n/t

Maybe it's because I don't date men, but I found most of her list of expenses rather incomprehensible. Waxing? Never done it. Never plucked my eyebrows, either. My clothing budget is miniscule, I own 2 pairs of shoes, and REFUSE to buy diet books. So I guess I'm not a very good female, eh?

the more I think it's the Ann Coulter effect: Ann Coulter says all feminists are hairy-legged, birkenstock-wearing man-haters, and we're bending over backwards trying to prove that we can also fit some arbitrary feminine stereotype.

kactus, you are awesome.

me too (not a very good female ;) ) It is years since I have worn shoes with heels, never wax and my eyebrows get more rampant with every passing year. I am far too lazy to diet, tho i am concerned with fitness as I get older and more creaky, so have started cycling more.

You might enjoy this:

Goat love

If I were a goat
I could luxuriate in
the fumy rankness of the male s
self-urinated aura.
The dung between his toes
and the yellowing tangle
of his matted haunches
could only add
to his essential goatness
and make him sweet, to me.

And he, my cloven hoofed darling,
would not compare the brightness
of my slitty eye
or the lustre of my pelt
or the firmness of my udder
to other she-goats;
his interest would only be aroused
by the scent of a female
who is as ready,
and as female,
as she can be.

But I am not a goat, so
I am expected to rid
my legs of the hair that undulates,
silky on my inner calf and
wisps down-fair under my knee.
And say goodbye to the pert tufts
that make me smile when they
bristle like pirate s beards as I
curve my arm over my head to wash.

It seems I am supposed to colour
the grey in my hair, though every
strand is hard earned, and flatten
my soft belly though
I d rather cradle it in my hands
and wonder at its impertinence.

In balancing my self against
supposeds and expecteds,
I would rather stay alone, unless
a lover happens by who
would savour the taste of me,
and not my soap.

© Angela France

Especially the hair part. As I get older hair becomes somewhat more of an issue, lol. My heart is barely working so I don't grow any hair on my legs that I have to shave--however, menopause is rearing is much-anticipated head and so the hair on my legs seems to be migrating north to my chin, hee hee. And that's what makes me laugh, because I know I'm supposed to be on those fuckers all the time, but sometimes I forget and then I've got a 2-inch hair growing out of my chin. This is really only funny, I guess, for those women of us who are getting to this age. You younger females might be appalled, perhaps :)

As for gray hair, I think it's interesting to watch. I have a friend 3 years older than me who HAS to dye her gray out now because she's been doing it so long that people would, apparently, die of shock if they saw how gray she really is. And on the other extreme, I keep finding gray hairs in my 9 year old daughter's hair. What's up with that?

I don't know--I like the smell of plain old soap, although there are some perfumes I like, but I also like the smell a man gets when he's working, although that's supposed to be gross. Once more, non-generic female here ;)

In business, a patina of professionalism includes grooming. That means clean, sharp presentations. For women, the conventions are different than for men, and for some many traditional grooming standards could be considered onerous.

Just as a man with a 3-day beard, unkempt hair and rumpled t-shirt isn't going to thrive in, say, the banking world, neither would a woman who wears Birkenstocks. (I'm not trying to paint a picture of anyone here, so I won't.)

I like to look attractive, and I confess I'm influenced by a childhood reading my (attorney) mother's fashion mags. My everyday dress outside of business meetings consists mainly of jeans, hardly ever skirts, sneakers, hardly ever heels, light make-up either way. It's a luxury for me that right now I don't need to deal with office dress codes and business attire, but my ex relished not having to wear suits, hard shoes and ties, too.

Part of my work on my hair, brows etc. is simply so that people see me for the professional that I am. If I don't do it, I don't show it. One can say, "Oh, people should see you for who you are, not how you look," but how you look reveals a lot about who you are. If I meet a client who's wearing a t-shirt, swim trunks and thongs, that tells me a lot about him.

How our culture dresses up gender can me screwy at times -- and it changes all the time. My mother tells me of her childhood when girls in school had to submit to skirt length inspection or be expelled, and I reel in shock. But paying attention to presentation, with a lot of care and work and expense, is a global phenomenon that crosses gender, culture and nation.

In other words, I don't see it as being "a very good female," but expressing oneself within the customs one finds oneself.

And I'm sure that much of my decisions in career, when I was still a working woman, were simply because I couldn't stand the idea of having to meet those standards. And it's funny, too, because I have mad office skills--type 80+ wpm, know word processing in and out, exceptional speaking and writing skills--but I just never could stand the idea of being in an office. Just the pressure of having to put on stockings every day seemed like too much, lol.

I have the luxury of mostly wearing t-shirt and jeans to work, but haven't always. There are times when I have to dress up for meetings, seminars etc - and agree that it is a question of what is appropriate.

I am writing as I think, so forgive me rambling. Long ago - before I had my daughter - I worked in the fashion trade: I travelled around a chain of fashion shops, training window dressers. Because I was 'head office staff', I was expected to be in the current seasons fashions, fully made up, glossy, bubbly and motivating. I feel that was much more oppressive than the times now when I need to dress more professionally for an occasion. I think perhaps it was because the judgement was constant, and about details: I would be criticised for something 'last season', for chipped nail varnish, for not enough make-up. That was a world of difference from dressing and presenting appropriately for the occasion/company.

Something else that occurs to me is the difference between dressing appropriately (which is often a matter of respect) and dressing to please a person (often a man). I like to feel attractive - but can't honestly say that it is attractive *to* anyone; it is just a matter of feeling good. As a poet I am often in front of an audience at readings and open mics and of course I consider how I look, and take some trouble with my appearance. I suppose that what makes me feel good, attractive, isn't neccessarily what a (stereotyped) man would find so.

Maybe I would feel different if I were looking for a partner: I have been alone for 15 years and have every intention of staying that way. I know I felt differently when I was younger: one of the delightful and unexpected benefits of the menopause is the inner confidence and certaincy I found.

I'm with you, Boudicca. I'm single too, and it would take somebody really special to make me partner up again. I just like my own company, and I like not having to rearrange my life to fit somebody else's schedule, or rearrange my self to fit their expectations. And yeah, I suppose some of it has to do with menopause, which is just down the road, but also with being a cranky old woman who's pretty much set in her ways. I like it like that.

People dress according to the role. A woman in a spit-and-polish military dress uniform will not make many sales to teens - especially if she is old enough to be a colonel.

Likewise, fully made up, glossy, bubbly and motivating young woman will not command the respect of troops.

Obviously this is an extreme example to underscore the point. At a certain age (time period in growing older) we stop going to slumber parties and trying on the latest fashion. So does our peer group.

In my own life, I recall this. In 1994, I shopped at Bebe's and they had clothes that worked for me. Then two things happened. I became seven years older and Bebe's headed for a younger crowd. I walked into a Bebe's store in 2002 and it was unrecognizable. Even if it fit - which non of it would, I would not be caught dead in those clothes. The people who do like those clothes wouldn't wear my style on a bet.

Part of the rebellion people have against fashion is a rebellion against ourselves. I reject my earlier fashion consciousness and I reject the fashions that are foisted as they are part of a younger group whose tastes seem garish - never mind-up my Bebe's "gangster suit" of 1994 was haute couture - that was stylish!

Rejecting younger fashion is moving out of an age and era where such things are important and as day-to-day lives intrude, we change. In the film "Peggy Sue Got Married," the premise is Peggy Sue's life is not working. She is having marital problems with her husband, her high school sweetheart, and in the premise of the comedy, she is thrown back in time. Now a teen again, she meets her husband to be and "the fight is on." The parents in the alternate reality (the past)ask Peggy Sue (who knows she's in the past) "what are you two love birds fighting about." "House payments."

Long set up for the punchline, but I say that is why those all important fashions no longer hold us. We worry about house payments, car repair.

Another silly story. In the 1950's "Twilight Zone," the episode is about the appliance in the house attacking the owner. In a stupid scene and electric shaves starts down the staircase, creeping along after the main character. I am a kid and say to my parents, "oh, that's stupid!" They smile and say, "wait until you become a home owner!"

LOL. The money pit.

Much of the rejection of fashion is not only generational, but also class-based, and reflects socio-economic attitudes.

This is a rich thread and topic and I hope others join in.

In her blog, she starts off describing her feminist upbringing. In fact, she was describing feminist views, or so I thought.

The annoying part of a non-feminist upbringing is how friggen long it takes a person to de-program themselves and make peace with the idea that that you are already complete.

Actually, I think this is something most everyone seems to struggle with. Lose a job, have a relationship fail, whatever, and despair can set in, and it can be a journey to separate oneself from that identity, and the value that it provided to one's self-esteem. I don't see that as a non-feminist thing, but an issue for everyone raised in this society that lives the Puritan ethic.

It was a failed relationship that brought me to feminism.... when I looked back at the reasons why it failed and noticed how each step along the way brought me to do more of the household work, led me to perform more and more self-negation to make the relationship "work", and I started realizing how each of us had expected something different, and connected what I'd been through to feminist issues.

Just because I made less money didn't really mean that cleaning the house was my job, and it was foolish of me to agree that it did.

Losing myself and trying to be everything he wanted was not the way to keep a partner.

Real partners don't treat holidays as "I'm going to visit my family for the holiday. You're welcome to come along."

...but certainly not conviction -- not without further evidence, anyway -- is that her sentiments are part of the "I am not a feminist" type of feminism, where you can only embrace feminism if you dismiss the name and distance yourself from all earlier incarnations of female empowerment (or at least the '70s versions).

I'm starting to feel kind of guilty talking about her like this. Hopefully she'll see us in her referral logs and come take a peek, and maybe join in.

the comment thread behind that post is very comprehensive and worth reading. That's the beauty of blogging--everybody has a chance to express their opinions, maybe learn something new, and maybe even have their minds changed or at least expanded.

and yes.

was in response to RedDan's questions.

But I do have a question. You said:

Marriages without husband/wife roles are something new. Of course there are stone butch lesbians who want to be husbands and lipsticks that want to be wives - but that's not feminism.

I hope you're not suggesting that these things are anti-feminism. I too came out in the 70s, and had an impossible time trying to look like the androgynous model which was what all lesbians were supposed to emulate in those days. My breasts were too big to look right in a vest. My waist was too narrow and my hips too big. I was almost laughably feminine in my body shape, although I braided my long hair back and refused make-up and tried my damndest to look the part. It really was only when I accepted and embraced my femme identity, and realized how absolutely sexy I found butch women, that I found sexual fulfillment as a lesbian.

And yeah I do find masculine women sexy. I like a butch woman who knows how to fix cars and the toilet and all that other stereotyped nonsense. I, on the other hand, am not a domestic goddess and would really rather hang out on the computer or read a good book than cook a 3-course meal for my mate. And I still don't wear make-up or dress femmy except in extreme circumstances.

I guess what I'm getting at is that gender roles, especially in a non-traditional relationship, which any lesbian relationship is by definition, still challenge the patriarchy in many subtle ways. That butch changing the oil might, indeed, be the bottom in bed. And that femme who fears chipping her nails might easily be the one wearing the strap-on. Same thing in straight relationships, too.

In my phone sex goddess days one of the most prevalent male fantasies was about being fucked in the ass by a super-feminine woman wearing a ridiculously enormous dildo. And some guys would get off just by a detailed description of my 6-inch stiletto heels tapping across the pavement.

That's one of the things that I do find refreshing about younger dykes, especially the ones who are gender-queer. They know that appearances can be VERY deceiving, and sometimes the deception is half the fun.

To your question, I was in the midst of clarifying the sentence you quoted.

In my view a marriage can be a marriage without roles based on biology. I, too, have to wonder about the statement,

I think a lot about the women I know. How hard they work, and how much they try to be better people and to understand and navigate their world. I think about everything they bring to the table. I think about what I bring to the table. And what I want in a man, is a man who can bring it, too. And I worry that my generation paid a price for the fruits of feminism. Because the men of my generation frequently seem bitter and unable to navigate their world. They seem ill-prepared to fight the good fight and succeed against the odds. We are the growing pain of progress.

If we swap the words, and let a man blog in the same way, it reads,

I think a lot about the men I know. How hard they work, and how much they try to be better people and to understand and navigate their world. I think about everything they bring to the table. I think about what I bring to the table. And what I want in a woman, is a woman who can bring it, too. And I worry that my generation paid a price for the fruits of male privilege. Because the women of my generation frequently seem bitter and unable to navigate their world. They seem ill-prepared to fight the good fight and succeed against the odds. We are the growing pain of progress.

Is the fact dragonflygrrrl and I each made a bad pick mean that feminism is the root cause?

We each wanted something from the man we chose. Maybe we wanted a traditional role and were not comfortable when the role shifted - but that is not a result of feminism.

and perfectly apt. Thank you.

I wonder if what you were describing was really a failure of feminism, or was it a failure of our culture -- especially male culture?

It seems that our culture is filled with two stereotypical men: the macho ass, and the wimpy weenie. What are men supposed to be about? Our country is so confused, many people actually see our president as strong, when I see someone insecure and behaving like a bully to compensate.

I thought your post posed an interesting question: Why did you (and perhaps he) and everyone else feel this pressure of expectations that he should be working hard? Why is it okay for a woman to be a homebody, but not for a man? Where do these expectations come from? Maruta's gender reversal of that one paragraph revealed a lot, I thought.

Relationships have been failing since forever, it seems. My great grandmother split from her husband for much the same reasons you split from your younger guy. My grandmother had a weak husband, often unemployed (except for during the war), and she was the breadwinner, and it was a burden upon her -- but she never even considered leaving him. In fact, many men seem to be weak when it comes to life-partner relationships. Are they just too fragile for feminists? From the venom and vitriolic outrage spewed at feminists by MRAs, dominionists and misogynists, it sure does seem to be out of fear.

But is their fear really feminism's responsibility? Are our expectations really too high?

I'm new here too. :-)

I don't really have much to contribute to this thread right now but I like the dialogue that's happening here and I think it's a very interesting, important discussion.

Glad I finally came over here and started reading and posting!

I looked at the bio and saw the name. I have fixed the references.

Hey, thanks Murata. I see that I did list my copyright on that page, too, so it is right there. Guess I'm just not used to seeing my name all out there like that!

I mean I am trying to keep it subtle, but at the same time, I'm not anonymous, so I am admittedly trying to have my cake and eat it, too, at least for a while. :)

I was taught to be strong, I was taught to open my own doors and change my own tires and to plow forward within my career and to take care of myself, etc. etc. etc.

i can see how, given what you were taught feminism was all about, you came to the conclusion that feminism posed problems in your life. what you describe as feminism is really women assuming the male ideal of isolationist independence. there was much work done in the 80s about the interdependence and interconnectedness of women's ways of doing things and i would recommend any of these books. although i'm linking to them at amazon.com, if you decide to buy, please consider doing so at the original amazon bookstore:

Toward a New Psychology of Women
Women's Growth in Connection
In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development

i especially recommend Women's Growth in Connection.

Hm, how interesting.

"Isolationist independence" is an interesting phrase, particularly.

Thank you for the recommendations. :)

that in our traditional male culture, certain characteristics were valued. strength. independence. self reliance. stoicism. rationality. dominance. every man is an island.

women were not valued and were assigned characteristics of weakness, submission, dependence, emotionality (the word hysteria coming from the old theory that a woman's womb actually dislodged from its location and that's why women would get emotional).

as woman threw off their assigned roles, feminism talked a lot about women being equally as capable of the male charactersitcs listed above. but in the 1980s, jean baker, miller and others took a fresh view. they said, maybe those traditional male ideals are not what should the ideals of women, or even of men. that maybe if we look at women's ways of doing things, we will see that what we should be valuing is not independence, but interdependence. that no one is an island, we're all connected and interconnected in a great web. miller goes on to assert that the traditional characteristics males have valued are in fact psychologically unhealthy for women and for men.
that all of us are strong at times and weak at others. all of us are dominant in some spheres and submissive in others. all of us are rational and emotional. and that valuing one aspect over another diminishes us.

in that sense, being a feminist is not about fulfilling traditionally valued characteristics of maleness, but of questioning that very value system and accepting the whole of ourselves and valuing the way we are all interconnected and interdependent.

anyway, there's lots more in the books.