In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Trust, Mutuality and Co-creation Within Feminism: The Art of Building a Movement

In the post on Intersecting Identities and Feminist Identification, commenter Tiffany of Houston summed up what I view as the core problem with one salient sentence:

“I can’t take feminism as a movement seriously because I have a lack of trust in it.”

That’s it. Right there. That accurately describes how many women feel towards feminism—a lack of trust. And that lack of trust is a critical barrier to building a movement. A movement that made tremendous strides toward improving the day-to-day lives of women, but whose momentum has withered (in the U.S.) in recent decades. Now, feminism is still kicking ass and taking names; despite the periodic premature announcement of its/our death in the mainstream media. Important work continues to be done concerning domestic violence, (hat tip: brownfemipower, whose blog should be part of your Recommended Daily Requirement of Feminism) reproductive justice, LGBT rights, racial justice, women of color in the media, women in the trades, women at work, motherhood…….all kinds of feminist organizing.

But. Our movement is fragmented. Our power is diffused. Old wounds have been allowed to fester. Old concerns remain current concerns. In fact, many of the same ills that exist within feminist movement also exist within the labor movement (save for one major difference—the labor movement has never been as geographically isolated as the feminist movement). Whining? If so, I’m in damn good company, and plentiful company at that.

And that’s key. Because there is a backlash. We have lost ground. And we cannot return to our former momentum of progress without solidarity. Without critical mass. Healing wounds takes time, and it often hurts. But the benefits outweigh the pain. So, let’s engage in little triage, hmm?

Back when I entered the apprenticeship program in 1988, the IBEW (at the international level, what we call the “I.O”—but don’t get me started on “international” as referring to Canada and the U.S.; that would be a whole ‘nother post) was well aware of losing ground. At the local level, not so much. Oh sure, folks were aware of the nonunion element getting work, but there was a combination of attitudes towards that fact. Among them: an arrogance that we were better electricians, that those who hired nonunion would live to regret their foolishness; a blase, “whaddya gonna do” attitude, a feeling that the pendulum would swing back on its own; a “fuck this shit” attitude amongst the older members close to retirement, ready to jump ship and collect their pension at the earliest opportunity; an apathy endemic to much of the union movement—a sort of just-keep-plugging-along and hope for the best. And of course, the still-present old-school unionism that still believed in organizing the unorganized, as enshrined in the (union) Constitution. In the years before and throughout my apprenticeship, the I.O. took many tacks toward stemming the tide of lost work and lost membership.

And one of them was a novel approach: the COMET classes. Construction Organizing Membership Education Training. The idea being, that the membership within the Locals had to get individualized instruction on what the problem was, why it existed, and how serious it was. COMET II classes were designed to further that education, with tactics for organizing and a framework of strategy to keep the process moving forward. I had my first COMET class with Jeremiah O’Connor, a mercurial Irishman who was the organizer for Local 701 (Brother O’Connor went on to become the Sixth District Vice President, and later the International Secretary-Treasurer. He was instrumental in the creation of the IBEW Women’s Conference).

COMET classes were resisted by the membership, especially by the baby-boom generation. Younger members thought, “yeah, we know, but the political tide has turned and that’s the way it is.” But the boomers? Shit, “we don’t need no stinking COMET classes.” It was bullshit, they said. Buncha blah, blah, blah thought up by too many people who haven’t picked up a set of tools in decades. The goal was for each Local to have every member attend a class. And the boomers unoffically boycotted the classes in droves. But then again, there were some who went—with the purpose of heckling, shouting down, telling why the whole procedure was bogus, why organizing wasn’t going to work.

Yet some people were converted. Even if they didn’t agree with every step in the plan, they saw that the big picture—organizing the unorganized, why that fell by the wayside over the years, and how to return to that critical mass—was central to our survival. Over the ensuing years, the focus changed, and various strategies were developed. Again, it was/is a process. There are organizing initiatives in strategic geographic areas. An army of organizers to carry out the work. The emphasis has switched from “stripping” (taking the workforce away from nonunion contractors) to organizing nonunion shops. There is a greater emphasis on improving the image of the union and its workers—correcting the misconceptions and misinformation perpetuated in the mass media. Also, a greater emphasis on diversity and bilingual information. And it is working. It is having an effect. We are gaining critical mass. Critical mass that will be especially important to political strength. The labor movement has always had its greatest gains—and greatest losses—through legislation.

So, for that matter, have feminists. We need critical mass, and we can get it by taking a few pages out of labor organizing handbooks. What has brought the most historical success for labor organizers? Face time, and a whole lot of it, with the unorganized. Listening to their concerns, and putting their needs on the agenda. Forming coalitions with other labor and/or community groups—and not just by having a few officers sit in on meetings, or take seats on a board—but by rolling up the sleeves and doing the nitty-gritty work. We have to create an atmosphere of trust, mutuality, and co-creation within the movement. Because building a movement is time, labor and money-intensive. It’s a labor of love. If folks feel unloved—well hell, there goes the movement, right out the door.

Again, I cede the floor. What are your thoughts on feminist organizing? If you had two hours a week to devote to feminist organizing, where would you spend it? Who would you spend it with? What area would be your emphasis? How would you fight the negative image of feminism? How would you create a safe space for those who feel like they are on the outside looking in?

I’ll even start: if I had two hours each week to organize for feminism, I’d do it through forming a local group dedicated to getting young women to consider nontraditional work. And because of the strong effects of stereotyping, it would probably be best to start in middle-school/junior high, and continue from there on through high school. And I would talk about feminism within that context, from both a personal, historical, and legislative perspective. I’d want all those young women hungry for the chance to register and vote when they turned eighteen. And I’d want ’em hungry for a chance to continue the process of desegregating nontraditional fields.


34 thoughts on Trust, Mutuality and Co-creation Within Feminism: The Art of Building a Movement

  1. I dunno. I’m not much of an organizer, which is one of the reasons I decided not to become a labor organizer, which I seriously pursued for a while. I am a teacher, and in the classroom, I try to make a point of both using feminist pedagogy to encourage young women’s participation, including texts by women, explicitly including feminist analysis, and identifying myself as a feminist so that my students can’t run around thinking that feminists are scary monsters.

    That’s not organizing, though.

  2. First off, La Lubu, I can’t thank you enough for the writing you’ve done here recently. I’ve been Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz‘s memoirs, and she raises many of the issues you write about here. The intersection of and parallels between the labor movement and feminism are fascinating to me.

    Although I’ve considered myself a feminist since I first heard the word, I’ve never been a real part of the movement. I wouldn’t even know how to get involved. But the kind of nitty-gritty, on-the-ground work you’re talking about here is exactly what I think is needed today. Back in the 60s and early 70s, “movement people” held all kinds of workshops in everything from poster-making to Taekwondo for women to US history. I’d love to see that kind of local, accessible community effort again. In many ways, I fear that the online world has replaced a lot of this face-to-face work. I don’t want to sign anymore e-petitions. I want to do work on the streets. I just need to figure out how to do it.

    I love your idea of getting young women interested in nontraditional careers. I do work in a traditionally female field – massage therapy – but the Big Names in my field are almost exclusively male, as is the case in many other traditionally female fields (culinary arts, anyone?) I’d love to encourage young women to have ambition above and beyond simply doing their jobs. I’d love to see more women as leaders in their fields, whatever that may be. I’ve been fortunate to have a wonderful business mentor, a woman who was a pioneer in the field of nursing entrepreneurship. She expects a hell of a whole lot from her students, and I have every intention of living up to her expectations. Someday, I hope to help other women do the same. (At the moment, I’m very much in the beginning stages of building a career.)

    A big concern of mine right now is how certain “education” corporations take advantage of poor, unemployed young women who are desperate to find good work. It’s usually vocational-type work – culinary arts, massage therapy, phlebotomy, cosmetology, medical technicians, fashion design, etc. These companies convince students – usually very poor, very young, very vulnerable women – that high-paying jobs are theirs for the taking, if only they’ll take out tens of thousands of dollars in students loans. From what I’ve seen, a lot of these young women are single mothers who are drawn in by the prospect of high-paying part-time jobs so that they can spend more time with their children.

    In reality, graduates are VERY lucky if they can break $15/hour doing part-time work. This is especially troubling in the field of massage therapy, where it’s easy for a cash-strapped young woman up to her eyeballs in debt to cross the line over to prostitution just so she can pay the bills. Most of the time, the pay is terrible, the working conditions are abysmal, and most of the workers are contractors, which means they have no benefits and very little job security. The so-called “education” companies that train these young women do a very poor job of educating them on workers’ rights, how to tell a good employer from an abusive one, and how to run their own businesses.

    So I guess there’s a lot of work to be done in my own field, but hell if I’d know where to start. National massage organizations do exist, but their primary focus is on selling malpractice insurance to therapists who really don’t need it – there’s zero organization around improving education and working conditions. There are so very few ethical schools that it might be best to set up a booth at high school career fairs warning young women away from massage therapy. Le sigh.

    I know I’ve rambled on (and on and on) here, but getting my thoughts written down tonight has been incredibly helpful to me. I have a few ideas bouncing around in my head now. Thanks for the opportunity. And sorry for the lengthly comment.

  3. I’ll even start: if I had two hours each week to organize for feminism, I’d do it through forming a local group dedicated to getting young women to consider nontraditional work. And because of the strong effects of stereotyping, it would probably be best to start in middle-school/junior high, and continue from there on through high school. And I would talk about feminism within that context, from both a personal, historical, and legislative perspective. I’d want all those young women hungry for the chance to register and vote when they turned eighteen. And I’d want ‘em hungry for a chance to continue the process of desegregating nontraditional fields.

    Your ideas here are straight up great. Local groups is the way to go because by localising female empowerment, it is more likely to feel personal and spread out due to word of mouth. That hunger you are talking about is what is lacking and so desperately needed.

  4. What an excellent post! I am also a tradeswoman, having began my apprenticeship as a Tool & Die Maker in 1984. I was the first woman in skilled trades in the multi-national company where I still work, and was the only one for about 10 years. After completing my apprenticeship I started getting more involved in my union. I could see the need for education for women to recognize the opportunities out there in skilled trades. I’ve done presentations at local high schools and other youth groups. I currently am a presenter at a week-long program negotiated by my union for women to learn about skilled trades. I also hold a position within my union representing women and minorities in situations of harassment and discrimination. And I have been involved in my local union’s women’s committee for a very long time, holding the position of chair for three terms, and as well I also sit on our national women’s committee.

    The reason I bring all this up is to show that for me I’ve found the easiest road to being a feminist-activist has been through my union and the labour movement. By being actively involved in my union I’ve been able to influence and present ideas for bargaining, whether it be for childcare or for contract language around domestic violence. By having the resources available to us from within the union, such as the research department, we are able to launch excellent campaigns in the larger political arena around these same issues.

    The tide has turned, and, in Canada at least, for the first time ever, more women are unionized than men. Women are recognizing the need to be organized and see unions as fighting for issues that are relevant and important to them. What better time to become a feminist-activist!

  5. I am a teacher, and in the classroom, I try to make a point of both using feminist pedagogy to encourage young women’s participation, including texts by women, explicitly including feminist analysis, and identifying myself as a feminist so that my students can’t run around thinking that feminists are scary monsters.

    That’s not organizing, though.

    Sez who? That sure the hell sounds like organizing to me!! (And BRAVA!! Bravissima!) I think we have to expand our idea of what constitutes organizing. Feminism isn’t a “card-carrying” movement like labor. It has a wider range. One can bring feminism to any setting, and here you are, bringing it to the classroom.

    By ensuring the participation of young women in class, by introducing them to educational resources designed by and for women, by identifying yourself as a feminist, and by hosting classroom dialogue from a feminist perspective—yeah, that’s feminist organizing. It sure the hell would be if it was taking place outside the classroom, so it can be organizing within the classroom, too.

    I think part of feminist organizing is getting away from the idea that feminist work is separate and apart from daily life. The last thing I want to do is go to another meeting—I’m all meetinged-out from the labor movement. And where I am located geographically, there isn’t going to be a feminist meeting I can attend anyway. I have to bring feminism to what I am already involved in, because there’s a time element too (still have to work, still have to make dinner, still have to do laundry, help a budding young feminist with her second-grade math and reading, go to karate class, lift weights, read, take a shower, etc.)

    EG, when I was in the eighth grade, I went to the ERA march in Chicago. Some women from my dad’s union were going, and I went with ’em. Throughout the year, I had the “pleasure” of going to an algebra class led by a male instructor who patronizingly told the female half of class in so many various ways that girls weren’t really any good at math anyway, so just try to skate by (no, he was emphatically not using reverse psychology). I had a male social studies teacher that used his classroom as a platform for trying to convince the young women present that our “proper” role was basically to be barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen; that we weren’t as intelligent as men (which made the world a sad, lonely place for the rare bright women), and that it was a waste of time for a woman to pursue higher education for any reason other than finding a marriageable man. He fit all that in between his John Birch screeds. Unfortunately, in that year, those were the most passionate teachers I had. A teacher like you would have made a tremendous difference in my life.

    Ghigau, I love the way Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz challenges white supremacy and classism from within and without feminist movement. I especially liked how she described the anti-war movement in Outlaw Woman; how it took a long while before there was a critical mass of people against the war. And I hear what you are saying about the diploma mills—we’ve got one here where I live. And there’s still a law on the books (and yes, it is enforced) about massage therapists getting tested periodically for STDs, as the assumption is that “massage therapist” is code for “prostitute”. And never be sorry for a lengthy comment!

    Aulelia, I’ve been loving your posts something fierce, though between writing and monitoring my own posts I haven’t been able to show that this week! Charcoal ink is definitely going to become one of my pit stops! Thank you.

  6. I would latch on to existing groups and try to make them better. I wouldn’t try to build more groups that take extra energy and may further fragment the movement. I’d get frustrated that the old groups move so slowly and people are resistant to change, but then I’d just take a break or find another group to latch onto.

    Personally, I’m interested in online activism. I am inspired by the web and I think it’s a great tool for organization. I think planting roots here online makes a ton of sense. The more we can do to make sure a search for “feminism” or “women’s rights” results in something positive and accurate in Google and Yahoo, the better we are as a movement. We’re building the international library online and as feminists we have a duty to make sure that library includes women’s history, women’s rights, equal opportunity, and that it’s free of sexism and misogyny.

    Side note: If I had the money, I’d be interested in doing research. I’d love to do sociology experiments. I think there is major room for scientific exploration in the areas of human relations and behaviors. And I have an inclination that plenty of that research can benefit women by exposing sexism and misogyny and by finding ways to effectively combat it. I think any endeavor can benefit from research and the feminist movement can certainly benefit from more research.

  7. I think that one of the biggest problems with any kind of organized feminist movement is the huge variety of opinions on what feminism means. For some people, it means changing words and erasing all traces of historical anti-womanism. For others, it means women becoming men with vaginas. For others, it means being “sexually liberated” so that you can still be a male sexual object, but now it’s my choice. These different opinions conflict with each other and, because each group feels fully justified in their own opinion, they are offended by the conflicting ones.

    A labour movement is different. I think most people in a union can agree on the fundamentals of what they want – good pay, good benefits, good safety on the job. But for women’s issues, the goals are much foggier.

    So that’s your first step – what IS feminism? What are our goals? “To end discrimination against women” is far too vague because thousands of years of discrimination have made the line between “natural” and “social construct” a very blurry one. Set concrete goals that we, as a unified movement, can work towards. I just don’t know how to do that with so many self-titled feminists with conflicting opinions, but if you come up with an answer, I’ll join your union.

  8. So that’s your first step – what IS feminism? What are our goals?

    Our goals are going to vary according to where/how we are situated. As life impacts us differently according to our other identities, our priorities for feminism will vary as well. A familiar feminist standard is that abortion rights is Number One, period. That if we’ve lost that, we’ve lost everything. But if you check out this survey of working women, and scroll down to the section “What is the Most Important Thing You Think Members of Congress Need to Understand About Working Women”, you’ll find that of eleven areas of concern, abortion was number eleven (the ranking is gleaned from analyzing keywords in written comments). What was the top concern in the written comments? Pay. In the fill-in-the-blank section, healthcare was number one. As far as the top three legislative priorities, that varied according to age and race; younger women were more concerned about balancing work and family obligations, older women about retirement. African-American women were more concerned about ending workplace discrimination.

    And doesn’t that make sense? It doesn’t mean one group of women are “wrong” and the other group “right”. They are prioritizing according to the immediate impact on their own lives and the lives of those they are close to. Straight-up Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

    My bottom line is critical mass. We need an increased number of women who identify and act on feminist concerns. We don’t need to worry about the ranking of priorities when we have the necessary numbers to insure a basic level of activism and allied support for all concerns. We don’t have that now, and we will continue to not have it if vast numbers of women continue to consider feminism to be the “white girls” movement, or the “middle class” movement, or even “my mother’s” movement. None of our priorities are secure without critical mass.

    Just like the labor movement, we need to get ’em in the door, and then give ’em something to do—something to do that meets their needs. And then they will stay. And more will join.

  9. Lauren, if I can stay a little while longer, I’d be more than happy to do a post on getting into the trades.

  10. Trust is not only sexist

    Trust is the basic stumbling block in all human endevour regardless of sex.

    To use the Union Movement as an example.

    These are typical widely held fears of unionization you must prove they have no merit.

    An employer would like to be good to its workers but wont gracefully cooperate with unionization because:
    It can’t trust the union is not performing illegal activities or are allied with organized crime.
    It can’t trust the union is not primarily a leftist orginization instead of protection for workers.
    It can’t trust the union to back up management on the few things that should be common sense and things they will have in common.

    The list can be similar for feminism. Can a woman trust the feminist movement not to hurt HER man. The rhetoric can get scary.

    Can the Feminist movement move beyond strict political ideology.
    Can a female small business owner running close to the line afford femininsm in her work place and how much will it cost? Can you show her in dollars and cents that she will not lose to the competition (which is her biggest worry) if she employs feminist principles. Remember she cannot lose clients and she cannot afford lost productivity or her business will fail.

    Answer these questions and you will be a long way towards reaching your critical mass.

  11. Thank you, La Lubu. I guess I think of organizing as something pointed, toward a specific goal: ERA, or union recognition, or something like that. But I really do appreciate your supportive words.

  12. If I could do any feminist organizing, I would continue working in welfare rights and all that entails. One of the biggest attractions of welfare rights organizing, for me, is that you are often able to see immediate results–a family who had their foodstamps withheld learns how to advocate to get their foodstamps back, for example. I also love the fact that many, many of the great welfare rights organizers are women (and some men) of color, and I welcome the chance to be part of a movement that is not led by white feminists.

    I believe that poverty in America is usually swept under the rug; there is more finger-pointing at women in poverty and women on welfare than workable solutions. I have loved and appreciated being part of the solution, even if it’s something as simple and immediate as getting one family their needed housing.

  13. Lauren, if I can stay a little while longer, I’d be more than happy to do a post on getting into the trades.

    Fine with me. I’m probably not going to be able to post for a few months due to the demands of a new job, so go for it.

  14. I’d love to read that post too! Especially if you have the time or inclination to address some of (small) initiatives that are happening–I know the bus stop near where I work (in NYC) has a billboard directed specifically at women encouraging them to get into carpentry, electricity, etc. It shows a woman in a hardhat holding a wooden beam, and says something like “The average salary in the trades is $53,000. Need we say more?” And then a hotline and some stuff about how the trades need women. Let me see if I can find a link. Here’s the website: http://www.new-nyc.org/

    I also read about a Rosie-the-Riveter day camp for girls on feministing.com, and saw that the same organization was offering basically apprenticeship courses for women in need: http://www.nnetw.org/

    I guess I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know, but I’m excited about this because not only does it improve women’s self-esteem and independence to be capable of such practical and important work, but because I think this could be a really important way to fight the feminization of poverty: rather than being tracked into pink-collar jobs which are usually ununionized, women could go into the unionized trades with all the benefits that accrue.

  15. Lubu, would you do a detailed post on how to get into the trades?

    Yes! And I would add in comments my experience in a state that is very, very weak in union membership and activity and how I got in the trades in spite of that.

  16. Speaking as a male feminist, I’d say that a necessary goal of any successful feminist movement has to be getting men involved as well.

    Among a depressing number of men “feminist male” is viewed as a contradiction in terms, and while a lot of that is simple homobigotry, a lot of it is a lack of understanding of basic feminist goals, as well as a failure to understand that patriarchy hurts men too (though to a vastly lesser extent than it does women).

    Don’t ignore 50% of the population when organizing for feminism. There are male feminists out there, and there are more men who are just a small bit of education away from becoming feminist.

    Whether the men are involved in the main group, or organized into a male auxuliry is a matter for debate, I can see arguments both directions. But making the term “feminist” unisex is critical. As long as feminism is viewed as something only of importance to women achieving feminist goals will always be an uphill battle.

  17. I’m a substitute teacher so I see all ages, and it’s shocking how early gender roles are imprinted on children. The key – I believe – is to get to both girls and boys and teach them to be equal. It’s a fine thing to teach girls and young women to be strong and independent, but the boys have to be taught that as well.

  18. Re: #13 — Oh, how cute! I’ve never seen a labor movement concern troll before.

    EG: … because I think this could be a really important way to fight the feminization of poverty: rather than being tracked into pink-collar jobs which are usually ununionized, women could go into the unionized trades with all the benefits that accrue.

    I know it’s not as immediate or as individual a solution, but unionizing pink-collar jobs is another important front for fighting the feminization of poverty and improving the status of predominately-female jobs.

  19. Steve, it’s an adversarial process because the NLRA demands that. A union working on winning an employer’s ‘trust’ during a campaign is probably committing an unfair labor practice.

    In regard to organizing men into feminism: I fervently believe organizing around ideals is for suckers. Good organizing begins with finding a concrete goal that would benefit your target community. Appeal to someone’s moral ideal and they’ll listen to you politely, appeal to someone’s self-interest and they’ll start making phone calls for you. There are lots of feminist issues that benefit men; I think a good one is access to child care. But equal pay, job access, birth control- is the payoff that a man’s going to see from working on these issues make it worth his time? Maybe his wife will bring home a bigger paycheck or hold off on having kids until they can handle it, and maybe you can convince a man to help out a little with those rewards in mind. But the wife, on the other hand, will work like a dog for HER bigger paycheck and HER monthly pack of pills.

    That’s my take on why feminist organizing should always focus on women. More bang for your organizing buck. Um, also women need more chances at leadership positions, and more value places on their female relationships and, more chances to define their goals and see them through to completion without depending on men. Those things too.

    Oh jesus, I wrote this comment on a saturday night. Next issue to organize around: fighting nerdy behavior.

  20. Carrie

    Thanks for the info

    I guess this is a shoulda woulda coulda thing.

    Anyway I am a capitolist at heart. I also unserstand that capitolism is value nuetral so a true capitolist must have a good solid moral philosophy or one is just a variation on brutal piracy.
    The left often thinks catitolism is the definition of piracy. This is wrong, what is right is that it can slide into Piracy just as solicialism can slide into dictatorial top down oppression.

    We all have to watch which direction the skids are greased

    Steve

  21. Yes, let’s all sit around and talk about how and why feminism isn’t as welcoming as it could be and put the rest on the back burner.

    Good work continues to be done when feminists grow and change through action. Talk is cheap.

  22. Carrie I can see that POV, but I think its ultimately shortsighted and not very successful.

    Note that, regrettably, the vast majority of those in government are male. Therefore it requires getting male votes to pass feminist legislation, which argues for making “feminist” a gender-neutral term and educating men to become feminist. Ideally, of course, women would be equally represented in government which would give feminist causes greater traction. Until that’s achieved, however, its necessary to enlist male votes to the cause.

    But as long as men percieve feminism to be something of use and value only to women, any political action taken by feminists must first overcome the male apathy that is inevitable as long as feminism is closed to them.

    Remember Kos and his assinine behavior re: feminism? That’s what making feminism exclusively, or even primarially, for women results in.

    I’m not arguing that feminist groups shouldn’t focus primarially on recruiting women, of course they should. As you point out women are the most direct beneficiaries of feminism. But men do benefit as well, and male involvement will make achieving the goals of feminism vastly easier.

  23. i agree with Carrie’s idea that organizing should be around specific issues, rather than general principles. applied to feminism, i think this also works better because there are so many varieties of feminism. i do agree with La Lubu that solidarity and critical mass are important, so there needs to be enough agreement to get a large number of people together, but we’re never going to get all feminists to agree on more than a very vague set of general principles.

    i also agree that men should get involved with feminist issues, but i don’t think women should spend much time on this effort. unfortunately, i think women have to work under the assumption that men are not going to be of much help, until this is proven not to be the case. so this effort should be led by men.

    personally i think men who believe in womanist/feminist principles should spend our time trying to convince other men of two things: 1) that men also have alot to gain from feminism, 2) that because men have power and control in society men have caused the problems feminism seeks to allieviate, thus we have a moral obligation to support women, and thus feminism.

    so i would implore any man who is reading this to GET ACTIVE.

    one obvious issue that fits under #2 above is sexual assault prevention. sexual assault is a men’s issue: whether the victim is a man or woman, the vast majority of perpetrators are men. thus, it is the moral responsibility of men to stop rape.
    one very needed step a single man can take is to start a Men Against Sexual Assault group on your college campus. i don’t think we can overestimate how important this is. unfortunately, there are still so many men who just don’t take this issue seriously, and some of them that refuse to listen to women on this issue. i have seen the stunned look on men’s faces when they hear a man say that sexual assault is huge problem.

    college campuses are one place where rape is not only accepted, but almost normalized. many young men have been so badly socialized they honestly do not recognize that getting a woman so drunk she will not resist their sexual advances is rape, and again, they will often dismiss this idea when they hear it from a woman, or even an older man. what’s needed is male peers to make this obvious point to each other.

    (let me make it clear, men SHOULD listen to women on this issue. i am not excusing their unwillingness to listen to women on issues affecting women. however, because it seems so many men won’t listen to women, men have an obligation to speak to them.)

    this is an area where one man can make a difference. i hate to quote a politician, but i love Barrack Obama’s line that “one voice can change a room.” when it comes to the maltreatment of women by men, this is absolutely the case. one man, or especially a group of men, can really change the climate on this issue. so please, men, if you want to help the much-needed feminist revolution, TALK TO OTHER MEN!

  24. brad jackson, i am amazed at how often i see self-proclaimed male feminists whose primary argument for what feminism should do to achieve tactical sustainability is re-focus energy on appealing to men. truly feminist men i have known have understood that feminist values benefit them, without having to make a big stink about the way patriarchy hurts them or the way some aspects of feminism potentially marginalize their involvement, & that is the kind of male support i want to see within the feminist movement: men that can be supportive, active, & understanding without shifting focus on to themselves & the crucial role they imagine themeselves to play. encouraging the feminist movement to devote itself to recruiting men into the movement & educating men on how feminism will benefit them is a very deceptive patriarchal machination. men have a responsibility to educate THEMSELVES, & i see no reason to appeal to the oppressor.

  25. I think we have very different conceptions of what successful organizing would look like.
    The organizing I’m talking about is not about going to people with power and convincing them of the correctness of your views. Organizing is about going to the less powerful, finding out what they’d like to change about their lives, and thinking strategically about how the group can make that happen.
    I think talk of ‘educating’ people to become feminist is condescending. Call your group feminist and then do something that improves some lives, and that’ll do far more to spread the label of feminist than any essay or seminar.
    I’m not talking about who gets to call themself a feminist- I think that ongoing argument is kind of boring. I’m talking about strategic grassroots organizing and where feminist organizers should focus if they want to get stuff done. You knock on a random man’s door, he probably has not thought enough about whether he gets to call himself a feminist to get insulted about it. And it’s not like you knock on people’s doors and say, “Hey, I’m here from the feminist movement, is your wife here, because you’re kind of the enemy.” You say, “Hey, I’m from this group trying to get this program going, would you be interested in helping us? No? But your wife is around? Oh great, could you get her for me?”
    It would be a waste of time to stand there lecturing the guy on why access to birth control is so important when there’s another person in the picture who already gets what you’re talking about and would be way more excited about it.
    But I don’t want to exclude men. I just think why try to convince men to join in when there’s so many women who don’t need convincing, they just need someone helping them figure out how things in their community get changed.

  26. Remember Kos and his assinine behavior re: feminism? That’s what making feminism exclusively, or even primarially, for women results in.

    Wait. Kos’s assholish sexism is feminism’s fault for not doing more to reach out to him? Funny, I would have thought that his sexism was the fault of his own male privilege.

  27. EG poor phrasing on my fault, sorry. As I reread my comment this morning I noticed that it sounded like I was blaming feminism for his assholery. I’m not.

    I’m saying that its easier for that kind of attitude to exist when feminism is percieved as a woman-only hobbyhorse as opposed to a broader political movement. Kos’ assholery is no one’s fault but his own.

    Carrie wrote “The organizing I’m talking about is not about going to people with power and convincing them of the correctness of your views. Organizing is about going to the less powerful, finding out what they’d like to change about their lives, and thinking strategically about how the group can make that happen.”

    Well, at this point in history making stuff happen requires the votes of elected government officials who are, close to universally, male.

    Look at the history of feminism and you’ll note that every single legislative success has required convincing male legislators to pass pro-feminist laws. Every. Single. One.

    Take for example women’s sufferage. Women got the vote thanks to endless hours of thankless and often dangerous work by feminist activists, who were almost exclusively women. But those efforts were devoted to convincing men to voting for universal sufferage.

    Which sucks, and things shouldn’t be that way, but you can’t fight on the basis of the way things should be.

    Again, I’m not trying to say that feminist activists need to make a big fuss about involving men. I am saying that an effort to make the term feminist gender neutral will produce huge dividinds. “Women’s rights are human rights” was, from my POV one of the most brilliant slogans ever invented.

    Right some (many?) of the men who support feminist causes and goals are reluctant to call themselves feminist. Homophobia and fear of homophobes plays a large role, both of which are of, course, rooted in patriarchy: since “feminist” is percieved as a women’s thing then being feminist is percieved as feminizing and plays right into the patriarchial and homophobic male fear of being seen as feminine. Which means that your male allies, or at least those without the whatittakes to say screw that crap, are afraid to even publically express support, much less take the label feminist.

    I’m saying that if feminism is percieved, correctly, as having benefits for men, and for being a term that can apply equally to men and women, then even men with no particular empathy, or sympathy for anyone but themselves, will support feminist goals. I think success is achieved, to a large extent, by changing the way people view your goals so that they are seen as having a universal appeal.

    Right now most Americans, including a large number of women, see feminism as an oddball little movement that has no bearing on their lives, does nothing for them, and is purely the hobbyhorse of a small collection of women. This is, of course, fueled in large part by the right wing noise machine. Still we can’t win if that’s the way people see the movement. Directly challenging the, false, perception that feminism is a hobbyhorse for women not a big important thing like international diplomacy (or whatever) strikes me as the most effective way to achieve the goals of feminism.

    Because feminism *is* big and important that means quickly and efficiently implementing our legal objectives will make dozens, hell maybe hundreds, of other problems easier to deal with, and help solve the underlying problem of rooting out the patriarchy from our culture. Its a win/win scenario, we achieve the good of implementing feminism (which is good and necessary simply in and of itself), and like achieving most good and necessary things it’ll make other problems simpler to solve.

  28. hmmmm…..

    feminism as something for women only == oddball little hobbyhorse.

    I don’t think that’s what I’m saying, but maybe I haven’t gotten rid of all of the memetic toxins introduced by my upbringing in a patriarchy centered society.

    I’m trying to say that universal appeal, and universal applicability of terms (feminist) helps any movement, including feminism. But my choice of language disturbs me.

  29. “Well, at this point in history making stuff happen requires the votes of elected government officials who are, close to universally, male.”

    This is so very wrong in so many ways. Politicians don’t write the laws, the people demand the laws that politicians are forced to write.

    I’m not talking in some abstract way, either. I’m talking about people in the streets, messing things up, making it impossible for politicians to remain in power without changing the laws. To claim that suffrage came about because men became convinced by the sacrifices of women is absurd.

    In fact, women made heroic sacrifices that messed up the system enough so that everyday Americans realized that without changing the laws, life would never be peaceful and safe again. In fact, most politicians remained unconvinced that suffrage was a good thing. They did, however, know that they would not be able to maintain power without granting women the vote.

    To be clear, the difference is what political tactics threaten power and what political tactics do not threaten power. I could care less what a politician believes. What I care about is her actions.

    The very same politicians who supported racism prior to 1964 remained in power after the Civil Rights Act was made law. They didn’t change their minds at all. They realized that continuing to enforce the laws was not going to work on the streets any more.

  30. Ravenmn, I completely agree with you about what an organizer’s attitude towards politicians should be. You don’t waste any time convincing them of anything other than their lives are going to become more difficult if they don’t get on board with your program.
    Brad, it still sounds to me like you’re talking about marketing, not organizing. Marketing is really important, and I think your concerns are relevant for how big national organizations present themselves. But organizing takes place on a way smaller scale. I’m a big fan of Saul Alinsky’s method.
    Here’s a question for everybody: since it’s so important to cull the issues you organize around from the concerns of the community, what do you do when those are not ‘feminist’ issues? For example, what if you go into a community thinking they need a women’s health clinic, and it turns out what everyone is worried about is foreclosures? Do you organize around the foreclosures and hope that someday you can organize around the clinic? Or do you stick with the clinic?

Comments are currently closed.