Q.: When is feminism like homeschooling patriarchy?

[Kelya]

daelem, I don't understand your reply.

MamaJunebug, it sounds like you're blaming feminism for not "delivering" what you expected, instead of blaming patriarchy for blocking the efforts of feminists to improve upon the things you mentioned. It isn't the fault of feminism that your liberation wasn't as promised, its the fault of the patriarchy. That's what I understood from what Deelaem bolded in your statement- can't speak for her but that raised my eyebrows as well.

[Kelya]

You know since we're on the subject of Feminism, I have a question to ask; is it wrong to call myself an Equalist and not a feminist?

I have no objection but I just don't want to support only women's rights, I want to support the rights of every creature on this planet both human and animal rights regardless of gender, race, creed, sexual orientation etc.

But when it comes to Vision Forum or QF, I would fully support Feminism and a woman's individualism.

I also think Feminists should claim the title Feminist back, because too many conservatives and the media caricaturize Feminists as antagonistic, irrational, man-hating or ridiculous. You should watch a youtuber called Feministfrequency, she makes good points on how feminism and women are portrayed in films and in the media.

You're letting others define feminism for you right there, with that bolded quote. I'm heavily involved in multiple feminist spaces and everyone supports the rights of "every creature on this planet," regardless of those factors you mentioned. It's called intersectionality. We're in a new wave of feminism- third wave or post wave, depending on who you ask. The days of asking black women to set aside their color, queer women to set aside their sexuality, poor women to set aside their experiences being poor, to set aside experiences outside of middle class white women is OVER. We need a feminist movement that reflects the actuality of women of all color, gender, sexuality, economic status, immigrant status, education status, everything, and we are developing. Explore some feminist spaces in real life, I think you'd be pleasantly surprised. Additionally, the book "This Bridge Called My Back" by Cherie Moraga and Gloria Anzaluda is a good place to start for learning about intersectionality.

I personally think everyone who is a feminist needs to claim the word without shame, because otherwise, like you said, we let others define it. Think of "Feminists only care about women and are man hating, babykilling Nazis! Isn't that why you call yourself an equalist?!" type responses.

[finleeport]

You're letting others define feminism for you right there, with that bolded quote. I'm heavily involved in multiple feminist spaces and everyone supports the rights of "every creature on this planet," regardless of those factors you mentioned. It's called intersectionality. We're in a new wave of feminism- third wave or post wave, depending on who you ask. The days of asking black women to set aside their color, queer women to set aside their sexuality, poor women to set aside their experiences being poor, to set aside experiences outside of middle class white women is OVER. We need a feminist movement that reflects the actuality of women of all color, gender, sexuality, economic status, immigrant status, education status, everything, and we are developing. Explore some feminist spaces in real life, I think you'd be pleasantly surprised. Additionally, the book "This Bridge Called My Back" by Cherie Moraga and Gloria Anzaluda is a good place to start for learning about intersectionality.

I personally think everyone who is a feminist needs to claim the word without shame, because otherwise, like you said, we let others define it. Think of "Feminists only care about women and are man hating, babykilling Nazis! Isn't that why you call yourself an equalist?!" type responses.

Right. I was thinking of the Feminist that my college teacher spoke about, I forgot her name but from what I could remember, she married an Native American Chief and he told her once 'In my tribe women should be seen and not heard' and she said 'oh yeah? watch me'. She also defended Civil Rights, but when some people ask her to support a white woman's accusations of being raped by a black man, she refused. If anyone knows what is her name I would be grateful.

[emmiedahl]

Someone yesterday posted a link to a feminist blog discussing food stamps, and I don't think women even came into the discussion. It was about social justice and making sure everyone has their needs met.

This is not Gloria Steinem's feminism. Modern feminism is very much egalitarianism. I mean, you are allowed to define yourself however you please, and if you feel a disconnect with feminists for whatever reason, then maybe you should use your own term.

I used to feel uncomfortable with the label, but I am learning to embrace it. I associated feminism with my mother, who has issues with men and does not think women should stay at home with children unless they are stupid. But there is definitely a home for all types of people in modern feminism, whether you want to live there or not.

[MamaJunebug]

MamaJunebug, it sounds like you're blaming feminism for not "delivering" what you expected, instead of blaming patriarchy for blocking the efforts of feminists to improve upon the things you mentioned. It isn't the fault of feminism that your liberation wasn't as promised, its the fault of the patriarchy. That's what I understood from what Deelaem bolded in your statement- can't speak for her but that raised my eyebrows as well.

Ah, I see now. Thanks, Kelya.

My original words were:

One of the things the feminist movement promised but couldn't deliver on, in its early years, was making husbands/fathers more responsible within the home. So I, as one of the earlier feminists, wound up being homemaker AND corporate employee. Where was the liberation in that kind of women's liberation?

(Note well: that didn't last very long. I told my The Spousal Unit he had to start kicking in big time on the homefront or I would quit my job. As I was bringing in 50% of the income by then, he shaped up.)

My response to Kelya, daelem and anybody else who's interested ;) --

Blame? By no means. Not at all. It was a simple fact that not all individuals - my TSU among them - listened to the whole tenets of what back then was called "women's lib": That women should be allowed access to the workplace with equal opportunitiess, and that men should share the duties of the home with the opportunity to become equal to their partners in bearing the burdens/joys.

My TSU was thrilled when I beat out several competitors (some of them male) for a good-paying job (partly because I worked for less, unwittingly). My TSU was deaf when I said, "Ok, we both put in 9 hours at our offices today, so let's both get dinner made/cleaned-up-after."

Was this the fault of feminism? Naah! That's the same as saying that an adulterous Lutheran is the fault of Lutheranism. Feminism implies and requires education, and I schooled that TSU and while we never got to exactly 50/50 at home, we got to where I was not exhausted! (Now, to finish up the simile: Lutheranism implies and requires self-control, repentance, humble acceptance of God's forgiveness, and a duty to sin no more.)

The FJian who said that patriarchy is the default worldwide is probably right. Just by dint of men being bigger and stronger, and because women bear the children conceived by force or in love, patriarchy is a very easy way to run things.

That's what's beautiful IMHO about mere Christianity (there is no male nor female in Christ Jesus) and about other religious traditions which call for egalitarianism, and about feminism (which I understand to say, "Each person should be able to pursue a responsible life as she or he wants, without regard to gender roles"):

These systems elevate us from the "might makes right" caveman mindset to one that should use cooperation, mutual support, communication and gentle power to make us all stronger.

One last note: A few weeks ago I was chatting with two nice ladies who belong to the congregation I recently joined. I think the topic was men helping out at home. One of them said, "I'm not a feminist but they really should help, I think" and the other chimed in, "I'm not either but I agree" and I said very clearly, "I AM a feminist and I agree with you both!" with a big smile.

You can imagine their looks. ;) I'm out of similes than don't involved hooved woodland creatures and halogens.

[browngrl]

I don't believe that men are being paid less because they are not breadwinners. They are being paid less because companies don't give a fuck.

my thoughts exactly

[Austin]

We're working on it. It's a lot harder than one would think, especially since there are a lot of groups identifying as feminist and not all of us agree with the other groups.

I don't hesitate to identify myself as a feminist, but I see a lot of the younger women I work with (and I'm only 32) have issues with it.

Right now, though, to be honest, I'm more worried about women's rights, especially on the pro-choice front. Never mind that a lot of the things feminists are calling for - more family-friendly workplaces, maternity leave, better daycare options - would NOT just benefit women, but everyone.

We absolutely must reclaim it, wear it proudly, and NOT let the conservatives continue to co-opt it and completely bastardize its meaning.

And one day when I'm feeling stabby, and some young woman pipes up with, "Oh, I'm no feminist. . ." . . .well, it' ain't gonna be pretty. GTFU and realize that the only reason you're in this job and have an education and can do the million things you take for granted all the time is because some other women (and decent men) made that possible for you.

[jockosmom]

I understand what MamaJunebug is trying to say. Early on, in the 50's, 60's, and 70's, feminism seemed easier to define because the issues were more black and white. There were real barriers to women being in certain careers, having access to certain types of education that could help them to succeed, certain rights that we all take for granted now. Once some of those big barriers were breached, the issues became more about women being able to make choices for themselves, for what is right for a particular woman and her particular family. I'm old enough to remember when the want ads in the paper were divided into Employment - Male and Employment - Female, and also remember when announcing you were pregnant to your boss meant immediate dismissal from your job, no matter how vital the income was for you. Those issues are behind us now but somehow it still feels like women are getting the short straw in many areas. I'm grateful that I have a job and can work but I'm not grateful that it's still expected that I'm going to do all the shopping, cleaning, and cooking at home. Younger men (18-30) have probably mostly experienced a world where women are everywhere in the workplace, but men over about 50 (at least many of the ones I know) still think housework is women's work, no matter how much they would deny that.

[Nothing2CHere]

I don't believe that men are being paid less because they are not breadwinners. They are being paid less because companies don't give a fuck.

This.... :banana-dance:

We absolutely must reclaim it, wear it proudly, and NOT let the conservatives continue to co-opt it and completely bastardize its meaning.

And this! When I was in college, I did not join the feminist club on campus (even though many of my female friends were members) because even though I agreed with what they stood for, that "feminism was the radical notion that women are equal," (they had written it up on cards and passed them out at an activities fair, I kept mine to hang in my dorm room), I didn't want to be labeled one of those crazy, man-hating femi-nazis (Rush - not the band - had just popularized that phrase, I believe). I'm now at a place where I can say, yes, I AM a feminist, and yes, I can be a feminist even though I'm married and have a baby on the way.

[Kaylee]

Some women on the other hand are forced into working full-time jobs and then doing the majority of housework/childcare. I'm very thankful for the feminist movement...but corporations used it to their advantage and as a chance to pay men less money because they were no longer "breadwinners". It backfired on us. There are women who would love to stay home and be SAHMs or homeschool, but financially can't justify it because of the husbands salary.

I think this is one of those myths that many people believes, but I'm not sure that it's true. Companies did use the "breadwinner" thing as an excuse to pay women lower wages, which the feminist movement fought against, but I don't think that men's wages were actually lowered in response to women working. I've heard a lot of people blame low wages on working women, and also on immigrants, but I think the real issue is just that most employers will pay the lowest amount they possibly can an don't care who they screw. Since the "default" person in those society still seems to be the middle class white male, those with money and power keep them placated by blaming low wages, social ills, and other complaints on women, minorities, and anyone else with even less power and standing, because they don't want the "majority" to start blaming them or looking for answers that might actually require change and responsibility towards the workers and/or disenfranchised members of society.

Also, most women in the middle and working class had to work to help provide for their families. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, many families lived on farms and women worked long hours in the fields beside the men caring for crops and animals. In the early textile mills, teenage and even younger girls were put to work doing hard jobs and working long hours. Even when they married, most women took in ironing or sewing, helped in their husbands' businesses, or did some other form of income producing work. Many also took jobs as maids, governesses, and other servant jobs that made it possible for the upper class women to run their households without working themselves. There was also a lot of work at home that contributed to the family income, either by saving money or producing goods to resell.

The 1950's housewife image was very much a media creation to encourage women to be content in leaving the factory jobs they had gotten as part of the war effort. They would likely have been "let go" anyway, but it was a way of making them feel like they were being patriotic and good women by freeing up the jobs for the men returning from war. It was also a way to push a certain image of family that encouraged them to marry early and start buying things. It was much more about consumer culture and economics than womanhood or family.

I think it does suck that some women who would like to stay at home can't, but I don't blame that on feminism. If anything, the same people who push for more women to stay at home and not work are the ones who support politicians and economic policies that make it even harder to do so. There's also the class issue that means the wealthy can still afford it, the middle class can do so by making sacrifices and/or the woman working from home, the working class may or may not be able to afford it with major sacrifices and more/harder additional work, and the very poor cannot afford it but may try to do so just so their children can provide an additional income or so the children can take care of household tasks while mom works (something the fundies sort of do, but many out of greed and entitlement rather than necessity) - the types of jobs have changed, but the overall pattern isn't that different now than in the past other than child labor laws & the availability of free public schools.

[Witsec1]

Some women on the other hand are forced into working full-time jobs and then doing the majority of housework/childcare. I'm very thankful for the feminist movement...but corporations used it to their advantage and as a chance to pay men less money because they were no longer "breadwinners". It backfired on us. There are women who would love to stay home and be SAHMs or homeschool, but financially can't justify it because of the husbands salary.

The decline of unions, the switch from manufacturing to information/service economy, automation, outsourcing - of course these have nothing to do with the decline of real wages. Nope, it's gotta be the feminists. :roll:

[desertvixen]

Blame? By no means. Not at all. It was a simple fact that not all individuals - my TSU among them - listened to the whole tenets of what back then was called "women's lib": That women should be allowed access to the workplace with equal opportunitiess, and that men should share the duties of the home with the opportunity to become equal to their partners in bearing the burdens/joys.

That, or they listened but really didn't give a fuck. Now the attitude is "YOU wanted to work, YOU solve your issues, and enjoy the Second Shift because we're going to give you a hard time either way" - whoever said upthread that women are always being held to a double standard was right, and the sad thing is that a lot of the time, that double standard is enforced by other women. Plus, by keeping women from viewing it as a problem of the system, and instead only as their problem, they can keep it going longer.

I'm a feminist. I'm a single mom, senior NCO in the Army, and anyone who doesn't think that I feel the conflict between those two is mistaken. The thing is, however, the military is a career I love and enjoy and it has so many benefits that I have to feel they outweigh the costs. Does that mean I don't wish sometimes that I could stay home with my girl all day, not go deal with a hundred other people's problems while my daughter gets mistaken for a member of my daycare provider's family? Hell no.

And I know how damn lucky I am to have my setup.

We absolutely must reclaim it, wear it proudly, and NOT let the conservatives continue to co-opt it and completely bastardize its meaning.

Austin, amen. It reminds me of the people who don't understand how having a baby can make you more pro-choice.

And one day when I'm feeling stabby, and some young woman pipes up with, "Oh, I'm no feminist. . ." . . .well, it' ain't gonna be pretty. GTFU and realize that the only reason you're in this job and have an education and can do the million things you take for granted all the time is because some other women (and decent men) made that possible for you.

Oh yes. They make me stabby.

I'm now at a place where I can say, yes, I AM a feminist, and yes, I can be a feminist even though I'm married and have a baby on the way.

Nothing2CHere, I'm glad you got to that place. It can be hard to get there now and then, but it's pretty cool once you get there.

I think it does suck that some women who would like to stay at home can't, but I don't blame that on feminism. If anything, the same people who push for more women to stay at home and not work are the ones who support politicians and economic policies that make it even harder to do so.

Raine, this, exactly. Or the section of the "pro-life" movement (pro-life in quotes because I don't really consider the loudest voices to be pro-life so much as they are pro-controlling women's bodies or anti-choice, but I do know that there are people who are genuinely pro-life, who actually care about what happens to those lives once they are born) that consistently votes against measures that would increase security for actual people.

[treemom]

I'm calling bullshit on this, and will continue to call bullshit on this, until you provide proof this has happened. Seriously.

Um, there is no right to not have to work and support yourself. If you weren't married it would require two incomes, why is it shocking to get what you want requires two incomes?

Also, men are still paid more than women.

[Hane]

Even in the idyllic 50s, women worked. Both of my grandmas had jobs. My maternal grandma worked as a presser in a dry cleaning place until she had her first kid. They scraped by until my mom was old enough to take over the housework jobs. Then her mom got a part-time job as a janitor in the school that she went to. Her dad worked worked shifts so he often wasn't home after school and my mom had to watch her younger brother and sister and also cook dinner. Her dad had a full-time job in the steel industry, and it paid reasonably well. But he was a blue-collar worker and not an executive, so he couldn't make enough to support a family on one salary. My paternal grandmother did back-breaking labor as a clothes washer. Her situation was different because her husband was blind and couldn't find work. But she certainly wasn't the only mother in that situation where her husband was unable to contribute financially.

As someone who grew up in the '50s and '60s, please let me put in my $0.02:

I grew up in a postwar "housing project" of little Cape Cods and ranch houses (4-5 room houses with single bathrooms, on quarter-acre lots) in a New England factory town. All the dads were blue-collar workers, so no one was rich. Only one mom in the neighborhood had a job; she was a cleaner at the local phone company office and later an operator--her husband was one of those whiny, slack-twisted guys who used to quit his job every time someone looked crosseyed at him, and who gave her no help with the house and their four kids).

But living, overall, was cheaper: My dad's weekly salary equalled the mortgage payment. Houses back then had fewer "things": usually one car, one black-and-white TV, a stove, a fridge, a washing machine. No kid in my neighborhood had his/her own bedroom. People did their own yardwork, sewing, painting, and so on. One mom, who had six kids, baked her own bread when the grocery money got tight.

Most of the dads worked at the industrial jobs that boomed post-WWII, so they were able to give their families comfortable, if not luxurious, lives.

Then, as the late '60s approached, things started getting more expensive. One of the moms realized that her husband, a sweet guy, was never going to conquer the world, so she took a secretarial job while her kids were in school, and started college at night, becoming an art teacher (who won the town's Teacher of the Year award soon thereafter).

Many of us kids had parents who were unable to go to college, so it was expected that we would get a higher education: our parents wanted to give us better lives than they'd had themselves. As we started junior high and high school, many of the moms started getting jobs (often "to pay for the kids' braces," as there was no such thing as dental, let alone orthodontic, insurance). My mom and dad started a part-time real-estate agency; she did the book and phone work while Dad ran the family's neighborhood grocery store.

As the kids got older and the moms had more freedom of movement to do outside work, household finances and conditions started to change: we saw color TVs, clothes dryers, dishwashers, two-car families, garages and extra bathrooms added onto houses, and so on.

Women in intolerable marriages now had the wherewithal to leave. (When I was little, there was a single, whispered-about divorce in the neighborhood: "Mary's husband is a falling-down drunk, and she was right to leave him," said the almost 100% Catholic ladies of the neighborhood.)

So I see feminism as a socio-financial-organic kind of evolution. As much as I originally dreamed of being a SAHM, feminism and the ability to get out there and support myself were what saved my @$$ when my first marriage became untenable.