Bitch, Ph.D.
Shakespeare's Sister
The Angry Black Woman
Susie Bright
I Blame the Patriarchy
Majikthise
Body Impolitic
Republic of Dogs
home, journal, about me
Body Politics
labels and sexuality,
bi,
feminist,
poly,
kinky,
queer
Creative
photography,
poetry,
prose
Talk Back
guestbook,
feedback,
journal,
email me
something that should be obvious, but isn't
"Choice" is not the litmus test of feminism. Nor should it be mistaken for empowerment.
I would hope that this tends to become more obvious when people stop and actually critically examine the choices available.
talking, listening, and feminism
Coming home from Wiscon gets harder every year. For one long weekend, I can forget that the rest of the world Just Doesn't Get It, because I'm hanging around hundreds of people who, for the most part, are feminists and feminist allies who actually Get It.
This is not a con report. A con report would list all the nice people I spent time with -- and there were a lot of them -- and talk about more than one of the panels I went to, and such. This is a "what's on my mind now" post, which happens to reference a Wiscon panel.
At the "Feminism Fundamentals" panel, Chip Delaney said, during his introduction, that men can't be feminists. This statement went by without comment, which surprised me -- that's a controversial statement, one which usually derails the hell out of the discussion. But it did mean that for once, the comment got to ferment in my subconscious for awhile, and I got to have interesting thoughts of my own about it.
One of the other things said on that panel -- regarding something else under discussion, but good advice in general -- was that you have to pick your battles. I don't have the energy or the passion, really, to fight this battle. People who want to argue about whether or not men can be feminists will have to do it without me. However, I do want to explore, a little, why feel a lot of sympathy for this viewpoint.
Naming is a powerful thing. On the one hand, the inclusive choice uses that power to welcome allies, and that can be a good thing. I do think, however, that it's useful to examine the other choice. If we use the power of naming in a more exclusive manner -- one that excludes men, relegating them to "feminist allies" or "pro-feminists" -- what does that say?
It says a powerful thing, I think. It explicitly, linguistically underlines the problem: That it is difficult to impossible for someone raised with privilege to see through that privilege.
This is a vastly important concept, I think. I spend way too much time soothing the ruffled feathers of feminist allies, who want desperately to believe that they're not one of the bad guys. The truth is: we're all part of the problem. Every single one of us. And as long as you want to believe you're not one of the bad guys, well, you're only going to be looking for sexism outside yourself. We're all the bad guys. We've all been raised in a sexist culture and we've been treated differently according to our gender from the time we were a day old. "Feminist" is not the opposite of "sexist."
Recognizing our ingrained sexism requires quite a bit of self-examination, patience, and humility. And telling men that they can't be feminists shines a bright light on the fact that doing that self-examination through the miasma of gender privilege is a whole different ballgame than doing it from the oppressed side. Gloria Steinem has recognized that first moment of a woman's feminist consciousness awakening as a "click" -- when the pieces click into place and she realizes that this feminism stuff applies to her. The personal *is* the political. "[H]er private anxieties, anger, and despair are not personal failings but are understandable responses to the off-the-wall expectations of patriarchy." (The Mommy Myth, by Susan J. Douglas and Meredith Michaels.)
That moment is different -- and much harder to come by -- on the more empowered end of the disparity. We've all got an intellectual immune response that fires off quickly and powerfully when we're presented with ideas that contradict the stuff we've been immersed in all our lives. It says, Balderdash! I know this to be not-true. All my life, I've been told How Things Are, not in words but in actions and deeds, every day of my whole life. Any concept that flies against this conditioning has to break through that immune response. For women, that click moment is when the weight of experiencing daily oppression breaks through the conditioned response. For men, that click is harder to come by. Some men have reported that it happens when something horrible occurs to a woman they're fond of. Some men have been on the receiving end of racism, classism, ableism, ageism, or somesuch, and manage to generalize to the -isms they're not on the receiving end of. Whatever it is, something, sometimes, will break through that automatic response, and start somebody thinking about their privilege. That is, however, not the same thing as the eye-opening click of "Oh. Yes. This is about what I experience *all the time*."
I know this, viscerally. I know this, because I have experienced it in my examination of my own class and race privilege. I will never, ever be able to look at race the way I look at gender. No matter how much I think and analyze before I open my mouth, my class and race privilege comes out often, and the best I can do is to try to be aware of it, and be not just gracious but humble when I'm called on it.
This is not because I'm especially stupid. In this, I am fairly ordinary. And if you think you're especially gifted and should be an exception, I say: you're part of the problem. I know only five men who are especially gifted in that way -- and believe me, I've hunted! At least two of them don't call themselves feminists for, as far as I can tell, pretty much this reason. And all of them are candid about the ways in which they are part of them problem.
Like I said, I'm not willing to fight this battle. On the one hand, telling pro-feminist men that they can't be feminists would leave us with a much smaller, more thoughtful and dedicated cadre of pro-feminist men, and that sounds kinda refreshing. And it would be really nice to be able to stop wasting my time trying to educate people who won't or can't see through their own gender privilege. On the other hand, though, alienating pro-feminist men by denying them the power of the label seems like it's just inviting more of those same exhausting circular arguments with liberal men that already frustrate me. Call yourselves whatever you want, boys, because I'm not prepared to have another argument that's About You.
But I wish, wish, wish, that more men could do what those five Guys who Get It have done: I wish more pro-feminist men could say, "gosh, women that I profess to respect and support -- and oftentimes love -- believe that inequality exists, not just out there, but in here inside of me. And they believe that, so maybe I should try believing that, because I believe in them. Let's try, for a month, to assume that it's true: I am part of the problem, and my privilege gets in the way of me discussing it and understanding it, much less fixing it." And honestly spend that month struggling for the humility required to put one's ego aside and pay attention.
Because I know men who've done things like that, and they're better for it. And the feminist movement is better for it.
Moroccan Carrots
Mmm-mm. Sweet and salty and tangy and spicy and just a hint of hot. Serve with: tomato and cucumber in minted yogurt, and lentil soup (and lamb, if you're a meat-eater).
1 lb carrots
1/4 c dried fruit, in 1/4" pieces (I used whole dried cranberries; apricots or raisins would be more authentic, though)
2 tbl olive oil (or more...I used more)
1/8 tsp saffron, crumbled
hot water
splash lemon juice
2 tsp cumin
2 tsp coriander
dash cinnamon
1/2 tsp dried orange peel (or orange zest)
1 clove garlic, finely chopped
pinch fenugreek (optional)
dash cayenne (or more, to taste -- alternately, use a flavorful pepper flake; I'm fond of Aleppo)
1 tsp ground ginger
fresh cilantro, chopped
salt to taste
1/4 c nuts (I used walnuts because that's what I had on hand. However, I think almonds, hazelnuts, chestnuts, pine nuts or pecans are all more appropriate in north African cuisine.)
freshly ground pepper
Put dried fruit in small bowl with lemon juice and crumbled saffron. Add just enough hot water to cover. Let soak at least 10 minutes (preferably 30).
Heat olive oil gently in large saute pan with cumin, coriander, garlic, cinnamon, and fenugreek, until fragrant.
Meanwhile, slice carrots diagonally, 1/4" thick. Put carrots in pan with olive oil & spices. Pour in dried fruit, and turn up heat until most of the liquid is gone. Turn heat back down & saute carrots until they begin to soften. Add cayenne, ginger, cilantro, salt, and nuts. Saute for five more minutes, or until nuts are heated through. Add pepper.
Serve hot or cold.
Hearty vegetable cheese pie
I assembled this for a friend who finds quiches too eggy.
Hearty Vegetable Filling
olive oil
6 small carrots
1 red onion
3 golden beets
2c shredded meat-substitute (for example, see my textured soy protein mixture, below)
12oz cheese, grated
1 egg white
Bechamel Noisette, with egg
1/2c milk
3tbs heavy cream
1 bay leaf
2tbs butter
2tbs flour
1/8tsp freshly grated nutmeg
1/4tsp white pepper
salt & ground black pepper, to taste
1 egg
1 egg white
Cook filling:
Roast beets. (see below for beet-roasting directions) Skin and cut into half-inch pieces.
Preheat generous quantity of olive oil gently in heavy-bottomed saute pan.
Coarsely chop onion and carrots into 1/4" pieces.
Saute onion, carrots in olive oil until soft. Add chopped beets and meat-substitute. Stir to combine. Simmer for 5 minutes.
Sauce:
Simmer 1/4c milk and heavy cream in a small saucepan, along with bay leaf, nutmeg, salt, and peppers.
Melt 2tbs butter in small saucepan. Add 2tbs flour, mix well. Whisk periodically until roux is medium- to dark-brown. (Ideally, whisk often. The more you whisk, the less likely you'll burn the roux, but it'll take longer to brown.)
Whisk milk mixture into roux. Take off stove & add another 1/4c milk, whisking until smooth. Let stand until lukewarm.
Beat egg and egg white together. Add eggs to milk mixture. Stir until incorporated. Sauce should be thick but still pourable; if too thick, add more milk.
Assemble pie:
Line springform pan with crust of your choice. (see below for my rich whole-wheat pat-in-pan crust.) Line bottom and at least halfway up the sides. Bake crust blind until just barely set. It should still be pale. Brush with egg white; return to oven until egg cooks to glossy finish (about five minutes).
Spread a layer of cheese on the crust. Add most of the vegetables. Pour sauce over vegetables -- it's pretty thick, so don't pour it all in one place. Add more cheese. Sprinkle the last of the vegetables and the last of the cheese together across the top.
Put the springform on a cookie sheet before putting it in the oven -- my pie ejected a bunch of olive oil while it was baking. Cook at 350 for 45 minutes. About 30 minutes in, when the top is beginning to brown, cover with foil.
Cool for at least 10 minutes in pan before removing springform.
[more]
yearly silence
so.
For those of you who haven't watched this happen in previous years, here's what happens:
Some time in mid-august, I vanish from the internet. In late august, I announce that I'm going to Burning Man. In early-september, I come back.
So, yes, I'm still alive, but I'm busy, and those of you who aren't going to burning man this year will see/hear from me in early september.
Being a blogreader
The downside about going away for a weekend is apparently it takes me four days to catch up on all the reading that piled up while I was gone (and then the stuff that piled up while I was reading the old stuff)!
I don't actually read all that many blogs. Look over there at that sidebar -- see how short that blogroll is?
And while you're there, note that it's one entry longer than it used to be. I've added Republic of Dogs. I went and read his fine blog because I'm impressed by the comments he made in this thread over in Twisty Faster's "I Blame the Patriarchy." She even calls out my favorite of his comments in its very own post regarding "How To Be A Feminist Fella After Getting Lambasted By Feminists". If you've ever wondered what what men can do about the patriarchy, this is your answer. If you've never wondered what men can do about the patriarchy... go read it anyway.
And, for the record: I eat no shrimp tacos. Nor pork, nor chicken, nor beef. Though I've been known to enjoy the heck out of tacos with soy-based fake meat products in them, from time to time. And on the very rare occasion, with real live breaded fried fish filets.
(Edit: and, oh my! the blogroll was missing Twisty's site. That's what I get for editing html before the first cuppa coffee...how embarassing.)
comments are back: thank you, haloscan
signed up with haloscan in hopes that I can give y'all back the ability to make comments without turning spam-control into a time-sink for me.
Old entries will be weird, with the "Comments (0)" from HaloScan but with comments in-line from greymatter's old comments system. I actually find the whole comments-in-a-separate-window thing annoying, but maybe I can either get used to it or find some way to embed the haloscan comments system in the page. I haven't played with it really at all yet, except to make sure it works.
Two posts in one! The Plame game, and: More on reproductive choice
Should I keep doing these what-I'm-reading roll-up posts, or should I start posting one entry per link? (since I've turned comments off for now, y'all will have to email sev@byz.org if you want to actually weigh in on this question.) The problem with going one-post-per-link is that I'm really not going to have time to go into the kind of detail that I'm putting into this post:
Shakespeare's Sister posted a link to a Washington Post article by Dan Froomkin on the "who outed Valerie Plame" game. If you haven't been following the recent revelations in the hunt for who leaked the identity of Valerie Plame, a covert CIA operative, to the press, then Froomkin's article is the place to go to get caught up.
It's become pretty clear that at the very least, Rove identified Plame to journalists. Calling her the wife of Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV does in fact unambiguously identify her, seeing how as in this country, people can legally have a maximum of one spouse. All the speculation about whether he used her name or not is kind of silly. It's disingenuous to suggest that giving someone enough information to uniquely identify a person isn't "leaking" just the same way that giving someone the person's actual full name would be.
How often do men get referred to as so-and-so's-husband? Maybe Rove doesn't understand how a reference like that could in fact be construed as identifying information. He *might* be that dumb. And, as a privileged white male, perhaps he's just too sheltered to understand. How many of you know what Rove's wife's name is? I mean, we know that Clinton's wife is named Hilary, the shrub's wife is named Laura. It was trivial for me to discover that US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's wife's name is Rebecca Turner Gonzales, though I can't say I ever hear her referred to except to point out that that's the name of Gonzales's wife. But at least her name is included -- they don't just call her "Mrs. Gonzalez." Rove's wife's name is "Darby" and not just "Mrs. Rove," something that would surprise me if my only source of information was mainstream news. Somehow, they mostly just call her "Mrs. Rove."
How we refer to women isn't a straightforward problem. Even when we're talking about women's accomplishments, we often find that women are referred to using their first names, or using their relationships to men (wife of, daughter of, mother of) instead of using their full name. Stripping women of their names is a linguistic power game in which women's status is reduced and mens' dominance is reinforced.
Get a grip, Rove. As much as you and the rest of the patriarchy would like to reduce women to mere appendages of men, we do in fact have our own names, our own careers, our own ambitions, our own lives.
So, now: the white house promised to fire anybody involved in leaking the identity of an undercover CIA agent. And the man hasn't even had his security clearance suspended -- a common practice when there's an investigation going on. Helloooooo? How's about a sign, any sign at all, that the white house gives a sodding screw about living up to the promises made to this country? Y'know, the parts of this country that *aren't* Halliburton stockholders?
And, as for the rest of the what-I'm-reading list: [more]
[Archives]
Search entries:
Rings
<< | ! | Women Bloggers | ? | >>
<< | ! | Femme Fatales | ? | >>
<< | ! | Queer Diary Ring | ? | >>
<< | ! | diary of a feminist | ? | >>
<< | ! | Just Good Food | ? | >>
<< | ! | WebGrrrls | ? | >>