Yes! Love your point that we all need each other. Extreme independence can be tempting compared to all the emotional work required to tackle the subconscious sexism in ourselves and our relationships... But if we don't do it, who will? Its not fair but life never is and if we want a better world we have to work to create it.
I especially agree with the conclusions. Feminism, during my life as a young adult, was divisive. The main issue now, as I see it, is to dissolve the polarities but to have "equity" for all.
Something that has always bothered me about our current models of feminism is that it doesn’t get at the root of the issue. Jobs like teaching, working with people with disabilities, or any other Pink collar job is paid very little while also being jobs that require incredible skill sets and are very taxing. In order to be liberated many women seek to work in other fields (which I think is also great) but very little work has been done to increase our understanding of the VALUE of those jobs. Mothering is an incredibly difficult job to do, let alone do well. Mothers should be paid more than what a blue collar worker gets paid. But the issue is instead of valuing domesticity we work within the current patriarchal framework and try to get well paid jobs outside of the home.
You see this in the Democratic Party’s solution which is to increase access and decrease the price of childcare. This completely ignores the reality that anyone caring for children DESERVES to be paid well for the taxing job it is. If we actually valued women’s work inside the home we often say we do it would be more cost effective to keep mothers in the home and actually treat their contribution as valuable.
I’m not sure if I’m explaining what I mean very well right now but hopefully whoever’s reading this knows what I’m getting at.
Hi Elena, I started following you on Instagram because my wife is pregnant with our first child, and with your Motherhood Until Yesterday theme you were/are answering a lot of questions I had from the perspective I'm interested in. Being a big fan of The World Until Yesterday, I connected with it immediately - thank you for the work you're doing!
I'm writing here because I wholeheartedly agree with the thrust of this post, and I want to give a perspective that's a bit different as far as how we reach the goals you describe. Specifically, I love hearing statements like the following:
"…to want for all people, female and male, liberation from sexist role patterns, domination, and oppression." from bell hooks.
"This is not about women versus men. This is not about self-sufficiency and independence. It is about love and interdependence and wanting a better world for everyone."
What I want to propose is that the way to reach the above is a new movement that is - at its inception and its core - about women and men coming together to achieve what you're describing above, and this movement is different than feminism.
In my view there are a couple reasons for this. Keep in mind this isn't meant as a critique of feminism in any way; I only want us collectively to have the best chance of success in the long term goals above.
A) As you described the waves of feminism in your post, men were not mentioned at all. That totally makes sense: those movements were led by women, for women, because that's what was needed. What we're talking about now is not that; it must be led by women and men for both women and men, and that's a different movement.
B) On a practical level, it would be ineffective to label this as feminism. If you truly do want men to be involved and know that they are included, feminism is probably the second most ineffective name you could choose - right after "men's rights", and for the same reason! Both are exclusionary in this context.
Again, this is not a critique of feminism the movement, nor is it saying feminism is no longer important. I'm asking you to consider, as your contemplating what feminism means to you and what it means to have the goal of "wanting health and flourishing for ALL people", that these are overlapping but ultimately different things.
What's exciting to me is to start defining and forming what that movement would look like, with people like you who clearly care deeply, think deeply, and from what I've seen engage in good faith with different perspectives.
I would love to hear your (and any others' who happen to be reading) thoughts on this. Cheers!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, John. I hate to say it but I think you're right. I don't think the feminist label is serving me anymore. I think a lot of the things I am advocating for - like more support for mothers - are essentially feminist issues, but it's entirely possible to advocate for them without invoking feminism and, in fact, there might be MORE alignment and support for them without that label. Feminism means so many things to so many different people right now, which creates a lot of confusion.
I’m wondering… as a woman that has received rape threats for providing abortion resources in the days after the election, how it’s possible to not be polarized by this? I understand that not all men are acting this way, but it’s enough that it’s worrying and it’s enough to elect a serial rapist into the most powerful position in the world. I also wonder what women’s responsibility is in “coming together for a better society”? Especially when I know many have been trying, for years, only to have our safety and maternal mortality get more and more threatened by men and politics over-represented by men. I want to make life better for everyone, especially mothers and women. I believe that starts with adequate healthcare, aka abortion, to keep women alive, in order to have a motherhood/womanhood in the first place.
I hear you. But consider how so many of these conversations have become intensely polarized due to social media algorithms, inflammatory news, and other discussion forums that deliberately promote the most controversial content to get attention. Most people, if you sit and speak with them one on one, are reasonable. Usually, you can find at least some common ground. Consider also how some of the most effective movements for social change (Gandhi, MLK) have used peaceful protest to highlight the hypocrisy and cruelty of their oppressors; how they deliberately used language that SPOKE to their oppressors and their oppressors values instead of alienating them. These days, we are all shouting at each other and not listening. Listening is exhausting and trying to find common ground is exhausting, I know, but that is the work of advocacy, no?
I really appreciate your thoughtful reply. I do agree that the online space where we only share a few seconds of a thought, can strip away nuances in these big conversations. Thus, making them more polarizing, like you say.
I agree that the real change needs to be made in our intrapersonal relationships. I also agree with the thought on peaceful protests. Where our beliefs diverge is that I think 4B is exactly that. If my life and reproductive safety are threatened, I’m allowed to choose safety by not allowing men access to that, as a peaceful protest. I’ll still be showing up in my workplace relationships with men, friendships with men, and family members that are men with mutual respect and kindness. I’ll still be open to productive conversations about these issues.
I’d just challenge you to really consider what the right place for women is in this environment. For me, mothering a slew of adult men and putting my health, life, and livelihood at risk just is not it.
Yes! Love your point that we all need each other. Extreme independence can be tempting compared to all the emotional work required to tackle the subconscious sexism in ourselves and our relationships... But if we don't do it, who will? Its not fair but life never is and if we want a better world we have to work to create it.
Yes. Interdependence can open us up to hurt and harm but the opposite (being closed off to love) is worse I think.
I especially agree with the conclusions. Feminism, during my life as a young adult, was divisive. The main issue now, as I see it, is to dissolve the polarities but to have "equity" for all.
Something that has always bothered me about our current models of feminism is that it doesn’t get at the root of the issue. Jobs like teaching, working with people with disabilities, or any other Pink collar job is paid very little while also being jobs that require incredible skill sets and are very taxing. In order to be liberated many women seek to work in other fields (which I think is also great) but very little work has been done to increase our understanding of the VALUE of those jobs. Mothering is an incredibly difficult job to do, let alone do well. Mothers should be paid more than what a blue collar worker gets paid. But the issue is instead of valuing domesticity we work within the current patriarchal framework and try to get well paid jobs outside of the home.
You see this in the Democratic Party’s solution which is to increase access and decrease the price of childcare. This completely ignores the reality that anyone caring for children DESERVES to be paid well for the taxing job it is. If we actually valued women’s work inside the home we often say we do it would be more cost effective to keep mothers in the home and actually treat their contribution as valuable.
I’m not sure if I’m explaining what I mean very well right now but hopefully whoever’s reading this knows what I’m getting at.
Hi Elena, I started following you on Instagram because my wife is pregnant with our first child, and with your Motherhood Until Yesterday theme you were/are answering a lot of questions I had from the perspective I'm interested in. Being a big fan of The World Until Yesterday, I connected with it immediately - thank you for the work you're doing!
I'm writing here because I wholeheartedly agree with the thrust of this post, and I want to give a perspective that's a bit different as far as how we reach the goals you describe. Specifically, I love hearing statements like the following:
"…to want for all people, female and male, liberation from sexist role patterns, domination, and oppression." from bell hooks.
"This is not about women versus men. This is not about self-sufficiency and independence. It is about love and interdependence and wanting a better world for everyone."
What I want to propose is that the way to reach the above is a new movement that is - at its inception and its core - about women and men coming together to achieve what you're describing above, and this movement is different than feminism.
In my view there are a couple reasons for this. Keep in mind this isn't meant as a critique of feminism in any way; I only want us collectively to have the best chance of success in the long term goals above.
A) As you described the waves of feminism in your post, men were not mentioned at all. That totally makes sense: those movements were led by women, for women, because that's what was needed. What we're talking about now is not that; it must be led by women and men for both women and men, and that's a different movement.
B) On a practical level, it would be ineffective to label this as feminism. If you truly do want men to be involved and know that they are included, feminism is probably the second most ineffective name you could choose - right after "men's rights", and for the same reason! Both are exclusionary in this context.
Again, this is not a critique of feminism the movement, nor is it saying feminism is no longer important. I'm asking you to consider, as your contemplating what feminism means to you and what it means to have the goal of "wanting health and flourishing for ALL people", that these are overlapping but ultimately different things.
What's exciting to me is to start defining and forming what that movement would look like, with people like you who clearly care deeply, think deeply, and from what I've seen engage in good faith with different perspectives.
I would love to hear your (and any others' who happen to be reading) thoughts on this. Cheers!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, John. I hate to say it but I think you're right. I don't think the feminist label is serving me anymore. I think a lot of the things I am advocating for - like more support for mothers - are essentially feminist issues, but it's entirely possible to advocate for them without invoking feminism and, in fact, there might be MORE alignment and support for them without that label. Feminism means so many things to so many different people right now, which creates a lot of confusion.
I’m wondering… as a woman that has received rape threats for providing abortion resources in the days after the election, how it’s possible to not be polarized by this? I understand that not all men are acting this way, but it’s enough that it’s worrying and it’s enough to elect a serial rapist into the most powerful position in the world. I also wonder what women’s responsibility is in “coming together for a better society”? Especially when I know many have been trying, for years, only to have our safety and maternal mortality get more and more threatened by men and politics over-represented by men. I want to make life better for everyone, especially mothers and women. I believe that starts with adequate healthcare, aka abortion, to keep women alive, in order to have a motherhood/womanhood in the first place.
I hear you. But consider how so many of these conversations have become intensely polarized due to social media algorithms, inflammatory news, and other discussion forums that deliberately promote the most controversial content to get attention. Most people, if you sit and speak with them one on one, are reasonable. Usually, you can find at least some common ground. Consider also how some of the most effective movements for social change (Gandhi, MLK) have used peaceful protest to highlight the hypocrisy and cruelty of their oppressors; how they deliberately used language that SPOKE to their oppressors and their oppressors values instead of alienating them. These days, we are all shouting at each other and not listening. Listening is exhausting and trying to find common ground is exhausting, I know, but that is the work of advocacy, no?
I really appreciate your thoughtful reply. I do agree that the online space where we only share a few seconds of a thought, can strip away nuances in these big conversations. Thus, making them more polarizing, like you say.
I agree that the real change needs to be made in our intrapersonal relationships. I also agree with the thought on peaceful protests. Where our beliefs diverge is that I think 4B is exactly that. If my life and reproductive safety are threatened, I’m allowed to choose safety by not allowing men access to that, as a peaceful protest. I’ll still be showing up in my workplace relationships with men, friendships with men, and family members that are men with mutual respect and kindness. I’ll still be open to productive conversations about these issues.
I’d just challenge you to really consider what the right place for women is in this environment. For me, mothering a slew of adult men and putting my health, life, and livelihood at risk just is not it.