A Subjective Look at the Subject of Feminism

A few reactions to this week's reading:
To be frank, my first response to the Califia reading was one of shock and dismay as I was in disbelief at how gravely Janice Raymond manipulated the essentialist argument. While her argument lies largely on the notion that transexualism is a manipulation of biology as well as a "reinforcing of sex-role stereotypes," Raymond's outright bigotry sparked a different question about biology for me. And that is, this blatant power hungry feminist ideology that Raymond is touting, makes me wonder if we humans are not simply biologically predisposed to subjugate one another no matter how low we may be on someone else's totem pole. I think what Califia succeeds in doing, is realizing that many of the problems women face vis a vis feminism today is due to the lack of reception, love and support from fellow women. Perhaps her most prominent reflection was her realization that "We (women) will have to change at least as much, if not more, than men." Halberstam echoes this sentiment as well in "Female Masculinity," as she speaks of the women who sneer and snicker at tomboy and "masculine" looking women. Women reinforce just as many stereotypes as men, and whether the patriarchal structure is responsible for that lack of support, is almost irrelevant. It is incumbent upon us to confront internal female hatred and bigotry.
Another point that stuck out was Raymond's assertion that one of the reason's men may want to become transexual is because of a certain envy of female biological power. I'm curious to discuss how women in this class view their biological stance, how relevant child-bearing is for everyone and whether it is viewed as a source of empowerment or burden.

In the piece by Oyeronke Oyewumi, what are the distinctions made between the terms woman, feminist, wife, and mother? How do these roles function differently in the different social structures discussed in the article? When thinking about family structures other than the traditional "nuclear family," how does your concept of the "woman" change, or does it?

In her piece, Family Bonds/Conceptual Binds: African Notes on Feminist Epistemologies, Oyeronke Oyewumi engages in a push to dismantle western discourses as applied to nonwestern women in feminist thinking. She specifically is interested in the notion of 'family' and how it translates to African women. However, not much attention is paid to the fact that 'African' as a category is, in itself, a vast generalization. How far is too far in breaking down categories to their smallest common denominator in understanding epistemologies?

Transphobia & The Women's Movement

Although arguably (extremely) biased, Pat Califa's article "Sex Changes" was refreshingly honest.  Her critique of Ms. Raymond and her book shows an ugly side to feminism that brings up many questions about solidarity within the women's movement.  Eventually in the movement, new forms of feminism (for black women, for lesbian women, for black lesbian, etc) came into existence.  As smaller and smaller groups of feminism form, doesn't that take away from the togetherness supposedly emitted by a movement?  Doesn't that contribute to its downfall (did it, in this case?)?  In other movements (i.e. Civil Rights Movement), there were different degrees of diversity within them, yet all (at least) semi-successfully achieved a sense of consensus that led to success.  Is there such a platform within the Women's Movement?  Why or why not?  If not, is there really not ONE THING that all* women (*let's just stick to women in America for now) can't agree to fight for and gain/achieve?

Yes, all these questions came from Califa's article. : )

As I read Judith Halberston's "Female Masculinity," I couldn't help but feel ashamed at myself because I realized that I could be one of those women who, upon seeing a "gender-ambiguous" person in the women's bathroom thinks, "Is he or she in the right place?" I would never say it out loud, but thinking it is just as awful. I felt so evil for being someone who could make such a public, free space such an awful experience for others. While I know now not to think such things, what can be done to effect this change in others? On the one hand, simply creating gender-neutral restrooms wouldn't really solve the problem because it reinforces the idea of separation; it goes against (what I believe to be) the feminist credo of equalizing. On the other hand, it deeply troubles me that those who are "gender-ambiguous" find bathrooms such an intensely limiting space, so perhaps a gender-neutral bathroom would be a safe haven of sorts for those who want it while simultaneously ushering society into a new era of acceptance and awareness. I think that the addition of gender-neutral bathrooms would foster open and honest discussion on what gender really means. So... what is the "right" thing to do?

(Someone posted about the effect on children, which I think is a fantastic point--I wouldn't have even thought about that!)

In her introduction, Halberstam discusses the problems facing those who do not fit clearly into either traditional gender category. In some of our earlier readings, authors have discussed the idea of femininity as being something feminists should either celebrate or strive to break free from. How would these feminists treat the idea of the "third gender"? How does the "third gender" fit into their ideas about femininity and the goals of feminism at large?

In "Female Masculinity," Judith Halberstam writes, "...although we seem to have a difficult time defining masculinity, as a society we have little trouble in recognizing it, and indeed we spend massive amounts of time and money raifyiing and supporting the versions of masculinity the we enjoy and trust" (936).  Halberstam fails to, in this section at least, truly divulge into what masculinity is.  What and how then can we define masculinity and how does it differ as views of family and all aspects of life do in other cultures?