Moot Thoughts & Musings

I'm glad I found your blog. It's a new link on mine!

I'm not sure why people tend to think of feminism as an extreme political viewpoint. (I'm not saying that you're doing that, but there are undertones of that sentiment in your post.) One of my friends from home often rushes to state that she's not a feminist, because she has this skewed connotation of the word. The way I think of it this: if you believe in equality of the sexes and that women ought to have the same rights and privileges as men in social, economic, and perhaps even scholarly arenas (trying to apply it to you), then you're a feminist. I sure as heck am, and I'm proud of my convictions and the company with which I'm aligning myself. So perhaps agreeing with this woman's reasons for homeschooling doesn't make you a feminist, but other things might.

I think the reason some people think of feminism as an extreme political viewpoint is because NOW makes abortion rights the centerpiece of their platform. Whether we like it or not, NOW controls the definition and conversation about feminism in the US. NOW does not accept the broad definition of feminism as equality in political, social, and economic spheres. They have a well defined, detailed Marxist political and social agenda that is non-negotiable. That is why I avoid calling my self a feminist, even tho I am one by classical definition.

Also, the rhetoric in the early days of the movement was extreme, as when Gloria Steinem admitted women could NOT have it all, (traditional family + high profile career), and Kate Millett repsonded by saying "family has to go." Or when Betty Friedan called homemakers "parasites" on society.

Erica, I think I am as much of a feminist as you are in the sense you stated.

I'm not one in the Marxist sense (i.e. oppressed-woman/female arena vs oppressor-man), wh. is how it would make itself known in scholarship (see Susan McClary, with whom I got off board when she started about tonic and dominant as symbols of female oppression by men--??). I don't think I'm one politically, because I'm nothing politically. If you pressed me for opinions, I could give you some (...like I believe that health care should be available to everyone equally). But I think a truly feminist political perspective would have to actively seek out legislation and whatever political benefits that are advantageous for women as political group. So in that I'm a passive feminist, rather than an active one, I would consider myself not a political feminist. (Enter my husband who has all this philosophical discussion on what is political...)

I don't really consider it an extreme political viewpoint, rather a political viewpoint. And my distance from having political viewpoints may have made it seem that I was distancing myself from it because I may have viewed it as extreme.

I don't think abortion rights is an extreme political platform either (and if you want to engage me with this, mom2, you have to do OFFLINE!)

I don't think NOW controls the definition and conversation about feminism in the U.S. I'm asserting this from personal experience. NOW isn't on my radar screen whatsoever...it's like a non-entity. Not because I choose not to be involved with it, rather because it doesn't occur to me to. Why doesn't NOW occur to me at all? Because it doesn't figure in anything that I read, including blogs. (And I'm a blog-junkie!) I've read a lot on feminism. In fact, just the other day, I skimmed through a few books on feminism at the book store and NOW wasn't mentioned at all.

My point? NOW may figure quite prominently in some circles and even perhaps even more prominently at one time (your generation, mom2, and earlier), but I think it's fallacious to think of it as controlling the definition and conversation about feminism in the U.S. today.

I think NOW does control the conversation at least politically. Maybe not in blogdom, but definately in the mainstream media. And just because you don't hear NOW mentioned, doesn't mean they aren't controlling the conversation. Take a look at the HUGE numbers of PACs they control financially.

I read more than blogs, you know. I was just including that. And there is quite the political presence in blogosphere.

Politically and financially is only PART of the picture!! They might be controlling the conversation, but only in PART of the educated world. (Read this article interestingly). There's a whole sector of the educated class that doesn't participate in the financial side of things. They are people who are engaged in non-commerical enterprises (e.g. members of the university). Groups like NOW aren't what makes this sector tick. There may be some alignment on the face of things, but I think, there's definitely a sense in which educated women who are intentional about themselves as feminists will want to think it out for themselves and won't be swayed by political organizations...

I find it sad that thinking that women are just as good as men (which isn't a lot to aspire to) is so radical as to be considered an "ism"

but if that's being a feminist, sign me up.

I wonder if there'll ever be such a thing as a masculist. In a good sense.

First off, thanks for the link! :) Second off, it's true that I homeschool out of my feminist convictions but then pretty much everything I do is from my feminist perspective -- it permeates my life. And FWIW, I have written (critically) about NOW on my blog. I do agree with mom2 that they seem to have an edge on the media discussion of feminism. So for example, they respond to something and the media picks it up and say, "The feminist response is..." And I think NOW is totally off-track these days. I do think that some women think that NOW *is* feminism and so they don't own that title even when it would fit them.

Feminism -- like any -ism -- gets eaten by rhetoric. Personally I define feminsm as the acknowledgment of the devaluation of women and womanhood and the desire that this devaluation would cease. For me, abortion rights is a big part of my feminism however there is the organization Feminists for Life and I think it's terrific that they're owning the term "feminist" and offering another point of view. (I like when feminists are inclusive.)

I think before God women and men have equal worth, but to say they are equal and mean that they can do the same things the same way is ignoring biology, basically. I've done extended research for studying the differences between boys and girls in the way they learn. My generation "feminists" who gave their boys dolls and their girls trucks threw their hands up in despair because natural tendencies in each to want to play with "traditional" gender role toys.

You girls need to be careful, too, in thinking that you can have it all ie. traditional family and career. You can't. And that's all there is to it. Anyone who says you can is lying. Something will always suffer. And that will be you. No man will look at the home THE SAME WAY that you will look at it. Oh, yeah, they'll help clean up, with the kids, but that's not his responsibility. Like you could help your mom when you were growing up, but the burden of planning wasn't on you. And when you try to balance home and career, that burden is on you. The old feminist movement that got women out of the home and in to the job force sold women a piece of goods. And that is that she can work two jobs while her husband works one. I'm glad I stayed home with my children. Now that I only have one at home, it's still pretty intense as far as work and home, but nothing like it would have been when they or he needed more attention.
I'm frightened for my children's generation. If they buy into their culture's thinking, the future generation will suffer! Keep thinking!!

Dawn has my number - I AM one of those woman who think of NOW *as* feminism and so do not own the title even tho it fits me. I think that is because of my age - and because I do get most of my news from mainstream media, such as NPR and the New York Times, and Wash Post.

That said, when I read Dawn's blog, I find my self nodding in agreement with almost everything she says.

I think I am watching the next chapter in feminst history unfold as "you girls" :) moderate the extremes from both sides and find the better way. Unfortunately, societal change moves at a glacial pace, and I don't think the financial, corporate world is where it needs to be to make "having it all" a reality yet. The Europeans are definately ahead of us in that respect, but at a cost with their Socialist economy.

I am looking forward to seeing this worked out under good ole American democratic and captitalist principles. I think we have a glimmer of the direction with the huge increase in the small business sector.

My own company is an example of that with the principles coming out of a large corp to start their business. We have 50 employees, are a $20 million company with HUGE potential for growth. But our owners decline growth. They are content with the quality of life the company provides. They work 35 - 40 hours a week, giving themselves and their employees generous amounts of time off for "family stuff" within the work-week. No one works Saturdays or overtime. Were we to take on more business, the owners could easily work 60 - 70 hours a week, and that is unacceptable to them for the life style they want.

Along the same lines, the world's largest electronics company (wink, wink) is losing business to small start-ups who can be competive with the big boys because they don't have the overhead of a big company.

Another positive factor that will advance the slow pace of societal/corporate change is the FAST pace of technological change. That feeds into the development of small business. I can think of 5 people off the top of my head who were allowed by their large companies to work from home who eventually decided to start their own businesses, doing what they were already doing, but contracting their services back to their own (and other) companies.

This is exciting stuff for a girl who grew up beliving that nice women don't work, and if forced to, only as a secretary, nurse, or teacher.

Tuggy, you crack me up.

Thanks, Dawn, for your response! Wow! It's great to have it from the horse's mouth, so to speak. Blogosphere can be really cool just for that reason. I feel rather ill-suited to give any kind of authoritative response. My comments come out of my personal observations, gut responses, and what I find interesting. So thanks for chiming in. I'm enjoying your blog and love how you articulate why you do what you do.

I think what you say is very true about essentially what makes an -ism, that it will permeate how and why you do everything. This is true for my life. I'm a Christian (of the Reformed Protestant ilk), and I think if I really take my faith seriously (wh. I do) that it will permeate every aspect of my life, and I spend a lot of time thinking about how that gets played out, sometimes coming up with a picture a little different than the received social tradition in my circles.

And surprisingly, sometimes, I find outworkings of how I live not altogether different from people of vastly (or not so vast) different value systems. Thus, we may end up doing and thinking the same thing, though for slightly different reasons. (there's a whole category of doctrine devoted to this, wh. I will not get into here). So perhaps I would fit under the subcategory of a kind of Christian feminist (and there are those...). Though, in the end, perhaps labels aren't as helpful...

The homeschooling movement had, originally, been driven by leftist interests. It was later appropriated by the religious right, but originally, that was not the case. I think part of the reason it became so widely associated with fundamentalism was because religious folk were far more organized, and more effective in promoting it.

Feminism strikes me as hardly a monolithic movement. Some parts of it are quite extreme. Some of it (like Claire-Huxtable-feminism) is more run of the mill. Ecofeminism, for instance, is a variation of the broader post-Marxist, post-Freudian feminism, and that I think is indeed quite radical in its politics.

Interesting. Like most positions, feminism is a multifarious creature. Glad to see you in blog orbit, scott! :)