The Wrong Idea of "Equality"

So often, I see people with privilege talking about "equality" and fairness in a way where the terms are taken in the most unexamined, uninformed way possible. I have a few examples about what I mean:

• A thin person tells a fat person that she is equally oppressed because she's been made fun of for being thin.
• A man states that if women want "real equality" then they can't expect to take maternity leave or be given time at work to breastfeed.
• A white person claims they face just as much racism as people of color because they swear they've been called a "cracker" one time and real fairness would mean the elimination of all slurs.

In each of these cases that chief problem is the denial of the cultural context in which we operate and the history involved. In other words, stuff just ain't the same for different groups of people. Yes, all body shaming is a problem, but the cultural context is repeatedly telling us that fat bodies are wrong. Therefore, thin people benefit from thin privilege on a daily basis and simply because they have experienced body shame, doesn't mean their experience is anywhere similar to that of a fat person. The same goes for the white person who benefits from their white privileged literally every day. Their isolated incident with the slur does not remotely compare to the daily oppression people of color face and our long, violent national history with racism.

And as for the example of with the man who is talking about "real equality" for women, the problem is that his version of "real equality" is again ignoring the world in which we operate. It takes a man's situation as default and denies the sexism that women face on a daily basis. As I've said before, I feel strongly that you can't achieve an actually equitable society through expecting women to behave and think like men in order to be seen as legitimate, to get ahead, and be successful. My brand of feminism has never been about this. Instead, it is about making systems (which have always favored men in the past) also work for women. If we take how men do things as the standard and expect women to conform to that, we're simply validating patriarchy.

It's so much more important in each context, that we examine the "-isms" at play--the existence of oppression and the history of discrimination. The real problem is that when people benefit from white, male, thin, able bodied, straight, cis, etc. privilege, they don't want to compromise that position. So they deny the situation and instead talk about this false notion of equality which ignores the real world we operate in.

To me, it is much more important to think critically about how privilege affects our world and how we can work toward the eradication of various oppressions than to try to figure out some arbitrary standard of "equality."

Things are Much Happier in my Bubble

At a party this weekend, two people were discussing how absurd traditional gender roles are. HEY! What a great topic. I can get down with this--or so I think. I knew one of the people better than the other, and I was legitimately curious, so I asked if he identified as a feminist.

Of course, this opened a can of worms. A big, nasty can of worms where feminism was posited as something deplorable. Amongst the things said were...

How to Enter Feminist Discussions at the 101 Level and Not Totally Mess Up

As it has become abundantly clear, I've been dealing with a whole lot 'o people who are new to (and relatively insensitive toward) discussions of gender. These past few exchanges have been a truly stressful experience for me. They've made me question my ability to engage with people who frankly don't care about issues of oppression and equality. They've made me want to go live in a cave where I only interact with other hardcore feminists who "get me."

And that's really sad--because if everyone who cared deeply about a cause became so jaded by interactions with uninformed people, that cause would eventually die out. There'd be nobody willing to spread/promote the messages. And that's really the last thing I want for feminism. I really believe there needs to be a space for 101 interactions. I'm not convinced that I'm necessarily the person to champion these spaces, for my own emotional health, but I do think they are important.

As such, after doing a few things to personally cope with this frustrating business, I've decided to channel this experience into something productive and hopefully useful. What follows are my suggestions for how to enter feminist discussions (and other discussions of privilege, oppression, and inequality) at the 101 level and not totally mess up! I should note here that some of the people I engaged with were actually just trolls. But for people who are new to feminism and would like engage in good faith, here you go...

Facebook Annoyance: The Mansplaining Edition!

Facebook is continuing to be the bane of my existence. For every good experience I have with it, comes about 5 horrible ones. I'm really beginning to think I should quit it all together. Too bad I'm hopelessly hooked on being one click of a button away from knowing what all my friends are doing...

Plus, look what great blog fodder Facebook is giving me! So much that "social media" is now its own tag. Hooray?

Anyway, the latest incident involves some pretty heavy mansplaining and the justification of sexist language. Which made me realize that I haven't ever really written about mansplaining before...which is kind of incredible since I, like every outspoken woman, encounter it on an almost daily basis. 

Boys Will Be Boys? Huh?

My love of NPR is well documented and I like to listen to it in the morning, when I'm in my car. However, I moved extremely close to my job, so my only chance to catch a story is when I run to get coffee or other errands, here and there. As such, I can admit I'm falling a bit behind on my current issue awareness. Today, I caught a snippet of Michele Martin's Tell Me More (one of my favorites!) Martin replayed a clip from another NPR program Talk of the Nation in which they were discussing the scandal involving Secret Service agents and prostitution.

The man in the clip, said something to the effect of "boys will be boys."

I rolled my eyes so hard, I pulled a muscle. Listen, I'm not here to discuss the Secret Service scandal, because, as mentioned, I know too little to do so, but I would like to tackle this "boys will be boys" shit.

Who Are All These Bitches on TV?

Have you heard about the new shows "Don't Trust the B in Apartment 23" and "GCB?" There's two things they have in common. They are news shows on ABC and they have "bitch" in the title.

You know, there's something really different feeling about the way Bitch Magazine uses the "B word" and the way that these shows are doing it. While Bitch Magazine feels revolutionary and reclaimatory, the stuff ABC is peddling feels tried and borderline offensive.

Like really? We're still calling women bitches? And it's so routine that it's in the title of television shows now?

Sigh.

Things that Need to Disappear from Our Vocabulary...Edition 539, Heterosexist Garbage

As I was reading Jezebel this morning, I came across a quick blurb on how "One Million Moms" doesn't like that Ellen DeGeneres is the new JC Penney spokesperson. They said,

Funny that JC Penney thinks hiring an open homosexual spokesperson will help their business when most of their customers are traditional families...DeGeneres is not a true representation of the type of families that shop at their store. The majority of JC Penney shoppers will be offended and choose to no longer shop there.

In addition to making me roll my eyes so hard that I pulled a muscle, this reminded me of another of the many things that I think we should be totally removing from our vocabulary...any phrase or statement that asserts that gay people need to hide their lifestyle or alter their behavior in public. Examples include...

The Genderbread Person

I absolutely love this. Like a lot. Like maybe too much.

It should really clear up any confusion that remains about these very different facets of sex and gender.

(h/t to a commenter at Jezebel.)

"My Heart Belongs to Daddy"...Ewwww

So earlier this week I saw My Week with Marilyn. Truthfully, I wasn't impressed. While I love Michelle Williams and I think she does a good job, it wasn't really an interesting film and Monroe just comes across as annoying, which, maybe she was. I don't know.

Anyway, I saw it at the Alamo Drafthouse, because, you know, I see everything there. One great thing about the Drafthouse is that it does not play commercials as you trickle in the theater. Rather, they have a pre-show composed of clips from music videos, TV shows, movies, and other pop culture artifacts, all which pertain to the "featured presentation."

So for My Week with Marilyn, they played a video, which I assume was from a Monroe movie (I know very little about her, other than what you can't escape from as a member of our society.) It was a song and dance routine of "My Heart Belongs to Daddy." I couldn't find the exact video, but this should give you a good idea of what it sounded like:

Let's take a look at some of these lyics:

While tearing off a game of golf
I may make a play for the caddy
But when I do, I don't follow through
Cause my heart belongs to Daddy 

If I invite a boy some night
To dine on my fine food and haddie
I just adore, his asking for more
But my heart belongs to Daddy
...
If I invite a boy some night
To cook up some hot enchilada
Though Spanish rice is all very nice
My heart belongs to Daddy

Obviously, there are a number of things wrong here and this for real grosses me out. I am super uncomfortable with the inclusion of "daddy" into suggestive situations. I have no idea where this type of thing started, but Cole Porter's "My Heart Belongs to Daddy" is the earliest instance of this stuff that I've personally seen. Who knows? It might be as old as human civilization.

I can't help but let my mind go to all kinds of horrible situations when I think about this. And it all has to do with the connection that has been made between youth and sex; the infantilization of women.

Examples of this are everywhere in our youth obsessed society: sugar daddies and sugar babies, Brazilian waxes, baby talk, plastic surgery, and the list could go on. TV shows poke fun at it. Bloggers get mad about it. Advertisers have long capitalized on it, for example, in this old school ad:

Just as with Marilyn saying "da da da da DAD," there is undeniably both undertones of childishness and sexuality in here. I mean, come on. "Innocence is sexier than you think?"

This is a problematic combination.

Ok, listen. I am very much a "to each their own" type of person. If you really think that combining a childlike element in your ADULT CONSENSUAL relationship is for you, then whatever. So long as no kids are actually involved, live and let live. But I will say I am concerned about the power dynamics at play, just as I am with real age disparities. It makes me uncomfortable to have this cultural script of women as weaker, less informed, and dependent.

Ah well, I guess I'll just be over here enjoying a relationship that is blissfully devoid of any daddy references.

When Thanking Becomes a Problem

This post is a part of my “Out of the Kitchen” weekly column at The Progressive Playbook in which various news and pop culture items will be examined through a feminist lens.

It is the season of thanks. Expressing gratitude is a wonderfully beautiful thing; not only to express to others in appreciation of their generosity, but also as an act for oneself. Taking time to reflect upon the important things in our lives and really being thankful about them puts things in perspective. However, having laid out that I do think expressing thanks is valuable, I'd like to take a moment to discuss how simply saying "thank you," like most things, can be a very gendered act.

First, let me back up.  As a nonprofit manager, my work depends on the generosity of others. This career path puts you in the position to operate from a place of continual gratitude. That's a given. Nevertheless, this past summer, I realized something about myself and my communication style. I took a look at the emails I was writing. Literally every single one ended with "Thanks!" so much so, that it was even a part of my chosen signature line. Often I would start emails with a statement of thanks and then end it with "thanks again." Frequently, I was thanking people who were simply doing their jobs. In fact, I would end emails this way even when I was actually doing a favor for someone else. I also apologized for things that were not my fault and generally assumed a submissive stance in my day to day interactions.

It became a bit emotionally exhausting. People weren't reciprocating this behavior and I sort of felt like crap on a regular basis. I decided something had to change. I've come to believe that people will respond to you in the manner that you present yourself to them. If you grovel, they'll believe that they are doing you a favor. If you apologize, they will believe you were in the wrong. Apologies imply that much. Conversely, if I wanted to be taken seriously, I decided I had to drop unnecessary thanks and apologies.

This small switch in how I conducted my email communications began to make me feel a lot better. Turns out, I'm not alone in this approach. I recently read a piece by Amy Reiter over at The Daily Beast, where she goes through a similar process. She writes,

Then one day I looked up from my under-challenging, midlevel job and noticed that my boss, who was generally regarded as kind of a jerk, but a smart and talented one, never, ever thanked people. He never apologized. And he didn’t appear to give a rip about what was going on in the lives of anyone around him. He never took responsibility when things went wrong, preferring instead to label someone else the culprit and chew them out.

...A recent study examining the relationship between agreeableness, income and gender, published in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, found that the workplace does tend to reward disagreeable behavior. Disagreeable men tend to earn more than agreeable men, and disagreeable women, though they earn less than both nice and not-nice guys, earn more than agreeable women, researchers found.

These facts are interesting. The truth is that sugary sweet politeness doesn't pay off, literally, so why use it? As women we are continuously told to play nice and to be accommodating and to put others before ourselves. It's high time we reject this behavior and reclaim our right to communicate clearly, firmly, professionally, and without groveling. I guess what I'm really getting at is that thanking, like everything else in life, should not be a mindless, reflexive act and it certainly shouldn't come from a place of obligation. It means much more when you offer thanks only when it is motivated by actual gratitude.  Basically, don't pepper your language with unnecessary thank yous and apologies.

And unnecessary really is the operative word here. I'm certainly not advocating for jerkiness either. So please do take time this week to express genuine thanks as you feel it. Appreciate the happiness in your life and share it with friends, family, coworkers, and you community. And do apologize when you are wrong.

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! But to quote a very appropriate Tweet by scatx, "Be thankful on Thanksgiving, hang with family and friends - but don't for a second celebrate false history about Native/European relations." In case your curious, you can learn more about what she means here.

Why, Donald Glover, Why?

And then there's the moment when I learn this about Troy--UH I mean Donald Glover and become really, really sad. Trigger warning on the link for rape jokes. Of all sorts.

Booooooooooooo!

There's Only One F Word that Bothers Me

This post is a part of my “Out of the Kitchen” weekly column at The Progressive Playbook in which various news and pop culture items will be examined through a feminist lens.

Trigger warning for homophobic slurs.

If you asked me 30 minutes ago who Brett Ratner is, I would have fumbled around for a minute or two before admitting that the name sounds familiar but I can't place it. In fact, I think I might have even claimed he was affiliated with 80 hair bands, in some kind of twisted combination of Bret Michaels and Riki Rachtman. My mind can create really interesting things when pressed...

Anyway, as I'm told by Ronald who shared this news with me, Ratner is, in fact, a filmmaker. He's responsible for a myriad of mediocre films including Rush Hour, Red Dragon, and X-Men: The Last Stand. But I became acutely aware of him because Mr. Ratner recently decided to proclaim that "rehearsal is for fags."

Part of me just wants to stop here and let that ignorance hang in the air. But I can't let it go. I feel like I am continuously making this case, but I will assert this at least one more time:

Words matter.

I am someone who loves language. I love how word choice can add impact, gravity, and/or flavor to whatever message you are trying to convey. Words, to me, mean everything--and I truly believe that the words we use shape our reality. Language can create the most beautiful imagery. It can empower us to tell our own stories, transport us into whole new places, educate us about things beyond our own small worlds, and help us express deeply felt emotions.

But the power of words, when thrown around carelessly, can also hurt others and cause us shame and humiliation.  Too often people think that language is "no big deal." However, as I've argued before, all the little deals can really add up into things that make the big deals. When society is, in this case, making every possible effort to other and disparage homosexuals, is it any surprise that gay kids are sometimes bullied to death?

There is clearly a negative side to the power of language, which is often a tool of oppression. How many women are called bitches when they stand up for themselves? How often is a woman called a slut for doing the very same thing a man does (but he's a "player?") How much was/is the "n-word" used to spit venom at African Americans? How many times were Jews compared to animals during WWII in order to dehumanize them and justify mass murder?

When you really think about it, it becomes pretty clear. Words are amongst the few uniquely human things we have, and despite our childish notions about "sticks and stones" or "rubber and glue" words can and do hurt us.

Mr. Ratner is learning that words matter the hard way. He has since issued an apology and stepped down as the producer of the upcoming Oscars, but the impact of his initial words remains, nevertheless. His original four word statment has now required a lengthy apology, which he acknowledges is not enough.

That's the tricky thing about words. When you say them, they're out there. You can try to undo them all you want, and issue flowery apology after flowery apology, but nothing said can ever be unsaid. That's become a cliche, but things become cliches for a reason. I think it's appropriate to invoke one of my all time favorite lyrics, by Modest Mouse in "Blame it on the Tetons:"

Language in is the liquid that we're all dissolved in, Great for solving problems after it creates a problem

I just keep coming back to a very simple concept: respect. It's something that is taught to us from the time we are in preschool, but we still have a hard time grasping.  Eliminating hate speech is really quite simple when you demand it upon yourself to only choose words which offer respect and dignity to every person you are speaking to and about.  There really is no excuse for carelessness.

Seriously, STOP Using Rape Analogies. Now.

This post is a part of my “Out of the Kitchen” weekly column at The Progressive Playbook in which various news and pop culture items will be examined through a feminist lens.

Trigger Warning for discussion of rape.

I was just reading through Jezebel, when I encountered this quote from Johnny Depp about photo shoots:

Well, you just feel like you’re being raped somehow. Raped … It feels like a kind of weird — just weird, man.” He’ll pose with fans, “But whenever you have a photo shoot or something like that, it’s like — you just feel dumb. It’s just so stupid.

This kind of stuff just outrages me so much that I have a hard time even knowing where to begin. Because I am usually quite happily enclosed in a protective feminist bubble, I hear rape metaphors rather infrequently in my personal life. And when I do hear them, I feel pretty confident in pointing out how very wrong they are. Read more...

Um, We're Still Saying "Wife Beater?"

Why do people act like words don't matter? I'm so sick of hearing "wife beater" used in such a nonchalant way that normalizes it as a concept.

Listen people...they are tanks or A-shirts.

Not only is "wife beater" incredibly misogynistic, it's also classist as hell. How many times do I have to assert words matter? They really do.

WHY BEYONCE? WHYYYY?

"I need to find a catchy new word for feminism, right? Like Bootylicious." -Beyonce

THIS kind of crap is the kind of crap I was saying we need LESS of!

Seriously, Beyonce. Just come to terms with it. You ARE a feminist. Duh. Just ask yourself circa 2010:

"I think I am a feminist, in a way. It's not something I consciously decided I was going to be; perhaps it's because I grew up in a singing group with other women, and that was so helpful to me. It kept me out of so much trouble and out of bad relationships. My friendships with my girls are just so much a part of me that there are things I am never going to do that would upset that bond. I never want to betray that friendship, because I love being a woman and I love being a friend to other women."

Now let us never EVER speak of this "bootylicious" bullshit again.

Why Feminism Anyway?

This post is a part of my “Out of the Kitchen” weekly column at The Progressive Playbook in which various news and pop culture items will be examined through a feminist lens.

Sometimes I live in a bubble. It’s a bubble I think we all frequently create for ourselves, where we’re surrounded by people who think like us and are open to our thoughts. The upside is that this bubble is safe, comfortable, and friendly. The downside is that our bubbles don’t often challenge us and that comfort can turn into complacency.

In the interest of avoiding complacency, when I meet people who don’t initially seem on board with feminism or who are actively against the label, I do like to engage in an occasional discussion. Frequently this issue arises, “I’m on board with equality and all that, but I just don’t like the term ‘feminism’. It’s so angry (militant, man-hating, self-righteous etc.)” Or, in other friendly discussions I’ll hear “I’m not a feminist but…” (In fact, celebrities even promote this idea, which I’ve written about a bit before.)

What it drills down to is that many people have a problem with the term, not the actual theory behind feminism. Studies substantiate this claim. Even though a majority of people understand gender bias exists, they can’t imagine referring to themselves as feminists. Of course, there are extremists who actually don’t believe in equality between men and women, but for the most part the general public’s objection to feminism is based upon its bad reputation and not its actual theory. In these discussions, after someone has stated their discomfort with feminism and I’ve explained what it’s really all about (the end to sexist oppression) the next question is always, “So why not go for a different term? ‘Feminism’ has such a bad connotation.” Some of my friends and acquaintances even go as far as to identify as equalists.

But this is where I simply must stand firm. For me, part of sexism is the systematic devaluation of everything associated with women; feminism included. For me to identify as a feminist is key to my work as someone who rejects sexism (and all the other –isms for that matter.) Giving up the term would be like a small symbol of giving into the idea that to stand up for women is the same as being an angry man-hater. Clearly, being pro-girl is not the same thing as being anti-boy. Feminism really is for everybody (thanks bell hooks!)

No More "Fat Talk?"

Quick post. I've been contemplating...one of the activities I often do with young women in body image workshops is aimed at ending "fat talk." Or in other words, it helps them gain the tools needed to both stop themselves from making negative weight focused talk and to neutralize the situation when their friends engage in negative weight focused talk about themselves and others.

However, the more I write and think about HAES, the more I realize that this is not enough. It's not enough to tell girls they can no longer engage in "fat talk."

The real solution is to remove the negative spin on the descriptor "fat" (as I've argued before.) Because, let's face it, some of us are fat. And that's ok.

I mean, I think that getting girls to stop engaging in all kinds of negative talk is great, but we should also be able to use the word "fat" without it having the negative connotations it has. But we gotta start somewhere, I suppose.

Baby steps, people.

SlutWalking: Redux

So, as promised, I wanted to revisit my experience with SlutWalk Austin.

To put it in one word: Amazing. I was so happy to be a part of this awesome event. I will say, I got pretty emotional. As Brooke Axtell spoke about her experience as a survivor of rape, I felt chills...the powerful words she spoke to the crowd stayed with me as we embarked on our trek, "Keep talking until somebody listens...Rape is soul murder and the resurrection is extremely painful. Only you can tell the story you need to tell to honor the truth."

Damn.

I had a lump in my throat as I walked with my dude in support of all people facing rape survivorship, to support them and to clearly display the message: the victim is never to blame.

I was moved by the range of people in attendance. There were people of all ages, colors, gender expressions, sexual orientations, and backgrounds of all kinds. This video, from the story above, much better tells the story:

Slut Walk from The Daily Texan on Vimeo.

HOWEVER, I will say, I was very, very disappointed to hear the event organizers say that "this is not a feminist event, this is a humanist event."

Besides being categorically wrong (there's not much more feminist things than SlutWalk!) this idea perpetuates the negative stereotypes of feminism as a movement. When we are afraid of the word "feminist" and opt for words that people don't find so scary (ie humanist) we give more power to feminism's detractors. We've got to stop accepting the "I'm not a feminist but" mentality and understand that those of use who want to end sexism, who care about empowering girls, and who walk to end victim blaming are feminists. The solution, is to advocate for widespread acceptance of the term, not avoid it.

Anyway, I loved SlutWalk. I loved chanting with other feminists (and YES men can be and are feminists!) about the end of victim blaming. I loved everything about it!

The Importance of Language

I've thought and discussed with others frequently about the importance of language and how our words shape our reality. But I don't think I've written about it yet, so here goes.

At its core this blog makes the case for being politically correct, so before I proceed I figured I would simply state why I feel political correctness is important: Political correctness is respectful. Now, I know how confusing it can be to keep up on what is politically correct to say. However, in 99% of the cases it takes only 2 seconds to choose politically correct language and it can speak volumes to the type of person that you are. You know, the type who cares about the feelings of other people.

Plus, as a general rule, if you if you are making an attempt to be sensitive to the situation/identities of the people around you and you slip up, they're going to cut you some slack and gently correct you. But if you're someone who throws words around like a callous jerk, you're not going to get the same understanding and you will be generally regarded as said callous jerk. Oh, and FYI, if you're not sure what to say, it's ok to ask. Most people would rather be asked how they identify in XYZ category than to have someone use a hurtful term.

Ok, so I am in favor of political correctness. I think it's respectful. Having laid that out, I want to get back to my original point...I feel that language holds enormous power over our world. I think that how we describe things plays a part in our reality and is extremely influential in how your portray yourself as a person. It is because of these reasons that I've abandoned words like "gipped" "denigrate" "bitch slap" "that's so gay" and anything else that has a sexist/racist/heterosexist or any other -ist connotation. (Not that I don't slip up and not that I know it all, but I try.)

Recently on a thread of a feministing post about abortion, community members got into a debate about how to identify those who oppose access to abortion rights. They call themselves pro-life. Feminists have been calling them anti-choice for years...so what's the answer? I see two sides to this debate:

1) Even if we disagree with their politics we should continue to call them pro-life because that is how they identify. It's rude to slap a label on them. In essence, we can't "identify them" (which I've argued before.) And it's basically childish name calling to refer to them as anti-choice, which is the same as them calling us pro-death.

2) The term pro-life is a loaded term which implies that the other side is against life and therefore, it is right to choose another term for this political position. Anti-choice is a more accurate and fairly respectful term.

My opinion falls squarely into camp #2. (In fact anti-choice has long been a subject tag on this blog.) If those who oppose access to abortion rights want to call themselves pro-life, that's fine. I however, will not call them that, because I believe we must acknowledge what power language has, and in this case using that language goes against my personal beliefs. As I said on the thread linked above:

Referring to them as anti-choice, rather, frames their position in a way which aligns with the pro-choice framework. By calling themselves pro-life, they are stating that anyone who stands in opposition to them is against life, and therefore horrible villians. When really, it's about what exactly LIFE is and who's life we're talking about.

Therefore, it is a pretty damn feminist act to call them anti-choice. Besides, why would this offend them? They are against the choice to abortion, right? Are we against life, on the other hand?

Now, I do grant there is merit to the "we can't identify" them camp (and I think this viewpoint is very important in most contexts). However, this case of identity has to do with a specific set of political beliefs, not a personal identification like race, religion, sexual orientation, or gender. Like another commenter noted on the thread when someone asked if it's ok for someone call a transgendered person by a gender they do not identify with, "It's more the equivalent of a group of people asking to be called 'The Overlords of the Universe Who Are Supreme To Everyone Else.' It's just hyperbole, it's not factual or even grounded in rational objectivity."

Exactly.

Now to my second point about language, and it's one I've been pondering at length lately, given that yesterday was the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO). Specifically, my question deals with the "phobia." I've been wondering if the terms homophobia and transphobia actually encompass the litany of issues facing the GLBTQ communities.

Basically, I feel like -phobia is not a fully accurate term for what is going on in our society, mostly because other phobias are legitimate psychological disorders. What is really going on is blind hatred, removal of rights, and marginalization. Yes, there is and forever will be a connection between fear and hatred and fear is at the core of so many anti-GLBTQ things (Prop 8 anyone? "Teaching" kids gayness...?) But I feel like fear is just a tip of the iceberg for what is really going on. Many people wouldn't call themselves homophobic because they have a token gay friend or family member, but still stand in strong opposition to anything that would attempt to give GLBTQ people equal rights. (Although most racists don't call themselves racist either...)

Anyway, it's for this reason that I often say heterosexism. It's my attempt to more accurately encompass the layers of discrimination against GLBTQ individuals. I need a term like misogyny for it, I guess, but I think that it's the hate that is most salient here. And I don't think we should replace the -phobia terms, necessarily...I'm just considering if they're accurate.

Anyway, these two examples are just a few of the ways that I ponder how language plays a critical role in our society. I maintain that wording is very powerful, not only in what makes you the person you are, but also in how we exert ourselves into the world and convey ourselves to others.

So choose your words wisely.





Edit: Turns out I have talked about it...here and here, just not in this detail.

What is a "Feminist Ally?"

So twice in the past week I've come across the term "feminist ally." The first was on a feminist blog calling another blogger this term. It didn't stick out to me initially. Then I saw it used in the comments section of a different feminist blog in the context of "feminists and allies must fight against XXX."

This got me thinking...What exactly is a feminist ally? I'm familiar with gay allies. Like GLAAD says, "A straight ally can merely be someone who is supportive and accepts the LGBT person, or a straight ally can be someone who personally advocates for equal rights and fair treatment."

This makes sense to me, and I actually identify as a gay ally (on both parts). One can support the freedom of non-heterosexuality and believe in rights for homosexuals, but not actually particpate in homosexuality. Feminism is not the same. Let's take a look at a similar definition of feminist ally like, for example, "A feminist ally can merely be someone who is supportive and accepts the feminist, or a feminist ally can be someone who personally advocates for equal rights and fair treatment of women."

This doesn't make sense. If you personally advocate for equal rights and fair treatment of women, then you ARE a feminist (like the term or not!). You are not a feminist ally. And if you are supportive and accepting of a feminist, but do NOT advocate for equal rights and fair treatment, then you are merely someone who lets others believe what they want, but you are not actually an ally to the feminist at all.

Basically, "feminist ally," to me sounds like another way to try to make people who are afraid of the word feminist more comfortable with it as a concept, and to perpetuate the FALSE assumption that only women are feminists. A simple Google search of "feminist ally" confirms that there is an immediate connection made between the term feminist ally and males.

Guess what? Men can be and are feminists. These soft and fuzzy cutesy terms, (like feminist ally) used to reinforce false assumptions about feminism and feminists, get us nowhere. It does the movement a whole lot more good if the people who really are feminists embrace the term and denounce the negative spin that has been put on it.

UPDATE, July 2013: I understand that there is a very real and important sect of feminism that feels that identifying as a male feminist is problematic and uses the term "ally" for these people. I, personally, don’t take issue with male identified feminists, because I’ve seen it done right several times. But that is rare. Some men take on the feminist label and appropriate it with the intention to mansplain and talk over women. I’ve often heard that instead of making feminism for men, men should make their spaces (ie the rest of the world) more feminist. I like that.

Ultimately, whatever term you use, it’s much more important to live the values of feminism than to "be a feminist." The first step for participating in ANY movement where you carry a privilege is to STOP TALKING AND LISTEN. Seriously—read, listen, and learn all you can.