Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

[brook]

I very much agree with Lyanna and the older I get the more sympathetic, class analysis seems to have fallen way out of favour but I simply do not think feminism can be worth anything without it. 

I also think there is a lot of misunderstanding about working class women and what they understand/want vs how they try to survive and make the best of what they actually have available to them.

There was some conference down here recently where a well-known older feminist was giving a talk about how women need financial literacy and to understand they shouldn't let themselves lose their independence and 'a man is not a plan' and it really irritated me. I could always outline very clearly the structural problems that led to me being forced into being a stay at home mum, I knew what they were, I hated them and (this bit is really cruicial) I knew what that 'choice' was doing to my future prospects. The simple fact is none of that mattered because the only choice I actually had that wasn't largely dictated by other forces was 'do I have kids or not' everything after that the choice was about how do we survive.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

3 hours ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

Yes, and that's why many progressive feminists (and especially feminists of color) are focusing on intersectionality, which is defined as "the interconnected nature of social categorizations such as race, class, and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage." In this case, we're looking at class and, more pointedly, at economic factors. Feminism as a whole has a LONG way to go in this (we can't even kick TERFs the curb, so how are we going to deal with grinding economic inequality), but there's some good work being done at the grassroots level. Sadly I don't have any links and I have to go to a meeting so......will try to get back to this in a bit.

Thanks Xray.  The economic and class issues are the hardest to discuss IMO because they cut across groups in ways that we are not trained to see or acknowledged.  Would appreciate links, but whenever you have the time.     

2 hours ago, mankytoes said:

I appreciate you saying that.

I think it's pretty much pointless talking about "working women", or "working mothers", because there's two (to keep it simple) different groups in there- women who want to work, and women who have to work. I don't think women who have to work are likely to be engaged in feminist thought on this issue, because it isn't really relevant to them. On the lowest end, it can actually be easier women to get casual work. For example, I once joined a temp agency looking for summer work, which was mainly waitering. I got the odd day. My mate joined, got the odd day. His (conventionally attractive) little sister joined (none of us had any experience), got work every day. I'm not saying that's important in the wider view of things, but if that is an individual's experience, I don't think they're going to relate to stories about work discrimination. And I think that largely plays out when you look at the demographics of active feminists.

With regards to the quote you posted, I'm struggling to understand exactly what she's saying, but the attitude is what I would say goes down to the heart of patriachy, which is men taking the public role, and women taking the private role. I don't really know what else to say, because that's pretty obvious, someone saying that a woman shouldn't do a certain job because she's a mother is clearly a sexist statement, unless you think a father also shouldn't do that job.

Unfortunately I'm more a history nerd than a scifi or fantasy one. I think ASOIAF has loads of interesting feminist debates within it, but I just haven't seen or read enough of the overall material to make a judgement on how women and feminist ideas are depicted.

So, while I agree that I detest the "working mother" appellation - it reinforces the idea that only women have two jobs, one that pays and the other, parenting, that doesn't - I disagree with your two categories.  Or, put differently, it's more of a ven diagram (and applies to men too!) - with women who have to work and women who want to work having a (probably pretty large) overlap.  Now, there's probably another category of "women who want to work but can't afford it/don't think they can afford it because of the opportunity cost of childcare" and another category of "women who want to work but not in the job they are in."  

Separately, what about the depiction of women in other pop culture?

 

26 minutes ago, Lyanna Stark said:

 

The way I read it was that this is a world where a certain class of well off women/women who have husbands raking home big cash have the opportunity to work outside the home, so they have already reached the level of "feminism" they require, sort of. (Again, like Xray said, correct me if I am wrong Zabzie.)

I don't think Kellyanne Conway is even promoting it as feminism to be honest, and there are lots of issues with what she is saying (for instance, Trump's cabinet seems pretty woman unfriendly, but I digress)

If for the sake of discussion we assume she's discussing feminist issues, then it's a type of feminism that is very exclusionary.

It seems to me what Kellyanne Conway is talking about here is (with a VERY generous interpretation) a feminism that is strongly irrelevant to working class women, or even to middle class women, since it only caters to women in very specific circumstances. It's also, I think, one of the reasons why feminism can sometimes be seen as an elite pursuit, since women in positions of power focus on things like somewhat more flexible working hours, or more women in the board rooms, or equal pay for equal work, which often equals equal pay for equal white collar work, for white, straight women.

That's not to say the issues aren't important (they are, and I feel women in positions of power, in board rooms, in government etc. is an *extremely* important issue), but to many women it feels very far removed from their everyday lives and exclusionary. Especially since it gets juxtaposed against the Trump cabinets extremely woman (and minority and LGBTQ) hostile policy suggestions.

I'd say that is an issue in quite a few places, that weaker groups, or groups with fewer people speaking for them, often get sidelined. This is (in my experience) often working class women, who just feel feminism is something for the well educated women in the big cities and it has no relevance in their lives. Since I live in Redneckville and my circle of friends involve a lot of women working care work, I can of course see that feminism would benefit them *a lot*, and that it has (subsidised child care, parental leave etc) but that there is also a long way to go, and that a lot of these women have nobody, or very few people, speaking on their behalf. If you work night-shift changing dirty diapers on dementia patients, board rooms probably feel a million miles away, and flexible working hours, or working from home isn't really a Thing either. Higher salaries, more people on each shift to prevent heavy lifting and simple wearing out from too many "efficiency savings", etc. would help tho, as would a better social safety network for elderly people since women, and especially lower paid women, often end up as carers for elderly relatives on top of the work they already need to do. And the childcare they also need to do.

It's doubtful that Kellyanne Conway and her mates will ever do anything for these women, but then I think they feel let down by "mainstream" feminists as well, who are discussing things far away from their everyday lives. If we're then looking at mainstream feminism, it is my firm belief we need to look more at the intersection of class and feminism, so that working class women get a stronger voice. More well off feminists can't leave their poorer or less well off sisters behind in this. It will come back to hurt us all, in the end.

 

 

Thanks - this is more eloquent than I was being.  

2 minutes ago, brook said:

I very much agree with Lyanna and the older I get the more sympathetic, class analysis seems to have fallen way out of favour but I simply do not think feminism can be worth anything without it. 

I also think there is a lot of misunderstanding about working class women and what they understand/want vs how they try to survive and make the best of what they actually have available to them.

There was some conference down here recently where a well-known older feminist was giving a talk about how women need financial literacy and to understand they shouldn't let themselves lose their independence and 'a man is not a plan' and it really irritated me. I could always outline very clearly the structural problems that led to me being forced into being a stay at home mum, I knew what they were, I hated them and (this bit is really cruicial) I knew what that 'choice' was doing to my future prospects. The simple fact is none of that mattered because the only choice I actually had that wasn't largely dictated by other forces was 'do I have kids or not' everything after that the choice was about how do we survive.

Thank you for this.  It's that discussion of the structural problems - in particular those that make women look at their future career prospects v male partners' and make choices about long term careers, that is very interesting to me.  I think that pervades the discussion even up to very high income levels.  As you say, often the focus is survival within existing circumstances - how can you worry about changing the world when you are just trying to make rent (or not get hit, or whatever).

[brook]

Coming from the perspective of someone living in a country with a not yet entirely dismantled social safety net (so this may not be true elsewhere) I think domestic violence may actually be the one issue where we don't actually talk about specific challenges faced by those in higher socio-economic groups.

A woman with a couple of kids living on unemployment benefits or minimum wage can leave and - from a purely economic perspective - may not be in a worse place than she was before, this doesn't mean she'll have enough to survive easily - rental prices here pretty much ensure she won't but there is support available to her.

A woman living in a suburb where average weekly rents for a family-sized house or apartment are more than she would get in single parent benefits (which is most suburbs within an hour of the sydney cbd really), with kids in private schools that charge 20k or more a year the decision to leave is one that can involve completely devastating her children's lives and, whether it should be the case or not, a hell of a lot of women choose what they see as their kids best interests ahead of their own safety.

[Maithanet]

6 minutes ago, brook said:

A woman with a couple of kids living on unemployment benefits or minimum wage can leave and - from a purely economic perspective - may not be in a worse place than she was before, this doesn't mean she'll have enough to survive easily - rental prices here pretty much ensure she won't but there is support available to her.

A woman living in a suburb where average weekly rents for a family-sized house or apartment are more than she would get in single parent benefits (which is most suburbs within an hour of the sydney cbd really), with kids in private schools that charge 20k or more a year the decision to leave is one that can involve completely devastating her children's lives and, whether it should be the case or not, a hell of a lot of women choose what they see as their kids best interests ahead of their own safety.

Hmm, I'll admit I haven't thought about it that way, although having to pull your kids out of private schools seems like pretty small potatoes compared to not letting your kids grow up in a household where violence is acceptable. 

In addition, you mentioned the social safety net, and I agree that is really helpful for addressing DV issues.  Lots of women in America have a choice between staying with an abusive relationship and taking the kids to a homeless shelter (which are themselves often very unsafe for women and children).  No surprise that things have to get really, really bad before a shelter looks like a good option. 

[Mlle. Zabzie]

5 minutes ago, brook said:

Coming from the perspective of someone living in a country with a not yet entirely dismantled social safety net (so this may not be true elsewhere) I think domestic violence may actually be the one issue where we don't actually talk about specific challenges faced by those in higher socio-economic groups.

A woman with a couple of kids living on unemployment benefits or minimum wage can leave and - from a purely economic perspective - may not be in a worse place than she was before, this doesn't mean she'll have enough to survive easily - rental prices here pretty much ensure she won't but there is support available to her.

A woman living in a suburb where average weekly rents for a family-sized house or apartment are more than she would get in single parent benefits (which is most suburbs within an hour of the sydney cbd really), with kids in private schools that charge 20k or more a year the decision to leave is one that can involve completely devastating her children's lives and, whether it should be the case or not, a hell of a lot of women choose what they see as their kids best interests ahead of their own safety.

This is a good point - there is a "standard of living" trap that systemically may keep a woman in an abusive relationship.  And there is also a class piece to it that others have touched on in threads on DV - one convinces oneself that it doesn't happen to "our kind of people"....and so one hides it.

[brook]

And lest I give the impression that isn't the case here I'll just say that there isn't a women's shelter in Sydney that doesn't have long waiting lists (yes waiting lists) and that includes three that I know of serving very very high income areas.

[Maithanet]

7 minutes ago, brook said:

And lest I give the impression that isn't the case here I'll just say that there isn't a women's shelter in Sydney that doesn't have long waiting lists (yes waiting lists) and that includes three that I know of serving very very high income areas.

Yeah, in the US that varies hugely by where you live.  In talking with my sister-in-law, it didn't sound like she had a lot of trouble getting into a shelter, but it was a horrible place. 

[Lyanna Stark]

28 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

This is a good point - there is a "standard of living" trap that systemically may keep a woman in an abusive relationship.  And there is also a class piece to it that others have touched on in threads on DV - one convinces oneself that it doesn't happen to "our kind of people"....and so one hides it.

Thank you for bringing these issues up, Maithanet, brook and zabzie. The intersection class/feminism was one @butterbumps! and I wanted to discuss originally, and domestic violence is certainly something that is can be impacted by class.

To respond to the above by @Mlle. Zabzie (because the formatting is not playing ball with me) Yes, I think this is key. It will very likely be hard to consider a life with a significantly lower standard of living, with perhaps far smaller support network to call on when issues arise (and as we know, they always do).

While working class women may in some regard have an easier time leaving abusive relationship since the drop in standard of living isn't may not be significantly lower, I wonder if it really is simpler in practice since at least here (as in Sydney) I believe shelters have waiting lists.

With regards to the "it doesn't happen to our kind of people", I think that is a HUGE issue, both with domestic violence and psychological abuse, and perhaps especially in middle class families and higher. I was surprised how easily the domestic violence issue was discussed among my working class friends, and how it was seen as fairly non-dramatic. "Oh he punched her from behind so she fell to the floor, so now she kicked him out finally" as a sort of sidenote during a dinner party. I must admit I was 0.o, but at the same time, it was sort of treated as a "these things happen, you deal, you move on" and the discussion was more on "don't let him move back in, we have your back". Refreshing in its simplicity, and this was from a group of women who all worked in care (minus myself) or were semi-retired due to medical issues.

I know more than one person who didn't suffer domestic violence, but who stay in horrible relationships because of standard of living issues. This is definitely an issue with a large impact on people's decision making, especially if there are children involved, and you feel splitting up would make them materially worse off.

 

[mankytoes]

21 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said:

So, while I agree that I detest the "working mother" appellation - it reinforces the idea that only women have two jobs, one that pays and the other, parenting, that doesn't - I disagree with your two categories.  Or, put differently, it's more of a ven diagram (and applies to men too!) - with women who have to work and women who want to work having a (probably pretty large) overlap.  Now, there's probably another category of "women who want to work but can't afford it/don't think they can afford it because of the opportunity cost of childcare" and another category of "women who want to work but not in the job they are in."  

Separately, what about the depiction of women in other pop culture?

I mean I see what you're saying, obviously many women who have to work want to work, but I'm saying from a feminist perspective there is no political consciousness there, because there isn't a choice. So the perspective is different. That's my experience, anyway.

I find the work issue interesting, because it is such a particular idea to our modern culture, that work is actually a positive thing, yet it's something we take for granted. This video explains that really well-

As someone from lower class/income background than a lot of my peers, I do have this impression that the old fashioned view of work as negative is much more prevalent in working class communities, and the modern idea of work as positive is much more prevalent amongst the upper classes. And I think that's a big reason why feminism seems to be mainly a movement of the wealthy and the middle/upper classes.

I'm not that in tune with pop culture generally, though one thing that really does my head in (and I know this isn't exactly a unique insight) is those magazines where they take paparazzi photos of women, and speculate whether they've gained three pounds or had a boob job, or whatever.

[Galactus]

I do have this impression that the old fashioned view of work as negative is much more prevalent in working class communities, and the modern idea of work as positive is much more prevalent amongst the upper classes. 

 

More specifically, in historical terms, it's the ideology of the middle-class. (as opposed to the old aristocrat, who doesen't "work", at most he has "duties" or "pursuits") coupled with a not-insignficiant dose of protestant work ethic. 

[mankytoes]

8 minutes ago, Galactus said:

More specifically, in historical terms, it's the ideology of the middle-class. (as opposed to the old aristocrat, who doesen't "work", at most he has "duties" or "pursuits") coupled with a not-insignficiant dose of protestant work ethic. 

It's certainly the practice of the middle class, but in many cases, the ultimate aim (or dream, depending on how fixed the system is) of the middle classes is to enter the upper class, and stop this ghastly buisness of trading, banking or whatever, and make ones living the superior way, by owning land.

Either way, I think this partly explains why feminism is usually seen as a relatively recent phenomenon.

[brook]

I think 'working class women don't care about feminism' is a lot like 'young women don't care about feminism' in that most of the time it simply means 'their feminism doesn't look like I expect it to/is not focused on things I care about'

In particular, in Australia, working class feminism is increasingly expressed through unionism and that isn't something that is generally recognised because unions are still overwhelmingly thought of as 'male'

ETA a few recent examples 

https://tenplay.com.au/news/national/2016/11/14/domestic-violence-leave

http://www.unitedvoice.org.au/news/educators-chain-themselves-pm’s-office-equal-pay

http://www.unitedvoice.org.au/press-releases/time-rethink-minimum-wage

http://www.australianunions.org.au/PPL

http://www.actu.org.au/actu-media/media-releases/2016/women-are-still-losing-out-on-pay-at-every-stage-of-life-new-report-reveals

[Chaldanya]

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

Hmm, I'll admit I haven't thought about it that way, although having to pull your kids out of private schools seems like pretty small potatoes compared to not letting your kids grow up in a household where violence is acceptable. 

I know you don't mean to, Maithanet but if we can not judge women on if they managed to escape a DV situation no matter their reasons. And to always be sensitive when discussing these issues there are victims of domestic violence on the board who may read and/or contribute to the thread. We don't need to be judging them...

[mankytoes]

10 minutes ago, brook said:

I think 'working class women don't care about feminism' is a lot like 'young women don't care about feminism' in that most of the time it simply means 'their feminism doesn't look like I expect it to/is not focused on things I care about'

In particular, in Australia, working class feminism is increasingly expressed through unionism and that isn't something that is generally recognised because unions are still overwhelmingly thought of as 'male'

Maybe, I mean I think the easiest way to find out if someone is a feminist is to ask them. First poll I found- https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/10/05/treat-women-equally-dont-call-it-feminism/

22% of people in the higher social groups said they considered themselves feminists, compared to 15% in the lower classes, so almost 1.5 times more likely. The figures for the question "should women have equal rights and be treated equally in every way" were 82% to 79%, so a lot closer (also shows how most British people don't consider those ideas to mean the same thing).

[brook]

Seems to show that maybe that isn't the best way to find out if someone cares about feminism after all

[Chaldanya]

2 minutes ago, mankytoes said:

Maybe, I mean I think the easiest way to find out if someone is a feminist is to ask them. First poll I found- https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/10/05/treat-women-equally-dont-call-it-feminism/

22% of people in the higher social groups said they considered themselves feminists, compared to 15% in the lower classes, so almost 1.5 times more likely. The figures for the question "should women have equal rights and be treated equally in every way" were 82% to 79%, so a lot closer (also shows how most British people don't consider those ideas to mean the same thing).

But this isn't a problem with the tenets of feminism or what feminism looks like.  There are other factors at play here the major one being that the people who don't want to move to egalitarian society for whatever reason have done a bang up job of painting all feminists as unnatural man hating/child hating humourless hairy beasts. 

[Theda Baratheon]

2 minutes ago, Chaldanya said:

But this isn't a problem with the tenets of feminism or what feminism looks like.  There are other factors at play here the major one being that the people who don't want to move to egalitarian society for whatever reason have done a bang up job of painting all feminists as unnatural man hating/child hating humourless hairy beasts. 

Yep. more and more feminists, "the left", liberals and social justice warriors are just dirty words. especially feminists - there are women I know who would NEVER call themselves feminists and yet they're interested in all of these issues relating to feminism. it's just not safe to admit to being a feminist half the time EVEN MY GOD DAMN PHONE LITERALLY JUST AUTO CORRECTED 'FEMINIST' TO 'DEMON' WHAT THE HECK 

[Chaldanya]

1 minute ago, Theda Baratheon said:

Yep. more and more feminists, "the left", liberals and social justice warriors are just dirty words. especially feminists - there are women I know who would NEVER call themselves feminists and yet they're interested in all of these issues relating to feminism. it's just not safe to admit to being a feminist half the time EVEN MY GOD DAMN PHONE LITERALLY JUST AUTO CORRECTED 'FEMINIST' TO 'DEMON' WHAT THE HECK 

I dunno sometimes I'm a demon feminist and other times a feminist demon. I feel a title change coming on.

[brook]

I love you both

[Theda Baratheon]

5 minutes ago, Chaldanya said:

I dunno sometimes I'm a demon feminist and other times a feminist demon. I feel a title change coming on.

LMAO I definitely think a title Change is in order

5 minutes ago, brook said:

I love you both

<3 <3