Feminists? Any here?

[Tuckervill]

A person has to live for several years, every day , in a role/with an identity where the dominant, overriding societal attitude might disempower the value of that role to other more powerful, socially acceptable roles OR stereotype that person.

A good first step is just to realize it is possible that the view you hold of race as a white person could change if you got to experience life through someone else's eyes. (30 days is a great tool for that.) I often encounter this inability to empathize or to consider that someone else could see things differently when it comes to race/gender, etc. I wouldn't be exaggerating if I stated it is 99% men who I encounter with this inability to empathize.

Karen

[Biciclista]

great quiz Karen.
I haven't said much here because I was a part of the "bra burning" feminist movement and then saw how badly it backfired on us.
My grandmothers both worked hard to support their families during the depression when often my grandfathers couldn't get work. My grandfathers when they did work, earned more. My father and my mother were latchkey kids, as was I. Same thing, next generation. My mother made much less than my father, and as a single mom (they divorced when i was 6) she barely made ends meet even with my father's absolutely dependable child support checks ( $25 a week for 2 kids, went up to $35 eventually).
then it was me and my generation. In the guidance counselor's office, I was told: you can be a nurse or a teacher or a secretary; which career track appeals to you?
None of them appealed to me although i did apply to a nursing school and got turned down because i had the "wrong" personality.
In college, I discovered all sorts of wonderful things, and the absence of a dress code. I lost my panty hose forever. I was not a good student unfortunately so did not have an opportunity to blaze trails for others to follow by getting involved with Genetics or Animal sciences.
Instead I had to get a job. And the jobs available to me were clerical and retail and paid pretty badly.
So how did we do?
We no longer had to dress up in ridiculous shoes and dresses to work, go to school, or out to play.
We could get legal abortions.
We didn't have to be quiet when men were abusive towards us in the workplace (but more than likely nothing would be done about it anyway)
We still couldn't get good salaries.

ok, so fast forward to today:
We're fighting to keep those legal abortions.
We can pretty much dress the way we want anywhere.
More girls than boys are in college and graduating from it; but there are no jobs.
There is a big movement of "stay at home moms" many of us wish we could afford that very thing that was considered normal, even though in my own family for 3 generations it never did happen.
Men working in women's jobs STILL tend to make more $$ than women.
Women CAN get jobs in men's fields, but they still get hassled and abused, even in white collar jobs like flying commercial airlines.
I really lucked out, I work for a large corporation who bends over backwards trying to be fair. And to me, they certainly have been; i'm well compensated for my work. But i know that i am the exception, not the rule.
I guess I'm not a feminist anymore, although I am incredibly proud of the women who fought for our right to vote, to receive fair wages, and to be considered equal in the eyes of the law to men. But bottom line, (and as the mother of two sons); I believe in equal rights for all of humanity, and even more equal rights for our neighbors, the animal kingdom and the plant kingdom. Thanks for listening.

[sfa]

Those commercials were targeted towards, and portrayed, older women with older children.

Does your program actually use that term, "displaced homemaker"? I would find that creepy. Our local CC has programs for people who need those things, but they're not targeted at any particular segment or situation. They're available for whomever needs them.

Karen

Could be the demographics of your area that determined the target of the ads. I don't know if our program uses the term "displaced homemaker" externally or not--I know we DO use it internally, but the advertising materials I think just use the name of the actual program. And I'd be very surprised if your local community college was the only CC in America not targeting programs at particular population segments. Most funding that's available through federal, state and private grants is designed for particular populations, so we have programs for high school dropouts, veterans returning from abroad, women and minorities in engineering, low income residents, mid-life career changers, non-native English speakers, people with disabilities, etc. Of COURSE the services are available to whoever needs them, but the high-need populations are targeted with special programs and funding, and the programs are focused on the particular needs of that particular population, so the mid-life career changers probably won't need help on interviewing and professional skills but may need help on study skills, and the high school dropouts are going to need GED preparation along with study skills and academic mentoring and career counseling. And women who have been out of the workforce for many years or never in the workforce to begin with have particular issues and problems that, for example, veterans don't have (and the veterans have issues that NO other population has!). In theory each individual might be able to go seek out the services that only she or he needs, but it's a lot easier for the students to have someone on staff suggest and guide them through the process so they don't miss something important.

Sarah

[Tuckervill]

I probably wasn't clear in that the ads were on TV during the early '70s.

We agree more than we disagree. I know that our local CC gets funding based on whatever particular program they can attract. I just hate governmental jargon, which is quite frequently insensitive and imprecise.

Karen

[GLC1968]

I haven't weighed in on this post before now, partly because I'm not 100% sure how I feel about many of the topics presented here. I have very much enjoyed reading all the points of view discussed so far.

I tend to cringe at the term 'feminist'. I'm not sure why, though. Perhaps because if I were to 100% embrace all that being a feminist would have meant in my younger days, it would also have meant being forced to look down upon all the choices my mother made in life, and I couldn't do that.

My mother didn't finish college. She was an 'airline stewardess' (yes, that's what they were called then) back when there was a height and weight requirement (and a heel height requirement, too!). She gave up her 'career' to marry my father and raise children even though that wasn't really what she wanted out of life. She wanted to be a doctor, but it just wasn't in the cards for her. Could she have fought for it? Absolutely. Did she? Apparently not, and I don't really know why.

I do know that my mom ran her own business out of the home when we were kids. My mother was the one who mowed the lawn and chased down errant spiders. She also did the cooking, the cleaning and the child care. She forced me to play soccer on the boys team (yes, I was forced - I was screaming and crying in the car on the way there because I didn't want to, but she made me) so that I would learn teamwork and the importance of physical activity (there were no 'girls' teams then). She encouraged me to play with Tonka trucks and Lego's along with my Barbies. As I got older, she ensured that I had every opportunity that my brother had. And from a very, very early age, she (and my father both) told me that I could do anything I set my mind to. I could be ANYTHING I wanted to be.

How did all this translate? Until I was in college, I didn't understand why all the boys wanted to be my friend but date someone else. I knew I could get more respect from a guy who looked at me as 'one of the boys', so that's how I related to them. Sexism is something that happens to other women, not to me. I remember when I was bartending and the sleezeball general manager used to hit on all the women in the place. He'd set their schedules so that he was working with certain ones. He'd give his 'favorites' better sections or better assignments. I saw how he spoke to them and about them because, like 98% of the men I've ever known, he treated me like one of the guys. Did I report him, hell yeah. Did he EVER treat me unfairly? Not once. I don't think it ever occurred to him to do so.

When I made a 180 degree career change at 29, I did so with intention. I purposely picked a field dominated by men. Why? Two reasons - 1) the subject matter did not come easily to me and I wanted a challege after my previous career and more importantly 2) because I knew I'd have an advantage. And did I ever. I got fellowships and grants because I was a minority. I got interviews and offers, TA positions, visiblity, opportunies, etc...partially because I was a woman in a field dominated by men, and partly because I spoke English natively (also a minorty for my field) and have excellent communication skills. I even had a paid PhD program laid at my feet at a top-rated school, if I wanted it...because there is an extreme shortage of women professors in my field.

I take full advantage of these opportunites. Opportunies created by the very women that would have frowned upon my mother's choices (in light of her desires). How do I rectify that?

Am I a feminist? I don't think so. How could I be when I take advange of the very inequality that feminism is trying to eliminate?

[Biciclista]

I haven't weighed in on this post before now, partly because I'm not 100% sure how I feel about many of the topics presented here. I have very much enjoyed reading all the points of view discussed so far.

I tend to cringe at the term 'feminist'. I'm not sure why, though. Perhaps because if I were to 100% embrace all that being a feminist would have meant in my younger days, it would also have meant being forced to look down upon all the choices my mother made in life, and I couldn't do that.

My mother didn't finish college. She was an 'airline stewardess' (yes, that's what they were called then) back when there was a height and weight requirement (and a heel height requirement, too!). She gave up her 'career' to marry my father and raise children even though that wasn't really what she wanted out of life. She wanted to be a doctor, but it just wasn't in the cards for her. Could she have fought for it? Absolutely. Did she? Apparently not, and I don't really know why.

I do know that my mom ran her own business out of the home when we were kids. My mother was the one who mowed the lawn and chased down errant spiders. She also did the cooking, the cleaning and the child care. She forced me to play soccer on the boys team (yes, I was forced - I was screaming and crying in the car on the way there because I didn't want to, but she made me) so that I would learn teamwork and the importance of physical activity (there were no 'girls' teams then). She encouraged me to play with Tonka trucks and Lego's along with my Barbies. As I got older, she ensured that I had every opportunity that my brother had. And from a very, very early age, she (and my father both) told me that I could do anything I set my mind to. I could be ANYTHING I wanted to be.

How did all this translate? Until I was in college, I didn't understand why all the boys wanted to be my friend but date someone else. I knew I could get more respect from a guy who looked at me as 'one of the boys', so that's how I related to them. Sexism is something that happens to other women, not to me. I remember when I was bartending and the sleezeball general manager used to hit on all the women in the place. He'd set their schedules so that he was working with certain ones. He'd give his 'favorites' better sections or better assignments. I saw how he spoke to them and about them because, like 98% of the men I've ever known, he treated me like one of the guys. Did I report him, hell yeah. Did he EVER treat me unfairly? Not once. I don't think it ever occurred to him to do so.

When I made a 180 degree career change at 29, I did so with intention. I purposely picked a field dominated by men. Why? Two reasons - 1) the subject matter did not come easily to me and I wanted a challege after my previous career and more importantly 2) because I knew I'd have an advantage. And did I ever. I got fellowships and grants because I was a minority. I got interviews and offers, TA positions, visiblity, opportunies, etc...partially because I was a woman in a field dominated by men, and partly because I spoke English natively (also a minorty for my field) and have excellent communication skills. I even had a paid PhD program laid at my feet at a top-rated school, if I wanted it...because there is an extreme shortage of women professors in my field.

I take full advantage of these opportunites. Opportunies created by the very women that would have frowned upon my mother's choices (in light of her desires). How do I rectify that?

Am I a feminist? I don't think so. How could I be when I take advange of the very inequality that feminism is trying to eliminate?

++++ great post!! ++++

[sgtiger]

Of all the adjectives that I might use to describe myself, feminist would probably not be one. Then again, I haven't given it too much thought previously. I do ,however, fully believe in women's rights. And I see women's rights as being more than a women only issue. I think it is a human rights issue. I believe that everyone should have the opportunity to pursue their goals and be able to live their lives as they see fit as long as it does not impinge upon the rights of others'. It's going to take more than just us, as women, to recognize and to speak out about the injustices we see in this world towards women though. It will take changing the mentality of the human race. Whether it may or may not be agreed upon that existing legislation and workplace policies go far enough or not, those policies are moot if they are ignored. We have to raise the standards by which women see themselves and men see women in order for those policies to truly be effective and to mean anything. Just as gaining civil rights took more than minority advocates in order for them to be recognized, we need the men in our lives to believe in us - whether they are our bosses, fathers, friends, brothers, sons, mentors, spiritual leaders, legislators, etc. Without their backing and willingness to see us ,women, as being just as capable; the change we want will not happen. Let's face it, we don't live in a vacuum. Our lives are influenced by men both in positive and negative ways, whether we choose to recognize that or not. So I do not see how we can have a discussion about women's right without involving the role of men in it. Personally, I'd like to imagine a world where there isn't a necessity for such policies, because PEOPLE are respectful of one another and they are recognized for their actions.

[PinkBike]

i just sat down and read this whole thread.
i think: feminism is about validation.
as long as there is a swimsuit edition of sports illustrated we are not there.
as long as it is still generally acceptable to demean women, we are not there, and believe me it is - overwhelmingly and blatantly.

i am an aircraft mechanic - one of maybe a half-dozen women out of about 800 mechanics where i work. almostly exclusively white, american men. i actually feel a kinship with the black struggle, i believe i share some of their struggles. as for my male coworkers, they have no idea what i live with. no idea.

i agree with zen, there are only nurses. only feminists. and only mechanics.

i wish. this whole topic makes me sad.

[Zen]

Am I a feminist? I don't think so. How could I be when I take advange of the very inequality that feminism is trying to eliminate?

I see it as taking advantage of the opportunities that the feminist movement helped create.
Some plant the tree, some sit in it's shade.

[OakLeaf]

I'm so frustrated by the number of posters in this thread who view feminists as somehow looking down on stay-at-home moms.

Of course there are many people who do look down on stay-at-home moms - just as there are many who look down on any other work traditionally done by women - nurse, secretary, elementary school teacher, fiber artist, etc. It's unsurprising that some early feminists still harbored some of the prejudices that had been drilled into everyone since their birth. "Consciousness raising" is a process that didn't and doesn't happen overnight.

But devaluation of housework wasn't invented by feminists, and it certainly has not been feminists who've perpetuated it. For the past 30 years, it's been largely those who describe themselves as "conservative" who revile women (exclusively women) who "have children they can't support." Where is the equivalent vituperation of high-earning males who "have children they can't raise?" Where is the government mandate and popular demand for them to spend more time at home? What is the inverse of "welfare queens" - "day care kings," perhaps?

I wish these posters would remember that it's the second-wave feminists in the early 1970s who developed the concept of wages for housework. How much more is it possible to respect and validate homemakers, than to demand that homemaking be valued equally with all other work?

[Pax]

Well said Zen and OakLeaf!

[shootingstar]

I'm so frustrated by the number of posters in this thread who view feminists as somehow looking down on stay-at-home moms.

Of course there are many people who do look down on stay-at-home moms - just as there are many who look down on any other work traditionally done by women - nurse, secretary, elementary school teacher, fiber artist, etc. It's unsurprising that some early feminists still harbored some of the prejudices that had been drilled into everyone since their birth. "Consciousness raising" is a process that didn't and doesn't happen overnight.

But devaluation of housework wasn't invented by feminists, and it certainly has not been feminists who've perpetuated it. For the past 30 years, it's been largely those who describe themselves as "conservative" who revile women (exclusively women) who "have children they can't support."

A few months ago on TE here, this was the reaction on the use of "tomboy".
http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showt...ghlight=tomboy

Really, that word is old-fashioned within today's context. But somehow there were a few posters who took abit of pride they were a tomboy in childhood.

Well, for those of us who weren't "playing" with the boys, climbing trees, ..then were we less exploratory, less adventuresome, less daring...?

I don't think so, hard to say that to a kid like myself, who was unwillingly doing English translation for my mother in stores, banks, etc. starting from age 8 and up and given other adult-like responsibilties at home to help mother, when other kids were playing more freely. And yes, father I will help you type up the immigration application forms for relatives he was helping sponsor from China to Canada. I was 16 yrs. old. (No wonder why feminism for me, is layered with issues related to immigrant matters, race relations, etc.)

My success as well for all my sibs, sits on the shoulders of a mother who looks like and is indeed, low-income, tired immigrant mother, stay at home mother who was a picture bride (didn't meet my father in person, in advance of marrying him after she got off the plane in Canada) and knows she was EXTREMELY lucky to have married a man who didn't physically abuse her, had hrs. and hrs. of respectful discussions with him (I associate any decent marriage partially with ability to have long, exploratory and respectful discussions.) and a husband in his retirement, shares cooking and household work with her. I know how rare the latter is in THEIR generation.

My comment earlier about knowing English language as a language of power, to even express injustice and achievement to a broader audience, is important because this whole discussion excludes attitudes and opinions of millions of non-English speaking women and men worldwide.

[Irulan]

I'm so frustrated by the number of posters in this thread who view feminists as somehow looking down on stay-at-home moms.

Of course there are many people who do look down on stay-at-home moms - just as there are many who look down on any other work traditionally done by women - nurse, secretary, elementary school teacher, fiber artist, etc. It's unsurprising that some early feminists still harbored some of the prejudices that had been drilled into everyone since their birth. "Consciousness raising" is a process that didn't and doesn't happen overnight.

But devaluation of housework wasn't invented by feminists, and it certainly has not been feminists who've perpetuated it. For the past 30 years, it's been largely those who describe themselves as "conservative" who revile women (exclusively women) who "have children they can't support." Where is the equivalent vituperation of high-earning males who "have children they can't raise?" Where is the government mandate and popular demand for them to spend more time at home? What is the inverse of "welfare queens" - "day care kings," perhaps?

I wish these posters would remember that it's the second-wave feminists in the early 1970s who developed the concept of wages for housework. How much more is it possible to respect and validate homemakers, than to demand that homemaking be valued equally with all other work?

I must comment as I am one of those who said that.

I wouldn't have said it if I hadn't experienced it in a real way.

To deny that the feminists of the 70s and 80s put down, disrespected or poo-poohed the women who gave up on careers and degrees to choose to raise their kids while their spouse was the provider is to have really big blinders on. And, I think to say that feminists didn't invent the devaluation of at-home moms is dancing around the issue, and not acknowledging the crap that women regularly dish out to each other. In my experience, the feminist movement increased the devaluation of at home moms and put it in the limelight, because we weren't getting with the program.

I would have love to been respected for my choice, but instead I got a lot of disdain, "how could you" etc from my so-called sisters. How validating is that? It has nothing to do with equal pay for equal work; it has to do with judgment, righteousness, and put oneself above another for choices. The vibe was sent out from my so called sisters that getting married, staying home and having kids was the ultimate sell out. This has nothing to do with conservatives, or other female professions, and nothing to do with welfare families, either. I could care less about wages for housework; it was the look in other women's eyes that I was somehow diminished, lesser-than that was disheartening.

Yeah, I"m carrying a big chip around. I acknowledge that.

[GLC1968]

I see it as taking advantage of the opportunities that the feminist movement helped create.
Some plant the tree, some sit in it's shade.

It rankles me that you see what I do as "sitting the shade". I guess I should have said that chosing the career I did and then busting my rear to succeed in it was no cake walk. This was particularly obvious when I was in school and was surrounded by 'old boy' professors (and one arab one-who clearly had REAL issues with women in my field) who daily said things that would have made many women question their choice. I took it as a challenge and laughed at their small mindedness. While I may not be blazing brand new trails, I'm certainly doing everything in my power to help further clear those early paths so that there is plenty of room for more women to follow in my footsteps. And yes, I take every advantage that being a woman affords me.

My point about being a feminist is exactly what Zen pointed out...by my taking advantage of being a woman and working it to it's full potential, I guess I can't be considered a feminist. Like so many have said here, a feminist is about equality for all. It's really too bad because truly 'working the system' to advance an idea is an area that I can testify offers great opportunity to futher the cause. I believe that women (and all minorities) should be able to do whatever they choose to do. I don't buy into 'feminism' as a classification for me because the very nature of the definition makes the choices that I made invalid or somehow unsavory, if you will.


And for Oakleaf and others who expressed frustration at the idea that some of us feel that feminists look down on stay at home moms, I would like to point out that back when I was an impressionable young girl and first forming my views about how women fit into this world, the feminists that I was exposed to DID look down on stay at home moms and woman who took traditional female roles in the work world (like stewardesses). I understand why they did and I also understand that 1) not every feminist felt that way and 2) it's very different now, but the fact of the matter is, these early radical women were my first exposure to the idea and they were influencial in how I developed my views. That isn't to say that they have any bearing on why I don't consider myself a feminist now, but it is the reason I didn't jump on the band-wagon back then.

And I do agree with Irulan that there is absolutely a disdain towards women who choose to stay home and raise childern AND there is also disdain towards those who chose to have careers and not ever have children. Where did this huge barrier/line come from? Why does it have to be either or? Again, I know that most people here don't feel this way and I'm not blaming feminists for this...I'm just saying that there is a big barrier there and the idea that women can choose EITHER path is clearly not widely accepted yet. With all the negative connotations associated with the word 'feminism', perhaps a different movement would be more effective?

I'm hereby declaring myself a 'humanist'. Anyone wanna join me?

[OakLeaf]

I missed where I said that no feminists ever looked down at SAHMs. In fact, I acknowledged that some, maybe many, did so.

I'll go further. As a teen, I was one of them. I don't remember ever having said anything directly personal to anyone, but I may have, and whether or not I did, I apologize.

You know where I originally learned that attitude?

From my non-feminist, traditional-sex-role dad. And the way he treated my own stay-at-home mom. From my earliest memories, her work and her role was devalued and disrespected and openly insulted. Not by feminists. By a patriarchal male. I learned that, and it wasn't until I left home and began to associate with women who respect women (a synonym for feminists) that I was able to unlearn it.