That's So Deep

Picture this: Fellowship Hour at church with some good chili. Myself and three others get into a discussion about feminism. I ask the two guys: are you a feminist? Both are hesitant to simply say “yes.” Those pesky “extreme” feminists get in the way. And so proceeds an hour long conversation about feminism. I’m not sure I didn’t scare some grown folks – I get very passionate.

But here were two examples of guys who were trying to understand, who were listening to me and I to them. It’s always wonderful to have those kinds of conversations. I want to work so hard at dispelling the myth that feminism is only for women. It is also for men. And it isn’t just about “women can do whatever men can do,” but understanding the standards and social constructs that privilege men. Often I respond angrily in situations because of how I am made to feel, as a woman, whether belittled or silenced or inadequate or objectified.

So I am feminist.

But I sometimes have trouble saying that. It’s loaded. It means so much to so many different people – many times unflattering perspectives. Not only that but it is just complicated. As we had this conversation, I was well aware that I was speaking to a black man and a white man. Gender is not the only factor at play in our experiences and relationships. Because, while I lack one privilege, I have another.

I hesitate to firmly announce “I am feminist, hear me roar,” when feminism historically has been a space for the voices of white women. White women have employed their white privilege, even as they demand men to relinquish theirs. And because of that, as you suggest, white women sacrifice their wholeness.

I think my hesitation in fully claiming the “feminist” title (no caveats) is a part of my own attempt at claiming wholeness. The idea of wholeness gives me shivers. The idea of claiming myself – no caveats – is miraculous. But as I strive, I will continue to add my asterisks: I am feminist.*


*Sort of. 

PS – I love blogging. This post went in a direction I didn’t intend and I love it – blogging as therapy indeed. 

Geeze Liz,

You’re right. This is deeeep and extremely layered.

When I first read this article and your post, the first questions that came to mind are: “What is really the problem here? Why is it considered controversial in the first place?”

Obviously, there is no simple answer to those questions, but I think that they are pretty good starting points when attempting to think through these issues.

One of the first things I reacted to when I initially read the article (on hipsters using food stamps at local farmers markets and organic stores), was that it was almost completely lacking in seriousness. Which to be honest, was extremely off-putting. The purpose seemed to be to highlight the irony of being young, college-educated, unemployed, BUT (….wait for it) still privileged—continuing to hold a wealth of cultural and social capital, while learning to maintain it on a budget. You are right. We are not given much background information for the individuals profiled in the article, but I think it is safe to say that they are used to certain lifestyles, which would not normally include financial assistance from the government; hence, the irony. At the same time, however, the article brought up several interesting points about the ways we think of the poor in this country.

There is a general “expectation” or assumption about those who are on government assistance. We don’t assume that one would use food stamps at a farmers market or an organic store (first of all, I really didn’t even know that you could until I read the article). We assume that if you are on food stamps, you can’t afford organic foods. We assume that if you can’t afford organic foods, you can’t afford to live in areas with organic grocery stores and locally grown fresh produce (which is a reality for many).

So there it is—privilege, stigma, and access.

How do stories of “hipsters” (and other individuals who do not “fit into our framework”) on food stamps change the way we think about the “poor?” What is the relationship here between cultural, social, and economic capital? How does this complicate our understanding of being “poor”…and “privileged?”

I agree with you—the stigma isn’t decreasing. “Hipsters” and other “middle-class” individuals on food stamps get a pass. If you’re young, college-educated, unemployed, and struggling—blame it on the recession (which is legit). BUT, if you’re uneducated, unemployed, and have always been poor—you have nobody to blame but yourself. (Hmmm…really though?)

Personally, I am pro-food stamps for those who need it. To be completely honest, after reading the articles, and reflecting on my own situation—living in a studio apartment with two other people in order to front all that I can of my meager salary toward bills, student loans, and sending funds home to help out my own family who have been hit hard by the recession in the past year—I checked to see if I was eligible. As it turns out, I’m not….but…I checked. And that’s real talk.

***shrugs*** Just sayin.