There's a Reason "Paternalism" Refers to Children

It baffles me that feminists and activists don't focus more on children and education. Third wave feminism seems fairly infatuated with teens and youth culture (which is all very nice), but I don't see a whole lot of thought being put into the educational and literacy crisis. Third wave feminism is all about intersectionality, so from that perspective, we should definitely be talking about how the educational crisis feeds into issues of class and poverty. But feminism is also about uncovering the ways in which we are socially programmed. And what is more socially programming than education and the way that children are taught and treated in our society? This should be a huge issue for modern feminism. To quote bell hooks, feminism is for EVERYBODY, and that means feminism is for children too. "Children are the future," and all that, so we better be sure as hell that we're not programming our future to be racist, classist, sexist, homophobic bigots.

You know how everyone has to sort of "unlearn what you have learned" in order to not buy into patriarchy and oppression? You know how there's this whole metaphor about coming out of shame and small dark windowless spaces? Imagine how nice it would be if our children DIDN'T HAVE to unlearn everything they had learned. Imagine if what they learned was true, and fair, and not colored by political arrogance and misnamed "patriotism." Imagine if they grew up in a world where people WERE treated decently and not subjected to psychologically damaging stereotypes and oppression. Isn't that the goal of feminism, after all? To create that world? Why, then, are we not focusing on creating that world for our children NOW: in our homes, in our schools, in the libraries and movie theatres and concert venues? We can't wait around for a day in which it will be "less controversial" to teach decency and respect to young children. That day will never come if we don't start trying to create it now. To quote Phillip Pullman, "we have to build the Republic of Heaven where we are, because for us there is no elsewhere." If you care about social change, then FIGHT for children's right to be taught TRUTH and DECENCY and RESPECT. Teach them to think CRITICALLY about the world in which they live and not to blindly accept what is being shoved down their throats. I shit thee not, the most radical action comes from teaching the truth to children. I cannot emphasize enough how important it is for us to have a plan for deprogramming our children, otherwise the marketers and patriarchal bigots and sexist homophobes will most definitely have a plan for them.

Vaginas? Really? (Eve Ensler, I'm Talking to You!)

So. Why all this fascination with reducing women to vaginas, America? *sigh* I suppose that since there's SO MUCH of that reduction going on, I ought to be a bit more specific of what kind I mean. Let's try to forget about the objectification of women for a minute (I know it's difficult, but let's just try). And let's also try to forget about all our puritanical friends who don't want to talk about sex at all (see ya later, asshats!). No no, for now, let's just focus on the people who actually TALK about sex, and try to do so in a respectful way. Everyone talks about vaginas as if they're the female equivalent of penises. "Men have a penis, and women have a vagina." "Women aren't going to vote for Hillary just because she has a vagina instead of a penis." "My vagina would wear a leopard print bikini." Even our enlightened feminist friends like Eve Ensler: all the time, vagina vagina vagina. I don't give a shit about my vagina. If we're going to reduce women to a "down there" part of their body, uh... HELLO, shouldn't it be the clit???? I don't think I need to go into the reasons why we should be talking about the clit instead of the vagina (semi-automatic and all that...), but I would have expected better from feminists. I guess I can understand the thinking of health and sex ed teachers who don't want to talk about something as SCARY as the clit, since it's about feeling good (*gasp*) instead of procreating in the image of god and chastity and properness and all that. But come ON feminists! I know YOU'RE not scared of a little good-feeling sex, so what's with all this buying into the dichotomy of penis-vagina? It seems to me that going with vaginas (instead of clits) just buys into heteronormativity, a puritanical desire to not to talk about pleasure, and this whole fixation with women being "the creators of the life" and "moon goddesses" and so on. Fuck that shit. Thanks, but I'll take that orgasm over a baby and a bunch of reusable pads any day.

Questions & Thoughts of the Day

question of the day: how do you incorporate activism into your life when you're so busy because you have two jobs because you don't want to sell out to the man, so you have your nice independent job, but it pays shit, so you have to have 2 jobs, and as a result you have no time to actually make activism any part of your life other than not actively participating in corporate culture? how can you incorporate activism that is, well, *active* into your life, instead of simply resisting passively?

another thought, has activism become too organized, rule-ified and corporate-ized by massive non-profits like HRC and NOW which are composed mainly of older, upper class white people instead of grassroots folk who are young, of color, poorer, female or lgbtq? why is activism being done by the relatively more privileged ppl on behalf of their poorer "brothers and sisters"? it feels a little paternalistic. i'm not saying that the work they do isn't valuable or coming from a good place. but when we are all affected by intersecting oppression, why are we recreating the same power hierarchies in the groups that are supposedly "fighting the forces of patriarchy," as it were.