Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
because i'm never going to write the great american novel. damn that f. scott fitzgerald.
About Me
- kate.d.
- washington, dc
- my name is kate, and i'm a new england expatriate living in DC by way of chicago. i work in development for a non-profit, and i spend my spare time fighting the patriarchy and reading things. oh all right, i watch "project runway" too.
The Age of Wiffiti
Elsewhere
Blog Archive
-
►
2008
(46)
- December (8)
- November (2)
- October (4)
- September (2)
- August (4)
- July (5)
- June (4)
- May (4)
- April (4)
- January (9)
-
►
2007
(251)
- December (14)
- November (16)
- October (24)
- September (23)
- August (22)
- July (23)
- June (21)
- May (4)
- April (26)
- March (20)
- February (30)
- January (28)
Blogroll
- Holla Back NYC
- Gapers Block
- DCist
- Pandagon
- Feministing
- Feministe
- I Blame The Patriarchy
- Pachycephalosaur
- Goddess Musings
- Hugo Schwyzer
- Mimi Smartypants
- Shakesville
- Two Glasses
- Tart Juice
- The Disgruntled Chemist
- Jaynie K
- Kitchen Table Comix
- Red Sox Bat Girl
- Did You Know...?
- East Side Girl
- EJ Shea
- Lucky White Girl
- Dancing With Words
- A K8, A Cat, A Mission
- Pink Shoe Diaries
- All Eyes on Jenny
- thisiht (this shit)
- joy unexpected
- This Fish
- You're No Jack Kennedy
- 97percentqueer
- Thinking Girl
- Lemon Gloria
- Dancing Fish
- The Curvature
- It's like I'm...mmmagic!
- A Serious Job is No Excuse
5 comments:
Let me ask you something, because I got in a bit of a scrap over this post: Do you think it's really useful to boil Feminism down to "People who want equal rights for women"? Personally, I think Feminism implies a hell of a lot more than that, not least of which being a certain intellectual/analytical perspective. It just seemed to me that reducing feminism to that -- and/or equating it to "humanism" which is wrong on a number of counts -- and then exhorting men to get behind that banner...? It annoyed me. And, oddly, the more I thought about it, the more it annoyed me.
yeah, that comment thread got interesting, didn't it? here's what i think - that whenever people get into a group discussion about what Feminism-with-a-capital-F means, there's going to be trouble. because Feminism-with-a-capital-F doesn't really exist. there is no monolithic school of Feminist thought, no bootcamp or basic training or anything like that :) as problematic as it can make things, i think "feminisms" is probably a more apt term.
so, while one woman might define feminism as "equal rights for women," another might define it as "subert the dominant patriarchy paradigm," and yet another might say "lesbian separatists rule!" and of course, i imagine more women fall into the first category than the latter, but you get my point.
all this makes it very difficult sometimes to talk about what "feminism" is. and that can often bog the broader discussion down. i think mr. shakes theoretical point - the idea of a feminism that says "women are human beings with equal rights" being necessary to a broader idea of humanism and a just society - is spot on. so, would i equate it with humanism? probably not. but do i see feminism as an essential component of humanism. yeah.
by the way, i'm a little confused by your sentence: It just seemed to me that reducing feminism to that...and then exhorting men to get behind that banner
what is the "that" in that sentence? equal rights? or that feminism = humanism?
ok, i tried to post a comment here over lunch...did blogger eat it?
oh, i will be so mad. let me test with this one.
So you're not going to re-post your follow-up comment? Slacker.
i actually think i'm going to do a whole post on it. so, more to come....
Post a Comment