What Online Feminism Must Learn From Racial Justice

feminismracialjustice

By Pia Guerrero

Twelve years ago, I was doing social justice work through a community engagement project in a 10th grade class in San Francisco.

The class consisted of kids from the Mission District and Bayview Hunter’s Point. Mission District at the time was a vibrant Latino community and a hot zone for gang activity. Life for my students from this district was rough. Among other things, many had lost loved ones to gang violence. Walking from school alone was a scary practice, as kids were threatened and harassed to join a different gang on a daily basis.

My students from Bayview Hunter’s Point faced similar challenges. This community of regular folks making their way through life like the rest of us was known for gangs, drugs, prostitution and violence. One student, Artese, a warm girl ready to joke at any time described hearing gun shots and stepping over condoms and syringes on her daily walk to and from school.

One day, a group of girls in my class were chatting about their bodies. At that time the myth was that body image issues didn’t affect girls of color, so I was a bit surprised. I listened intently and was deeply saddened by what I heard. Many of the Latina girls were on diets and taking diet pills. Norma, who was on the thinner side of normal said, “Yeah, I still have some pounds to lose”.  Two black girls were saving their money for boob reductions, including Artese. I wondered, “How can these bright, beautiful, loving young women face so much in their lives and in their communities and yet be so concerned with their size?”

I knew at that moment that race, class, gender, size, etc. were intricately intertwined and I couldn’t fight for one while ignoring another. It was then that I began incorporating feminism into my work and was inspired to co-founded Adios Barbie with Ophira Edut. Deep in my heart I knew that we must accept our true selves and our intersecting identities in order to see and seek possibilities for ourselves and others. Soon after I found this quote and shared it with my students.

“We cannot think of being acceptable to others until we have first proven acceptable to ourselves.” – Malcolm X

As you can imagine, I’ve always rooted my feminism in a social and racial justice framework. My feminism is one where I seek justice and fight for the freedom of the most oppressed. But lately I’ve been disheartened by a new kind of feminism popping up within feminist circles across the web. This feminism is one of vindictiveness, revenge, and silencing of others with differing opinions. It is steeped in pain and fear, with actions towards other feminists resembling the bullying and peer pressure reminiscent of Mean Girls. This is a feminism of rage targeted towards individuals and not systems.

This is not my feminism.

My feminism is one of inclusion and respect built upon the possibility that loving non-violence can herald radical progress as proven by Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights movement. My feminism is one informed by my shehero bell hooks. Who said,

“Visionary feminism is a wise and loving politics. It is rooted in the love of male and female being, refusing to privilege one over the other. The soul of feminist politics is the commitment to ending patriarchal domination of women and men, girls and boys. Love cannot exist in any relationship that is based on domination and coercion….A genuine feminist politics always brings us from bondage to freedom, from lovelessness to loving.” ~bell hooks

hooks has also said that “feminism is for everyone.” And from that I mold my feminism and share with you a new framework based on another framework for advancing racial justice in the world. Hopefully this feminism is one that inspires and moves you towards one of freedom, connection, transformation and real progress.

A Feminist Framework for Trying Times  

(Adapted from Applied Research Center’s Strategic Framework for Advancing Racial Justice)

1. Focus on structural sexism and systemic inequality rather than simply personal prejudice (and bias).

2. Focus on impacts rather than intentions…Impacts can be documented, while intentions are debatable and difficult to prove. Rather than dwell on who is sexist, it’s far more useful to focus on the causes and effects of sexism.

3. Address gender inequality explicitly but not necessarily exclusively. Sexism must be illuminated in order to be eliminated. Often other significant factors are involved that must also be made visible, such as race, class, ethnicity and immigrant status.

4. Propose solutions that emphasize equity and inclusion. Sexism is pervasive, but it need not be permanent. Offer proactive solutions that are equitable, inclusive, and viable. It is important to distinguish the principle of equity as fairness.

5. Develop strategies to empower stakeholders and target institutional powerholders. Build inclusive and cohesive alliances that prioritize the full engagement of women and girls as leaders. Make the powerholders with decision-making authority enact changes that target institutional sexism.

6. Make gender justice a high priority in all social justice efforts. A successful progressive movement must recognize gender justice as a central component of social justice. The struggle for gender justice is not a zero sum game. Instead of allowing sexism to drive social division and disparities, we must make gender equity the driving force for uniting and benefiting all people (including men and boys).

 

Post to Twitter

Warning: Feminist Wearing Makeup Ahead. Look Both Ways Before Crossing

Woman's Eye

By Quinn Davis

“The only way I’m staying with you is if you stop wearing mascara.”

Sure, I had dated some d-bags before. But this guy competed for it in the Olympics, won the gold and then spent the next six years touring the country so that hopeful up-and-coming d-bags could look up to someone. Plus, some cereal could capitalize on his success (Shredded Douche!).

(Word to the wise: If you’re dating a woman who has a future in writing, has thought about writing or has written anything ever, you should consider treating her with more respect than your collection of Kerouac books. Cheers!)

Okay, back to the Cosmetic Conundrum. Count Douchula and I had been dating for a year or so when he decided to inform me that I was “just not interesting.” This morphed into me begging him to stay with me, which morphed again into him demanding that I make some changes, including my makeup.

Was he allergic to the product? you might ask. Did he feel insecure about his own lashes next to my lacquered ones? Did his mother die while driving under the influence… of mascara?

The answers were no and, shockingly, no and no.

Now for some background: I’m not some spineless leaf floating around waiting for someone, anyone, to pick me up and call me their own. The short way of explaining why I was in this relationship to begin with is that I wasn’t in a good place during my first two years of college, and Monsieur D’bag took this as an opportunity to practice for the Big Leagues.

I could go on and on about this relationship and all of its advantages, but I’m waiting to get Oprah famous before I allow karma’s spiked tail to strike – for the betterment of all the rest of us, believe you me. Besides, it’s difficult to explain why a woman stays in a physically and/or mentally abusive relationship; that subject needs a discussion or two million of its own. Instead, I’m going to use someone who used me (schadenfreude is not dead) to illustrate the fine line that feminists walk: Fighting socialized norms while following them.

It was the spring of my sophomore year, and I had just dipped my toe into the pool of feminism. It was exhilarating. Every word I read felt like someone else was describing me – to myself. I finally understood why things didn’t feel quite right when middle-aged men commented on my appearance. I got how fourteen-year-old boys learned to have the gall to look me up and down whether I stood alone or with my parents.

And – most importantly, at least in this piece – I saw how the desire to wear makeup was socialized into me as completely and concisely as a cult.

I didn’t realize it at the time, but my foray into feminism was the start of the disintegration of my relationship with Snap Crackle Douche. It helped me realize what a crap-tastic situation I was in. However, at the time of the Cosmetic Conundrum, the full realization was just a glimmer in my eye.

“If you’re such a feminist, how can you buy into the very things that are used to oppress women?” he asked.

To tell you the truth, I had no idea how I could. I mean, I liked wearing mascara. When I put it on, my eyelashes were transformed into these incredible, feather-like things that made me feel like a magical being. I was a friggin’ unicorn. Bam.

Of course, I now knew that this idea was tainted. Somewhere along the line, I soaked up the idea that unicorn eyelashes were what beautiful women had, and that being a beautiful woman is very, very important. All that shiz was subconscious, which is exactly why it was successful. Would it really work if someone came up to me and actually said the above sentences to me? Uh no, and it’s not just because I would have thought that whatever “unicorn eyelashes” were, they would make me look like a drag queen.

So here I was, caught up again in douchery, trying to explain why I did what I did. I lost the argument, spent the next month trying to find a satisfying lie (“It’s just a bet, and if I win, I get a pony!” <-not a finalist) and yearned to unveil the HOLY CRAP!-worthy lashes I had been blessed with.

A month and a half later, I sat in my feminist psychology class, trying to look and sound as awesome as the seniors next to me. Once again, feminism decided read my mind and explain myself to myself. My professor explained:

“It’s hard enough to feel forced into making a decision without being punished for making it. Believe it or not, a lot of people actually do like whatever thing society is telling them to do. You can’t socialize someone into liking something and then ostracize them for liking it. I know the media and beauty industry made me think that I needed mascara. I’m a feminist! But now I love it. I love it for me. I can go without, sure, but I just love the way it looks.”

FaBLAM! In case you’re confused, that was the noise of the logic bomb that went off in my head.

The point of feminism isn’t to proclaim how women should be. In fact, that’s the opposite of feminism. Feminism is about people choosing for themselves, without societal, familial or any other pressures getting in the way.

If you’re only aware of societal pressures on a subconscious level, it’s damn near impossible to make a truly feminist choice. I certainly didn’t when I first started to wear mascara.

But now that I was able to choose what I wanted while recognizing those pressures, I realized that mascara was one of my forms of expression. I loved my unicorn lashes, polka dots and pigtails not just because of how they made me look, but because it broke people’s stereotypes. They would walk in, see me as a harmless puffball and then be hilariously confused as the cuteness started swearing like a sailor, calling the shots and kicking anyone who touched her junk (yes, really).

Once I figured all this out, I went back in my mind to that argument I lost, just like everyone does. I would tell him that as a feminist, only I would choose the way I present myself, as long as it does not harm myself or anyone else. If I choose something that I’ve been socialized to like, I am no less a feminist than my Burt’s Bees and Birkenstock-wearing sisters.

And best of all, I would have actually said it, batting my unicorn eyelashes the whole way.

Related Content:

Face Value? Study Claims Makeup Makes Women Appear More “Competent

Post to Twitter

Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Playboy, Porn, and Pole Dancing

TBD-NEWS-20-5-8-PLAYBOY2.jpg

By Sheena Vasani

“Would you rather have brains or beauty?”

“Beauty,” replies the Miss University London beauty pageant contestant adding because if she weren’t beautiful “nobody would want to listen to her anyway.”

Should we assume this quote came from newspaper archives, maybe from the 50s? Unfortunately not. The Guardian included this quote as part of a story reporting on the growing trend of UK university beauty pageants in December 2008.

Take a closer look and a disturbing pattern emerges.

The Guardian reported in 2006 that one of the UK’s leading retail groups WH Smith, reported its Playboy stationery line as one of its best-selling of all time. Ironically, its popularity lay not with boys, but adolescent girls. And while the BBC reports that WH Smith has since withdrawn these products, shops like Wet Seal in America still sell clothes promoting the Playboy bunny brand to teenage girls. Numerous large retail stores in both the UK and US sell inappropriate sexy clothing for children that many parents actually buy. Reports indicate the female public figure many American teenage girls look up to is Paris Hilton, well-known for her sex tape and rich father. And then I discovered that Brown University offers pole-dancing competitions, as does Cambridge University.

That’s right, folks. Forty years after feminism’s second wave burst onto the scene, 40 years after female activists burned bras, and 40 years AFTER Gloria Steinem went undercover as a Playboy Bunny to expose the misogyny involved in that world, women have gone from being viewed as sexual objects to – you guessed it! – still being perceived as sexual objects, whose only real accomplishment and source of power lies in their lust-provoking abilities.

Now, don’t get me wrong. The second wave was about empowering women, destroying the ideology running rampant stating a woman’s sole purpose was to sexually please men. In many, many respects, it succeeded. Women received more opportunities to shine than their mothers, particularly in the workplace. According to the U.S. Department of Labor data from 2009, women held “49.8 percent of all jobs, their highest proportion in history.”

But if a beauty pageant contestant from one of the best university systems in the world admits her looks are more important than her brain, if young girls feel the pressure to look sexy that they purchase the likes of pole dancing kits, what is this saying about female liberation and gender equality?

Sadly, some women are also encouraging such choices, celebrating it as “post-feminism.” As Christie Hefner, Playboy CEO and daughter to Playboy founder Hugh Hefner explains, “the post-women’s movement generation has just a more grown up, comfortable, natural attitude about sex and sexiness that is more in line with where guys were a couple of generations before.”[i]

So, the oppression of females through sexual means by men back then was not so much a human rights violation as it was actually a portrayal of male enlightenment, and now that we slow and insecure females understand this we are reverting back to objectifying ourselves?

I’m all for sexual expression and liberation, and if participating in pornography or pole dancing satisfies you, then fair enough. But the fact is many women involved in pornography describe their experiences as unfulfilling, as the famous memoirs of Traci Lords and Jenna Jameson show. Yes, Jameson might be quick to promote the pornography industry, but one has to wonder why she also says if she ever had a daughter, “she would lock her in the house before she’d let her get involved in the sex industry”?[ii]

Not to mention, many women are drawn to the adult entertainment industry out of financial or emotional problems, often resulting from sexual abuse. Both Traci Lords and Jameson’s personal stories speak of childhoods or teenage years filled with trauma. As Mary Anne Layden, Ph.D., and Director for Women’s Psychological Health in Philadelphia states:

“Most strippers, as with other women who work in the sex industry, are adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Research indicates the number is between 60%-80%. …Often as adults they reenact their childhood trauma by working as strippers, Playboy models, and prostitutes. The men who, now as customers, physically and visually invade the adult women’s bodies, reenact the role of the perpetrator. These women work in the sex industry because it feels like home.”

And what about the women who don’t work in the sex industry but want to associate themselves with Playboy and pole dancing? I don’t buy that this is genuine sexual liberation. It’s still about pleasing men.

Perhaps this happened because we grew overwhelmed with the impossibly hard to reach standards of beauty laid out for us by the images of airbrushed, artificially altered beauties? Perhaps we fell for the underlying message of ads flaunting such photos, that we are simply sex objects, who are only to be seen? Or maybe we just became tired of pointing out the objectification of women only to be dismissed, called prudes? Instead, we convinced ourselves life would just be “easier” if we repressed our anger and lived in denial? After all, who wants to be perceived as insecure and undesirable, especially to men? Whatever the reason, in an ironic move to feel “empowered” and wanted, instead of beating our oppressors, we are sadly joining them.

Next time you fantasize about being a Playboy bunny, feel pressured to visit a strip club even though you’re heterosexual, or to take up pole-dancing classes, remember the words of Susan Brownmiller, one of the most involved members of the real women’s liberation movement in the 70s: “You think you’re being brave, you think you’re being sexy, you think you’re transcending feminism. But that’s bullshit.”[iii]

Women of the West the battle still wages. Let’s join forces and get our acts together, lest we run the risk of selling out.

 

 


[i] Levy, Ariel. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture (London: Simon & Schuster, 2005) 39.

[ii] Levy, Ariel. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture (London: Simon & Schuster, 2005) 183.

[iii] Levy, Ariel. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture (London: Simon & Schuster, 2005) 82.

 

Post to Twitter

The Beauty Myth: Worth Fighting Against?

TooSkinny-1024x4805-300x140

TooSkinny-1024x4805-300x140

By Guest Contributor Melanie Klein of Feminist Fatale

In light of Britney Spears’ recent unaltered photos, a recent guest post at Jezebel proclaimed feminism’s battle with the beauty myth as bourgeois and not worth the fight. Author, Helen Razer, claims that the efforts to expose the gruesome reality behind the beauty myth is a tiresome and unworthy battle that detracts focus from issues of  “real gender equality.”

I recall an era when feminism’s purview was not limited to banging on about the need for more fat chicks in glossy magazines. While others fight for the right to force-feed Kate Moss, I continue antique fretting over equal pay, domestic violence and federal representation. At 40, I am old and clearly out of step with a movement that demands Size 14 representation.

She continues:

Yes. This just in: heat is hot, water is wet and teenagers are obsessed with their appearance. As such, let’s spend money on developing an industry code of conduct so that we can all enjoy the spectacle of more cottage cheese on Britney’s thighs.

Is it as simple as “teenagers are obsessed with their appearance?” I don’t think so. While the obsession with beauty has long been considered a narcissistic rite of passage among teens, beauty and body image issues are not limited to this demographic. Research shows that eating disorders and the preoccupation with beauty is found younger and younger girls as well as increasingly older women. Disordered eating, eating disorders and an overall obsession with the physical form is not limited to teens as part of a passing trend.

Not only are the consequences of the beauty myth not limited to a specific age group, it is not limited to rich (“bourgeois”), white girls. In fact, the Eurocentric beauty ideal is exported the globe over via the mass media and continues to erase our physical diversity. The global reach of these manufactured and altered images result in more and more  individuals conforming to homogeneous definitions of beauty.

As Brumberg traces in The Body Project: An Intimate History of Young Girls, physical beauty has become the sole measure of the worth of girls and women. This reduction of value and self-identification to the numbers on the scale and shape of one’s figure signals a  sociohistorical shift in the ways in which girls and women are valued. It doesn’t matter if you’re intelligent, independent, competent, charismatic, artistic, or successful unless you’re thin, toned and flawless. In other words, you’ve got to be hot, too.

The pursuit of hotness, as an extension of the battle to achieve the elusive beauty myth, trumps all other facets of  a woman’s character or accomplishments. Even pregnancy and motherhood are not excluded from the pressures of the socially constructed measure of beauty. The MILF, a term made popular by the film American Pie, has become a staple fixture in pop culture.

Naomi Wolf sounded the alarm over twenty years ago with the publication of The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty are Used Against Women. As women began making strides thanks to the tireless efforts made during the second wave of feminism during the Women’s Liberation Movement, we began to be bombarded by increasingly unrealistic images of female beauty. This proliferation of our cultural space with skantily clad or nude women has continued and increased. The relentless and one-pointed focus on beauty has resulted in generations of women imposing, what Brumberg calls “internalized control,” on themselves.

Beauty in itself is not the problem. Dominique Millette tackles this debate in a recent post. So, what is the problem and why is it important?

Melanie Klein of Feminist Fatale states five excellent reasons why the beauty myth must be deconstructed. Read the rest of her article here.

Post to Twitter

Is “Bo-tax” Unfair to Women Who Want Their Looks to Compete?

AP Images

AP Images

Feminism’s Face-Lift

Alexandra Suich, The Nation

Can a tax on breast enhancements and liposuction be channeled to benefit the public good?

During the Senate’s debates over who should bear the cost of the nearly $900 billion healthcare bill, there emerged a surprising suggestion: plastic surgery patients. A proposed tax, dubbed the “Bo-Tax” after the wrinkle-reducing injections, would add a 5 percent additional charge to elective cosmetic procedures. The tax could help raise $6 billion over the next ten years to offset the cost of health reform. It was included in the original healthcare bill the Senate considered, and it is likely to make it into the modified bill, when the details of the newly brokered Senate compromise are finally announced. Apparently breast enhancements and liposuction can be channeled to benefit the public good.

Plastic surgeons have decried the tax with as much ferocity as Americans once denounced taxation without representation. It is not just Playboy bunnies and Hollywood starlets who get breast enhancements, liposuction and face-lifts, they claim, but also middle-class Americans. According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, which is lobbying against the proposed tax, nearly 90 percent of people seeking cosmetic surgery are women, and 60 percent of them earn between $30,000 and $90,000 a year. This has led plastic surgeons to brand it the “soccer mom tax.”

That plastic surgeons oppose the Bo-Tax is not surprising. But that the head of one of America’s most stalwart feminist organizations, the National Organization for Women (NOW), has also come forward to oppose the bill certainly is. NOW has railed against silicone breast implants and cosmetic surgery in the past. The group sponsors an annual “Love Your Body Day” to encourage women to appreciate their natural bodies–uncut, unenhanced and un-Botoxed.

These harsh economic times, however, call for a different ideology. Or so says Terry O’Neill, NOW’s new president. Middle-aged women are struggling to compete in the job market, and cosmetic surgery can help them appeal to employers. “They have to find work,” she told the New York Times. “And they are going for Botox or going for eye work, because the fact is we live in a society that punishes women for getting older.”

Read More: The Nation

Related Content:

You’re So Perfect…Except For Your Boobs

Plastic Wrap – Turning Against Cosmetic Surgery

Sweet Revenge?

Ironing Out the Wrinkles of Wanting Plastic Surgery

Hollywood Now Seeks Authenticity

Terrifying Trend: Models and Mini-Liposuction

Huffington Post: Former Miss Argentina Dies From Cosmetic Butt Surgery

Using Cosmetic Surgery Stop Bullying?

 

 

Post to Twitter

How I Reconciled My Diet With My Feminism | | AlterNet

Ninety-five percent of dieters gain the weight back. Diets don’t work. They perpetuate the idea that the less space we take up in the world, the more lovable, beautiful and valuable we are. But what if you aren’t dieting to just look good? What if you value yourself through thick and thin and choose to “diet” in order to eat and live healthier? Are you a sell-out? A traitor to feminism? Weigh in on the debate and check out this article called How I Reconciled My Diet With My Feminism | | AlterNet.

Posted using ShareThis

Related Content:

Girls and Dieting: Then and Now

Scale Back: It’s International No Diet Day!

How Diets Decrease Your Self-Esteem and Not Your Size!

Three Steps to Transform the National Weight Debate

Post to Twitter