psychosoma

[psychosomal]

Perhaps famous, bogusly wealthy women do not claim to be feminists because they no longer are. They have long since gained the capital to let rest their worries about supporting themselves, and have retired the undoubtedly feministic attributes that built their ladders to fame. In fields where…

[iamreallyangry-1]

How dare these powerful and public women not identify as feminists. It must be because of their wealth and prestige and not because every human being has a right to decide with which political ideologies they wish to affiliate themselves.

Just because I am a woman, or any of these famous people are women, does not mean we are anyone’s sisters. It doesn’t mean we have to ~*~support the cause~*~.

[psychosomal]

I completely understand your defense. I called for it when I directed my verbal attack missile at women like you. While you have the right to (quite snarkily) claim your right to abstain from the feminist movement, at least acknowledge that accepting the benefits thereof consequently renders you a hypocrite. Happen to be a registered voter?

As a woman, your freedom of expression (intellectual and otherwise) was won. Enjoy the taste of freedom and power, provided to you by women who worked (& are still working) hard in their lives to make yours better. You already condone feminist advocacy through embrace of rights won…why not admit it?

[iamreallyangry-1]

Yes, I am a registered voter! Susan B. Anthony is one of my favorite historical figures, along with Elizabeth Cady Stanton. They said some stupid shit, yes, but they did some great things, too.

In fact, a lot of brave women did a lot of brave things for me. Some of them did it in the name of feminism; some did not. A lot of shitty women did and continue to attempt to speak for me in the name of feminism, out of the mistaken assumption that because I own a vagina and some female brain chemistry, I somehow get drafted into a political movement I want no part of.

Which is entirely the point. Feminism is a political ideology, and it does not own the concept of gender equality. Feminism does not own women’s rights; I can appreciate women’s rights without being a feminist.

Feminism is a political ideology, and no one is obligated to join it. No one is obligated to join it based on their gender or sex especially. No one is obligated to join it because it happened to do some great things decades ago. It is not hypocritical to see what a movement has done and what a movement continues to do, and separate oneself from it. It’s not hypocritical to appreciate the acts of brave women in the past even if they did it in the name of feminism. It’s not hypocritical to recognize a movement’s flaws and then join a different movement that encompasses a better ideology.

I owe them my gratitude. I don’t owe them my affiliation.

[psychosomal]

Good points, and thanks for taking the time to argue; I enjoy it. I'm curious to hear your personal definition for feminism, if you'd please humor me. I agree with you in that there are contentious aspects of feminism, especially regarding the mis-representation/interpretation thereof. I believe the foundation of feminism is the basic idea that women should not have to prove themselves deserving. For me feminism is one word to express (with slightly less exasperation) the injustice that is dooming people of non-male genders to defend their rights rather than capitalize on them unimpeded (as men do). Its foundation has birthed a broad scope of political ideologies & forms of activism: some astute and effective, others hollow or hostile. Not all of it helps, and some of it actually hurts. But the variety here is due to how people use feminism to steer their political decisions.  It is one thing to denounce certain forms of activism, it is another to denounce the cause. 

Yes, there are just as many well-meaning steps taken by feminist advocates that are not well articulated or particularly effective, but I'm not about to burn the feminism flag because of them. In the same vein, I support Greenpeace's core mission but often disapprove of their militance. Greenpeace is not leading our environment's rescue, but they join a greater company of people in the notion that our environment is indeed worth saving. The dumb and crazy will do what they are good at: dumb and crazy things. I'm not about to abandon what is important to me because someone's disgracing the noble, and sadly still novel, idea of equality.

Could you tell me a bit more about the "better," more complete ideology you refer to toward the end of your response? Is the "different movement" you favor a movement for gender equality? You make a distinction between feminism and women's rights that I think arbitrary. I believe the two are indivisible. For me, feminism is an operational tool to advance the women's rights movement.  Actions made in the interest of women's rights can rightly be called feministic, but the endgame of the women's rights movement as I experience it IS a state of gender equality. For gender equality to occur, women and trans-identifying people require more legislative respect. Do you disagree? Tooting a devotion to gender equality while poo-pooing feminism as an idea...I don't really buy that. Non-men provide many valid arguments for gender equality, as we know the limitations imposed unto our gender(s) intimately. As women testifying to the existence of inter-gender contention, our views are inherently feministic. If you are referring to your own active participation in a better movement, and that movement is indeed gender equality, I'd love to sneak a peek at your playbook. What is your angle? What is your operational definition for measuring progress toward gender equality? 

[psychosomal]

Perhaps famous, bogusly wealthy women do not claim to be feminists because they no longer are. They have long since gained the capital to let rest their worries about supporting themselves, and have retired the undoubtedly feministic attributes that built their ladders to fame. In fields where…

[iamreallyangry-1]

How dare these powerful and public women not identify as feminists. It must be because of their wealth and prestige and not because every human being has a right to decide with which political ideologies they wish to affiliate themselves.

Just because I am a woman, or any of these famous people are women, does not mean we are anyone’s sisters. It doesn’t mean we have to ~*~support the cause~*~.

[psychosomal]

I completely understand your defense. I called for it when I directed my verbal attack missile at women like you. While you have the right to (quite snarkily) claim your right to abstain from the feminist movement, at least acknowledge that accepting the benefits thereof consequently renders you a hypocrite. Happen to be a registered voter?

As a woman, your freedom of expression (intellectual and otherwise) was won. Enjoy the taste of freedom and power, provided to you by women who worked (& are still working) hard in their lives to make yours better. You already condone feminist advocacy through embrace of rights won…why not admit it?

[psychosomal]

Oxymoron of the day: Females declaring themselves NOT feminists.

Perhaps famous, bogusly wealthy women do not claim to be feminists because they no longer are. They have long since gained the capital to let rest their worries about supporting themselves, and have retired the undoubtedly feministic attributes that built their ladders to fame. In fields where women have established themselves as worthy of both recognition and support, women need not proclaim themselves feminists. Some women of note who have denounced their feminism: Taylor Swift. Katy Perry. Melissa Leo (of all people!). Carla Bruni.

"I don't really think about things as guys versus girls. I never have. I was raised by parents who brought me up to think if you work as hard as guys, you can go far in life." - Taylor Swift in interview with Ramin Sedooteh for The Daily Beast

"I am not a feminist, but I do believe in the strength of women.” - Katy Perry in her acceptance speech for Billboard's "Woman of the Year" Award

"I have never personally felt the need to be a feminist activist... I imagine I am [a feminist] if feminism means claiming one's freedom. But I am not if it means being committed in an active way to the fight that some women are still leading today... I admire their bravery a lot, but I have chosen to commit myself elsewhere." - Carla Bruni in an interview with Elle France

"I don't think of myself as a feminist at all...as soon as we start labeling and categorizing ourselves and others, that's going to shut down the world. I would never say that." - Melissa Leo in an interview with Salon's Andrew O'Hehir

Well, it's been some time since all of these quotes were published, so let's not waste another moment in disbelief. First, these are not average women, as their wealth and fame damn near override the setbacks of their non-male gender status. Second, need these women be feminists in the first place? Mechanically, what is the advantage? After all, no one is making the argument that women cannot sing, that women cannot act, that women cannot be models or play house with French presidents. For these successful women, the way has been both paved and well-trod. The only criticism they might face has more to do with their public persona or talents, but these things most probably would not be attributed to their being women.

Guess what? Regardless of who you are or what you do (or did) for a living, if you are living as a woman and value your own life, you'd be a fucking fool not to call yourself a feminist. Perhaps these women are not attuned to the micro/macroaggressions of men, but it's more likely that they're paying a professionally-large man to buffer them from that kind of fucking nonsense. This cannot always be the case for wealthy famous women, of course. Perhaps the delineation is made based on how you make your millions.

Declarations of feminism are useful for public figures exploring new realms. It is an appropriate, attention-grabbing act of aggression. AGGRESSION: both women and men have this capacity, but women ascribe to constructs in which their aggression, and subsequently their ambition & taste for justice, is repressed. When we think of unabashed feminists, we often think of comediennes Amy Poehler and Tina Fey. Every day these women work hard to disprove the notion that women are not funny (or at least not as funny as men). They are comfortable trumpeting their feminism, and do so wittily and consistently. They use their notoriety and constant public exposure to ply the public with reminders that equality has yet to be achieved 

Women like Poehler and Fey continue to raise awareness because they themselves are still living and working in the face of unfounded bias. These women are challenged by adversity and overcome: using whatever means necessary to debunk the ludicrous epithets that oppress us. This ruthlessness is testament to their talents. This tough-as-nails brand of confidence is something every woman could use. To their own credit and to the credit of the women they inspire, the bias against women in comedy is slowly beginning to fade. For women both topics of tabloids and not, a declaration of feminism doubles as an acknowledgement that yes, as women we face adversity in our professions and personal lives simply due to the gender we identify with, but we will continue weightlifting/overseeing the department/getting paid to make people laugh not despite, but because we are women. Because we can.

Alright now, I've proposed above a potential reason why a woman of Katy Perry fame might not identify as a feminist, but I still am stumped as to why this would need to be a public concession. As a public figure whose success is drawn from your fan's affection, promotion & monetary investment in whatever it is you're selling, you've got a responsibility to them in return. Melissa Leo, declaring yourself a feminism does indeed perpetuate categorization and labeling, but the categories have already been made and the labels are used to facilitate navigation of oppressive reality! Feminism is a movement characterized by efforts to close the disparate experiences of opportunity across genders. We must use language to describe the current state of things if ever we hope to move forward. Carla Bruni, you may not be out rallying for gender equity or doing photospreads for BUST magazine, but for someone of your fame, supporting feminism is most important when you are asked because everything you say is PRINTED IN THE FUCKING PAPER. It's so easy...just verbally express your support. 

A message to all y'all famous(ly shy feministic) ladies: Your sistas from otha mistas are suffering because unlike you, they lack the funds to isolate and protect themselves from the oppression of men and machismotic women. Women of fame, GIVE THANKS to your lady admirers and CHECK your male admirers all in one go: make a declaration of feminism today. Write something encouraging. Support our cause, don't abandon it just because you got drunk off your own power and decided it's easier to bag a fella if you ascribe to traditional relationship constructs (I bet he only wants to fuck you from behind).

Great strides are made not despite being women, but because we women are increasingly owning up to our ability, both individual and collective. Stopping, or even slowing down? A luxury we cannot yet afford.