In the journal “Sex Roles,” a study was done regarding “attachment parenting.” Apparently, feminists are more likely to defend “attachment parenting” than people who identify as “non-feminists.” And you know what I have to say about that? Hogwash … I call hogwash on all of this. I do not think that feminists are definitively for “attachment parenting” all across the board, and I’m going to keep using quotes because I find that title for that behavior ridiculous.
Personally, I’m pretty sure this is just a pack mentality situation. Feminists are so used to fighting and protecting women doing what they feel they need to do that they’ve lost sight of some of the actual issues. Attachment parenting will never be okay with me. Seeing a 5-year-old boy with his mouth on his mother’s breast will never be okay to me. Buy organic, people! Or frequent a farmers market if you are so concerned about the nutrition your kids are receiving.
“Attachment parenting” is causing a whole bunch of mental issues that no one seems to want to discuss or own up to. I’m in a baby book under what not to do because my mother rocked me to sleep. She said I was her last baby and she was going to rock me no matter what anyone said. Doctors and friends told her that if she didn’t let me gain independence I would have a hard time leaving her and they were right. I had horrible separation anxiety from my mother and my home. There were several times in my life from ages 6-22 that I couldn’t leave my house because my anxiety was so bad it was the only place I ever felt safe. It took a lot of work to get over that and sometimes I still feel the need to get on a plane and hole up in my mother’s house, and yes, I blame a lot of that on the rocking to sleep and the coddling that my mother defended so vehemently. So what exactly would breast feeding ’til age 7 done to me?
Feminists just want to protect women and that is a noble fight, but sometimes you have to choose your battles. Just because a woman does it, it doesn’t mean it’s right or it’s defendable. Everyone has a right to parent their child the way they see fit and society doesn’t need to be sticking their nose in people’s homes unless the child is in danger, but when you put it on the cover of Time magazine, you make it society’s business and that’s where the feminists come to protect. They’re like the cavalry. But feminists! Please stop and reconsider, or maybe I should just say “consider.” Consider the issue and the repercussions before you jump in and fight the good fight … some fights just aren’t worth having, and frankly, that’s because whatever you’re doing in your personal life may not be suitable for someone else. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander? Well. Not necessarily.
I talk in hyperbole a lot. I use a lot of analogies and examples when I speak. On more than one occasion, someone has texted me – or the in case of my Aunt, scolded me – over my choice in language to get my point across. My retort is always the same to them: “I like to be descriptive.” And I do, I really do. I like to paint with words when I can. I feel it’s a writers place to be descriptive, and that’s why Stephen King is so successful. He can terrify you because he’s so thorough.
When I read an article that said that women make better writers when it comes to writing sex I thought “duh.” Now, I’m not talking 50 Shades of Grey, because that writing is terrible. I’m talking Ann Rice’s The Sleeping Beauty trilogy, if we must be specific. Even though 50 Shades of Grey has deplorable writing in it, it is incredibly successful because it is incredibly descriptive. In the article I read, it said that women “are more sincere in writing emotion,” and naturally, I think that is a load of bull – that is, most definitely, not why we’re better at writing about getting down.
I think it has to do with the fact that women like to describe things and we like to connect. Men turn into drooling babies when sex is involved. They use words like “bang,” “laid,” and “screw,” just to name a few. Don’t get me wrong - I’ve used those terms (and worse) too, but I would never use them to describe real, actual sex; I use them to make sex dismissive.
I was a little put off that the writer of the article made it all about emotions and being sincere. You know, things that are always used to describe women. It’s like saying a child should always go with the mother because she’s the mother and it doesn’t matter who the better parent is – a mother is kind and caring and what a child needs. Women are usually painted as these emotional, maternal archetypes, and it’s just crap. I mean, why can’t women write sex well because they understand sex better? That’s my stance – women can write sex better than men because they understand it better than men. Call it sincere or emotional, call it whatever you like. It’s knowledge, and knowledge is power.
I have to start this by saying I love Louis C.K. I really love him. I find him brilliant and I relate to almost all of his angry rants. Recently, however, it was brought to my attention that the man I love was engaging in some pretty harsh female-bashing during an interview with radio personalities Opie and Anthony.
Before I tell you my take on this, let me tell you what happened. Louis was telling a story about how he had a phone interview and was retelling a joke about how he went to the doctor at 40 and they just stopped fixing things. Instead of fixing said things, they just say “Your ankle is worn out now.” As he was telling the story, he commented on the fact that a person in studio had said “I would think at 40 you would still be getting solutions from the doctor.” While the person was speaking, however, Opie or Anthony interrupted (I can’t tell them apart because I can’t be bothered to listen to their droll show), saying “Ah, the hole,” to which Louis C.K. says “Yeah, isn’t that weird?” and he’s again interrupted with a guy saying “THE HOLE” and Louis C.K. kind of drops his voice, finishes his sentence, and says “the chick.” Louis C.K’s tone here is important to me, because I’ve seen almost all of his comedy routines and this tone is the tone he uses when he’s a bit uncomfortable. It’s like a “Oh boy I gotta deal with this now” tone. He continues on with the story which is clearly about how to deal with a heckler taking the wind out of your sails and Opie and Anthony turn it into a woman-bashing session and Louis C.K. goes along. I’m not going to transcribe the interview but you can look it up it’s on YouTube.
I’m not going to lie—I squirmed a bit while listening to this mostly because I really wanted Louis C.K. to tell Opie and Anthony to shut up but he didn’t. Then again his job is to be funny and how funny would it be to start a fight on a ridiculous radio show. He did say repeatedly that the “joke ruiner” stereotype isn’t a sex thing, but then he goes on to say it never happened with a man. On the one hand he’s saying it’s not a gender thing and then presenting it as a gender thing. To me this is just another example of the fact that when guys get together they turn into 7th graders. The will never stand up to each other and they will always regress to silly name calling and insensitive activities. That’s fine when you’re 13 but when you’re in your 30’s and 40’s and your voice is broadcast to millions of people you have a responsibility to be a big boy and not do and say those kinds of things.
This is the Opie and Anthony shtick—they do this gross-out immature playground humor and they get away with it. It angers me that they’ve been around so long doing this and no one has done anything about it. JCPenny gets attacked for having Ellen DeGeneres—a successful, charitable, good person as their spokesperson, and two radio personalities in LA get fired for accurately calling Whitney Houston a “crack ho” but this goes unpunished?
The point of this rant is that there will always be playground bullies and boys that kick girls in the shins because they don’t know how to deal with their feelings about them. I was sad that Louis C.K. didn’t stand up to them but then again, it’s tough being the biggest bully on the block.
It’s been a while since there’s been a good, strong, well-done feminist film and I’m excited to say that ‘Peace, Love, & Misunderstanding’ is one of them. It stars Elizabeth Olsen, Catherine Kenner, and Jane Fonda, which is a winning combo, ladies. This movie chronicles three generations of women who are trying to find a way to understand each other after years of familial disintegration. Written by Joseph Muszynski and Christina Mengert and directed by Bruce Beresford, ‘Peace, Love, and Misunderstanding’ is a film about understanding, multi-generational empathy, and learning from both your mistakes and your success.
I really liked this film because I’m a young feminist who has recently become very close with my grandmother, who is not a feminist in any way. I think Zoe’s (Olsen) struggle in being a young feminist is interesting to watch as she navigates through both her grandmother and mother’s relationship (the two haven’t spoken in 20 years). Zoe’s mother (Keener) is the complete opposite of her mother (Fonda) and has never allowed her children to meet their grandmother. But when marital problems hit, she packs up the kids and heads back home to her mother (‘Hope Floats’, anyone?). Over the course of a few summers, they get to know each other and begin to repair a very fractured relationship, all the while learning about each other and life itself along the way.
Feminism is present in many forms in this film. Grandma Grace is a second-wave feminist flower child who loved the 60’s and free love and feels women should do whatever they want and feel is right. Diane (Keener) was born at Woodstock—and has rebelled against it ever since. She is an uptight New York lawyer, highly educated and financially self-sufficient. She sees her mother as a flippant selfish woman. Then there is young Zoe (Olsen) who’s somewhere in between both of them. Her feminism is not fully formed yet, and watching it mature is the fun of this film.
I really liked the idea of this film because feminism itself is so fragmented and dysfunctional. You have people like us that think you can be feminine and feminist then you have people that think you have to be very masculine to be feminist. You have slut-shaming and slut walks. People who think that being a stay-at-home mom is feminist and some that think only if you are self-sufficient and making your own way are you a feminist. It’s a very confused path and this movie illustrates that with its multiple generations and nuances of relationships. Anyone who enjoys feminism and chick flicks should probably check out this movie.