ccassidy's blog

            In my third web event, I had hoped to unbind the negative stereotype that is associated with being a feminist.  This particular type of stereotyping seemed to be very relevant for the culture of Bryn Mawr and the experiences that so many students have outside of our campus.  I wanted to examine the different aspects of the negativity surrounding feminism and deconstruct the gendered fear that has become inherent to the way society views feminists.  What I discovered was that there are so many different stigmas surrounding the feminist cause and it pressures people to avoid labeling themselves as feminists.  The most interesting article that I read for my third web event was titled “The F Word: College Student's Definitions of a Feminist,” authored by J. Scott Carter and Shannon Houvouras.  This article revealed that college students no longer feel comfortable identifying as feminists in a social or political realm because of all of the negative press that the feminist movement is saddled with.  I then tried to expand on the definition of post-modern feminism, specifically ecofeminism, as a means of demonstrating that feminism is no longer exclusive to gender.  Feminism has become a movement for all intersectional identities.  And yet, the stereotype of feminism still persists in every day life, in both trivial and significant scenarios.  The question then becomes how can people, or just me as an individual, slowly change the way that the world perceives feminism.

Here are the notes that Marian, Piper, Amanda and I used for our presentation on Ecofeminism

Ecofeminist meal

• Salted kale chips
•      Reference to the “Book of Salt”
• Tabouli Salad
• Spinach salad

History of Ecofeminism

• Ecofeminism is new branch of feminism that focuses on riding the world of any hierarchical structures.  This sector of feminism addresses the “self” and “other” as a subject and an object.    
• ecofeminism as an extension of intesectionality
• need to be open-minded because this could be the way that people looked at first wave feminism
• “Particularly, ecofeminists attack patriarchal society's dualistic thinking, wherein one side of the dualism reflects the "self" or the subject, while the second represents the "other" or the object. The object is considered only insofar as it can benefit the subject.”
• “The movement wants to create an interconnected community, void of hierarchies, where all beings -- human, non-human, and members of the organic world -- have their own intrinsic value and are part of the same living organism, the earth.”
• Women’s Studies Librarians Office
• University of Wisconsin System
• http://womenst.library.wisc.edu/bibliogs/ecofem.html

Accessibility

Here is a link to the source we referenced in our presentation on Ecofeminism:

http://womenst.library.wisc.edu/bibliogs/ecofem.html

We hope that our presentation answered any questions, opened everyone's mind to the possibilities that Ecofeminism has to offer and accurately recognized the reality to the movement.

Here is a link to the source we referenced in our presentation on Ecofeminism:

http://womenst.library.wisc.edu/bibliogs/ecofem.html

We hope that our presentation answered any questions, opened everyone's mind to the possibilities that Ecofeminism has to offer and accurately recognized the reality to the movement.

     The first wave of feminism was characterized by its overwhelming strength and empowered voice for the women who had been oppressed by the male gender.  During that era, feminism became a radical notion supported by women who would not be silenced by a ruling class.  Since then, the dynamics of feminism have changed to focus on intersectional identities as a more inclusive method of removing a broader oppressive force.  However, a negative stereotype concerning feminists has persisted, enforcing the idea that anyone who identifies with a feminist policy is automatically a flaming radical who harbors a deep hatred of the male gender.  While many feminists still fight against a traditional, male-dominated society that is still present, post-modern feminists are beginning to focus their attention on a more general entity that is being oppressive.  This new sector of modern feminists looks less at oppression in terms of gender but as a force brought on by anyone suppressing a voice or opinion.  It is time for the negative stereotype surrounding feminists to be deconstructed and unbound so that the feminist movement can be accessible to all intersectional identities.

I thought it was interesting that Judith Butler strongly emphasized a person’s concept of “self” as being connected to different relationships that are cultivated.  This is why I found Butler’s text the most accessible of the theoretical texts that we have read thus far.  I have found that most of my relationships have played a huge role in defining and discovering who I am as a person.  There are many people who would argue that too much interdependence can be dangerous. That being independent is the only way to move forward in life. 

One of my favorite singers, Sara Bareilles, recently released an album called The Blessed Unrest and one of the tracks is called “Islands.”  Whenever I listened to this song, I interpreted the message to mean that human beings are all islands and that becoming dependent on one another is dangerous and problematic.  Today I went back and listened to this song with Judith Butler and interdependence in mind.  To me, the song seems to have a different meaning now.  I think the message could be interpreted as a call to humans, or islands, to become more dependent on other islands to survive.  It seems that every time I listen to this sing it means something else but right now it feels like a call social dependence as a means of creating a “self.”      

Here is a link to listen to the song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPOhGIpZjKU

I thought Tuesday’s discussion about whether or not a person has a right to know what I am thinking in the classroom was very interesting.  Personally, I do not think that anyone has right to my thoughts.  There certainly is a requirement to speak for participation reasons but is a requirement the same as a right?  My first Serendip web event focused on silence in the classroom and a possible strategy to overcome that silence but one of the essays I read for this web event talked about the vulnerability to silence. 

           (Here is the reference made in my web event) 

           In the essay, "The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People's Children,” Lisa Deplit claims that speaking in class should make us “vulnerable enough to allow the world to turn upside down in order to allow the realities of other to edge themselves into our consciousness” (297). 

Re-reading my web event with this new context of a right to hear thoughts made me wonder if anyone has a right to my vulnerability.  It may not be the intention but it can be a consequence.  Forced speech could become forced vulnerability.  This may or may not be the thought process of the people who maintain their right to silence but I thought it was an interesting connection. 

I thought it was interesting that in class on Thursday we came to conclusion that Heidi Hartmann was a power feminist.  I didn’t realize this at the time but one of the questions I had brought with me to Tuesday’s class challenges this idea of power feminism.  I was really intrigued my the family first economic policy that would allow for families with newborn children to take time off of work to care for the child without losing a significant amount of compensation.  What Hartmann failed to address was how a company would maintain the same level of productivity.  Would staff members who are single and without a family have to work extra hours? Would they receive extra compensation for those added hours? Maybe this is a prime example of normative time and requirements for productivity but this seems like a flaw in this economic plan that’s striving for leveling the playing field between men and women.  After Thursday’s class and our defining of the term ‘power feminist,’ I realized that this economic plan attempts to create equality by placing an unwarranted burden others who may or may not have the same familial complications. 

I thought it was interesting that one of the questions asked at the end of class on Thursday was whether or not Gayl Jones was intentionally trying to make the reader uncomfortable with her graphic language in Eva’s Man.  For me, the detail and word choice of the story was definitely very challenging to read in one sitting.  The graphic detail is overwhelming and part of me just did not want to recognize that, while this is fiction, the story is very real.  That being said, I don’t think that Jones had any obligation to filter the story so that is would be an easier or more accessible read.  The reason it is accessible as it stands now is because it tells the truth.  We discussed this topic earlier on in the semester, whether or not is the responsibility of the author or the reader to make decisions about accessibility.  I personally think that I would not have had such an intense reaction to the story if it had been filtered.  As difficult as it was to read, would the story have had as much of an impact if it hadn’t told to whole truth?          

            Many people have perpetuated a certain preface for high school: it is a time for self-discovery or reinvention.  There is this build-up, a significant drumroll, which inspires middle school students to believe in change and, hopefully, acceptance.  Maybe this is a naïve perception of secondary education. Maybe this can more accurately describe the college experience.  Nonetheless, there seems to be a sense of anticipation and optimism surrounding the concept of high school.  Having been a jaded high school graduate for two years now, it has become clear just how constrictive and heteronormative my experience was.  There are ways in which a high school institution could change its curriculum to include certain courses that could expand the minds of high school students in a way that leaves them more open to intersectional identities.  Queering the high school curriculum to include gender and sexuality courses would allow for the discussion of socially ‘taboo’ topics.  If these personal opinions, theories and identities are addressed at an earlier stage in education, it would make these topics more accessible and less foreign when they are encountered later on in life.