I’ve always sort of liked Jacqueline Bisset, but after reading this interview with her… I think it’s comparable to how I feel about Helen Mirren. Helen Mirren is fabulous, strong, beautiful… and she says wacky and sometimes offensive things in interviews. Maybe it’s that women of a certain age have difficulty explaining their complicated views on sexuality and equality and such? Perhaps. Anyway, Bisset is 70 years old and she has some thoughts about feminism and ladies’ issues.
Bisset on aging: “Shine a light on an oil painting from the front and it looks wonderful. Shine a light on it from the side and it looks really craggy and peculiar. That’s the way I feel about my face now. It is craggy, and I’m both proud of that and scared by it. As an actress you can try and hang on to your image by being lit very carefully – and end up looking amazingly young. But obviously I’m never going to ask for that. In life. I suppose I’m afraid of being discounted. And there are times now when I feel completely invisible in the street.”
On feminism: “Women are becoming so tough. I have never fully embraced feminism. I certainly thought it had some good points, but…” But women whinge too much nowadays? “Well I don’t know, but I think they probably do. Then again, women take on too much so of course they whinge, because they’re absolutely exhausted. That’s our mistake, always wanting to be perfect.”
She’s “rebellious”? “When I met the first man I had a real relationship with, other women would ask: ‘Why do you do everything for him when you’re not married?’ When I explained that I liked to take care of him, they would say: ‘Marry someone rich, then you won’t have to do that.’ What a peculiar idea! Never for one second was that my goal. But maybe that’s because I’m a rebellious type.”
Beauty, attraction, romance: ” Girls today are so attractive and sexy, and they show themselves off in such an obvious way, so men feel that they are in a sweet shop. The flip side of that is that women see themselves as interchangeable. I feel that this obsession to be ‘hot’ is more prevalent than it ever was in my youth. It’s not ‘I want to be charming and magical and romantic and beautiful’. It’s ‘I want to be hot’. In other words: ‘I want men to want to screw me.’ Desperation, isn’t it? Because they don’t really want to deal with the results and often end up feeling used. I went through a period like that. When I dressed and behaved in a certain way, I couldn’t handle the results: it didn’t take me where I wanted to be. So I started to be more low-key and I got better relationships as a consequence.”
Well… that’s interesting. I guess. It should be noted that she didn’t start to use the word “whinge” (in America, we would say “whine”) until the interviewer provided her with that opening. She’s right about some things, like women wanting to be perfect and women wanting it all, etc. But she’s also giving us some Get Off My Lawn Realness when she’s talking about ladies today wanting to be “hot” and that leading to men using them or whatever that argument is. Maybe she should have thought harder about becoming a feminist?
PS… Fun fact: Bisset is Angelina Jolie’s godmother. Bisset was close friends with Angie’s mom Marcheline Bertrand. Bisset and Jolie are reportedly still close.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Did i miss something,why is everyone talking about feminism all of a sudden?
LOL
I was thinking the same thing. It just shows how boring so many of these people actually are. They all just latch on to ONE thing that is being talked about. I can name at least 10 celebrities that have given and interview about feminism or mentioned it in an interview. And the vast majority of them don’t know what the hell they are talking about.
I feel like feminism is the new celebrity cause du jour, just as AIDS, “Africa” and environmentalism were before.
I think they are being asked, FWIW.
Yep.
Exactly! And sometimes I think the journalist really wants to know, and other times I think it’s trolling. There are times when the celebrity being asked wouldn’t know left from right. I highly doubt they have any valuable thoughts on feminism.
It seems to have become a staple question in interviews because editors know the answers will generate attention.
I guess every single woman in Hollywood has to declare now. Nobody is asking the men though. I am a guy and I can be sexist sometimes without thinking but isn’t it sexist to only ask women this question? Isn’t basic equality of opportunity what every gender wants?
Loopy….and CB and everyone…please excuse an emergency hijack, but I’ve just read the saddest news:
Deborah, the Dowager Duchess of Devonshire has died, at 94.
I’m crying my eyes out, she was my tip top favourite lady. RIP lovely Debo. xx
Sorry about barging in, thought some of you would care to know.
🙁
I have no clue who she is, but condolences.
So sorry to hear that.
Kiddo, GNAT
Being very Anglocentric I’m
afraid! (Though there are interesting links with both JFK and his sister, Kick)
x
She was the last surviving Mitford sister
Chris2: i’m crying too. I bought her recent book from a charity shop yesterday so i’m was spooked when I heard that she’d died.
She may have been the last Mitford, but she was as magnificent as the recent. RIP Debo.
Thank you for the news. I was just wondering about her the other day when I saw her book at the library. It was a good read and she lead a fascinating life.
Well its definitely the topic after feminists faked threats to Emma Watson to try to gain sympathy for their cause.
What is so offensive about working for the equal rights of both sexes? Is that whining, seriously? Her comment about perfection…according to who(?); in a society that changes every 5 or 10 years, in their assessment of that. I was also shocked about her statement of the “toughness” of women; it’s even amusing. We should hook her up to Sojourner Truth, and then ask her about whining. For the record I am theoretically a radical feminist, while I would be described as gentle and very feminine. (and sexy!) Feminism is not anti man, mother, or sexualities.
“faked threats to Emma Watson”
Head/desk.
.
Radical feminism seems to be a catch-all phrase for angry feminists. In the inception of the National Organization of Women, its conservative members objected to NOW’s push for permissive contraception and abortions laws. Radical members were angered by NOW’s failure to support women’s sexual rights, particularly the right to choose among heterosexual, bisexual, and lesbian life-styles. Betty Friedan was among those she allegedly termed “a lavender menace”, because as she saw it, they alienated mainstream society for feminists in general.” We still are alienated by the mere term, radical. Yet, the inception for the recovery of gay rights, began here, with “radical” feminism.
Well, Mia, if you are speaking about the threat to release naked photos, that hoax was done by a group of internet spammers that are not feminists, but a group of guys who capitalize on internet trends. The story was in the Washington Post.
If you know of something else, then please let us in on it.
And “gain sympathy for their cause?” The cause where women want to be treated equally? That women could no longer be fired for being pregnant? That they could serve on juries? That men could no longer have complete control over the the marital property? That sexual harassment is wrong and creates a hostile work environment? The employers firing an employee for reporting sexual harassment was considered unlawful retaliation?
If people did not fight for their rights, then African American’s would still be considered property, would be using separate bathrooms, would not be able to own property, could not vote, and would be riding in the back of the bus.
People of the same sex would still be living in the shadows for fear of being beaten, without repercussion. They could not envision marriage with the person they love.
We have a long way to go in this country…in the world. But it takes people having the courage to use their voice. There will always be people who will oppose …but we still fight the good fight, because it is worth it.
@mia
That is false as Elle Kaye already showed. The reality is that women are targeted by threats of violence everyday for simply talking. Just look up Anita Sarkeesian. She has been sent death threats and rape threats for years. And for what? Oh because she critiques video games. She is not taking away anyone’s games or forcing companies to change them. She is just critiquing the tropes regarding women. But trolls that are mostly male, from places like 4chan and reddit, have decided to threaten her reputation, body, and life over it. Some of those threats, have been so serious that she has had to involve law enforcement.
Well said Wolfpup. The specter of lesbianism spreading to young women and girls, stopped the movement in its tracks (thanks Phyllis Schlafly!) . We would be further along if people didn’t associate feminism with man-hating gay women. I’m a feminist and I love men.
As for Ms Bisset and Mirren, I think these two women had doors open to them because of their looks, so they never had to fight ‘too’ hard. Perhaps their world view is that since it wasn’t so bad for them, it shouldn’t be so bad for others?
But ask Streisand her views and you’ll get a different story. While beautiful and gorgeous, IMO, she had to fight the conventional wisdom that said a woman who looked like her couldn’t be beautiful. A woman couldn’t direct a movie. I woman couldn’t produce a movie.
I really wish some of these women would put themselves in other women’s shoes. So while they (perhaps) didn’t have it hard, they’d (hopefully) feel different if they walked a mile in the shoes of women who are harassed everyday at a job they can’t quit. Women who do the same job, have to feed and shelter the same number of dependents but take home less pay.
I am currently writing an essay sort of about feminism, not my choice of topic (the relation between poverty, lower paying and valued jobs and being female), and even within feminism there are different schools of thought.
1) make everything equal because we have the right to equality
2) embraces the differences between men and women, but begin to value what women have to offer a bit more, and incorporate those strengths into curriculum, books, leadership values etc.
and 3) men and women are different, women are all different, men are all different, lets just make opportunity for everyone.
The more frequent talking points that the media is covering/asking is making feminism old, redundant and ugh. I wish there were some really interesting, great conversations about moving opportunities, access to better pay, dialogue etc. forward. And not between celebrities who have not explored the topic and journalists who have no idea how to bring forth a compelling topic. How can we provide women more opportunities to make a boatload of money to pay for education or business startup other than stripping if that isn’t what they feel comfortable doing, while men get to go work in the oilfields, diamond mines, truck driving, pipe fitting and so on and so on. Because the conversation should be moving our understanding forward and providing solutions to problems, not trying to create quotes that redefine a valuable conversation.
Those are some great suggestions and ideas.
I think we can expand on that further in terms of human value as a whole. Why do CEOs and owners deserve enormously disparate pay checks while the lowest rung of that workforce is struggling to exist? Why do white collar criminals pay fines to the government while low level offenders are sent to jail, and statistically, predominately by race?
Even if you would like to advocate for entrepreneurial spirit, again, the value of that person by class, gender, race or ethnicity may severely impact how reliable that person is perceived and what kind of financial backing they will receive. Case in point: Donald Trump. He has had enormous business failure but consistently gets backing. Injustices abound, and it has a great deal to do with perception of people and how they are defined as less equal, less valuable, and not based on what they have actually contributed to society or could contribute to society.
This video may offer a fresh perspective – it is good documentary on the subject of gender. It would be interesting to know what feminism would make of this as well.
Gender Change – Full Episode With Sound !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hjIeg1tE68
If you find this offensive, I see her point about “whinging.” To be sure, offensiveness is subjective but to me it’s less offensive than your ageist jab in there.
There IS a particularly loud sect of women branding themselves as feminists that go beyond wanting gender equality and just wanting everyone to change habits, merely because they feel offended (remember…just because your knee jerk reaction is to be offended, doesn’t mean you’re right). And in doing so, they’re actually making people reluctant to call themselves feminists.
+1
In my opinion,Mirren and Bisset are not against or for feminism because they were/ are feminist without to think to be or pursue to be .Just the fact that they didn’t have kid or they have a career or have a sexual life .They chose their life fully.
Their actions and lifestyles are feminist-driven.
Maybe these women were just too busy with their careers to focus on the matter. There has always been backlash against feminism, and it disavowal continues by juxtaposing and obscuring and degrading the theory with men, mothers, sex and religion. This is not new!!! And what better spokesperson could the powers that be have, than their fame w*ores. (sorry – I couldn’t think of a better word)
The discussion has always been about power; who has it, and who does not (will not and cannot).
@wolfpup Well said. I cannot remember a time in my life when there was not a back lash against feminism nor a time when the bulk of power was not in the hands of men.
As you climb the management ladder even in areas with a large female work force like the UK Health system and social care the higher you climb up the echelons of management the more the men are the predominant members of management meetings and many have never even worked with the people they are making decisions for.
All the talk about sexuality and how feminists are perceived as man haters is more about deflection from the heart of the issue. Many years ago I sat with a group of nurses and doctors at a clinic where the mostly male doctors were advocating that women should and could take on more responsibility which was fine in principle but when I suggested that the salary were also equalised out not one doctor spoke out in favour.
I do agree with men and women being able to define their personnel characteristics with out facing prejudice but I also believe that until we have a balance in the power structure women will be a tendency to perceive women as the supporting sex.
Well, Mirren may not be against feminism on the whole but I lost a lot of respect for her, when as a woman who experienced sexual abuse, she still said in an interview that rape was a problem to be settled between a man and woman. I know she’s older and some older women still have a certain mindset but when I still hear young men AND women saying the government shouldn’t get involved in sexual disputes between a husband and wife and one male college student actually said in a class (made up mostly of women) that a “husband can’t rape his wife by definition of the word,” and none of girls wanted to argue with him about it until I prodded for a counter argument, then it’s still a problem.
The first day I asked how many students would identify themselves as feminists, only two students in a class of 28 (24 girls: 4 boys) raised their hands. A lot the girls actually looked around nervously, like they were embarrassed to raised their hands. It’s slowly becoming a taboo among a lot young women to self identify as a feminist. If we’re not careful it’ll be the new “f-word” everyone is avoiding.
That’s the thing that a lot of people won’t acknowledge.
A lot of people reject the “feminism means equality” definition not because they’re uneducated, but because they look around and see it being practised as something completely different.
People are very quick to jump on anybody who rejects feminism, but if the feminist movement wants to improve it’s PR problem, it has to start directing some of its criticism towards the crazies in its ranks.
I have no problem admitting that I’m pro-equality and I’m definitely in favour of fighting injustices where they exist. But some people invent the stupidest things to be offended by, and I would rather not adopt the victim mentality that a lot of the Social Justice Warrior types seem to represent.
Be the change. If the feminist movement is beaten down successfully and rights go down hill, and the militant types drove the bus, then everyone suffers and then no one gets a pass for not changing the dialogue.
thank you emily. i wrote this in the other thread when i read the quote “you are either a feminist or you hate women” i was sitting there with an open mouth.
you are either with us or against us is not a good way to present a movement.
what do you think people will think about feminists who say something like that? thats very dangerous black and white world view.
after reading all that i appreciate Emma Watsons speech even more. Emma opened her arms and tried not to alienate valuables allies.
also if feminists want men to take care of other men, feminists should take care of other feminists. not always say “every movement has its extremists”. that is true and i dont judge a movement on that. but i do judge a movement on how it deals with its extremists. there is too little criticism against feminist extremists in the movement. they ruin the reputation.
i see lots of feminists taking down other feminists but usually because they dont agree about certain policies or because they get the media darling (will happen to Emma too, wait for it), not because they actually are just attacking people and pushing newbies away.
Emma really did a good thing: Trying to understand why people dont want to be seen as feminists. thats a lot more mature way of thinking instead of labeling people who dont want to label themselves as woman haters.
feminism definitely has a PR problem. being more open and empathetic in the way of communication does not mean giving up key points of ones ideology. if you want to change the world you will need to get people onboard. Persuade them with your idea instead of attacking them.
I guess the main problem for me is the outright rejection of feminism often reeks of a distorted privilege.
I mean, it’s great that you have the luxury to reject feminism, but understand that women in other countries are still fighting for their freedoms. It might not matter to you because it doesn’t directly impact your life but feminism IS still very viable and warranted. Having other women (and ideally men) declare their support DOES impact the ability of women in oppressed countries to affect cultural change.
It just seems like *some* (please note that I said *some*) women would rather remain willfully ignorant about the true definition of feminism and it’s implications in modern-day society than to form a concise and thoughtful argument about why they do/don’t support it.
@TheOriginalKitten, I feel like the hatred for the movement is sometimes greater than the concern for others, or even any sense of gratitude for the past sacrifices and progress, in some cases. It’s like: I’m up, Jack, pull the ladder up. Pointing out the negatives, ONLY, in some instances, some people don’t say what they actually stand FOR, only what they are against, and how does that benefit anyone? I’m not addressing anyone specifically in this thread. Just a general observation.
@TheOriginalKitten
Maybe I’m putting words into her mouth, but I think it wasn’t a rejection of feminism at all, more of a rejection of a subset of “feminists” (I don’t think they deserve that term, personally) who think if you criticize anything they say at all – no matter how reasonable and valid your point is – then you are anti-feminist and anti-woman. To me, that is dangerously blind and misguided and risks the very movement we all claim to stand for. If one is supposed to be about gender equality and that woman need a stronger voice, why are they so quick to vilify another woman, simply because she disagrees with some of their extremist viewpoints that actually fly in the face of gender equality?
I do think that these extremists ARE necessary because they really help get the issue into the public discussion (hey, it takes all types!), but for the above reasons, I also find them dangerous to feminism.
EDIT: Just saw @Kiddo’s response. If it wasn’t obvious, I am a feminist who is for gender equality and I do sincerely believe the word “feminism” is still necessary because women simply aren’t treated as equals yet (just look at pay gaps!). But, I think it’s also good to question myself and really think about what my positions – and others’ who identify as feminists – mean in the grand context. Constant reevaluation is necessary because if we don’t, society will just write us off as unreasonable crazypants (which some “feminists” truly are…every movement has its extremist sector) and our goals will take even longer to reach.
I always hear about these “fringe” and “extremist feminists”, but I have yet to see comments from them or read articles or interviews with them.
I would correct them if I could, but it seems many exist in Rush Limbaugh’s neighborhood and not mine.
“If one is supposed to be about gender equality and that woman need a stronger voice, why are they so quick to vilify another woman, simply because she disagrees with some of their extremist viewpoints that actually fly in the face of gender equality?”
I completely agree, Mira. We really need open discussion and room for differing opinions in order to make progress.
@Kiddo-Yes, sometimes it seems like they’re just putting their fingers in their ears and ignoring what could be an informative discourse because they don’t want to be lumped in with a term that they perceive to be negative. Yet they refuse to do the legwork to actually understand what that terms means. But part of that is the way some feminists shout or intimidate instead of calmly elucidating. I can be guilty of that so no shade, but it really does comes from a place of frustration, not anger. But Mira is right that re-evaluating how I approach others who disagree with the feminist movement is essential in getting the message across.
Also, just to be clear, I was using “you” in place of “one”. My comment wasn’t meant to address any particular person here directly.
@Tiffany 🙂 I’m not trying to be snide here, but your comment is a slight case of what I’m talking about. Clearly me and other commenters have stated we feel that despite the fact that we stand for gender equality, there are others under the label feminists who advocate beyond gender equality. That’s a valid opinion to have. By you comparing me to Rush Limbaugh, a deplorable man who is anti-feminist, you are ridiculing and belittling our positions (fellow feminists) instead of thoughtfully considering why we might feel this way. I purposely did not bring up what I consider to be extremist viewpoints because they incite volatile discussions on both sides, and I didn’t want the discussion to turn into that.
@TheOriginalKitten: I always mix up “you” and “one”…no worries!
EDIT: @Tiffany, I was trying to recreate the little smiley face after your name, not put in a trollface!
@Mira, I think reevaluation and thought are necessary all the time. Critical thinking is important. But some people express anger and anger only. But if they are living in this country, they have enjoyed the benefits of the movement at least to some extent, and I don’t see some of those people even acknowledging that. They appear to believe that they arrived at this freer place in the country all by themselves without the work of those before them, including some of the crazy ones. It’s an outright rejection of everything, without at least some context of history and how they benefited from that history.
Now, if they think feminism isn’t needed anymore, and they ‘have enough’, then they should just be straight forward enough to say that. Or, again, acknowledge the gifts they received from this movement, excellent PR or not.
ETA: I agree with @Tiffany :). I hear more about radical feminists from people rejecting and berating radical feminism than I actually hear radical feminists themselves, so there’s that.
And I’m done on this thread. Gonna go find mimif and have fun. mimifism.
Mira, I wasn’t trying to lump you in with Rush. He is in a league all of his own!
My point was rather that I always hear second hand about the extremists, but I have yet to come across them myself. I am told that the extremists voices are so loud and over powering that the “feminism = equality” folks are drown out of the conversation, yet for some reason I haven’t even heard these loud voices. If they really are that loud, overbearing and dominant in discussions about this topic, why aren’t there specific examples instead of generalizations?
t think that many don’t understand what a feminist is: rather I am hearing remarks about the way that ideas are presented. There are schools of feminist thought. This includes Liberal Feminism, Radical and Libertarian feminism, Marxist and Socialist Feminism; Psychoanalytic and Gender Feminism; Existentialist Feminism, Postmodern Feminist, Multicultural and Global Feminism, and Ecofeminism. Such great thinking is being done by women for women! Why is it so hard for women to be for themselves?
Back in the day, women who were working for women’s issues, called this part of the struggle, “consciousness raising”. It seems as though this is still a mission statement in the world that we are living in today. All feminists who eye-roll about the of the insufficient understanding around this issue, must keep on going; this is what we do. We continue to work that a better world may come into being. We can educate voters; and well as women who seek the dignity of all persons.
@Kiddo
I understand what you’re saying, but I’m willing to bet that those on the other side of the debate feel the inverse of what you feel!
I also understand what you’re saying about certain people not appreciating that it takes radicals to get us to the point that we have today. But at the same time, is that more hurt feelings or do you legitimately believe they don’t appreciate it? This is a sincere question – I’m just coming from the line of thinking that people shouldn’t have to qualify every argument they make with “I appreciate what the radical feminists did but…” I agree that not all people fall under this category, but it’s worth pausing to read between the lines a little more to see if they’re actually being ignorant or just feel that they don’t need to qualify their statements every time.
Lastly, and again, I’m not trying to be snide here, but just as food for thought (and you may feel that you have already thought critically about this) but if there are many people (such as me) who claim they feel marginalized by the radical feminists and wrongfully attacked by them AND who genuinely seem sane feminists (I hope I do, but I’m biased!) and if your initial reaction is that you haven’t the foggiest of what they’re talking about…well, maybe that’s a hint to consider their points more. We don’t have to agree on every last point, but to call someone anti-woman or anti-feminist (not that you have toward me, but others have done this to me and others on these comment threads) just because they aren’t in complete agreement…well, that’s just a detriment to the feminist movement.
Enjoy your mimifism! I need to stop procrastinating on this essay…
@Tiffany…fair point, sorry for my misunderstanding. Personally, for me, it comes out in what I consider to be the smaller squabbles of feminism (e.g., catcalling, which broadly, I personally believe is a gray area (assuming certain factors aren’t at play, like being alone at night) and it’s squabbles like these that people like Rush Limbaugh can easily exploit and in the interest of practicality, I think we have bigger fish to fry right now than a jerk on the corner). I understand people may not agree with that, and that’s OK, but I’ve been countlessly attacked and told that I’m a terrible woman and not a feminist for having this viewpoint.
My point is to give you an example. I’m not saying issues like that shouldn’t be discussed at all or that I necessarily must be right, but to be attacked like that by people who say they also support gender equality and women’s rights has, at times, given me second thoughts about whether I should be calling myself a feminist.
As @wolfpup says though, these are internal issues on how to present ourselves. But I really do resent the inference that because I don’t agree on certain particulars then I’m uneducated and don’t understand feminism. Just because one is more radical in what one considers needs to be changed in the name of feminism doesn’t mean one is a better feminist.
And to a certain extent, I think women are much more cautious in how we present ourselves, which is why we’re having these types of debates. Just in the workplace, I’ve noticed that women, including myself, tend to think a little bit more than men before they speak, not wanting to be wrong or look stupid. This may be a biological factor, a social construct, or a both. I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing, but it goes back to what I was saying before…we need to pick our primary goal (for me, gender equality) and go all the way for that. We need to figure out which are the issues that are truly important to our cause (more women in powerful positions, pay, etc., at least to me) and advocate those. In my opinion, getting enraged at each other because they disagree whether a man calling a woman beautiful on the street in the middle of the day is OK, weakens our stance against the Rush Limbaughs of the world.
Funny how we interpret Emma’s speech differently, I did not hear her suggesting that feminists had a PR problem -in fact the opposite. She suggested that the problem lies with how some people perceived feminists and the benefits of bioth men and women feeling free to be different.
To me women like Jacqueline Bisset live in a very cocooned world reinforced by their talent and their perceived beauty. They are not really in touch with women who struggle to survive financially, who are carers as well as part of the work force without the benefit of a income which allows them to employ nannies to help with the pressures.
@Mira, the thing is that not one of those people ever qualified that they appreciated the past sacrifices, not one. Most put no thought into the possible necessity of the angry feminist at any point in time, aside from yourself, who, you seem to me, to be willing to appreciate some aspects of the movement while not liking others. I think not acknowledging the value and only trashing certain ‘types’ as a reason to dismiss feminism outright, is more about perceived slights without historical context and without giving credit where it is due. I don’t think it’s ignorance, though, Mira, I think it’s cognitive dissonance. Because the rights they enjoy might have been handed to them by some of the same types they dislike today, but they wouldn’t hand those rights back.
I didn’t say I haven’t the foggiest in re radicals, I said that the pervasiveness of this radical faction seems to be extraordinarily exaggerated, not that it doesn’t exist. It’s a handy excuse at times to dismiss, In the same manner that people call Obama a ‘socialist” (which couldn’t be further from the truth, BTW, corporatist to the core). I think that, often times, when people are told to control their tone, It’s a way of exercising control. There are times to be nice and times to go ape-shit. You need to pick those battles wisely, but not all discussions and not all arguments deserve to be handled equally and in gentle ways. Men know this and women know this too, but they think rudeness from other women is more of ‘a sin’. Feminism isn’t saying that every damn thing anyone says is equal and treated as such with kid gloves. It says we have the right to be equal, that doesn’t mean you have to agree and support every other thing someone says or thinks because they are female.
If a conversation veers off into what I would coin the tiny Jezebelian-argument, just for the sake of argument, and practicing college studies alone, and it isn’t going to impact the larger goal, then I remove myself from the discourse because it is a waste of time and it is a tiny skirmish, it isn’t a battle I choose to engage in. In those cases, my involvement only further indicates some greater significance than what should be given to the subject at all.
I do not see any radical feminists walking around “man-hating.” Simply, where are they, and what are they saying? (It’s not hear-say that I’m looking for). Perhaps they are saying that there are women, who do not seek to be defined by their relationship with men; beginning with Adam. I understand that is radical, but maybe you’ll agree that one has to think outside of the box, to make it bigger. Some amazing souls have done just that. Feminism is philosophizing to a great extent: it isn’t neatly packaged, because it requires participation.
The right of women to control their own bodies is still debated; yet we were carried to this point by feminists. There is still much work to do before all of women’s educational, legal, and professional/occupational gains are secure. People call you names when they are afraid!
Feminism is a conversation about human rights and our response to that. There are vested interests, that seek to silence the inquiry. Feminists enter this discourse by asking who has the power, and why; who doesn’t, and why not? Feminism is not based on the status-quo.
Just because it annoys me, the Rush Limbaugh’s can be so distracting, by calling the lesbian faction within the movement “man-haters”. We all know that simply is not true, but the name continues to be slung. STOP!
I don’t she is very close to Angie at all. She has said she follows her and tries to keep up but they don’t talk on the regular. She hadn’t talk to her in some time when she found out Angie had surgery. I think she was great friend with Angie’s Mom. but maybe if Angie’ Mom was alive they would have been closer. She always says sweet things about Angie though.
I so agree with her about a lot of women we see today. yes being “Hot” is the thing. all the ass pics and such.. All the selfies all the look at me in this or that. Problem is none of this equals longevity; because so many of the women we see are interchangeable. Nothing really unique or special. Everyone is doing the same thing and it is boring. In a few years most of them will be a memory.
I agree, but I think every generation has its own crop of distant memories. It’s just that with the Internet, it’s much easier to become one so we have more of them.
I get what she is saying, too. Being hot is valued more than most everything else. I’m sure it was always like this to an extent, but given the Internet, and advertising, etc the whole sexy/beautiful thing had become so literal, over the top, and most of all uninteresting.
What?? How can you say that about the Katherine Hepburn of our generation, Mrs. Kim Kardashian??
I’m so tired of all the nakedness that I find myself ho-humming, not too interested anymore. It has lost the sexy element, when ladies are unable to see the link of it with mystery (men’s imaginations). I really do not understand the body part obsession, unless we are taking dolls apart.
@mira you made me giggle!
Really? You never fully embraced the idea of equal pay for equal work. Or, how about being able to hold land in your own name and not your husbands or fathers? Feminism doesn’t mean you hate men and wear ugly clothing for goodness sakes! So sick of this!
Amen! To quote the Princess Bride, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Here let me play along:
– I’m not a vegetarian; because I like the colour blue.
– I’m not a Christian; because I ride water slides.
To quote Laura Bates (founder of the Everyday Sexism Project) on BBC3 Free Speech last night; “Feminism is not a gender war, it is people against prejudice”.
Surely it’s not that difficult a concept to grasp.
Ha! Brilliant, Mia4S!
Love that movie! Perfect!
Yes, exactly. Bisset always comes off as not too bright, and she ISN’T HELPING women with her remarks.
Yes! It’s like some women belive feminism ultimately equates a loss of femininity.
Considering women are still doing the bulk of the work in the home, many have a reason to “whinge”. While some men are putting in more of an effort on that front, not enough have, and they still spend fewer hours doing it compared to women.
“I am a feminist. I’ve been female for a long time now. I’d be stupid not to be on my own side.” – Maya Angelou.
Whenever someone naysays feminism, I just repeat that in my head. Women whine too much, dear Lord. I don’t buy her justification for her agreeing with that statement, either – we take on too much and want to be perfect so we whine about it? Stop. If you have no idea what you are talking about, just… stop.
But here’s the thing: why take “sides”?
There are seven billion people in this world, and only two sexes/”sides”.
Surely it makes much more sense to embrace the ideal of every INDIVIDUAL, regardless of sex, getting their fair chance, respect and everything else?
I know that has always been my ideal.
And because I remember reading intwerviews with Bissett in my childhood/early adolescence, I know that was – probably still is – her ideal, too.
When I was thirteen or fourteen, I could not find one single reason why women should take their husbands’ surnames (or even marry, for that matter).
I could not find a single reason why any woman couldn’t do most jobs that men do – and vice versa (and be paid the same, OF COURSE).
I WAS a feminist even before I had become really aware of the term itself.
But I never ever equated advocating equal rights and such (which struck me as only natural) with man-hating. And the fact is, many of the 1970s and 1980s so-called “feminists” really were man-haters, or at the very least seemed to find pleasure in the thought of womanhood subjugating manhood. (Yet some of them were using ther husbands’ surnames, for example!)
That’s why I eventually stopped using the term “feminist” – because it had become synonymous with advocating female *dominance* over men.
From what I can remember, Bissett’s stance was more or less like mine.
She WAS a true “feminist”. She simply wasn’t a man-hater or dominance seeker.
Oh and BTW: I STILL can’t find one single reason wh a woman should take her husband’s surname. 🙂
My thoughts on this whole matter haven’t changed at all. Not one bit.
And that’s because they were healthy thoughts, to begin with, IMO. 🙂
“And the fact is, many of the 1970s and 1980s so-called “feminists” really were man-haters, or at the very least seemed to find pleasure in the thought of womanhood subjugating manhood.”
This might be true but sometimes it takes an overreaction, an extreme indictment of a group, and an uprising to achieve progress.
The Black Panthers weren’t holding hand and signing kumbayah with white folks during the civil rights movement, but it doesn’t negate the role that they had in the Black Power movement. Sure, MLK likely achieved more with his peaceful protests but the BPs got NOTICED. They sent the message that they weren’t putting up with it any more.
So I don’t blame women for being angry back then. I think a lot of them had hit a breaking point. There were sick of being nice, polite women and they were sick of being subservient to men.
Anyway, thanks for sharing your reasoning behind distancing yourself from the feminist title. If more people would explain it the way you did, I would be much more receptive to the counterarguments.
Well, as I said below, because you disagree with an element, does that mean you throw the baby out with the bathwater? Do you enjoy the rights that were fought for and won? Then you must be a feminist.
I think it has to be noted that in the 70s, there were still laws that discriminated against women in all sorts of ways.
While it might seem in contradiction to equality to be in favor of a “side”, it makes complete sense when one of the sides starts off oppressed and discriminated against. To make that side equal, you’d need to work for that specific group.
@TheOriginalKitten as someone who lived through the 70/80 and was on the feminist fringe there was a lot of battles to be won back then and because men had the power they were a target for our frustration. Many women were brought up in a social norm where they were not only expected to run a home, care for children and the little man as well as well as working towards a career. And at hat time most men were not supportive of the new ideas.
Having said that in the current years,all my female friends who are independent both emotionally and financially never complain about men .It is those who feel trapped with a relationship in which the man dictates the lifestyle who spend hours complaining about their men and they outnumber those who do not.
Fool.
+1
Disappointing.
She’s interesting and thoughtful.
“I feel that this obsession to be ‘hot’ is more prevalent than it ever was in my youth. It’s not ‘I want to be charming and magical and romantic and beautiful’. It’s ‘I want to be hot’.”
I really loved this. She articulated a really truthful observation in a way that I never could have.
I like her, even though she apparently doesn’t support equality between genders. Also, I don’t think women being tough is a bad thing like she seems to imply here.
I kind of feel like she was having a stream of consciousness in her response to the feminism question. She started off with the typical older-person wisdom sort-of-thing where she describes the young as ‘whinging’. This follows the never ending path of young vs old, like that joke about having to walk to school in the snow up hill, both ways, I-had-it-rougher-in-my-day trope. Every generation does this, and every generation is probably right, in a lot of ways. She then follows up with contemplating how much women have to take on, so she is comparing what is different and more difficult these days. I do agree that there can be attacks on too small issues and sometimes I engage myself in these follies, as well. Major issues of equality should be hammered, but I guess it’s a case of picking battles in order to win the war.
Sorry, that was my own stream of consciousness, I’m not sure if I was entirely clear.
Yes you were quite clear and I think that might be why her stance doesn’t bother me so much. It seems like she acknowledges that women try to be perfect and take on too much….eh.
I’m not a mother but if I had kids and had to work full-time I would probably be whining all day long. It’s hard to have equality in it’s truest form when men can’t get pregnant.
Women shoulder so much of the responsibility in child-raring, add to that the responsibility of trying to bring home a beneficial income, and it must be so overwhelming. Alas, it’s because of feminism that we have that ability to accomplish all of this.
I have been trying to get my boyfriend pregnant for years, but it’s just not working. Sigh. He’ll never get it.
The state of the economy and the income disparity has had a major influence on women taking on too much. Even though women may theoretically have the choice of working while mothering, or staying home and not working as a parent, economically speaking, this really isn’t an option for the vast majority of women. Income levels of (all) men (and also women) have not risen in order to sustain many of the couples and their children with stay at home moms or dads. Income levels and unemployment status are even worse for the black population. It has almost become the conundrum of women (or couples) having to decide if they can afford to have children, and I think that we don’t want a society where only the rich are allowed that privilege of biological drive. So are women actually taking on more than they can handle by choice? Or has the ‘choice’ shifted? And of course, the economic strain has been far worse and persisted for much longer depending on race.
Someone upthread mentioned that she didn’t have children. If she didn’t want them, then this decision of lifestyle is much easier in a sense. She wouldn’t have had to pick between the two.
@ mimif-Ha ha…if you figure out how, please let me know. Getting a dude knocked up is likely my only hope for carrying on the Kitten namesake.
@Kiddo-Interesting comment. I think maybe the choice has shifted right? I mean at least for the majority of us, the peasants, the plebs, the muumuu community.
@mimif. I hope he doesn’t end up getting a baby bump from Katy Perry. I have to wonder about his noncooperation.
She said she “never fully embraced feminism’ but “thought it had some good points.” So it’s possible that she does she “support equality between genders.”
Yes you’re right.
That part of her interview I loved and made me really think.
I also liked this quote. People should worry more about their character and building it. It is a pity that Bisset then imposes a limit on who she thinks someone should be by implying that being tough is not a good thing for a woman. I also liked what she said about aging, it seems a lot more truthful than the things other celebs are saying.
“Because they don’t really want to deal with the results and often end up feeling used.”
I liked this part too. This is what I think of when I see Miley in her videos spread eagle. Yes, you feel hot and you are getting attention now…but please be aware that at the end of the day, it might not sit well in your mind. Maybe it will, but sometimes there are lingering effects of striving to be “hot” above all else. (‘above all else’ is very important part of how I feel about this subject).
Is it our mistake to always wanting to be perfect or are we subconscientiously trying to live up to an unwritten expectation?
I agree/like her sweet shop analogy in so much as I think a lot guys really do think that and I while I dislike the ‘nature makes me a predator” argument, I will give them that they are naturally the more visual gender. However just because you’re in a sweet shop doesn’t give you the right to go and lick all the lollipops or smash the chocolate frogs or piss into the giant tub of m&ms, right?
That’s part of what feminism is, giving women the freedom to be themselves in whatever version they want without others holding them back because they don’t conform to their standards. So fully embrace feminism ladies, otherwise we face this continuing and headlines like the recent one out of Silicon Valley I believe…. Something like they’re starting to hire more women because they’ve discovered they’re just like men, only cheaper.
Girls can do anything, wearing anything and they should get paid for doing it (I know this could be taken the wrong way as autocorrect just did by changing paid to laid. I swear autocorrect is a guy 🙂
“However just because you’re in a sweet shop doesn’t give you the right to go and lick all the lollipops”. Actually, it does – when so many lollipops want to be licked. Consenting adults, u know. And if the lollipop is dissapointed in the results – well, i guess… maybe it’s time to stop being a lollipop and start becoming a person…
How is she rebellious when her idea of being a women is the stereotype of being nurturing, soft and dainty? The slutshaming on top of that ‘well those hot women can’t go crying when men abuse/mistreat them!’ is appalling and stereotypical too.Maybe they get mistreated because the men are douchebags? There are plenty of women who aren’t considered ‘hot’ or who don’t dress in an ‘obvious’ way and they still get mistreated. I feel like she adopts those oldschool mentalities which is a far from being rebellious! The delusions.
I also feel like she’s pro-man as she implies she changed her demeanour and appearance and ‘attracted better relationships’. If she had said she felt more like herself, she wouldn’t come across as desperate for male approval. That was her arrival, men, not creating an identity for herself.
It’s not moaning when it’s the truth. We have a voice and we finally can be heard yet people still won’t listen. I’m talking about topics like rape but I’m sure that’s ‘our mistake’ too?
Open your mind girl! Bisset, you can do better. Or maybe you can’t.
+10,000,000
Very interesting take. I didn’t get all that out of what she said, but I can see how that you would. Meaning, you might be right.
I thought she was saying that superficial dudes are usually attracted to superficiality, and vice-versa. If we portray an image of someone who is overtly sexy, we’ll probably end up in a relationship with a guy who’s focus is on appearance. Is that slut-shaming? Maybe.. I guess I didn’t think of it that way but maybe it is.
I would never date a guy who’s Facebook photo was that of a ripped torso or who was into gym selfies, so I do think it goes both ways in that sense.
But maybe I’m just giving her too much credit….
I didn’t think she was slut-shaming at all.
I thought she was saying that superficial dudes are usually attracted to superficiality, and vice-versa.
I see where you’re coming from and I’m sure there are a lot of cases where such thinking is actually true but outward appearances should never be an indicator of personality or justify people treating other people disrespectfully. Emma Watson is considered stereotypical feminine and had dudebros all over her with their misogynist thinking and now that they finally realised she’s also strong and intelligent, they are foaming at the mouth. Angelina Jolie & Scarlett Johansson, women who don’t even have to make an effort to look ‘hot’, are certainly not superficial either but that won’t stop people from making their looks the focus point and rendering them into sex objects. Bisset’s goddaughter is a perfect example of how looks don’t tell you anything about somebody’s personality yet she’s still stuck in that oldschool way of thinking that hot = easy and dainty = marriage material.
I think the problem lies with the people who judge others on their looks. When the woman turns out to be *gasp* a multifaceted intelligent human being, I doubt she will stay with a man who sees her as an object. At her age, she should’ve figured this out too but I guess not. It doesn’t seem like she put much thought in her answers and just spoke from her own experience which is very positive as she got the approval by simply behaving in a demure way. Problem solved for her.
Yes but when men do it they are just self-obsessed and vain but women are usually considered dumb, vain and easy.
To be clear: I was speaking in terms of clothing choice only, not about the genetically-gifted. I took Bisset’s comment to be about how one dresses.
I agree that interesting and intelligent people come in all makes and models. l think the stereotype that you’re talking about crosses gender lines, though (see; Brad Pitt for example). That being said, truthfully women suffer far more from the pretty = dumb assumption.
@tok “I thought she was saying that superficial dudes are usually attracted to superficiality, and vice-versa.” – That’s exactly how I understood it.
‘well those hot women can’t go crying when men abuse/mistreat them!’ – The question is, what do u mean by “mistreating”? If we talk about shallow women briefly attracting shallow men who do not answer women’s expectation, that’s no “mistreating” in a dramatic sense of word.
Yup, Lana86. I agree with you 100%. Did she say that “women can’t go crying when men mistreat or abuse them” or just imply that?
I need to read the full piece I think.
“Because they don’t really want to deal with the results and often end up feeling used”
I think it depends on the woman. Some women can handle being promiscuous without the emotional factor and some women cannot.
I do think women at times get caught up in the power of their sexuality over men, only to find that it doesn’t lead to a meaningful connection.
I should say, at least that was my experience when I was in my early twenties.
Then again, my “sexy” club outfit attracted a guy that I ended up dating for 7 years, so there’s that.
There’s an overlap between her honest, and relatively insightful observations and the inadvertent reinforcing of stereotypes happening here.
I’m not sure how I feel..I agree with her and I don’t.
@tok, oh no, the quote “women can’t go crying when men mistreat or abuse them” is from Artemis (I think it’s how Artemis interpreted Bissets message – which I dont think is fair)
“I do think women at times get caught up in the power of their sexuality over men, only to find that it doesn’t lead to a meaningful connection.” yeah, so true! And media and entertainment industry sustains this idea so hard! I mean the image of sexy woman who gets whatever and whomever she wants just by being sexy. I think thats the root of the problem – girls buy this idea, and think that they can get power only through the means of sexiness.
Here you go, Jacqueline:
“Either you are a feminist or you are a sexist/misogynist. There is no box marked ‘other’.”
Take a bow, Ani DiFranco.
I think she enjoys the benefits of the movement without signing any boxes.
so its “you are with us or you are against us”? when did such black and white thinking ever help anyone? i can see why that keeps people from labeling themselves feminists.
Do you enjoy any rights as a woman that you wouldn’t have without the movement?
@kiddo, do you enjoy any benefits that you wouldn’t have without the patriarchy? Oh wait….the internet you’re using right now.
Bad argument.
Are you so certain that no woman could have been in the position or had the intelligence and capacity of creating the internet? Since there aren’t a lot of black men in tech companies, is it your argument that it’s good that they didn’t break through because they otherwise wouldn’t have been capable of such feats? I suppose they should be shut out from the jobs, leave it as it is because life without some structural white patriarchy would be absolutely devoid of intelligence and usefulness.
Because a man developed something does that automatically make him anti-feminist? Feminism isn’t about not appreciating men, or their accomplishments Jemma. It is about equality and having the right, that if so inclined, women could go make up the internet or an app and not be shut out because they have vaginas. It’s about having the right to vote for men or women. It’s about having the opportunity to have careers and make money and to able to afford things like a computer or internet service without being limited to asking a man permission or choosing only between being a mother, a nurse or a school teacher.
The fact that you can say things that you are saying right now, as ridiculous as they are, were brought to you by feminists.
Your line of thinking is incredibly absurd.
No, Sara. As I explained on the other thread, feminism is the belief in equal social, economic and political rights between genders. Nothing more, nothing less.
If you believe that women should have equal rights with men then you are a feminist, whether you self-identify as one or not.
If you believe that there are areas in which women should have fewer rights than men (or vice versa), then you are a sexist.
There’s nothing combative about it: it’s a simple definition of two terms. Like I said elsewhere – we can argue policy or presentation. But we can’t argue the terms. They have simple meanings.
Personally I think we should all be feminist in our approach and not be influenced by those who like to place negative labels on it. I am a feminist not just for my self but because I believe in equal rights for all women, the right for women to be who ever they want to be within the law and the right to be equal partners in a relationship be it gay or straight.
And I also think that male actors need to get off the macho muscle bound hero roundabout and show they can be different and still have fan bases and women actresses need to come in a range of sizes and brain power and declare for feminism
Enough already. Why are we paying so much attention to what celebrities have to say about topics such as feminism and racism? Yes, some make very good points but can we stop using celeb interviews as the basis for these topics of pubic discourse? There HAVE to be some other people out there who have things to say. Possibly even academics? I get tired of these successful women sh*tting all over the very thing that made is possible for them to be successful and independent in the first place.
Is she actually French… like from there? If that’s the case, her stance on feminism is not unusual culturally.
She’s English.
No she’s not. Born and raised in England from an english mother and a scottish born father.
She actually often corrected journalists about that, usually when they assumed it was easy for her to star in french films because she was French. She’s always insisted she had to learn the language.
And I’m curious about what kind of french people you actually talk to because her stance on feminism IS unusal in France, even for people the same age as her. Movements like Les chiennes de garde, Osez le féminisme ou Ni putes ni soumises are highly visible in the media and their points are supported by a large majority of the population.
I lived there. Found it very rare to find women who were overly political in any way. Granted, could’ve been the circles I was in, but it seemed pretty clear.
“It’s not ‘I want to be charming and magical and romantic and beautiful’. It’s ‘I want to be hot’. In other words: ‘I want men to want to screw me.’ Desperation, isn’t it? Because they don’t really want to deal with the results and often end up feeling used….”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is a very interesting statement. That so many girls do not get. We are still judge harshly to this day about how we are perceived. I would hate to be a female in my 20’s… trying to navigate all the BS that it thrown at them.
And it does not help that so many men, are still being raised to be so misogynistic.
If a girl “behaves” a certain way… then she is a wh*re. And you treat her as such.
Men being told… “hey… if it’s for free.. go ahead and get it son!” But never marry it.
Such charming behavior. *sarcasm*
But women are told that men can be complete wh*res for years… and that is expect. And you are suppose to accept it as a good thing. That he got it out of his system. Fun fact. Men never stop being wh*res once they are one.
So much has changed every decade for women. Bisset is a product of her generation. Not a bad thing.
Just as I am a product of my generation. We all have our personal beliefs and how to find a little happiness.
It’s interesting because in my twenties the word “player” was a term we used a lot to refer to a promiscuous man, sort of like the male version of a slut. It was not a good thing. We might mess around with a player, but none of us wanted to seriously date a player.
But the difference is that a “player” was viewed as unattainable, a free spirit, while a “whore” was just seen as dirty.
The narrative behind each term suggests that promiscuous men are fully in control of their sexuality. They’re not being serious with us because they don’t WANT to be, because we’re not worthy of them. While a promiscuous woman is used goods that no man would want anything serious with, she is not worthy of being loved by any man. It’s sad that a promiscuous women is still framed that way in our society.
@TheOriginalKitten it is the difference between the fun loving bachelor and the lonely spinster when the actuality is that in retirement single women are less likely to be lonely because of their tendency to bond and establish interests whilst single men often isolate themselves. They coupled with people who cannot adjust to a single life are the biggest suicide risk in the elderly.
Lainey had this quote from Caitlin Moran’s book How To Be A Woman:
But, of course, you might be asking yourself, ‘Am I a feminist? I might not be. I don’t know! I still don’t know what it is! I’m too knackered and confused to work it out. That curtain pole really still isn’t up! I don’t have time to work out if I am a women’s libber! There seems to be a lot to it. WHAT DOES IT MEAN?’
I understand.
So here is the quick way of working out if you’re a feminist. Put your hand in your pants.
a) Do you have a vagina? and
b) Do you want to be in charge of it?
If you said ‘yes’ to both, then congratulations! You’re a feminist.”
I read quite a bit of feminist theory in grad school. Most of it I can’t recall now, but I do remember thinking that some of it was far reaching (‘Wait… because a vase is on display at a museum, it is all about female bodies and the male gaze? HUH.’).
Before I realized what feminist in this context meant, I assumed that being a ‘feminist’ was about more than women should have equal rights, etc. If someone had asked me last week if I was a feminist, I may have given a tepid, ‘Eh, sure, maybe, not totally, but some of it I can get behind. Whatever, this sounds like a complex question for a yes-or-no answer.’
I am wondering if anyone else out has this reaction, and it could – quite possibly – explain some of the lack of enthusiasm for feminism from certain quarters? I consider myself a feminist in the nonacademic (non-theory?) version, but really can’t say I wholeheartedly support all feminist theories in an academic sense.
I think you’re right. I think people are opting out, based on unimportant minutiae, such as what you mentioned. I think some people who associate themselves with the movement may latch onto the same type of minutiae and that further dilutes the focus of the higher cause.
If you are looking for equality and rights, which is what the strongest driving force of the movement has been and has (incompletely) accomplished, I think you should be able to identify.
I said this yesterday: because there might be a person or persons who have theories, ideas and perspectives that you disagree with, does that mean you should be throwing the baby out with the bath water? I used the example of Jessie Jackson in the civil rights movement, maybe I should have used Sharpton because he seems to get some people’s goat, (I digress), but because you don’t like either, maybe not all of their positions or them personally, does that mean that you shouldn’t say that you are a civil rights advocate, altogether?
Nice points!
I do think some of the minutiae is quite important because it is a driving factor behind the ‘man-hating, bra-burning’ stereotype of feminists.
My personal takeaway from this is that if someone asks me if I am a feminist, my response will be ‘How do you define a feminist?’ and I’ll take it from there. 🙂
I think the definition has been stated plainly by many of the people speaking up for it in our modern day, and maybe that signals a 4th wave. I would say yes, and then define it, or qualify it for myself. Of course there are people who will say ‘no’, and that’s because they don’t believe in equality or they think that we are in a post-gender world where women have everything they need. Those people, in fact, are not feminists or civil rights advocates.
But the others, who have qualms with peripheral issues, are doing themselves a disservice by turning their backs on progress, and not feeling any gratitude for those who struggled and sacrificed before them. Remember, influence is money or numbers. If you don’t have the money, you better have the numbers. Divide and conquer is the easiest way to kill something off.
Kiddo, I really appreciate your comments. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Very well said.
I think feminism itself is simple – that one believes in the equality of the sexes. IMO, in academia, a lot of things are overthought.
I identify as feminist based on the definition that I gave. However, my issue with feminism in practice is that the discourse is dominated by a certain subset of women, mainly those who are straight, cis-gendered and white, and therefore (1) ignores the interests of those not in that group and (2) does not include the fact that feminism intersects with other issues that do not affect those in that group.
That’s why the movement needs more new blood in its ranks, or as what has been the case, an evolution and branches that have formed for subgroups.
It’s more that those not in the white, straight, cisgendered group are ignored or dismissed. For example, when #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen was big on Twitter a while back, there were a whole bunch of articles saying that (1) Twitter had now become “toxic” for (white, etc.) feminists and (2) people with critiques against the current discourse should shut up because the feminist movement needs to present a united front.
I’m not a follower of anything on twitter, I have issues with privacy rights regarding them and other social media sites, so I can’t give you an educated reply on that issue. I do not think people should shut up. I think people should speak up.
If you are asked if you are a feminist, explain why. Because I care about the rights of….. You can change the dialogue and the dialogue is, in fact, changing. You can still start an offshoot, but I think groups that have goals that coincide should stand together because the voices are louder in numbers.
Everyone, of course, has the right to embrace or reject something. I just wish, in general, that people would acknowledge, at least to some degree, that some good has come from the movement.
What I’m saying is that many women feel alienated from the current coverage and discourse regarding feminism because they feel that the current discourse does not fully represent their interests and even disrespects them, even though they believe in equal rights for both sexes.
With the #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen thing, for example, many non-white feminists were criticizing the fact that white feminists generally have constantly dismissed the fact that a non-white woman’s experiences have just as much to do with race as with gender. Meaning that while the non-white feminists often stand with their white counterparts, white feminists often do not stand with (and often go against) non-white feminists on their issues.
Hi Kranky,
I was taught and always carried the view that in order for one to be a feminist, one must hold the belief – and live one’s life in a manner to reflect that belief – that a woman’s VALUE (a woman’s thoughts, feelings, ideas, etc.) is equal to that of a man’s.
Because women the world over vary in their values and ambitions, the fight for each woman is different. I currently live in a world (my home environment, my friends, relatives and peers) where my values are respected and esteemed on all fronts. I feel secure in my place as a woman but recognize that there are so many out there who do not have the same luxury. One woman’s fight for feminism might involve rights regarding her body whereas another might be tied to treatment and compensation in the workplace, and still miles away another woman may be struggling to be afforded mere human dignity.
From the indisputable idea that men largely rule the world and have historically set the limits by which many woman still abide, feminism was born.
That being said, I believe most of us (men as well as women) inherently harbor the torch for feminism though it may not necessarily be in the forefront of our minds until someone’s cause is brought to our attention. I think this accounts for the lack of enthusiasm you mentioned in your original post, in addition to the great lack of understanding of what it means to be feminist.
Wow, ^ That was beautifully stated ^
JB wasn’t necessarily being “rebellious” rather I think she was being a feminist. Paying for her own way, living the life she wants, etc. Too bad she doesn’t get that.
I like what she said! I believe in gender equality but I don’t think women are equal in all things. I don’t think women should be police officers for instance. Tasers are being over-used. The police force has become more of a bully mentality. Women simply dont have the physical strength and size to take down a big man. Police officers used to have to meet a certain criteria size wise and now they’re hiring little these little guys and women who are so taser happy! For what they lack in strength and size they make up for with their position and badge.
But what do you mean when you say “gender equality?” Many people think that means men and women are the same whereas I was under the belief that men and woman are equal in their value to society and esteem of their thoughts and feelings.
Therefore, while not all women may be a good fit for the police force, there are women who have proven themselves to be a great asset to the force, just as some men would not meet the physical and mental rigors of such a position.
“Women simply dont have the physical strength and size to take down a big man. ”
I completely disagree with this. Gender does not determine ability, even physical ability.
I have known men who are 5’5″ and weigh 120 lbs., skinny with little muscle tone.
I have known women who are 6’3″ and weigh 220 lbs., muscular with lots of strength.
If they were both police officers, the female would be able to take down a big man, but the male would not.
I am fine with having certain requirements for physical jobs, but that is very different from saying your gender determines your ability to meet that requirement.
Tiffany,
I get what you’re saying but I still think the mentality of the police force has changed since accepting women as full on police officers. I don’t know where you’re from but a 6’3″ woman 220 lbs? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a woman that large and if there was one she couldn’t run around the block let alone take down a man unless he was already laying there and she sat on him. Equal opportunity but not all are equal IMO. Plus there’s the temporary insanity that a woman has every month.
It’s not always about brute strength, it’s about using the strength you have wisely and learning where to target to get maximum results in bringing down someone. If a woman passes all the physical tests there’s no reason she can’t be a police officer.
i think its the terminology that needs to change. Feminism, like its counterpart chauvinism, is a relatively negative term. Both are based on the predication of taking something from one group and giving it to the other.
Each side should drop this nonsense and adopt a joint cause/term, that promotes each sex equally. But unfortunately, you have glory hounds on each side that just want the press stories.
She’s right about the ‘hot’ comment though. many women nowadays want to be viewed as ‘hot’. Where the problem lies is, that when they get attention from men they are not interested in, then this attention becomes a liability.
JB and Helen are two classy ladies, whom i wish more hollywood starlets would use as role-models, rather than the Kardasian/hiltons/etc things we have now.
JoJo, good comment!
JB makes a good point about how some girls “want to be hot”. the selfies of Miley, KK (all of them), NIki really supports that. And for the non-celebrities, remember “Girls Gone Wild”? series? You can choose to put yourself in suggestive poses and scantily posed, and this does not mean that your “asking” for it. Guys, since they are more visual than female, will enjoy this visual buffet and would never tell girls to change. However, with choosing to be “hot” only, may cause others to have a certain perception of who you really are and it could be an uphill battle trying to change people’s perception.
For example, Marilyn Monroe. She was the definition of “hot” in her day and still is. Her clothing, persona (walk), makeup, etc. was very risque at that time. But, if you recall she was trying to shed the dumb blonde image and wanted people (directors, studio execs, etc.) to see that she was more than just a sexy bombshell. She had every right to change herself from Norma Jeane to Marilyn, but it came with a price. When she got older, she was terrified of aging and scared she would be nothing without her body. When an individual’s only focuses is “I want to be hot”, with nothing to offer to others or themselves, it is very sad and this becomes more apparent when they become older. (Pamela Anderson, Kim K, Jenny McCarthy, etc.) It’s very similar to like seeing the Parthenon in Rome, in current time. You can see the ruins and imagine what it must have been in it’s heyday.
I have never fully embraced feminism = I have never fully understood what feminism is
*This*
Jacqueline Bisset was the Elizabeth Hurley of the 70s and 80s. Who can forget the iconic scenes of her under water in The Deep in a wet, totally see-through t-shirt. She marketed herself as a very sexy woman so the fact that she’s now saying young women today have to be “hot” to be popular comes across as disingenuous. She is honest about her brand of feminism though, and it’s in part because of her age bracket. We were raised to nurture, to be feminine and appealing. However she’s been a successful actress and director who seems to have done things her own way so I give her a pass. Plus she hasn’t botoxed, injected and lasered her face into an unrecognizable mess, I like that about her.
To give her the benefit of the doubt re: the young women feeling that they need to be hot to be popular comment, she may have been speaking from experience – that being considered sexy wasn’t all that great for her overall, esp. when she got older and wasn’t thought of as sexy anymore.
I totally get what she’s saying. Then again, I am an older woman. If my younger self had read that, I would probably react defensively or not really understand. All I can say to the younger readers here who may have found her comments perplexing….just wait. 🙂
“Get Off My Lawn Realness”… Howling!!!
Ironic since she is a rich independent working woman! She is just trying to appear more alluring