The Pratfalls of Feminism.

[ladymirth]

It's rather weird to be defending pro-life when you're pro-choice yourself.

See, the thing is, I DON'T believe that all pro-life activists are misogynists and anti-feminists. I know that the feminist agenda will always include pro-choice, but I don't see why people who cannot agree on only that aspect of feminism should be automatically disqualified from being feminists at all. 

Hence, this huge OT thread on anti_feminism . 

It's really weird. My own pro-choice beliefs are continually parrotted back at me, when all I want to say it that people who believe in pro-life aren't automatically evil. 

I just understand that pro-life women are placed in a rather impossible postion. They believe that abortion is the same as murder, and murder is basically universal morality. So of course saying "that's just your belief, and you can't impose it on me" can't fly with them. But at the same time, a lot of pro-life women care about women's rights too. 

I am honestly confused about this whole "you can be personally pro-life, but it doesn't matter as long as you're politically pro-choice" issue. Isn't pro-choice and pro-life always a political stance? You either think that women should have a choice in the matter, murder or nor murder, or you want the law to intervene and take that choice away. There's no such thing as pro-abortion, after all. 

This is why I get so tired of the feminist movement sometimes. It's as intolerant and narrow-minded as any antiquated church. You can't be feminist if you give up your career and have children, you can't be feminist if you're a devout Christian, you can't be feminist if you don't believe pornography is evil, you can't be feminist if you like blowing men, you can't be feminist if you think that sluts do exist, you can't be feminist, YOU CAN'T BE FEMINIST!

And for the love of the Mother Goddess, STOP BANDYING ABOUT THE WORD "MISOGYNY" LIKE IT'S ON CLEARANCE SALE!!

It's even more fucked up than the Monotheistic Churches. At least they've had centuries to evolve and grasp the concept of tolerance. And they're not in a constant state of war with one another now.  

Would it kill the radicals to admit that they can still disagree on certain issues, fight against each other on certain issues, and still be part of the same damn movement?

And now I'm sitting back thinking that maybe I'm the one who doesn't get it. Maybe I AM 'over-open-minded'. Will I look back on this post in another six months and groan at my own naivete? 

I'm feeling very young and uncertain today.

Comments

[lady-akatari.livejournal.com]

I agree with you, actually.

I'm pro-life, because I'm a complete sucker for small adorable things, but I don't let it influence my politics. And I... I don't know; I don't actually believe in forcing people into courses of action.

But I get strange looks from my liberal friends--"you don't support a woman's right to choose? Are you sure you're a liberal?"--and if I knew more people involved with feminism as an official cause, I'm sure they'd react the same way.

...Of course, it's currently three in the morning for me, and I should be doing schoolwork, so coherence and reliability of sentiments are equally non-guaranteed for me. I just wanted to let you know you're not alone in these opinions.

[pgwfolc.livejournal.com]

I agree with you, for the most part. I just think you may be talking to the wrong feminists. It's a big umbrella, after all, even if some of them don't see it.

OTOH, my sister (who calls herself a feminist and assures me that I better be am one, too) certainly got pressure from her feminist friends to do things like keep her name (rather than taking her husband's) when she married. But the thing is that she doesn't like our last name. It's her choice to take his name...

So, yeah. They can definitely take it too far. But, to me, when it gets down to it... a feminist is someone who wants to see women get equal treatment. Someone who wants to abolish gender bias in all its sundry forms. Equal opportunities, equal pay, etc. And there's been a lot of progress made on that front, but there's a lot to go...

[un-sedentary.livejournal.com]

This is why I get so tired of the feminist movement sometimes. It's as intolerant and narrow-minded as any antiquated church. You can't be feminist if you give up your career and have children, you can't be feminist if you're a devout Christian, you can't be feminist if you don't believe pornography is evil, you can't be feminist if you like blowing men, you can't be feminist if you think that sluts do exist, you can't be feminist, YOU CAN'T BE FEMINIST!

You're talking about radical feminists... I often find that their attitude is more anti-men than pro-equality. Not everyone... but a good percentage.

Staying at home to care for your kids is valid - and when a woman turns on her "sister" to criticise her for placing her family first, we're going into seriously negative and "un-sisterly" territory. Pornography has both men and women in it, so I don't really get the notion that it humiliates women. Not to mention the existance of gay sex, I don't know, is that offensive to women somehow too because it fails to acknowledge their existance? As for blowing men, Samantha from Sex and the City has said it well: "Men, they may have you on your knees, but you've got them by the balls." And, frankly, saying that if you do anything to please a man in bed you are anti-feminist is going back to the days where a woman was expected to lie on her back and take it, which IS anti-feminist. Part of the feminist movement is that women are allowed to enjoy sex and have a lot of it, because, damn it, we do it for reasons other than babies.

Which brings me to my next point. I suppose a sincere pro-life belief is something I can respect. But I can't respect it when it's imposed on me. I'll tell you why, actually, pro-life laws would be a bad thing, without going into a woman's right to choose: because abortions will always exist. Back-alley, coat-hanger abortions that end with the death of the mother half the time, WILL (and do) happen in places where sterile abortion performed by a doctor is outlawed or inaccessible. So the question is, do you force women to get these back-alley abortions and risk their lives, or do you give them a safe venue.

Plus, I also think a woman's right to choose is important, of course. A man can walk away, even if it would be wrong of him (and if the pregnancy is the result of a one-night stand, he might never even know he fathered a child). It's so much harder for a woman to have a baby and give it up for adoption. Not to mention, the 9-month pregnancy will happen to her whether she keeps it or not.

Also, consider that birth control is not infalliable and I've heard of women getting pregnant even while on the pill. Condoms definitely break and leak. So the only way a woman has to guarantee not getting pregnant 100%, is abstinence, while guys can go out and have as much annonymous, responsibility-free sex as they'd like? That's wrong. And also anti-feminist.

[ladymirth.livejournal.com]

I agree with everything you say, especially this one:

I'll tell you why, actually, pro-life laws would be a bad thing, without going into a woman's right to choose: because abortions will always exist. Back-alley, coat-hanger abortions that end with the death of the mother half the time, WILL (and do) happen in places where sterile abortion performed by a doctor is outlawed or inaccessible. So the question is, do you force women to get these back-alley abortions and risk their lives, or do you give them a safe venue.

Which is why McCain saying that "Roe vs Wade was a huge mistake" filled me with horror. You try governing by moral beliefs instead of accounting for human nature and you can damn near destroy a country.

I'll fight pro-life laws tooth and nail, but I'll never label them woman-haters.

As for the porn issue and the mud-slinging and vitriol that involves...don't even get me started. I did a research and presentation on it last semester, and it seems completely impossible for the anti-porn feminists and the sex-positive ones to hold a civil debate with each other. If you're anti-porn you're a sex-hating prude and if you're sex-positive you're a whore and a sellout. AND THEY KEEP LUMPING IN PORN STARS AND PROSTITUTES TOGETHER, WTF?!!! The whole thing sickened me made me find new levels of loathing for Andrea Dworkin.

"Men, they may have you on your knees, but you've got them by the balls."
Haha, how true! Plus, it's actually rather fun. XD

I just hate how radical feminists needs to turn everything into something that resembles an elitist clique. I run into this attitude a lot in fandom and it pisses me the hell off. I hate the cult of the patriarchy but I sure as hell am not going to lie down and take the "cult of the matriarchy" either.

[ladymirth.livejournal.com]

OTOH, my sister (who calls herself a feminist and assures me that I better be am one, too) certainly got pressure from her feminist friends to do things like keep her name (rather than taking her husband's) when she married. But the thing is that she doesn't like our last name. It's her choice to take his name...

Have they no sense of irony?

More and more, I feel like feminists are shooting themselves in the foot by antagonizing each other needlessly and being as rigid and righteous as the patriarchy they claim to oppose. The more rabid they are, the more hypocritical they grow.

Take for instance, the Hillary supporters who are voting for Sarah Palin because she's a ZOMGstrong!woman. Having ovaries aparently makes you stronger. Or something. *headdesk*

[pgwfolc.livejournal.com]

Have they no sense of irony?

No. They're all English majors.

I feel like feminists are shooting themselves in the foot by antagonizing each other needlessly...

The bigger the tent/umbrella/whatever, the more room there is for disagreements. And the less direct, visible, and/or immediate opposition, the less call there is for unity.

The more rabid they are, the more hypocritical they grow.

This is true of just about any standpoint.

As for Palin... it doesn't make sense to me. They're just angry that Hillary didn't get the nom, I think. But yeah, putting the polarity of her reproductive organs (which is no business of theirs in the first place, really) above her actual politics and qualifications (have you seen this vid?)... I just don't get it.

[ladymirth.livejournal.com]

I don't know; I don't actually believe in forcing people into courses of action.

I've seen this said by many people. And I don't understand. If you're pro-choice, you don't have to like abortion, you just need to acknowledge that the woman will have to decide for herself. If you're pro-life, it IS about forcing women not to abort, isn't it?

I don't like abortion. I don't think that life begins at conception but I think that the fetus should be respected more than a "clump of parasitic cells" and I have no patience with party animals who get knocked up and are then like, "I won't have the baby because I'll lose my figure". But I can't judge poor women and runaway teenagers and mentally ill women who are genuinely going to suffer for having the baby. They should be allowed to decide for themselves. Plus, if pro-life laws came into effect, we would be back to coat-hanger abortions and baby trafficking.

Apparently, this makes me personally pro-life but politically pro-choice. Which makes me go "huh?".

[ladymirth.livejournal.com]

No. They're all English majors.

Hahaha!

I can't access YouTube directly on my PC (pesky virus) but if you tell me what the title is, I can find via googlevideo.

[pgwfolc.livejournal.com]

The title is "Who's Sarah Palin?" And yes, if you search for it on Google, it should come up easily enough, and give you this link which is a YouTube frame with a Google Video sidebar.

[ladymirth.livejournal.com]

Thanks, Paul!

Yep, that about sums it up. And people think we can still have civil discussions about this woman?

(Great video, although I could have done without the background music. =/ )

[pgwfolc.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it does sum things up rather well. Surprising what you can do with 5 minutes of video.

I do like the song (kind of grew up with it), but yeah, I'm not really sure what it added to the video.

[fairyinmypants.livejournal.com]

I do consider myself feminist, as I read into feminism in my spare time and identify with its ideas. The commonly misinterpreted beliefs of "you can't be a feminist if you decide to stay at home and have kids, enjoy blowing men, believe in Christianity", etc., just feed on the commonly enforced stereotypes of the feminists and the movement they are apart of. All of those supposed beliefs that you mentioned are associated with the IMAGE of the independent woman, but it is only an image fueled by one of the many double standards that define what independence is. As far as actual feminist ideology goes, there is nothing wrong with wanting to stay home and have children. Everyone should understand that mothering is one of the hardest jobs that anyone can undertake, and one of the most important for any child's development. The feminist movement does not deny this, in fact it glorifies this vital role that women have in people's lives. But to say that the feminist movement rejects the idea of women staying with the kids is even more close-minded because it feeds onto a very stereotypical image of the feminist and trivializes the complexity of any ideology behind the subject of mothering. Again, all of the "standards for a feminist" that you mentioned is a harsh generalization based solely on the image that society/media gives off. It is this image that feminism analyzes and fights against.

[ladymirth.livejournal.com]

But to say that the feminist movement rejects the idea of women staying with the kids is even more close-minded because it feeds onto a very stereotypical image of the feminist and trivializes the complexity of any ideology behind the subject of mothering.

But I'm not talking about stereotypes. I'm not talking about the image that people in general have of feminism. I'm speaking from countless experiences when people who purport themselves to be strong feminists have come out themselves and put down mothers, adult entertainers, sex-positve feminists, Christian women etc.

As for stereotypes, there is no smoke without a fire, after all. Also, the different ideologies of third wave feminism are so varied and most of the time at cross purposes that I cannot accept that the feminist movement as whole can fight against any given stereotype with a united front. Whenever one faction of the feminist movement tries to break down a preconception, another one rises up and actively reinforces it.

I did a research about the porn wars of the 60s and 70s last semester, which is when the first great rifts in the women's movement began. The intolerant viciousness and mud-slinging that began in that era continues in grand tradition today, in mainstream media as well as in fandom. It sickened me so much that I refused to identify as a feminist for a while.

Again, all of the "standards for a feminist" that you mentioned is a harsh generalization based solely on the image that society/media gives off.

Society nothing. I wouldn't even know that this how some feminists think if it weren't for the fact that feminists haven't come out and said this to my face, and if I hadn't encountered women who have suffered disdain at the hands of such feminists.

Mind you, I'm not saying that all feminists are like this. Mostly, it's the radicals. But "radical" is such a relative term, that it's still difficult to single out who the culprits are. Especially since it's usually the case that while a feminist may not hold all the aforesaid stereotypical beliefs, she may still hold a few of them.

Just to be clear, I'm not attacking feminism as a concept. I'm attacking the individuals who are so caught up in their own ideas of what that constitutes that they can't tell when they're being hypocrites.

[faye-lights.livejournal.com]

I agree with what some others have said or suggested here--I am not familiar with the community you refer to or the particular people who are turning you off, but these ideas sound more like a stereotype of feminism rather than feminism itself. Radical feminism was necessary once, but as societies have changed, so has feminism. Consequently, feminism means different things in different cultures and times.

The basic tenet of feminism is that women have the same choices and are treated as equals with men, and if you believe in that, you are a feminist, whether you're a man or a woman. To me, the issue of abortion has nothing to do with that. I know that Roe v. Wade is an important feminist landmark in history. I understand that some feminists see a ban on abortion as an attempt to control women's bodies, but there are many feminists who are pro-life who think of it differently.

I am a feminist. I am also generally politically conservative. I am pro-life. I work full time while my husband takes care of our home. He gets up in the morning and makes my breakfast and packs my lunch. I kept my last name when we married. I shave my legs, wear a bra, keep my hair long, and wear make-up and high heels and even the occasional low-cut blouse.

If women didn't think for themselves, there would be no feminism. Don't let anyone use it to make you feel that you should think like them. That's more fascist than feminist.