SOME STRAY POINTS ON FEMININE FEMINISTS

The comments here and elsewhere on "fun feminism" made me think a lot so I have quite a bit to add.  Here we go, point by point:

(1) As Arwen pointed out, my personal dress style is very much expressive of my social or professional class.  Obviously, the way I think about my own choices is not necessarily at all applicable to other women in other situations.  For example, the impact of femininity on my pocketbook may not seem as much to me as to others, and being able to convey power while in heels may be a function of where I am in the status hierarchy in our society.  And as I noted before, race and body-type issues also strongly affect the pressures placed upon people in terms of self-presentation.  (Think about the criticism hurled at African-American Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney because of her hair, or the crap Jessica Valenti had to put up with for not being flat chested.)

(2) Someone on a thread at Ilyka's place sniffed that all this discussion of lip gloss seems "unserious."  This comment is ironic because the discussion of lip gloss is a reaction to the fact that women are so frequently judged primarily by their looks. If you live in a society where the message is constantly, "You ARE your looks," you're going to start to give some thought to how you look, what message you are conveying by how you look, and how that affects your life. It irritates me to no end that after living with so much focus on our appearance by others that we are then cast as frivolous for thinking or writing about it. 

(3) Some female commenters in various threads have confessed to feeling superior at times to more feminine women.  I'll 'fess up that I have had that feeling as well at times in my life.  But despising women for adopting the trappings of femininity plays into traditionalist views that women are to be judged primarily by their appearance.  In reality, whether we bleach our hair or not says nothing about our intelligence or competence.  That doesn't mean that the woman who bleaches her hair might not benefit from saying to herself, "Do I have to do this?  Do I want to do this and, if so, why? Is it worth it? Whom am I trying to please?" And I am guessing that many women who bleach their hair, including the bleached blonde feminists out there, have indeed thought about this.  It would be condescending and presumptuous to assume otherwise.

(4) I agree with the commenter who observed that femininity becomes unfeminist if it stops you from doing something you would otherwise want to do.  I think I've written about this before, but one example of toxic femininity came up in my life when I tried out for the novice crew team in college.  So many of the women with whom I tried out wanted to row, but they were highly ambivalent because they were afraid of becoming too muscular in the arms and back!  I certainly don't blame these women for their ambivalence because there is a price to pay if you are a woman with very well developed biceps and shoulders.  But how awful that women still feel they have to choose between participating in a wonderful health-improving and extremely fun sport versus having a body that is acceptable to others.   

(5) I should clarify that I don't actually think of myself as a "fun feminist."  Well, I am fun and I am a feminist and I think that feminism is a key to a more fun life among other manifold advantages, but my feminism isn't defined by fun. Also, my appearance isn't really about fun.  In terms of appearance, I guess I would categorize myself as a corporate feminist or white-American-professional-woman who is a feminist. 

This is just a stray round-up of points.  More self-analysis to follow, if you can stand it. If not, come back later. 

Comments

[Richard]

>>> [ … ] femininity becomes unfeminist if it stops you from doing something you would otherwise want to do.

Immaturity does too. The “offense” isn’t being feminine, but rather not knowing yourself or not having enough confidence to be yourself if you do know yourself. These are issues of emotional development having little to do with feminism. If the fashion trend is masculine edginess rather than feminine innocence, for instance, and you go along with the trend despite the fact that you secretly long to show more femininity, then you still have a problem. That problem’s called immaturity.

[Natasha]

I think, actually, issues of emotional development do cut to the heart of feminism. Because of the social-conditioning (or whatever you like to call it) of young girls and women, it is actually far harder for women to a) know ourselves and b) have enough confidence.

[Richard]

>>> Because of the social-conditioning (or whatever you like to call it) of young girls and women, it is actually far harder for women to a) know ourselves and b) have enough confidence.

Social conditioning is going to happen whenever humans live in communities, so I’m not sure how far you can blame such conditioning on this issue. And maturity is mostly a process of experience plus temperament. I’m suggesting that even if a society had reach feminist nirvana you would still have people that don’t know themselves and lack in confidence. That is, implementing feminist principles and values isn’t suddenly going to make all young women wonderfully mature. That’s the reason I wondered above whether this is really a feminist issue or whether it’s one of human development instead.

[Natasha]

I see what you're getting at.
But I think the fact that, in my observation at least, women suffer from lesser confidence and lower self-knowledge more commonly than men - meaning that there is a gender-skewed incidence of the two things. I would put that current skewing down to the way our society grows girls.
This doesn't mean that in the hypothetically feminist nirvana a mix of men and women wouldn't still be low in confidence and self-knowledge - the hope would be that it would be evenly distributed between the genders.

[Natasha]

sorry, I've missed out a word. It should read: "But I think the fact is that..."

[The Happy Feminist]

I think maturity can play into how a person reacts to social conditioning or social circumstances.

But I wouldn't dismiss the pressures women have traditionally faced and continue to face as things that are necessarily so easy to overcome by maturity and common sense (although those things can help). If your life is saturated with people focusing on how you look, and either rewarding or punishing you for it, it's not necessarily immature to respond by being pretty concerned about how you look.

The degree of pressure on a woman will vary of course depending on her culture or other circumstances. For example, my mother is not immature but her self-worth is far more tied to her appearance than mine because she is of a generation and class of women whose entire destiny depended on the ability to attract a husband.

[Sydney]

Is it really true that young women have less confidence than young men? I know that idea is batted around a lot in feminist forums, but I'm not sure to what degree it's true. Young men tend to posture and act in sterotypically "manly" ways when they lack confidence, just like young women obsess about appearance and act in sterotypically female ways when they lack confidence.

I actually think that these conversations about appearance have been prety eye opening -- about how PETTY AND CATTY women can be towards each other because of idiotic things like appearance. Adult women feeling superior to other women because they don't shave and the other woman does? Or because they're wearing "sensible" shoes when the other woman is in heels? Please ladies. Less contention, more adhesion. It's just the same divisive bullshit that's always been there, it's taking a different form.

All of this comes back to the idea that you should do what you want, regardless of what the patriarchy, or WHAT OTHER WOMEN, think of you. That is independence. That is maturity. Who cares if you do it wearing lipstick.

[mythago]

That is, implementing feminist principles and values isn’t suddenly going to make all young women wonderfully mature.

It removes many barriers to maturity.

All of this comes back to the idea that you should do what you want

No, it comes back to the idea that you should make thoughtful, informed decisions to do what you want. What you propose is 'choice feminism', not independence.

[Sydney]

Well DUH decisions should be thoughful. But I'm thankful that every single decision that I make in life does not begin with the phrase, "Now what would a GOOD FEMINIST do? Would doing XYZ make me a BAD FEMINIST?" If that's your modus operandi, good for you. The rest of us have lives to lead.

[Natasha]

Is it really true that young women have less confidence than young men?

I can only speak from my own experience and from my perceptions of the people I have met in my life. I only have subjective data to say that yes, many dozens of young women I know have been significantly less confident in certain key power/status contexts. One example: they may be very confident about the colour of make-up they want to wear, but not confident about holding their own in a conversation.

It is also my personal experience that the more these girls/women see their situation in terms of gender rather than just 'lack of confidence' or 'immaturity', the more clearly they seem to understand their situation and the more motivated they are to act differently. For them and for me, understanding the gendering of things has been a more effective tool, if you like, for self-knowledge and self-empowerment, than thinking in terms of maturity/immaturity.

[The Happy Feminist]

It's safe to say that the analysis Mythago is referring to is not about meeting some arbitrary definition of what a good feminist would do.

I have had the habit since I was a kid of being very aware of whether I am caving to some standard of female subservience, either symbolically or substantively. For me, it has a lot to do with pride, wanting to do right by myself, and wanting to represent the idea of a strong woman. It's not about some fascistic standard I am trying to meet.

There are a lot of women out there who adopt a self-effacing way of living without thinking about why they are making certain choices. I read a blog post at Granny Gets a Vibrator a while back about a young woman in the gym watching her muscle bound boyfriend lifting weights. At some point, the woman hopped up and did some cutesie maneuver with the lightest weight in a giggly imitation of her boyfriend's workout. The boyfriend kind of laughed at her as if to say, "Aren't you cuuute," and then made some sort of comment along the lines of, "Be careful, you don't want to wind up like that [muscular] woman over there." And the young woman giggled. (I am forgetting the nuances but it was a cringe-inducing post.) There is nothing wrong I suppose with how the young woman being cutesie and acting like it would be inappropriate for her to actually build up some strength. But maybe she would benefit from someone saying to her, "Why are you acting in a way to deliberately provoke condescension? What makes you want to convey that persona and what do you get out of it? Do you think you might be better served in the long run if you insisted on respect rather than a pat on the head?" Etc. etc.

[Sydney]

"Why are you acting in a way to deliberately provoke condescension?

Well, she got your condescention too, so it seems. Why should SHE care what YOU think?

[mythago]

Goodness, Sydney, I didn't know they were teaching reducto ad absurdam in med school these days. Or that "Well DUH" was commonly used by adult postgraduate students, rather than middle-schoolers.

As HF said, the issue isn't good feminist vs. bad feminist. It's that we live in a sexist world with sexist impositions on what choices are and aren't good. It's not about "if you were a real feminist you'd stop shaving your legs."

I truly don't get all the tantrums about this. Nobody is trying to take away anybody's sparkly earrings or lacy underwear.

[The Happy Feminist]

Sydney, it's not about what I think. Not at all! If the next opposing counsel I meet looks and sounds like Paris Hilton, I will treat her and think about her with absolute respect as an opposing attorney (unless her actions in conducting her case cause me to lose respect for her).

If a person with breast implants wants to join my local feminist organization, I would hope the members would welcome her with open arms and get down to work with her on whatever aim they were trying to achieve. That's the truly feminist way to behave.

What I am saying though is that a feminist analysis of one's choices is, for lack of a better word, "empowering." Do you really think that women should never bother to think about these things?

[Sydney]

Mythago, I must have really struck a nerve for you to get so personal! (Blush) I'm flattered you care so much, actually.

Happy, "never" is probably too strong a word. What I'm objecting to is the value judgements people are making about others for the way they choose to adorn their bodies on a day to day basis. On one hand, we're all like, "Nobody better jugdge me if I wear a short skirt! What I wear doesn't make ME a slut!"* and on the other hand we're like, "That woman is wearing heels, the fool! I am SOOOOOOOO much smarter/better/more practical than SHE is." It's all rather hypocritical. Or so it seems to me. I'm just trying to not make assumptions about the people I meet, or make arbitrary decisions about their value compared to mine, based on what they wear.

Case in point: There's this girl in my class who carries a dog in her handbag ala Paris Hilton, and everybody in my class could not stop talking about what a moron what she must be. And how vacuous. But to talk to her, she's actually very smart and together. So the accoutrements of Paris Hilton do not necessarily a Paris Hilton make. (Though I have to wonder if the dog ever shits in her bag, but that's another point entirely.)

* Note I am not arguing that wearing short skirts does make you a slut. Or that the word "slut" should be used to describe a woman. Ever.

[evil_fizz]

So the accoutrements of Paris Hilton do not necessarily a Paris Hilton make.

No, but if you're walking around with a dog in your Prada bag, I only think of two people: Paris Hilton and Reese Witherspoon's character from Legally Blonde. Parisian accessories might not make you just like Paris Hilton, but one can't honestly pretend that people won't make such an association. If I walked around in a green dress slit down the front to my navel, I'd have a hard time objecting when people made J-Lo jokes.

[Sydney]

Evil Fizz, I'll be sure to remember that the next time you all rail about how women shouldn't be judged by their appearance.

[Richard]

>>> Richard wrote: ... implementing feminist principles and values isn’t suddenly going to make all young women wonderfully mature.
>>> Mythago replied: It removes many barriers to maturity.

Mythago-- You're dreaming. New "barriers" will replace the old ones, as maturity is experienced based. You sound like a utopist, and here I thought my use of the term "feminist narvana" would never be taken seriously by anyone. Silly me.

>>> Sydney wrote: Mythago, I must have really struck a nerve for you to get so personal!

Sydney— I get called names too when I disagree. I keep suggesting that feminism doesn’t benefit from the practice, but churlishness is the way of the movement presently. Deep down, they’re pretty decent people really, mostly interesting and smart too. But make no mistake, you will get abused in the comments here if you dissent.

[evil_fizz]

Evil Fizz, I'll be sure to remember that the next time you all rail about how women shouldn't be judged by their appearance.

There's a huge divide between "shouldn't be" and "won't be". I think it would be ridiculous to suggest that your appearance has no bearing at all on how people judge you.

To me, carrying a small dog in a handbag is a very specific cultural identifier. Like a blue Gap dress with a beret, that item itself references someone specific with a particular public persona. I don't mean it in the same sense as "wearing a short skirt just invites sexual harassment", although I could see it being read that way.

And frankly, I don't think it's appropriate to hold my views against anyone else. I'm not pretending to be the feminist spokesperson, or even the spokesperson for the commenters on this blog.

[The Happy Feminist]

I don't believe that women (or people) shouldn't be judged by their appearance. Clearly, we communicate things about ourselves with our appearance. For example, if I show up at a client meeting looking sloppy, it's not completely irrational for a client to wonder how organized I am.

The problem isn't whether we are judged by our appearance to any degree. Such judgments are inevitable and not always inappropriate. The issue is whether we are judged fairly by our appearance. For example, it is unfair to assume that a woman in a mini-skirt wants to have sex or wants to be catcalled. It is unfair to put undue stress on women's appearance in particular. It is unfair to expect women to hide the fact that they have breasts. It is unfair to make a big deal to judge women unduly by whether they are pretty or sexy and then call them frivolous for caring about whether they are pretty or sexy. It is unfair that the standard of beauty for women often seems so narrow and requires starvation diets, plastic surgery, constant aerobicizing, etc. And the list goes on.

I think you can critique the emphasis people place on women's appearance and the foolish conclusions people make based on women's appearance, and ALSO say it is worthwhile thinking about what we ARE saying with our appearance and whether we are being unfair to our self-presentation and the effort we put into our appearance.

Oh, and if my dog were small enough to carry around in a bag, I totally would.

[mythago]

But make no mistake, you will get abused in the comments here if you dissent.

You poor thing, Richard. If only HF would stop scolding you when you tell people to fuck off, you wouldn't feel so silenced.

New "barriers" will replace the old ones, as maturity is experienced based.

Sorry, could you put that into English? You seem to be saying that there's no point in ending sexism, because something else will just get in the way in its place. Surely you didn't mean that.

What I'm objecting to is the value judgements people are making about others for the way they choose to adorn their bodies on a day to day basis.

Except nobody is arguing that it's OK to make those value judgments. I'm not really sure how many times HF, or I, or anyone else for that matter can tell you that "We need to think about why we make the choices we do, instead of ending our analysis at 'I like it'," is not code meaning "We should all judge other women's appearance on whether they meet Feminist Standards (tm)." This isn't the first discussion where you've chosen to be snotty and misinterpret other people's posts into something you dislike but nobody actually said: observing that isn't flattery.

[Sydney]

Mythago, Stop being obtuse. You're the one who is insulting people.

[Sydney]

Happy, I'm not objecting to the idea that people are judged by their appearances. Sure, in a client relationship you expect people to look professional. What does bother me is hearing other women talk about feeling superior to women who don't conform to their personal sense of style. Take the woman who said she felt superior when she saw a person wearing heels, because her flats were so much more sensible.

Why is this need to feel superior to others so strong that we look for it in whether or not another woman shaves her bikini line? Or wears lipstick? It comes off as very petty and insecure. I'm not saying that YOU (Happy) were making such value judgements, but they're definitely being made, and they're divisive and counterproductive. It makes feminists look like a bunch of 13 year old girls.

[Richard]

>>>Mythago wrote: You seem to be saying that there's no point in ending sexism, because something else will just get in the way in its place.

Nope, not what I said. You’re once again confusing behavior of young women resulting from their immaturity, and their behavior resulting from wrong-headed social conditioning. Ending sexism would cure that latter, but not the former. Your comment suggests it would miraculously cure both.

>>> Mythago wrote: You poor thing, Richard. If only HF would stop scolding you when you tell people to fuck off, you wouldn't feel so silenced.

Never complained about HF, mythie. I said “in the comments here.” And the person I asked to f-off was engaging in just such abuse. It’s really quite systemic to the fem community. I challenged HF once to go onto some mainstream fem sites, preferably with a male name although that’s not necessary, and strongly disagree with a post there. Then watch the abuse and name-calling fly back your way, probably within the hour. It’d be enlightening to many who claim feminism invites discussion, I think.

[mythago]

Your comment suggests it would miraculously cure both.

Is it time for the discussion on 'infer' and 'imply' again?

And the person I asked to f-off was engaging in just such abuse.

"She started it!"

I think you must be new to this whole Internet thingy. Plenty of us aren't, and have had the 'enlightening' experience of strongly disagreeing in anti- or non-feminist environments, and watching the abuse and name-calling fly--particularly towards those perceived as female. If you'd tried baiting and playing contrarian anywhere but feminist discussions, you'd know that.