"The women of Bikini Kill let guitarist Billy Karren be in their feminist punk band, but only if he's willing to just "do some shit." Being a feminist dude is like that. We may ask you to "do some shit" for the band, but you don't get to be Kathleen Hannah."--@heatherurehere


Showing posts with label Feminism 101. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Feminism 101. Show all posts

Sunday, January 25, 2009

More Than "Feminism 101"

Today I was reminded, in the best possible way, just how interesting and exciting it can be to start to recognize the complexities in the way the world works, in the ways that systems of oppression work. Every day (it seems) I learn something new about the complexities of gender (and race, class, and sexuality, among others) oppression, so I can tap into that excitement on a daily basis. It's easy for me to feel like I haven't learned anything yet, because I'm learning every day. But remembering back to when I was first being introduced to feminist theory makes me remember that the insights come frustratingly quickly when you're first learning about it, and that it was an exciting and scary period.

I was reminded by all of this by a reader who runs an introductory feminist course in South Carolina, who writes:
hello i came across your blog, i run a blog for an introducory women's and gender studies class. Basically the point of my blog is it is a safe area for students write what they think as they aproach the idea of feminism, which in most cases is new to them. i assure you most of the blogs that they post are interesting to read, and it would mean alot to me if you would follow our blog. the site is wearethewave.blogspot.com.


Along with having a perfect title, Wearethewave is a great read. The students are engaged, interesting, and are coming at feminism from an interesting perspective, often trying to reconcile deeply held Christian values with some of what feminist theory is telling them. And there are men in the class, to be sure--and since this is an ally blog for men who identify as feminists, I'd like to share a part of one piece with you, in the hopes that you'll go check out the rest of the blog. Stephen Long writes:
I am a white, upper-middle class, heterosexual male. I am also a Christian. In many ways my religion has perpetuated a patriarchal system of oppression. Sometimes I feel like an outsider in this Introduction to Women’s Studies course because of my privileged status. During class discussions, I feel as though I have had a hand in oppression although I cannot think of any oppression that I have knowingly caused. However, my status has provided me with benefits and protection in a society where race, class, sexuality, and gender intersect to marginalize and oppress women. I recognize that I benefit from a patriarchal system that favors men like me.

As stated in Bell Hooks’ Feminism is for EVERYBODY, feminism is “a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression” (Hooks 1). The fact that most people learn of feminism through a patriarchal mass media is reflected by the common misconception that feminism is anti-male. In actuality, feminism is committed to gender equality and “without males as allies in struggle feminist movement will not progress” (Hooks 12). Statements like this make me feel like feminism is a movement that easily includes men as well as women. I appreciate Hooks’ narrow focus for feminism, too; her definition is so specific.


It's inspiring to know that men (and, of course, people of all genders) are learning about feminism in positive ways, and are, like Mr. Long, really getting it. (And I'm happy that Feminism is for Everybody is being taught, of course!) So what are you waiting for? Go check out Wearethewave.

Saturday, October 20, 2007

Saturday Linky Goodness: Feminism 101 and "Things Happen to Men, Too!"

Tekanji has a fantastic post/FAQ up over at Feminism101 regarding "What’s wrong with saying that things happen to men, too?" (Full disclosure: In her 'other reading' section, she quotes a couple of posts from Feminist Allies, one by me and one by Dave.)

Tekanji's take on the work that men need to do, and the importance that context plays as regards discussions of what hurts men, is particularly lucid:
No one is saying that discussions on men and masculinities shouldn’t go on. It is absolutely important to have dialogue on men’s issues, including discussions on violence done towards men. The thing is, a feminist space — unless the topic is specifically men’s issues — is not the place to have that discussion and neither are spaces (feminist or otherwise) in which the topic is specifically focused on women’s issues. What it boils down to is this: Men, not women, need to be the ones creating the spaces to discuss men’s issues. There are a lot of feminist allies who do this, in fact, and there also a lot of non-feminist (or anti-feminist, if you really want to go there) spaces that are welcoming to this kind of discussion. Thus, the appropriate response to a thread about women is not to post a comment on it about men, but rather to find (or make) a discussion about men.


Now, I consider FA a feminist space. As such, certain types of discussion will be discouraged. But at the same time, I wonder if FA couldn't sometimes be a discussion forum for some of this stuff that many of us deem as inappropriate in some feminist women's spaces. What do y'all think? Is FA an appropriate forum for discussions about men's violence against men? About men and porn? If there were more forums where men could discuss such things, and do some good work in helping men overcome the negatives caused (in part) by conceptions of traditional masculinity, would it be worth having this be (in part) one of those forums?

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Feminists <3 Trannies

[cross-posted to my blog]

So for some reason my friend Jen decided to randomly ask me a question about the intersection of feminism and queer visibility. I know I didn't cover all the bases here, but given that I hacked this together in a few minutes while at work I think it's a pretty good basis for further examination. What do you think? What would you add? What would you change?

Reposted with permission (unabridged), from a chat with a friend:

[2007-07-10 11:20] jen: jen has started a chat with you
[2007-07-10 11:20] da5id: oh hai
[2007-07-10 11:20] jen: why is women's empowerment/strength associated with sexually ambivalent behaviour (drag, androgyny, bisexuality) ?
[2007-07-10 11:20] jen: hello :)
[2007-07-10 11:22] da5id: Because all of those things challenge people to consider the meaning of gender. If one denies the socially constructed nature of gender one cannot work to break down its socially rooted injustices.
[2007-07-10 11:23] da5id: And, um... "ambivalent"?
[2007-07-10 11:23] jen: my professor's phrasing
[2007-07-10 11:23] jen: not mine
[2007-07-10 11:23] jen: what do you mean, by the way
[2007-07-10 11:24] jen: if you're busy, it's cool
[2007-07-10 11:24] da5id: Give your professor this link:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ambivalent
[2007-07-10 11:24] jen: will do
[2007-07-10 11:38] da5id: In order to address women's equality issues (which drive the empowerment/strength stuff), one must first accept that such issues exist. In order to do so, one must ditch essentialism and recognize that gender is a social construct. A great way to do so is to break out of the man/woman binary and show that lines, if they exist at all, are blurry as all hell.
So: person X is bisexual, and this is accepted rather than treated as aberrant. Ergo, bisexuality is an acceptable and natural state. Ergo, there is no strict duality of MSW/WSM, nor is there even a duality of hetero/homo. Things are fluid, and it becomes a whole lot more difficult to pigeon-hole people based on sex and gender.
Also: person Y is a transvestite, and this is accepted rather than treated as aberrant. Ergo, clothing that is commonly seen as either feminine or masculine cannot be strictly associated with one sex. Gender constraints are eroded, forcing observers to relax or even abandon their notion of gender. This means gender is not an absolute. Ergo, it is a social construction. Ergo, it can be changed. Then we are drawn to examine it and ask how it can be changed for the better, leading us back to issues of female empowerment.
[2007-07-10 12:07] jen: sorry i was in a meeting - also, i am in love with you
[2007-07-10 12:07] jen: thank-you for the help
[2007-07-10 12:10] : jen has left the chat.
[2007-07-10 12:16] da5id: No problem.
[2007-07-10 12:17] da5id: Hey, is it okay for me to post this conversation on my blog?
[2007-07-10 12:17] jen: sure
[2007-07-10 12:17] jen: thanks for asking
[2007-07-10 12:17] jen: permission
[2007-07-10 12:18] jen: off to lunch and take care
[2007-07-10 12:19] : jen has left the chat.

Thursday, April 26, 2007