Man-hating feminist?

I want to talk a bit about a particular feminist stereotype, and one I’ve heard a lot. In our culture, even some friends of mine who wouldn’t normally buy into stereotypes about gender, race or sexual orientation (and, of course, just about everyone who does buy into them) do not hesitate to stereotype feminists. This, of course, largely comes with the misguided idea of what feminism is (most people who believe these stereotypes would agree that women do deserve equal pay for equal work, and that therefore they are feminists themselves). However, one of the stereotypes that seems particularly ridiculous to me is the idea that feminists hate men. In fact, it is impossible to believe completely in all of men’s rights without being a feminist.

I recognize that misogyny and misandry are functional terms in that they allow us to define overt types of discrimination, but the use of separate terms gives the false impression that it is possible to separate one of the other. In fact, for every stereotype or societal expectation that says females can’t do something, there is one that says males must do it. And for every stereotype that says females must do something, there is one that says males can’t do it. This poem by Nancy R Smith (more commonly seen in its adapted version) illustrates this point much more beautifully than I could.

This particular issue came to my mind because of a conversation with a (straight) male friend of mine (actually my ex-boyfriend). He was trying to tell me things about how all males think, but of course he was basing it on how he himself thinks. He was trying to defend sexist comments he’d made on the grounds that that’s really how all guys think. I consider my boyfriend to be my best friend, and my broader group of friends consists of mostly males. My ex-boyfriend was trying to tell me that all these guys are actually jerks just like him, but I don’t know it because they censor themselves around me because I’m a girl. I’d like to make a list of the basic points he made, and my responses from a feminist perspective.

Statement: All guys are jerks on the inside, but hide it by censoring themselves around girls.
Feminist response: Males, like females, can be wonderful people or jerks. Some choose to censor themselves around certain people, and some prefer to be themselves. Just because my boyfriend/male friends are males doesn’t mean I should assume they’re fake around me.

Statement: Any time a straight (he didn’t specify this, but I assume he meant it) guy meets a female within his age range, he automatically rates her in terms of physical attractiveness.
Feminist response: This may be true of some guys, and it is certainly how society tells guys to think, but thankfully, there are lots of guys who do not mindlessly follow these expectations. Many guys have minds of their own and are capable of seeing women as individuals. The fact that one guy is shallow does not mean they all are.

Statement: Males, moreso than females, are inherently homophobic.
Feminist response: Males and females have and equal capacity for tolerance, or lack thereof. Homophobic beliefs are societal rather than inherent, and males and females are equally prone to internalizing societal messages.

Statement: Males, moreso than females, always have conventional tastes in the opposite sex (they all like big breasts, blonde hair, thin figures, not too much muscle, etc).
Feminist response: Tastes in women vary from individual straight/bi male (and lesbian/bisexual female), and only a very stereotypical viewpoint suggests that they are looking for the same thing.

Statement: Guys are always thinking about sex and how to get it, and are helpless without it.
Feminist response: A person’s sex drive varies from individual to individual, male and female. Males and females are both equally capable of functioning without sex and thinking about other things.

In every case, the statement made by my ex-boyfriend was an example of misandry (and, because of references to the objectification of women, etc, also misogynistic), and the feminist response was against his anti-male argument. I really think people need to understand that what is anti-male is also anti-female, and what is anti-female is also anti-male. More importantly, what is pro-female, which is feminism, is also pro-male.

I know what it’s like to not fit my gender stereotypes or to meet my gendered expectations. I know what it’s like to be a female who’s expected to be emotional rather than logical. But I also have male friends (ironically enough, my ex-boyfriend is among them) who are hurt when people expect them to never show emotion. People need to understand that far from being about “special rights for women”, feminism is about changing the harmful realities that both males and females face every day.
Read further...

Sex

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about sexual consent, and what’s okay and what isn’t in terms of sexual acts. I believe strongly that any sex between consenting adults is okay, but lately I’ve wanted to define my beliefs more clearly. So here they are: my sexual beliefs.

I believe the following sexual acts are completely natural and normal for anyone who wants to engage in them. None of them should be seen as harmful or degrading, and none should be stigmatized. This list may get a little redundant, but I really wanted to make my point. It should be noted that by “sex” I mean sexual activities of any kind; not just intercourse.

• Sex for money, whether it’s a person’s only option for making a living, or a way for someone with another job to make extra money on the weekends.
• Sex in front of a camera/video camera, whether you plan to sell the results, put them on the internet, send them to your friends, just watch them on your own, or do anything else you like with them.
• Sex while alone.
• Sex with someone of your own gender, of the opposite gender, or of no gender/both genders/anywhere between the genders.
• Sex with multiple people at the same time (of any combination of genders).
• Sex with someone to whom you are related.
• Sex purely for pleasure.
• Sex with someone you just met, be it the start of a relationship or the last time you ever see each other.
• Sex with a different person (or combination of people) each day, or with different people throughout a day.
• Sex while in a sexual relationship (marital or otherwise) with one or more people – either with your relationship partner(s), or with one or more people outside the relationship, or with one or more people in your relationship and one or more people outside it, etc.
• Sex within the context of open relationships, polyfidelitous relationships, “friends with benefits” relationships, gay relationships, straight relationships, monogamous relationships, marital or non-marital relationships, or any other kind of relationship.
• Sex outside any relationship at all.
• Sex with any kind of toys or other objects, or with the aid of pornographic material (either alone or with someone else).
• Safe, sane and consensual BDSM.
• Vanilla sex.
• Sexual kinks of any kind (ie voyeurism, exhibitionism, etc).
• Any type of sex (oral, anal, vaginal, manual, etc).
• Any part of the swinging lifestyle.
• Sex for people of all genders, sexual orientations, races, classes, religions, body types/sizes, and ages (as long as there are no children involved – what defines a child depends on the person, but anyone under the age of twelve is a child).
• Choosing to have no sex at all, whether you’re a male or a female.
  

I believe the following sexual activities to be morally wrong and completely unacceptable, and should be accepted in society. Anything on this list is there because it hurts people.

• Sex in which one or more people involved do not consent to everything being done, keeping in mind that there is no consent unless everyone says yes, even if no one says no (it hurts the person/people who don’t consent)
• Sex in which anyone involved is too drunk/high on drugs, or too young, or not mentally fit to consent (it hurts the person being taken advantage of, even if they claim they want to do it)
• Sex that breaks a rule of a relationship one is in – ie if someone is in a monogamous or polyfidelitous relationship and has sex with someone outside it, or if someone films the sex or tells people about it – and the other person or people in the relationship don’t know about it (it hurts the other person or people in the relationship)
• Dishonest sex – ie lying about not having an STD, not being in a relationship, one’s sexual history, one’s intentions towards their sexual partner(s), etc, (it hurts the person or people being lied to)
• Sex for the purpose of manipulating someone or using it against someone (it hurts the person or people being manipulated and having sex used against them, and it often leads to dishonest sex)
  

I would not condone the following sexual activities, and I would advise people against them, but I do not consider them to be morally wrong.

• Sex without proper protection against STDs and (if one is trying to avoid it) pregnancy
• Sex that is not done carefully and could involve health risks (ie BDSM without the proper precautions such as safe words, engaging in potentially harmful sexual activities without making sure everyone knows what they’re doing)

Read further...

Marriage

So, I suppose it’s probably a bad idea to start out a blog with an issue that, no matter which side I pick, will cause half the feminists to disagree with me. I’ve read some posts lately about feminist marriage in general, especially http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/apr/24/feminist-wedding-jessica-valenti?commentpage=2 this article.

The main question, as I understand it, centres around whether it’s possible for a feminist to get married without compromising his or her ideals. I have to say I strongly believe the answer to that is yes. I can certainly see where people are coming from when they claim that marriage is an inherently patriarchal institution. It has its roots in patriarchy, and many people still view it and practice it in this original, patriarchal sense. But that isn’t how it has to be.

The way I see it, just about everything in life is rooted in the patriarchy. Straight nightclubs are often sexist, but going to a bar doesn’t have to be anti-feminist if you dress for yourself rather than the men looking at you, if you pay for your own drinks, and if you consider yourself to have as much right to refuse/pursue anyone in the bar as the men in there. Even the idea of dating is often viewed in a patriarchal way – if I go to dinner with my boyfriend, people will assume certain things: he asked me out, he’s paying for the date, he will win my heart if he gives me flowers at the end of it, etc. However, going on a date has no sexist implications if we split the cheque and have intelligent conversations rather than confirm to silly gender-based stereotypes.

My point is that marriage is what both people make it. If you want to wear a white dress, take your husband’s surname, walk down the aisle with your father at your side and your female friends behind you to meet your husband with his male friend there, be pronounced “man and wife” and have him “kiss the bride” and put a diamond on your finger, and afterwards have men make speeches about it, you can do that. That’s entering into a traditional, patriarchal institution. However, there are ways to change all those things.

• The white dress: there is no law saying you have to wear white, or even a dress. If you and your partner like to swim together, get married in bathing suits. If you like to ski together, get married in winter coats and goggles. If you want to make a statement about the classist dress codes at formal events, get married in jeans with holes in them and t-shirts. If you’re environmentalists, get married in the most environmentally-friendly clothes there are. This day is about you and your partner, so you can get creative and wear whatever you feel represents you best.
• Taking his surname: well, that one’s obvious. Right now I consider myself to be “Ms -Real Name-”, and if I get married, that won’t change. Naming the kids is another issue, but that’s an issue whether you’re married or not.
• Walking down the aisle: if I ever got married, I would insist upon walking down the aisle with my husband. There are lots of ways to involve your parents/friends in the ceremony, and it doesn’t have to mean the groom chooses his male friends and the bride chooses her female friends. The terms “bridesmaids” and “best man” need not be used.
• There is nothing sexist about wedding vows if you both say exactly the same words in the vows, and leave out any references to “man and wife”.
• There is no rule that says you have to use rings, and certainly no rule that you have to conform to the classist traditions in which the man only cares about the woman if her buys her a big diamond. You could both wear matching, cheap rings.
• Have everyone make speeches, or no one.
• Split the work of wedding planning, don’t get all worked up as though it’s the best day of your life, no stag and doe, and keep the budget small. Obviously any wedding costs a certain amount of money, but by not conforming to the white wedding ideal, you can save a lot of money and spend it on something that can actually benefit you as a couple – like a honeymoon or a house.
• This is the most important one: don’t change your relationship after you’re married. Don’t slip into gender roles or expect your partner to. It’s fairly obvious.

All the things I just listed should really be obvious. Since I have not been planning my wedding since I was two years old, and in fact have not given it any thought until the little thought that was required to write that list (I fully admit it was mostly stolen from the article – I just had a few of my own things to say about some of the items), I know I have only scratched the surface of the ways in which a wedding can be feminist.

Now, I do have my own particular views about marriage. I would not get married because I or my partner felt that we had to do it, or because we felt it would legitimize our relationship. If our relationship were so fragile that we felt it might fail without a contract keeping us together, then I would not consider us close enough to get married. I would also not get married for the sake of being married. I’m only eighteen and I am far too young to know yet if I will ever want to make a lifelong commitment to someone, and I do not fear the possibility that I may never do so. I would not get married because I believe that married relationships are more legitimate or more of a commitment than other ones. However, that doesn’t mean I see no reasons to get married.

Reasons to get married (yes, I am quite fond of lists):

• It's an excuse for an awesome party. If I got married I would keep it low-budget, but the reason I look forward the party isn’t the whole white wedding and all the expensive stuff that’s supposed to surround it. I like the idea of all my and my partner’s friends and family coming together to enjoy themselves, meet each other, and in general (hopefully) have a great time. Obviously there are lots of ways in which you can do that, but whether it’s right or not (and I don’t believe it’s right, but it is true), you will get the most people there if it’s a wedding.
• There are legal benefits. I don’t agree with all of them, like the idea that romantic couples living together deserve more benefits than two best friends living together. However, the legal benefits would be a great help to me and my husband/wife (depending who I married) in our married life. I realize there is also the issue of the equality of these legal benefits. I live in Canada, where same-sex marriage is legal and equal, and I don’t think I’d consider marrying anyone if it weren’t. If I were to marry a man, I would make sure that all services we used would equally extend their services to any same-sex couple.
• It’s a celebration of our love and commitment – not that we need a wedding to do that. If I married someone then every day would be a celebration of this, but a wedding would be one day when we can celebrate it with the many other people we cared about. I like that idea.

Obviously, marriage isn’t for everyone. I judge the quality of a relationship on how healthy and equal the partnership is, how strong the communication and the trust, and how great the commitment. I would not consider anybody else’s personal choice to not get married to make their relationship any less significant or committed. I judge the starting point of a relationship to be the actual beginning of the relationship, rather than the wedding date. And in fact, even if I were to meet someone to whom I wanted to make a lifelong commitment, s/he and I may come to the conclusion that marriage isn’t for us. I just don’t like the idea of not having the option open on the grounds that it’s anti-feminist, when I think marriage is what you make it.
Read further...

Introductory post

So. I’m a Canadian eighteen-year-old and I have decided to start a blog. I decided I should do an introductory post to explain what this blog is going to be about.

I swear that most of my writing will not be nearly as awkward as those two sentences.

For a while now, I have been following a lot of blogs throughout the feminist blogosphere. As a feminist, I find it difficult to find an outlet for my frustrations when I see sexist messages everywhere, and I know I’ll be dismissed if I comment on them. Not that I don’t comment on them in real life, but finding feminist blogs was a welcome relief to me, making me realize I was not the only one who saw things wrong with the world.

Not that I’ve never received these messages before, being a liberal arts student at university. I don’t really know what I want to do afterwards, beyond a vague idea that I can’t be satisfied unless I know that my career is really making a positive difference in the world. Other facts about me that colour the way I see the world, and will therefore affect the content of this blog… I’m Caucasian, middle class, a socialist with an affinity for hippie culture, a Christian (yes, I am also pro-gay, pro-choice, pro-science, believe in evolution and seperation of church and state, etc... I hope to blog about how I put these views alongside my faith), an athlete, a geek, bisexual, in a relationship with a male (it’s been 20 months and unlikely to end soon), and a lover of reading, writing, music and Sarah Haskins (I just re-watched her superspecial – http://current.com/items/89771812_sarah-haskins-in-target-women-super-special.htm – and felt she had to be mentioned).

My doctors cannot agree on exactly which disorder or combination of disorders I have, but I have been diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder, social phobia, avoidant personality disorder, mild Asperger’s syndrome (in childhood only), depression, a non-verbal learning disability and generalized anxiety disorder. I suffer from panic attacks and insomnia off and on, among various symptoms of the above disorders. I’m going to assume that I don’t actually have every single one of them, and to be honest I don’t know exactly which I have. Because I have chosen to avoid medication or therapy, however, I don’t really care. I am completely able-bodied, and those are my only mental… issues. I don’t really know what to call them.

In terms of the gender with which I identify… I don’t quite know. Somewhere between cisgendered and transsexual, somewhere under the giant umbrella of “transgendered” when it’s used in the loosest possible sense, I identify as however I feel that day. Since I’ve basically ruled out sex reassignment surgery or legally changing my name, I’ve figured there’s no sense in worrying about it too much. I will, however, usually refer to myself as female. For the record I certainly don’t claim to not benefit from cis privilege, any more than I would claim not to benefit from white privilege. I would never suggest that I know what it’s like to be transsexual.

I do absolutely consider the internet, including blogging, to be a source of serious journalism. However, I would not like to mislead my readers (and I realize that using the term makes the rather presumptuous leap of faith that I may someday have readers) by claiming this blog is that type of source. I created this blog because I read feminist blogs and strongly agree with many of the points they make, and feel I have similar things to say. I am going to write about my beliefs and ideas in the context of my experiences and society at large. If, by some chance, someone actually reads this, I would to thank them (you?) for taking the time to do so.
Read further...