The term "feminist" and its connotations

[Tao]

Oh, well Tao is kind of a hick, so we'll just have to forgive his assumptions about feminists. (yeah, don't worry I am totally justifying a stereotyped response based on a stereotype.)

Too true!

I'm looking back to the point, earlier in the discussion, where Tao says "'feminist' by definition carries an extremist connotation . . . [so any generalization of the group is inherent]." That's not something I'm willing to accept.

First off, apologies to the Mary Poppins thread for this co-op, this conversation really started in an older feminist thread. Second, to Katya, I personally apologize if anything I have or will say feels like an attack, it is not my desire to rationalize or justify any attacks on feminism or any other group. The biggest reason I'd say my thoughts are more applicable to feminists than to Muslims would be lack of definition. To someone saying "I'm a Muslim", I can ask if they follow Sunni Islam or Shia Islam and be readily able to know much of what they claim to stand for. To someone saying "I'm a feminist", I can conceivably ask if they feel they are Third wave but, to my experience, even after getting confirmation upon such, I'm not much more enlightened than prior.

By Katya's definition of feminism:

Feminism is the radical idea that women are people.

I'd posit that every member of this forum is a feminist, and as such, can offer our own feminist views on feminism and still nothing can be said to help define the term, as it covers nearly everyone the average American is likely to meet. In the other thread LJ gave the example of going around exclaiming "I'm a eukaryote!" Which is apt, though possibly too broad. Perhaps a similar, though less common, analogy could be found in claiming "I'm euploid!" According to wikipedia, 1 in 160 live births have chromosomal abnormalities, and yet trying to find a title that means "one who has no abnormal chromosomes" is challenging, to say the least. I'd think that those not qualifying for Katya's definition number even less than 1 in 160, so I would expect to find a title even more difficult to find, as we tend to label that which has something to define it. I reject the idea that a title so ambiguous can carry any meaning, ergo more extreme definitions compete for the connotation.

Either the term has meaning, and can (and will) pick up some generalizations from the public, or it already is so general that it is meaningless.

Edit: Holy cow, I started this reply before the split, and find it finally posts to page two: whoa.

[Dragon Lady]

I just read this blog post today from the Feminist Breeder (because I read birthing blogs cuz I'm weird like that) and thought Katya might enjoy it. I think it explains what she's been trying to say. And by its definition, I think we're all feminists.

Edited to fix html typo and again to fix normal typo.

[wired]

The blog post lists the following as a qualifying question for feminism....

Do you believe in political, social, and economic equality between men and women?

I'd be interested to know what people think that means. I suspect that what "political, social, and economic equality" means in practice will find a huge variation.

[NerdGirl]

I think I tend to qualify all kinds of labels that I use for myself depending on who I'm talking to because there are a lot of people who associate things with those labels that aren't accurate descriptions of me. I often tell people that I'm "Mormon, but not a very typical Mormon." Or sometimes "Mormon, but very in favor of gay marriage." Or I'm "pro-choice, which doesn't mean I think abortion is a good thing, just that it should be legal because some people are not as privileged as I am to have never had to make that choice." Or "I'm from Alberta, but I'm very liberal politically." And sometimes I'll say things like "I'm a feminist, which doesn't mean that I hate men or think that women need to act like men or that motherhood is bad." It's not that I associate those things with those labels, but I know that sometimes the people I'm talking to do and I don't want to be mischaracterized.

Really I guess that's why I just don't like labels, but sometimes you have to use them to describe yourself. If I'm forced to label myself, I would label myself as a feminist rather than not a feminist, but I would much prefer to describe myself by listing the things that feminism means to me instead of using a single word that has so many misconceptions associated with it. I don't always feel right about putting qualifications on a term I'm describing myself with, because then I feel like I'm saying, "I'm a whatever, but unlike all those other whatevers out there, I'm not this and this and this." Because all the other feminists don't hate men, and all the other Mormons aren't necessarily whatever I'm saying I'm not, but if you try to say, "I'm a feminist, and I know you think feminists hate men, but that's simply not true," then you just get into a big argument. So I either avoid using terms that bring a lot of not necessarily true connotations to people's minds, or I qualify them.

Although lately I have been calling myself Feminist Mormon Med Student when I comment on Feminist Mormon Housewives, so I guess I don't really have a problem using the feminist label when I'm talking to people who think it means the same thing I think it means.

[Portia]

Thanks, moderator, for spinning this off!

I hardly think I qualify as a "feminist" myself considering that I spend my time solving multi-step algebraic equations and playing online dominion, not marching in support of Planned Parenthood or health care reform provisions or something. In fact, several of my friends whom I would consider my peers in liberal-ness are anything from perplexed to appalled at my own attitude to gender roles in relationships (my views on men making money could be torn from the pages of an Edith Wharton novel, quite frankly. Whether that's good or bad is another topic, but it shows that I am a traditionalist in an important way).

I hope we realize that it is a fictional character. Who would be long dead by now, at any rate? And maybe posters on here are only acquainted with middle class Mormon mommy helicopter-style parenting, but trust me, everything seen as "domestic" in today's society, whether that's cooking, cleaning, or getting on the floor and playing with the kids, would have been done by servants' servants in an upper class Edwardian home. The Coming of Bill (Wodehouse) was one of the most interesting books I've ever read which addressed attitudes to mothering. In it, he satirizes the then-in-vogue (very late 1910s very early 1920s) attitude that kids should be kept in hermetic, hospital-like rooms, not played with too much, and certainly not coddled. The wife doesn't "work," (she's the daughter of a millionaire), and neither does the dad, for much of the book (he is a wannabe artist hipster), but neither of them are "stay-at-home parents," either. Her aunt sort of is, but they have a whole phalanx of servants.

The term "feminist" does very much apply to early suffragists: what else would you call them? Anyone can read about the "first," "second," and "third" waves. But I stick to my guns that the Disneyfied version is an expression of MODERN-DAY anxieties about motherhood (isn't all art reflective of the culture that creates it?) than what an actual wife of a banker would do and feel AT THE TIME. If a London mom wants to drop out of the theater circuit and go take her kids to playgroup and French tutoring and shopping at Whole Foods, go right ahead. But I just feel that with such anachronism in a show set 100 years ago, you might as well put the woman in a minivan and zumba class. It's the anachronism that bugs me, not the domestic roles.

If anyone can make a convincing argument that the current notion of stay-at-home-mother predates Betty Friedan, please, speak up.

[Marduk]

I actually think that's pretty on-the-nose, Portia. Disney has a habit (not that they are the only ones, but certainly they are a big offender) of supplanting local norms (both historically and ethno-culturally) on the times and places they seek to represent.