How To Be A Feminist And Still Like Men Enough To Date Them @feminismintimaterelationships - Tumblr Blog

A Reflection

BLOG POST 12

For my last blog post, I wanted to reflect on all that I’ve learned about feminism’s role in intimate relationships. Overall, I certainly believe you can be a feminist in a healthy and satisfying heterosexual relationship with a man. Yet, it still is going to take a lot of work. From these articles I have analyzed for my posts, I have learned that we need to be vocal about our beliefs from the very beginning. If you are uncomfortable with any gendered dating script, speak up! It is encouraging to know that egalitarian relationships and ones that do not rely on gendered scripts are more satisfying anyway, for both women and men. While having a list of politically-charged questions might not be the route for me, I should have a list of important morals and beliefs that I am unwilling to alter in any way for a partner. Part of feminism is respecting oneself and being faithful and loving to yourself. Once dating, it is important to continue to have conversations about feminism. Practicing feminism with my partner on a daily basis will increase satisfaction and guarantee both partners are “on the same page”. Educating my partner on women’s issues could be extremely helpful and change any misinformation they may have gathered before meeting me. Seeking and having social supports for the type of relationship I want to have, such as egalitarian, will be incredibly beneficial to the relationship. Having discussions about power dynamics and income levels may be uncomfortable but is incredibly relevant to a relationship’s success. Knowing that your partner respects my career, income, status, and does not feel threatened is necessary. I do not have to embrace all political stances. For example, dating a Trump supporter, or someone with dangerous political views, does not make me tolerant and accepting.

I think my favorite thing I have gathered from this project is feeling encouraged to make a list of all the things important to me in a potential partner; Not feeling like I have to be any less of myself but looking for someone who will add more to me. In the most “radical” forms of feminism, loving others deeply and genuinely is a form of political resistance. This means loving men, too!

Walking through the streets of Brooklyn, I hear discussion of rights, equality, privilege, culture.

BLOG POST 11

One major question I have had during the creation of this blog was: What if a male partner agrees with me on major feminist ideologies but simply has misconceptions and misinformation on what feminism strives for? I take it for granted, as a Women’s Studies major, that I’ve studied the ins and outs of feminism, read works from talented feminist theorists and activists, and learned from intelligent and thoughtful professors. Yet, even for myself, there is a lot more learning to do. In classes, we talk about how there is not one universal, all inclusive definition of feminism. And that feminism is likely plural, and should instead be considered feminism(s). Even in the academic world of feminism we do not all agree on what we are doing or what we should be doing, other than maybe a very basic understanding of “equality with men”. Speaking for itself, these misconceptions are even greater for those who do not consider themselves feminists.

Educating your partner and having conversations about feminism will hopefully clear up these preconceived notions about feminism. Like the author of “The Feminist Misconception,” I believe it is absurd to think men cannot be feminists and cannot value and be passionate about women’s rights. It may just be a process. The unknown author of this piece writes, “Once one understands a concept, they grow with it, shape it, form it into what it means for them” (2017). It may take time, energy, conversations, arguing, but at the end of the day I know many men are capable of this.

One part of this piece I very much dislike is this quote: “Men seem to think they cannot be feminists. As a male myself, this idea seems entirely preposterous. It does not take much to be an advocate. It does not take time or effort, it does not take willpower or strength. All it takes is plain understanding.” I completely disagree. My feminism requires time-consuming advocacy, the willpower to be true to yourself and love all other women, and goes much deeper than “plain understanding.” Yes a man can (and should) be a feminist, but you cannot just tack that label onto your identity and call it a day. It takes effort and work. As we have seen in history, it takes hundreds of years to achieve small human rights and I am not naive enough to believe we are anywhere close to breaking down all systems of oppression. We need to continue to clear up these misconceptions and encourage activism, something that can begin with our intimate partners.

If you’re not going to support marginalized folks, then we can’t be friends, let alone date. The personal is political.

BLOG POST 10

Very similar to Hanna Brooks Olsen’s stance in my third blog post about dating Trump supporters, this article, “10 Things Every Intersectional Feminist Should Ask On a First Date,” believes feminists should be open about their viewpoints. Lara Witt gives a list of 10 questions we need to be asking at our first encounters with potential romantic partners. They are all “tough” but relevant political and moral questions. Honestly, they might turn someone off at the getgo, but for any confident feminist you are probably looking for someone that can at least partially answer these without running. Or at the least, respect and acknowledge where you are coming from/ why you are asking them these intense questions. Nonetheless, they feel almost as if they were interview questions and are likely not many people’s “style” for first dates. I’m afraid that while in theory these are excellent questions to ask, it would take tremendous confidence and the right type of person to manage this effectively. The main goal of these questions is to try and figure out your potential partner’s beliefs of themselves and the world in a time-efficient way. This completely takes the mystery and romance out of a relationship, aspects most people value and look forward to.

My favorite question is number 3: “How do you work to dismantle sexism and misogyny in your life?” (Witt, 2017). This is a BIG question but so important when I am looking for a potential partner. Yet, I am not even sure I would be able to effectively answer this myself if asked on the spot. On the plus side, while all Witt’s questions relate to equality and human rights, I think they could be somewhat personalized based on the causes that are most important to each individual. At the very least, I think this post and Witt’s questions inspire feminists to be fully-open about their beliefs and not “settle” for someone who fundamentally disagrees about important human rights issues. We do not need to hide out feminist identity on first dates and we should feel the confidence to ask important questions if comfortable.

Ever wondered what it would be like to date in a completely gender-equal world? The answer may surprise you.

BLOG POST 9

Our dating and romantic scripts are gendered; men are burdened with being the initiators and playing the dominant role and women are forced into more submissive roles. In Viren Swami’s “Is feminism killing romance?,” he examines how moving away from gendered dating scripting and towards more egalitarian relationships will actually increase relationship satisfaction and success. Swami looks at studies that found egalitarian couples had better communication, had sex more often and had generally more satisfying sex lives, healthier relationships, increased relationship stability, lower divorce rates, and compared to men who followed more traditional dating patterns, men were more committed to their partners in egalitarian relationships. These findings are very similar to those discussed in class related to couples who value equality.

While the change to more egalitarian dating scripts are obviously beneficial to women, Swami found many benefits for men too. Pressures on men to initiate dating and sex can be frustrating. Egalitarian scripts allow for more personal preferences and behaviors. Swami (2016) writes: “Having to “perform” according to traditional scripts limits expressions of individuality and behaviours – ultimately making it harder for two people to develop true intimacy.” So I wonder, why do some couples still prefer traditional gendered power roles?

I think it is interesting because feminists obviously value equality but also do not want to shame women who would prefer traditional couplings. Feminists want women to be able to choose for themselves what they want, even if that means choosing not to have equal power in the relationship. Many times women who value traditional organizations of families argue that feminists do not want women to be stay at home mothers or to be the partner making meals for the family, when these are not true. Feminists want all women to have the choice and to have as many options as possible. It seems difficult to advocate for both equality and for women to have the choice to have traditional families. But I think through more education and women taking power back in other spheres of life, hopefully more women will see these benefits Swami finds in egalitarian relationships.

BLOG POST 8

For this blog post, I wanted to look into a story written by an academic mother who did not receive social support for her relationship from fellow academic mothers. The article is titled: “Mean Girls with Ph.D.s: What it’s like to have fellow academics making fun of your family photo.” Essentially, the author, Marney A. White was criticized for the photo she used alongside an article “Academia and motherhood: We can have both” published in The Washington Post. The photograph features a picture of her family, her husband looking at the camera, holding their son on his shoulders, and White looking lovingly at her son. Fellow women (potentially feminists) were angry that she chose a photo where her husband is the main focus while she is not, an aspect she ironically rejects in her piece. I get it. Symbolically, might not have been the best picture because her husband is holding the “power” in the photo which is not descriptive of an egalitarian relationship. Truly, I think these women felt threatened and upset that once again, the man is the center of attention. But White is not trying to be symbolic. She chose a picture of her family, where she is on campus (at work) and adoring her family. She loves her husband, someone she doesn’t think of as threatening, like the other women did. Nonetheless, she should not have been attacked by these other women.

This article made me think about social support for relationships. Even a group she thought were her supporters, fellow mothers balancing being in the University system, let her down and were unsupportive. They created an additional, unnecessary obstacle to being an academic mother, making White defend herself and her choices. I appreciate White’s attempt to join the group in the first place and I encourage all women to seek out similar social supports. We need to surround ourselves with as many people who acknowledge and accept who we are and what we are trying to do. This means finding friends that embrace your intimate relationship and families such as embracing your multi-race family or homosexual relationship. Social supports are vital to any successful relationship and despite this setback, I hope White continues to seek out the social support she deserves.

BLOG POST 7

For this post, I read Vanessa De La Rosa’s, “How feminism empowers heterosexual relationships.” She explores how prior to being in a serious intimate relationship with a man, she assumed it wasn’t possible (on point with my skepticism self that created this blog). She writes:

“I assumed that as a feminist, I had to give up the notions I had of love, and saw relationships as constraining institutions set in place by men to hold women back and use them for their personal gain. I feared falling in love and forgetting my ambitions; I feared that falling in love with a man would give him power over me and I would lose myself in the desire to make him happy no matter the cost” (De La Rosa, 2017).

A strength of her piece is that De La Rosa looks at both sides of the conversation. She explains that while relationships, especially marriages, in the past were a death sentence for liberal feminists, because women have more opportunities and are essentially equal, relationships can be egalitarian and fulfilling. She does list some of the many ways that women still are oppressed, such as the rampant violence against women and the wage gap, however it seems that De La Rosa does generally believe women have almost reached true equality with men. Her analysis lacks any intersectional lens, not thinking about how women of color, those who have a lower SES, who are gay, have a disability, etc. are at an even higher disadvantage than white women. I do not believe a poor, lesbian, Latina woman, without health insurance, working at minimum wage, with children, thinks that we have almost reached equality with white men. Because, we haven’t. Also, disappointingly, when listing pioneering feminists, she limits her list only to a number of white women.

Additionally, she is excited over the fact that her boyfriend is a feminist. Yet, she mentions that he will not even label himself as one, claiming the word is “dead”. Clearly, feminism is not dead. There has been a resurgence, a fourth wave, and will not be “dead” until all forms of societal oppression are vanished. I do think De La Rosa is right in regards to the possibility of having an egalitarian relationship. However, I would hope this would be with a man who understands feminism is alive and here to stay, embracing its ideology and call for activism.

We don't learn to love in a linear path, from self to family to friends to spouse, as we might have been taught. We learn to love by loving. We practice with each other, on ourselves, in all kinds of relationships.

BLOG POST 6

In my Development of Intimate Relationships class, we never dove too much into the concept of love. We discussed attraction and passion, briefly talking about how there are things in intimate relationships, like love, that are hard to measure and study. Seriously, can researchers even study love? Our semester-long case study sought to help us identify “Why do we love who we love?” and “What other factors are needed in a relationship besides love?” However, love is a concept that we do not fully understand. For this blog post, I read Bitch Media’s, “Love as Political Resistance” Lessons From Audre Lorde and Octavia Butler.” Adrienne Maree Brown views love as a form of political activism, particularly resistance, something Audre Lorde and other feminists are big proponents for.

The phrase “political resistance” sparks negative associations and in a time of Trump, where many individuals feel as if their personal identities and freedoms are under attack, I figured Brown wanted us to stop throwing around the word love, and only love those that see us as fully human. While she does explain that we should stop mindlessly loving everything and everyone, her stance is just the opposite.

“What we need right now is a radical, global love that grows from deep within us to encompass all life.” (Brown, 2017).

According to Brown, we need to be loving harder and deeper. Love should go outside of our intimate partners, family, and friends, and to a global love. This falls in line with the popular slogan, “Love Trumps Hate,” and we need to be fighting hate with even more love. What does this mean for intimate relationships? I think we need to stop looking at love as something that should be the greatest and deepest for one person. We should not be forced to love one person (essentially, our partner) more than anything else. Instead, we need to feel that type of love for all of those in our community and on this Earth. I think this is powerful because love brings so many other wonderful things to the table such as ability to empathize, something our society is truly lacking right now. At the most basic level, Brown wants us to feel that love can be one of the greatest sources of power, and something everyone has the ability to do.

BLOG POST 5

For this post, I analyzed Veronica Jaris Tichenor’s article, “Status Income as Gendered Resources: The Case of Marital Power.” Tichenor discusses power dynamics in marriages, highlighting the difficulty with truly have equity between partners. I first will talk about the points in the article that make me hopeful for gender equality in terms of the current state of relationships, followed by what I am pessimistic about. Then, I will give my own ideas on ways to combat power tensions in relationships.

Tichenor explains that women tend to use “logic and persuasion” while arguing with their male partners. Men, on the other hand, resort to vetoing (Tichenor, 1999). It is positive to hear that most women know how to argue better than men. They are able to use the power they have in a constructive instead of a dominating way. We need to continue to teach girls and women how to use the power they have without dominating, as this continues the cycles of inequality and oppression. On a slightly sad note, this point makes me think about why women had to learn to be good arguers; likely because they had to work twice as hard to get where they are. The second thing is that partners try to ignore the status and income differences in their relationship. While the strategies they use, like denial and not socializing with the friends of the partner who has a high income/status are not constructive ways to handle the situation, putting effort into not letting income or status dominate the other partner is one step closer to equality (Tichenor, 1999).

The first point I am pessimistic about is that role-reversal couples are not innately egalitarian because of societal pressures. These social rules and pressures continue to make partners feel inadequate in their gender roles, forcing a couple to lean away from true equality. The second point is that we literally change the definition of the word “provider” because society is so uncomfortable when this is connected to femininity and performed by a woman (Tichenor, 1999). Society needs to realize that everyone wants to be provided for and help provide in a family. True egalitarian relationships make this a reality.

Ways to combat power tensions in relationships include:

Eliminating the gendered and racial wage gap. This would hopefully empower women to positions of higher power and status. More jobs held by women would be considered respectable. However, society should be respecting all jobs at all status and income levels.

Teach boys from childhood, as we do with girls, how to perform housework and create a narrative that housework is something everyone does and should be shared equally in a household.

Make conscious decisions to work towards creating gender neutral role expectations, or simply not having gender expectations in the first place.

Tichenor (1999) explains that women with higher degrees are more respected by their husbands. While this should not be the case, -- all women should be fully respected no in relation to their educational background -- creating more opportunities for women in education and to receive higher degrees will give more women more power in their relationships/marriages.

What does feminism look like in a relationship? Try these great tips to foster a healthy, supportive partnership.

BLOG POST 4

This post seeks to discuss and hopefully answer the question below.

“So, what does feminism look like in a relationship? How can you foster a healthy, supportive partnership with someone of any gender?” (Truscheit, 2017).

I love that “feminism” in this article is used as a verb. It is rare we use it in this way but is so important when thinking about how our actions and words are tools to practice feminism. It is something partners can do together and helps foster a safe space for both partners in the relationship. Watching my friends and family put effort into practicing feminism whether for themselves or for my sake is extremely heartwarming and encouraging. It not only shows their interest in what I’m passionate about but also demonstrates that they want to make the world a safer place for me and others. The ways I see the men in my family practice feminism with me: Marching at the Women’s March and March For Our Lives, watching feminist documentaries, having political discussions, not saying or repeating offensive jokes, and apologizing and correcting themselves when they are not being as inclusive or thoughtful about women when they should be. In terms of my friends, I have one friend whose boyfriend is always giving her space to be with her female-friends. I have come across many young women who I think struggle balancing friendships and relationships. This act is simple, yet reassures her (and myself) that her boyfriend values her friends and respects when she wants to spend her time with us. This is definitely something every feminist should look for in a potential partner. Having your own space/autonomy/agency and not being an attachment of your partner is critical to a successful relationship. You do not always have to be a “we”.

This article mentions many other ways of practicing feminism with your partner. The two I find important, relevant, and go hand in hand: “Speak Respectfully About Other Women” and “Apologize”. Speaking respectfully seems easy but because our language is so deeply rooted in misogyny, sometimes it is not obvious or intentional when saying something offensive. I really appreciate when my male friends apologize when I am upset or confrontational about what they had said. These can be something we all can work on but will ultimately improve partner communication and problem-solving skills.