Hey Kobi,

Here are a couple sites that can give you a huge boost. You may have to do the six degrees of separation on some, as they are chock full of links . I have started doing a lot more reading thanks to conversations here. Again, thanks for the wonderful, albeit sometimes "uncomfortable" reminders of the importance of feminism in our lives.

Feminist Theory Website:
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/feminism/

Women's Studies and Online Resources:
http://userpages.umbc.edu/~korenman/wmst/

National Women's Studies Association:
http://www.nwsa.org/research/theguide/index.php

Artemis Guide to Women's Studies in the U.S.:
http://www.artemisguide.com/

Women and Gender Studies Web Sites:
http://libr.org/wss/wsslinks/index.html

Happy hunting!

I read this about 5-years ago and am sure it is just as timely. The description is from Google Books.

Identity poetics: race, class, and the lesbian-feminist roots of queer theory
Linda Garber

Columbia University Press, 2001 - Social Science - 262 pages
"Queer theory," asserts Linda Garber, "alternately buries and vilifies lesbian feminism, missing its valuable insights and ignoring its rich contributions." Rejecting the either/or choice between lesbianism and queer theory, she favors an inclusive approach that defies current factionalism. In an eloquent challenge to the privileging of queer theory in the academy, Garber calls for recognition of the historical -- and intellectually significant -- role of lesbian poets as theorists of lesbian identity and activism.

The connections, Garber shows, are most clearly seen when looking at the pivotal work of working-class lesbians/lesbians of color whose articulations of multiple, simultaneous identity positions and activist politics both belong to lesbian feminism and presage queer theory. "Identity Poetics" includes a critical overview of recent historical writing about the women's and lesbian-feminist movements of the 1970s; discussions of the works of Judy Grahn, Pat Parker, Audre Lorde, Adrienne Rich, and Gloria AnzaldAa; and, finally, a chapter on the rise and hegemony of queer theory within lesbigay studies.

Kobi:

I don't have any suggestions at the moment, but just to say that hopefully within a year or so, if I can find a publisher, there'll be another book on this general theme. :)

Cheers
Adrienne

Great quote, Anya/Georgia. It's exactly as stated, I've seen it first hand.

I can't, I won't, rend my lesbianism from my Feminism. I don't care what new, kitschy "theory" comes along, or how much pressure is brought to bear to buy into it. My understanding of myself as a white privileged, woman and lesbian was illuminated for me by Feminism. It gave me an informed, humanistic/heuristic/moral center from which to function in the world that took me beyond self-preoccupation without insight. As I said earlier, Feminism is based in the personal is political - queer theory is based in the political is personal . That semantic shift is huge.

I'll have a lot to say about this, and will, in the coming days. Just now, I'm in a make or break battle with Patriarchy.... My Feminism tells me to reach out to other lesbian women who have been through this. Queer theory tells me to change myself and my wardrobe.

Chazz:

With your kind permission, I would like to use the text I highlighted in red as an epigraph.

Cheers
Aj

Umm, I'm not seeing anything highlighted in red.

[QUOTE=Chazz;396275]I'm in a make or break battle with Patriarchy.... My Feminism tells me to reach out to other lesbian women who have been through this. Queer theory tells me to change myself and my wardrobe.[/QUOTE]

I'll wager this is what Aj intended to highlight.

Reach out Chazz, reach out!

Strength and courage,
Heart

Chazz:

Sorry about that, thought I'd done the text color inside the quoting correctly. Obviously not. This is what happens when I try to do intelligent things before the second cup of coffee.

What I'd like to quote you on, again with your kind permission, is this:

Feminism is based in the personal is political - queer theory is based in the political is personal.

Cheers
Aj

[quote=Heart;396295]This would ALSO be a great epigraph.

Cheers
Aj

Chazz,
This statement has echoed through my head since I read it earlier. It very much sounds like my state of mind in my younger days when I was about to sell everything, get off the grid and move to womyn's land. I didn't, as I felt that was too extreme then, as it was a complete reaction to being fed up with the "patiarchy" and just sharing my part of the world with men in general. In as much as I wanted to just be done with dealing with what I saw as my foe, I thought it better somehow, to stay and make my stand.

This may not be at all what you are alluding to. Could you please explain the "make it or break it battle" you are going through?

Thanks.

A child custody battle with a father who is abusive, rabidly homophobic and misogynist, watches porn with his 6 year old son, doesn't pay child support, files false CPS reposts, sees his son as a trophy of his male prowess rather that a human being, refuses to see that his son is a "special needs child" (and stands in the way of his getting services) ---- and, a Family Court judge who is all about "Father's Rights" and just awarded "Dad" joint custody.

Thanks. I'm sorry that this "battle" is not a metaphor and it is very much reality. I didn't mean to pry. To me, the broadness of your earlier post felt much more ethereal than a situation such as this.
I hate hearing of the countless stories like this. I am never sure whether to light a candle and send out positive thoughts into the universe or to gift wrap a Louisville slugger and send it to you.
Thanks again, take care.

Oh, so not alone! Looking toward your future works with great excitment!

Thank you, my Sisters.

As to my "battle" - all women's "battle" - being reality or metaphor..... All women's "battles" are both at once. This is what breeds (in "us") complacency, resignation, defeatism, self-disavowal, self-loathing, self-negation, mindless self-preoccupation, depoliticalization - and, horizontal oppression. Many times, all at once.

The "battle" with misogyny is the one-on-one of it, as in: I'm dealing with a misogynist individual.... The "battle" with patriarchy is the systemic front of the "battle". Misogyny begets patriarchy begets misogyny begets.... it's an endless loop of self-reification that is so pervasive many of us cannot look it in the eye, or take its full measure on a macrolevel. It's too much to process or bear. So we deny it, bargain with it, concede to it, or glimpse at it with one eye that is, itself, half shut. A body has gotta survive, after all.

I, like most female human beings who strive for some measure of peace and serenity, want to believe things have gotten better in the sexism department. Superficially, they have. People have become adroit at using PC language and gestures, usually when the stakes are low. That is the public face of benevolent sexism.... But when the stakes are high(er) and something of genuine value is on the line (i.e. wages, a promotion, a legal decision, equal rights legislation, budget debates, a child....), all pretense of parity and gender equity goes out the window.

Think, I mean REALLY think for a minute: "Who's interests are most at risk (REALLY, REALLY) in the budget debate? Women and children's - that's who. The services and programs most essential to "us" are the ones taking the biggest hits. (Marginal men's, too, but to a lesser degree.)

Look around.... state after state is tightening the restrictions on abortion. Why should I care, I'm a butch.... I care because "when they came for the gypsies, "I" said nothing....".

To the extent that we have all become so self-preoccupied with our gender identities, labels, neologisms, and wars.... we have abdicated our obligations to ourselves and one another. The System doesn't care what pronoun you or I use. It still sees us as children of a lesser God because we're woman or para men (in its mind).... It thinks this even as it (patriarchy) smiles in "our" faces and says otherwise, but only, when the stakes are low.

Feminism, NOT gender theory, addresses these things. Feminism canonizes "us" over "I" --- gender theory canonizes "I" over "us". The later leaves us standing alone in our consecrated subjectivity or, at best, marginally unified in some version of "Im okay, you're okay", but don't you dare ask too many questions 'cause we've got a "tent" to erect. (Tents, big or small, do not offer good cover in a war.)

Patriarchy has every tool at its disposal - it owns the System. It's perfected its dominion over our lives and our minds. Its most effective backlash against 2nd Wave Feminists was to turn women against Feminism (i.e. ourselves) and give us gender theory - a self-negating ideology that leaves us elbowing each other for a higher place on a mythical hierarchy for a bigger piece of the patriarchal pie. Ya gotta give it to patriarchy - it's brilliant

Chazz,
 

You can not see me right now but I am giving you a standing ovation.

Yes, yes and yes, again for your oh-so eloquent post. It reminds me so well of all the reasons why my feminism is so much a part of who I am.

I have pushed it down, dampened my feelings and beliefs in order to work, raise my children to their own respective womanhood and to be able to support them.

Thank you.

To everyone who has been messaging me.... THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU ! ! ! ! :gimmehug:

And for good measure: XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

So there......


Here's the short of it.....

Was in a relationship with a woman for 8 years. Her daughter was 4 when we met. I raised that child as my own and became "Momma".

It was an interracial relationship (strange term that; aren't we all of the human race?). Mentioning race to say: This beautiful child was my teacher in so many ways. We cried, together, so many days when she arrived home from school because she was the only Black child in her class, and the butt of much taunting. (I live in a white, middle-class ghetto.) I still cannot find words for the hurt and rage I felt over her having to go through that. I felt so powerless and ill-equipped, so I cried with her.

(Keep it short, Chazz).... Anyway, her bio mother - who was always ambivalent towards her own child, even resented her - ceded most of the parenting to me. I loved it, even as it conjured nurturing feelings in me that were inconsistent with my understanding of myself as a mega masculine butch. (This was a large part of what prompted me to begin reclaiming my woman-self. I'll get to that at some point. Remind me, I get distracted....)

Then, it all went to hell, to this day I'm not entirely sure why?!?!? But, $50,000+ later in legal fees over a multi year custody battle and subsequent debt.... bio Mom gets herself in a (legal) jam, cleans out my bank account, taps out my credit cards, goes to work one day and never comes home (not so much as a phone call since) and hands over full custody of the child to her homophobic father. I haven't seen, or spoken to, "my" little girl since.

I spent two years fending off creditors not of my making (almost lost my house), but worse, I lived in a traumatized emotional stupor. I still mourn.

Always the optimist, I decide the solution for bad love is good love.

So, I get involved with another woman with a 7 year old son.... His father (the one I referred to in a prior post in this thread) starts making false CPS reports, sues for custody based on Mom and I having fist fights and sex in the kid's presence (neither of which, ever happened - the CPS reports came back unfounded, btw), but the judge still awards him joint custody.... The negativity, stress and ugliness took it's toll on the relationship - among other things - and, we're since parted ways.

Oh the joy of being butch and loving our partners' children.

I'm not much for public displays of my private business, but.... I can't help but wonder how much sexism and homophobia played a part in these, and other struggles, in my life.

I'm still the proverbial optimist in matters of love - just dumb, I guess - but I have been forced to reconsider what "theory" best addresses the issues making my life a living hell. I'm not seeing where gender theory addresses the things I'm living through. It was fun and edgy for awhile, but outside of the LGBTQ community, how I gender identify and look, still boil down to me being a female in a patriarchal culture. And, a lesbian woman at that. If I don't do, what I don't wanna do (i.e. transition to male), I don't see that changing much under gender theory.

Joining in on the standing ovation.....
 

I think things are better for women in many ways than they were when I was a child in the 60's, but they have not changed enough I agree and since the ERA was not passed we don't see as much written about of fought for except for from those who want to make abortions and birth control harder to get and want to re-establish what counts as rape. Rape affects us all. Pregnancies due to rate affect all women. Birth control affects everyone as we get more and more overcrowded....

Also, this "give the fathers the kids" shift. The children used to always go to the mother, but now, in the name of Women's Lib...somehow the trend seems to be to give the kids to the fathers, especially if they have more money...which considering the still wide split in wages...they are likely to have.

As a child I grew up with my father telling me he had total control of me and could do anything he wanted and he was right.

Yes more has been done with children's right and yes women can own property without a man but so much more is expected of us and the trend seems to be going back to a 50's model of marriage.

It really weirds me out that things are so much more conservative now than they were in the 70's and 80's. And rarely do we hear a peep from anyone about Equal Rights for Women.

Chazz, good for you for being a stand up Mom. It is heartbreaking that anyone would use a child as a pawn in a break up or just refuse to achnowledge that someone who was in a child's life for years should have the right to at least see the child.

[QUOTE=apocalipstic;397051]The children used to always go to the mother, but now, in the name of Women's Lib...somehow the trend seems to be to give the kids to the fathers, especially if they have more money...which considering the still wide split in wages...they are likely to have.
QUOTE]

Actually, it's a fallacy that kids always went to the mother. The truth is that historically fathers rarely sought custody of their children, so mom was the default. And when fathers did contest custody, they usually won - sometimes because they had more means, and sometimes simply because they were fathers making a demand and the courts complied, even if the mother was fit.

One of the things the so-called "Father's Rights" groups have done is to stand the concept of more involved and responsible fathering on its head by taking it into the courts. They claim they want to be more involved fathers, but the truth is they are using courts as a way to exert control over their ex-wives, with their children as pawns. They have conflated "involvement" with their agenda for ownership, hijacked the Responsible Father's Movement, and shifted it to one of father's RIGHTS (the change in terminology being telling).

There are involved and loving fathers who are divorcing and want to maintain strong connections to their children via shared custody.
Usually in these situations, the divorcing parents are able to come to a mediated agreement. Some men are faced with a vindictive ex-wife who is using the courts, but that is the statistical exception. It is more common for men to manipulate custody cases, most unfounded child welfare reports are made by men, and men routinely do better in family court forensics because they control more of the resources in the family.

In short, women don't do well in family court when it comes to contested custody and visitation cases, though the myth is that family courts always favor mothers. That's what Father's Rights groups want you to believe. They were the ones behind the spurious diagnosis of "parental alienation syndrome" used against abused mothers to wrest their children away, and they were also proponants of charging mothers who had been battered in front of their kids with "failing to protect" their children from domestic violence.

There are links, articles, research, etc. There's also the fact that after speaking as an advocate on behalf of battered mothers at a state hearing in Albany a number of years ago, a father's rights nut-job tried to run the car I was in off the road.

The harsh reality is, once you enter a court, it's about power, possession, property, legitimacy, and ownership, not about relationships, and that's where men have it all over women.

And if you're a lesbian parent without a biological or legal connection to the child, facing homophobia and misogyny, (both rooted in patriarchy), your chances are bleak. It remains to be seen what kind of impact legal marriage in some states will have on parenting in gay/lesbian families.

Heart

[quote=Heart;397071]Thank you for clarifying this. In the cases I know of personally, it have been about control and money and men have more of both, so they win.

Honestly the reason I never had children of my own is that I knew here in TN that my own father would have stepped in and gotten custody. That is what happens inn places like this. I could have moved, but staying here was more important to me at the time. Having a child somewhere with no support network where I did not know any one seemed too overwhelming.

I did the best I could, apocalipstic. Thank you for the recognition.

To this day, patriarchy (and it's enforcers) still see children as possessions, chattel. Many men still "their women" this way, too. No amount of neo-age, PC rhetoric has altered that an iota.

Even when a father is little more than a sperm donor, he has total ownership of a child. It doesn't matter that said child was parented, nurtured or financially supported by someone else for years. Biology IS destiny in the concrete world whether post-modernists recognize it or not through the haze of their immanent acts of mind.



And gender theory is addressing these issues how?

I'm not an academic and not an expert in gender theory or feminist theory, by any means. But Rosi Braidotti, an Italian feminist, has criticized gender studies as: "the take-over of the feminist agenda by studies on masculinity.... promoting gender as a way of de-radicalizing the feminist agenda, and re-marketing masculinity (including gay male identity), instead."

In practice, gender theory is exactly that: "the take-over of the feminist agenda by studies on masculinity.... promoting gender as a way of de-radicalizing the feminist agenda, and re-marketing masculinity, instead...."

To that, I would add: Gender theory is also the rebranding of "womanhood", "female", "femininity" by men who cherish the binary and gender constructs because both serve their immanent acts of mind.

The bitter irony of lesbians being in the service of that agenda has turned "Sisterhood is powerful" into "Sisterhood as farce".

The popularization of gender theory (which is common in B-F-T communities), continues the worship and over-valuing of masculine/man/male, while expressing ambivalence and undervaluing of feminine/woman/female.
I don't find current expressions of "girl power," with its ongoing sexualization of children and commodification of women's bodies and sexuality, to be liberatory. And the reality is that binaries have been reinforced, rather than blurred, crossed, or jettisoned because gender theory, at least as enacted in queer communities, seems to lack any political analysis of institutionalized power.

Again, not an expert in gender theory in any way, just my observations.

Heart, you're a woman, a lesbian, with many years of experience within the "B-F-T communities" - YOU ARE AN EXPERT ! ! ! ! :gimmehug:

Another vastly different, and I think essential, aspect of Feminist/Womanist theory is that it's genesis was largely an evolve-up, grass roots form of heuristic that addresses multiple oppression (race, class, economic and ageism).... Gender theory is largely a creation of academicians and jocositists that speaks to a largely white, privileged and male identified constituency solely about gender.

Mine as well. And this lack of analysis of institutionalized power is at the "heart" of racism as well. Just more reinforcement of an unequal foundation. What is so terribly sad to me is that gender theory could be such a positive force in de-constructing this power structure.

Don't get me started on "girl power"....

How does BF play into these gender roles?

It's difficult to dismantle what we seem to play into.

But I completely see that discussions about gender analysis do nothing to help the issues facing Women eccept as it related personally.

One of the reasons gender studies started investigating masculinity -- and this was at least twenty years ago -- was that the masculine and the male were considered the baseline, the ur gender, the the model of humanness. There needed to be an historical and cross-cultural understanding of how masculinity and maleness were constructed IN ORDER to destabilize the binary, in order to understand that the idea of male identity, especially in psychoanalysis and medicine, was not a stable social fact.

To the untrained eye it looks like it stuck there.

What's missing is a social movement. That's what we're longing for. And it's not coming out of women's studies or gender studies departments. Nor should it.

Women's Studies departments were built out of a social movement, but they are now parts of academic institutions. Students may start social movements, but their professors never will.

Those who began by investigating the construct of maleness seem to have ended by fetishizing it instead. It's quite clear to me that although the intent may have once been to destabilise the gender binary, gender studies have had great success in promoting it.

Is there something transgressive about a female bodied person claiming that they are male because they resemble traditional males? Isn't that just saying that those who look and act traditionally male must BE male? What happened to dismantling assumptions about traditionally gendered behaviours?

I've been a gender transgressor for my entire lifetime. When I was six years old I boycotted the Flintstones, refusing to watch them because of the ridged gender stereotypes the show promoted. I started riding motorcycles in 1981. I instruct riders at the racetrack. I've made a living at various times as a carpenter and general contractor. Without any friends or family in the business, I earned a union card in the Stagehands Union in the mid 1980s. It's an infamously sexist and bigoted union, and 1986 was an inauspicious time for that sort of pioneering.

I've fought that war with my own body, too. I've been the object of unwanted sexual attention from men from my earliest memory. When a strong beard sprouted on my chin in my mid twenties, the attention magically disappeared. What a relief! I suddenly was free from daily verbal rape. I unselfconsciously wore my beard, along with my hairy legs, with my vintage dresses and high heeled shoes. I reasoned that anyone I wanted to know wouldn't care about my beard, or they might even admire my courage. I didn't shave it off until I was in my early 30s.

I did all of the above AS A WOMAN. I did the above declaring loudly all the while, "THIS IS WHAT A WOMAN LOOKS LIKE".

That's what it looks like to dismantle the gender binary in my world.

i do not know what has been happening in gender studies in recent years. For all i know you are right. i am not your foil in this argument. i was making a point about how the departments arose, why masculinity studies emerged and were seen as important.

Kobi, feminism never died and there are many many feminists and feminist groups engaged in action across the globe.

Start with Amnesty International, http://www.amnesty.org/en/campaigns/...-against-women, and take a look at the book I have linked in my sig line (by Nick Kristof, a feminist man).

I understand the urge, but I don't think a "pure" form of feminism exists. As has been talked about, feminism as a movement has been guilty of racism, classism, even misogyny. No social movement is without its serious blind spots and drawbacks. None can be glorified.

Heart

Great post. Just the other day I was thinking about NOW and wondering if there even was a chapter nearby any longer. I happen to think that, globally speaking, there is a war raging against women that almost no one is acknowledging.

Does anyone even know who Gloria Steinem is? Or that ERA has nothing to do with baseball or real estate? Anyone remember the Lesbian Herstory Archives? How about "Sisterhood is Powerful"?

The right has so bastardized the term Feminist that many refuse to ID as a feminist, even though they believe in feminist ideals...as long as you don't call it "feminist". Argh.

I also agree with some things you said, Heart, but it seems as though the right has succeeded in its attempt to divide and conquer.

Thanks for the links.

I am having a bit of trouble articulating what i am looking for.

The purity I am seeking isnt in a movement per se. It is purity in getting back to myself. Have had to compromise a bit much of myself of late. I was referring to getting back to my roots.

Hi, Hunter Green. I'm glad you joined the conversation.

It's not just the "right" who has succeeded in its attempts to divide and conquer. We've done it to ourselves by placing certain subjects off limits for discussion. It's as Heart said:


There is is no analysis of institutionalized power in gender theory.

Analysis of gender theory isn't tolerated in most quarters.


As if there wasn't enough fetishizing of maleness to begin with ! ! ! ! :seeingstars:

Creating terms like "masculine of center" does not destabilize the gender binary, it reinforces it. How many people outside of the LGBTQ community (or, inside of it for that matter) make a distinction between maleness and masculine? I mean, REALLY.


This statement cuts to the core of the issue, doesn't it....

In the absence of a epistemological consideration of gender theory, all that can be said of it is that it's a self-justifying, inaccessible, meme that reinforces stereotypes. There is nothing remotely transgressive about that.


meme = information held in an individual's mind, which is passed on to another individual's mind.

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that studies knowledge. It attempts to answer the basic question: what distinguishes true (adequate) knowledge from false (inadequate) knowledge?