Fauxminism: It’s What Makes You Dinner

[ismnotwasm]

Now this is an interesting one--not pulling punches here---

Fauxminism is the curious phenomenon where people think that featuring, talking about, or even just being a woman is an inherently feminist act and thus renders the person and/or act(s) in question irreproachably progressive with regards to matters of gender. What makes someone a fauxminist is not any particular action or choice that they make or take, but their dogged insistence that anything they do must be feminist because they are a woman or have involved a woman without taking into account how those actions affect the lives of other women. They tend to say things like ”Criticizing another woman? Jeez, that isn’t very feminist of you” and “Support all ladies no matter what they do (even if that’s hindering other ladies)!” in response to feminist critiques of anything even marginally involving a woman.

To quote the ever-excellent Kate Harding:

feminism is not, in fact, all about choosing your choice. It is mostly about recognizing when things are fucked up for women at the societal level, and talking about that, and trying to change it. So sometimes, even when a decision is right for you, you still need to recognize that you made that decision within a social context that overwhelmingly supports your choice, and punishes women who make a different one.
While trying to set up a One True Feminist or Feminism would be problematic (not to mention blatantly fallacious), if feminism really were just about supporting individual women’s choices, then it would simply be called “female individualism.” While choice is an important part of feminism, it is far from the only part, especially in a world where those doing the talking about feminism often have more choices available to them than those they would criticize.

Feminism, then, does not equal blind support for all women and all of their choices, but working towards a world where more and more women have more and more agency in their lives — a world where women who aren’t hot, extraordinarily talented, Republicans, mothers, assigned female at birth, powerful, or able to look sexy while kicking someone’s ass are still able to be people, too.

http://skepchick.org/2013/04/fauxminism/

[seabeyond]

1. this really should not be a tough concept. but, seems to be outside of so manys grasp

i like men degrading, demeaning me, using sexist slurs and reducing me to a pile of disrespectful shit. i am a woman, that makes me a feminist, too.

[ismnotwasm]

6. Those

Are in my permanent dumbass category. I should clarify some of them seem to me to be intelligent well meaning women, just a little stuck on stupid here and there.

There is only one male poster I pay absolutely no attention to, and No women posters. I'm always interested in POV's, but that 'I'm a women and *I* fought for _______, in the (decades of choice) and proceeds to defend sexist bullshit that if she fought for anything she'd recognize, well--I AM sorry, but-- dumbass.


I tend to pay less attention after that. And it's not so much that I disagree with them, as its I don't understand how they could have possibly reached the conclusions they have as feminist activists.

Women who are unaware of largely unaware of feminism outside of DU or things like articles on Rush Limbaugh, or through a male-centric filter, I kind of understand, it's like your matrix cartoon. In their own minds, bereft of good and accurate information, or simply not that interested, they are righteously right.

[redqueen]

7. I love all of your posts.

SO HARD!

[Summer Hathaway]

26. I, too, place certain people in

my 'personal dumbass category'.

It includes women who are stuck-on-stupid when it comes to their perception of all men, most other women, and a penchant for adopting whatever BS is spewed on the topic of feminism by those who dictate what their fellow women should think, feel, or react to.

"but that 'I'm a women (sic) and *I* fought for _______, in the (decades of choice) and proceeds to defend sexist bullshit that if she fought for anything she'd recognize, well--I AM sorry, but-- dumbass."

After attempting to make sense of that totally incoherent rant, I can only state the obvious - that the women who fought for women's rights (in any decade) have a much better grasp of what is important than a group of so-called 'feminists' on a message board, who spend an inordinate amount of time promoting the idea that any woman who disagrees with them is a dumbass.

"And it's not so much that I disagree with them, as its (sic) I don't understand how they could have possibly reached the conclusions they have as feminist activists."

Maybe that's because they have reached their conclusions based on something more substantial than the ravings of a handful of so-called 'feminists' on a website.

[haikugal]

2. Palin...

comes to mind among others who claim to be feminist simply because she's female. At the same time she speaks against the poor, abortion rights etc. I could parse it further but typing is difficult until I get my 'puter repaired. Thanks for the link...more reading for me.

[In_The_Wind]

3. It is way overblown to some.

■Secret Submissives
While enjoying or even lusting after strong, powerful women does not in itself make someone a Secret Submissive, using reasoning along the lines of “femme fatales are hot” as one’s primary justification for supporting gender equality does. Secret Submissives are people who like to see women in certain types of power because they get off on it, not necessarily due to beliefs regarding gender equality. Add a dash of geeky sincerity and scrape off some of the more blatant objectification and you have Joss-Whedonites, who, while often more well-meaning than Secret Submissives, still predicate their beliefs in female empowerment on some stereotype of a Strong Sexy Woman.

[ismnotwasm]

8. I was a little disappointed

In 'Serenity' -(-I had never watched the series 'Firefly)' because I had heard that it was all feminist. I love the movie because I love sci-Fi, but I've long since given up on a truly feminist character-- at least one that doesn't get killed off--

The whole 'companion' thing, though-- ugh.

CJ Cherrhy, one of my favorite sci-Fi authors, has this to say in her essay about character building;

Gender.
Having said the dreadful word, let's look back at the panel topics at the beginning...

Do women write better characters? My reason for saying no is simply that Herman Melville's Ahab is a wonderful character and I can think of a dozen characters by women novelists that are really pretty awful. Can men write good female characters and vice versa? Yes. But...

'Weakly-drawn' female characters are fairly prevalent in a very common type of novel written primarily by men, the traditional male adventure novel. Remember, any character who's an absentee or an abdicator during the action is a 'morally weak' character, and if the writer also slights their viewpoint and development priot to the denouement one can also say they're 'weakly-drawn.' And that 'weakly-drawn' aspect of the also 'morally weak' character, all political statements aside, is the primary flaw of women characters created by men for adventure fiction. Let's get it in perspective: men's adventure fiction was a 'type' of fiction for a market that asked nothing better, a lot of it very similar to writing for fanzines today. Political changes in the world have changed the perception of women's roles, and therefore such 'moral weakness' in the female characters comes across as misogynistic today. The literature has matured somewhat, the writing demands more---but I think we make a political and ethical mistake when we make demands that the female characters of today's adventure fiction all be 'morally strong.' It's quite enough for me, speaking as a woman, that they just be 'well-drawn' and let the chips fall where they may.

A great deal of uncertainty and indignation I hear from male writers about how to write 'strong' female characters seems to flow from the question, really, whether all female characters are now politically forbidden unless they appear 'morally strong' in books written by men. Only in a world overwhelmed by jingoism, say I. Let characters be what they need to be for a good story and leave the political correctness and the quota systems to editorial writers, not novelists.

Now, looking at Ahab, since we raised the ghost of Melville, here's an example of a fine character who blends both 'morally strong' and 'morally weak.' But the proportions of strength and weakness are mirror-reversed in Ishmael,...and that remains one of the odder curiosities of Moby Dick, that Queequeeg, who is minor, remains stronger than the narrator, about whom nobody much cares and who alone survives...but if you look at the structure of the novel, Ahab would not be Ahab unless observed by someone as hesitating and 'morally weak' as Ishmael. He (Ahab) ascends from folly to godhood like Oedipus, violating rule 4 above, because his extravagant action is very much like that of Oedipus, destructive, absolute, passionate, and unable to be told effectively except through the shock of an outside observer who himself lacks those traits. It subtly reverses traits of a typical men's adventure novel of somewhat later date by putting the narration into the person of Ishmael, who takes the more passive role of the female in adventure fiction, and who yet evokes the admiration of the audience from a safe emotional distance for the death of Ahab. Looking at a male adventure fiction piece versus Melville's lasting work one can see similarities; but one can also see how the shock communicates itself without becoming either horror novel or men's adventure. And the difference is the narrator. Why keep the narrator remote? The answer is the same as that in Oedipus: the ending relies on it. And in that one of the longest novels in world literature behaves in many respects like a short story, not a classic novel: it has an 'morally weak' narrator and a strong 'punch' at the end.

http://www.cherryh.com/www/charac.htm

Edit to add, Cherryh does some great gender role bending in her novels.

[Shivering Jemmy]

4. This works for men also

There are a lot of choices that I made that were right for me but that occur within a context of forced disadvantage for women. I'm a scientist today in part because my parents encouraged their boy to go in to science. No one ever told me that because I like science I had to become an elementary school teacher. They told me there were a zillion things I could do. But
I know smart sciency girls in my cohort and they were all pushed toward one track only education of young children.

So because I'm a man a range of career options were highlighted for me as a young boy. I'm not ashamed of this. It does not lessen my achievements. But I'd be a fool not to admit the certain fact that the world is poorer for all the brilliant women scientists that could have been but for gender role pressure.

[seabeyond]

5. see. just the recognizing is part of the solution. and yes, you are right. nt

[Shivering Jemmy]

11. Too many people confuse criticism of the system

With personal insult.

I am not the system that made me. Those words are very liberating.

[seabeyond]

13. I am not the system that made me.

this is very good. i really wish people could get this. it is not about guilt or responsibility. it is about recognizing and healing.

[MadrasT]

9. FAUXMINISM FUCK YEAH

and


Here is a typical scene in my life:

1. I make a comment about some dumbass thing a woman does as being idiotic and destructive not only to feminism, but to women in general.
2. Boyfriend says "But that's her choice!!! And she's a woman!!! How can it not be feminist!!!"
3. My head explodes

4. I say "Any choice a woman makes is not necessarily a feminist choice just because a woman chose it, and women choose to do things all the time that harm women collectively."

5. Boyfriend gets annoyed and changes the subject.

This happened just last week... what the heck were we talking about... benevolent sexism, that was it.

[seabeyond]

12. lmao. nt

[ismnotwasm]

14. LoL!

Too funny!

[MadrasT]

10. Ooooh, this is familiar

Anti-Victimhood Brigade

These women interpret any conversation about patriarchy, sexism, male chauvinism, privilege, misogyny, or even feminism to be an admission of victimhood, and, therefore, powerlessness. They are basically to feminism what Morgan Freeman is to racism in that they believe that the best way to deal with sexism and misogyny is to cease discussing them, as they see said discussions as emphasizing a lack of power instead of empowerment.

[geek tragedy]

15. Cf. "I'm not a feminist because I want what's best for all human beings." nt

[Gormy Cuss]

16. That's a great link. n/t

[eilen]

17. I agree. I think you said it better than me.

I was struggling with this on another board in the discussion of HBO's Girls in which the creator Lena Dunham characterized her series as "Feminist". I strongly disagreed.

[Aerows]

18. I'm as gay as it gets

and I'm a femme lesbian. You'd think the idea that I cook dinner makes me subjugated to gender roles simply because I like to cook and dress how I want to dress.

I'm not 100% femme, but I am a "lady" in most situations. I choose to make dinner, I choose what I wear, and I choose my partner. If that isn't empowerment, I don't know what is.

[ismnotwasm]

19. And I'm straight as you can get

Which is weird, if you knew my history. I don't know how I ended up straight, truth to tell. I hate cooking, but I like a bohemian style of dressing.

I'm very forthright in conversations, and people get used to that--or they don't. I don't quite know what you mean by 'lady' but I'm assuming you mean in the traditional sense. I'm in no way ladylike, but I occasionally get mistaken for one, probably because I like dresses and skirts. Heh.

Criticisms of choice feminism can be misleading because its sounds as though choices shouldn't be personal. It's actually a larger conversation, and its more about ideology.

My husband stays home because he's unable to work do to MS, I work in the "traditional" women's field of nursing. He takes care of the home, best as he can. It's definitely a different perspective than many people experience and of course it wasn't my husbands 'choice' to get ill.

So we all have circumstances, we all have choices.

[seabeyond]

20. I like a bohemian style of dressing. and here i pictured leather. lol

you ALWAYS surprise me.

i told my inlaws a decade ago i want to change bohemian style of dressing. my mother in law about shit. was all like, .... wha?? doesnt mean i would put flowers in my hair. geez.

thanks for the giggle

[ismnotwasm]

21. Leather was a few years back

[seabeyond]

22. huge smile....

HUGE.... lol

thanks.

[Aerows]

24. I've gotten rid of all the leather

about never.

[MadrasT]

25. LOL

I went through quite the leather phase, too.

Now I gravitate toward fatigues and combat boots.

Or just plain old jeans and t shirts.

I have my bohemian chick moments, and my cowgirl moments, but they are getting fewer and farther between.

L-o-v-e my combat boots.

[ismnotwasm]

27. I wore combat boots for quite some time

And they were real and broke in being from my daughter who was in the Army at the time. My kids used to say " My Momma really DOES wear combat boots!"


I gave them to another daughter. Wish I had them back. I have a great pair of small boots from London Underground, saw them in a second hand store probably ten years ago--they've never worn out and the leather is like butter.

[Aerows]

23. Choosing for ourselves

because we can choose for ourselves is what matters.

I choose my path, because I can, and if I can't, I'll try to forge it anyway. That's what defines us ultimately.

[ismnotwasm]

28. Well said!