This is feminist parenting

I wrote the following in the middle of a three-hour flight from Washington D.C. to Minneapolis on Thursday, December 20th. I would like to report that Felicity was a complete angel for Ian their entire time together.

This morning, I stepped onto a plane, waving goodbye to my husband, who had our 12-month baby strapped to his chest. This was to be the longest separation yet between myself and the baby, a whole seven hours and a half hours. I felt guiltily liberated. 

Our small family is going to Minnesota for the holidays. My husband has a conference in Atlanta immediately after Christmas, and I’m staying a week longer with my family before joining him back in New York City. We scheduled our flights separately, finding that the best price for my round-trip was to fly an hour to Washington D.C., enjoy a two and a half hour layover, and then sit on a three hour flight to Minneapolis. I booked my ticket with a lap infant, planning to have Felicity fly with me.

Ian, on the other hand, was able to purchase all direct flights. So despite lifting off thirty minutes before he would, I would arrive three and half hours later.

Two mornings ago, talking about our trip and upcoming flights as we prepared for the day, we realized how crazy it was for me to have two flights with the baby and an overall longer time waiting in airports and in the air. Ian suggested taking her. I readily agreed, knowing that I would have her on my lonesome on the journey from Minneapolis to New York City after the New Year. I recalled flying alone with her when she was a sleepy three months old and how challenging that seemed at the time. I felt happy to share the burden of parenting with my spouse.

Last night, thinking about the logistics, I started to panic. The maximum Ian and the baby have spent alone (without me easily accessible) is about four and half hours. It isn’t that he is never home or isn’t a good caretaker; he does much of the parenting when he is home, sharing in the diaper changes, feedings, baths, is in charge of bedtime, and is a really excellent and involved father. It is more the case that I am still breastfeeding. So even if I have appointments, am working, or am ill, I pop in every two to three hours, check on everyone, see if the baby needs to nurse, and generally offer an over-abundance of unnecessary ‘advice’ to my husband about baby-related things he already accomplishes with finesse.

I am in the process of weaning the baby down to one or two nursing sessions a day, and so was not so worried about an extended amount of time without breastfeeding her. Instead, I had a serious case of the maternal “what ifs”: what if her ears bother her on the flight and she screams for hours, and I’m not there to comfort her? What if she desperately decides she must nurse, adamantly giving my husband her nursing sign, refusing the soy milk, peanut butter, and fruit packets we carefully tucked into her diaper bag, and then refuses to be comforted? (This is her latest – and quite effective – tactic to get middle of the night feedings). 

As I write this, I realize our division of labor is good. This is feminist parenting. To say, I desperately would love some time to myself and would like to enjoy (as much as one can enjoy) my day in airports and in the air in solitude, with my book and my writing and my research project. To say, it makes more logistical sense for the baby to be in airports and in planes for less time, and to only have one descent, which can be so painful for little ears. To you, now that we are down to fewer nursing sessions, there is no reason why my very capable and nurturing husband can’t be the sole caretaker for the great challenge of taking a very active, newly willful, almost-toddler across the country. To say that he can handle it, no matter what the day brings. To say that even if she does get upset and cries for their entire three hour flight, it will not permanently damage her and she will be fine, and he will be fine as well. 

They were supposed to be landing about the same time my last flight was taking off. I kept my phone on as long as possible, holding it nervously in my hand, desperately wanting to know how everything went. Alas, I had to turn it off before he texted to say that they’d landed. 

Although it has been nice to be able to think about other things besides the baby, to read and not be juggling a baby on my lap, and work on editing my current research project instead of singing endless renditions of Twinkle Twinkle Little Star, the desire to know what is happening is overwhelming. I am accustomed to being in control (or at least feeling that I am in control). 

I find myself counting down the minutes until I see them: ninety minutes left in the air, another thirty or so until I can hug the baby, kiss my husband, and know that being a mother doesn’t always equate to sacrificing what I need and want.

"The Myth of the Male Decline"

Check out this interesting article in today's New York Times regarding the recent buzz about "the male decline." It's a great article, and well worth your time. Here is one particularly discouraging quote that discusses the motherhood penalty as part of the larger sexist hegemony:

Once they have children, wives usually fall further behind their husbands in earnings, partly because they are more likely to temporarily quit work or cut back when workplace policies make it hard for both parents to work full time and still meet family obligations.But this also reflects prejudice against working mothers. A few years ago, researchers at Cornell constructed fake résumés, identical in all respects except parental status. They asked college students to evaluate the fitness of candidates for employment or promotion. Mothers were much less likely to be hired. If hired, they were offered, on average, $11,000 less in starting salary and were much less likely to be deemed deserving of promotion. The researchers also submitted similar résumés in response to more than 600 actual job advertisements. Applicants identified as childless received twice as many callbacks as the supposed mothers.

 

 

 

This infographic was found alongside the article linked to above, and can be found here.

The article wraps up discussing the "male mystique," that is, how men are bound within their sex to particular roles and expectations:

Just as women who display “masculine” ambitions or behaviors on the job are often penalized, so are men who engage in traditionally female behaviors, like prioritizing family involvement. Men who take an active role in child care and housework at home are more likely than other men to be harassed at work. Men who request family leave are often viewed as weak or uncompetitive and face a greater risk of being demoted or downsized. And men who have ever quit work for family reasons end up earning significantly less than other male employees, even when controlling for the effects of age, race, education, occupation, seniority and work hours. Now men need to liberate themselves from the pressure to prove their masculinity. Contrary to the fears of some pundits, the ascent of women does not portend the end of men. It offers a new beginning for both. But women’s progress by itself is not a panacea for America’s inequities. The closer we get to achieving equality of opportunity between the sexes, the more clearly we can see that the next major obstacle to improving the well-being of most men and women is the growing socioeconomic inequality within each sex.

What do you think?

Oh, you aren't a feminist? My mistake.

Carrie Adkins wrote a really interesting piece on Nursing Clio called "I'm Not a Feminist, But... I'm Taking This Class." I love this article. Adkins writes the assumptions about what feminism is, what feminists do (or don't do), and even what feminist look like (we're all ugly, didn't you know?).

So few people, especially women, subscribe to being a feminist these days. I get it. There is a lot of baggage with the term; I think sometimes we still envision women burning their bras when we hear the word 'feminism' or imagine groups of angry women. Angry women that supposedly hate men.

It's true that there are some women out there that legitimately hate men, but they are few and far between, the equivalent of the small percentage of men and women who call themselves Muslims and are willing to blow themselves up, compared to the general, peace-loving Muslim population, that adhere to the Koran. And it's the same type of thinking, over-generalizing, that allows us to make an assumption about what a group is like based on a few extremists.

I think people legitimately don't understand what being a feminist is anymore.

Adkins writes how she loves to define feminism for her students:

Nevertheless, I feel compelled to do something to challenge my students’ “I’m not a feminist, but” mentality. I always introduce a definition of feminism at appropriate points in my classes, generally something quite basic, like “the movement for women to have rights equal to those of men.” Sometimes I’ll even add, “so, if you think women should have equal rights, congratulations, you’re a feminist! Even if you happen to be a guy!” I’ll point them to the growing online collections of “This Is What a Feminist Looks Like” images.

This issue really gets to me. I look out there, into the world, and there is still so much to be done. I don't think it's about giving women the same 'privileges' that men have. Women have been granted equality through political action, yet there is still great inequality in women's jobs, roles, what they are paid, and how they are seen in the world. Women are not given as much respect as their male counterparts. Feminism is more than changing laws. Feminism is about changing attitudes and changing perceptions. Feminism is about love and respect and acceptance.

Question: What does feminism mean to you?

Reclaim what now?

Bittylab, a new company just launched last year, is trying to get their BARE bottles off the ground. At first glance, everything seems great: the bottles are designed to mimic a woman's breast, they are free of so many of the nasty chemicals still found in many bottles and baby things, the company seems to be pro-breastfeeding, and they won a 2012 Eco Excellence Award.

Enter their marketing campaign this July on Twitter: "New Baby? Reclaim your wife. Meet BARE," and "Feeling like you're competing with your newborn for mommy's attention? Meet Bare."

While I give them (slight) props for marketing to men (whom most companies completely ignore when advertizing for baby, household, and cleaning products), Bittylab is suggesting that a wife is property to be reclaimed. As in, the wife, or her breasts, are the husband's property. Or, you know, a baby is competing for breast time because it needs to eat so it can grow and not die. Hopefully every new mom has heard by now: Breast is Best;* we should encourage as much nursing as possible!

And then let's look at the second ad for a moment. It either suggests that a) you feed your baby formula; or b) you pump and then bottle-feed your baby. The company's stance is pro-nursing, so the first is out, leaving the suggestion that a mother pump instead of nurse to save some time.

Speaking as *ahem* an experienced pumper, you would prefer that your partner stop everything, strip off her clothing, slather her nipples in lanisoh so they don't crack, connect her breasts to suction cups and a motor, and feel a little like a milking cow? While I appreciate that it's an option and enjoyed the opportunity and choice to pump when I need and wanted to, pumping is just not glamorous.** Pumps don't work as well or expediently as a baby's little bird mouth, and then you actually have to feed the baby the bottle later, not to mention wash and sanitize the bottles and pumping equipment. So it takes a lot longer, which doesn't really correspond with saving time using the bottle. Not to mention, a father really shouldn't be putting his own needs before his infant's needs. This seems to harken back to an era where the patriarch of the family was served their meal first, and makes all of the family decisions.

Oh Bittylab, why so sexist? Why such shameful advertising?

But it's okay everyone, they apologized on facebook!

Ladies, We're really sorry about the twitter campaign run last week. It was a huge miss understood and resulted in offensive messages. It was taken down yesterday. The messages had nothing to do with putting a husband needs before the baby's needs, it was more about having a little extra time for the rest of the family. Obviously the whole campaign was poorly executed. We apologize deeply for this miss understanding and assure you, from now on the campaigns will be closely monitored before they go out. Thank you for a second chance.

.... oh.... they didn't actually realize why the ads were offensive.

* While scientific studies do show that breastmilk is superior to formula for infant brain development, I fully understand that not all moms have success with breastfeeding. While I firmly believe that every mom should do their absolute best, even through the hellish acclimating period (the first 3-180 days), I do not judge those moms that are unable to continue. As long as they tried. Really hard.

** Notice how awkward our friend from 90's is here? Even though she's decked out with her special pumping bra and a cardboard computer, one can immediately tell that pumping is a really strange activity. And this picture? This picture is to actual pumping as a fast food burger ad is to the actual "product" they've convinced you is edible.

Another Reason Feminism is Still Necessary [TRIGGER]

How many times have you heard any of the following:

Is there really any need for feminism today?
Aren't men and women equal now?
Aren't we living in a post-feminist society?

 

There are so many reasons that the feminist movement is still needed today, like the gender wage gap, sexual objectification, and maternity rights, to name a few of the big ones. It still all comes down to how women and men are treated differently because of their sex organs, and there really are so many ways in which women are treated with hatred. Granted, there are some who call themselves feminists who hate men. This is not real feminism, and it is wrong. At its heart the feminist movement is about equal respect, inclusion, and love for everyone, despite sex, sexual orientation, gender identification, race, ethnicity, or social position.

Sorry about the soap box. I get really worked up when I see things like this:

This is Anita Sarkeesian, creator of Feminist Frequency. She is a media critic that offers fantastic reviews about television and movies that expose harmful tropes. You may remember her from an earlier post about the Bechdel Test.



In mid-May, Sarkeesian announced that she was fundraising on Kickstarter for a project called "Tropes vs. Women in Video Games."Her original goal was $6000. She described her project, writing the following:

I love playing video games but I’m regularly disappointed in the limited and limiting ways women are represented.  This video project will explore, analyze and deconstruct some of the most common tropes and stereotypes of female characters in games.  The series will highlight the larger recurring patterns and conventions used within the gaming industry rather than just focusing on the worst offenders.

Within 24 hours, Sarkeesian met her goal. When the fundraising closed on June 27th, 2012, Kickstarter reports a total of 6,968 backers with $158,922 raised. This in itself is pretty astounding; clearly there was a very positive response to what she is trying to do, and many people saw value in it. However, she also received a very strong negative response from some of the gaming community.

She started to receive death threats, ugly emails, and all sorts of horrific responses. Her Wikipedia page was bombarded with hateful messages and pornographic images (it has since been locked). Sources report that her phone number and address were made public to certain hate sites online. This article on New Statesman has a complete list of the harassment and bullying if you want to read the full extent of it.

Ben Spurr, a Canadian, created a video game called "Beat Up Anita Sarkeesian." Why? In his own words:

Anita Sarkeesian has not only scammed thousands of people out of over $160,000, but also uses the excuse that she is a woman to get away with whatever she damn well pleases. Any form of constructive criticism, even from fellow women, is either ignored or labelled to be sexist against her.
She claims to want gender equality in video games, but in reality, she just wants to use the fact that she was born with a vagina to get free money and sympathy from everyone who crosses her path.

Sarkeesian also received horrific comments on her youtube channel, particularly on her initial video introducing the "Tropes vs. Women in Video Games" project. It looks like (as of today) many of the death threats and most hateful things have been removed, but here are some examples of what I found looking through this evening:

Sexism isnt a problem for the gamers, it's a bonus addition, And we want that [sic]

Feminists are hypocrits.... they complain about bout this when there are sluts and hoes everywhere... lol that simple fact makes feminists a joke [sic]

Don't add well-rounded female leads and NPCs! That would destroy the games! It would be as bad as adding black kids to white schools in the 60s was!

Her throat  I want to slit it [sic]

It's anti-man in the sense that... we are the domimant power and the Feminism movement is wanting women to be on the same level men are...[sic]

There are over 14,000 comments responding to her video, many of them angry, some attacking women as a whole, some just attacking feminism.

And you have to ask, Why was there this crazy response? I understand that some may feel that there are more important projects for a young feminist researcher to be exploring, but it's a legitimate project that will take time, equipment, and funds. People donated by choice. Sarkeesian very clearly outlined her projects, and stated what additional funds would go towards if her initial goal of $6000 was met.

The hateful responses make it that much more evident that feminism is not dead or unnecessary, as many of the responses claimed. Sarkeesian has been harassed and threatened because she wants to look at stereotypes of women in video games. Many of the responses glorify violence against women, rape, and the idea that all women are "whores." Because they have vaginas.

And really, the responses are crazy. Crazy, disheartening, and genuinely disturbing in their ignorance of why violence against women is a problem, in why women want to be more than wallpaper when they're represented in pop culture, and why feminism may not be such a crazy idea after all. The responses in and of themselves prove that there is still hatred against women. And not just hatred, but disgust for a woman even wanting to critique pop culture.

And some people want to say that feminism is unnecessary. I don't think so.

[As a side note, Anita Sarkeesian has been incredibly brave throughout this whole process. I loved this cartoon by catiemonstrosity:

Way to go, Anita! It takes a lot of courage to fight back!]

What is Sexual Objectification?

While I do have mixed feelings about Ms. Magazine, as I'm sure many feminists do, there is some fantastic material from time to time.

Much like bell hook's Feminism is for Everybody is an excellent primer of feminism and explains why the feminist movement is still relevant today (and if you haven't read this book, feminist or not, you really should pick up a copy), this article from Ms. Magazine on sexual objectification is a good starting point for a conversation The piece is the first of four installations on sexual objectification, defining first what it is, then listing questions one can ask to help identify sexually objectifying material.
 
The article defines sexual objectification, writing, "If objectification is the process of representing or treating a person like an object, then sexual objectification is the process of representing or treating a person like a sex object, one that serves another’s sexual pleasure."

It's all very reminiscent of the Killing Us Softly series by Jean Kilbourne. If you're interested in advertising and objectification, much of her content is available on youtube.

(Somewhat) Brief Interviews with Lovely Ladies

My good friend L. is completing her thesis, doing research on feminist mothering and queering mothering. L. is also finishing her degree in Women's and Gender Studies at Eastern, and we started our program together in 2010. She drove to Ann Arbor today, and we sat down for a couple of hours with some iced tea at the kitchen table, and she interviewed me.

The questions were good ones, centering on my views of what feminism is, how I became a feminist, how feminism shaped my decision to have a child, birthing choices, and how I parent. In addition, we talked about whether or not 'queer' parenting is a possibility for heterosexual families, and what this would look like. (I won't write about all of this here, you can read about many of my views in this blog post).

During the interview, L. asked me about what kind of feminist community I have in New York City. I paused, and with reluctance shared that I really didn't have any feminist community at home. I didn't even really realize that I was so missing this part of my life until I stopped and thought about it. While it's true that I love my local moms' group and look forward to our weekly visits in Sakura Park, and I'm sure a handful of the moms may own up to the term 'feminist,' we don't talk about our experiences, children, and parenting through this type of filter.

I found that group through meetup.com (and I refuse to be embarrassed about this - I don't think I would have made it through those first few months without this group!), and I'm sure I could find some sort of feminist mothers' group there as well; it is New York City, after all! Or maybe I could start a fringe group in my area, I really wouldn't mind hosting that sort of thing.

Community is such an interesting thing. I was looking forward to spending more time with good friends in Ann Arbor this summer, but it turns out that without a car, and with friends moving further away, I'm spending more of my time alone (or with Ian) than I do in the New York.

You might ask, what is feminist community? Personally, feminism shapes my perspectives. It is the filter through which I process my experiences in life and make sense of the world. That said, it is incredibly valuable to have discussions with other people (and parents, specifically, now that I'm a mummy) that share this worldview, and to feel supported and supportive to others. Feminist community is a safe place to process, and sometimes, just vent.

For the feminists out there, what kind of community do you have? L. mentioned that her primary feminist community is online (though she and her husband are starting a feminist/queer parenting group next month, neat!). My feminist community consisted of my peers in my grad program until I moved, and now I really don't have any. And I miss it.

Men at Home and Feminsm

Here's an interesting article from bitch.com regarding the "mancession" and feminsm by J. Victoria Sanders.

I think it's valuable that Sanders points out that even as more dads are staying home now, the respect for what is considered "women's work" is still quite low. The general attitude is that men shouldn't have to be stay at home parents (poor men, having to cook and clean and take care of children!), and, if going back to work, these men shouldn't have to be competing for "pink collar" positions (those that are typically filled by women).

Oh to be in a world where this is equal respect for all types of jobs, especially those caring for children, our future. Personally, I think teachers should be required to have more education themselves, and should be compensated as well as doctors (and really, that physicians should earn less, but that's for a different day - who really wants to talk insurance and inflation now?).