A Feminist View

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
A Feminist View
49
Wed, 09-24-2008 - 6:43pm

http://www.salemnews.com/puopinion/local_story_266231148.html

>>My View: This feminist won't be voting for McCain/Palin
by Kathy L. Abbott, Salem Evening News, September 23, 2008

It's hard these days to figure out what a feminist looks like.
A hundred years ago any woman asking for the right to vote was deemed a feminist. Today it's not just going to the voting booth that makes you a feminist, but who you vote for once you're inside.

Fifty years ago demanding the right to work made you a feminist. (Even I remember the pain of hearing my high-school English teacher tell us that it made no sense to hire women. They were just going to get married, get pregnant, and quit anyway, so why not give the job to a man in the first place.) Today women are not only expected to work, they are also expected to pull double duty and raise their children at the same time.

Forty years ago asking for the right to choose an abortion automatically made you a feminist. Today abortion is often seen as a religious decision rather than a woman's issue.

Thirty years ago a woman had to fight to keep her maiden name. Today my lesbian niece fights to have the same last name as her legally married partner.

What does a feminist look like today? All my life I've been an active feminist. But these days when I advise women to breast-feed their babies for at least two years, people often think that my advice implies that I don't value a woman's right to work. (I'm a professional lactation consultant. Two years is the recommendation from the World Health Organization.)

When I was young I worked hard for a woman's right to work and to push through all those glass ceilings. Now that I've been a mother for 11 years, I find myself working equally hard for the right to stay home and do what only a woman can do — mother her own babies.

I find it scandalous that the United States is one of only three countries in the world that does not legally guarantee a woman's right to maternity leave (paid or unpaid).
For me, becoming a mother radically changed my outlook on what a feminist should look like. Because only women can get pregnant, give birth, or breast-feed, I now see the issues surrounding these events as not only women's issues, but as feminist issues. When women are discriminated against for choosing the "mommy track" or for demanding a decent six months off for maternity leave, or fighting for the right to pump their breasts at work (nurses and teachers have to fight the hardest for this one!), I feel compelled to raise my voice in solidarity. For me, accommodating the realities of motherhood is the greatest feminist issue we face today!

As for abortion, getting pregnant made me rethink that as well. Because I was 38 when I got pregnant I was at a high risk for Down syndrome. Before conceiving, my husband and I talked about terminating if tests showed a high probability of risk.

But then I actually got pregnant. Despite my husband's wishes I refused to even take the test. I was ready and wanted this baby, normal or not.

It shocked me that I would feel so strongly about this. But the bottom line was it was my choice, not my husband's, not my government's, but mine alone. It was a choice only I could make. I intend to fight for my daughter's right to choose as well.

So what does a feminist look like today?

On the surface Sarah Palin does look like a feminist. She's a working mom who not only votes but who has risen high in political office. But what I see is a politician who has taken a very strong stand against a woman's right to choose an abortion. What I see is the mother of a 4-month-old baby with Down syndrome who is not only working as the governor of a large state, but is now running for vice president.

Here I am fighting to give women the right to stay at home with their newborns for at least six months, and Palin is out there using her 4-month-old infant for photo-ops in a run for the White House.

Today a feminist looks very different to me than when I was in my 20s. Today, in my mind at least, a feminist is a person, male or female, who fights for equal rights for women, who fights for a woman's right to determine what happens to her body, and who fights for her right to actively mother her own children.

Times change, the things we fight for change, the face of feminism changes. Thirty years ago I would have been overjoyed to see a woman on the GOP ticket. I would have automatically assumed that she was a feminist and that we shared the same values.

But today it is clear that Palin and I do not share the same values. For 30 years I have let my feminist values determine which lever I will pull when I step into the voting booth, and this year will be no different.

So please tell Sen. McCain that even though I think it was a gutsy move to put a woman on his ticket, the woman he chose does not in my mind represent today's feminists. And because he chose Sarah Palin, Sen. McCain will not be getting my vote this year. <<

Photobucket
siggybarbie
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
In reply to: nisupulla
Thu, 09-25-2008 - 7:31am

>>Are you fighting for this right so that women have a CHOICE, <<

Yes.

>>or were you planning to FORCE a woman to exercise her full six month leave? <<

Sorry, that one's so absurd its commical.

>>And if she chose not to exercise her "feminist-won right," would she be less of a feminist? Less of a mother? Less of a WOMAN?<<

No, and neither I nor the author said or implied this. If, as we've agreed, the "right" is the "choice", then how would her choice make her less of a mother or woman? I can't follow you're logic.

>>What about CHOICE in accommodating the realities of motherhood?<<

Yes, that's what I thought the author implied.

>>YOUR reality of motherhood ISN'T the reality of motherhood for OTHER WOMEN! <<

Exactly. As I said, I think the author believes that Palin represents a WOH mother and is pro-life. IF SAH mothers are not accommodated, then WOH and no abortions would be a threat to "choice".

>>Why aren't you and your motherhood feminists fighting for women to have the CHOICE to bring their children to work or stay at home? <<

Your tone seems hostile and nasty. And again, I agree with this author that choice is important.

>>It seems, based on your issue with Palin's choice to work and be a mother at the same time, that your narrow description of feminism doesn't tolerate women who make choices with which you don't agree.<<

??? The author and I have an issue with Palin's choice to work? I don't and I didn't read that from the author.

>>but does feminism respect as feminists those who still don't CHOOSE abortion for themselves? No. <<

Ummm, the author said she does consider herself a feminist and that she wouldn't have chosen and abortion in the case of Down's, so again, where are you getting this?

>>Feminism isn't about freedom of choice, it's about limiting choice to attempt to create a single definition and a culture of women who all fit the same description. <<

Ummm...put down keyboard... walk away from the computer....

Photobucket
siggybarbie
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-20-2005
In reply to: nisupulla
Thu, 09-25-2008 - 10:17am

<>


I think this is *exactly* why Palin was brought onto the ticket. And from what I have seen/heard so far from her and about her, it's proving to be true.


For a political party to bring someone to the

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-19-2003
In reply to: nisupulla
Thu, 09-25-2008 - 10:33am

although you didn't ask me I hope it's ok for me to answer since I agreed with the poster.


I don't think this was the 'only' reason but I do think satisfying the conservative and/or religious

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-02-2008
In reply to: nisupulla
Thu, 09-25-2008 - 12:44pm

ORIGINAL POST:

"Here I am fighting to give women the right to stay at home with their newborns for at least six months, and Palin is out there using her 4-month-old infant for photo-ops in a run for the White House."

Isn't this CRITICISM for Palin's choice, as in "her choices aren't acceptable in a feminist worldview" ? Isn't this a refusal to tolerate or accept as feminist one woman's CHOICE to work with her baby? Isn't this a statement that women shouldn't take a 4-month-old baby with Down's to work? If I'm wrong, WHAT is this author saying about Palin's choice? Because the way I read it, she's saying it's counter to the her maternity leave plan. But I thought that leave would be a CHOICE women could make? Oh, except moms with Down's babies? Or is it moms running for public office? I'm trying to figure out which moms are required to take the leave, because clearly Sarah Palin has made a non-feminist choice because she's not at home with her baby. She shouldn't have had that choice, because the author clearly disagrees with Palin's choice. That's not pro-choice, that's pro-MY-WAY.

Both you and the author have a PROBLEM WITH, not a PRAISE for, Palin's personal choice of how to balance work and motherhood. How can you launch this criticism, while at the same time claiming to be FOR women having a choice to take leave, go back to work, or work with a child? If she were for that choice, and if you were, too, Palin's choice would be APPLAUDED and PRAISED. I don't hear applause and praise for a woman taking her baby to work. I hear criticism and judgment. How is that supportive of all choices?

In my world, this author leveled judgment, condemnation and blatant intolerance for one mom's choice to take her baby to work.

If there are choices a woman can make that undermine the entire feminist movement, where is there acceptance of all choices of all women? There isn't. Which is why you and the author think it's a perfectly acceptable feminist position to judge Palin's values as UNfeminist.

If the feminists were actually fighting for choice for ALL women in ALL issues, then ALL women and ALL of their choices and values would be celebrated and applauded as feminist, whether we as women agree with each other's values and choices or not. But feminists don't want women to be free to develop their own ideals, values, and beliefs, and be free to create their lives in the way they choose. Feminism is about excluding certain values and replacing them with "feminist" values. Some women, in order to be considered feminist, must give up what is deeply important to them: their religious belief systems, family values, and treasured cultural traditions. How is THAT choice for women?

In the feminist worldview, the only choice we DON'T have is to THINK for ourselves, I guess. The author, and you, insist that there are values that women shouldn't be allowed to hold, to express or to choose for themselves and their families. Being pro-life is a personal value the feminists won't tolerate. And if you have one opinion, believe, or principle that runs counter to the feminist position on that issue, you aren't in the club anymore. In fact, you become the enemy, the target of criticism and judgment, and the anchor that is holding the entire culture back in the stone ages.

It is clear from everything I have read, no matter what you say, that there is NO TOLERANCE IN FEMINISM FOR TRADITIONAL VALUES. Traditional women need not apply. I'll take a world where I can choose my OWN values, with no one judging or refusing to tolerate mine. I don't criticize others for their values, yet every feminist I've read has criticized mine.

Once again, I restate my position: By choosing FEMINISM, we trade having a man tell us what our VALUES should be for having a FEMINIST tell us what our values should be.

LOVE IT! PRO LIFE Pictures, Images and Photos

siggy1
pregnancy week by week
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
In reply to: nisupulla
Thu, 09-25-2008 - 7:18pm

Isn't this CRITICISM for Palin's choice, as in "her choices aren't acceptable in a feminist worldview" ?

As I’ve already said, no.

>>Isn't this a refusal to tolerate or accept as feminist one woman's CHOICE to work with her baby?<<

No.

>>Isn't this a statement that women shouldn't take a 4-month-old baby with Down's to work? <<

No.

If I'm wrong, WHAT is this author saying about Palin's choice?

The author is saying that Palin is exploiting her infant for photo ops.

>>Because the way I read it, she's saying it's counter to the her maternity leave plan. <<

She’s saying that using a baby for photo ops is not a choice for many people. Which is in contrast to the many moms the author works with who would stay with their babies but don't have the choice due to lack of maternity leave plans. The author seems to believe that Palin is unlikely to get that and that she's not representative of a typical mom.

>>Oh, except moms with Down's babies? <<

Don’t see that the author highlights Down’s. Do you have a problem with it? Is that why you bring it up?

>>How can you launch this criticism, while at the same time claiming to be FOR women <<
Back at ya sweetie.

>>I hear criticism and judgment. <<

You’re hearing what you want to hear then.

>>In my world, this author leveled judgment, condemnation and blatant intolerance for one mom's choice to take her baby to work. <<

I didn’t read that. Why do you suppose you interpreted it that way?

>>It is clear from everything I have read, no matter what you say, that there is NO TOLERANCE IN FEMINISM FOR TRADITIONAL VALUES.<<

Your thinking seems to be dichotomous. Wouldn’t staying at home be traditional and therefore what the author is in favor of and it is YOU who is being intolerant?

>>I don't criticize others for their values, <<

OOOps. Spit out my coffee on that one....

Photobucket
siggybarbie
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-02-2008
In reply to: nisupulla
Thu, 09-25-2008 - 8:18pm

>>I don't criticize others for their values, <<

OOOps. Spit out my coffee on that one....

I didn't criticize ANYONE's values. I pointed out that the author, while hailing choice for all women and mothers, is at the same time criticizing Palin's choices as a woman and mother. I don't criticize the author's VALUES, I question her stand for choice for women if she objects to the choices of women who don't do things her way. You make my point by reiterating that I pointed out the critical nature of the disapproval the author showed for the choices Palin made by bringing her baby to work.

>>"The author is saying that Palin is exploiting her infant for photo ops."

Well, that's not all she's saying. The author says "I'm fighting for...while Palin is..." This is a STATEMENT that the author finds Palin's choices unacceptable, and for the reason that Palin didn't choose what the author is fighting for. The author was saying The author is in NO WAY supportive of Palin's choice to bring her son along while she does her work (and that's EXACTLY what Palin was doing in front of those cameras--WORKING to further her career, baby and all.)

Which leads me to wonder, how is it "exploiting a baby" (which, by the way, is your judgment and criticism of Palin's choice of where to take her own baby) to include the baby in family photo ops? How is it exploiting the baby to make the statement that a woman can be a mom and work without having to give up one for the other? How is it exploiting a baby for a woman to nurse him in her office (which Palin has admitted to doing)? And what would the criticism be if the entire family were visible and present for these photo ops EXCEPT the baby? Would it be, "Palin is ashamed to be a mom and won't put the baby in photos?" Certainly there is the inference that many would draw that, "Palin doesn't want anyone to see her baby because he has Down's" And before you point to me as if that's my issue, I'm just addressing the author using her words and details. I would be very careful where I start inserting digs against posters, because you already insinuated that my mention of Down's might be some prejudice on my part--you don't know how many Down's siblings and children I might have, so please don't make any more inferences or assumptions about me with this one.

>>>"Which is in contrast to the many moms the author works with who would stay with their babies but don't have the choice due to lack of maternity leave plans.
Isn't part of the contrast between one mom and another a result of women exercising CHOICES? I mean, if there is truly full freedom in choosing, NO TWO MOMS will make the same choices, right? Palin chose NOT to exercise her full maternity leave benefits and returned to work with her baby after 4 weeks--what's the criticism, if we are open to any choice a mom might make? I understand that's not a choice for all women, but it seems, once again, that if Palin doesn't make a choice or have a job that is representative of the "typical mom" (your phrase, not mine), then her choices aren't valid or deserving of praise.

There is no "typical American mom." Typical is relative, and that's a reflection of the DIVERSITY and FREEDOM women . Moms are different in different regions (New York City vs. Mucie, IN), different tax brackets (welfare bracket vs. upper 1%), different cultures (Amish, vs. Housewives of OC). Within my circle of friends and in my community, I'm a typical mom: married, more than 5 kids, own our home, stay at home, churchgoing, homeschooling; that doesn't mean I can't relate to other women in different circumstances or women with different values. And that doesn't mean that I don't consider working woman lawyers and financial analysts in NYC with 2 kids, a Mercedes, a penthouse and a vacation home less "typical" than myself. Among working women in high-power positions with a stay at home dad in the family, Palin is probably more typical than not. Lots more women relate to SOMETHING about her life than either you or the author seem willing to acknowledge.

You can hold on to your coffee this time, because if you look back at my posts, you will notice that there is NOT ONE criticism of the working, mothering or childrearing choices or family values of ANY WOMAN. It is one thing to object to someone's judgmentalism, and entirely another thing to object to a PERSON'S CHOICES when she has freely exercised her right to choose what she feels is best for her children and family. I have done the former, while the author has done the latter. And my objection to the author's disapproval of ANY of Sarah Palin's choices as a woman and mother is that the author claims to support a woman's right to choose what her family needs. My criticism extends to the overriding majority of "feminists" who have taken the opportunity to criticize the personal choices of a mother, pointing fingers at another woman in judgment and disapproval of OTHER'S choices, as if she, and any other woman choosing something other than the "typical" choice or "what I am fighting for," are somehow defeating the cause of feminism. If Palin had chosen to stay home for 6 months, would she then be representative enough of the American Woman for you and for the author? Somehow, I doubt it--I suspect there are more ways that Sarah Palin's choices aren't "good enough" for the feminist movement. This is my main criticism.

Which leads me to my final question: If feminism is about freedom of choice for women, HOW can ANY WOMAN (Palin included) who freely chooses whatever she wants and needs FOR HERSELF and HER FAMILY be doing ANYTHING but ADVANCING THE CAUSE OF FEMINISM?

LOVE IT! PRO LIFE Pictures, Images and Photos

siggy1
pregnancy week by week
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
In reply to: nisupulla
Thu, 09-25-2008 - 8:57pm

>>is at the same time criticizing Palin's choices as a woman and mother. <<

I'm just not buying it. That's not at all what I read.

>>This is a STATEMENT that the author finds Palin's choices unacceptable, <<

The author makes no such statement, that's just your interpretation.

>>before you point to me as if that's my issue,<<

If the shoe fits...

>> then her choices aren't valid or deserving of praise.<<

Not sure why you are inferring this.

>>You can hold on to your coffee this time, because if you look back at my posts, <<

Did you edit them?

>>I have done the former, <<

I disagree.

>>Which leads me to my final question: If feminism is about freedom of choice for women, HOW can ANY WOMAN (Palin included) who freely chooses whatever she wants and needs FOR HERSELF and HER FAMILY be doing ANYTHING but ADVANCING THE CAUSE OF FEMINISM? <<

Because Palin doesn't promote choices or opportunites. That the gist of the author's piece.

Photobucket
siggybarbie
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-02-2008
In reply to: nisupulla
Thu, 09-25-2008 - 10:56pm

>>>"Because Palin doesn't promote choices or opportunites."

None at all? Not a single one? I can think of a few to prove your general, broadbrush misstatement wrong...

---The opportunity of an unborn human being to be born? That's an opportunity most feminists would deny.

---The opportunity to learn about contraception? She's all for teaching it in schools. http://volokh.com/posts/1220810663.shtml

---The choice to homeschool? That's a choice many Americans want and some don't have.

---The choice to run for political office and raise a large family? Seems like an admirable choice that appeals to many women in high power positions.

---The choice to work and raise kids? Popular choice.

---The choice to bring your baby to work? Choice MANY women would appreciate--and if the Governor can do it, why can't ALL women do it? (Insert VP of the US and it becomes an even more powerful and groundbreaking choice).

---The choice to forge her way in a traditionally all-male occupation? Seems like a HUGE opportunity for women around the world.

Your black-and-white, all-or-nothing statement further illustrates my point about you and about feminists: if a woman makes and promotes choices that are not YOUR choices and YOUR opportunities that YOU want pushed forward, they don't count, and neither does the woman behind them.

LOVE IT! PRO LIFE Pictures, Images and Photos

siggy1
pregnancy week by week
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
In reply to: nisupulla
Fri, 09-26-2008 - 6:26am

Sorry, I just can't take your post seriously.

>>illustrates my point about you and about feminists: <<

I think that the crux of the problem. You have some chip on your shoulder, unrelated to me and my feminism and also unrelated to the author's view. You are arguing against something that isn't there.

0.02

Photobucket
siggybarbie
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-02-2008
In reply to: nisupulla
Fri, 09-26-2008 - 10:17am

If you read the comments that other readers have posted on the Salem News website, it seems I'm not the only one who understood and interpreted the author's post. It seems clear to the readership of that online paper that the author was (1) passing judgment on Palin for her choices as a working mother, while at the same time claiming to be fighting for choices for working mothers, and (2) she takes the stance that "unless you agree with my views on every issue, you're not a feminist".

Some Examples:

READER COMMENT:***Feminists worked and fought so hard in order to HAVE the Sarah Palins of the world, but...nope! Now we've twisted it around because we now need to fight to 'actively mother our own children'...so Sarah is NOT a good feminist because she is a WORKING MOM!! What an amazing position to take!!

READER COMMENT:***And lady, you don't define my idea of true feminism. You, it seems, do exactly what is convenient for YOU at the moment and define it as feminism.

READER COMMENT:***Your letter is so hypocritical.You are now saying that a feminist fight for the right to actively mother her own children. Lady make up your mind. If I told you to stay home and be a mother I would be labeled a SEXIST. You should think about what you want to say before you say it.

READER COMMENT:***Basically, unless you agree with the writer on her abortion stance, you're not a feminist. Sad, shows that its the Dems that are intollerant and uninterested in dialog with the other side. They see 'bi-partisan' as your side will do it my way, then we are cooperating.

READER COMMENT:***I find it interesting that the writer calls herself a feminist but clearly passes judgment on Palin's decision (not the government's decision, not her husband's decision) to work. Very hypocritical. I am not in any way, shape or form a Palin fan, but it is not because of her mothering or lack thereof.

So, it seems I'm not the only one "imagining" the author's criticisms, or "fabricating" the author's judgmental view of Palin. It seems I'm not the only one who got a sense for her intolerance of the views and beliefs of others, and heard her hypocrisy when it came to promoting choice (but only the "choice of the day" or the one that works for her in the moment).

Perhaps the judgment, criticism and hypocrisy I'm reading in this article IS there after all, and it's YOU who is misunderstanding, justifying or overlooking it simply because it appears you share the same hypocritical judgments and criticisms as the author.

I can't come up with any other explanation for why my understanding was echoed by essentially every other reader who commented on this piece in the Salem News.

LOVE IT! PRO LIFE Pictures, Images and Photos

siggy1
pregnancy week by week