I've been having an interesting conversation with another commenter (elsmith7) on the comment thread about women changing their last names after marriage and it's made me think about some larger issues of how we view the daily practice of feminism. We were arguing (in a very polite way, I hope!) about whether you can differentiate the act of choosing from the choice itself. I said that when a woman sits down and thinks about the decision of naming herself, regardless of what she chooses, she has engaged in a feminist moment of choosing her own identity. The other commenter countered that when a woman chooses to keep her own name, she is in fact striking a blow against the partiarchy, and in this sense, it is her choice itself which is feminist, rather than the process by which she obtains it.
This coversation, however, has made me think about "choice feminism" in general and what it really means to us today. As pro-choice advocates for reproductive rights, we talk about the choosing process as inherently femininst. Whatever a woman decides to do with her body and her fetus, I think most of us would agree that it can be seen as a feminist decision because it was made with her initiative and expressed her control and physical agency. It is not the abortion or the newborn that is feminist; it is the decision which the woman made. However,this argument seems to become more complicated when talking about women choosing to be stay at home moms or to take their husband's last name, things that seem to traditionally support partriarchal systems. And yet, when a woman engages in a thought process about one of these issues, isn't she essentially engaging in a feminist discourse? Isn't it a feminist act to consider those options which feminism has given us, regardless of the end result, to exercise complete power and control of our destinies and identities? Can we talk about the choosing process itself as an abstract system of feminist engagement?
Just to complicate things a little more, I'd like to focus on a particularly thorny example. I've recently become fascinated with JOFA, the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance, www.jofa.org. The idea of Jewish Orthodox feminists, who willingly live within a particularly partriarchal religious system and yet consistently engage with that system itself to allow feminism to foster and grow within it, is a powerful challenge to the way so many of us view feminism. I would argue that in such a social system, in which the choosing process itself becomes a rebellious act due to the relative lack of options which can be contained and sanctioned by Orthodox Judaism (compared to mainstream, secular society), simply integrating a worldview that includes feminism and feminist options is ultimately significant, regardless of the daily choices which these women end up making. For example, a woman who thinks about expanding her role in synagogue prayer (a traditionally masculine obligation), thus redefining her concept of what it means "to be a woman" in the eyes of G-d, has in my opinion engaged in feminism and has had a truly feminist moment, even if her eventual decision does not challenge the patriarchy. I'm sure a similiar argument could be made for other traditionally patriarchal religions.
I'm really interested in hearing what others think about this. Is it the choices we make which make us feminists? Or, is it when we exercise our right to choose?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Feminist Choosing or Feminist Choice?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16732
IMHO, it's a bit of both.
A woman who works without really considering that decision isn't inherently any more feminist than a woman who stays home similarly unthinking. And, yet, we can't ignore the associations our decisions have.
In the end, it's about making your life as good and fundamentally satisfying as you can. So, maybe I do choose to stay home. But I also have my own bank accounts, insist on getting an equitable amount of help around the house from my husband, and look after the kid of a single-mom neighbor who's going to law school so she a) can leave him with someone she knows well and b) wouldn't have to pay me as much as a formal day care center.
Well, it has to be about choosing, doesn't it?
The bad thing about patriarchy is not so much patriarchy itself, but the fact that we have this rigid societal structure that prevents us from making choices at all. "Patriarchy" certainly defines how that society is structured, and which limited roles are available to each person, but swapping "patriarchy" for yet another rigid societal structure that strips away choices isn't much of a victory.
So we have to blow it wide open and create a society where each person gets to consider their situation and make decisions that are best for them. Some women will pick changing their names. Some men will. Some couples will pick an entirely new name. Some won't change names at all.
And part of feminism's job is to change societal attitudes away from the traditional mindset and towards accepting that each person is going to do something different. Ideally, no one would bat an eye at a woman changing or retaining her name. So we're allowing women to make their informed choices (while we educate ourselves so we have the information needed to make those choices) and at the same time making society a better place to make those choice in.
This whole process is feminist. That's how I see it, at least.
THIS!
What scares me is how many women make 'choices' that they have never really stopped to think about at all. For a lot of people life is 'monkey see, monkey do'. I certainly believe that many, many women just (for example) take their husband's name without even considering that there are other options. Same with having children. Lots of folks are just 'it's what you do' kind of people and conformity is very important to them. Not enough people are comfortable standing tall against peer pressure and social expectations. It's like now that the LAW doesn't keep people in line (can't keep your name, can't have abortions) we rely on social pressure to get people to maintain the status quo. Instead we hear all the reasons why it's just easier to go with the flow and not make waves. It's almost refreshing to just hear someone have the guts to come out and say that they just don't have the guts, ya know?
I'm pretty sure that a large proportion of people will always prefer conformity and simple societal rules to having to think for themselves all the time. It turns out that some people intrinsically respect authority and think that you should follow laws without deciding for yourself whether or not you agree with them. Some people shy away from conflict and anything that sounds like it might be hard. No matter how much I dislike that, I find that opening minds is something that people actively resist.
Anyway, Feministing probably has a reasonable number of people who count themselves as open minded, but just joined this culture and are following it's societal rules without thinking them through. Talk to enough people on the far left and far right of the political spectrum and they start to sound the same, unthinkingly clinging to their dogma. On here it's more "If you do this particular thing you're a tool of the patriarchy."
To quote Dworkin: The choice between a shit sandwich and two shit sandwiches is not a real choice.
I think the intent is a lot more important than the act itself. Jesus criticized the Pharisees for seeming holy and going through the motions, but all for show. Feminist decisions are not made to show off, they are made from internal conviction.