A long response to tekanji in this post started to take on a life of its own and get out of hand so I thought I’d just write a post instead.

So, tekanji said:

But, see, you’re setting up a strawfeminist with the “choice feminist” arguments. I’ve never seen anyone identify as a “choice feminist” but I have seen it often used to try to shut down discussion on the topic of choice before they start. And, furthermore, by the first part of your definition, people would see me as a “choice feminist” because I often say that feminism is about choice. Because, to me, it is.

(First off, I’d like to acknowledge that “choice feminism” was a very poor choice of words on my part because it was what first came to mind in trying to describe the concept I was thinking of. So, I’m retracting that statement since it was really loaded with a lot of connotations I wasn’t trying to convey and don’t agree with. Just in case you don’t read the comments on the other post.)

I think it’s disingenuous and does feminism a disservice when people say “it’s all about choice”. I am not trying to put words in tekanji’s mouth, because that’s not what she said. I am just explaining where I’m coming from on this. In fact, I’m mostly using her comment as a springboard onto a tangentially-related topic and not a direct response. Just in case that isn’t clear.

Is feminism all about choice? Just about choice? No. It’s not. That’s part of it, and an important part, but choice isn’t possible without economic and legal equality, equal rights, etc. I suppose for women like me and tekanji, choice is probably the most important aspect of our feminism because we’re very privileged, but in many parts of the world (and, hell, for many women even in the US), there isn’t a choice. You do what’s expected of you, or you may not survive. For those living under the system of oppression, there can be strong economic, legal, or social barriers preventing any choice from being possible in a very literal sense. Sometimes, it simply makes that choice more difficult, and I would argue that’s still not a “real” choice if it’s made under coercion but the two situations are enormously different.

There’s a lot of other things feminism is about too. I think the ultimate goal should be that, in the end, people can do whatever makes them happy* as individuals, where everyone has the same potential, starting from an unbiased position that doesn’t privilege certain people over others (as much as that is physically possible, which is admittedly a problem). …but this isn’t because all choices are good or that we have to honor/respect all choices. It’s because feminism is, to me, recognizing women as autonomous, individual beings who, by extension, must be allowed to make their own decisions and live their own lives with as little intervention as possible. Choice being available is really a result of the basic tenets of this attitude, which is great. My feminism includes trying to extend this attitude not simply to women, but other marginalized groups as well. Everyone deserves the same basic rights. So people need to be given the freedom to decide for themselves regardless of what others think about it, because everyone deserves the right to live on their own terms according to their priorities and what serves them best.

The problem is when the argument becomes just about choice. If feminism is reduced only to the choices women make on an individual level, ignoring the bigger issues, it becomes either incredibly judgmental or incredibly useless (or, probably, both in different ways). For example, I also believe people should have the legal freedom to say what they want, even if I think it’s harmful or wrong*. But this doesn’t mean I can’t criticize people’s speech. To me, the idea that we can’t critically examine women’s choices is much like that, or the people who claim that to be “tolerant” you can’t criticize their intolerance. If you stretch the concept too far, it becomes not only useless but also self-defeating.

BUT. I don’t think it’s okay to criticize or personally attack women for their choices. I don’t think it’s okay to make blanket statements telling all women they’re wrong for doing X. I think it’s better to suggest possible conditions which might influence people to make certain choices, to point out why certain choices could be problematic, and then step back and allow a woman to decide for herself what her priorities are, how she feels about things, and how her choices make her personally feel. And sometimes a woman will make an decision which is not feminist, but if it’s a practical matter of life or death, the last thing that woman forced into making a bad decision needs is to be judged, belittled, or demeaned.

We need to trust other people’s judgement about their own specific situations, that they do what seems best at the time or what is practically possible at the time. To assume we know better than someone else what they need to do, or what makes them happy, is not only presumptuous but antithetical to the basic goals of feminism.

So, I suppose, the big point I wanted to make here really was: is feminism about choice? Yes. But not just about choice. That’s the distinction about the attitude I was criticizing and those who believe choice is a very important facet of feminism. Choice is an abstract idea in many situations, for many people. Ideally, if everyone were in a more privileged position, choice would be all it would have to come down to. As it stands, feminism needs to be concerned with more practical concerns as well: healthcare, the wage gap, sexual violence, etc. And it simply gets worse if you’re a person of color, queer, poor, disabled; if you’re struggling to survive, or if you’re more likely to be profiled or targeted for hate crimes, or if you’re denied basic rights that other people are granted by default, those are much more immediate threats and concerns which must be dealt with before we can even begin to talk about choice.* It’s very nice place to come from if not being criticized for potentially anti-feminist decisions is the most one needs to worry about. For most people, it’s not that easy.

Footnotes:

1. Disclaimer: I don’t think it’s okay for people to choose to do things which harm other people. If your ability to be happy is contingent on doing horrible things to others, that’s a problem. So, yes, whatever a person finds fulfilling is great within what should be basic and obvious limits: doing nothing to another person without their consent, not abusing a person (or animals, for that matter) physically or emotionally, and not intentionally causing harm to someone. Unfortunately, there’s still room to argue about whether, say, BDSM is evil according to these guidelines, or abortion, but I don’t think either of them are, and that’s a debate for another time. Right. Disclaimed.

2. Another disclaimer: unless they’re actively promoting harm by trying to incite people to hurt others, or they’re sending death threats or something. Words can hurt but when it crosses the line into promoting physical violence there is a problem and I don’t think this kind of hate speech is okay. This is a slippery slope and hard to determine from a legal perspective, because if anyone’s speech is limited, everyone’s is. So I don’t like it and have no solution, but there it is.

3. This doesn’t mean we can’t talk about choice until all the world’s other problems are solved. I’m just saying it’s understandably not high on everyone’s list of priorities.

1. Why is liking to cook a gendered behavior and why is it unfeminist to take care of my house? Because, really, these are practical life skills and something that needs to be done by someone. This isn’t abstract theory. I’d be lying if I claimed there was no pressure whatsoever to take care of my house, but when I’m the only one with the free time to do it and I don’t actually mind, and if my siblings do their chores also and the boys do as much if not more housework than the girls, what exactly is the problem? Christ. You’d think wanting to eat decent home-cooked food or not wanting the kitchen to be buried in dirty dishes was some sort of crime against feminism. (And I’m not even supportive of so-called “choice feminism”!) I mean…really, people, it’s just something that needs to be taken care of, preferably by someone who doesn’t mind taking care of it.

Now when everyone else refuses to clean the litter box, that’s what pisses me off. Which reminds me…ugh.

2. Why are there no decent candidates running for…well, anything? The gubernatorial election in Colorado is specifically what I’m talking about. So there’s the Republican candidate, terrifying in most every way, and the Democrat who, true to the party line, is less evil and doesn’t seem to actually stand for anything without scowling about how he disapproves personally first (see: stance on abortion), and then there’s the Libertarian who is great on women’s issues and gay rights but is, well, Libertarian, and thus whom I cannot vote for in good conscience as the commie I am.

Okay, that’s oversimplifying. Her stance on immigration terrifies me, as does the general Libertarian philosophy regarding social welfare programs, which she definitely supports. Which brings me to the big point: all the candidates have fairly inadequate platforms regarding immigration. This is a big deal to me. I get to hear people using “immigration” as a thinly-veiled pretense for their racism every single day. “Immigration” as an excuse to ignore the complex race and class issues that are actually at the core of the matter. “Immigration” as a front to promote hate speech against not only undocumented workers, but pretty much anyone who vaguely resembles what they imagine lurks south of the border (where everything is Mexico), which includes anyone with darker skin, a Spanish-sounding last name, and/or a funny accent — because if you’re not white you must be “illegal”. No other explanation for it.

And I’m sick to death of this. Beauprez’s the worst; his website from what I’ve seen (and I didn’t linger very long) seems to be fairly tame compared to the propaganda his campaign’s been plastering all over Denver. It’s all xenophobic, reactionary hate speech. That’s all it is. At least Ritter’s only committed to enforcing the laws we already have, punishing companies who hire undocumented workers and the like, which I can support from a legal perspective even if it isn’t particularly useful or humane. (My personal opinions and proposed solutions? Maybe another time.)

I hate feeling these split loyalties. I can’t find a candidate who seems anywhere near decent on all the issues personally important to me: gay rights, women’s rights, immigration, and a general commitment to helping people in poverty you know, not starve or die from preventable illnesses and that kind of thing. The one that’s okay on the first two is terrible on the others. The one that’s more moderate on the last two is not that great on the first two. There was recently a post on the feminist community on LiveJournal urging people to vote for Winkler because she’s unabashedly pro-choice…without realizing that, for some of us affected by other issues, that’s not enough on its own. When I hear people talking about how “Mexicans are less than human” (actual quote) and about what they want to do to “those Hispanics”, you know what? Whether I, the queer Latina girl who mostly doesn’t like guys and isn’t sexually active, can get an abortion is the lesser threat to my immediate wellbeing.

3. If you have to preface a statement with “I’m not racist…” whatever comes out of your mouth next is almost certainly racist, and if not, it’s at the least going to be ignorant, poorly thought-out, problematic, or insensitive. Ditto for “I’m not sexist”, “I’m not homophobic”, etc. I know it’s been said before but it bears repeating.

3. a) If you feel the need to include someone’s race when talking about them in a situation where you would never think of attaching a racial slur if they were white, you’re racist. Sorry. (Or not. Yeah, not sorry.)

3. b) If you don’t want to be around me because you feel “judged” because I think you’re racist, maybe you shouldn’t say racist things. No, I’m not going to feel bad for leveling judgement after you just said something horribly offensive about the ethnic group I happen to, um, belong to. Especially if by “horribly offensive” I’m just trying to be polite about the fact that you just told me you want to commit what would legally constitute a hate crime.

4. Okay, I think I feel better until something else comes to mind.

5. Oh yeah, and I’m going to see the Dalai Lama speak tomorrow and that’s going to be really, really awesome. This isn’t an annoyance…unless maybe we start talking about how I feel about Tibet. I guess that’s another discussion for another time.

Okay, I normally avoid jumping on the feminist blogosphere drama bandwagon, but seriously. It’s so “nice” to know that no matter what kind of work you’ve done, how intelligent you are, or how well-respected, if you are female, you are not allowed to be taken seriously or treated with any amount of dignity:

You know, I was psyched to be invited to this lunch and was feeling pretty honored. But then things like this remind me that no matter what I do or accomplish, because I’m a young woman all I’m good for is fodder for tacky intern jokes and comments that I don’t “represent feminist values” because of the way I posed in a picture.

Pretty much. Unfortunately, it’s worse than that. If you’re an attractive young feminist you can’t be taken seriously because you’re attractive and young. But if you aren’t attractive you also can’t be taken seriously since you’re an ugly man-hating feminist, and you must only care about women’s rights because you’re not pretty and assumed to be insecure. If you’re not pretty enough you’ll get flack for not being good eyecandy no matter how thought-provoking your ideas, and if you’re too pretty you must not have anything valuable to say since we all know intelligent women are never attractive. And so on and so on.

I think someone must really have to hate women in order to think like that. I do.

PS: Since it’s my area of concern at the moment, I think I’ll post some stuff about feminism and fiction writing soon, okay?