(no subject)

[labellementeuse]

I had a pretty terrifying phone conversation today that basically asked me to defend myself as a feminist. I'm standing for a women's rights position - extremely nerve-racking considering that my background in women's activism is limited, but everyone has to start somewhere - and so I was expecting some questions about myself as a feminist, but boy was this conversation frustrating. I was asked to identify which wave of feminism I came from, a notion I find pretty intensely frustrating - there are things about all the waves I applaud, and things about all the waves I deplore; if I had to describe myself it would be a mixture of third-wave and second-wave, heavy on the third wave, but I really think most of that is derived from the fact that third-wave feminism is what surrounds me. And I nevertheless think that there are some pretty heavy problems with third-wave feminism - I am sex positive, for example, but I think there are elements of third-wave feminism that verge on being post-feminist and exploitative in regards to sex. (Of course, I couldn't give any of these examples to show that I do know a little bit about feminism at the time because I was shitting myself.)

But, you know, what I really find frustrating is the notion that it's something that's good or appropriate to do, push someone into a corner and threaten them with academic feminism until they break down and cry. For one thing, I'm pretty sure that serious academic feminism is going to be of minimal use to me in this position - more on that if I get it, which at the moment feels a little unlikely. For another thing - what the hell is the use of asking someone which wave of feminism they're from? What would it tell you about me if I said I was third-wave feminist? - or post-feminist? OK, if I told you I was post-feminist I *might* mean "I am something of an airhead who hasn't been paying attention to the oppression of women", or alternatively I might mean "I am a rightfully angry WoC/queer/poor woman who is frustrated with the way feminism has elided my experiences and do not wish to associate myself with feminism", although then I probably wouldn't call myself post-feminist. But you know what I mean! You learn nothing from a feminist by her identifying herself with a wave because waves are descriptive, even historical terms of a general movement. They're not terms you can use to identify someone - I mean, yes, someone might talk about themselves as a *product of* X wave feminism and I'll always be influenced by the post-feminism that's around me, the third-wave feminists I read, and the second-wave feminists of my mother's generation. They all went into making up me, the feminist. How should I identify?

Comments

[amarynth.livejournal.com]

Wouldn't it have been funny if you'd said first wave? Just to fuck with her?

On a more serious note, is this an elected or appointed position?

[amarynth.livejournal.com]

Ah, that stinks. Well, good luck.

I've got to say, having reflected on it while making a snack, that from my (limited) experience your position, as somewhere between second and third wave, seems to be the position of every single feminist. Obviously nobody identifies with the first wave, and almost nobody seems to want to throw their lot in with either wave completely.

Of course it's possible that this is just people trying to have it both ways, and that second wave feminists are afraid of looking like they haven't noticed the last 30 years happening, and third wave feminists are afraid of looking like they think feminism was invented by the Spice Girls. But to me, 'which wave do you identify with' isn't a very useful question - although I suppose the follow up might be.

As something of an aside I also think the term 'sex-positive' is becoming increasingly broad and therefore increasingly meaningless. It seems to encompass everybody who doesn't think that sex between men and women in a patriarchy is intrinsically bad, which has got to be, for better or worse, 90% of feminists.

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

yeah, I'm trying just to be like, que sera sera. *shrug, sigh*.

For the record, the Spice Girls explicitly identified as not feminist, and I would probably place them as post-feminist girl-power (as c.f. grrl power) types. Third wave feminism is a bit older than that. But yeah, you're absolutely right.

[amarynth.livejournal.com]

I didn't know the Spice Girls had specifically identified as non-feminist but even if they hadn't I wouldn't imagine they did. I was deliberately using an over-the-top accusation. It should be taken as seriously as the idea that second wave feminists wish it was still 1978.

[clockworkflight.livejournal.com]

*sympathises* Not to mention it dismisses the achievements of feminists between the waves, or those who were active around the waves but were excluded from them.

WTF is wrong with asking "What does feminism mean to you?"?

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

Right, exactly!

I don't know. :-/ I think she has this idea of me as someone really fluffy and ignorant, which - you know, maybe, but I don't feel that! ugh.

[disturbed-kiwi.livejournal.com]

Dude. None of any of those distinctions meant jack squat to me standing as they did without explanation. I imagine they are the same sort of pissant distinctions that don't matter in a general sense (such as when I'm trying to classify exactly what sort of genre a band like Katatonia comes from, with its Doom Metal background but clean vocals, and the evolution into songs with strong melody and little distortion etc etc) but only to die-hards.

That may not help you feel better about getting the job given it is a die-hard position, but I just had to throw my oar in.

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

Well, I think the idea is that if you're standing for a women's rights position you should be able to understand what is meant by second wave feminism (for example). It is a pretty broad and somewhat important distinction in the same way that, for example, one might refer to McCarthyism and expect to be understood. But, ugh, I don't know. :-/ thanks tho, hon!

[disturbed-kiwi.livejournal.com]

That makes sense, like if you're starting a metal band you need to now what subcategories you're going to fit into so you can find the appropriate bands to play with and know what expectations your audience will bring. Just for context.

Obviously I'm phrasing this in terms more familiar to me ;)

[trialia]

*laughing quietly* And all this, my love, is why I do not define myself as a feminist. Ever. Despite being completely up for equality and all that jazz :)

[labellementeuse.livejournal.com]

Honestly, I found this comment simultaneously patronising and offensive. :-/ I mean, first off, feminism is the radical belief that women are people. And secondly I kind of take exception to the implication that *all* feminists are somehow like this woman. I mean, I identify as a feminist and I don't feel the need to defend that to everyone or interrogate everyone who calls themself one. :-/ I'm not trying to start anything, I'm just letting you know that this comment bothered me.

[trialia]

Heh, then you read it wrong. The implication about which you're talking is not my implication - it's other people's stereotype, and I don't want to be fitted into it in their heads, so I don't take on identifying as feminist and all the baggage that implies with certain people - even, apparently, people like you who do identify as feminist. Frankly, If I call someone a lady and she takes offence because I'm not using the term woman, she can go fuck herself for all I care. I don't use the term to be patronising.

[dazyndara.livejournal.com]

*Wishes you luck*

Did you find out if you are working on Thurs night?