Ahh love.... and bell hooks

At last!  Another blog post!

Seeing as March is now almost over, I don't think I can call this blog post timely.  I was going to provide you with a little review of a book by bell hooks titled; All About Love: New Visions, in honor of Valentine's day.  And then another blog post in time for International Women's day.  But I've since missed both of them, and one of those things is apparently not relevant anymore.

I've also managed to miss World Water Day, but that was because it conflicted with National Goof Off Day, which I was busy observing.

As some of you may have remembered, I mentioned in a previous post about how it can be difficult for someone who is wanting to know more about feminism to know where to start.  I've definitely experienced this problem before creating this blog but I have since discovered that in this city we have an amazing Feminist Book Club.

The book club was started by Justine Little, with it's headquarters in Spartacus Books in East Vancouver, and meets once a month to talk about their latest book club selection.  The FBC's facebook page had this to say.  "The Feminist Book Club hopes to become a democratic collective dedicated to DIY education, respect, and community. The FBC aims to create a space to engage with feminist literature and other critical medias to facilitate growth and friendship in Vancouver's feminist community."  They are also welcoming of anyone from any, race, class, sexual orientation, and gender identity, which means that men are also welcome to participate.

I must admit though, I did feel a bit nervous going to my first book club meeting, considering that I am a male and I identify as heterosexual.  The problems that we would be discussing were ones that would have been brought about by hetero males, not to mention the fact that I thought I would be the only guy there.  Turns out that my apprehensions were unfounded and I discovered that everyone there was very friendly and inviting.  The discussion too was very pleasant and there were homemade snacks aplenty.  Everyone there was also really interesting.  There were activists, artists, writers, all sorts of creative, social justice types.

Anyway the book that we talked about was bell hooks' All About Love: New Visions.  Bell hooks is quite an interesting woman, and a very important and respected thinker.  She has written a lot on the connections between race, class and gender and how they are able to perpetuate systems of oppression.

Hooks writes about different kinds of love from romantic love, to friendship, to familial love and as a lot of great insight to offer.  She examines how love has been written about in the past and how it has been gendered.  How women and men have both been cultured to love, and the problems of how to love completely within a patriarchal society.  Often the book is intensely personal as she draws upon her own experiences with love, and this honesty was very refreshing.

I am someone who tends to distrust critical and cultural theorists often because of how abstract, and full of jargon a lot of writing can be.  While a lot of writing can be quite fascinating, there is a big gulf between academic theory and lived experience.  I get the feeling of theorists talking the talk, but stumbling when it comes time to walk the walk.  That's why All About Love is so interesting because throughout reading it I got the sense of hooks trying to walk that walk.

In the book she attempts to rewrite a definition of love, "the word "love" is most often defined as a noun, yet...we would all love to better if we used it as a verb."  What she means by this is that love is not actually a feeling, as we have been cultured to believe, but something that we do.  I certainly found this to be a really interesting and useful idea, and there were times when I felt so electrified by what she had to say that I wanted to run out and tell everyone I knew about this.

The chapters on communication, honesty, and ethics were just a few of the standouts for me.  And the chapter on justice and children, made me want to go raise a kid, just based on the strengths of hooks's ideas.  I wish I could get more into her ideas here but sadly this is simply a review.

Unfortunately, I also found a lot of the book to be downright bad.  My experience of reading it was so strange because I felt I alternated wildly between being thrilled by what hooks was saying, and then just trying to slog through the muck of large badly written sections.  In the end it became a hunt to try to just find those incredible moments of brilliance.

Come on Artax!  We've got to get out of this swamp of self-help!

Throughout the book, hooks heavily references various self-help books dealing with love.  Often she does this with a great deal of criticality that cuts through the treacle to get to the useful bits, but I found that at times her criticality faltered and she became a sort of Oprah Winfrey character who would just heap praise on inane self-help authors.  She would say things like, "so and so's profound insight helps to illuminate this revolutionary idea when they say..."  then she goes on to give a quote that is not profound at all and actually incredibly dull and banal.

Other times hooks would end up taking up the writing style of a self-help book.  One common thing that pops up in self-help writing is to back up whatever argument that is being made with anecdotal evidence.  This thing happened to my friend Joe's daughter so it perfectly backs up what I have to say.  Superficial arguments back up by flimsy evidence is something that I would expect from something like The Secret, or, Rich Dad, Poor Dad, but I expect a little more from such an esteemed thinker as bell hooks.

I don't think I can give this book a wholehearted recommendation.  There is so much about it that is so infuriating, or just plain irritating for me to be able to do that.  The bad parts where so damn bad, but when the book was good, it was out of this world.

Next week.  Back to business.  Plus at least 50% more dumb pictures.

Mom, Dad... I'm a feminist.

Now that I have one posting under my belt, I've already started to receive some comments on this blog.  Most of the comments are from friends and they are mainly encouraging.  I have gotten one comment from a male friend that is a bit confounding though.  To paraphrase, he said, "I used to believe what you believe about feminism but then I researched it some more and that got me quite alienated and depressed".  Basically he said men can't be feminists.  He then went on to give me a list of resources that I should look at, that look quite interesting.

While the book suggestions are extremely helpful, the comment about, men not being able to be feminists, was extremely disappointing not to mention condescending.  It was disappointing because it signals exactly what I was talking about when I said that feminism is a marginalized ideology, and because it is a marker of problems with thinking about agency, and authorship.  If we say that men cannot care about feminism because they are not women, does that mean that we then have to also say that non-aboriginal people cannot care about first-nations issues because they are not first nations?  Or that straight people can't care about gay rights, or white people for racial equality, or whatever?

The frustration that my friend expressed was because he was unable to find some common ground on which to stand with "official" feminists.  He wanted to be included but all his research told him that he cannot be.  That all men are the problem, instead of, patriarchal societal structures which create toxic gender stereotypes, are the problem.

The real reason I started this blog.

I do not believe that I am being naive, when I say that I can be a feminist.  While I am aware that there is a great deal written about how all men are oppressors, and all men are the enemy, I also know that this is not the majority opinion.

Like another friend of mine said, "there are a LOT of different "feminisms", but I see feminism as basically meaning that women and men deserve the same rights, and that it's worthwhile to study ways in which cultures have caused gender-based bias and oppression, so we can all have more freedom AND respect for one another."  This sounds pretty good.  Haven't gone over to the dark side yet.

Apparently this is the true face of feminism according to  this site.

But I believe that I am getting ahead of myself.  All this talk about patriarchy, agency, toxic gender stereotypes, and whatnot.  I think it's worthwhile to start at the bottom with a definition.  A good place to begin my journey might be by starting with a "lowest common denominator" definition of feminism.  One that would cover the most ground and provide some sort of compass for my explorations.  Probably the best source for lowest common denominator definitions is Wikipedia. 


Here's what it has to say. "Feminism refers to movements aimed at defining, establishing and defending equal political, economic, and social rights and equal opportunities for women."  Alright.  This sounds pretty good as well.  Can't really argue with wanting to bring about equality.  Maybe it's just that I've watched too much Star Trek, but equality seems like it would be pretty nice, and maybe a lot of fun.  Not to mention all that galavanting around the galaxy and whatnot.

Or would it...

The war of the sexes just got sexier.

Anyway, so now we have a very basic working definition of what feminism is.  But can men be a part of this?  Well I certainly think so.  Further down the wikipedia site there is a lot of really encouraging stuff regarding men and the struggle for women's rights.  There is however one bit that says, 

Other feminist women argue that men cannot be feminists, being incapable simply because, in terms of their acculturation, they are not women. They maintain that men are granted inherent privileges that prevent them from identifying with feminist struggles, thus making it impossible for them to identify with feminists.

To me this sounds more like a problem with naming rather than a problem of inclusion.  That the idea of men calling themselves feminists would in a sense dilute to power of when women identify themselves as feminists.  Ok that's fine.  I don't really agree, and I'm going to do it anyway.

What about women who say that all men are oppressors?  Well obviously I don't agree there either.  I don't think I really need to point out that as a man, I had the luck of being born in a very privileged position, but any feminist ideology that does not eventually include men is inevitably doomed to failure.  There can be no equality without inclusion.

"I'm so sick of that douchbag calling himself a feminist.  Just look at that idiot baking a cake."

By now you might be thinking to yourself, okay, okay, enough already!  So you consider yourself a feminist.  Big deal.  Get on with it.  Surely your blog isn't going to consist of wikipedia and dumb pictures?  While that might not be such a bad idea, and not to mention, highly entertaining, I have been doing some research.  Hard to believe I know.

Next week!  The feminist book club.  A review of bell hooks' All About Love: New Visions!  And more wikipedia and dumb pictures!

Feminists in the mist

I am a male, and I consider myself a feminist.  That may seem like a strange thing for a man to identify himself as nowadays.  I've heard a lot of talk from people claiming that the job of feminism is done.  That we have achieved equality and equity.  That feminism is obsolete.  And besides, isn't feminism only about women anyways?

These notions are precisely what inspired me to start writing this blog.  Feminism doesn't just matter, it might matter now more than it has before; albeit in a different way.  We don't live in the world of TVs Mad Men anymore, the playing field is much different now, and maybe more complicated.

As for feminism relating only to women, that's false.  My understanding of feminism has always been understanding power dynamics, notions of identity, and how gender is performance fraught with expectation to adhere to established orthodoxy.

Perhaps I should talk more about why I decided to start this blog.  I don't really know that much about feminism.  I have a sense of feminism being extremely important, but I don't think I know as much as I should about it.  At the heart of it, feminism is a humanist ideology, and needs to be understood on those grounds.  The problem that I have encountered though is that there is so much out there it is quite daunting trying to find a starting point.

Every time I walk into the women's studies section of my local bookstore or library, I have no idea of where to start.

As an ideology, to an outsider, it can feel a bit insular, but I also get the feeling that it is one that is quite marginalized.  In a way, all ideologies or philosophies are quite insular, and difficult for outsiders to get into.  But people already have a sense of who are the prime movers and shakers in other ideologies, philosophies, or sciences.  Most people, who might have access to reading this already, are already familiar with names like: Marx, Lenin, Nietzsche, Plato, Freud, Darwin, or Einstein.  When it comes to feminism however, it seems like a person would have to already know a bit about it before they could name any of the important people.  Right now, I don't think I could name five prime feminist thinkers.  I want to change that, and this blog is a tool for me to to advance my own knowledge of feminism and to work through what I might learn about it.

So how can I consider myself a feminist when I don't feel that I know that much about it?  Well, like I said, feminism is at its heart a humanist ideology, and I care very much about people, and about treating them properly.  I think that's enough for me to be sure of for me to feel comfortable identifying myself as a feminist.

As for feminism being something that is marginalized, I say this because I don't really feel like people really take it seriously anymore.  Like I said, I have heard people say that feminism's job is done and now it's obsolete.  This is something that is troubling enough when men say it, but it's downright disturbing when women say it.

There is an astounding amount of evidence in the world showing that gender inequalities still exist and that double standards still rule the day.  It is easy enough to turn on the television or open a magazine or do a google search to figure this out. 

I will leave you with the result of a google image search of my own.  I typed in "women's studies", and this is what I got.

 

 Hopefully nothing comes to blows for me.