Feminists? Any here?

[Irulan]

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.

In a lot of ways this post really makes me smile... we are on opposite ends of the experience spectrum here. This really shows how we are so much products of our own experience, in addition to a larger culture.

My mom was an original 60's working mother feminist ( almost a bra burner but not quite), my dad was a weak man. I was spoon fed feminist idealism from a very early age, but the paths I took with my life soon diverged from the then typical feminist agenda. That would have been fine on it's own, but within my own peer group, I got a whole lot of crap for it.

i will leave it at that.

[Crankin]

It's funny, your experience of the SAHM vs. working outside the home mom varies so much, depending on your peer group. When I had my kids in the 80's, everyone I worked with was my age and having kids. I never gave a thought to staying home, even if I could have afforded it. But then, one summer I took my older son to a mother-child toddler activity class. There, I met up with a group of women that eventually became some of my closest friends. But none of them worked. This was a group of 40 or so women. I went to the play groups, classes, and couples activities in the summer and on the weekends/nights. No one dissed me, but they just didn't understand how I could live my life the way I did. All of these women were highly educated, too. When I got pregnant with the second one, I was asked, "So, you're going to stay home now?" They were surprised when I said "no," but I think I was somewhat accepted due to my "traditional female career."
Some of these people had been married much longer than I had been and waited to have their kids.
My lifestyle worked out very well for me, my husband, and kids. I never expected anyone to do exactly what I had done; it's too personal of a decision. My mom, who never worked, continually told me to have a career and my own money! I think she was born too early. Although my dad was quite active in household things and child care for a man in the fifties and sixties, my mom would have received a lot of cr*p from her peers for working back then. It just wasn't done, especially where I lived.

[PamNY]

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.

Keep in mind that what you describe happens to most everyone at some point in life. If you expect validation from everyone you know, you are bound to be disappointed. Virtually any major life or career choice is likely to elicit disapproval from someone. The idea that a person owes you validation because of gender doesn't make sense. The list of women who disapprove of me is long, and likely to get longer before I die.

Pam

[Mr. Bloom]

I was spoon fed feminist idealism from a very early age, but the paths I took with my life soon diverged from the then typical feminist agenda. That would have been fine on it's own, but within my own peer group, I got a whole lot of crap for it.

But, at the core, isn't that was all this is about...having the freedom to determine what is right for you without:

• subordinating your beliefs to someone else's mold
• subjecting yourself to someone else's interpretation/perspective of things around you?

Forget gender...isn't that at the core what freedom is? True freedom is the ability to do what you NEED to do without being subjected to the persecution or the pressure of what someone else WANTS you to do. If you NEED to work to support your family - GREAT! If you NEED to stay home to raise your kids - GREAT! Every situation and circumstance is different, so why do some believe that there is only one mold that works A working mom is no less a woman than a SAHM and vice versa.

And, for the record, I am not a "male feminist", because, I believe at the core, that there is not equality in any extreme. Women are women, men are men - there are inherent differences, but there is no superiority in God's eyes...so there's no room for any sense of superiority in mine.

[Grog]

But, at the core, isn't that was all this is about...having the freedom to determine what is right for you without:

• subordinating your beliefs to someone else's mold
• subjecting yourself to someone else's interpretation/perspective of things around you?

Forget gender...isn't that at the core what freedom is?

I think a lot of the liberation movements (of all strands) have been about realizing how "what we want" is actually constructed. It's not a conspiracy or anything, it's just that the world already exists by the time we're born and there's lots of expectations on people about how they're supposed to behave and be treated. 2That's the way we do it."

These expectations are based on gender for a large part and on other things too, call them race, class, ability, etc. You realize that these expectations are there when you break them, and you're negatively sanctioned for it. When you're clearly made to feel that you do not belong somewhere, or that you are not behaving in a way that's appropriate for you. I felt a lot of that when I was in a position of leadership in a political organization for a while (it ended in me resignating). I felt that (less so) when preparing to get married and feeling that I was out of place, not because I was a woman but because my culture was a bit different from that of the person I was marrying. (It did not end and it works nicely despite the difference.) As long as one behaves exactly as expected, nothing is noticeable. When things start differing from the expectations, you're in for a ride. And we live in a world with lots of difference now, international mobility, different languages, etc. so there's lot of people feeling that kind of "friction" all the time. (We need some Chamois Butt'r.)

To say the least, expectations are not distributed evenly, and a lot of people are getting the wrong side of the deal. Often they don't really notice it. Many religions are built around the acceptance of one's place in the system and the hope that the next time around (next life, or in heaven) it will be a better place. Changing the deal is largely impossible to fight on one's own, because the lines are so deeply drawn. That's why collectives form.

So what is real freedom?

For my own life and ethics, I've accepted that there are expectations that I will simply fulfill, gender roles I will take, etc. because they are so deeply carved into me. I'm not sure if that's freedom, but I need to pick my struggles, and freedom is not my priority I guess. There are other expectations that I really don't think are right, and I do my part to inch toward change. I feel like a slug trying to get to Ushuaïa, and I'll probably get run over before I get there.

[OakLeaf]

And, for the record, I am not a "male feminist", because, I believe at the core, that there is not equality in any extreme. Women are women, men are men - there are inherent differences, but there is no superiority in God's eyes...so there's no room for any sense of superiority in mine.

What makes you think that feminism has anything to do with "superiority?"

[Mr. Bloom]

some of the original posts...clearly imply that many do believe that...I don't personally think it does...

[Deborajen]

Feminism has a lot to do with superiority. Its roots are in the women's movement for equality - political, social and economic. Since the days of suffrage (and even way before that) women have fought for such things as the right to vote, the right to equal pay for equal work, and to break social barriers by doing such things as riding a bicycle. It was about being given equal rights and not being treated inferiorly.

It's true that times have changed a lot, and I agree with one of the first posts on this thread that it's harder to distinguish a feminist from a non-feminist woman anymore. There are laws that protect equal rights (or at least try to). Women are still, though, generally more challenged at such things as being accepted as authority figures. Some of this is social and some of it is economic (ie., workplace titles and corresponding salary, etc.). Although it's now acceptable for women to ride bikes, a lot more men ride than women. I wouldn't call this a "superiority" thing because it's more of a societal role, but maybe I'm somewhat of a feminist in that I'm in favor changing the role a little more.

No, feminism isn't entirely about superiority. Today it's definitely less about superiority than it was before, but it does does still exist and it's definitely in feminism's roots.

[Zen]

The word "superiority" doesn't even fit in this sense. It just doesn't sound right to my ear. Equality, yes, superiority no.

[Deborajen]

Superiority as in doing away with it --

If there isn't equality, there's superiority/inferiority

[Biciclista]

I'd argue with any woman here my age who says she wasn't devalued at some point BECAUSE she was female. Superiority indeed. Until women are no longer treated like chattel around the world, we need to fight for the rights of those women.

[Mr. Bloom]

I'd argue with any woman here my age who says she wasn't devalued at some point BECAUSE she was female. Superiority indeed. Until women are no longer treated like chattel around the world, we need to fight for the rights of those women.

Mimi, are you advocating superiority or equality??

If you agree that male domination/superiority is wrong, then how does one advocate an equal, but opposite wrong?

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

She's advocating equality.

[salsabike]

I'd argue with any woman here my age who says she wasn't devalued at some point BECAUSE she was female. Superiority indeed. Until women are no longer treated like chattel around the world, we need to fight for the rights of those women.

Mimi, are you advocating superiority or equality??

If you agree that male domination/superiority is wrong, then how does one advocate an equal, but opposite wrong?

Thank you, Mimi. I couldn't agree more.

Hard to imagine how Mimi's comment could be read as advocating superiority instead of equality. But whatever.

[Zen]

I guess I'm not a feminist anymore, ...

oh but I think you are.
As time progresses, society changes and the way we make our voices heard also changes.

The 60's and early 70's were revolutionary times. The civil rights movement, the resurgence of the womens rights movement and Vietnam war protests were all in the streets at the same time. We do our protesting and organizing via pixels, zeroes and ones now and I think we have a greater voice than ever. I bet you're using that voice.