as men.
The fact is, stupidity knows no gender. Women now have more opportunities than they did in the fifties and sixties, and more are coming, because of freedoms brought to them by the trailblazers of feminism, but with those opportunities for greatness also come opportunities to demonstrate the innate stupidity of all human beings. This is a good thing, inasmuch as freedom is inherently a good thing.
As for whether a woman can wear make-up and shave her legs and still be a feminist... a feminist is anyone who supports equal rights for women. Anyone who tries to define it otherwise needs to get out their damn dictionary.
I agree about hiring quotas, and its sad that they are already in place in a lot of large organisations and government departments. While it has good intentions, it often has the opposite affect, the very people they are trying to protect are not getting equal rights because they are being hired (or not hired), not because they're good at their job, or are the "right person for the job". They get the job because they are the right race, or right gender, or have a disability. "Let's just be equal" would be a fantastic way of life, yet that would require the entire world to have a brain.
Awesome.
Nora Ephron's Crazy Salad from 1976(unlike some papers you may have seen,
it's an easy read, but also an objective critique of the feminist movement at that time(plus it's funny as hell, which is the main appeal for me).
I just bought but haven't read Full Frontal Feminism, by a younger,
possibly third wave feminist, on why feminism is important to younger
women.
I once applied to work at a feminist bookstore and when asked whether I considered myself a feminist or not, I had to pause and seriously consider the question. Opponents will always try to redefine what a cause stands for, as that is one of the most successful ways to sabotage progress. However, my understanding of feminism is that it initially did not include women of color or women who chose to live a more traditional lifestyle (i.e., stay-at-home moms). I have profound issues aligning with a cause that purports to represent all of one class of people and then compartmentalizes, dismisses, and judges sects within that class.
Ultimately I answered that I was a womynist (for lack of a better term) for the reasons I described above and ultimately I did not get the job. I wasn't sure if it was because of the answer I gave, because I continued to shave and wore make-up, or because I married a man (that was a double strike - I conformed to traditional convention by marrying and taking my husband's last name and I was with a man). Being a Leo, I never assumed it was because I wasn't qualified ;). Regardless of the reason, it left even more of a bitter taste in my mouth than before about feminism.
I am a passionate and strong advocate for equality generally. As a rape survivor and a woman, I am even more passionate about women being safe and being treated equally. What saddens me most, though, is that we are harshest on each other. Women are judged by one group of women for wearing make-up and by another for not. Same thing with high heels and skirts, not to mention brands and cuts worn. Someone mentioned that she wears make-up for herself. not her husband. I wear it to, but I am conscious of the fact that since I was five - or possibly younger - I thought wearing make-up and high heels is what it meant to be a woman and to be desirable. That is a product of our culture, which does exploit and objectify women. I suppose it just matters to what degree you buy into it and to what degree you want to take a part of it for yourself.
Bravo, Karen, for being a responsible mother and teaching your daughters about feminism and all that it means and entails early.
A parting point I would like to make is that some of those traditional women's magazines (like Marie Claire and Harper's Bazaar) have great news articles.
This is the first time I have read one of your posts and I love it! Gotta read the rest. I am a feminist. I do what I want to do with my life and I think that sniping at other women makes the feminist movement weaker, not stronger. I think you have as much if not more to add to the movement (to the more "educated" sniffy snobs dismay) It should be about freedom to be who you are and to do what you want with what you have.
As to what women look like- ohmigod, aren't we over this yet? I love fashion mags & stuff. I love my husband and my kids. When I stayed at home it was my choice!!! If we keep judging and stabbing women in the back how can progress be made? Its all wide open & whoever wants to narrow what we can do - to me, is not a feminist.
This makes me sad too and I'm glad you brought it up. There is so much power in standing together and helping each other, just look at men's success from forming professional networks - the old boys club we all love to hate. It's an easy enough model to steal and yet we still don't do that nearly as well as they do. Why is that? Why instead do so many of us insist on modeling the worst stereotypes by sniping at each other and hold each other back? Perhaps we feel that as long as none of us gets ahead the rest of us won't feel so bad about where we are in life.
Such crap.
Such a freaking waste of energy.
I have no problem with people having different definitions of feminism, or environmentalism, or christianity or (insert your controversial topic here). In fact I'm all for it. Disagreement should lead to dialogue and I'm a huge believer in dialogue - even (gasp) a good healthy argument. 'Cause see, we don't have to agree in order to get along. But we do have to respect each other despite (perhaps even because of) our differences and not use them as an excuse to put each other down.
Imagine what we could do if we used our powers for good.
(setting fire to the soapbox now)
i don't know if that was really what you were trying to say, but that's how your post made me feel. i'm also not sure how much sense this comment is making. i only have a G.E.D. i am however going back to school this fall.
anyhoo...
i'm glad you made this post, thank you
Sister, I've only got my high school diploma and a few college courses under my belt. Your comment made sense!!!
What's funny, is that there are so many parts about me that aren't exactly typical "feminist" traits. It sort of feels if your married, or have children that you're automatically in the minority...
Thank you for your comment!!!
That ladys breasts need liberating.
Confused, perhaps the crucifix round her neck is a clue? The bemused blonde behind looks like she's coming back down from an acid trip, and the Quaker hatted dude behind obviously has something stuck up her arse.
THIS IS WHAT A fe MINI st LOOKS LIKE
Total contribution to world body of knowledge= zero.
In the age of cyber terrorizm, what is there left to liberate? I think these people are living in a fantasy, and two centuries behind time. In a place like the UK, who can say society puts constraints on your behaviour or lessens your life-chances? The internet and Wikis have succeeded in democratizing information and have added a new dimention to the idea of complaining and self-indungence. Most women(and men) are too busy these days earning huge amounts of money, getting fat, spending money and getting involved in self obsession to worry about womens liberation. Can you really be serious? Just look around at the women in the media. The Victoria Beckhams, Kate Mosses and Shilpa Shettys...do they need liberating? How many women are like them? How many women in relationships are in control of that relationship?
In the western world, women are not in chains. It is a myth. Women are very much in control.
Like Marxism before, "Feminism" should now be more concerned with wine tasting and offering tips on buying the latest fashion accessories from Gucci et al.
I would start by suggesting the lady at the top of the page loses the T shirt and considers a humour implant and if she is looking for a man, a facelift.
Errrr...Maybe you'd like to read THIS POST here. But I doubt it would help you pull your head out of your ass any time soon.
You said: "If she is looking for a man" that the women in the photo should get "a facelift."
That is just a teeny tiny little example of why we still do need feminism. I'm wondering what sort of fantasy world you live where you think KATE MOSS and VICTORIA BECKHAM are "proof" that society doesn't put "constraints on your behaviour or lessens your life-chances". They are two famous, white, privileged, starved, surgically enhanced, RICH women who actually are two prime examples that our society is FUCKED.
How many women are like them? VERY FUCKING FEW.
I enjoy how you suggested that feminism, and discussing feminism on the internet, was basically about "complaining" and filled with "self-indulgence" -and yet then you said that maybe "'Feminism' should now be more concerned with wine tasting and offering tips on buying the latest fashion accessories from Gucci et al"...Yes, because that's NOT self indulgent at all.
I think that you're the one living "two centuries behind time".
http://cupcate.vox.com/library/post/we-havent-come-a-long-way-baby.html
Like I said, I doubt you'll read it or actually understand it. But whatever. You don't really need to.
Lady, reading your other posts about how you hate the UK, you still think you speak for women in this fair land? Really? Why not ask Brit women if you speak for them? If you hate 80 year old British men so much you can always go back to your own country, it will be no loss for us.
Close off the conversation in a patronising fashion, surround yourself with like minded people, go for it.
I didn't say all women were like Kate Moss or Victoria Beckham, but they are role models of get up and go people that millions of girls admire and emulate. Women with balls. Contrary to your small world view, there are a lot of women like that, they don't need your brand of feminism steeped in victimhood.
You post on a public forum presumably so that other people will read what you've written and pass commentary. Did I do something wrong? Did I commit a mortal sin by god forbid disgreeing with you?
Kate Moss and Victoria Beckham do what they do not with a gun at their heads, they DO IT OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL. Vile sociological arguments that they somehow have no right to take their clothes off because it offends the whole of womankind have been shown to be ridiculous throwbacks to the mistakes of the 1960's. Would you also say the terrorists that blew up the buses and trains on 7/7 were also victims?
I notice you never actually engage with people that disagree with you, is that because you already know what they are all going to say and have pre-empted them in your mind?
More fun than a tart, but less fun than vodka? Hmmm
Are you one of these here Yankie dolls that wants to be British? God, not another one. The country is full up with people like you now, can't you go somewhere else? If you are genuinely concerned with liberating women, and it's not just a load of old vodka and tart fumes, please go to Afghanistan and get stuck in.
Together we can change the whole world. You have the power to help her do it.
Sexist and racist! Charming!
Seriously dude, please stop commenting on here. You clearly don't have anything rational to say, and you're not exactly striking up a discussion. It's fine that you disagree with me, and if you weren't so fucking insulting and rude I might want to discuss this with you. But I don't, and I don't have to.
And PLEASE do not fucking tell me to go back to my "own country" or tell me that I'm trying to speak for all British women or call me a "Yankee doll" that's trying to be British.
You really don't like women speaking their mind, do you?
Please dont ever speak on behalf of british men again, you're embarrasing us.
just thought I'd share a private message I got this morning from ptrek...
Your girlfriend thinks that blogging in an insulting way about 86 year old British male post office workers and workers that can't speak very good English doesn't come across as arrogant, racist and sexist. Is it any wonder Americans have a bad name? I have no beef with Americans, I admire them. But not when they do this.
I don't speak for Brits? Maybe not, but I am one. I was disagreeing with a ‘feminist’ viewpoint when Kate blocked my disagreement in such a childish way. But it doesn’t matter, she can go on deluding herself she is making sense for all time.
PS- Actually mister hero to the rescue, it’s none of your F-ing business what I write. For someone that claims to be an IT worker, your spelling is embarrassing, please don’t spell on behalf of Brits.
Anyway, I could rant on, but I won't. Fabulous post, I favorited it.
Kudos on the original commentary opening these quesitons. I also recommend Christine Northrup and Caroline Myss as more upbeat versions of feminism,
not that I agree with every single thing they say(or know if I do or not)....
Oh, I'm glad to see the trolling didn't continue on this one.
For me, feminism is about opening potential up for women to have more control over their choices in life. That includes academics who want to keep it more theoretical and show off their credentials. And women who want to throw their Guiness up in gutters. Women who want to wear makeup and those who don't. I don't wear makeup, but I don't do it because I am trying to make a point. I don't wear it because it just doesn't feel like the person I am. It's about letting women go to the gym (or not) for whatever reason they choose. It's about women being able to choose things that I might deem unhealthy for myself, while giving them the right to choose it for themselves for as long as they want to.
I turn 23 in June, lol. To be honest, I don't even know where I stand with feminism anymore. I'm a feminist, obviously. But I've been shunned by most of the 3rd-wavers I know. They don't do it outright, it's just more passive aggressive and like, "You're against porn, right?" and when I respond, "Well, no." I get the look.
I need to write another post on my feelings about all this, as a lot has changed in the months since I wrote this. But anyhoo. Thanks for reading! Can't wait to read what you think! (Be gentle, lol) :)