So part 2 of the 'Are Women Dominating YA" conversation is up on the Stacked Books blog.
There was also a great twitter conversation between authors E. Lockhart, Maureen Johnson, John Green, Maggie Stiefvater, and librarian 'Teen Librarian Toolbox' about what this blog post means and what the bigger picture of gender on the NYT list means.
It should be known that I follow E. MJ and John Green on twitter so I was sort of reading this as it unfolded but the link provides an inclusive view of the whole conversation. I adore these authors and I think that they are so smart, and MJ in particular has taken on gender in YA before with her cover flip article. Also, here's the awesome slideshow of cover flipped books.
The twitter conversation brings up some great points. First of all, is the biggest problem here with the NYT best seller list? Or is it with gender in YA (and the idea of females dominating YA). MJ clearly believes gender is the problem, although agrees that the NYT best seller is rife with issues as well.
I think that perhaps the NYT issue is a big deal, but as MJ points out it is more concerning for writers themselves, not the public as a whole. I mean I can see the issues with judging ALL of the YA books out there by placing them on one list that only has 15 spots, but the issue of gender in YA is so much bigger than one problematic list.
John Green also makes a good point by saying that the NYT bestseller list probably shows more clearly which YA books adults are buying. Rather than what YA books teenagers are buying. Although, full disclaimer I am an adult buying lots of YA books and I certainly don't think that there is anything wrong with adults reading YA. But it is interesting, where is the list that tells us which YA books teens are really reading?
John also states that he believes that list of which YA books teens are buying would be largely by female authors and perhaps this is true. I don't know where such a list exists, and yes there are a lot of female YA authors so this could be very possible. But I don't think that is the main point in this blog post and discussion. I think that the main point is that regardless of the fact that there are MANY female YA authors who write lots of amazing books, the NYT YA bestseller list is disproportionately full of books written by male authors. So, male YA authors are still the ones getting the 'acclaim' for their books, even if male YA authors are technically in the minority.
Kelly over at Stacked Books also brings up some problematic tweets from the twitter conversation between the authors and a librarian:
"1. Green's comment that we need to accept this is happening and "begin a conversation about why."
There is no "beginning" this conversation. It has been on going for a long, long time. But it's interesting that the moment a male steps in to the gender conversation, it's a beginning. Just because someone decides to enter a conversation, doesn't mean it's the beginning of a conversation."
Also:
"And so I revert to the question I keep wondering about: how much does a revered male's voice help a female's career? When a man who is seen as someone with power and authority within a field -- be it the YA world, the librarianship world, the teaching world, the publishing world, the corporate world, and so on and so on -- why is it his word is what can make (or break) a woman's chances in that same field? What is it that allows him continued authority and respect? And hell, he doesn't necessarily even need to be revered. It's likely having a male voice is enough to help a lady out in many, many places."
As Kelly states, this is not about John Green specifically. I adore John Green. This is about a sexist marketplace and a sexist world, where because a critically acclaimed male author writes a review or blurb for a female author the book may be better received or sell more copies. This just happens to be a good example of what the widespread sexism in our world means in the YA lit world.
I'll leave you with this quote from the second stacked books article,
"It is clear there is an issue to discuss here, and I am so glad it's bring discussed.
But it should also be clear that in discussing this issue, there are even messier, sometimes more problematic, knots to untangle."
Showing posts with label feminist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label feminist. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Monday, November 4, 2013
On Women "Dominating" YA literature
There is an interesting blog post over at Stacked Books that discusses the idea that women writers are "dominating" YA literature by looking at the data for the New York Times Bestseller List.
From the blog post:
"As should be absolutely clear, there has never been a time women have outnumbered men on the NYT List in the top ten. Never.
It gets more interesting if you look at how few spots individual women have had on the top ten list. There have been nine weeks when only one woman has had a spot on the top ten. That woman is, of course, Veronica Roth."
"Books written by women have never once -- never once -- had at least half of the spaces on the top ten list. They've had a few weeks occupying four spaces but never have they had five books in the top ten slots in the 47 weeks that the YA List has existed.
A couple of other factoids to include at this juncture: there have only been five weeks where a woman held the number one spot on the New York Times List for YA. Five. They were held by Veronica Roth (for four weeks -- three of which were in mid-July, on the 14th, 21st and 28th, which would reflect a bump in sales immediately following the release of the first stills of the movie and the fourth week, September 15, likely reflects sales following the release of the film's trailer) and Kiera Cass for The Elite, which stayed for one week only. Cass's novel debuted at #1 on the May 12 list, which reflects the sales for the week her book was available for purchase.
Again, in 47 weeks, there have only been two women to see the top spot. They only held it for a combined five weeks."
From the blog post:
"As should be absolutely clear, there has never been a time women have outnumbered men on the NYT List in the top ten. Never.
It gets more interesting if you look at how few spots individual women have had on the top ten list. There have been nine weeks when only one woman has had a spot on the top ten. That woman is, of course, Veronica Roth."
"Books written by women have never once -- never once -- had at least half of the spaces on the top ten list. They've had a few weeks occupying four spaces but never have they had five books in the top ten slots in the 47 weeks that the YA List has existed.
A couple of other factoids to include at this juncture: there have only been five weeks where a woman held the number one spot on the New York Times List for YA. Five. They were held by Veronica Roth (for four weeks -- three of which were in mid-July, on the 14th, 21st and 28th, which would reflect a bump in sales immediately following the release of the first stills of the movie and the fourth week, September 15, likely reflects sales following the release of the film's trailer) and Kiera Cass for The Elite, which stayed for one week only. Cass's novel debuted at #1 on the May 12 list, which reflects the sales for the week her book was available for purchase.
Again, in 47 weeks, there have only been two women to see the top spot. They only held it for a combined five weeks."
Click on over to the article here to see all sorts of nifty graphs and tables explaining the gender breakdown of YA authors on the NYT bestseller list.
This is a great and necessary blog post because so often we hear that YA is all female writers or that female authors dominate YA. While this may be true in sheer numbers of YA authors out there, it is not true in the critical acclaim or public representation of YA authors.
I'm not trying to say that there should be more female authors on the YA list than men, that's not my point. My point is that anytime women participate in something in large numbers, they are suddenly seen as "DOMINATING" it. Regardless of whether they actually are, in fact, dominating it.
I think all of this goes back to the idea that books and writing by female authors are not seen as prestigious or "serious" work. Men are the "great American authors" and their stories are serious, profound works of art. Whereas women's work is perhaps less likely to be regarded as serious and more likely to be seen as fluffy, chick lit.
There's a second part of this article coming tomorrow from Stacked Books. Check it out and let me know what you think.
Does the representation of female authors on the NYT bestseller list mean anything? Does the list impact what readers are reading??
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
The Purity Myth
I recently finished the book The Purity Myth by Jessica Valenti (She also wrote full frontal feminism).
On the whole I really liked this book. It presents the idea of the purity myth in easy to understand language. Sometimes I think Valenti's books are a bit too simplistic, but I think of them as almost "primers" for people who are just getting their feet wet in the topic. I also think that this is a positive because sometimes I just don't have the attention span for some of the more academic or scholarly articles/books.
So what is the purity myth?
According to Valenti, "The Purity Myth is for women who are suffering every day because of the lie that virginity exists, and that it has some bearing on who we are and how good we are." (p 11). The idea that whether or not a person remains a "virgin" has the biggest impact on whether this person is moral, just baffles and infuriates me. Not to mention the fact that we don't have a working definition for virginity.
Hanne Blank, author of the book Virgin: The untouched history, had a bit of a problem when she went to define "virginity". She decided that she would head to the Harvard medical school library to find a medical definition. She searched through all kinds of books, and found that there was no standard definition. She says, "Then it dawned on me - I'm in arguable one of the best medical libraries in the world, scouring their stacks, and I'm not finding anything close to a medical definition for virginity." (p. 20). Blank said she found it strange because "People have been talking authoritatively about virginity for thousands of years, yet we don't even have a working medical definition for it!"
This whole idea of an intact hymen being an indicator of virginity is crap too. Hymen's break without sexual contact and some people may have sex and still have a partially intact hymen. It's not just a piece of skin/tissue stretched across an opening... The definition that Blank came up with was "the state of having not had partnered sex" But what qualifies as sex? What about in gay couples? Valenti asked many people their opinion on what "counts" as sex. My favorite answer that she got, from a lesbian, was "It isn't sex unless you've had an orgasm". Of course that means many people may have never actually "had sex" according to this definition.
But now thanks to the Virginity Movement (or the Abstinence Movement) it seems like the focus is always on virginity. This movement tells women that in order to be "good" they must be chaste, virginal and not have sex. This tells women that in order to be "good" all they have to do is not have sex. It doesn't matter what else they do in their life, as long as they keep their legs closed they're still "good"! Not to mention the fact that you are judging women's worth purely on their "virginity". Good girls don't have sex and any woman that has had or is thinking about having sex is an inherently bad, dirty person.
This brings in abstinence only education
Abstinence only education is based on the message that teens should not have sex until marriage (of course this assumes that you are heterosexual and able to get married legally). They also love to provide false statistics and plain old lies about sex, contraception, and STI's.
A quote that Valenti includes in the beginning of chapter 2 from Darren Washington, an abstinence educator:
"Your body is a wrapped lollipop. When you have sex with a man, he unwraps your lollipop and sucks on it. It may feel great at the time, but, unfortunately, when he's done with you, all you have left for your next partner is a poorly wrapped, saliva fouled sucker."
First of all, I felt like vomiting when I read that quote. I think that this quote sums up the virginity/abstinence movement pretty well. Sex makes you dirty and useless. But only if you're a woman! I might add. Because women are keepers of their sexualities (or worse the idea that father's are the keepers of their daughter's virginity which is even more vomit inducing to me) they are the ones that are made dirty, used, or worthless by having sex. Another great aspect of the abstinence movement (which provides sex "education" in middle schools and high schools the country over) is that it received over $178 million dollars a year in 2007. Luckily, according to SIECUS this federal funding fell to only $50 million in a year starting in 2010. But really, in my mind even one tax dollar is too many.
Some outcomes of abstinence only education:
- middle school students who received this type of sex ed were found to be just as likely to have sex as teens who had not received this type of education.
- teens who had taken abstinence classes were more likely to say that condoms were ineffective in protecting against STI's.
- teens who took abstinence only education and pledged their virginity were not only less likely to use condoms but also more likely to engage in oral or anal sex.
(Valenti, p. 119-120)
Time and time again, it has been proven that abstinence until marriage education doesn't work, and yet... few people seem to fight its use in our public schools.
Other topics that I found interesting in the book:
- Emergency contraception and legislation surrounding its availability.
- Legislating women, relating to abortion, birth control, miscarriages, etc.
- Purity balls
- Rape and women "deserving it"
- Women and teen girls sexuality and pleasure
All in all, I enjoyed the book. Check it out if you're looking for a fairly quick read.
On the whole I really liked this book. It presents the idea of the purity myth in easy to understand language. Sometimes I think Valenti's books are a bit too simplistic, but I think of them as almost "primers" for people who are just getting their feet wet in the topic. I also think that this is a positive because sometimes I just don't have the attention span for some of the more academic or scholarly articles/books.
So what is the purity myth?
According to Valenti, "The Purity Myth is for women who are suffering every day because of the lie that virginity exists, and that it has some bearing on who we are and how good we are." (p 11). The idea that whether or not a person remains a "virgin" has the biggest impact on whether this person is moral, just baffles and infuriates me. Not to mention the fact that we don't have a working definition for virginity.
Hanne Blank, author of the book Virgin: The untouched history, had a bit of a problem when she went to define "virginity". She decided that she would head to the Harvard medical school library to find a medical definition. She searched through all kinds of books, and found that there was no standard definition. She says, "Then it dawned on me - I'm in arguable one of the best medical libraries in the world, scouring their stacks, and I'm not finding anything close to a medical definition for virginity." (p. 20). Blank said she found it strange because "People have been talking authoritatively about virginity for thousands of years, yet we don't even have a working medical definition for it!"
This whole idea of an intact hymen being an indicator of virginity is crap too. Hymen's break without sexual contact and some people may have sex and still have a partially intact hymen. It's not just a piece of skin/tissue stretched across an opening... The definition that Blank came up with was "the state of having not had partnered sex" But what qualifies as sex? What about in gay couples? Valenti asked many people their opinion on what "counts" as sex. My favorite answer that she got, from a lesbian, was "It isn't sex unless you've had an orgasm". Of course that means many people may have never actually "had sex" according to this definition.
But now thanks to the Virginity Movement (or the Abstinence Movement) it seems like the focus is always on virginity. This movement tells women that in order to be "good" they must be chaste, virginal and not have sex. This tells women that in order to be "good" all they have to do is not have sex. It doesn't matter what else they do in their life, as long as they keep their legs closed they're still "good"! Not to mention the fact that you are judging women's worth purely on their "virginity". Good girls don't have sex and any woman that has had or is thinking about having sex is an inherently bad, dirty person.
This brings in abstinence only education
Abstinence only education is based on the message that teens should not have sex until marriage (of course this assumes that you are heterosexual and able to get married legally). They also love to provide false statistics and plain old lies about sex, contraception, and STI's.
A quote that Valenti includes in the beginning of chapter 2 from Darren Washington, an abstinence educator:
"Your body is a wrapped lollipop. When you have sex with a man, he unwraps your lollipop and sucks on it. It may feel great at the time, but, unfortunately, when he's done with you, all you have left for your next partner is a poorly wrapped, saliva fouled sucker."
First of all, I felt like vomiting when I read that quote. I think that this quote sums up the virginity/abstinence movement pretty well. Sex makes you dirty and useless. But only if you're a woman! I might add. Because women are keepers of their sexualities (or worse the idea that father's are the keepers of their daughter's virginity which is even more vomit inducing to me) they are the ones that are made dirty, used, or worthless by having sex. Another great aspect of the abstinence movement (which provides sex "education" in middle schools and high schools the country over) is that it received over $178 million dollars a year in 2007. Luckily, according to SIECUS this federal funding fell to only $50 million in a year starting in 2010. But really, in my mind even one tax dollar is too many.
Some outcomes of abstinence only education:
- middle school students who received this type of sex ed were found to be just as likely to have sex as teens who had not received this type of education.
- teens who had taken abstinence classes were more likely to say that condoms were ineffective in protecting against STI's.
- teens who took abstinence only education and pledged their virginity were not only less likely to use condoms but also more likely to engage in oral or anal sex.
(Valenti, p. 119-120)
Time and time again, it has been proven that abstinence until marriage education doesn't work, and yet... few people seem to fight its use in our public schools.
Other topics that I found interesting in the book:
- Emergency contraception and legislation surrounding its availability.
- Legislating women, relating to abortion, birth control, miscarriages, etc.
- Purity balls
- Rape and women "deserving it"
- Women and teen girls sexuality and pleasure
All in all, I enjoyed the book. Check it out if you're looking for a fairly quick read.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Modesty and Feminism
I recently found the blog The Aspiring Homemaker (I honestly can't remember which blog directed me to it now...) but I was enthralled by her simple tales about life at "the cottage" in Georgia. She discussed how her mom had always worn modest outfits and she and her sister eventually decided to as well, stressing how it was never forced on them and they chose it for themselves. Her family eventually decided to become "homesteaders" and chose to move out into the country and grow more of their own food. I find this lifestyle truly interesting and I'm making my way through her entire blog as quickly as I can.
The photo above from Mia over at aspiring homemaker.Between finding Mia's blog and just randomly searching modesty on tumblr (just one of the many things I randomly search for on Tumblr to see whats out there), it got me thinking more about modesty.
In recent years I've dressed more modestly (or conservatively whatever you want to call it). Its mostly just a matter of what type of clothes I'm comfortable in. I love to wear skirts and dresses, but I'm never comfortable in very short ones or extremely low cut ones. I'll usually put a tank top under low cut ones and just not purchase short ones. I don't like constantly having to worry about whether I'm exposing myself. This is mostly just based on practicality and comfort for me personally, I definitely do not judge anyone for the clothes they choose to wear. I feel like thats a big part of feminism, to not judge other women for their choices. I don't always succeed on this front, but I'm trying.
While reading different blogs and posts on Tumblr I was examining my ideas of modesty based on many other women who choose to dress modestly. I'd say by and large the main reason women (and some men) choose to dress more modestly is because of their beliefs or religion. While I do attend church, pray daily, etc, etc... My decision and love for dressing modestly does not come from my religious convictions.
Once again, I try very hard not to judge women whose decision to dress modestly does come from their religious ideals. I believe that if they're happy and enjoy what their wearing then great! One of the main reasons I don't choose to dress modestly because of religion is the seemingly inherent idea of the way a woman looks causing men to "stumble" as it is often phrased. I don't feel that I am responsible for being anyone's keeper. The way I dress is for my benefit alone, I'm sorry if you feel differently.
I think that men should be responsible for their own behavior and not try to place the blame on someone else (i.e. a woman and what she was wearing). This is my personal (mostly feminist) conviction. I am not saying that you need to believe it or think its right. I see so many, mainly conservative Christian, blogs talk about how they're so happy to dress modestly and that its their duty to their Christian brothers.
For instance, I love this tumblr that features daily inspiration for modest women based on fashion bloggers or readers submissions. These girls have awesome style and dress more conservatively! On their sister blog, where they include many more text posts I was a little dismayed to find that they spout the hardcore conservative Christian line. Not because I think there is anything wrong with being a conservative Christian... whatever floats your boat. But their main focus is on dressing modestly for God, but also for men, so that they (men) won't lust after you and you can help them remain pure for marriage (although purity is highly regarded for both men and women, it seem to be mostly the woman's fault if the man "stumbles"). I hesitate to blog about this because there are so many differing views on how religion, feminism and modesty relate and I honestly don't want to step on anyone's toes.
Another section of women that often choose to dress modestly is Muslim women who don the hijab. Hijab is really a complete way of dressing, rather than simply the headscarf that many Muslim women wear. It is a way of covering one's body usually from the head to the wrists to the ankles, including the headscarf to cover one's hair. (I minored in religion in college and focused a lot on Islam and Muslim women).
The above photo from this website.
I love the hijabi fashion websites because they come up with some great outfits! The usually involve maxi skirts or dresses, or longer tops with wide legged jeans. I greatly admire all of the Muslim women I see wearing the headscarf, I know it must be hard to do sometimes. I think that it looks lovely and I am slightly jealous of how wonderful it looks. This is another example of religious reasons for dressing modestly. They believe that in order to please God they should cover their head and most of their body. Once again, I think thats a wonderful reason to dress modestly! I just don't personally hold it as true. But then again I'm not Muslim. Theres a whole other side to the hijab (and its other versions like the burqa, the niqab and the chador) issue about women not being allowed to wear them in some European countries when they want to. I'm not opening that can of worms.. That would be a whole 'nother post. :)
[Sidenote: I am aware that there are more conservative Jewish women as well, but I'm not as knowledgable about them, nor have I read any blogs by Jewish women. Although I'm sure there are great ones out there!]
All of this goes back to my reasons for dressing modestly. It's just how I'm comfortable and I like not feeling incredibly exposed. Regardless, I still wear bikinis, but at the beach or the pool, where they are appropriate. Is this hypocritical of me? I don't think so... but everyone is entitled to their opinion. I enjoy swimming and sunbathing so I'm not going to give up swimsuits.
So often I see in feminist discussions that women have fought for the right to wear what they want without being forced to wear something by certain rules. For instance, when my mom went to school they had to wear skirts or dresses to school every day. If it was below something like 25 degrees out they could wear pants under their skirts but they had to be taken off as soon as they got to school. This dress code was common even for college women and women in the workforce for a long time. The feminist movement fought for women's rights to wear what they want, pants if they wanted, miniskirts, belly shirts, whatever. I fully support this! I would never want to take away this right. It's just that the clothes I choose to wear are more modest.
In my opinion, this is a feminist choice. I'm not following society's demands that women show as much skin as possible, that they be incredibly toned, have huge boobs and the desire to show them off all the time. I don't judge women that dress like this, because it obviously makes them feel good! But I don't really appreciate society trying to tell me what I must do, simply because I'm a female.
Because of the implied reasons that I dress the way I do, I often wonder if people think I'm uneducated or brainwashed into wearing long skirts. I feel that this is often the idea when you see groups of women usually with long hair and wearing long skirts. "Oh they must be those crazy fundamentalist Christians!" I wonder if people can tell by looking at me that I'm not in fact dressing the way I am for religious reasons, nor am I being forced to dress that way by my family, nor am I uneducated (I have a Bachelor's Degree. In Women's Studies no less!) I am a feminist and proud to dress however I want.
Photoset based on this article about a BYU student.
Find the info about this outfit and blogger here.
This great style from here. See Casey's blog here. I love pencil skirts but I'm not sure I could pull them off this well.
This photo from here.Some photos of me:
This is a super old picture of me (above). I always loved this skirt and was super sad when it was too small.
When I go out I pretty much always wear some sort of sweater over sleeveless and spaghetti strap shirts/dresses. I'm just more comfortable that way.
More current style. My favorites right now are maxi skirts and sweaters. 
Sorry about the horrible camera/mirror quality. I was being too lazy to set up my tripod.
From last summer. I love this skirt. It's so swishy. (Worn paired with a white cardigan)
I guess I wanted to write this blog because the issue has been weighing heavily on my mind lately. I've been thinking about the way I dress a lot and I've gone back and forth in the past few years with wearing only skirts/dresses all the time and then wearing jeans often. Mostly because sometimes its just easier to throw on a pair of jeans.
With my perusal of modesty websites I just found myself wondering if anyone else dresses modestly for similar reasons to mine. That is, not for religious reasons. If you've got any links to likeminded blogs or whatever, shoot them my way!
What are your views on modesty as a feminist choice? What about women's choices to dress however they want, is that any less feminist? How are you most comfortable?
Sunday, January 15, 2012
How to get involved!
I just finished reading Jessica Valenti's Full Frontal Feminism (she's also the force behind the website feministing). At the end of the book she has a chapter titled "Get to It" talking about how you can become educated and involved in the feminist movement.
I think this is a great idea for anyone wondering... what now?
Perhaps the most important first (or second depending on how you decided you were a feminist) step is get informed. Read books and blogs, watch videos on youtube, check out major news websites to see how they do and do not report on women's issues. (Check out my previous post on my feminist reading list if you're wondering where to start.)
Sex
- Get educated! Find out what your school district teaches by way of Sex Ed. If its abstinence only (and it probably is) engage your friends and peers in discussions about safe sex practices. Hand out reliable sex info so that people can truly be informed. Planned Parenthood is a great resource to check out!
- Take control of your sexuality. But be smart about it! Learn how to protect yourself and go to the Gyno! JUST GO. I know its not the best hour of your life ever... but seriously, go. (Not sure if you can pay, afraid of your parents finding out. Check out the closest Planned Parenthood to you.)
- My favorite recommendation from Valenti, "Have orgasms. By any means necessary."
Reproductive Rights
- Volunteer at your local clinic! (Google can tell you where that is). Help them in any way you can! Whether as an escort, intern, or just help them raise money!
- From Valenti, "Find out about your local pharmacies' policy on giving women their birth control and emergency contraception prescriptions. if they're trying to keep women from their legal right to birth control, throw a shit fit. alert the media, write letters; if its a chain pharmacy, make sure the pharmacist is adhering to the company standard."
I love this idea. This is a great grassroots, local way to understand reproductive rights.
Politics
- Vote! Check out the webiste Women's voices. Women vote. Spread the word. Perhaps campaign for your favorite candidate!
- Check out the White House Project and find out ways to get involved with politics.
- Run for office!
And in general, read, watch, become an informed citizen of this world. TALK! Talk about whats important to you and your life. Don't let people silence you! If you don't want to talk then write! Write a letter, a blog, or in your journal.
Most of these suggestions are from Full Frontal Feminism with some added commentary by me. Thanks to Jessica Valenti for writing such an awesome book!
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Enlightened Sexism
I first read Enlightened Sexism for my Voices of Oppression class last spring (as I've mentioned before). This is an easy read, although it is bit long at almost 400 pages. But Douglas' discussion of sexism and the feminist movement through the media, entertainment industry and just general everyday life makes it so interesting.
From the book, one definition of enlightened sexism,
"Enlightened sexism is feminist in its outward appearance (of course you can be or do anything you want) but sexist in its intent (hold on girls only up to a certain point, and not in any way that discomforts men or pushes feminist goals one more centimeter forward). While enlightened sexism seems to support women's equality, it is dedicated to the undoing of feminism."
In my opinion this idea seems to be at the very base of feminism, at least as I currently see it. The media and society tells girls to be sexy and alluring but then tells that they should NOT have sex until their married. Women can do what they want, become doctors, lawyers or even the president! (Well, maybe she could become the president. The jury is apparently still out on whether Americans would actually elect a female president). But don't push too far, don't try to actually pursue feminist goals while enjoying the fact that you are allowed to vote, attend universities, and actually be elected to public office.
Also, regardless of how successful women are in their career it is expected that she will not be able to continue full time in her chosen profession if she decides to also become a mother. There is no way a woman could work a 70 hour work week after she's had a child. WHO WILL STAY WITH THE CHILD?? They (usually white, male employers) cry in despair.
They hardly ever ask this question of men that are employed in the same job.
Another of the central tenets of enlightened sexism is a woman's "choice" to be sensual, a sex object.
"Because women are now "equal" and the battle is over and won, we are now free to embrace things we used to see as sexist... Now that women have the same sexual freedom as men, they actually refer to be sex objects because its liberating."
Women are just taking control of the sexuality, right? They finally have the ability to claim their right to sexuality and sexual behaviors. It's their choice!
Choice, I find, is so important in feminism. We talk about a woman's choice in regards to birth control and abortion. But in this case, how can a woman truly "choose" to become a sex object when all of the media and society is telling a girl that is how she must act. Then its not really a choice so much as an obligation if a girl/woman wants to fit into society, her school, her peer group, etc.
A pretty amazing statistic from the book,
"A 2009 poll revealed that 60 percent of men and 50 percent of women 'are convinced that here are no longer any barriers to women's advancement in the workplace."
Pretty shocking stuff, huh? What about the absolute, hard fact that women make only 77 cents to a man's dollar for the same job? Thats not a barrier??
Also very important to this idea of no barriers in the workplace lets look at the top jobs for women in 1999:
"In order, secretaries, retail and personal sales workers (including cashiers), managers and administrators, elementary school teachers and registered nurses."
Now, 8 years later the top jobs for women in 2007 were, in order:
"Secretaries, registered nurses, elementary and middle school teachers, cashiers and retail salespersons."
Wow... Look how much has changed!! Now let's examine how many women are portrayed as doctors, lawyers, CEO's and even the President of the United States on TV and in movies. Tons!
Watching TV and movies you would think, well women have definitely made it! In the book Douglas mentions the no-nonsense Dr. Bailey from Grey's Anatomy, all of the attorneys and A.D.A's on Law and Order and Dr. Cuddy (House's boss). If TV is portraying this many women in high powered jobs, surely it must be true right?!
Not so much. But it does lull the public into believing that women have indeed "made it" and are making tons of money in the top jobs around the US.
See, there's no work for feminism to do anymore! Or so they (the media, society, the government to some degree) would have you believe.
I guess my take away from this book was question everything! Pop culture, the media, TV, movies, its all great entertainment. But what are you really watching/reading? How are women portrayed? And is it an accurate portrayal? Don't be a mindless media consuming zombie. Think about what you're seeing and question it. Talk about it with others. Think for yourself!
My Feminist Reading List
I actually read this for my voices of oppression class but I really enjoyed it. Its sort of a trip through pop culture through the lens of sexism and feminism. I reread it over winter break and found it just as exciting the second time around. I love her idea of Enlightened Sexism. I touched on it a bit in my post about Female Chuavinist Pigs and I'm planning on an entire post dedicated to Enlightened Sexism eventually.
Okay I actually picked up this book at Barnes and Noble because I wanted to read her essay about going undercover at a Playboy club. But I did actually enjoy the rest of this book as well! She offers a great look at the Women's Rights movement from the ground up. She also includes some writing about her trips with political candidates (not as applicable or as interesting to me personally).
I loved this book. Ina May Gaskin is an incredibly well known midwife who works on "The Farm" in Tennesee. Reading this book made me want to go there to have all of my babies. This book is part guide to childbirth (as the name implies) covering all kinds of FAQ's about childbirth in general and home birth in particular. There are also a good number of personal birth stories that Ina May attended including some at "The Farm".
I know that this technically isn't "Feminist" per se... but I am very interested in the idea of Feminist Childbirth and this qualifies in my opinion.
Recommended for: women planning home births, anyone interested in childbirth/homebirth, midwives, future midwives, anyone interested in the natural birth movement
(I'm pretty sure I got some weird looks reading this book on the airplane home from spring break since i look about 12 and was obviously not pregnant)
This is the memoir of a California Midwife. She chronicles the many births she's witnessed and assisted in her time. She has quite a few unique stories and provides great information on what its like to be a midwife in the United States.
Recommended for: midwives, midwives to be, nursing students, anyone interested in chidbirth/homebirths
This is the memory from the midwife Cara Muhlhahn who is featured in the documentary film The Business of Being Born that I watched in my Women's Health Issues class (its a really great film by the way!). She talks about her years as a labor and delivery nurse and her years as a home birth midwife in New York City.
Recommended for: midwives, midwives to be, anyone interested in childbirth/homebirths, nursing students
I borrowed this book from the library to read over winter break. I LOVED it. I've seen this book many times and never picked it up for some reason. I really enjoyed this book about the rise of raunch culture and how women are buying into it and claiming that by dressing provocatively they can be sexy and also feminists. This was a really thought provoking book. See my post here about this book.
A collection of essays by self proclaimed feminists and when they had their "click" moment. A great read on the way that individuals come to identify as feminists.
This is another sort of trip through time. She chronicles the Women's Rights movement from 1960 to 2009. She offers a broad overview of the movement at the time and then personal interviews with different individuals about their lives.
This is a great primer for anyone who's not sure where to start in regards to Feminism and the Women's Rights Movement.
I actually picked up Three Cups of Tea at Target one day intrigued by the synopsis on the back about a guy that builds schools for girls in Pakistan. This is the story of Greg Mortenson's travels through Pakistan and Afghanistan and his promise to build schools for girls in remote areas.
There has been some backlash about parts of the book(s) being fabricated or exaggerated recently... I'm not sure what to say about this other than regardless of these accusations the books are still DEFINITELY worth reading. I suppose we must take everything with a grain of salt these days. But the overall message of Mortenson building schools where no one else will, is very important.
This is a great book about how important women and girls are especially in developing and developed countries! The author (and New York Times journalist) visits many different organizations overseas helping women and girls in various ways. From aid groups that help girls who have escaped sexual slavery in brothels to women who had fistulas from rape or early pregnancy and their search for a surgeon to help them.
Fiction
I read this book for my Gender and Religion class and I absolutely loved it. Margaret Atwood is a genius (in my humble opinion). This dystopia about women's roles and what happens if women become valued only for their fertility. I'm having a hard time accurately summing up this one so I'll copy and paste the description from Goodreads,
"Offred is a Handmaid in the Republic of Gilead. She may leave the home of the Commander and his wife once a day to walk to food markets whose signs are now pictures instead of words because women are no longer allowed to read. She must lie on her back once a month and pray that the Commander makes her pregnant, because in an age of declining fertility, Offred and the other Handmaids are valued only if their ovaries are viable. Offred can remember the years before, when she lived and made love with her husband, Luke; when she played with and protected her daughter; when she had a job, money of her own, and access to knowledge. But all of that is gone now..."
I also read this book for my gender and religion class and while its probably not a strictly feminist work it does provide an alternate (fictionalized) look at a very well known story in the Bible. The story of Jacob, his wives and his daughter Dina is retold from Dina's point of view and shows us what might have actually happened to the women and girls barely mentioned in the Bible.
This is worth a read for anyone that loves historical fiction or alternate takes on Biblical stories.
Welcome!
Hello all!
I decided to start this blog because I wanted a place to collect all my thoughts about feminist related things. The content will probably be pretty diverse and perhaps not what you would generally think of as “feminist” but things that I am looking at or see in a feminist light.
I have a Bachelor’s Degree in Women’s Studies and ever since I’ve been out of school I have the urge to write long paper-esque reviews of books or just about things I’ve been thinking about. I guess that’s what happens when the majority of your classes are seriously paper driven. So, in lieu of writing papers… because that would be sort of pointless since I’m not in class right now, I’m going to write blog posts! Honestly I’ll try not to be pretentious… because I don’t think that’s how I really am.
I don’t think that just because I have a Women’s Studies degree I know everything there is to know about women or feminism or whatever. I definitely do not. The vast expanse of my ignorance is probably shocking. I took a lot of great classes that I loved but there is just no way you can study a movement that’s been around for 100 years in 4 semesters.
So, a little bit about myself:
Age: 21.
Current Occupation: Student (going back to school for nursing)
The moment feminism clicked for me: I really wish I could remember this. I took a Philosophy of Feminism class before I went to Florida State and I’d like to think it was during this class. I wanted to major in French but I couldn’t because of some stupid requirements so my advisor told me to pick another major. I went back and forth between criminology and women’s studies for a while reading about both before finally deciding to do women’s studies. I got to school and started taking my classes and loved every one of them!
Favorite classes I took: I loved my Women’s Health Issues class that I took with a nursing instructor. This is actually the class that made me think about becoming a midwife, pairing my love of feminism and love of medicine.
I also liked my Contemporary Muslim Women class and my Voices of Oppression class I took my final semester.
Favorite topics to read about/research/think about: Feminism (duh!), sexism, pop culture, women in the media, feminist childbirth and parenting, reproductive rights, and so many more.
Future occupation: Currently I’m taking pre-reqs to get an accelerated Bachelor’s of Science in Nursing so I can be a nurse for a while. Right now my areas of interest are Labor and Delivery and Emergency Medicine. I would also like to eventually return to school and get a Master’s so I can become a Certified Nurse-Midwife. I would really like to be in a practice with other Midwives and provide home births.
Well there’s a bit of the basics. Have you got any more questions for me? I’d love to answer them.
Coming up I’m working on a starter list of my favorite feminist minded books!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)