The Great Divide

Birth rape: I’ll say it again

3

Writing about birth rape in March 2008 for feminist webzine The F-Word is what led me to birth advocacy and, eventually, becoming a birth doula. I am passionate about birth and making it a better, more empowering experience for all mothers, not just those who get ‘lucky’ and have straightforward labours or respectful attendants.

So it was with deep disappointment and even anger that I read piece after piece after piece arguing with, dismissing and even ridiculing the women who have chosen to use this term, some of the authors quoting my original story. In response, I have written another feature for The F-Word, which you can read here.

Luckily, at least one other feminist blogger agrees with me and has stood up for the victims of this heinous crime. I find it incredibly sad that so many others don’t.

Image credit

Mainstream feminism and motherhood: solidarity extends beyond the personal

14

bridge

I approached a group of contributors at The F-Word (none of whom have children) to see if any of them would be interested in writing an article for the readers of Fertile Feminism; Laura Woodhouse responded with enthusiasm.  I asked Laura to give us her thoughts on why mainstream feminism is often (or at least feels) exclusionary to parents and what her ideas are for bridging that divide. This is her response, in the form of a guest post. In return, I’ve written a post at The F-Word explaining why I created this site and what its goal is, which you can read here.

A note before you get reading: It takes courage and insight to write sensitively about a subject with which one has no personal experience, so please, if you are able, leave a comment and let Laura know what you think — if you liked it, agree with her, disagree (and why) or your ideas for building on what she’s written. Taking part in these discussions is what Fertile Feminism is all about so I hope you’ll feel moved to comment.

_____________________________________________________

When FertileFem suggested that a childless feminist blogger contribute to this site, in the spirit of building bridges between mainstream feminism and the feminist mothers it often excludes, I was really keen to get involved.  However, I’ve found it difficult to figure out quite what to write. I feel a little like an impostor entering a territory where my personal experiences and knowledge are suddenly exposed as somewhat lacking in relevance. The temptation is to say, ‘Actually, I’m not sure there’s really a lot I can do here. I’ll leave it to the experts.’

It seems that’s the position taken by many of us childless feminists who make up a significant portion of the current UK feminist community when it comes to motherhood. We either prefer not to try and tackle issues of which we have no direct knowledge, or – worse still – we are entirely oblivious to their existence, and to their relevance to feminism. The personal is political, right? So for those of us who, like me, came to feminism fresh out of our teens, sick to the back teeth of being sexually harassed, assaulted and objectified by our male peers and a sexist dominant culture – launching ourselves with headstrong gusto into campaigns against lads’ mags and for abortion rights – issues such as childcare, birth trauma, maternity care and breastfeeding rights just weren’t on our agenda. Which is understandable. But when these campaigns united young women into larger feminist groups and later developed into conferences and events, and those groups and conferences failed to take the childcare needs of feminist parents into account, or offer any talks or workshops that recognised motherhood – and mothers’ – relevance to feminism, this short-sightedness became discrimination. And that’s not what feminism is about.

It doesn’t help that the middle class feminist aim of freeing women from the shackles of enforced motherhood and housewifery in order that we could make it in the worlds of education and employment (ignoring the working class women who often never had the option of staying at home in the first place) inevitably paints motherhood in a bad light, nor that the dominant cultural narrative of the feminism-liberated modern woman struggling to ‘have it all’ makes it seem nigh on impossible to have children while achieving any of the things middle class feminism promised us. Until you start thinking about having children of your own, or until you’re faced with an unexpected pregnancy and motherhood becomes a personal issue, it can be all too easy to separate it from feminism.

Yet, for me, some of the reasons I have always thought I would be unlikely to have children were rooted in sexism: employment discrimination against pregnant women and mothers (how can I progress at work if I’m going to have kids?), the horrible gender role indoctrination of children (would I ever be able to counteract it?), the lack of affordable childcare and flexible working hours (how on earth can I have it all?). And as I’ve begun to think more seriously about having children (I can’t even tell you how much it’s freaked me out realising that having kids with my partner would actually be really rather lovely!) I’ve started to feel this mother-directed sexism on something close to the same visceral level that I felt sexual objectification and beauty fascism when I first became a feminist. And I want to do something about it.

But it shouldn’t take that level of visceral, personal identification with an issue to kick me into gear and start trying to do my bit for mothers. Feminists should advocate for all women; ‘the personal is political’ just isn’t enough. We need to remember that not all women’s ‘personal’ is the same, but that all women’s ‘personal’ matters.

I think it’s a reflection of my privilege as a young, sheltered, middle class woman that my early activism was centred around things that affected myself, and it’s only been through reading the experiences and theories of disabled, trans and BME feminists that I’ve succeeded in breaking out of my own little personal bubble and expanded my range of activism to include issues that don’t affect women with whom I can identify.  And it’s a reflection of the marginalisation of mothers within feminism – and the dismissal of mothers’ needs in wider society – that it took a change in my personal circumstances for me to really identify motherhood as a feminist issue.

That’s why I’m so pleased to have discovered all the feminist mother blogs that have been springing up recently, and why I want to work with feminist mothers to help bring your voices and battles and mainstream feminism together. It’s been all too easy for childless feminists to ignore motherhood, and it really, really shouldn’t be.  We need to listen, learn and become allies to mothers by not only centring your voices but using our own to advocate for mothers everywhere. I know when I wrote a short blog post on the proposed maternity reforms last week I felt rather out of my depth and a little embarrassed by the blandness of my writing compared to the informed passion of the mothers who left comments. But discomfort and ignorance is no excuse, particularly when mothers like FertileFem are putting the necessary information out there to enable us to learn. It isn’t good enough to say ‘I’ll leave it to the experts’; we’re supposed to work in solidarity with all women, and when the women in question are working their arses off raising the next generation, the least childless feminists can do is make some noise on your behalf!

Photo credit

Getting it

21

getting it

When it comes to the ways in which parents and children are discriminated against and why those discriminations are inherently anti-woman, some people just don’t get it. Kate Harding, it seems, is one of those people.

She is one of the people to whom some feminist mothers may point when discussing the (sometimes pleasantly unnoticeable, sometimes seemingly insurmountable) divide between those who have had children and those who haven’t. She is someone who I personally agree with on many feminist issues but often, when it comes to a topic relating to parenting (usually concerning parenting in public), I find myself defensively reaching for that old cliché: “You couldn’t possibly understand, you don’t have children.” Whilst I dislike that line and think it is mainly unhelpful in a goal of creating positive discourse, there are times when its use is tempting when engaging with (or reading) someone who is just so not…getting it.

Just as I’m sure attempting to explain the realities of race or class inequities and pressures to someone who has not lived through them can feel quite frustrating and fruitless, so too can reading and responding to commentary that comes across as ignorant, insensitive and hypocritical from an otherwise smart, savvy and progressive woman.

Take, for example, Harding’s latest article on Salon’s Broadsheet, which was written in response to film director Kevin Smith being kicked off a Southwest Airlines flight because he was deemed too large for a single seat and hadn’t purchased two, in accordance with Southwest’s ‘person-of-size’ policy. As a fat-acceptance activist on another popular site, Harding took issue with this and linked the incident with the general air of hostility and hostility-disguised-as-concern aimed at fat people in public. Her impassioned, well-written piece shows how important this issue is to her, and many others.

But as I read her post, I couldn’t help but see extremely similar parallels between what she was railing against and what she herself had written just a few months ago in an article entitled ‘Screaming Toddlers on a Plane!’ In it, she discussed the removal of a two-year-old child and his mother from an airplane for the child’s ‘disruptive behaviour’ (which consisted of excitedly shouting “Go plane, go!” and “I want Daddy!”). While she expressed “sympathy” for parents flying with toddlers, she went on to admonish us to at least try to ‘control’ them. Because if she couldn’t see that we were ‘trying’ hard enough? She “reserve[s] the right to smugly judge [us], damnit.”

Essentially, she supports the idea that if a child cannot conform to social and behavioural norms and if its parents/carers do not actively take steps to ensure the comfort of others around them or at least apologise profusely for inconveniencing them (even if said ‘annoying’ behaviours are completely age-appropriate and nothing can really be ‘done’ about them, short of violence) she agrees that that child, and subsequently those with him/her, should be removed. At the very least, she reserves the right to express her disdain for what she perceives as the parents’ failings. Openly.

Yet, here she is in this instance, angry as all get-out that anyone would dare try to prioritize the comfort of other passengers over one person’s right to exist, or allow a long-held prejudice against a vulnerable group of people (who may or may not have any control over their ‘condition’) to be voiced. The collective disgust at the lack of ‘control’ a fat person or excitable child is seen to be exhibiting; the ways in which society seeks to punish those who encroach on our space or do not adhere to what is defined as normal or acceptable; the arrogance and privilege displayed by those who feel it is their right to criticise and complain when they are inconvenienced in any way by someone they don’t view as worthy of respect…can she, and others, really not see the ways in which fat-bashing (and other forms of intolerance) follows similar patterns to child/parent-bashing?

Now, Ruth at Look Left of the Pleiades has already drawn attention to the ways in which fat-acceptance is similar to child/parent-acceptance so I won’t repeat her many, many good points and analogies here, but I urge you to go read her post and then come back. Because I want to demonstrate why Harding’s perceptions of and attitudes towards children and parents in public are as harmful as the perceptions of and attitudes towards larger people that she so passionately disputes in her latest article and why this kind of disconnect contributes to the perpetuation of a ‘divide’ between feminist parents and childless feminists, as it does between those who are of ‘acceptable’ body size and those who aren’t.

Let’s start here, from the Kevin Smith article:

Perhaps they [those who complain about sitting next to large people] even had the special misfortune of sitting next to a rude fat person, the kind who doesn’t even seem contrite about infringing on someone else’s severely restricted personal space…There’s no shortage of rude people of all sizes, but it seems like everyone’s got a story about that whale who made a two-hour or three-hour or even five-hour flight pure hell for the adjacent paying customers.

Just like how everyone has a story of a screaming baby or toddler making their flight pure hell, huh? And, like, the freakin’ parents didn’t even APOLOGISE, can you believe it?!

From the ‘Toddler’ article:

I also believe, however, that unless he has special needs that make public screaming both more likely and far more difficult to end, a toddler hollering in a closed space for a prolonged period about something other than physical pain is very unlikely to evoke much sympathy. And the adult in charge has a responsibility to try to calm him and reinforce that this is inappropriate public behavior.

Reinforce that this is inappropriate public behaviour?! To a two-year-old who is stuck on a plane and is probably hungry, thirsty, scared, uncomfortable, bored or all of the above?!  That is at least as laughable and useless to parents as “Just eat less and exercise more” probably is to severely overweight people. I’m also not keen on how Harding sets conditions on her sympathy: “If you do x and y, I’ll put up with you. But if I don’t think you ‘tried hard enough? I reserve my right to judge you and have you ejected.” Eerily similar to the conditions often placed upon sympathy for fat people: only if they are actively trying to minimise their mass and stay out of thin people’s way are they allowed any.

See, those of us who are and/or love people to whom airlines’ “person of size policies” apply don’t automatically envision the discomfort of getting stuck next to a fatty; we envision the physical and emotional pain of being the fatty crammed between two potentially hostile strangers, at the mercy of flight attendants who might decide we’re fine on one flight and a “safety risk” on the next.

I don’t automatically envision the discomfort of the people around me if my child cries on an airplane either, though I am all too well aware of the disapproval. My first duty is to my children and their well-being, not the flight enjoyment of those surrounding us. I do my best to minimise noise and disturbance but if, like what happened to me the last time I flew, my child is crying and howling because she was woken (in the middle of the night according to her body clock) by the flight attendant and made to sit back up and put on her seatbelt, I’m not going to care two jots if the people around me are put out. They might think I’m ‘doing nothing’ by simply sitting there with a hand on her shoulder, waiting for the upset to pass, but what they don’t know is that if I had kept shushing and fussing and cajoling, the wails would have undoubtedly gotten even louder. Funnily enough, some parents know their kids better than perfect strangers and what appears to be ‘ignoring’ to an outsider is actually preventing things from escalating further. The stares, the mutters, the annoyed glances, the outright commands to “shut that kid up”…these make for a pretty tense flying situation too. I would expect someone who has endured the same but for body size to be a bit more sympathetic to the enormous strain and embarrassment this causes the concerned party.

…the risk of smaller-scale humiliations — sitting next to someone who complains about their size; absorbing flight attendants’ naked disdain; overhearing someone say “I hope I don’t have to sit next to her”; being told, as Smith’s seatmate on his later flight was, that they should really purchase two seats in the future to avoid making other people uncomfortable; plus the aforementioned dirty looks and heavy sighs — is often enough to keep them at home.

Yep, know that feeling too. One man, on approaching his seat across the aisle from me and my six-month-old daughter, who was happily smiling and looking around, commented very loudly to his wife, “Oh great, we’re sitting next to a baby. See if we can change seats when the flight attendant comes by.” When they weren’t able to change seats, many heavy sighs and dirty looks ensued for the duration of the flight whenever my daughter made so much as a peep. I remember sitting there, tears silently coursing down my cheeks, as I held my finally-asleep baby — unable to move, go to the bathroom, eat, drink or read for fear of waking her and invoking the wrath of that horrid man. It made me forever fearful of the reactions of people around me and made me question whether I was the selfish one for wanting to go visit my family.

In the last paragraph of the Kevin Smith piece, Harding’s emotions come to the surface. Her rage at the lack of human decency and understanding becomes apparent and she says:

And I read comments from lots of people who are less openly hateful, but still think that fat people should buy two seats or lose weight or stay home — not that the airline has any responsibility to, say, ensure that adequate seating is available for everyone or treat people of all sizes like equal (not to mention individual) human beings — and you know what I think? Forgive me, but sometimes there’s no other way to say it: Fuck you. That’s what I think.

Sing it, sister! I agree with you 100%. I too wish that airplanes (and many other public spaces) were more accommodating of larger people, those with disabilities, families…the way most things are modelled on one body and type and under the assumption that one is travelling alone is very frustrating. I just wish you could apply those same strong feelings about accepting our bodies for what they are to accepting children and the nature of parenting for what they are. I wish you could be open-minded enough to know that even if you never experience parenting first-hand, it is something that you share a common bond with; that you (and all people) have a vested interest in making parents and children feel more welcome and included in our society, not ostracised. Those who were unaccepted for what they were as children can become the very people you struggle against now — the rigid, the selfish, the unkind. Setting out prescriptive behaviours and expectations for one group of people according to how their presence impacts others, not according to what is best or appropriate for them, is exactly what feminism (and fat-acceptance) strives to eradicate.

Just as you don’t want to be judged for your size, nor do we want to be judged for our reproductive and parenting choices, especially by those who haven’t walked a yard in our shoes, let alone a mile. In a homogenized world, I suppose everyone would be thin, every child would sit quietly and every parent would happily and healthily manage to work and bring up their children. But we don’t live in that world nor would any of us want to, I imagine.

As feminists, we celebrate diversity, challenge privilege and patriarchy and constantly question our own prejudices in order to grow and become better allies to those on the outside who need our help most. We mind our language, respect those with different needs, backgrounds and experiences from us and know when to say “I haven’t lived that. Tell me how I can stand with you and help you battle these injustices.”

In order to do that we need to become invested in fights that are not our ‘own,’ look for connections and similarities instead of divergences and dissimilarities.  We need a feminism that ‘gets it’, or at least tries to. Not just about fat, not just about kids, but all of it. Because if we can’t support these basic tenets, and each other, what hope do we have of changing anything at all?

Photo credit

Go to Top