Feminists and Femininity

Hello love! 
I've been doing a bit of light reading (catching up on your blog), and i have some thoughts: I have been thinking a lot about being a woman these days, and I think there is a vast empty canyon between "girly girls" and feminists. Why has it been so difficult for me to find my own balance? I think it is valuable and important to spend time painting your nails, because you should spend some time on yourself. I also think when it comes to "binders full of women" kind of issues we should feel confident enough to stand up and compete with men. Go take over those jobs ladies! (if you want them). If that means a power suit with shoulder pads, then do it.
UGH!! Why can't we (as women) be feminine and still command the respect we deserve from society? Can you imaging if a female CEO sat down at a board meeting and started breast feeding? The world may explode. But why? Why does one have to undermine or compete with the other? I am a hippie and a business owner who wants to wear red lipstick!!!
We get confused, and think being a girl and being a woman are the same thing. They are not. I've grown out of lip smackers* teen beat, and glitter eye shadow. It's time to grown up, embrace your curves, and take pride in being a woman. With sex appeal, education and ambition.
I have never felt like I was good at being a girl. I do like being a woman though. I am trying to re-invent myself a little bit. Even though I am uncomfortable sometimes, I am wearing red lipstick all the time. It makes me feel good, It makes a statement, and I think like Elizabeth Taylor says: Put on your lipstick, pour yourself a drink, and pull yourself together.
That was a lot, thank you for reading. 
*note: you are never too old for lip smackers. I was only making a point. :)


My Red lipstick rocking friend :),
The short answer is that people are most comfortable with boxes. These boxes are incredibly limiting. It's also a tool used by people to make a group as small and unlikable as possible. Think about how many times you've heard the phrase "I'm not a feminist, but...." So many people don't want to be classified as feminist because anti-feminist push the image of unshaven, no make-up, buzz cut women who look more lumberjack than most men. And let's be honest, not many people enjoy having that image attached to what they stand for.
Personally, I think that's garbage. I always go back to the basic definition: equality between sexes and genders. I think the more diversity to support the cause, the better. One of my favorite pictures is one of a "Votes for Women" march. The women are dressed to the nines in their lace and big skirts with hoops in them. These are not "butch" women. These are ladies with an agenda.  I say rock on red lipstick and whatever else makes you feel bold and your best self.
I think another point you hit on was the difference between being a girl and a woman, and the cutesie make-up being different from the entire make-up (not just cosmetics, but everything that makes up a woman's outward appearance). I was reading in a book called "Cinderella Ate my Daughter" where it discusses how society and the media sexualizes girls from a very, very young age (think baby bikinis). Because of that, women are very good at displaying sexy but not internalizing sexy. Our "sexy" is a display rather than something we feel- I accredit much of this to society and the media's boxes of what we should and shouldn't be.
Why can't I buzz my hair and wear fake eyelashes and red lipstick? Because it conflicts with society's boxes. It's all or nothing. Except it isn't. That's just what you're made to believe.

Much love,
Blythe

Book Review of The Book of Mormon Girl

Yay!  I finished a book.  It seems I do that so infrequently lately, but yesterday during nap time I managed to finish Joanna Brooks' The Book of Mormon Girl.  I want to pick out a few specific points about the book that really touched me, but first, I'd like to write a little bit about how I first came across Joanna Brooks.
About two years ago, I finished my first Women and Gender Studies class.  I had just found out I was pregnant and knew that after my graduation, I would become a full time parent.  To keep my feminism alive and going, I decided to start this blog (Happy Birthday on the 17th).  I needed some extra information if I was going to take this on, however.  I mean, how many feminist Mormons could there be?  That's when Google led me to Ask Mormon Girl, Joanna Brooks' website where she answers questions like Dear Abby for Mormon progressives.  When I read her posts and responses to many questions I had myself, I felt so...  hopeful.  Maybe I could be a good church member and still be me.

Then I bought her book, The Book of Mormon Girl.  And it was amazing.  So much so that instead of writing a short review that discusses again and again how wonderful I thought it was, I am going to pull some quotes that I particularly enjoyed.  This does not summarize the book in any way because the post would go on for days.  These are simply my favorite take-aways.

"'You'll be fine,' Sister Bryson would say, sensing my fear that I had done it all wrong, read wrong, thought wrong, loved wrong, married wrong, lost my way.  'You'll be fine,' she would say, resting her hand on mine, 'because you are searching for truth, and truth is what matters.'"

Since converting, I have heard it from both sides of the fence why I am wrong.  Why I am in trouble.  On the non-Mormon front I am told I am letting this church dictate my life.  I am letting them tell me what I can and can't do, who I can and can't be.  On the Mormon side I am told I lack faith enough, love for my Savior enough.  I am told I lack knowledge and understanding.  There is often been little peace from either side.  As a convert, I felt, and sometimes still feel, that I do not have a spiritual home- religious, yes, but spiritual, no.  The loving words that Sister Bryson imparts, "You'll be fine...because you are searching for truth..." are the ultimate encouragement.  You're not a failed Saint.  

"It is not a doughnut.

It is not a rose.

It is not a plank of wood.

It is not a bus without brakes.

It is not a pearl on a golden chain, nor is it a millstone.

It is neither a fragile treasure nor a heavy burden.

It is nothing that can be damaged, lost, or given away.

It is not an it.  

You, your body, your self-you are not an object lesson.  

You are an ancient spirit in a young body.  You will make choices."

In the chapter leading up to this, Joanna Brooks recounts many of the object lessons taught to her as a youth.  My favorite was the one about the white rose.  She and her fellow Young Women passed around a white rose, smelling and touching it.  After everyone had a turn, the leader explained that everyone would prefer a new, fresh rose to the wilted one everyone had handled.  And thus it was also with your virginity.  I love that Joanna Brooks addresses the object lesson.  Life is so much more fluid and dimensional than a simple object lesson.  It is also a lot more personal.  From the gospel I was taught, you are never ruined with the atonement of Christ.  Rather, we learn from our mistakes and continue on trying to be better selves.    

"I hold my tongue, but I also hold my seat.  This is a church inhabited by people willing to give up their own children for being gay.  This is also the church of Millie Watts and the church of my grandmothers.  This is a church of tenderness and arrogance, of sparking differences and human failings.  There is no unmixing the two."

This gives me courage to stay seated in my classes when the point has gone awry.  I have heard from many people that a problem they see is that the lesson strays from Christ, and I agree.  When this happens- when we begin discussing wars and politics and superfluous thoughts that are not even tangential to Christ, I want to leave.  Not leave the room, leave the building.  In the first sentence, this quote reminds me not to be bullied (not by people and not by ideas).  Keep my seat. I belong here, too.  There is good and bad and we take it together.  

"I don't want to blame anyone.  I want to do what my ancestors did:  look west and dream up a new country for my children... I want a faith as welcoming as a Pioneer Day dinner table set with a thousand cream-of-chicken-soup casseroles and wedding-present Crock-Pots, a table with room enough for everyone:  male and female, black and white, gay and straight, perfect and imperfect, orthodox or unorthodox, Mormon, Jew, or gentile."

This final quote pulls out a Mormonism that I envision.  The wonderful things when Mormons come together with love and celebration (which is absolutely overflowing at celebrations).  The wonderful values seen in families.  The service when there are people in need.  Combine these with acceptance and room for everyone at the table.  Without judgment.  After all, isn't that what our Maker is for?  

This book gave me hope.  It made me feel like I still belong, unorthodox and all.  As far as a book review, I would recommend this to anyone who has grown up in the LDS church, anyone who has ever had a faith crisis, anyone who is grasping or clinging to a religion that felt like home. Five stars.

Tidbits from the week

This week has been hard for me, so there is no real put together topic for this post-  it's going to be a little of this, a little of that.  I started my week seeing another feminist secret this week on the Post Secret Blog.  It served as a reminder to me that we are all hypocrites until we're perfect (which I don't really believe to be attainable in this life), so we need to cut others and ourselves some slack.    To the author of this secret:  You are not a failure-  you need help and support.  Don't we all?

I started my book review for Cinderella Ate My Daughter, by Peggy Orenstein.  Get excited for that because it was excellent book, and I have so much to say about it that it is turning into a huge project simply organizing my thoughts about it.  I feel like I am back in college writing a paper.  Anyone with a daughter-Heck, anyone with a kid or who has been a kid- I think you should read this book.  But more on that whenever I have the time to post my book review.

Last week while shopping for some kiddo stuff, I saw this little number in the infant section.  I haven't worked out the details in my mind, but I would rather my little swim naked than swim in this.  I think it has to do with naked being chalked up to her being a baby, but this swimsuit begin sexualization in infancy.  But how?  I need help identifying what it is that makes it so, but I truly believe naked would be more appropriate.  Please leave your ideas in the comments below.  Or if you feel like being more private about it, email me.

Here's another random:  I have noticed recently that it would seem I am more drawn to music from male musicians.  It's weird.  I noticed this because in trying to update my current listening enjoyment, I was trying to balance the female/ male contributions, but overwhelmingly, my musical taste leans towards male voices, with the exception of the Broadway genre.  In Broadway, I think I like female voices because then the range is good for me to rock out along with them.  I would be really interested in finding some statistics or readings on male versus female musicians.  Is this merely my taste in music or there a reason I lean towards male musicians?

While staying at my mom's over the holiday, Baby had the chance to play with both his toys and some of my childhood toys.  I have to admit, when I saw him playing with both his toy truck and my (now his) dollhouse, it warmed my heart and made me smile.  I've seen this meme going around in which a picture showing matchbox cars tucked into doll furniture is accompanied with the caption that this is what happens when you trying to disprove gender stereotypes.  To that I respond that trying to break gender stereotypes after a child has learned them is hard.  Starting from the get-go is another thing entirely.

Lastly, I have been debating whether or not to march in the Charleston Pride Parade this Saturday.  I really want to, but I'm sure there will be repercussions associated with it.  Does anyone have any experience with this sort of thing?  I would really love ya'll's feedback this week!

Book Review: The Gospel According to Twilight

**Fair Warning:  if you haven't read Twilight, this post contains SPOILERS about the entire saga and Ellen A. Heath's book.  

The Gospel According to Twilight: Women, Sex, and God by Elaine A. Heath

I read this book because, ashamedly, I really enjoyed reading Twilight.  I know.  I am a terrible feminist.  I have also seen all the movies, and again, I am ashamed to admit, I own them.  It's so very entertaining.  Would I rather my daughter grow up emulating Hermoine Granger than Bella Swan?  100 times yes, absolutely. I read one mom say she would allow her daughter to read Twilight only under the condition that she would write a paper after each book explaining the problems with each character and story line.  And yet.....  However, I'll save my Twilight apology for another day.  Or how about I never, ever bring up Twilight again on this blog?  Agreed?  Agreed.

So what did I read about?  The basic gist is Twilight is not very good news for girls, and yet, it is so relate-able because Bella is the epitome of what the media tells girls they are.

From page 38:

"The feelings of self-doubt, shame, and inadequacy come from being indoctrinated with the message that we are not beautiful enough, graceful enough, thin enough, curvy enough, talented enough, athletic enough, rich enough, or sexy enough to actually count.  We girls and women are given a thousand messages a day from television, movies, magazines, and the Web that we are deficient.  Our thighs are too big, our teeth too yellow, our hair too thin, our eyelashes too pale.  Bella is all that.  No wonder so many readers love to hate Bella.  She is us when we are enslaved to the lie.  She is the socially constructed false self that we hate but from which we find it hard to escape."

Another theme that Heath looks into is violence made normal in this love story.  Almost every female character in the Twilight saga experiences some kind of violence by the hands of a man or men, but let's focus on the (so-called) heroine of the story Bella.  The saga would be much less problematic if Edward's and Jacob's violent tendencies were not constantly justified by their "love" for Bella.  Heath discusses characteristics of Edward that are Red Flags for anyone familiar with domestic violence*.  First off, he is controlling as all get out (is "all get out" a southern expression?).  He demands to know where Bella is and who she is with;  he even uses Alice when he can't read Bella's mind.  He stalks Bella by sneaking into her room and watching her sleep.  Heath links the justification of these qualities with the justification of domestic violence:  He just loves her so much.  He wants to protect her.  He can't control himself because he loves her.  "[A]busive men," explains Heath, "use manipulation, 'reasonable' explanations, and other maneuvers...to keep their victims confused and under obligation to forgive and endure unacceptable behavior." 

 Elaine A. Heath's book analyzes Twilight under the microscope of women, sex, and God.  I will admit to skimming over the God section because if it is one thing that annoys me as much as Mormons preaching culture as doctrine, it's a non-Mormon teaching me about Mormon doctrine.  Heath pulls a lot of Let me explain LDS theology in her book, and I just don't dig it.  Other people might, I just find more often than not, when a person analyzes a religion they haven't studied in depth, she tends to get it wrong.  As a whole, I wasn't super impressed with this book.  It was very basic without enough analytical depth for my taste.  Two stars out of five...maybe? 

*When I use the term "domestic violence," I am referring to violence that occurs within an intimate relationship, whether it be spouses or paramours.  

Resisting the shame game

Let's talk about folkways and mores.  First off, I'm going to consult my handy dandy basic sociology text book (I like Michael Kimmel and Amy Aronson's Sociology Now, but that's probably because I love Michael Kimmel).

Folkways: relatively weak and informal norms that are the result of patterns of action, such as "manners"- infractions are noticed but seldom punished.

That's a more.... Yeah... couldn't resist

Mores: (mawr-eyz) informally enforced norms based on strong moral values, which are viewed as essential to the proper functioning of a group- but no law is enforcing them.  An example of this is a showing up to a job interview in pajamas and wet hair.  There's no law against it, but you're probably not going to get the job.

I think it is important to make these distinctions because one of my favorite anti-feminist arguments is "Show me where the law creates inequality."  While I believe that if I had a law degree I would be able to do just that, I do not, so I'll let that rest.  For now.  However, folkways and, even more importantly, mores are incredibly sexist.  

But that's not what I came here to talk to you about.  

I came to talk about how many mores are enforced in American culture with shame, and quite frankly, I've said it before and here I go again:

We need to cut that garbage out.  

boat dwellers

If it's one thing sociology has taught me it's that people go about their daily lives in very different manners.  There is usually not a better or worse, merely a difference in what makes people happy.  For example, how often do you think these boat dwelling people get asked when they want to settle down and get a home or how they won't be able to continue this life when they have children?  It's a shame mechanism.  They could just as easily turn the shame around and say, "Doesn't it bother you to be in so much debt with a mortgage, car payments, bills, and commitments that are so restraining?"  Shame goes 'round and 'round, and we need to cut that garbage out.  

Shaming other people is an act of trying to normalize or elevate another way of life (usually the shamer's preferred life).  The way I see it, no one else's happiness or choice of life style affects mine unless I allow it to, so why would I would shame anyone else?  Understanding this has been key to my letting go of what others want my life to be.

I see this a lot in child rearing, and in particular, breastfeeding.  It seems everyone has a very staunch position on breastfeeding one way or the other.  Parenting (and life) is about choices and making choices that work for you and your family.  What works for my family is breastfeeding, attachment parenting, and flexibility.  I stand by that, and I won't be shamed or corralled into schedules or early weening.  On the other hand, pro-breastfeed-ers need to understand that is not the best choice for many people.  I also believe that natural birth is the best choice for my family if it is an option.  Other women believe that planned Cesareans are the best for their family.  Word.  You do what you need to do.  That is your choice.  

One facet of feminism that I really like is the openness to knowledge.  I believe that everyone should have the opportunity to gain every piece of knowledge about their bodies and life and family so that they can make informed decisions for their life, including but not limited to birth options (birthing centers, hospitals, and homebirths) and breastfeeding (breastfeeding exclusively for as long as is beneficial, breastfeeding and formula, formula only).  Gather all the knowledge, and then be comfortable in your decision. Don't shame anyone else decision, and don't let anyone else shame yours!  

To Read List

My sister is getting married next month.  I get to hang out on a tropical island for a week in attendance of her wedding.  I am so excited.  I am looking forward to good food and playing with the baby in the pools and having very few responsibilities (besides baby, of course).  I am also looking forward to reading. Woot!  I'm compiling a list of books from which to choose my vacation reading.  I haven't read any of them, so if anyone has any thoughts/ recommendations, let me know!

Reading List 

Beyond the Sling by Mayim Bialik

Cinderella Ate my Daughter by Peggy Orenstein

Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys by Teresa Barker

The Gospel According to Twilight: Women, Sex, and God by Elaine A. Heath

Like I said, really excited.  

Debunk the Funk / 3. All Feminists are the Same

You might be a radical if...

This is a fun post (particularly after the comments on the the last post).  There are many, many, many, many types of feminists out there with the only solidifying factor being that we all believe equality should be more salient than sex or gender (sex being one's anatomy, gender being one's actions and identity).  There are so many types with one or two differences that there is hardly even space (or attention span) to type or read them all.  However, according to sociologists, most types of feminism fit into one of three categories:  Liberal, Radical, and Global (or multicultural).

Liberal feminism focuses on reform, both social and legal- basically a fix it attitude.
Radicals, on the other hand, more or less feel that the only way to achieve equality is to start fresh sans patriarchy as a whole.  This includes all institutions that are modeled after a patriarchy including but not limited to government, religion, and schooling.
Global focuses on the interaction of age, race, class, etc and gender.  I think this category is exemplified by an experience of Michael Kimmel (awesome, awesome, awesome sociologist and friend of feminists everywhere).

Michael Kimmel, author of
The Guy's Guide to Feminism

A white woman and a black woman were discussing whether all women were, by definition, "Sisters," because they all had essentially the same experiences and because all women faced a common oppression by men. The white woman asserted that the fact that they were both women bonded them, in spite of racial differences. The black woman disagreed.
"When you wake up in the morning and look in the mirror, what do you see?" she asked.
"I see a woman," replied the white woman.
"That's precisely the problem," responded the black woman. "I see a black woman. To me, race is visible every day, because race is how I am not privileged in our culture. Race is invisible to you, because it's how you are privileged. It's why there will always be differences in our experience."


That story in and of itself shows just how diverse feminists can be simply because of other life factors.  However,  even more than these separate categories, here are some other factors that vary from feminist to feminist:

1. Pro Life or Pro Choice.  Don't be fooled- some feminists would have you believe that in order to be a TRUE feminist you must be Pro Choice, but that is simply NOT the case.
2. Some feminists believe that men and women are actually incredibly different by nature, meant for different roles in life, yet are of equal importance.
3. Some feminist are loud, noisy activists.  Some are quiet, subtle activists.  I tried subtle for a while.  Apparently not my strong suit.  
4. Some feminists are angry.  Some are hopeful.  Some are both.
5. Some feminists are conservatives, some are liberals.  
6. Some feminists are religious, some are not.
7. Some are young, some are old.
8. Some are men!
9. Some oppose gay marriage, some do not.
10. Some don't realize they are feminists.

Being a feminist has one requirement:  believing in equality regardless of gender.  Everything else is an individual quality of a particular feminist.  What makes you unique?

A Bell Hooks Approach to Feminist Parenting

My son is four months old, but since that won't last forever, I have been researching how to raise a feminist child.  Some people will tell you that raising a feminist boy is different from raising a feminist girl.  I haven't made up my mind on the subject just yet.  This is the first of many posts that I will write giving varied perspectives of feminist parenting.  I do not necessarily hold the same opinions.  I am simply sharing what I find. 

One thing that did jump out at me in my reading for the evening was a piece on feminist parenting by Bell Hooks, a personal hero of mine.  She was describing how the physical discipline of children can influence their ideas of battered women.  This may seem like a stretch-  it seemed that way to me at first.  In her book Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics, Bell Hooks writes,

I often tell the story of being at a fancy dinner party where a woman is describing the way she disciplines her young son by pinching him hard, clamping down on his little flesh for as long as it takes to control him.  And how everyone applauded her willingness to be a disciplinarian.  I shared the awareness that her behavior was abusive, that she was potentially planting the seed for this male child to grow up and be abusive to women.  Significantly, I told the audience of listeners that if we had heard a man telling us how he just clamps down on a woman's flesh, pinching her hard to control her behavior it would have been immediately acknowledge as abusive.  Yet when a child is being hurt this form of negative domination is condoned.  

 She goes on to say that children have no civil liberties and are often viewed as property of the parent.  This physical power that a parent can exert over a child translates into a person who can physically dominate another will/should do so to maintain control.  Honestly, the two were apples and oranges to me until reading this book, and perhaps they still are.  It's an interesting perspective.

Hubby and I were discussing this in the car.  He's my skeptic on all things that go against cultural inertia, so I like to get his opinion on such things.  He said he understood what Bell Hooks was saying, but it is a parent's job to teach a child how to behave whereas that is not the case of a spouse.

I would have to say my current thoughts are that discipline is a not multiple choice where all answers are mutually exclusive, but rather a continuum where generally the parent knows the child best.  I was a recipient of the occassional spanking and I will absolutely, 100% not stand for violence against women. 

But then I look again, and maybe there is something to what Bell Hooks has to offer....

How does this sit with you?

**On a side note, this is not to say that either of us agree with the idea of using physical punishment to correct behavior but rather for argument's sake.  We have yet to get to a place in our parenting where discipline plays a role at all, but we had discussed the need for a pop on the bum to get a clear understanding to a child who isn't listening and the consequence could be dangerous (such as touching a hot stove).  However, I will not assume a position on that or presume anyone else has it right or wrong until I have hit that place in my parenting. **