Unless you are a student or staff at a college or university you experiance it...you know what it feels like - you've seen the nasty looks from coworkers and felt the negativity from aquainances when you utter that o so powerful phrase "I am a feminist".
But what does that mean today? And where should our movement be going? I have a new charge tonight - based on current events in the news, my own opinions, and some ideas from Pete Seeger.
I was listening to
DemocracyNOW! early this summer and heard him say something I had never heard before - here's the quote:
I'm of the opinion now that if the human race makes it -- I say we've got a 50-50 chance -- if the human race makes it, it'll be women working with children, these two very large oppressed classes in the human race. Children, doing what the grownups say they're supposed to do, and yet they're going to have to pay for our mistakes. They're going to have to clean up the environment, which had been filled with chemicals, the air being filled with chemicals, the water being filled with chemicals, the ocean being filled with chemicals. And they're going to have to clean it up. And I think it will be women working with kids that'll do this job. In millions of little ways, maybe done in your hometown. In my hometown we're starting a project to put in a floating swimming pool in the Hudson, because now the Hudson is clean enough to swim in. Let's swim in it. And if it works in our little town, maybe other towns will do it. In fact, if this swimming pool idea -- it's like a big netting in the water. So, I confess I'm more optimistic now than I was 58 years ago, 59 years ago, when the atom bomb was dropped.
It's the idea that it's not just women, but children also as an oppressed class in society worldwide. So it's not a new idea - just new to me - but it makes so much sense! If 51% of any given society is female, and 25% is under 18, then approx 60% of society is dominated by the other 40%; across the boundaries of culture, region, and argueably time.
Is it possible for the next wave of feminism to include in its mission the advancement and representation of children? I have come over to Mr Seeger's point of view - it is our responsibility as feminists, not just the female members of the movement but also the males, to create a world where we dont simply destroy our planet and our future for our own ends and claim it is for our children, we dont just focus on our own childs trust fund - but desire to include their vision for the world and their desires for the future that we are molding for them.
So where does news tie in you ask? Today I learned of a new trend in girls fashion - padded bras and thongs aimed at 6 year old girls! You may ask (though I can't imagine how) what this has to do with feminism.
If we accept this call for a true unity then the sexsploitation of our children can not be tolerated - how can we be looking to a new future and allow our kids to be brainwashed by a need to be "fashionable"? This is just another marketing ploy by another company to tap into a new demographic without careing about the social impact of their product. Did the jerk who designed these at all consider the image she/he is putting out there? I mean, WTF!?!
Over the summer my 12 year old sister,STICK thin(!!), bikini clad with a little tiny skirt on refused to show us the bottom of her bathing suit because her "legs were to fat"; and the other women in my family responded with "where did that come from?". Well DUH!! If every image she sees is about some anorexic model complaining about their weight then how is she supposed to appreciate herself?
But ya, we've all heard that before - so what (right?)? Well maybe I'm just saying it's about fucking time that we stop talking and talking and talking and finally do something about it.
A glimmer of hope for equalists everywhere:
You dont have to have studied feminism to know that men's sexuality and sexual health has always been of more value than women's - and though it's not law yet, a new Michigan bill introduced today would require girls entering 6th grade to get the HPV vaccine because it is proven to be more effective if administered before women become sexually active (ie. before they have a chance to be exposed to the damn infection). (For those who dont know, HPV is one of the top causes of cervical cancer and sterility among women and can be undetected without regular testing. It is also the #1 most common sexually transmitted infection in this country - effecting 3 out of 4 Americans. Now, one has to wonder - in a country where so many people go uninsured, and we claim to have a commitment to preventative health care, wouldn't you rather have a vaccine than pay for chemo?) While I do not condone young women having sex before they're ready (and even when they think they are they're probably not) , I DO think it's a good idea to protect them from cervical cancer and sterility - and we could wipe out HPV in this country if the vaccine were prevalent enough.
I doubt it will pass - the conservatives in this country will say it is an excuse for young women to have more sex even younger - but it puts an important issue into the mainstream and brings the arguement up and in that way we're taking some baby steps.