In a strange land

I’ll do the dirty work

Saturday 9 August 2008 · 15 Comments

Cross posted

I had hoped that one of my sisters in THM had already dealt with this, but alas, they are busy on various causes, Anna caring for her children but still finding the time to write about some of the difficulties that women in China might face and that we might be complicit in, Julie caring for her wee lad and organising a debate she’s hoping to run (more on that later, we hope), Anjum caring for her children and getting posts up on THM and at her own place and finding the time to drive for 3 hours to a provincial town to talk to people about how to help migrant women, Steph doing whatever it is she does with the Suit (and Steph, I really don’t want to know any more), and so on. I’m not sure what Maia and Ms Enid Tak-Entity are up to today, but no doubt it’s interesting, and worthwhile, and feminist. Not necessarily feminist in the sense of burning bras, waving placards, and protesting, but feminist – making choices for ourselves, being busy, independent, active – doing our best to be successful women, in a very well rounded sense of success. Me? I’ve been caring for my children and my partner, getting up to date on paid work, keeping in touch with a friend who needs a bit of extra support at the moment ( a very small return for the support she has given me over the years), cooking, cleaning, sorting our finances. We’re all busy women. But someone’s got to take out the rubbish, and I think it’s my turn. So sisters, relax! I’ve got the time to step up today.

The rubbish in question being this nonsense from Noelle McCarthy, who has tossed her pretty head and decided that because she gets to make choices for herself, because she is independent, then clearly, there’s no need for feminism anymore. Feminism is past its use-by date, and no woman of any sense calls herself feminist anymore, and certainly there’s no sisterhood amongst women anymore.

Well, that’s very nice for Ms McCarthy. But I have some news for her. Sisterhood is alive and well. Women do gather and support each other, both on-line, and in person. Witness The Hand Mirror, and the tremendous community of women blogging in New Zealand, on feminism. Witness the women working in Rape Crisis and Women’s Refuge. Witness Anjum’s tremendous work with migrant women. Witness the women who supported Louise Nicholas.

More than that, we still need feminism. Women are still raped, aren’t they. Women still get pressured to conform to just one preferred body type, don’t they? Women still work the second shift, don’t they? Women still can’t guarantee that they can decide what happens to their own bodies – the abortion compromise is after all, threatened yet again in New Zealand. Women still feel that they are not portrayed as equals, and this harms their prospects at work, don’t they? Actually, that last one was reported in the newspaper for which Ms McCarthy writes.

I think that Ms McCarthy has fallen into the trap of thinking that because she has no need of feminism, despite the tremendous freedoms that feminism has brought her, then there’s no need for feminism at all. That’s a special kind of wilful blindness, to take one’s own position, and ascribe it to everyone else. Surely, the most basic form of journalism training is to get both, or all, sides of a story, and not to assume that just one person saying that x, y and z have occurred means that x, y and z really have occurred. What can’t people trained in journalism apply that basic scepticism to their own opinions?

I get tired of obviously successful women, who have acheived their success because of the freedoms that feminism has given them, opining that feminism is a dirty word that no one uses any more, and I get tired of newspaper editors giving them the space to do so. But I suppose it’s an easy-write, and editors know that it will sell, so out it goes. And it’s even better if you can get a pretty woman to say it.

Categories: Feminism · Patriarchy · Women

15 responses so far ↓

  • Mikhela // Saturday 9 August 2008 at 8:43 pm | Reply

    Yeah, nonsense…my reading of De Beauvoir and Sartre’s relationship was that he put her down repeatedly, had affairs (?) and never saw her work as as valid as his ( I read his biography almost twenty years ago so may be misremembering) ‘A very modern sort of love’, she says – sadly true.

  • homepaddock // Saturday 9 August 2008 at 9:58 pm | Reply

    But what is there is a step forward from feminism to peopleism; where issues and concerns are addressed by people because they are people’s issues and concerns.

    Sometimes a group of people or its members might be better able to help those in the group because of what they have in common. But almost always people from other groups have something to offer too.

    And sometimes by labelling an issue a particular groups issue enables those in other groups to ignore it because it’s not their concern.

    In other words sometimes women are better able to help other women, but that doesn’t mean men might not have something to offer too; and it might help prevent the side-lining of important matters as women’s issues if they were regarded as people’s issues.

    I hope you’ll excuse the link, but I’ve given a much longer response to your post here: http://homepaddock.wordpress.com/2008/08/10/peopleism-next-step-for-post-feminist-progress/

  • homepaddock // Saturday 9 August 2008 at 9:59 pm | Reply

    Whoops – that’s help prevent the sidelining …

    [Fixed!]

  • Deborah // Sunday 10 August 2008 at 8:14 am | Reply

    The Feminism 101 blog has a piece on the “why not people-ism” line: Why feminism and not just humanism?

  • Che Tibby // Sunday 10 August 2008 at 8:28 am | Reply

    my inclination is to think that ms. mccarty says such things because they appeal to her male audience…

  • Daleaway // Sunday 10 August 2008 at 10:40 am | Reply

    I think Che’s onto it.

    Like all comely young maidens, Noelle’s re-education will happen gradually as she ages, gets offered fewer opportunities and freebies, and finds a few of life’s misfortunes and encumbrances come her way and remove her youthful advantages. The “social credit” extended to young women gets gradually withdrawn as they age. Joan Collins, who is no dummy, said being a beautiful woman was like being born rich and getting steadily poorer.

    Hell’s bells, doesn’t Noelle ever look around her in the New Zealand media and wonder where all the older women disappeared to? Working for equality for women in TV would be a bloody good first task for her if she’s feeling energetic as well as smug.

  • Deborah // Sunday 10 August 2008 at 11:44 am | Reply

    Just so, Daleaway. I actually took a paragraph out of my original post, because I thought it was just too sarky, about many women realising the value of feminism as they get a few more life scars.

  • What would Hayek say // Sunday 10 August 2008 at 12:05 pm | Reply

    Ms McCarthy is not to my taste. Her report on travelling to the Ureweras and getting scared of a dead animal on the side of the road suggested that her level of reality is one that has a high level of insulation from risk (playgrounds could be too dangerous for her).

    I feel bad about dissing her, but she is the type of journalist who raises my hackles male or female. In esence someone who essentially uses the name journalism to report on their own life (also called naval gazing) and does not actually research or talk to people outside their social circle. Still there is an easy solution, which is to ignore her articles (and turn off national radio whenever she is on).

    Good blog by the way. You provide balance to my reading and a different perspective which I appreciate.

  • QoT // Sunday 10 August 2008 at 1:21 pm | Reply

    What a laundry-list of bullshit stereotypes. “Unladylike baritone, haha I listened to Ani DiFranco, wasn’t I stupid? Tee hee hee, feminism is so, like, yesterday.”

  • malcolm // Sunday 10 August 2008 at 1:34 pm | Reply

    … also called naval gazing

    You mean like the Australian coastwatchers in WWII? :-)

  • Che Tibby // Sunday 10 August 2008 at 5:53 pm | Reply

    *snark*
    my favourite noel story is me and second chef walking along oriental parade, and spotting a friend walking towards us.

    we waved, and the young lady with him waved back to us.

    it was later we discovered that it was noel, and she’d assumed we were trying to get her attention.

    lol.
    */snark*

  • Che Tibby // Monday 11 August 2008 at 4:40 am | Reply

    what the? where did my *snark* tags go?

    [WordPress ate them. I've put a sort-of fix in. Deb]

  • Carol // Monday 11 August 2008 at 6:03 pm | Reply

    Yeah, I thought it was a silly piece by Noelle too. Though by no means her silliest – this would be a piece she wrote a couple of months ago about going to a baby shower and imagining that everyone was imagining her as a glorious femme fatale, being there all lone and unattached.
    As an exercise in self-absorption it was unparalleled, which kind of reinforces Che’s anecdote.

  • Jackie Clark // Thursday 14 August 2008 at 5:02 pm | Reply

    Thanks for that, Deborah. All a bit smug, Ms Noelle. I suspect that her feminism was, indeed, informed by the music she listened to, the clothes she wore, and the very red lipstick. Bah. Young women, I feel, think it’s very hip to talk in terms of humanism – as if there were no women left in the world who were disempowered and disenfranchised by dint of birth. And it seriously appalls me at how much sexuality is used these days to get these young women what they want. One can never reject ourselves as sexual beings, but for goddess’ sake, could we wear a few more clothes, while we’re at it? Power isn’t having tits and flashing them, it’s about loving the body you’re in. Oh, and could we stop the use of the word “girl” when talking about women over the age of 20? Rant over……..

  • Julie // Friday 15 August 2008 at 6:11 am | Reply

    Jackie, I so hear you on the “girl” thing, I had a fight recently with someone on a Facebook group wall about that very thing…

Leave a Comment