Why intersectionality is so important in feminism

A great read from Bitch Media on inclusive and intersectional feminism. The current women's rights movement needs to be willing to have more dialogues with individuals who feel marginalized and left out of the movement.

The author writes:

In short, unity is a two-way street. So far, inexperienced white cis feminists have taken up both lanes, assuring that anyone walking a different direction will assimilate into the throng. What's needed now is a movement that can get out of its own way, receiving and internalizing criticism in order to grow. That's the kind of movement I want to be a part of, because it's one that can win—for all of us.

I felt excluded by the pussy hats because what they represented had become the movement's mascot, and it didn't include me. But when I show up to march in protest of the newly reinstated abortion gag order, I'll be happy to wear one, because I recognize the importance of what it represents: a collective effort to liberate many different gender expressions and identities who have been oppressed because of their bodies. It remains to be seen whether I can expect my fellow marchers to return the favor. For the sake of our future and our freedom, I dearly hope I can.

In my opinion, I think that there are a lot of newly aware women who have joined feminist causes, and many of them are white women who are suddenly realizing that sexism effects them too. For many of these women, they are in the early stages of feminist identity development and may be blind to the issues of intersectionality, issues of trans-individuals, issues of women of color. We need to be patient, but not too patient, with bringing our sisters (and brothers; cis, trans, and queer) into the fold of intersectionality. We need to support each other, celebrate our differences, and be willing to converse. We can't move forward without an ongoing dialogue.

Self-Acceptance

I just learned about Style Like U from a podcast that was over a year old (yeah, I'm behind on things!). I just started listening to Phoebe Robinson's podcast Sooo Many White Guys while running. I've never been a podcast person, but with marathon training runs getting longer and longer, I can't keep repeating the same music, so I need something to hold my interest (totally open to recommendations!)

Anyway, I picked Robinson's podcast because I just finished her book (we'll read a few chapters next week). I thought she was funny and smart, and I really liked her writing style. The podcast is her interviewing individuals who are not white guys. The first episode was an interview with the artist Lizzo. I wasn't familiar with Lizzo, but from the clips of her songs in the show, I realized that I had heard her music before (I'm also woefully behind on modern music... I remain stuck in the '80s). The interview was interesting and they had some great discussion, but what caught my attention was the Style Like U project.

I looked it up later that day and was blown away by the videos on the site. Here is Lizzo's. The creator's basically film women (and some men, and some transgender) talking about themselves, their style, their bodies. Mostly the audio is the individual discussing themselves, but occasionally the creators will ask questions. Throughout the videos (each are about 10 minutes), the individual slowly takes off their clothing down to their underwear. Each video has a powerful message as the individual realizes who they are is more than what they wear (both in clothing and metaphorical "armor"). I've watched a few of the videos, and can't wait to watch more.

Revoke my card!

I think my feminist card needs to be revoked.

Just a few minutes ago, my daughter asked which of her two cat figures (identical cats with no sex characteristics) was the daddy. I responded, "that one is the daddy because he's wearing pants." Argh!!!

Feel Good Sunday

Here is a compilation of illustrations that say "fuck you" to beauty standards.

My favorite is this one...

Practice some self love today!

From Everyday Feminism - It isn't about reducing abortions

From: Everyday Feminism - How We Know 'Pro-Life' People Don't Actually Care About Reducing Abortions



For more, check out Jessica Valenti's piece.

Body Size and Body Positivity

I've come across a few interesting articles on body size and body positivity in the last few days.

On Everyday Feminism, Suzannah Weiss discusses some of the negative impact of the body positivity movement. She discusses how promoting ideas of "love your body" and "real women have curves" the body positive movement is doing a disservice to women. There can be strength in body hatred and strength in recognizing the misogynistic views that are placed on female bodies. Promoting loving your body no matter what devalues women's real, lived experience. 

Likewise, describing "real women" as having curves or enough weight for a man to hold merely shifts the "ideal" body from skinny to curvy. Most women will never fit the ideal without severe body modification (lipo to be skinny; implants to be curvy). And sadly, the message remains that a woman's body is for the pleasure of men. Women are encouraged to still view their bodies objectively from the outside and compare it to a standard that would make men happy.

To me, the problem with the body positivity movement is that it is still focused strongly on how the body looks. Women are taught from infancy that their appearance is their value. Women lose connection with their body by dieting, disordered eating, and extreme exercise. Women avoid their bodies and fail to listen to their bodies. Body positivity needs to focus more on the strength within our bodies - how our bodies can carry us throughout the day, how our bodies can produce movement and athleticism, or art and music, or literature and solve equations. We need more body subjectivity and less body objectivity.

On Bust, an author discusses the need for women to be honest with each other about our bodies. Specifically, we need to recognize that the experiences of fat women are different than the experiences of non-fat women. Our intersectionality has become more skilled at recognizing differing experiences of women based on race, but we are often still blind to differing experiences based on body size. The author of this article highlights some of her experiences. 

Being overweight, fat, or obese is still considered a stigma. As a society, we look down on people with stigma. To many, it is still acceptable to make fun of, sneer at, judge, and ridicule people, especially women, who are fat. And as the author points out, even if we aren't directly ridiculing our fat friend, when we complain about our own body and how it isn't good enough or thin enough, we are indirectly ridiculing our friend. We can't dislike the extra 10 lbs we need to lose without implying to our fat friend that her body type is bad and disliked. And as the author states, it is even worse to then turn around to our fat friend and say "but you're beautiful." That's directly lying to their face. 

Body size and body shape is a difficult issue. We've been brainwashed for too long that there is one ideal, skinny, white standard, and everything falling short of this standard is not beautiful. Moreover, the farther it diverts from the standard the more ugly it is. Body positivity needs to be not just loving (or at least accepting) our own bodies, but also celebrating and admiring the diversity of bodies in the world. Large, small, thin, fat, dark, light, round, straight, curvy, abled, disabled. We need to adopt a view that all bodies are beautiful - no standards, no ideals.

A prime example of Post-Feminist beliefs

You have probably seen others share and like the post by "Christy" regarding her feelings about the Women's March. I'm not going to link to it. Many others have also responded to it (for example). It has been bothering me since yesterday morning when I first read it. And while the responses I've read have been good, they left me still bothered and pondering "Christy's" viewpoint.

As I re-read the material we will be discussing this week in class, it struck me that "Christy" is a prime example of post-feminism, or more aptly modern misogyny. Just because "Christy" is female (at least we assume so) doesn't mean she can't be a misogynist; misogyny isn't just the domain of men.

In Modern Misogyny, Kristin Anderson describes the post-feminist movement as the depoliticization of feminist goals. Post-feminism believes the women have achieved equality and feminism is no longer necessary. Importantly, post-feminism discourages collective social action. Anderson goes on to describe post-feminism as depending on coporatist doctrine and neoliberalism and placing women's empowerment in the marketplace. Women are encouraged to achieve equality through buying things. Moreover, women are encouraged to focus on their own selves and self-improvement and transformation. Post-feminism promises freedom and choice in individual decisions. In this way, post-feminism masks structural inequalities and makes women solely responsible for their own success and failure.

Now back to "Christy". Her lack of need to march, to feel like part of a movement stems from post-feminism. As a post-feminist, "Christy" has absorbed the rhetoric that collective action isn't necessary and that women are now equal. She tells us that her voice is heard, her vote counts, and she has control over her body. "Christy" distances herself as strongly as possible from victimhood. Post-feminism demeans victims through victim-blame. Your voice isn't heard - you must not be speaking loudly enough. You don't have control over your body - you must have made mistakes. Victimhood is seen as personal failure to post-feminists. As Anderson says, victimhood is associated with insufficient personal drive. To "Christy", she has achieved equality (of a sort) and doesn't need to march. All of us marchers declaring a lack of equality and rights are being victims. If only we tried harder and bought more things, we wouldn't need to be out on the streets causing a ruckus.

This individualizing discourse, as Anderson discusses, makes us misunderstand our own circumstances, causes us to fail to see structural inequalities, and decreases our empathy for others. "Christy" tries to prove her empathy with her list of "misfortunates" because she knows that no one can argue against those atrocities. But "Christy" fails to see the women and little girls in her own country who need help. Of course we can't ignore the plight of women around the world, but when we can't see the problems in front of our own faces, our farsightedness (inability to see close objects) and lack of empathy are hallmarks of our own privilege.

My assumption about "Christy" is that she has a lot of privilege. She has the privilege to ignore structural inequality. She has the privilege to ignore intersectionality. She has the privilege to ignore the struggles of her mothers, grandmothers, and great-grandmothers. She has the privilege to post to Facebook and gather "likes" from equally privileged others.