The Feminist Review

Perhaps more unsettling than the movie itself was the crowd of white teenage boys circled up in the lobby afterwards, replaying their favorite fight scenes, “Dude, I couldn’t believe he did that!” (excited laughter) “Man, that was the best!”

Any movie dealing with interracial relationships and slavery is going to fill the internet with complaints. I don’t need to simply add one more voice calling out the disgustingly gratuitous violence of a Tarantino film…and frankly, I saw it knowing what I was getting in to.

Instead I want to point out a criticism that I’m not hearing. Where are the scared white people? Shouldn’t a movie all about “killing white folks and getting paid for it,” freak the white community out? But instead my local theater full of white people reveled in the gore, and the teenagers panted with pleasure.

A movie about slavery that doesn’t force white folks to look within? Not worth much. One subtle commentary can be found in the ethnicities of Django’s collaborators: his German partner and the silly Australian guards are the only white people who contribute to his flourishing. Why, in antebellum America, are foreigners the only white people who can see Django’s humanity? But this is too subtle for the folks in my theater.

Just like so many people want to say that racism is over now that we have a black president, all sorts of folks who don’t know their history are watching Django Unchained feeling that through this single hero, blacks are symbolically vindicated. This is grossly erroneous, but our symbols do matter. Obama’s election and reelection haven’t brought equal opportunity to blacks in the US, but our minds have been opened a crack, and our hearts hope a little stronger. As ridiculous as his heroism is (how did he become a sharpshooter overnight?), Django satisfies a need for power in an era in which black men’s impotence was strictly enforced. Finally, the black man’s (you know) gun is firing full-force.

But who does this serve? We know who black men kill – Django Unchained may tell a different story, but black men are killing black men every day in this country, exponentially more than they are killing white people. Telling black men, white men, all of us, once again, that power is found in violence fuels the self-destruction devouring so many black families and communities.

Now I certainly appreciate the ways this movie is unique. A black woman’s value is at the center of the story (though she is romanticized in silly ways, and her worth is continually noted in contrast to the other black women of the movie). Finally, the love between a black man and woman stops the world. The white sidekick sacrifices himself, while the black hero and his love ride off into the sunset. These inversions stretch imaginations, as mainstream movies never portray black characters in these ways.

But when do we stop believing that progress is achieved when we finally let everyone play the same old screwed up game? When do we get creative and simply change the game?

Filed under: movies, uncategorized on January 7th, 2013 by Anna Lisa | No Comments »

Thought I’d dust off this video as Lent approaches! A stirring tale of revolution – every journey begins with a single step.

Filed under: conferences, events on January 6th, 2013 by Anna Lisa | No Comments »

Preach it Sister!

Sister Joan Chittister raised consciousness and reclaimed women’s humanity this month in Minneapolis. Listen to her speech. From prostitution is a MAN’s profession, to language for God, to calling professional women to care about poor women’s employment, Sister Joan brings so many threads of insight together that even seasoned feminists will find truth and power in this tapestry.

Sister Joan Chittister, co-chair of the Global Peace Initiative of Women, partner of the UN

Glazing through moderately comfortable life in the US can dull our minds, leading us to think feminism is complete. Women can run for president! We have professional women’s sports leagues! Birth control is (mostly) available! Women are scientists and CEOs! We’ve achieved equality! No reason to whine.

If these thoughts cross your mind, listen to Sister Joan for a straight-forward, eloquent, rational reminder of the reality of living female in any country.

Comparing one culture to another can be a dangerous and offensive exercise; Sister Joan does it will wisdom and depth. She offers jaw-dropping, stomach-churning, hair-raising examples of sexism from around the world, then sheds light on the same currents of misogyny running deep within US culture. This is the best of a globalized mindset – to see what our cultures can teach one another with humility, respect, compassion and vision.

Filed under: events on November 23rd, 2012 by Anna Lisa | No Comments »

My heart used to race at red lights with white men in pick-up trucks behind me, watching them squint to make out my bumper sticker: “The only Bush I trust is my own.” I always hoped they would forgive me when they read the only other sticker on my car, “When Jesus said, ‘Love your enemies,’ I think he probably meant don’t kill them.”

One thing I resonated with as I watched the fabulous film Fagbug is that by far, most of the responses Erin got were positive. That’s been the case for me, as well, with my spunky little bush sticker. I think the people who despise it/me mostly curse inside their cars. Perhaps give me the finger, but I might be texting and not notice…:-) The few times people have honked, I see them smiling in my rear-view mirror.

And meet Turtle, the ’73 bug of my youth…inspired quite a few honks and smiles without a single sticker.

Filed under: movies on November 18th, 2012 by Anna Lisa | No Comments »

Do you know what health care you have gained? Not surprisingly, but quite disappointing, how little attention women’s health has gotten in the flurry around Obamacare. Check out this eye-catching poster, and pass it on to the women you love!

Filed under: news on August 5th, 2012 by admin | No Comments »

I’ve been hearing about these “two extremes” in the Church of the Brethren (CoB) recently. I have two responses: 1) I reject this assertion, and 2) I celebrate the extreme I am told I inhabit.

First, I contest the assertion that there are two equal or similar extremes within the CoB. Sure, there are people who strongly believe that God is happy that people are lgbtq and straight, while others strongly believe that God is aghast that some people are lgbtq. Strongly believing something does not necessarily make one an extremist. There are people who believe that it is wrong to be lgbtq who are extremists – people who say that a congregation should be punished for asking Annual Conference to discuss a 28-year-old decision. That sounds pretty extreme to me. There are people who say that lgbtq people and allies are being led by the devil or are overtaken by evil. That sounds pretty extreme to me. There are people who stalk and photograph conference attendees who visited the Womaen’s Caucus booth. That sounds pretty extreme to me. There are people who send death threats to lgbtq church leaders and their allies. That sounds pretty extreme to me.

Now I hang out with some rather radical progressives, and I have never – not even in our private, uncensored spaces – heard anyone suggest that someone else be punished for their beliefs, or that the Devil is controlling them. I don’t know of anyone who strongly believes that lgbtq people are fully worthy of God’s love who stalks and catalogues the people who visit the Brethren Revival Fellowship booth – even though, if anyone had reason to fear the opposition it is lgbtq people and their allies, the ones receiving death threats – NEVER sending them. These two “extremes” are not even equal players: decades ago a seat at the table was given to the Brethren Revival Fellowship, but many homophobic (and undecided) Brethren have refused to allow lgbtq folks a place in their churches, a booth in the Annual Conference exhibit hall, or a place in the “body of Christ.” (Thank God, it’s not actually up to them!) Read more »

Filed under: conferences on July 19th, 2011 by Anna Lisa | 2 Comments »

Sarah Hoagland’s article “Why Lesbian Ethics?” is a celebration of the lesbian-only (and therefore women-only) space that exists within the philosophical and cultural realms of ethics. Hoagland argues that this lesbian-only space should be recognized and developed. The thinking and living that happens within this space can only happen in a space without men (gay or straight), and, generally, without straight women either. She explains why this is necessary, writing:

Lesbian separatism certainly informs my work, including the ideas that (1) separatism is a no-saying to male parasitism and a withdrawal from the dominant/subordinate, man/woman relationship;( 2) protectors are not essentially different from predators;(3 ) a feminist agreeing to defend women’s rights is actually coerced into solidifying status quo values that make women’s, but not men’s, rights debatable in a democracy; (4) heterosexuality provides a legitimation of all forms of domination, most especially the exploitative and paternalistic justification of imperialism;( 5) separatism is a focusing on lesbians and a lesbian conceptual framework from which new values can and have emerged. (Hoagland, 196)

Hoagland does not particularly explain these ideas, likely assuming that her audience will already be familiar with these tenets of lesbian separatism. This article appears in Hypatia, a journal of lesbian thought. While I was initially reluctant to fully grant these points (particularly #4), on a second read I realized the deep truth of each. I am not sure how to incorporate point #3 into my own feminist work, but am grateful that I know realize I need to. I appreciate that Hoagland dives right in to her subject, not apologizing or tip-toeing. She is acting on point #5, focusing on a lesbian conceptual framework.

Hoagland offers a helpful example of the fresh conceptual framework possible within a lesbian-only space.

Before the women’s liberation movement began, women’s anger was madness. When a woman got angry, men would discount the anger by saying, “You’re so cute when you get angry” or “The bitch is crazy.”After the women’s liberation movement got under way, women’s anger became a righteous response to male domination. Men went right on saying the same things, but by coming together in a movement and focusing on each other, women as a group created a different context and stopped referring to men’s values and perceptions of women. (A similar phenomenon occurred as Blacks as a group focused on each other, ignoring white definitions/perceptions of blackness.) Tragically, that women’s anger has become once again taboo or psychological (therapized, especially among women), which suggests that the context of the movement has been co-opted and patriarchal disciplinarians and professionals have reasserted their control. (Hoagland, 200) Read more »

Filed under: articles on November 29th, 2010 by Anna Lisa | 2 Comments »

I was surprised to see the cover of the 2nd printing of Sister Outsider by Audre Lorde. Both versions were published by Crossing Press, which has published a long list of books that I want to read – all about natural healing, sexuality, spirituality…good stuff!

The old cover (left) is certainly dated. The picture could be much larger, since images are generally more eye-catching than words. But why switch to the drawn image on the new cover (right)?

The woman on the new cover is not Audre Lorde. Her neck is long and skinny. Her cheekbones are ridiculously sharp, and her eyes are unnaturally large. Her nose is long and thin. These changes make the woman more traditionally “beautiful” than the real Audre Lorde. They also make the woman look like an ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic of a person, rather than Lorde, a contemporary Black american. The full lips and twisted hair of the drawn woman still note her “Blackness.” She is looking up and askance, almost batting her eyelashes at the tall man standing in front of her. Did Crossing Press even read Sister Outsider?

Crossing Press published 200 Ways to Love the Body You Have in 1999. What about the body (and face) of Audre Lorde? There are plenty of other pictures of Lorde available, if Crossing Press wanted a fresh cover for the second edition.

Incidentally, Crossing Press was bought by Ten Speed Press in 2002, so I suppose I can’t really write a letter of complaint to anyone.

Filed under: books on November 25th, 2010 by Anna Lisa | No Comments »

What light does “The Social Construction of Black Feminist Thought” by Patricia Hill Collins (in The African American Studies Reader, ed. By Nathaniel Norment, Jr., 2001) shine on the questions of women-only spaces?

Patricia Hill Collins argues that both the content and method of meaning-making in the dominant Eurocentric, masculinist world of thought are oppressive to black women, as well as simply inadequate.  Accurate knowledge about black women is unlikely to ever come from “within a white-male-controlled academic community because both the kinds of questions that could be asked and the explanations that would be found satisfying would necessarily reflect a basic lack of familiarity with black women’s reality” (170). Black women scholars can only be welcomed into the dominant world of ideas/academia if they swallow any truths that contradict the findings of the Eurocentric, masculinist body of knowledge, because this inconsistency is a threat to dominant truths (and thereby the knowledge validation process that affirmed these truths). A black women-only scholarly space, therefore, results by necessity as these thinkers are squeezed out of dominant academia, in which credentials are controlled by white male academicians (170). This space is also necessary because an oppressed group’s “lack of control over the apparatuses of society that sustain ideological hegemony makes the articulation of their self-defined standpoint difficult” (168). Read more »

Filed under: articles on November 24th, 2010 by Anna Lisa | No Comments »

I read Audre Lorde’s Sister Outsider to find some wisdom regarding women-only spaces, and of course I found both support and suspicion. Many of the essays and speeches in this collection are focused on the constructive power of difference. Women in a space of their own can explore the differences between them, but also must remain in conversation with men in order to make the most of the differences among all, as well.

Lorde does identify many, many aspects of patriarchy that keep women from their full potential. A women-only space would allow women to be interested in their own fullness and destiny, allowing them to explore what they are capable of. Men’s presence is a necessary limitation on women, given patriarchy’s hold on society, expecting women’s energy to be used in the service of men before themselves.

“As women, we have come to distrust that [erotic] power which rises from our deepest and nonrational knowledge. We have been warned against it all our lives by the male world, which values this depth of feeling enough to keep women around in order to exercise it in the service of men, but which fears this same depth too much to examine the possibilities of it within themselves. So women are maintained at a distant/inferior position to be psychically milked, much the same way ants maintain colonies of aphids to provide a life-giving substance for their masters.” (53-54 – Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic as Power) Read more »

Filed under: books on November 23rd, 2010 by Anna Lisa | 4 Comments »