Misogyny or smart business practice?http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/offbeat/2007/07/22/douglas.bikini.lawn.affl
For those of you who can’t see the video, it’s a lawn-care service that features women doing yard work in bikinis. The concept here is to sell sex appeal, of course. As patriarchy would have it, the person in charge of the operation is an old, white man.
I don’t know, to me, there’s something pretty sick about posing women in bikinis to do yard work, as a way to make money for your business. I also wonder who is more at fault: the guy who runs this company, the people who come to these women for yard work, or the women themselves for working for this company?
Better yet, CNN passes this off as a story that's lighthearted. But, a discussion and showing to a few feminist friends of mine produced red flags all over the place. I wonder how an organization like CNN can run a story like this, in a satirical kind of way, and not actually ask the "hard" questions as the reported claimed he needed to ask.
I'd like to write CNN.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Friday, June 29, 2007
"Unhooked: How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love and Lose at Both."
Has anyone read a book called "Unhooked: How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love and Lose At Both"? I heard about this book from a feminist I'd been working with on some student activism issues, and also heard a few of my female friends mention it. Last week, in that emotional fall out, I decided to sit down and read the whole book - and I've got to tell you, I've never been so confused by a book in my life.
By the time I finish any book, I can always tell if I hated it liked it, but I don't really know with this book.It brings up a good point and takes a stand against sex-positive feminism in taking the position that sexual politics and the power thereof do not translate into true political power in feminism. In fact, it might add to the plight of women. Just from that chapter alone, one could write a whole damned essay on feminist theories and personal responsibility.
But at the same time, it also covers the lives of college students and the "hook-up" culture, featuring the lives of many young women who, caught up in the casual sex culture, were unable to have healthy, loving relationships. Its attribution is, as if, somehow casual sex leads to an inability to love.Furthermore, it treats heartbreaks, broken relationships, unrequited love (or as I like to call it, unrequited interest, as "love" is built in a relationship, and not just through mere association with someone) as if they are cataclysmic events that are harmful to young women and men. They are not. They are pretty healthy. They are a part of being an adult and social interaction. I've bad my share of bad (as well as good) relationships, unrequited interests, and all those things covered in the book, and it's only made me a better person. So, I am failing to understand the author’s point.
What I find problematic is that the author presupposes that, somehow, we can't have both. She supposes that, somehow, without love, that college students will grow old to be like that lady in "Great Expectations," sitting at home wth a bunch of cats.
What if, it's just that college students - and especially ambitious ones, are being promicuous because they've not yet (since their standards and dreams are so high) found the person who is fitting enough to love? Does this mean, then, that they ought to throw away the condoms, stay away from the bars, and just be old and boring?
It also talks about the academic challenges of college and how, because careers and academics are considered more important than love, many women are choosing the formers over the latter, and instead, choosing to “hook-up.” I get a sense, and perhaps I am being defensive here, that the author is advocating love and marriage over academic and career achievements. This, for me, opens a whole other dialogue about that Betty Friedan brought up in the “Feminine Mystique,” which, ironically, was mentioned in the book.
The book also attributes the casual sex culture with the Vagina Monologues and my favorite play, "Because He Liked to look at it." Its message was, essentially, raising awareness about female sexuality has somehow been responsible for the sexual behavior of women that ended up hurting them. I am not a big fan of using the play as political activism, but I don’t like the idea of bashing it.
My biggest issue with the book is, like many other studies of sexuality, it only addresses relationships in a heterosexual sense. There are many of my friends who go through the same “hook-up” culture as homosexuals, both males and females.I don't know …the majority of the book reads like a bad episode of Real Life or Queer as Folk (straight style), but it also brings up very interesting feminist perspectives, weaving together the various movements and waves. If nothing else, it's making me think.
In all, it's a good book. There are some quite touching parts to the book, while other parts just makes me want to throw the book out the window. It’s sort of like a roommate – sometimes you love it, sometimes you hate it.Bottom line I drew from this book: everything in moderation in terms of both casual sex and falling in love. I don't think the author said this, but it's what I drew from it.
There's Marc Loi's creative nature at work for you.I don't know what to make of this book …but, if you feel like discussing it, the copy I currently have is yours. Drop by the house any time and pick it up.
By the time I finish any book, I can always tell if I hated it liked it, but I don't really know with this book.It brings up a good point and takes a stand against sex-positive feminism in taking the position that sexual politics and the power thereof do not translate into true political power in feminism. In fact, it might add to the plight of women. Just from that chapter alone, one could write a whole damned essay on feminist theories and personal responsibility.
But at the same time, it also covers the lives of college students and the "hook-up" culture, featuring the lives of many young women who, caught up in the casual sex culture, were unable to have healthy, loving relationships. Its attribution is, as if, somehow casual sex leads to an inability to love.Furthermore, it treats heartbreaks, broken relationships, unrequited love (or as I like to call it, unrequited interest, as "love" is built in a relationship, and not just through mere association with someone) as if they are cataclysmic events that are harmful to young women and men. They are not. They are pretty healthy. They are a part of being an adult and social interaction. I've bad my share of bad (as well as good) relationships, unrequited interests, and all those things covered in the book, and it's only made me a better person. So, I am failing to understand the author’s point.
What I find problematic is that the author presupposes that, somehow, we can't have both. She supposes that, somehow, without love, that college students will grow old to be like that lady in "Great Expectations," sitting at home wth a bunch of cats.
What if, it's just that college students - and especially ambitious ones, are being promicuous because they've not yet (since their standards and dreams are so high) found the person who is fitting enough to love? Does this mean, then, that they ought to throw away the condoms, stay away from the bars, and just be old and boring?
It also talks about the academic challenges of college and how, because careers and academics are considered more important than love, many women are choosing the formers over the latter, and instead, choosing to “hook-up.” I get a sense, and perhaps I am being defensive here, that the author is advocating love and marriage over academic and career achievements. This, for me, opens a whole other dialogue about that Betty Friedan brought up in the “Feminine Mystique,” which, ironically, was mentioned in the book.
The book also attributes the casual sex culture with the Vagina Monologues and my favorite play, "Because He Liked to look at it." Its message was, essentially, raising awareness about female sexuality has somehow been responsible for the sexual behavior of women that ended up hurting them. I am not a big fan of using the play as political activism, but I don’t like the idea of bashing it.
My biggest issue with the book is, like many other studies of sexuality, it only addresses relationships in a heterosexual sense. There are many of my friends who go through the same “hook-up” culture as homosexuals, both males and females.I don't know …the majority of the book reads like a bad episode of Real Life or Queer as Folk (straight style), but it also brings up very interesting feminist perspectives, weaving together the various movements and waves. If nothing else, it's making me think.
In all, it's a good book. There are some quite touching parts to the book, while other parts just makes me want to throw the book out the window. It’s sort of like a roommate – sometimes you love it, sometimes you hate it.Bottom line I drew from this book: everything in moderation in terms of both casual sex and falling in love. I don't think the author said this, but it's what I drew from it.
There's Marc Loi's creative nature at work for you.I don't know what to make of this book …but, if you feel like discussing it, the copy I currently have is yours. Drop by the house any time and pick it up.
Rise of violence against women
I don't know if you've noticed the same trends, but I am very disturbed that in the past weeks, there seems to be a rise in violence against women. The college student in New York who was abducted and killed, the man who killed his family and shot himself on the freeway in middle America, the police officer who killed his pregnant wife, and now, the professional wrestler who supposedly (and allegedly) killed his wife and child - there seems to be a rise in violence against women.
In all these news stories, the focus is always on the "investigation," but never is feminist thought applied to this - asking why the rise in violence against women? Or, perhaps, is it that the media is merely focusing more on these cases now, being bored with Iraq and having nothing to report about the violations of the Bush Administration?
I assert this: violence against women can be blamed by the culture in which we live in, the one that eroticizes violence and misogyny. Take a look around you - the magazine ads that feature women in the trunk of a vehicle, diamonds that are depicting women lying on the floor with phrases like "to die for," video games that feature violence against women, television shows that show women being murdered.
Do a quick online search and you'll find a host of Web sites devoted to "erotica" that's devoted to rape and forced sex. All of these factors, I think, seap into our conciousness and tell us, as a people, that they're all "natural." No matter how intellectual, advanced and intelligent a society, such thoughts will become socially accepted norms.
One thing I've learned, as a feminist scholar, is that what is "natural" has to be challenged, its agency put into question - with us asking the questions of who the creators of these rules were, and more importantly, why these rules exist.I don't know how to deal with the prevelance of sex and violence on TV. Some parts of me, a more primal, animalistic part, still thinks the idea of being able to "reach out and touch somebody" with an M-16, being 500 meters away, as something that is powerful. In the bedroom, I still think certain mutually erotic pleasures, are still acceptable. But where do we draw the line?
Do we like these things because they are natural - true to the teeth natural, or are we buying into a violent, misogynistic society's product -- a product that, in the end, hurts one half of our human population? I could easily say "fuck it" and just try to be a good person. But our obligation in life is one that's not just for ourselves and our families, but our community and our nation. What then, shall we do, as "enlightened" feminists, when it comes to sex and violence?Marc
In all these news stories, the focus is always on the "investigation," but never is feminist thought applied to this - asking why the rise in violence against women? Or, perhaps, is it that the media is merely focusing more on these cases now, being bored with Iraq and having nothing to report about the violations of the Bush Administration?
I assert this: violence against women can be blamed by the culture in which we live in, the one that eroticizes violence and misogyny. Take a look around you - the magazine ads that feature women in the trunk of a vehicle, diamonds that are depicting women lying on the floor with phrases like "to die for," video games that feature violence against women, television shows that show women being murdered.
Do a quick online search and you'll find a host of Web sites devoted to "erotica" that's devoted to rape and forced sex. All of these factors, I think, seap into our conciousness and tell us, as a people, that they're all "natural." No matter how intellectual, advanced and intelligent a society, such thoughts will become socially accepted norms.
One thing I've learned, as a feminist scholar, is that what is "natural" has to be challenged, its agency put into question - with us asking the questions of who the creators of these rules were, and more importantly, why these rules exist.I don't know how to deal with the prevelance of sex and violence on TV. Some parts of me, a more primal, animalistic part, still thinks the idea of being able to "reach out and touch somebody" with an M-16, being 500 meters away, as something that is powerful. In the bedroom, I still think certain mutually erotic pleasures, are still acceptable. But where do we draw the line?
Do we like these things because they are natural - true to the teeth natural, or are we buying into a violent, misogynistic society's product -- a product that, in the end, hurts one half of our human population? I could easily say "fuck it" and just try to be a good person. But our obligation in life is one that's not just for ourselves and our families, but our community and our nation. What then, shall we do, as "enlightened" feminists, when it comes to sex and violence?Marc
Monday, May 21, 2007
My pet peeves!
It occured to me that the reason I have been such an asshole as of late is because I have been extremely annoyed by people. From the lady who takes five hours to park to the guy who years stupid ass shirts withstupid slogans, I hate them all. Here are a few other annoyances. Please bare with me. The people on campus who see me in uniform and proceed to rant to me about the liberals and how they are screwing up the country. Guess what? Shut your mouth. I am a liberal and I wear the uniform. Don't assume I am one of you just because I wear an Army uniform. It's annoying.
On that note, when I am having lunch in uniform, don't come up to thank me or offer to buy me lunch. I don't know you and I am not starving. So don't offer to buy me shit. I can pay my own meals and don't need a hand out from you. Besides, if you knew I am a godless liberal fucker, would you be as nice to me?
The Christians who keep on telling me about Jesus and telling me it's good news. Shit. I did not just crawl from under a rock. I've heard that shit. I choose not to believe it. And yot know what else? Don't shake your head and tell me you will pray for me because I've been told and know of Jesus but do not believe? Truth is you may have Jesus, but I have a deadly kick that I might have to introduce to your face.
The girl at the bar who thinks I am supposed to talk to her just because she is hot. No, I am not. I am at the bar to have fun. If you want to talk, you come to me.The guy at the bar who stares at the girls and give them dirty looks but don't have time to talk to them. Grow a pair of balls or poke your eyes out. Sitting there all night looking creepy isn't going to get you laid. Fucking losers.
The creepy fucker who kisses a woman on the hand whe they first meet. You aren't a fucking knight and the is not a queen. You know, it is gay. The only one who looks like a queen in that situation is you. Unless she knows and is comfortable with you, don't even put your mouth near her. I will smack the shit out of you.
The little idiot in a big truck playing country music so loud it makes my head hurt. I get you're a country boy, don't need to advertise it. I can tell my your dumbass mustach and thick accent.
The Navy guys who run around the bars in their Navy outfits, thinking they are the shit. YOU ARE NOT. You are uneducated and common. Get over it. The only time you ever see combat is on your video games, so shut up about how tough life is.
The little fuckers who think the waitresses are in love with them because she is nice. Guess what? BEING NICE TO YOU IS HER JOB! STOP ROAMING YOUR HANDS OR OVER HER OR GIVE HER YOUR PHONE NUMBER. SHE IS NOT INTERESTED.
The girl who, upon finding out I am at feminist, asks me if I am gay. I am not and I can show you! And stop telling me no shit statements like, 'It's their bodies and their choice.' You got anything else, like, oh, I don't know, 'George Bush is an idiot?'In the mall, people who walk like they've got all fucking day. They may have, but I don't. Get the hell out of my way. Especially in military malls. If you and your five kids can't walk fast enough, get the fuck out of my way. And since you get paid on the first and fifteenth, try buying something else other than sweats for a chance.
People who think that just because my parents are Vietnamese, that I am supposed to know how to cook said food. On, I don't know how to make pho, spring rolls, egg rolls, egg plants or anything else. My idea of cooking ethnic is Ramen, so stop asking.
The fuckers who don't get off their cell phones at the check out lines. Have a courtesy to hang up and deal with the cashiers. And make sure you've got your money ready. I don't have all day to stand at Target waiting for you
.The idiots who brag about how much they can drink. It doesn't make you cool. It makes you an alcoholic. Freshman year? Totally acceptable. Anytime after that, you are a loser.
Lastly, any guy who calls a woman anyone of the following after just meeting them: girl, honey, babe, darling, sweetheart or any terms of endearment. Shit. It is insulting. When I heard a guy call a food server at Orlando International Airport that a few months ago, I threatened to shove my fist down his throat. Next time, I won't be a threat.
And you know what else? The idiots near the student parking lot who take their sweet ass time to walk, while I am late for class. And the little fuckers who take forever to order food. It's not like ordering at Taco Bell is that complicated. It's not a gourmet meal.And people who don't say thank you when I hold the door for them. Next time, I will slam it in their face.
The couple who walks through a crowded place still holding hands and getting into everyone's way. It's not like anyone is going to mistake them for anything else but a couple because they both look perfectly stupid enough for each other.
Also, the idiot on the subway who doesn't know how to stay away from the door and has to be told five times to step away from it. Also, extremely fat but otherwise healthy people who refuse to give up seats to old people on the train. Selfish shits.
While I am at it, there are a couple more pet peeves I'd like to get out of my system just so I don't end up hurting anyone:People who can't take care of themselves when they get shitfaced. I am not your father, and I won't hold you when you're drunk and throwing up. This especially goes for guys who throw up all over themselves and expect their girlfriends to take care of them, in vomit and all. She's your girlfriend, not your mom! Love is conditional. Do that too many times and she'll leave your ass.
People who are making a turn in traffic, but slam on their brakes before turning on the blinkers. Next time, I'll plow into turn. Fucking learn to drive before you get on the road. The excuse that you're from somewhere else doesn't fly with me. I don't care where you're from, bad driving is bad driving.
Emotionally needy motherfuckers who still talk about their past loves and are pining away like losers. It didn't work for a reason. There are other fish in the sea. Get over it and move on! I am tired of hearing about it. You don't need love to be happy. Do I miss a certain girl from the past?
Hell, yes! But I don't need her. So you suck it up and move on, too!Military academy guys. Especially Naval ones. You're a freaking cadet, so get over yourselves. You all try to pass yourselves off as being successful and intellectual and tough, none of which is true. You're a trainee, a college kid with a scholarship. Truth be told, you aren't anything but patriarchal assholes. Stop talking about leadership, because the last time you saw leadership was when you were in the front-leaning rest position beating your face.
Guys who constantly talk about sex, and what they'd like to do to a girl. Here"s reality: we know you ain't gettin' any, so stop talking about it. It's crude, it's sick, and I don't want to hear about how you'd like to have a girl do number 2 on you.
And lastly, people who send me these dumb surveys. I don't care what your favorite color is or what the name of your first grade teacher was or what your initials spell out, stop telling me. What does the name of the street the house you lived in was on when you were six have anything to do with anything? If you have something to e-mail me, make sure I give a shit about it.
On that note, when I am having lunch in uniform, don't come up to thank me or offer to buy me lunch. I don't know you and I am not starving. So don't offer to buy me shit. I can pay my own meals and don't need a hand out from you. Besides, if you knew I am a godless liberal fucker, would you be as nice to me?
The Christians who keep on telling me about Jesus and telling me it's good news. Shit. I did not just crawl from under a rock. I've heard that shit. I choose not to believe it. And yot know what else? Don't shake your head and tell me you will pray for me because I've been told and know of Jesus but do not believe? Truth is you may have Jesus, but I have a deadly kick that I might have to introduce to your face.
The girl at the bar who thinks I am supposed to talk to her just because she is hot. No, I am not. I am at the bar to have fun. If you want to talk, you come to me.The guy at the bar who stares at the girls and give them dirty looks but don't have time to talk to them. Grow a pair of balls or poke your eyes out. Sitting there all night looking creepy isn't going to get you laid. Fucking losers.
The creepy fucker who kisses a woman on the hand whe they first meet. You aren't a fucking knight and the is not a queen. You know, it is gay. The only one who looks like a queen in that situation is you. Unless she knows and is comfortable with you, don't even put your mouth near her. I will smack the shit out of you.
The little idiot in a big truck playing country music so loud it makes my head hurt. I get you're a country boy, don't need to advertise it. I can tell my your dumbass mustach and thick accent.
The Navy guys who run around the bars in their Navy outfits, thinking they are the shit. YOU ARE NOT. You are uneducated and common. Get over it. The only time you ever see combat is on your video games, so shut up about how tough life is.
The little fuckers who think the waitresses are in love with them because she is nice. Guess what? BEING NICE TO YOU IS HER JOB! STOP ROAMING YOUR HANDS OR OVER HER OR GIVE HER YOUR PHONE NUMBER. SHE IS NOT INTERESTED.
The girl who, upon finding out I am at feminist, asks me if I am gay. I am not and I can show you! And stop telling me no shit statements like, 'It's their bodies and their choice.' You got anything else, like, oh, I don't know, 'George Bush is an idiot?'In the mall, people who walk like they've got all fucking day. They may have, but I don't. Get the hell out of my way. Especially in military malls. If you and your five kids can't walk fast enough, get the fuck out of my way. And since you get paid on the first and fifteenth, try buying something else other than sweats for a chance.
People who think that just because my parents are Vietnamese, that I am supposed to know how to cook said food. On, I don't know how to make pho, spring rolls, egg rolls, egg plants or anything else. My idea of cooking ethnic is Ramen, so stop asking.
The fuckers who don't get off their cell phones at the check out lines. Have a courtesy to hang up and deal with the cashiers. And make sure you've got your money ready. I don't have all day to stand at Target waiting for you
.The idiots who brag about how much they can drink. It doesn't make you cool. It makes you an alcoholic. Freshman year? Totally acceptable. Anytime after that, you are a loser.
Lastly, any guy who calls a woman anyone of the following after just meeting them: girl, honey, babe, darling, sweetheart or any terms of endearment. Shit. It is insulting. When I heard a guy call a food server at Orlando International Airport that a few months ago, I threatened to shove my fist down his throat. Next time, I won't be a threat.
And you know what else? The idiots near the student parking lot who take their sweet ass time to walk, while I am late for class. And the little fuckers who take forever to order food. It's not like ordering at Taco Bell is that complicated. It's not a gourmet meal.And people who don't say thank you when I hold the door for them. Next time, I will slam it in their face.
The couple who walks through a crowded place still holding hands and getting into everyone's way. It's not like anyone is going to mistake them for anything else but a couple because they both look perfectly stupid enough for each other.
Also, the idiot on the subway who doesn't know how to stay away from the door and has to be told five times to step away from it. Also, extremely fat but otherwise healthy people who refuse to give up seats to old people on the train. Selfish shits.
While I am at it, there are a couple more pet peeves I'd like to get out of my system just so I don't end up hurting anyone:People who can't take care of themselves when they get shitfaced. I am not your father, and I won't hold you when you're drunk and throwing up. This especially goes for guys who throw up all over themselves and expect their girlfriends to take care of them, in vomit and all. She's your girlfriend, not your mom! Love is conditional. Do that too many times and she'll leave your ass.
People who are making a turn in traffic, but slam on their brakes before turning on the blinkers. Next time, I'll plow into turn. Fucking learn to drive before you get on the road. The excuse that you're from somewhere else doesn't fly with me. I don't care where you're from, bad driving is bad driving.
Emotionally needy motherfuckers who still talk about their past loves and are pining away like losers. It didn't work for a reason. There are other fish in the sea. Get over it and move on! I am tired of hearing about it. You don't need love to be happy. Do I miss a certain girl from the past?
Hell, yes! But I don't need her. So you suck it up and move on, too!Military academy guys. Especially Naval ones. You're a freaking cadet, so get over yourselves. You all try to pass yourselves off as being successful and intellectual and tough, none of which is true. You're a trainee, a college kid with a scholarship. Truth be told, you aren't anything but patriarchal assholes. Stop talking about leadership, because the last time you saw leadership was when you were in the front-leaning rest position beating your face.
Guys who constantly talk about sex, and what they'd like to do to a girl. Here"s reality: we know you ain't gettin' any, so stop talking about it. It's crude, it's sick, and I don't want to hear about how you'd like to have a girl do number 2 on you.
And lastly, people who send me these dumb surveys. I don't care what your favorite color is or what the name of your first grade teacher was or what your initials spell out, stop telling me. What does the name of the street the house you lived in was on when you were six have anything to do with anything? If you have something to e-mail me, make sure I give a shit about it.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
The military and sexism
I've always known how sexist the military can be -- I am a part of it, but always assumed such rampant sexism was left to your younger, uneducated servicemembers. But earlier this morning, I had a conversation that made me realize that even the "old timers" can be extremely exist. Standing outside at the smoke deck (I don't smoke, but like to get fresh air while I drink my Red Bulls), I had a conversation with a man who's been in the military for about 20 years. We were talking about summer, and drinking and relaxing.
He'd mentioned that once, when he was 19, he was put in jail for hitting a high ranking officer in the face. It turns out he did so because he'd received a "dear John" phone call and was upset.Looking at this guy, I said, "Isn't it amazing the stupid shit we do for love when we're young?" To which, of course, he responded."They say money is the root of all evil. It's really not. It's women. Them bitches can ruin your life."I really didn't know what to say to that. I am a feminist, I love women in both romantic and platonic sense. Yet, my life has never, ever be ruined. No one has ever "done me wrong."
I realized that these men who blame their downfalls on women are the same ones who just couldn't quite make it in life. Perhaps he was dumped because he was a loser, and not because she was evil.
At times like those, I wonder what my role is as a feminist. At school, I am outspoken. At meetings, even more so. I am known as the "feminist guy" on campus. But what of my role in the military? Do I stand up and speak out against such silly sexism, or is it really a moot point? Do I have an obligation to speak up? How much, really, is too much to do as a feminist? Even if this guy is sexist, and I believe he is, what can one guy really affect the plight of women negatively or positively? Sometimes, I just don't have all the answers as a feminist.
He'd mentioned that once, when he was 19, he was put in jail for hitting a high ranking officer in the face. It turns out he did so because he'd received a "dear John" phone call and was upset.Looking at this guy, I said, "Isn't it amazing the stupid shit we do for love when we're young?" To which, of course, he responded."They say money is the root of all evil. It's really not. It's women. Them bitches can ruin your life."I really didn't know what to say to that. I am a feminist, I love women in both romantic and platonic sense. Yet, my life has never, ever be ruined. No one has ever "done me wrong."
I realized that these men who blame their downfalls on women are the same ones who just couldn't quite make it in life. Perhaps he was dumped because he was a loser, and not because she was evil.
At times like those, I wonder what my role is as a feminist. At school, I am outspoken. At meetings, even more so. I am known as the "feminist guy" on campus. But what of my role in the military? Do I stand up and speak out against such silly sexism, or is it really a moot point? Do I have an obligation to speak up? How much, really, is too much to do as a feminist? Even if this guy is sexist, and I believe he is, what can one guy really affect the plight of women negatively or positively? Sometimes, I just don't have all the answers as a feminist.
Monday, May 7, 2007
Feminism and love?
Anyhow, this is the first post. A great majority of the posts will have to do with feminism, and politics, others will not.
The intent, I think, is to create a space in which feminism and conciousness raising, as well as theory discussions can be put to good use. I hope to, from this blog, create a bridge between feminism and feminism activism, which -- at this point, are not on the same page.
So, without further delay, here is your first post:
I apologize in advance for the cheesiness of this note. So cheesy, you could make nachos out of it, and still have leftovers for something else.
So, feminism and love: it's been the topic in my head the last week or so, because of what we're reading in class and all. I want to get your opinion on whether we can love and still be feminists.I used to think it was impossible, because love, for what it's worth, upholds patriarchy. It leads to "family," and "wife" and "husband," all of which are problematic in its own sphere, because of society's definition.In fact, since my transformation/mutation/metamorphis into a feminist, I've rejected relationships and love, seeing it as weak and patriarchal.But, in reading "To Be Real," I realized that, indeed, love and feminism can exist.
While society's view of love, it seems, is based on inequality, feminists can indeed take such institution (love) and transform it into something powerful.Love, for the feminist, isn't about being weak or feeling "out-of-control" love, but it's a decision. It's a decision based on us having a choice -- in that we love someone for choosing us, and we choose someone for loving us. That decision to love is not because we are forced to, as is often the case with the general public, but because we choose to, and we feel like it.
For the feminist, love is about shared values and ideals, beliefs and dreams, knowing damned well that we are completely fine alone; but that we're better together.For the feminist, love isn't about someone completing us, making two halves into a whole -- but rather, two wholes joining.In fact, for the feminist, love isn't about someone making us better people, as the cliche goes (idealistically, you should already be good enough when entering a relationship), but rather -- joining forces to make something, someone, some agency, some group, some institution better.
Maybe I am all wrong. Maybe we feminists should just settle for casual sex, because anything else that can lead to a family might be patriarchal, but then again, maybe I am onto something here.After all, we feminists don't need a trophy partner or a suppoter, what we need are allies. As my favorite poem goes, and I think it applies here, "I don't want to build my life around you, but I want to include you in the building of my life." That, for me, is how love ought to be for feminists.
Marc
The intent, I think, is to create a space in which feminism and conciousness raising, as well as theory discussions can be put to good use. I hope to, from this blog, create a bridge between feminism and feminism activism, which -- at this point, are not on the same page.
So, without further delay, here is your first post:
I apologize in advance for the cheesiness of this note. So cheesy, you could make nachos out of it, and still have leftovers for something else.
So, feminism and love: it's been the topic in my head the last week or so, because of what we're reading in class and all. I want to get your opinion on whether we can love and still be feminists.I used to think it was impossible, because love, for what it's worth, upholds patriarchy. It leads to "family," and "wife" and "husband," all of which are problematic in its own sphere, because of society's definition.In fact, since my transformation/mutation/metamorphis into a feminist, I've rejected relationships and love, seeing it as weak and patriarchal.But, in reading "To Be Real," I realized that, indeed, love and feminism can exist.
While society's view of love, it seems, is based on inequality, feminists can indeed take such institution (love) and transform it into something powerful.Love, for the feminist, isn't about being weak or feeling "out-of-control" love, but it's a decision. It's a decision based on us having a choice -- in that we love someone for choosing us, and we choose someone for loving us. That decision to love is not because we are forced to, as is often the case with the general public, but because we choose to, and we feel like it.
For the feminist, love is about shared values and ideals, beliefs and dreams, knowing damned well that we are completely fine alone; but that we're better together.For the feminist, love isn't about someone completing us, making two halves into a whole -- but rather, two wholes joining.In fact, for the feminist, love isn't about someone making us better people, as the cliche goes (idealistically, you should already be good enough when entering a relationship), but rather -- joining forces to make something, someone, some agency, some group, some institution better.
Maybe I am all wrong. Maybe we feminists should just settle for casual sex, because anything else that can lead to a family might be patriarchal, but then again, maybe I am onto something here.After all, we feminists don't need a trophy partner or a suppoter, what we need are allies. As my favorite poem goes, and I think it applies here, "I don't want to build my life around you, but I want to include you in the building of my life." That, for me, is how love ought to be for feminists.
Marc
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)