Womanism

“A Womanist is to feminist as purple is to lavender.”

– Alice Walker

As touched upon in an earlier post, feminism has not always been as inclusive and sympathetic to the struggles faced by black women and other women of color as a result of the intersecting oppressions of racism and sexism.  What exactly do we mean when we say “intersecting oppressions”?  GeekFeminism defines intersectionality as the following:

 “Intersectionality is a concept often used in critical theories to describe the ways in which oppressive institutions (racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, xenophobia, classism, etc.) are interconnected and cannot be examined separately from one another.”

The womanist movement, feeling left out by the mainstream feminism of the first and second wave, which was focused primarily on the struggles of white women, thus came into being.  Womanism focuses primarily on the struggles of women of color, but as racism affects all people of color, male or female, womanism also targets the oppression faced by black men as well.

When we look at womanism as a movement, we should make sure to not view it as a lesser movement beneath feminism.  To do so is to reinforce the marginalization of women of color and the hierarchy which elevates white women at their expense – the whole reason womanism came into being in the first place.  It calls attention to the historical and ongoing privileging of whiteness and disregard of people of color within feminism.

We should also be mindful that womanism is not merely a historical movement.  It remains as relevant as ever, despite more of a recent push for full inclusivity and diversity within the feminist movement.  The racist hierarchy which gave rise to womanism is a systemic imbalance of power whose persistence is evidenced in the unequal platform for women’s voices in even new media.  Thanks to the internet and the feminist “blogosphere”, women’s voices are louder than ever, but the voices which are amplified most remain those of white women.

“Blogs run by traditionally marginalised women do not attract the same attention by the media. When feminists are pulled from the internet for interviews, it is routinely the same white feminist voices representing the broad perspectives that are visible on the internet. Unlike academia, where the power dynamic between professor and student does not allow for radical confrontation, marginalised women have forcefully made themselves heard  through a series of boycotts, as well as critical essays confronting feminists of privilege regarding race, ableism and transphobia.”

– via Renee Martin, “I’m Not a Feminist (and There Is No But).

If feminism is meant to be a movement that represents all women, all women must be viewed as equal players in that movement.  Womanism is an integral part of the movement while simultaneously being a movement of its own, equal in importance, whose concerns and goals should be the focus of all invested in achieving equality and social justice.  The struggles of women of color are not an addendum to the feminist struggle but they are the feminist struggle, not just one month in a year but at all times, inextricable.

One Billion Rising ETSU/Johnson City!

Did you know?

ONE IN THREE WOMEN ON THE PLANET WILL BE RAPED OR BEATEN IN HER LIFETIME.

ONE BILLION RISING IS:

A global strike
An invitation to dance
A call to men and women to refuse to participate in the status quo until rape and rape culture ends
An act of solidarity, demonstrating to women the commonality of their struggles and their power in numbers
A refusal to accept violence against women and girls as a given
A new time and a new way of being

JOIN US:

This (alcohol-free) event will be held at the Galaxy Lounge in downtown Johnson City from 7-11pm.  Cover will be $5 and proceeds will be donated to Abuse Alternatives and the Crisis Center.

Time:	Thursday, February 14, 2013 7:00 PM – 11:00 PM EST
Host:	Casey Lawhon Walker
Location:	Galaxy Lounge (Johnson City, TN) 216 East Main Street Johnson City, TN 37604

Women on Wednesdays

Join us tomorrow for Women on Wednesdays! Come see Dr. Beth Bailey speak on Improving Pregnancy and Newborn health in Northeast Tennessee! 12:00 pm in Dining Room 3 of the Culp! Light lunch provided.

 

Dr. Beth Baily joined the Department of Family Medicine in 2003. She holds an undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan, and a Ph.D. in Developmental Psychology and Statistics from Wayne State University in Detroit. Her research interests are broad and include studying the long-term effects of prenatal environments, including exposure to drugs and alcohol, prenatal interventions, domestic violence, child psychopathology, and health disparities. Since at ETSU, she has implemented research funded by the university, the March of Dimes, HRSA, the National Institutes of Health, and has published papers on the findings.

Black History Month

Throughout the month of February, Black History Month, ETSU Women’s Studies will be highlighting the stories and achievements of black women, and celebrating the contributions of all black women in the struggle for equality.  It’s important to reflect upon the intersecting oppression that women of color have faced and continue to face in addition to that which all women face every day to ensure that in our collective struggle, their concerns are not ignored and they are not left behind.

The importance of spotlighting the history of black women is exemplified by Rosa Parks, whose narrative and active participation in shaping the civil rights movement has been obscured and made passive by a dominant male narrative as well as a dominant white narrative.  We should instead seek to approach history from her own perspective, highlighting her active contribution to the civil rights movement and her powerful belief in its cause.

Feminism should be an inclusive movement and we must remember that we are all working toward the same goal – ending oppression and achieving equality.  That goal cannot be reached until oppression is ended and equality is achieved for all.

During this very important month, we hope that you will join us in our celebration and recognition of the achievements of these extraordinary women.

Follow us on twitter:

http://twitter.com/etsuwomenstudy

Thoughts on “Objectify a Man Day”

By Katharine

 

The other day, reading my twitter feed, I became aware of the concept of Objectify a Man Day, which was scheduled to take place on February 1.  It’s a day that was proposed by tech/gaming blogger Leigh Alexander to combat sexism in the tech industry (which, like in almost any industry, is quite prevalent).  While I felt her intention to call attention to sexism in the workplace was good, I felt conflicted about her proposal.

First, I think it’s necessary to have a working definition of objectification. Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog defines it as follows:

“Sexual objectification is the viewing of people solely as de-personalised objects of desire instead of as individuals with complex personalities and desires/plans of their own. This is done by speaking/thinking of women especially as only their bodies, either the whole body, or as fetishised body parts.

Sexual attraction is not the same as sexual objectification: objectification only occurs when the individuality of the desired person is not acknowledged. Pornography, prostitution, sexual harassment and the representation of women in mass media and art are all examples of common sexual objectification.”

In other words, objectification involves the reduction of a person’s status as an individual human being with agency of their own to that of an object valued (if valued at all) only for their instrumentality, or use in fulfilling the desires of another person.  In this case, those desires are for sexual gratification as well as maintaining a hegemonic power imbalance wherein men are elevated at the expense of women, who are devalued.
Alexander’s intent was to continue and further promote conversation about the sexism experienced by women in the workplace, in much the same way as the #1reasonwhy campaign had, except in this instance, she was focusing on not only the blatant, unmistakable examples of sexism, but the less recognized manifestations of it as well.

“In this crucible of negativity and conflict, the kind of harmless compliments that female tech journalists routinely get about their appearance when writing or speaking in public hardly seem worth getting heated up about. Yet sometimes it’s the more insidious elements of sexism that deserve the closest analysis, conversation and discussion. Everyone knows that discrimination is wrong. It’s just that sometimes people need a little help to recognise when discrimination is happening.” 

Leigh Alexander points out exactly how this manifestation of sexism – the comments about women’s appearances/bodies and turning them into objects to be publically criticized – plays out.  Women who speak out and attempt to be recognized beyond their physical appearance are often ignored, and (especially if their appearance does not fall in line with prescribed beauty standards or subjective sexual attractiveness) often reprimanded for doing so.  If women are perceived as attractive, they are either not taken seriously, sexually harassed and targeted with unwelcome advances/compliments, or both.  Usually, it’s both.

As Leigh points out, these unwelcome advances/compliments make women feel incredibly uncomfortable, making their workplace a hostile environment.  Even if well-intentioned, the intentions of those who give these sorts of compliments are unclear.  Are they expecting reciprocation of some kind for their unsolicited compliments?  When women turn down these advances, their rejection is often met with a condescending “I was only trying to be nice”, or ” learn to take a compliment” or some similar sentiment designed to marginalize her and deny her concern or discomfort the legitimacy it deserves.

Unfortunately, like this less-obvious, “good intentions” form of sexism, I believed that Leigh Alexander’s proposed response to it (to tweet or otherwise add objectifying “compliments” to articles written by men when promoting their work) would lead to negative unintended consequences for women.  Firstly, for women in the workplace, reducing the fight against workplace sexism to a single day’s campaign limited to social media is not likely to affect the kind of far-reaching change that is necessary to combat the institutional and deeply entrenched sexism in society.  Even if she had not specifically set those limits, it is fairly reasonable to expect that if women were to respond in kind to men’s unwelcome advances, that their responses would not receive the same level of accommodation or be respected as a form of valid criticism – women’s voices are not institutionally protected or promoted, which is what allows this sort of sexual harassment to take place in the first place.

Secondly, I do not feel that her proposal would, as she states, “help highlight by example what a gendered compliment looks like”.  Women and men receive and interpret these sorts of compliments differently.  For a man to receive compliments regarding his sexual attractiveness is to validate and to elevate his status.  For a woman, they are often threatening, uncomfortable, and they reduce their status to that of a sexual object.

For men resistant to the ideas of institutional sexism and male privilege especially, it is unlikely that they would be illuminated and enlightened by responding to their advances in kind.  Women are not given equal social power or respect, and by extension neither are their words or actions.  Like with more direct forms of women’s criticism, I feared that their responses would be brushed off or jokingly appropriated by the men that women were intending to educate.

Finally, I felt that her proposals could also have unintended effects on other marginalized groups.  For example, transgender individuals, intersex individuals, or individuals otherwise living outside of the gender binary, the proposal brought fears that the campaign would lead to transphobic comments thrown at them, or that they would receive comments exacerbating their gender dysphoria.  Gay and bisexual individuals felt that straight male appropriation of Objectify a Man Day, well-intentioned or otherwise, belittled their sexuality and opened up the possibility of homophobic comments.  Others worried that ableist comments would arise from the dialogue.  People of color also felt that the day ignored the intersection of racist discrimination that they face in the workplace.  These comments on a woman’s appearance are a branch on the larger tree of institutional sexism and other forms of oppression, and I did not feel that Alexander’s proposals were entirely effective in targeting the roots.

Leigh Alexander, as of the date this post was written (January 28), has called off Objectify a Man Day after listening to these and other criticisms.  As she put it:

“I hoped discussions of gender norms would be one of the positive outcomes of #Objectify, and that attention to the issue would make it all worth some inevitable hostility. But for some people who may be exposed to the wrong kinds of language on the planned day, misunderstanding can be actually harmful, and that is absolutely not a risk I want to take. 

 

“Starting dialogue” this way isn’t worth potentially triggering others, putting them at risk or making them feel unsafe.  I feel naive that I failed to fully consider the potential ramifications and want to apologize to anyone that was made uncomfortable or who felt threatened by my choice to approach an issue in this way.”

Even though she felt, in the end, as I did, that her proposal would lead to negative consequences that she had not intended, and it did not proceed as she had planned, it was successful in creating a larger dialogue, not only with regards to workplace sexism but to other forms of discrimination and oppression faced by members of other marginalized groups in society.  In that way, Objectify a Man Day was successful, but it reminds those of us fighting for a more equitable world that we must be mindful of how we fight our battles – and who we might harm in the process of doing so, even accidentally.  We have to be mindful of our own privilege as we point out the privilege of others, and we have to try to see what lies in our blind spots.  As Alexander said,

“…the real mission is making everyone feel welcome, period. What I wanted to encourage through humor was caring, empathy and a willingness to listen and educate — now I’ve been asked to change course, and by calling a halt to #Objectify I hope I’m modeling those same qualities myself. 

 

When people tell you they are hurting, are afraid or feel excluded, you don’t get obsessed with your own sense of righteousness, you listen. That’s what this has always been about. 

 

If you’ve been paying attention, I hope you continue thinking about the words you use to describe other people and their work. Please continue aiming to listen to and care for everyone who needs your help to feel respected, safe and welcome in tech — or anywhere.”

Our Journey is not Complete

By Katharine Hughes

President Barack Obama, in his second inaugural address,  said, “Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law, for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal, as well.”  It’s a nice sentiment, and while equality for gay and lesbian individuals and the legalization of same-gender marriage would be a significant step forward on our journey, we would unfortunately still be far from the end.

What Obama’s statement failed to mention was the ongoing struggle for equality faced by transgender and non-gender conforming individuals in our society.  This sort of erasure, deliberate or otherwise, is nothing new to trans* ¹ individuals, and in fact trans* invisibility is often a lesser problem than the discrimination and hurdles that trans* individuals face when they are recognized.  Trans* individuals live every day in a hostile environment simply by navigating through our society.   To be trans* in America means living with a greatly increased risk of becoming a victim of violence, sexual or otherwise, being fired or harassed on the job (if one can even get a job to begin with), increased likelihood of poverty (which only becomes more likely if a trans* individual is a person of color), increased risk of harassment, increased discrimination and violence from law enforcement, increased likelihood of discrimination by government authorities, inability to obtain up-to-date identification, increased likelihood of abuse in prison, and less likelihood to have access to healthcare, among many other problems.

Casual transphobia remains socially acceptable in nearly every sphere of public life.  Transphobic slurs are commonplace.  To watch television as a transgender person is to walk through a minefield, as one never knows when to expect the next assault upon one’s identity in the name of “humor” or inaccurate portrayals of one’s identity.  Even when using public restroom facilities, trans* individuals face anxiety knowing that if they are “found out” for using the restroom corresponding to their gender identities, they face the possibility of violence or other social punishment.  Politicians have even attempted to craft so-called “bathroom bills” which would, among other things, force individuals identifying as women to use men’s restrooms at the risk of their own safety.  In the case of Tennessee’s proposed “bathroom bill”, the state senator that proposed the bill also threatened to “stomp a mudhole” in any trans* individuals who were in the proximity of his family.

These are not harmless words.  These are not small problems.  These are not idle threats.   These things have real, profound, and lasting effects on the lives of trans* individuals every day.  These words and actions reinforce societal narratives about who is valid in their gender identity, reinforce an environment of violence against trans* individuals, reinforce the dehumanization of trans* individuals only trying to live unashamed and comfortably in their skin, and reinforce the acceptability of the exclusion of a trans* individuals from participating equally in society.

One thing is clear.  Our journey is long, and we still have miles to go before we can rest.  Steps forward in equality are important, but only if they achieve equality for all, and trans* individuals are far from equal in our society.  It is imperative to recognize their struggle if we truly believe in the promise of America.  We must speak out against transphobia in word and deed.  We must end the stigma against gender non-conformity.  We must make it clear that violence is not an acceptable response to what our socialization has programmed us to interpret as “deviant”.  We must affirm the right of all individuals to feel secure not only in their bodies but everywhere in our society.  We cannot erase the story of trans* people from our history or neglect to mention their struggles.  We must recognize their contributions when we mention Stonewall, and we must commit equal love as well in working to achieve equality for all.  Then, and only then, will our journey be complete.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Footnote:

¹ The use of trans* with an asterisk is meant to be an umbrella term encompassing not only transgender individuals, but all individuals of non-binary gender identities.

Women on Wednesday with Iqra Ahmad

Welcome Back!!!

It’s a new semester here at ETSU and a new semester for the women’s studies program and feminism. For some of us the semester has been off to a rough start, but nothing is really accomplished without a little hard work. As you may have already noticed there have been some changes with the blog and this semester we hope to keep it updated with at least one post a week to inform all of you what’s going on with the program. This year we will continue to host our lecture series Women on Wednesdays, so look forward for future posts about this lecture series. We would also like our students to feel free to submit writings/articles to post here on the blog, if you are interested in posting on the blog please submit your work to at garnetts@goldmail.etsu.edu!

This is the first blog of the semester so first and foremost I would like to take this oppurtunity to extend a warm welcome back to all of our students and faculty. I hope to see our program expand even further and continue to challenge and change minds. Here’s hoping for a good semester of feminist activism on and off campus!

Believe in yourself and believe in the people who believe in you! Welcome back everyone!!!

Steve Garnett

Dr. Karen Cajka

I know that it has been some time since Dr. Karen Cajka’s, Director of Women’s Studies, passing.  Nevertheless, I wanted to share some article, thoughts, blogs, and other web sources that honor the life, accomplishments, passions, and mentorship that Dr. Cajka brought to this world and especially ETSU’s Women’s Studies program.  I feel that there are not enough words in the English language that could express our gratitude for what Dr. Cajka has brought to this program, university, and most importantly our individual lives. As the Spring 2012 semester begins, we in the Women’s Studies office sense Dr. Cajka in everything we do. Her whit, brilliance, compassion, drive, and inspiration are ingrained in this office. Nothing I say can quite capture what she truly meant to this program and the people who were fortunate enough to have known her.

http://www.johnsoncitypress.com/Obituaries/article.php?id=31268

http://vegansteven.blogspot.com/2011/11/in-memory-of-dr-karen-cajka.html#!/2011/11/in-memory-of-dr-karen-cajka.html

http://www.easttennessean.com/the-significance-of-dr-karen-cajka-1.2721073

http://amberkinser.wordpress.com/2011/11/19/some-remarks-in-memory-of-you-karen-cajka/

I know there are probably many more articles and memorials honoring Dr. Cajka that can be found online. If you have any that you would like to share, please feel free to share them here! Also, any memories and thoughts can certainly be shared here.

A Bottle of Hair Dye Changed My Life

Why should hair color determine a woman’s intellectual worth?

This is a question I have lately been asking myself.

So, this post will be a little less formal than I would like. This would make an amazing research project, hint hint! I have been both a “blonde” and a “brunette.”  Let’s face it, I love hair dye, whether it be blonde, brown, purple, or blazing red. To me, it’s art on your scalp! I recently went from having sandy blonde hair, which is actually close to my natural hair color, to a lovely shade of walnut stain brown. 🙂 (Not only do I love hair dye, but I adore descriptive adjectives! Thanks BA in English!) I placed a bet with my friends that I would be treated with more dignity and respect as a brunette as opposed to being blonde. I was correct and I would like to share my observations and my hasty research on the blonde stereotype and its effect on our culture today.

First, let me share some interesting information I found concerning the blonde stereotype.  The classic example of the “dumb blonde” can best be witnessed when looking at the novel and film Gentlemen Prefer Blondes starting a bleach blonde Marilyn Monroe who plays the part of innocent, quirky, and essentially birdbrained Lorelei. Through her dumb blonde antics, she proves that she is preferred by men and is able to rack up a nice collection of diamonds.  A featured article in the August 1998 edition of Harper’s Bazaar, speaks to Anita Loos’s creation and the inspiration behind the legendary novel and film.  The article reveals that Loos’s inspiration for the character of Lorelei was her male friend and the “birdbrain” women that he dated.  She was also inspired by a party that she attended where a fair haired woman was present. Loos was facinated by her observations of how the men fawned over the blonde woman. The stereotypical image of the blonde who can manipulate men with her innocence, charm, and submissiveness in order to recieve diamonds was thus born.  Or was this an extension of a longstanding stereotype?

In western civilization, especially Europe, blonde hair is considered attractive, particularly coupled with blue eyes.  This combination is reminiscent of childhood for women who are often born with light hair, skin, and eyes.  However, these features often darken over time. With the birth of the cosmetic industry, this has allowed women access to hair color, and even blue contacts.  Women are able to transform their looks and appeal to this youthful appearance.  Also, think about childhood and its connection to innocence, nievity, and helplessness.  These are both historically considered desirable traits in a woman.  With innocence and nievity, a woman must be “guided” by the more experienced and noble man. Are the wheels in your mind starting to turn???

While researching the blonde stereotype, I discovered a woman named Rosalie Duthe.  She is considered the first “dumb blonde.”  She was a celebrated French courtesan.  She was the misteress of many noble men during the 18th century.  She was considered a “dumb blonde” not only for her obviously blonde hair, but the fact that she was unable to carry an intelligent conversation.  When spoken to, she paused for extremely long periods before speaking, thus making her seem dumb not only in the intellectual sense, but her percieved inability to speak.  Also, just an interesting note, she was often the subject of many full nude painting. Is anyone else thinking Playboy and how Hue Heffner prefers blondes for his “full nudes?”

When mentioning Playboy, this brings my discussion back to modern culture.  How often do we see blonde women in magazine, pornographic material, and other media as the dumb, submissive woman who NEEDS a man to fulfill her needs?  She needs someone to lead her and tell her how to literally survive! I found this article from the New York Times that was a humerous genetics-oriented rebuttal to the blonde stereotype. Getting a little sidetracked from the blonde stereotype, have you ever noticed that brunettes are often portrayed as (I hate to use this word) bitches? Just look back at the image of Jane Russell and Marilyn Monroe above. Notice their hair and notice their portrayal. I’m telling ya, someone NEEDS to do reserach on not only the blonde stereotype, but the reason why any female trait becomes a stereotype/joke. Maybe I’ll take this upon myself!

So, to end my little research/rant, I want to share my experience/observation/bet/experiment that I have taken upon myself as of late.  While at both the workplace and college, as a blonde, I have been treated as an unintelligent woman with low expectations, and it is a huge surprise when I strut my stuff intellectually.  When I make a mistake as a blonde, it is cute and excused. I just get the typical chuckle and, “Oh it’s ok, you’re a blonde!” Gee thanks. I am a target for cat calls and derogatory remarks. Apparently, it’s ok… I’m a blonde.  However, since my hair transformation to the dark side, my world has changed… more than I thought it would.  I am now the hateful bitch who is to be avoided when a mistake is made.  Nevertheless, I am respected. Sometimes I am feared! It is quite hilarious to me.  I have noticed that I am not randomly groped at the bar, the makeup counter lady does not run me down with the newest product, I am trusted with counting money, I am included in intellectual conversations, and women customers trust me when dealing with their husbands. In general I am respected now. The hair color commercials are right, what a difference a new color can make! This is not to say that I am now living happily ever after with my raven locks.  This little expirement and research has brought to my attention even more injustices forced upon women by culture.

I would love it if anyone wants to share any comments, research, articles, ideas, experiences, ANYTHING.