Twisting motherhood
It would seem that there’s a bit of a battle between radical feminist Twisty Faster and, oh, all mothers everywhere. Or at least that’s what it’s been pitched from the coupla posts that I’ve skimmed over the weekend. A quick preface: I’m one of the women for which there is no non-derogatory or non-demeaning or non-condescending word for the fact that I’m child-free, and generally plan on staying that way. I’m often frustrated that mommy-blogging is pointed to as the Grand Phenomenon of Women Online, and I resent that my non-motherhood status is questioned regularly. I appreciate greatly what Twisty has to say here towards the end of the post:
So, even as mothers need the support of the … whaddya call us? Non-mothers? … we need the support of the mothers, goddammit!
That's right! We want the mothers to step up.
She goes on to talk about the how and the why, the shorter version being that motherhood as it stands right now is a tool for the patriarchy. This is what the feminist mothers are having a hard time swallowing. Hmmm. Why I find the level of outrage problematic: I don’t agree with Twisty’s take on het sex or makeup, and I sure as hell still giggle mightily when she derides my — yes, my! — four-inch heels. Not that my four-inch heels are babies, or my choice to by them as Large, Looming and Very Important as the decision to breed, but come on… do you really have to take down a whole person because she kicks you in the DNA?
So, Twisty says that becoming and being a nuclear-family mother supports the patriarchy. Twisty thinks a lot of things that many mainstream-y leaning feminists like also support the patriarchy (see aforementioned heels). She talks about them in almost every single post. But all of the sudden it’s not okay because she’s talking about your own personal uterus? You gotta read it within context, people– the context of Twisty’s brand of radical feminism.
The job of the bleeding edge of various movements — political, cultural/artistic, etc.. — is to continually push the envelope of the boundaries of the conversation. By pushing farther out than what’s been tread before, we create the space for conversation to happen. Out of conversation comes (hopefully) enlightenment and understanding, and following that, progress and/or revolution.
Radical feminism is no different, and calling what serves as the current Western role for mothers, or my four-inch heels, tools for patriarchy really isn’t that radical. It’s examination and self-criticism that maybe doesn’t happen too much because we’re busy attacking misogynists that live outside feminism-country (necessary, valid, worthwhile, just to be clear). But when someone on your side points something that could be problematic out, and you go buckwild? I don’t know, it reminds me of when we point out sexist behavior by Good Lib’rul Guys and get bombed out for it.
Pot, kettle. Meet. Talk amongst y’selves.
Hi Deanna. I’m not a parent, so I was a bit confused when I saw that you’re linking to my response to Twisty with the words “all mothers everywhere.” Maybe you’re mixing me up with someone else?
As for your general sentiment – well, as much as I appreciate the good of Twisty’s writing, I more often find myself marveling at the bad. I don’t think that her brand of radical feminism is particularly progressive or helpful to people outside of her loyal commentariat. And no, I wouldn’t consider myself to be the pot to Twisty’s kettle, considering the fact that I do not view her as someone who is on my side. Same ballpark? Sure, but more often I simply walk away from Twisty’s blog with the impression that it all boils down to – “and you, patriarchy-pleasing fembot, will be SORRY one day.”
Hey Natalia, thanks for coming over. I may have confused you, yes– but I felt like your post was the most thorough of the arguments I saw in the “con” department. (and I mean that as a compliment. ;-) )
As for the quality of writing, I think this is ultimately a taste issue. As I mentioned, I don’t agree with her often. But I think it’s fabulous that she’s putting her stuff out there, and while she’s not the only great radfem blogger, she totally has my sense of humor and I dig it. I might be sorry one day, but hell, I’ll have had a good time.
:)
The quality of Twisty’s writing is always excellent. It’s the *sentiment* that I, unfortunately, find myself in disagreement with.
There’s nothing quite like a good writer with whom you disagree, though.
Heh, that kinda reminds me of this blogger meeting with Bill Clinton that I randomly got to be a part of a couple months ago… I just remember sitting there listening to him thinking, “Damn, I disagree with every single thing you’re saying, but I still *really* like you for some reason.”
This is difficult territory, for sure. I’m not a regular reader of Twisty’s, tho clearly we have something in common because I confess to hating heels* and I often find myself wishing I knew more women who didn’t have kids and were likely never going to.
I’m less judgmental about it nowdays — maybe because I’m growing older (I’m now 36), maybe because I’m feeling increasingly burned out on feminist debates and just don’t feel like getting into it anymore, maybe because I realize that there’s just no resolvable answer.
Like you say, let’s hope we’re all being enlightened through these endless feminist blog-wars.
* I only hate the heels, not the person wearing them. (I love you, Deanna!)
Also, good use of the word buckwild!
“I’m often frustrated that mommy-blogging is pointed to as the Grand Phenomenon of Women Online, and I resent that my non-motherhood status is questioned regularly.”
I’m one of those women too. I sometimes feels like I am left out of two conversations–women with children and men, but I’m fine with it most of the time. Going to BlogHer last year put me front and center with the idea that I am so NOT the blogger mainstream cares about because exhibitors definitely weren’t interested in my childless ass. That helped me define myself so it was a very useful experience. I came away thinking I’m a woman who is an activist blogger, not a woman who blogs if that makes sense.
Thanks for the above statement~