Okay so I know that we've been slacking in terms of updating the blog lately but I actually have a good excuse! I was writing...just not for this blog. Back in June a very good friend of mine invited me to a launch party for a local magazine called Flurt! (the exclamation is part of their name, I'm not just adding exclamation points to every sentence). It quickly made it into my list of favourite feminist websites. Recently I had the opportunity to contribute to their website which was super exciting for me. If you're interested you can check out my piece on Madonna and Pussy Riot and while you're at it check out the rest of the website as well. Thanks SO MUCH for taking the time to read this blog and I promise there will be a new post coming soon!
Thursday 30 August 2012
Wednesday 15 August 2012
Get Off That ATV...It's Pink and You're a Boy
“You don’t want a pink quad do you?”
This is the sentence that got me all worked up last Friday.
Let me provide some context here - I work in an ATV store and we sell a lot of
little quads to a lot of little kids. Our smallest quads come in a variety of
colours including metallic blue, green camo, red, burgundy, black spider, red
spider…and pink camo. I know I sound like I’m launching into a sales pitch but
I’m really about to launch into a rant about gender stereotypes. Although by
the time I’m done you might wish I’d given the sales pitch instead. So anyway,
kids come into the store all the time, they sit on the quads and they beg their
parents to buy one. This was exactly the situation that was taking place on
Friday and it was fairly ordinary except for one little detail. It was a boy on
a pink quad. This is obviously a terrible, terrible thing and must be stopped
immediately. I was doing paperwork at my desk when I hear one of the sales guys
repeatedly said to this little boy “You don’t want a pink quad do you?” “Why
would you want a pink quad?” I spun
around in my chair (I have one of those really big chairs that spins which
allows me to do dramatic things like whirl around suddenly) and said loudly
“Why not?” My co-worker (what do you call someone who is higher up than you but
not your boss? Can you say co-worker?)
didn’t pay any attention, I don’t know if he didn’t hear or was just
ignoring me. The little boy seemed oblivious altogether, he continued to
pretend to ride the quad and ask his dad if he could have it. The father also
ignored the comments about the pink quad. But the sister (who looked about 7)
responded. She said to her brother “They don’t want you to be a girl”. The
sales guy just kept on going, telling this kid that he didn’t want that quad. I walked by and told him to
“stop gender stereotyping!” Once again I am ignored. At this point I decide
that it’s probably a bad idea to go on a feminist rant and make a scene in
front of a customer.
If I had been braver/didn’t care about keeping my job I
would have told him that pink being a “girl’s colour” is a fairly recent
concept that has nothing to do with biology and everything to do with society.
I would have told them that kids should be able to like whatever colours they
choose. And I would have told them that the fact that girl’s colours are so
embarrassing and so bad is gender stratification and teaches girls that their
gender is a negative thing. The “pink is for girls” stuff obviously doesn’t begin at an ATV store. It begins with balloons and cards announcing that “It’s a boy” or “It’s a girl” and little onesies in either blue or pink. So where did these binaries come from? For something that seems so natural in our culture it’s not as old as you think. I’m talking like not even a century old. In fact, all Western babies used to be dressed in white dresses until the age of six, regardless of sex. And when pastel pink and pastel blue were first introduced as baby colours, pink was for boys and blue for girls. A 1918 article from Earshaw’s Infants’ Department said “the generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl”. Various department stores across the U.S. echoed this sentiment. Somehow things changed in the 1940s to the gender-specific colours we’re used to today. Jo B. Paoletti, a historian at the University of Maryland and the author of Pink and Blue: Telling the Girls From the Boys in America says that “What was once a matter of practicality—you dress your baby in white dresses and diapers; white cotton can be bleached—became a matter of ‘Oh my God, if I dress my baby in the wrong thing, they’ll grow up perverted”. Given the historical context of gender-specific colours, my co-worker’s comments about a boy on a pink quad seem ridiculously overdramatic.
What’s also important to note is
that while this boy being on a pink quad was something to deter, I am certain
that if his older sister had gotten on a blue quad, or a black spider quad, or
any other colour for that matter, it would have been completely fine. Dressing
a little boy in pink is treated like an awful thing to do, but dressing a
little girl in blue isn’t a big deal. His sister was exactly right when she
said “they don’t want you to be a girl”. Because it’s true. Your daughter is a
tomboy? Not a big deal (for most families at least). Your son wants to play
with dolls and play fairy princess? Oh my goodness, the apocalypse is coming.
Being a girl is seen as a negative thing, and masculinity is valued over
femininity. This is known as gender stratification (heteropatriarchy, gender
stratification…aren’t you glad feminists came up with words for all the terrible
things society came up with?).
I’m not completely clueless. I
realize that even though colours shouldn’t matter, they do matter. I am aware
that we sell our pink quads and our pink helmets exclusively to females, primarily
because our male customers don’t want pink and our female customers do. But if
a six year old boy comes into our store and hasn’t been taught to stay away
from pink, then we should be celebrating. We shouldn’t be teaching dumb rules
that shouldn’t exist in the first place. Sunday 5 August 2012
Here Comes the Heteropatriarchy: Sexism in Marital Traditions
By Devonne
Heteropatriarchy is present in heterosexual relationships before and after a couple ties the knot. Some of the best examples of heteropatriarchy can be found right at the wedding, in certain romanticized traditions. For starters there’s the whole taking the husband’s name thing. This is super romanticized, if you’re looking for proof just look at the thousands of young girls diaries with Mrs. (boy’s first name) (boy’s last name) written in the margins or take a glance at the recent status update of a not-so-young Facebook friend of mine announcing that she was now Mrs. __________. Because giving up your name and identity to be defined by your marriage to someone else is supposedly super romantic. There’s the argument that “it’s just a name” and it doesn’t really have anything to do with sexism or the role of women in society. Except that when you ask men if they would take their fiancée’s last name they often exclaim “No! That would be so emasculating!” (direct quote from male relative of mine). If it was just a name, men wouldn’t be so opposed to taking a woman’s name. Clearly names do in fact matter. Am I saying that all women shouldn’t take their husband last names? No, I’m not. I just think that’s there’s lots of other options – both keeping their surnames, taking the wife’s surname, hyphenating, combining, making up a whole new name, and I wish people would take the time to think about it and discuss it with their partner before just reverting to sexist tradition. I’ve talked to married women who have regretted changing their name and wish they’d thought more carefully about it. Personally, I don’t know what I would do. I like the idea of having the same name as your husband and your children so I think I’d lean more to the combining/hyphenating direction.
Anyways, let’s move on to another sexist marital tradition, one that occurs at the wedding itself. That lovely moment when the father walks his little girl down the aisle to give her away to her groom. Yeah, thanks but no thanks. This one stems back to the days when marriage was a contract and women were property being transferred from one man to another. I think this one is still pretty common, although I have seen a lot of brides on TV (I went through this phase one summer where I watched TLC wedding shows every day) being walked down the aisle by both their mother and father. Which is a tremendous improvement; it recognizes both parents at least and becomes a little less about male dominance. Recently, my friend went to a same-sex wedding where instead of being “given away” both women walked toward each other with their friends and family surrounding them in a circular formation. Now that is actually romantic and heartwarming. And would completely work for a heterosexual couple too. Ideally I’d like to elope (if I get married) but if for some reason I end up having a wedding, I’m totally picking the walk towards each other thing.
And now for the absolute worst marital tradition of all, the one that prompted me to write this post in the first place. A couple weeks ago I’m watching the finale of The Bachelorette. Now I know The Bachelor/Bachelorette series is trashy, ridiculous, and promotes completely unrealistic ideas about love. It very rarely ever actually results in a marriage (the goal of the show). But just hold off with the judgement over me watching The Bachelorette for a few minutes here. It’s the finale and we’re down to the final two guys. For those of you who have better things to do than watch women obsess over the fact that they’re not married yet while they travel around the world and make out with as many guys as possible, I will fill you in. This is the part where both guys meet the bachelorette’s family. So I’m watching, eating some ice cream, and thinking about how completely adorable Jef (potential suitor #1) is when he just has to go do something stupid like ask Emily’s (the bachelorette’s) father for permission to propose to her. Sigh. He’s not perfect after all. Then contestant #2 (Arie) comes along the next day and…asks Emily’s father the same thing. This happens every season without fail so I was hardly surprised. That doesn’t mean I wasn’t seriously irritated though. There are so many things wrong with this. Firstly, Emily is a 26 year old grown woman. She has a kid. She hardly needs her father’s permission to do anything. I understand that for some people parental approval is extremely important. But to ask the father before you even ask the girl? That makes no sense. Also, he’s not asking her mother. Not because Emily is closer with her father or anything like that. No, no, this is all based on the fact that her father is male and therefore is given the position of power. People who are in favor of this practice argue that it’s traditional and it’s “gentlemanly” and it’s really a “respect” thing. What about respect for the woman? Personally I would feel disrespected if my (hypothetical) boyfriend and father were treating me like property being transferred from one man to another. In fact, I’d be so pissed I would turn down the proposal (although seriously, if anyone thought that asking my Dad for permission to marry me was a good idea they clearly don’t know me at all and we shouldn’t be getting married anyway). I don’t know how common this practice actually is, and from what I’ve heard it’s fading away because it’s pretty old-fashioned. But The Bachelor/Bachelorette shows and internet how to guides on how to ask (they suggest you have a man-to-man conversation. Unless the father is dead, in which case you ask the mother) prove that it has not disappeared. If this sexist tradition is for some reason important to one of the people in the relationship or to the parents of someone in the relationship, here is what I would suggest: sit down with both parents of your fiancé/fiancée and ask for their blessing (rather than their son/daughter’s hand). That way the parents are included without the male dominance crap.
Traditions are never devoid of meaning and we should always look at where that tradition originated from and question why we follow it. We sometimes romanticize sexism, when there are so many other non-sexist and more romantic ways to do things. Weddings are wonderful, joyous occasions. And they would that much more wonderful if they didn’t include heteropatriarchy.
I love weddings. Wedding are fun. Weddings involve three of
my favourite things – dressing up, eating food that someone else is paying for,
and dancing. You know what else I like? Marriage. Love? Commitment? Monogamy?
I’m a big fan of all of that. No, not everyone wants those things, and I
strongly disagree with the idea that everyone would be happier married. But if
you do want those things and you find someone you want them with? Go for it. What
I don’t like is heteropatriarchy. And unfortunately, while I would love to just
enjoy the candy buffet, and dance to Madonna in my brand new pair of heels, the
sexism in marital traditions is just too glaringly obvious.
Heteropatriarchy is a big word – one that my computer
doesn’t even recognize (my iPhone has learned to autocomplete it though, it’s
such a good little feminist in training) but it has a pretty simple definition.
Heteropatriarchy is straight male dominance. Heterosexuality is organized in
such a way that the power that men have in society (patriarchy) gets carried
into romantic relationships. An example of how this works is that in
heterosexual families women do most of the housework and childcare because
that’s how our gender roles are set up. In same-sex marriages you can’t decide
who stays home with the kids and who works or who does the cooking or cleaning
based on gender. So you might actually have to make these decisions based on
logical reasons like who makes more money, or who likes their job more, or who
is a better cook. So when social conservatives talk about how gay marriage
ruins the family? They’re kind of right. It ruins the traditional (aka
patriarchal) family because it shows you can have marriages and families
without dumb gender roles. And that’s a good thing. Heteropatriarchy is present in heterosexual relationships before and after a couple ties the knot. Some of the best examples of heteropatriarchy can be found right at the wedding, in certain romanticized traditions. For starters there’s the whole taking the husband’s name thing. This is super romanticized, if you’re looking for proof just look at the thousands of young girls diaries with Mrs. (boy’s first name) (boy’s last name) written in the margins or take a glance at the recent status update of a not-so-young Facebook friend of mine announcing that she was now Mrs. __________. Because giving up your name and identity to be defined by your marriage to someone else is supposedly super romantic. There’s the argument that “it’s just a name” and it doesn’t really have anything to do with sexism or the role of women in society. Except that when you ask men if they would take their fiancée’s last name they often exclaim “No! That would be so emasculating!” (direct quote from male relative of mine). If it was just a name, men wouldn’t be so opposed to taking a woman’s name. Clearly names do in fact matter. Am I saying that all women shouldn’t take their husband last names? No, I’m not. I just think that’s there’s lots of other options – both keeping their surnames, taking the wife’s surname, hyphenating, combining, making up a whole new name, and I wish people would take the time to think about it and discuss it with their partner before just reverting to sexist tradition. I’ve talked to married women who have regretted changing their name and wish they’d thought more carefully about it. Personally, I don’t know what I would do. I like the idea of having the same name as your husband and your children so I think I’d lean more to the combining/hyphenating direction.
Anyways, let’s move on to another sexist marital tradition, one that occurs at the wedding itself. That lovely moment when the father walks his little girl down the aisle to give her away to her groom. Yeah, thanks but no thanks. This one stems back to the days when marriage was a contract and women were property being transferred from one man to another. I think this one is still pretty common, although I have seen a lot of brides on TV (I went through this phase one summer where I watched TLC wedding shows every day) being walked down the aisle by both their mother and father. Which is a tremendous improvement; it recognizes both parents at least and becomes a little less about male dominance. Recently, my friend went to a same-sex wedding where instead of being “given away” both women walked toward each other with their friends and family surrounding them in a circular formation. Now that is actually romantic and heartwarming. And would completely work for a heterosexual couple too. Ideally I’d like to elope (if I get married) but if for some reason I end up having a wedding, I’m totally picking the walk towards each other thing.
And now for the absolute worst marital tradition of all, the one that prompted me to write this post in the first place. A couple weeks ago I’m watching the finale of The Bachelorette. Now I know The Bachelor/Bachelorette series is trashy, ridiculous, and promotes completely unrealistic ideas about love. It very rarely ever actually results in a marriage (the goal of the show). But just hold off with the judgement over me watching The Bachelorette for a few minutes here. It’s the finale and we’re down to the final two guys. For those of you who have better things to do than watch women obsess over the fact that they’re not married yet while they travel around the world and make out with as many guys as possible, I will fill you in. This is the part where both guys meet the bachelorette’s family. So I’m watching, eating some ice cream, and thinking about how completely adorable Jef (potential suitor #1) is when he just has to go do something stupid like ask Emily’s (the bachelorette’s) father for permission to propose to her. Sigh. He’s not perfect after all. Then contestant #2 (Arie) comes along the next day and…asks Emily’s father the same thing. This happens every season without fail so I was hardly surprised. That doesn’t mean I wasn’t seriously irritated though. There are so many things wrong with this. Firstly, Emily is a 26 year old grown woman. She has a kid. She hardly needs her father’s permission to do anything. I understand that for some people parental approval is extremely important. But to ask the father before you even ask the girl? That makes no sense. Also, he’s not asking her mother. Not because Emily is closer with her father or anything like that. No, no, this is all based on the fact that her father is male and therefore is given the position of power. People who are in favor of this practice argue that it’s traditional and it’s “gentlemanly” and it’s really a “respect” thing. What about respect for the woman? Personally I would feel disrespected if my (hypothetical) boyfriend and father were treating me like property being transferred from one man to another. In fact, I’d be so pissed I would turn down the proposal (although seriously, if anyone thought that asking my Dad for permission to marry me was a good idea they clearly don’t know me at all and we shouldn’t be getting married anyway). I don’t know how common this practice actually is, and from what I’ve heard it’s fading away because it’s pretty old-fashioned. But The Bachelor/Bachelorette shows and internet how to guides on how to ask (they suggest you have a man-to-man conversation. Unless the father is dead, in which case you ask the mother) prove that it has not disappeared. If this sexist tradition is for some reason important to one of the people in the relationship or to the parents of someone in the relationship, here is what I would suggest: sit down with both parents of your fiancé/fiancée and ask for their blessing (rather than their son/daughter’s hand). That way the parents are included without the male dominance crap.
Traditions are never devoid of meaning and we should always look at where that tradition originated from and question why we follow it. We sometimes romanticize sexism, when there are so many other non-sexist and more romantic ways to do things. Weddings are wonderful, joyous occasions. And they would that much more wonderful if they didn’t include heteropatriarchy.
Monday 30 July 2012
An Ode to Marina and the Diamonds
Before we begin our ode to Marina and the
Diamonds, we first want to have a small ode to our feminist friend Rayna. Rayna
is funny, smart, opinionated and she is co-writing this post as a
guest-blogger! Welcome Rayna!
So who exactly is Marina and the Diamonds and
why is she so awesome? Well, she’s Welsh, she’s a pop artist, she’s awesome,
she’s got a beautiful voice, she’s a talented song-writer, she’s awesome, she’s
super stylish…have we mentioned she’s awesome? Have you noticed that we’re saying “she” and
not “they? If you thought this was a band, don’t worry about it. Many a poorly
informed music reviewer has made this mistake, much to our dismay. “She” is a
solo artist and her full name is Marina Diamandis. “The Diamonds” refers to her
fans (which mean we’re Diamonds.Obviously). We’ve been following her career
since her first album, The Family Jewels,
debuted in 2010. Now, two years later, she’s released a new album, Electra Heart. Which we absolutely
adore.
Musically, Marina has been compared to many
artists, including Katy Perry and Lana Del Ray. While Marina’s music can match
other popular artists in being fun and catchy, her lyrics are intellectual and
witty in a way that is hard to rival. The subject matter of her songs ranges
from the American Dream, to love, ambition, and our personal favourite
topic - feminism. It’s a little deeper
than “We danced on table tops and we took too many shots”. And it’s not just
that her lyrics can be interpreted
as feminist. Marina actually says she’s
a feminist, a very rare statement for anyone in today’s pop culture. In an interview with UK magazine Company, when asked if she sees herself as a feminist Marina responds with “Yes...everybody thinks it’s about hairy legged women who hate men. But it’s not”.
Contrast that with Ellie Goulding’s response in the exact same magazine where
she states “No...I don’t give a shit if an artist is male or female, as long as
the music is great. But I don’t think that’s being a feminist, I think that’s
about equality” (Ellie please be directed to blog post one where we define feminism). Feminism has such a negative connotation that most people state they’re not a
feminist as quickly as possible. For
Marina to openly say she’s a feminist and actually understand the meaning of
the word, is a breath of fresh air.
One of our favourite songs from Marina’s new album is “Sex, Yeah”. It sounds like it would be a vapid and
shallow song, but it’s actually a comment on raunch culture and the gender
stereotypes prevalent in Western society. Her lyrics lament that “nothing is
provocative anymore, even for kids,” while telling us to “question what the TV
tells [us]...question good and question bad”. While we are often taught to be
critical thinkers, this message doesn’t usually come from pop songs. The chorus
questions gender roles, wishing that “history could set you free from who you
were supposed to be” and that “sex in our society didn’t tell a girl who she
would be” . We could continue analyzing every line in this song but it’s
probably best if you just listen to it yourself.
Seriously. Go to youtube. Now. Also while you
are there take a couple minutes to watch one of her satirical music videos. We
recommend “Hollywood”,
“Oh No!”, and
“Primadonna”.
We live in a society where pop stars are common role models for young girls. And while that may be an issue in itself, if you’re going to look up to a pop star, Marina, with her confidence, intelligence and outspoken feminism, is a pretty good choice.
Why London 2012 Matters for Women
by Claire
For the first time in the history of the Olympics, every country has sent both female and male athletes, and all sports are open to both men and women. This is a historic moment for female athletes, showing both how far we have come, and how far we have to go.
The last holdout countries were Brunei, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. After a veritable amount of international pressure including suggestions that should they not send female athletes, their male athletes should be disallowed from competing in the games, every single country has complied, though with the stipulation of a number of restrictions being placed upon the female athletes (that do not apply to male athletes.)
Women athletes from Saudi Arabia (which was the last country to agree to send women, a decision made only a few weeks ago) agreed only under the stipulation that women would wear clothing complying with Sharia law (basically everything except the face, hands and feet covered,) they require permission of their male guardians, who must travel with them, and they are not allowed to associate with men other than their male guardians. Yes, these restrictions stem from the religious culture of the area, and we live in a time where we aim to respect all cultures, but it should be pointed out that at one time Western culture was also sexist. Fortunately, we’ve (mostly) moved past that, at least to the point where women can compete at the Olympics in all of the same events as men, without debate.
While these restrictions are blatantly sexist, and it is deplorable that it took 112 years from the time women were first allowed to compete for this moment to come, it is a reason to celebrate, for women everywhere, not just in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Brunei.
Unfortunately, many female athletes are invited to the Olympics on “wild card” invitations, rather than actually qualifying for the events. While the does kind of seem like we’re just placating gender equality activists by just putting women into the Olympics who have no real hope of placing anywhere noteworthy, it is important to bear in mind that many of these women come from places where there are so many barriers to them participating in sports that it is impressive for them to have made it as far as the Olympics. Having female athletes compete, even if they finish in the very last place, minutes after the next competitor, will only help to allow other girls and women to compete and participate in sport, both team and individual. They may finish dead last, but that athlete could be a hero in the eyes of so many little girls who need to be shown that it is okay for them to kick a ball, or to run for miles, despite what their culture may tell them.
The Olympics do not come without their problems. There are politics that get in the way, corporate sponsorships that give unfair advantages to some athletes (ahem, Michael Phelps) and while others live in poverty, there is the sexualization of female athletes, and a host of other problems. But at the very heart of the Olympic games is the fostering of international relations, cooperation and friendship, the celebration of human athletic achievement, and a little (or a lot) of healthy competition. One only needs to looks at the face of the Qatar team’s flag bearer (one of the first female athletes from that country) and the hundreds of other athletes as they walk into the stadium during the opening ceremonies, to understand this.
Victories during the Olympics come in big and small sizes. For some athletes, it is simply the ability to compete in state of the art facilities, which are distant dreams back home. For others, it is achieving a new personal best in their sport. Representing their country on an international level. Meeting new people and learning new ideas. Inspiring Olympic dreams in young athletes. Encouraging someone to take up a new sport. For a select few, setting a new world record. The massive steps towards the universal inclusion of women in the Olympic games is a big victory, one that should be celebrated everywhere.
Sunday 22 July 2012
Why You Should Go See Brave!
By Devonne and Claire
This movie is also different from others in that in displays the relationship between a mother and daughter. Often times, in movies such as these, the mother is absent, usually long-dead. Think about it. Ariel- no mother. Cinderella- no parents (just an evil stepmother). Belle- no mother. Jasmine- no mother. Pocahontas- no mother. Even the princesses who did have mothers (Sleeping Beauty, Mulan,) the relationships between them are never a focus or even an element of the story. These princesses live in worlds of male power where a major source of conflict stems from them disobeying their fathers. In Brave, the main focus is the relationship between Merida and Elinor, and the conflict that stems from their vastly different views on Merida’s future. Elinor is constantly trying to make Merida into more of a “lady,” while Merida continuously defies her mother’s wishes. In the end, their differences are reconciled, and neither was fully right or wrong. Yay for grey area!
One of them many articles written on Brave was an EW piece discussing Merida’s possible lesbianism. Um what? There is absolutely nothing in this film that indicates this. There also nothing that confirms her heterosexuality. Her sexual orientation is not an element of this film because there is no romantic storyline. What is problematic in the EW article is not that she might be a lesbian but that the proof for her being a lesbian is that she doesn’t embody traditional femininity. Entertainment blogger Carina Mackenzie put it best on twitter when she said “there is no indication in the movie that she is attracted to women. That is the criteria for a girl being gay. Not being into into archery, or not wanting to marry an idiot."
Though we loved this movie, we were left wondering if we were 5 year old boys, would we want to go see this film? We don’t really have an answer (maybe because we are not, have never been and never will be, 5 year old boys) but we would speculate that they would not be enticed to go see a movie that is largely about female bonding and conforming to traditional femininity. While the larger issue of conformity vs. individuality does apply to boys we’re not sure if the way it is presented in this film will appeal to a young male audience. One of the problems we see in the film industry is that there is a universal assumption that while girls will go see movies centred around boys, boys will not go to a movie featuring a female protagonist. What was so great about The Hunger Games is that men and women were going to see a movie centred on a female. We are just not sure that Brave accomplishes the same thing for its audience.
One other critique we would have for this movie (and many of the other few movies and books that do portray strong female characters) is that Merida is what our society would call a “tomboy.” Rebelling against gender stereotypes is awesome and there is nothing wrong with the fact she would rather ride her horse than go on a date. However we take issue with the fact that she is a “strong female character” because she is more traditionally masculine. While we’re glad that we (finally) got to see a princess who doesn’t need Prince Charming, we wish that we could relate more to her. Personally both of us possess more traditionally feminine qualities. We like to wear dresses, we don’t hate the colour pink, and we’d rather take dance lessons than play sports. That doesn’t mean that we aren’t strong women, just as women who are more stereotypically masculine are not automatically strong. There are plenty of little girls who are “tomboys” and we’re so happy that they have representations that they can relate to. But we feel like this particular portrayal has been done before (though admittedly not enough) and we’re still waiting for a strong a female character we can relate to. You can paint your nails while still having opinions.
If none of the above reasons have convinced you to go and see Brave, we have two more. One, it’s legitimately a good movie; it’s funny, it’s scary (to Claire anyways,) it’s heartwarming, and the body proportions are comically unrealistic. Also, Merida totally looks exactly like Devonne, which is super cool.
Sunday 8 July 2012
Twittering Feminists
Sometimes things make us mad, or get us excited, or there's links we want to share but we don't have enough to say to write a whole blog post. Sometimes we just want to have a mini 140 character rant. So we started a twitter! If you're on twitter and like our blog you can follow @feminist_issues.
Monday 2 July 2012
No One Asks For It
 |
| photo from http://www.yegslutwalk.com/background/ |
Slutwalk is a protest that was started in 2011 against victim blaming. In January of last year, a Toronto police officer told a group of women that to avoid being raped/sexually assaulted they should "avoid dressing like sluts to in order not to be victimized." Understandably, a few women (all over the country and world) were less than impressed, and decided to take a stand against the tendency in our culture to focus on the behaviour of the victim(s) rather than that of the offender(s). Slutwalk, in it's short history, is a movement that has spread to nearly sixty cities all around the globe.
The 2012 Edmonton Slutwalk is happening on Saturday July 7th, at the Legislature. We hope to see you there! We also wanted to tell you about why we're going.
 |
| photo from http://www.facebook.com/events/373281792720444/#!/events/373281792720444/ |
 |
| Photo by Francesca June, taken from http://www.artandsciencelab.com/ |
Before we get to far along, what exactly is sexual assault? Sexual assault is any form of sexual contact without voluntary consent. This can include forced kissing, fondling, vaginal or anal penetration, and oral sex. By this definition, there is no such thing as "asking for it" because it is non consensual. In North America, 1 in 4 women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime, and 40% of those assaulted won't report the incident to police.
Despite the widespread idea that the way women dress or act is a determining factor in their sexual assault, recent statistics have shown that this really isn't the case. 85% of sexual assaults are perpetrated by people known to the victim (StatsCan 1993), and 75% involve premeditation of some sort by the assailant. |
| Photo from facebook.com/PoliticalGutter |
 |
| http://www.sac.ualberta.ca/CreateChange.aspx |
 |
| photo from http://www.sac.ualberta.ca/CreateChange.aspx |
Victim blaming is not only very prevalent but it's extremely easy to do. When the topic of date rape came up at Devonne's work (due to a newspaper article someone had recently read) a female co-worker of hers said that if she ever found out Devonne was hanging out with "those kinds of boys" she would be in big trouble. Devonne didn't say anything about it at the time, but as she thought about it, she got kind of angry. Who exactly are "those kinds of boys?" Is there some flashing neon sign above their heads saying "DATE RAPIST" that she doesn't know about? Basically what this coworker is saying is that if Devonne some how missed the date rapist flags (and if you know what these are, please do tell,) it would be her fault and she would need to be punished. Because apparently being date raped wouldn't be punishment enough. As annoying as this was, it was most likely well-meaning. But this shows that there is a serious problem in that we believe that we need to lecture girls to not hang out with "those kinds of boys" rather than lecture boys about not being "those kinds of boys." It's not the offenders that would be in "big trouble," according to this coworker, it's the victims. And this coworker of Devonne's has an opinion that is shared by much of our society.
Slutwalk aims to raise awareness about this culture of victim blaming, and thereby end it. Once we start to teach not to rape, rather than to not get raped, we will be on the path to reducing the occurrences of sexual assaults. Whether someone is wearing a bra or a burqa, neither deserves to be raped. So if you agree that victim blaming is wrong, then please come to Edmonton's Slutwalk this Saturday. If you don't live in Edmonton, find out if there is one near you. If there isn't and you're feeling really ambitious, you could even start one yourself!
If you want more information on sexual assault you can visit www.ualberta.ca/sac or www.sac.ab.ca
Both the University of Alberta Sexual Assault Centre and the Sexual Assault Centre of Edmonton offer support, information, and assistance to sexual assualt survivors and their supporters. The U of A Sexual Assault Centre provides drop-in or telephone crisis intervention and can be reached at 780-492-9771. The Sexual Assualt Centre of Edmonton operates a 24 hour crisis line at 780-423-4121.
Sunday 1 July 2012
Chris Brown, Domestic Violence, and Why Your Jokes Aren't Funny.
Warning! If you have struggled, or are struggling with domestic violence, this post may bring up unpleasant thoughts/memories. Please read at your own discretion.
By Claire
Domestic violence is no joke. When I hear a joke about domestic violence it makes me want to throw up.
Violence isn’t funny, it’s not cool, it shouldn’t be used to sell a product, and it shouldn’t be made into entertainment. And it has no place in an intimate relationship.
I’ve never been in an abusive relationship, and (as far as I know) neither have any of my friends or family. But this is an issue that is extremely close to my heart.
I spent three months working at a transition house for women who were leaving abusive relationships. While I was there, I got an up close look at what domestic violence can do to a relationship, to a family, to a child, and to a woman. It rips families apart, it creates impossible monsters out of children, and it can reduce a woman to a shell of her former self.
The organization I worked for tried to help change that. At our shelter, we had room for up to 10 women and 8 children (though at one point I’m pretty sure there were more- it was hard to keep track sometimes.) There, women and children could stay for up to one month (though they certainly wouldn’t kick anyone out onto the street,) and have almost everything taken care of. There were beds, food, a closet full of clothes because many of them women leave with only the clothes on their backs, childcare available for most of the day, a children’s councillor three days a week, and women’s councillors available 24/7. The people working at the shelter were incredibly dedicated to helping these women get back on their feet and start fresh.
And while at points it was incredibly restorative to my faith in humanity to see women come to the shelter broken and leave not whole, but mending, it could be really hard. I would go home and as much as I would try to keep it from getting to me, some days it would. I couldn’t help but think how all of this could have been prevented if these husbands/fiancees/boyfriends/baby daddies/wives/girlfriends (yes, it happens in both hetero and homosexual couples) had just not hit them in the first place.
But domestic abuse is not just hitting and physical violence; it can be emotional, mental, verbal. Certainly physical is the first to come to mind, perhaps because it is the most inherently dangerous. You cannot kill someone with your words, but you can kill someone with your fists. Your words could cause someone to kill themselves, though.
Domestic abuse is not an exclusively feminist issue. There are men who are abused by their wives/girlfriends/boyfriends/fiancees/husbands/partners, and often these men face more of a stigma in admitting they are victims, because our society teaches us that men should be strong, unfeeling, and, well, (for lack of a better word) manly.
But it is not a stretch to say that domestic violence affects a disproportionate number of women. On average in Canada a woman is killed every six days by a current or former partner. That was 67 women in 2009. Today, there is around 3000 women and 2500 children living in shelters. That’s equivalent to the number of people I would have if I tripled the size of my high school. Half of Canadian women have experienced at least one incident of physical or sexual violence since the age of 16.
When will we stop and realize that these numbers are way too high and that enough is enough?
One of the most poignant moments for me is when I was doing my training, and we were given a character, and as a group, we had to go back and forth to various “places” (sheets of paper with “hospital,” “home,” “police station” etc. written on them and placed around the office) as we struggled to escape our abusive relationship. As in many real life situations, mine did not have a happy ending. My character was an immigrant woman, who spoke little English or French, and was eventually raped by her husband, resulting in a difficult pregnancy, complicated by the fact that she was constantly being sent from government agency to agency in the hopes that she could get some kind of assistance and leave her abusive husband. It ended with her heading back to her home, feeling hopeless and let down. It was incredibly eye opening because you could actually feel the frustration. If it was so maddening for me to be constantly walking from one end of the room to the other, how would it feel to be constantly going back and forth between people telling you “sorry, but I can’t help you?”
Domestic violence can be somewhat of a taboo topic in many cultures and societies. In many places in the world, it is still legal for a man to rape his wife. Here in our western society, domestic violence is somewhat less of a taboo topic, though it would seem that isn’t always a good thing. In my opinion, we have become uncomfortably comfortable with domestic violence. As long as it is not happening to us or our loved ones, we can’t be bothered to speak out against it, or not severe enough in our condoning of domestic violence. Which leads me to the eternal poster boy for domestic violence, Chris Brown.
For those of you living under a rock, Chris Brown is a grammy-winning hip hop/R&B artist, who I actually think is really talented- more so than many of today’s popular artists. However, in 2009, the night before the Grammys, at which he and his then-girlfriend Rihanna were both scheduled to perform, he beat Rihanna so badly that she had to go to the hospital. 3 years, a felony assault and uttering threat charge, a couple hundred hours of community service, more than halfway through his five years of probation, and a completed course on domestic violence (I actually read in an article- I wish I could find it now- that some men who are required to take these courses can actually use the time to bond with each other and share tips on how best to hit their partners so that it won’t be noticed,) Brown was invited to perform at the 2012 Grammys. Clearly, people are more than willing to forget what Chris Brown did, and celebrate his successes. He released a song called “Look at Me Now” - can we just pause for a moment and consider how sick this is, in the context of his career slump being because HE FUCKING BEAT HIS GIRLFRIEND?- on an album that, although it won a Grammy, was unpopular with critics because of Brown’s perceived unwillingness to mature and learn from his mistakes. As Sasha Pasulka puts it, “I’m not ok with Chris Brown performing at the Grammys, and I’m not sure why you are.”
Chris Brown shows very little remorse for what he has done. He got off easy with a guilty plea, and avoided jail time. He hired a crisis management team to repair his image.
He must have paid them well, since it would seem no one cares about his actions. We don’t have to forgive Chris Brown but it would seem that a lot of us are ready to anyways.
When someone with a lot of twitter followers points out that what Chris Brown did was wrong and that really he hasn’t done much to own up to it, they are promptly bombarded with messages from the so called “Team Breezy” (AKA the pseudostalker fans of Chris Brown) about how everyone should stop bring up things that happened in the past. During the Grammys this year here’s what Team Breezy was talking about on twitter.
Um, excuse me? No, thank you, I will continue to boycott anything to do with Chris Brown, and I will do so until he is old and dead and rotting in a box in the ground.
It is not ok that people are ok with him. I cannot stress this enough. It is not ok that (as Sasha Pasulka says in the article linked above) when Usher criticized Brown for what he did, Usher was delivered with so much hate from supporters of Chris Brown he had to apologize. Beyonce has plenty of kind words to say to Rihanna, and says them very well- but she says nothing to condemn Chris Brown. Oprah speaks more frankly about domestic violence in this clip (“he hit you once, he will hit you again,”) but she doesn’t say anything about Chris Brown.
So few celebrities have actually spoken out about Chris Brown, and those who have are met bombarded with comments and replies that are often filled with not only hateful speech, but scarily violent vitriol. No person (not even Chris Brown) deserves that.
Though Rihanna has gone on to have considerable success after being abused (as many women do) I think it makes it easier for us all to brush it off, to be content with “well, it obviously wasn’t that bad, look at her now.” As much as I wish that Rihanna had taken the opportunity to speak up for battered women everywhere, I respect her decision to put it behind her and to move on. She has no obligation whatsoever to become a spokesperson for domestic violence. As empowering for abused women everywhere to see that they’re not alone and that domestic violence touches everyone, from all walks of life, as it would have been to see and hear Rihanna speak out, she cannot be blamed for wanting to move on with her life. If I could do one thing to fix this mess, I wish that Rihanna would never have to have her name dragged into this again, and I wish that no one would ever see the police photo of her after she was beaten.
I know it sounds like I’m just beaking on Chris Brown here, but you have to understand that he is a visible representation of all men who beat women. These men are not usually so prominent in our media- I’m not arguing for public shaming to become a regular practice with criminals, but it would be nice if people made Chris Brown remember what he did. Because when he’s swaggering on stages all over the world singing “Look at Me Now,” from his album F.A.M.E.,I’m not sure that he does.
If we do hear about an abuser, it is often after he has been killed by his victim. Recently in Eastern Canada, there is an ongoing case before the courts about a woman who is facing charges of conspiring to commit murder after allegedly trying to hire a hit man (an undercover RCMP officer) to kill her abusive husband. What is being decided in this case will set precedent for other cases of abused wives who kill their husbands as a last resort, in self-defense, or as a result of battered woman syndrome.
This can be quite a polarizing issue, and I’m not 100% sure where I personally stand. I believe that it is fundamentally wrong to harm another human being. So the question is, who is more in the wrong, if both parties are both guilty of a heinous crime?
I think my proposed solution would be to aim for prevention- make it easier for women to leave, put more funding into shelters like the one I worked at, where women are able to start fresh after leaving, and to increase awareness about domestic violence, its warning signs, and how to help someone who is being abused. And if all this fails, and a woman believes she truly has no other way out, and is in danger every day, she must do what she believes she must do. Is all the years of abuse at the hands of the person you’re supposed to be able to trust most not punishment enough?
At the very core of this problem is the subjugation of woman in society. Some men, it would seem, have an insatiable need to feel strong, dominant and powerful, and some do that by exerting power over their wives, girlfriends, etc. Violence breeds violence, and in turn children that have grown up in a home where domestic violence takes place are more likely to either perpetrate it (if they are male) or be victims of it (if they are female.)
We need to stop the cycle of violence in its tracks and teach our children that it is neither ok to hit or to be hit. We also need to talk more about the subject of domestic violence and tell our friends and family that it’s ok if they need to reach out for help at some point and that there is always a way out. I commend TV programs such as “Criminal Minds” and “Glee,” for covering the topic of domestic violence, regardless of how trivially it was done. On “Glee,” for example, I was disappointed that when the topic was first brought up it was used as a “C” storyline, and wasn’t dealt with with a lot of complexity, but I am glad that they didn’t show the storyline being wrapped up nice and tight with a happy ending and instead showed (spoiler alert) Coach Beiste going back to her abusive husband, because that is what really happens. Many women have to try multiple times before they leave for good, whether it’s because they go back to their abusers on their own, because they are not financially independent, or whether their abuser drags them back, or any other of many possible reasons. That is, if concerns about finances, their children, and safety aren’t enough.
Domestic violence can be attributed partially to the rigid gender roles our society forces us to adhere to. The majority of abusers are men, who as young boys are taught that “boys don’t cry,” “real men don’t show emotions,” etc. All of this leads boys and men to bottle their emotions, not showing them and keeping everything inside, to themselves. Because boys and young men are not taught how to properly express and deal with normal, human emotions (including anger) this can often manifest itself as violence. This is clearly demonstrated by the cycle of abuse in an intimate relationship, where at first, there is a “honeymoon” period, where everything is fine and dandy, the man will be kind, attentive, loving and constantly showering the woman with affection and often gifts. Then, tension will slowly build, with the woman usually walking on eggshells, doing everything the man tells her to because she is afraid of the repercussions if she doesn’t. Eventually, the ticking time bomb that is the abuser will explode, usually into a bout of physical violence. After that, he will cycle back to the “honey moon phase” leading to the woman telling herself numerous mantras of “he didn’t mean it, he was just drunk,” “if I hadn’t left the house such a mess, he wouldn’t have been angry,” “he’s just having a tough time at work, things will get better soon.” As much as we all would like to believe that these things are true, they’re probably not. As time carries on, the violent episodes will become more frequent, and the honeymoon phases will become shorter. When the violence ends, it will probably end in one of three ways; she leaves, she kills him or he kills her. Not many of these outcomes have happy endings.
Domestic violence is not funny, it’s not okay, and the people who make jokes about it are not funny, and they are not cool. I’m not okay with anyone hitting anyone else, and I’m not okay with people getting away with crimes that deserve harsher punishment. Clearly, the justice system and society have failed Chris Brown and it has probably failed other men who beat their partners too. So, I implore you; don’t buy Chris Brown’s record. Don’t watch his videos on youtube. Unfollow his twitter and unlike his Facebook. And if you know of a woman that is being abused, or have suspicions, say something. Don’t be an innocent bystander-call the police, call local shelters and hotlines for advice, and pass on the information to the victim.
For more information you can visit http://www.transitionhouse.net, http://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/ , http://www.acws.ca/, or search “women’s shelter [name of your location]” in your favourite search engine. If you are trying to leave an abusive relationship, be sure to cover your tracks, by either clearing your history or using incognito features on your internet browser.
Sources:
Thursday 28 June 2012
Stop Stalking, Stop Shopping, and Start Reading
By Devonne
I spend too much time on the internet. When I'm bored or when I'm procrastinating, I creep people's facebook profiles, I shop online, or I peruse Pinterest. If you're anything like me (and I know I'm not the only one), I have some ideas for you. I'm not suggesting that you give up facebook stalking, gossip sites, or Etsy. I just think there's an argument to be made for sites that are a little more intellectual, don't make you feel guilty afterwards (I have a serious fear that I will accidentally like something and someone will find out I've creeped their profile), and won't cause your paycheque to dissapear. Thus I've decided to devote today's blog post to other blogs/websites. Sites that are pro-feminist (even if they don't explicit call themselves a feminist site) and are too fantastic for me not to share with you. So here is my list of the top four sites you can visit when you're bored, procrastinating, or pretending to work:
I spend too much time on the internet. When I'm bored or when I'm procrastinating, I creep people's facebook profiles, I shop online, or I peruse Pinterest. If you're anything like me (and I know I'm not the only one), I have some ideas for you. I'm not suggesting that you give up facebook stalking, gossip sites, or Etsy. I just think there's an argument to be made for sites that are a little more intellectual, don't make you feel guilty afterwards (I have a serious fear that I will accidentally like something and someone will find out I've creeped their profile), and won't cause your paycheque to dissapear. Thus I've decided to devote today's blog post to other blogs/websites. Sites that are pro-feminist (even if they don't explicit call themselves a feminist site) and are too fantastic for me not to share with you. So here is my list of the top four sites you can visit when you're bored, procrastinating, or pretending to work:
Feministing is awesome. It’s a
feminist blog but with a lot of different bloggers so there’s multiple posts
daily. They post on every feminist issue imaginable – they discuss politics,
movies, books, body image, LGBTQ rights, racism, you name it. Most posts are
very journalistic, they read like newspaper editorials. It’s probably the most
informative feminist site I’ve come across. They cover a lot of US politics in
particular, but they also do some really great analysis of popular books and TV
shows from a feminist perspective. If you haven’t visited Feministing yet, you
are seriously missing out.
Flurt is an Edmonton project that
includes both a printed magazine and a website. I had the opportunity to go to
their magazine launch party last weekend and I picked up a copy while I was
there. The magazine was cool, and included some interesting pieces but what I
got more excited about was their website (which I checked out as soon as I got
home). It’s basically like a feminist Cosmo. While they do have articles
regarding political topics and activism, it’s more lighthearted than
Feministing. They have sections on Sex and Dating, Entertainment, Lifestyle,
etc. I also really like that it’s a local venture. Feministing covers a lot of
US news and I do think that US politics are interesting and relevant. However, it
is great to read a Canadian viewpoint and hear about activism that is actually
happening in my city.
Feminism + Ryan Gosling. It’s
kinda my ideal combination. Basically a Gender Studies student started a tumblr
with pictures of Ryan Gosling saying (imagined) feminist things. Is Ryan
Gosling actually a feminist? I don’t really know. He has said and done things
that could be considered feminist but honestly that’s beside the point. The
tumblr is hilarious and a way to feel intellectual while staring at Ryan
Gosling’s face. It shows that feminism can be fun which is important to keep in mind after a Fox News clip posted
on Feministing has just made your blood boil. Also, this tumblr made me realize
that guys discussing feminism is seriously attractive. Any guy who wants to
talk patriarchy is going to have me enamoured pretty quickly even if he doesn’t
look like Ryan Gosling. Although it wouldn’t hurt if he did look like Ryan
Gosling.
* Feminist Ryan
Gosling is now a book! Which I just pre-ordered off of Amazon because I am super
cool.I also impulse bought the Miss Representation DVD at the same time because it is
the best movie ever.
And everyone should be required by law to see it. #kiddingnotkidding
This self-proclaimed “ladyblogging” site was
co-founded by Zoey Deschanel. Which in my opinion, is all the reason you need
to go check it out. But if Zoey Deschanel’s coolness isn’t enough to convince
you, I’ll give it my best shot. Hello Giggles is a website run by creative,
fun, and intelligent women and in between the sections on cute animals and nail
art is some really great cultural critique (see the Social Studies section).
The site appears to be aimed at tweens, and Zoey describes it as a place for young girls to see strong female role models.
It’s kind of like a younger version of Flurt, fun stuff mixed in with the
serious but without all the reviews of sex toys (I like Flurt a lot but I don’t
know if it was necessary to have an entire section on vibrators). If I had a
little sister, I’d definitely introduce her to Hello Giggles and I’ll probably
visit the site myself from time to time as well.
Thursday 21 June 2012
Why You Should Get Yourself Into A Women's Studies Class ASAP
By Devonne
A little over a year ago I was creating my first year university schedule. I was looking for another elective and thus was browsing the course catalogue when I saw that my school offered Women’s Studies. It sounded interesting and it fit my schedule so I registered. I didn’t know anybody who had taken Women’s Studies and the course description was vague so I really didn’t know what to expect. Within the first week I knew that it was my favourite course. I was in love with Women’s Studies. I would eagerly sit down each week to do my assigned reading because the articles were so interesting it didn’t even feel like school. When the semester finished I couldn’t bear the thought of not having Women’s Studies so I dropped a course I didn’t need so I could take another Women’s Studies course. I was hooked.
I had always been a feminist. I knew that a feminist was someone who believed in equality between men and women and I wasn’t afraid to identify as a feminist. And I wasn’t under any illusions that women had reached full equality. I was aware there was a wage gap, I knew that women were underrepresented in politics, and I knew that there was something wrong with the fact that my mom does 80% of the housework even though both my parents have full time jobs. I also knew deep down inside that my beloved Disney princesses were pretty crappy role models for girls. What I didn’t know was that what my mom was doing was called “The Second Shift” and that this is a widespread situation that was far more complicated (and sexist) than I had thought. I didn’t know why women were so underrepresented in politics. And it turns out that Disney princesses are even worse than I thought (I still secretly like them though. We just have a complicated relationship now). As for sexism in the English language? Gender stratification? Female Chauvinist Pigs? These were things I was surrounded by but had never even thought about before. That’s what happens when you take Women’s Studies. The whole world looks different to you. And while that sounds like a bad thing (because you’re suddenly seeing sexism that you used to just ignore) it’s really a good thing. Because once you identify a problem you can try to change it.
I loved a lot of the courses I took this year. I am super passionate about Ancient Rome. I could talk about the Romans for hours, really I could. The difference between the courses I found interesting and Women’s Studies is that Women’s Studies is applicable to my whole life. The things I learned there will affect how I vote in elections, the type of person I can date, and how I envision my future. It also leads to really awesome discussions between my friends and I (and not just female friends!). I’ve had so many great conversations with my mother about things I was studying in my Women’s Studies class. Like I mentioned earlier, I’ve always been a feminist. Now it’s a part of my identity in a way it never was before and it’s all because of Women’s Studies.
I know that by this time of year most students have already picked their courses for next year. I also know that there’s plenty of time to drop and add courses. So if you are a university student my words of advice to you would be get yourself into a Women’s Studies class ASAP. People are really hesitant about Women’s Studies courses (ex. my friends). I think there are some misconceptions about them which I will be thrilled to clear up for you all.
Myth #1: Women’s Studies courses are taken by crazy, butch, lesbians. People really do think this. My prime example being my father who frequently asked me questions like “have you bought some combat boots to wear to your Women’s Studies class?”. I feel like if you still have this stereotype of what a feminist looks like you probably aren’t reading this blog, but just for the record this is not true at all. Most people in intro Women’s Studies classes were just like me, they took it because it sounded intriguing and it conveniently fit their schedule. They came from various faculties (not just Arts) and I haven’t a clue what their sexual orientations were (nor do I care) but I would presume the percentage of lesbians isn’t any higher than the average course.
Myth #2: Only women can take Women’s Studies. I’m not going to lie, both my Women’s Studies classes were mostly girls. But neither class was all female. Men can and do take Women’s Studies. We had one guy in my 201 class who was from Engineering and didn’t even know what the word feminism meant when he got there. To quote bell hooks “Feminism is for Everybody”!
Myth #3: Women’s Studies only talks about women and feminism. I can’t speak for all programs but my courses also talked about constructions of masculinity, heterosexism, racism, and classicism. It was a lot more diverse in curriculum than I had anticipated.
Myth #4: It’s an “opinion course” and thus you can’t properly test the material. I can see how one might think Women’s Studies courses consist of your prof ranting about her personal opinions but it’s not like that (that would be this blog). Terminology is not opinion and feminist history is not opinion. As for the articles we read in class, we weren’t being tested on whether we agreed or not with the author. What was important was that we understood the author’s argument so we could explain it on a test.
Women’s Studies might sound obscure but in truth it’s offered at a lot of universities. I know for sure that it is offered at the University of Alberta, the University of Toronto (it’s called Women’s and Gender Studies) and Queens (it’s called Gender Studies). And yes, I just spent ten minutes looking at U of T and Queen’s websites just so I could say that. I personally am a U of A student so if you go there and have any questions about the difference between 101 and 201 or want prof recommendations I’d be happy to help you out. Just e-mail ThisIsaFeministIssue@gmail.com.
Saturday 16 June 2012
The V Word
By Devonne
Feminists love the word “vagina”. Seriously, feminists say
“vagina” about as often as junior high girls say “like”. So here’s my
omg-I’m-such-a-bad-feminist-confession:
I don’t think I’ve ever said the word vagina out loud. However, the
absence of the word vagina from my vocabulary is really not that shocking given
that I refer to my bras as “undergarments” and have only recently begun saying
the word “tampon”. Before you assume that I had some sort of prudish upbringing
you should know that my own mother had a laughing fit when I made her order my
drink for me because I was too shy to say “Sex on the Beach”. I’d like to be
clear – I do not think female anatomy, menstruation, or sex is shameful.
Talking like I’m from the Victorian era is just who I am. I have no idea why I
talk the way I do. Maybe I read too much historical fiction when I was younger,
maybe I spent too much time with my grandmother as a child. My strange word
choices extend beyond the realm of womanhood – ex. I’m more likely to say “This is greatly
distressing me” than “This is pissing me off”. Sometimes my terminology is
rather comical – I was having a discussion with my friends about STIs and
referred to one’s “potential lover” instead of “sexual partner” because I
thought it sounded better (my friends actually found the word “lover” more
embarrassing than “sexual partner). I’m
trying to become less easily shocked (note I say “shocked” not “offended”
because I’ve never found these words offensive as long as they’re being used in
the right context) seeing as feminist articles tend to use blunter language
than I’m used to.
However, when I read
that Lisa Brown, a state representative in Michigan recently got banned from
the House for saying “vagina” during a debate on abortion
, I was shocked. And I wasn’t shocked by her word choice, I was shocked because
the banning was completely and utterly ridiculous. Basically Michigan is in the
process of passing a new anti-abortion bill that bans all abortions after 20
weeks and allows no exceptions for women’s health. Naturally some of the female representatives do not support this bill and
are speaking up. Rep. Lisa Brown’s speech was really great, she
argues that the new anti-choice legislation actually infringes on her religious
freedom as she’s Jewish and Jewish law requires abortion if the pregnant woman
is at risk. This is interesting considering a lot of anti-abortionists use
their religious beliefs as their argument for why women shouldn’t have a choice
(because giving someone else choices would obviously infringe on one’s
religious freedoms. Not.) Then Rep. Brown cleverly wrapped up her speech by
telling the house
"I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina, but no means
no." How dare she mention a part of the female body while having a debate
about what females can and cannot do with their bodies! As someone who is
usually uncomfortable with the word “vagina” let me get a few things straight:
1.
Vagina is not a crude or vulgar word. It’s a
medically accurate word used to describe a part of the female body. And
yes, if you’re using it in a certain context (like making a vulgar joke) then
that might make some people uncomfortable (including myself) and probably
wouldn’t be appropriate in a government setting. However, if you’re using it to
refer to female anatomy during a
debate on the female body then that’s totally appropriate and
professional. It would not be offensive if a doctor used said vagina, nor
should it be offensive in a debate on women’s bodies.
2.
It’s actually rather immature to not say vagina
if that is what you’re discussing. When discussing trans-vaginal ultrasounds
(you know that totally medically unnecessary thing where they probe women’s
vaginas before they get an abortion just to violate them) , Virginia politician David Albo referred to it as Trans-V. So he’s totally
uncomfortable saying vagina but is completely okay with legislating on them.
I think Rep. Lisa Brown put it best
herself when she said “What word should I have said?". I mean honestly, there are
lots of other words for vagina but they’re either slang words that would have sounded vulgar or they’re silly
terms that would have made her sound like a little girl.
I’m really sick of politicians who
want to legislate on women’s bodies but are completely terrified of the female
body. I’m also sick of women being left out or silenced out of these debates.
They didn’t want to hear from Rep. Lisa Brown because she was pro-choice so
they simply banned her from the debate. They also banned Rep. Barb Byrum for
speaking out of turn (which is technically a reason to get banned, but reps
speak out of turn all the time from what I hear and they don’t usually get the
book thrown at them). Regardless of your views on abortion, silencing voices is
not the way to have a discussion. Even if the citizens of Michigan disagree
with Brown and Byrum’s views they should be upset that they have legislators
who are being unfairly treated. I know if I was one of their constituents I
would be angry that my representative was unable to weigh in. This is reminiscent
of how earlier this year Republicans had a discussion on birth control, with no
women at it. And when Sandra Fluke (a college student) tried to express her
opinions on why women should have access to birth control, she got called a slut.
Personally I think the debates on
abortion and birth control were dealt with decades ago and to reopen them is
extremely regressive. However, if you want to have a debate, have a real debate
with fair representation. And that means pro-choice female politicians have a
right to speak and to talk about the female body without being told to sit down
and shut up and it means that educated young women like Sandra Fluke have the
right to express their opinions without being ridiculed or slut-shamed.
I just went from never using the
word vagina to using it over a dozen times in this post. I guess that’s what
happens when my inner feminist becomes “greatly distressed”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)