So I'm reading Feminism is For Everybody by bell hooks, and I just have to say, so far this is the best book about feminism that I have encountered. Straight from the beginning she explains why feminism is not necessarily a fight against "the man," literally, and is against sexism and oppression from every source possible: male, female, young, or old.
First of all, this comes into play with people like Sarah Palin and Phyllis Schlafly. Both of these women are/were in politics, so both of them were in a position of power; both of these women also have/had a strong voice to influence the public; and both of these women, are women. But, for some reason, Phyllis Schlafly was against the Equal Rights Movement and Palin is an advocate for women in the home. So here's the deal: both of these women act like feminists, but mentally they both give into sexism.
Palin is an advocate for women being in the home, for strict motherhood, and she is pro-life, so no abortions.
To quote bell hooks:
"If feminism is a movement to end sexist oppression, and depriving females of reproductive rights is a form of sexist oppression, then one cannot be anti-choice and a feminist. A woman can insist she would never choose to have an abortion while affirming her support of the right of women to choose and still be an advocate of feminist politics. She cannot be anti-abortion and an advocate of feminism."
Now, back to motherhood. I'm not saying if you want to be a mother then you're not a feminist- in fact, I can't imagine growing up and not having kids; being a mother (eventually) is one of the things I have to experience. The difference is that Palin believes that women should fulfill their role in the home as a mother BEFORE they pursue their career in business and politics. Basically, the female's first and main priority is to have kids and to raise them.
Well, that right there is the problem. It is ok if a woman wants to be a mother and raise kids, that is her choice; but that is eactly it, it is HER CHOICE. If a woman does not want to have a child, she shouldn't have to. She should have the power to pursue a career, to have kids, or to do both. By forcing a woman into the role of the mother, that is oppression, that is sexism. Excuse me for this relatively distasteful analogy, but it's the best way I can get the point across:
Sex. It's natural. People do it. It's their choice. Nothing is wrong with coitus.
Rape. It's technically sex, only forced. That is what is wrong with it.
Forcing someone to become a mother, or to have a child, is basically rape. Obviously sex is a part of life. The problem is when it is forced upon you. There is nothing wrong with a woman cooking, a woman doing the laundry, a woman wanting to be a mother. You can do these activities as a female and still consider yourself a powerful woman, a feminist. In fact I enjoy all of these activities and do them in my leisure time. The problem is when motherhood is forced upon you. When you have someone in the government REQUIRING you to raise kids, stay in the home, and maintain the "housewife" image; that is no longer freedom but instead oppression.
So if Palin considers herself a feminist she needs to re-think the laws she supports. I understand if you believe that life starts at conception; I understand if you believe that abortion is murder; BUT not everyone does. If the woman's life is in danger, if it wasn't her choice to become pregnant, she needs to have an option, she needs the freedom to chose.
Feminism is about supporting freedoms and rights for women.Women hold their own stigmas, their own ideals against the actions of what other females do. That is sexism. Their own minds have an expectation, a requirement for the roles of women in society. That is sexism. Women put other females down because they disapprove of their life choices. That is sexism, too.
Feminism is for everybody, and oppression can come from anybody. So watch your thoughts, because even you could be adding to the limitations of females in society.
"Sisterhood could not be powerful as long as women were competitively at war with one another" -bell hooks
There as also serious economic dependency issues if the female is required to "mother"first before pursuing a career. Look at the position of the women 40-50s now. There is "age" discrimination in the workforce. All you have to do is look around and the women you know. Those women who are divorced, or even still married and dependent on the husband's financial decision-making, or after years of marriage and devotion to child rearing find themselves in economic turmoil. And what will they do for retirement? Many will not get sufficient social security benefits, will not have the skills for quality income-earning jobs, & can not be independent.
ReplyDeleteSeems to me that much of the "women at home" propaganda is a distraction from the insidious economic oppression that exists. Women need to be economically independent to claim their real power and choice.
And why is it that Sarh Palin and Phylis Schafly are not home with their mouths shut? Seems to me they are making profits from celebrity status. Sarah Palin should be ashamed or her child rearing skills instead of preaching to the masses.
Words to our precious daughters in this coming generation...keep shifting the paradigm. Go girls, but remember the generation that came before you. They may need your help;)
I think this is a darn good book, too...and why is it that people seem to be so uncomfortable with choice? It's even in the gay rights movement's argument: it's not a choice, therefore it's okay to be gay. But if people WERE making choices, it would be "worse"!
ReplyDelete