Choice Feminism

[IamJen]

das, I agree that sex workers are often chosen intentionally, because it's traditionally an easy class of people to criticize/put down, etc. This is what I meant about shifting the argument toward stay at home moms, or women who choose to leave high-powered male-dominated jobs for something more "feminine", or (talented) female athletes who choose to compete in same-sex sports teams even though they legally have the right to compete with men. There are lots of ways in which choice feminists are criticized for not "advancing the cause" yada yada.

Now don't pass out or anything, but your comment above is precisely what troubles me about anti-choice feminism and the whole lean-in extravaganza. How do we know what anyone else's motivation is wrt choices about stripping or childcare or whatever "feminist" issue is being discussed? Regarding SAHMs, the issue isn't such a big deal for me, as I work in childcare. However, on the other board where I'm seeing this being discussed, there is a mom who worked as a very successful attorney and is now staying home with her daughter. She is absolutely happy with her choice...*LOVES* being the primary caregiver, yet she takes heat from some for leaving the workforce and supposedly perpetuating the idea that women can't manage a family and a career, etc.

Shouldn't our focus be less on guilt-tripping women who choose "anti-feminist" paths, and instead on changing the societal viewpoint? More opportunities for shared childcare responsibility between partners, for starter.

I'm quite tired so I think I'm rambling a bit...will try and compose some thoughts for another day.

 

[mlp]

"Choice feminism" says whatever their reasoning is, it is their choice.

I like that.

I'm confused - when boys from lower income families choose to not go to college, it's a problem inherent in the educational system, but whatever a woman chooses to do, it's feminist by definition?!

 

[Eleven]

It's not about women making choices. It's about the choices women make.

 

[mlp]

However, on the other board where I'm seeing this being discussed, there is a mom who worked as a very successful attorney and is now staying home with her daughter. She is absolutely happy with her choice...*LOVES* being the primary caregiver, yet she takes heat from some for leaving the workforce and supposedly perpetuating the idea that women can't manage a family and a career, etc.

It sounds as though it's a good choice for her, and she was right to make it. But that doesn't make it a feminist choice.

I don't think anyone, woman or man, can have it all - a time consuming, successful career, and the best possible parenting life.

At some point, we may be at a place where women and men share equally in child rearing, where men scale back their careers in equal numbers as women in order to prioitize their role as parents. At that point, the decision to do so will be neutral as far as where it is on the feminist scale. But we're far from that still.

 

[Ann Chovie]

Shouldn't our focus be less on guilt-tripping women who choose "anti-feminist" paths, and instead on changing the societal viewpoint? More opportunities for shared childcare responsibility between partners, for starter.

Now this is the bit I dont get about Feminism...

Why is 'anti-feminist ' to be a 'stay home mother'?

If Feminism is about women having the right to make their own choices and that is the choice you have freely made then are you not the embodiment of Feminism?

Or are your choices only Feminist if they involve rejecting traditionally female roles or challenging traditionally male roles?

Was the objective of Feminism to acheive freedom of choice or to morph women into men?

 

[mlp]

The girl receiving the female circumcision is not making the choice, so it that is not a good analogy.

I'm taking about adult female who chooses to be a house wife for example. That choice would make a hard core feminists blood boil of course, but at the end of the day, if the women makes that choice on her own, it's a feminist choice.

Sure, that women may have been influenced by the culture, but she made the choice of her own free will. It's impossible to remove cultural influences. Even "proper feminist" are influenced by the culture around them.

It seems to me that your definition of a feminist is someone who rejects all cultural/traditional practices.

Well, parents make choices for their children all the time - everything from the clothes and toys they buy for them to vaccinations, attitudes they instill, etc.

If the fact that the choice these women are making for their daughters is one that affects them physically troubles you to the extent that you can't see beyond it, let me ask you this: When women (and many do) teach their girl children that it is a female's role to be subservient to the men in her life, is such teaching a feminist choice by the mother?

 

[das_nut]

I'm confused - when boys from lower income families choose to not go to college, it's a problem inherent in the educational system, but whatever a woman chooses to do, it's feminist by definition?!

When a woman makes a choice, and we tell her that she can't choose what she did because its wrong, that's just exchanging one straightjacket (traditional gender roles) for another (what a Real Feminist(tm) should do).

The problem isn't the choice an individual makes.

The problem is with how our society limits choices. Change our society so that all choices are open to everyone. That's the fix.

 

[mlp]

When a woman makes a choice, and we tell her that she can't choose what she did because its wrong, that's just exchanging one straightjacket (traditional gender roles) for another (what a Real Feminist(tm) should do).

The problem isn't the choice an individual makes.

The problem is with how our society limits choices. Change our society so that all choices are open to everyone. That's the fix.

A nice, simplistic, greeting card sentiment.

The choices individuals make do matter. As long as 95% of women assume the primary child rearing role, the child rearing role will continue to fall on women, because that is the expectation that both males and females will be raised with.

The changing-name-upon- marriage issue, is a prime example. There has not been a legal requirement that a woman take her husband's surname for years, yet somewhere between 90% and 98% of American women continue to do so.

Tradition is stronger than law, and tradition only changes when individuals make individual choices to do something different.

 

[mlp]

This piece expresses what I believe:

In any comment section on the internet where feminism comes up, someone will pipe up and cry, “But feminism is about CHOICE!” No. Feminism is not about choice – at least not insofar as it’s about saying “Any choice women make is a feminist one and so we can’t criticize or judge it.” Feminism isn’t about creating non-judgmental happy-rainbow enclaves where women can do whatever they want without criticism. Feminism is about achieving social, economic and political equality for all people, regardless of gender. It’s not about making every woman feel good about whatever she does, or treating women like delicate hot-house flowers who can’t be criticized.

And social change has been actively impeded when it comes to gender equality, primarily by men but also by a culture that now puts “choice” (but really a highly-constrained set of very gendered choices) ahead of progress and equality. And many feminists, unfortunately, are complicit in supporting a choice model over an egalitarian one. While how one individual sets up her family may be private, the aggregate is not; and it’s tough to argue that the housewife model is simply a private choice made within families with no outside influence and no greater consequences. The study that came out the other week about men with stay-at-home wives was instructional: Men whose wives stay home see women as less capable, tend to view majority-female businesses as less competent, and are less likely to hire and promote women.

But beyond that, the housewife model is what makes male superiority in the workplace possible, and creates disincentives to more family-friendly workplace policies. Men who have stay-at-home wives literally have nothing other than work to worry about. They have someone who is raising their kids, cooking them dinner, cleaning the house, maintaining the social calendar, taking the kids to doctor’s appointments and after-school activities, getting the dry-cleaning, doing the laundry, buying groceries and on and on (or, in the case of 1% wives, someone who coordinates a staff to do many of those things). That model enables men to work longer hours and be more productive; women in the workplace cannot compete (yes, stay-at-home dads exist, but there are a few thousand of them in the United States, making them uncommon enough to be insignificant for the purposes of this conversation). And of course men see that women can’t compete, and it cements their view that women aren’t as capable, and they end up mentoring bright young men who in turn rise up the ranks. And then the “opt-out” women opt out, and a bunch of other women who wouldn’t have opted out see that there’s not really a place for them and they don’t rise to the top either. And because women are the ones who are constantly treated to discussions on “how to balance work and family,” we feel like that’s our responsibility. Corporate cultures that are built around a man-and-housewife model aren’t exactly family-friendly in the first place, and making them really change is going to be impossible unless men are forced to change their behavior. So far, the corporate response to large numbers of women leaving has been to make it easier for women to leave. “Family-friendly” policies at places like law firms and big banks end up amounting to, “you can work part-time” — which means four days a week, and means you’re never going to achieve the highest-level positions, and is a path really only utilized by women. The men who have always been the most powerful go right on ahead maintaining that power, and they don’t even have to consider their own “work-life balance” because someone else is taking care of the entire “life” part. If none of those men had stay-at-home wives – if the men currently occupying the highest-level jobs in the world had to take as much responsibility for childcare and homecare as working mothers — you can bet that corporate culture would look very different.

That impacts a lot more people than just your family.

...and women are not passive victims. We make choices. Those choices have consequences big and small. Despite graduating from college and various graduate schools in higher numbers than men, women are still not advancing to the highest positions in their fields. Fewer than 5 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs are women. Women are 16 percent of corporate executives and 17 percent of law firm partners. It’s not just because women are choosing not to compete (although some are). It’s that our cultural institutions of power are built around a male breadwinner/housewife model. Women by definition cannot beat that model, and so the many who don’t want to go the housewife route simply don’t get ahead, or they leave. Technically that’s a “choice.” It’s just that your hand is forced.

It’s also worth considering the messages that we model to our kids. If staying home is your “feminist choice” and you actually have a full range of choices, what does that say to your sons and daughters about gender roles? Is it in any way challenging an already deeply-held cultural assumption that women exist to serve others? That women are care-givers and need-meeters and housekeepers and emotional-work-doers, whereas men are breadwinners and influencers and public-sphere-operators who are served by women? What is your son going to expect of himself and in a partner? What is your daughter going to internalize?

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2012/06/20/feminism-housewifery/

 

[das_nut]

A nice, simplistic, greeting card sentiment.

The choices individuals make do matter. As long as 95% of women assume the primary child rearing role, the child rearing role will continue to fall on women, because that is the expectation that both males and females will be raised with.

So what's your solution?

Should we fine women who make the wrong choices?
Socially shun them?
What?

 

[Ansciess]

So what's your solution?

Should we fine women who make the wrong choices?
Socially shun them?
What?

Who has said anything about fining or shunning or forcing women to do anything?

Just the mere discussion of what might be more ideal from a feminist perspective has you so up in arms that you've leapt to talking about punishing those for choices you think others regard as falling short. I don't think any feminist who has written about any of this has suggested doing anything other than being able to discuss the political ramifications of different choices rationally (without people getting utterly freaked out about the horror of possibly being judged by someone somewhere).

 

[mlp]

So what's your solution?

Should we fine women who make the wrong choices?
Socially shun them?
What?

I think all kinds of people make "wrong" choices all the time. We don't fine them/shun them/whatever, so it surprises me that you think that there are only two options - to either applaud any choice a woman makes as a "feminist" choice because it's a woman making it, or to punish the woman for making that choice.

For instance, eating a diet which consists largely of processed carbs, fats and sugars is probably a "wrong choice." I don't feel compelled to fine or shun people who do that; OTOH, I do not feel the need to pat them on their backs for the choice either.

 

[mlp]

Who has said anything about fining or shunning or forcing women to do anything?

Just the mere discussion of what might be more ideal from a feminist perspective has you so up in arms that you've leapt to talking about punishing those for choices you think others regard as falling short. I don't think any feminist who has written about any of this has suggested doing anything other than being able to discuss the political ramifications of different choices rationally (without people getting utterly freaked out about the horror of possibly being judged by someone somewhere).

This, especially the bolded part.

 

[Moll Flanders]

Shouldn't our focus be less on guilt-tripping women who choose "anti-feminist" paths, and instead on changing the societal viewpoint? More opportunities for shared childcare responsibility between partners, for starter.

I agree. I think it is the whole of society that needs to change but that will only happen gradually over time.

 

[das_nut]

Who has said anything about fining or shunning or forcing women to do anything?

Just the mere discussion of what might be more ideal from a feminist perspective has you so up in arms that you've leapt to talking about punishing those for choices you think others regard as falling short. I don't think any feminist who has written about any of this has suggested doing anything other than being able to discuss the political ramifications of different choices rationally (without people getting utterly freaked out about the horror of possibly being judged by someone somewhere).

If someone would criticize a woman's choice from a viewpoint that you disagreed with, would you be just as accepting? For example, someone who criticized a working mother for the "harm" she was causing her children?

Or can we only criticize individual women for making choices you disagree with?

 

[RabbitLuvr]

I'm beginning to understand why so many people don't like describing themselves as feminists.

If being a feminist means criticizing women for making "anti-feminist choices," such as choosing to take their husband's last name or choosing to be a stay-at-home mom, I really don't want to call myself a feminist.

 

[Renee1]

I'm beginning to understand why so many people don't like describing themselves as feminists.

If being a feminist means criticizing women for making "anti-feminist choices," such as choosing to take their husband's last name or choosing to be a stay-at-home mom, I really don't want to call myself a feminist.

Never mind the imperialist heterosexist white supremist classist ******** that is so often pulled in the name of feminism.

My feminism will be intersectional or it will be ********.

 

[Muggle]

I'm beginning to understand why so many people don't like describing themselves as feminists.

If being a feminist means criticizing women for making "anti-feminist choices," such as choosing to take their husband's last name or choosing to be a stay-at-home mom, I really don't want to call myself a feminist.

This x 1000.

I stopped calling myself a feminist a while ago and this thread has reiterated exactly why I stopped calling myself one.

 

[zirpkatze]

This x 1000.

I stopped calling myself a feminist a while ago and this thread has reiterated exactly why I stopped calling myself one.

I'm not sure if I ever called myself one to begin with but I don't now and I feel the same about this thread.

 

[mlp]

I think this thread is a good illustration of why, despite the wide availability of information, education, and laws in much of the world granting women at least the nominal opportunity to compete equally, equality for women is (and probably will remain indefinitely) a distant far off sparkle rather than a reality.

It's something that has puzzled me all my life - we make up half the population, and the time where men's superior physical strength has been meaningful as far as keeping us down passed some generations ago, and yet here we still are. We are so incredibly complicit in the situation in which women as a whole find themselves. If we can't even examine what effect our own personal choices have in shaping societal expectations and norms, and prefer to withdraw into victimhood, then I think that we as a group will remain forever stuck with the status quo.