A Farewell to Mommyblogging

I wrote the following in September:

~~~~~

There is a lot of blather on the momosphere about the "fabulous community" we have. How civil we mommy-bloggers are, how supportive, how untroll-like. How anyone is welcome, providing they are a mommy with a blog.*

From this side of the research I completed and presented Friday, it looks a lot like the idea of feminism as An International Sisterhood. Feminism is A Sisterhood for some women, who tend to look startlingly alike and have similar class and family backgrounds. Just a coincidence, of course.

"Oh no!" says The Sisterhood. "We're not diverse! Where are the black women? Where are the poor women? Where are the lesbian women? Where are the disabled women?"

"Well," says one of the black women standing nearby, "I agree that women's rights are important, but you know, your platform just isn't complete. I understand that access to daycare and contraceptives and abortions are important; but I want to see more of a focus on wage parity with white people. I mean, you have the choice to stay home or not; but I don't, and part of that is because my husband doesn't earn as much as a white guy does. And anorexia and bulimia are important too, but what I see is that black women are so radically sexualized that we can be put on leashes and practically no one bats an eye. Not even in The Sisterhood. We're considered more rapeable, more abusable, too fertile, prone to having too many kids without enough money--and you know, that's what's important to me. We need to fix that."**

Says The Sisterhood, "Hmm. I see. But that's not really interesting to us. That's racism, not sexism, and we're about sexism. And it's a problem in the black community. It has nothing to do with women. Our priorities, like daycare and contraceptives and anorexia and bulimia, will benefit all women. That's more important."

"And," says a poor woman, sweeping the floor under The Sisterhood's boardroom table, "I'm more interested in increased wages, myself. Changing tax policies so women with wealthy husbands can choose to go to work is nice and all, but it's not going to do a bit of good for me. I HAVE to work. And what's more, I have to work two jobs just to pay the rent. If the minimum wage were raised and if I could get benefits as a low-wage worker, that would make much more of a positive difference in my life. And schooling! I need my kids to have good schools. We can't afford private schools, and the public schools in the only area I can afford to live in are terrible. I want them to have a better life than I do."

Says The Sisterhood, "Hmm. I see. But that's not really interesting to us. That's classism, not sexism, and we're about sexism. And that's a problem with employment policies and specific employers. It has nothing to do with women. Our priorities, like changing the tax policies so they don't favour single-wage families , will benefit all women. That's more important."

A woman clears her throat. "Actually, you didn't know this before, but I am a lesbian. I didn't tell you because, what with Friedan's lavender menace speech, I wasn't sure I'd be welcome here. But you asked, so I'll tell you. I don't really need tax policies changed, either, right now, because the state doesn't recognize my family. I can't marry my partner; if we have kids, our parental rights will be forever in jeopardy. We both have to work if we both want to have benefits, because we can't be listed as spouses on each other's benefits policies. So what you're talking about--daycare and tax policies and all--isn't relevant for me either. I mean it's good, but it won't help me."

Says The Sisterhood, "Hmm. I see. But that's not really interesting to us. That's homophobia, not sexism, and we're about sexism. And that's a problem with marriage law and GLBT rights. It has nothing to do with women. Our priorities, like changing tax policies so they don't favour single-income families, will benefit all women. That's more important."

"Uh," says a woman in a wheelchair, who they didn't see before because her wheelchair didn't fit comfortably at the table, "How about this? I'd love to work, but I can't get a job. When you're in a wheelchair, sometimes people think you're stupid and talk down to you. They think you'll be a liability, take too many sick days, not be productive. They think they're doing you a favour when they offer you work. And I don't have the same access to contraception and family planning services because a lot of people assume I can't have kids or attract a male partner. I need better access. I need people to treat me as an equal. I need employment laws that guarantee me equal access to training and jobs, that prevent people from firing me if I need to go to a doctor's appointment. And a few years down the line, if this gets worse, I might need better disability benefits so that I can maintain my independence and stay in my home."

Says The Sisterhood, "Hmm. I see. But that's not really interesting to us. That's ableism, not sexism, and we're about sexism. And that's a problem with urban planning and employment laws and individual doctors and social assistance. It has nothing to do with women. Our priorities, like ensuring abortion access and legislation that admits more women to CEO positions, will benefit all woman. That's more important."

"You've just defined me right out of feminism," says the woman in the wheelchair.

"No kidding," says the black woman. "You want to know why we're not part of your precious movement, but when we tell you, you say our concerns don't interest you, are too specialized or too limited. You only want us here if we get with YOUR program."

"Yes," says the lesbian. "I know you didn't consciously mean to, but what you've done is defined the intersts of feminism in such a way that they're only relevant to wealthy, well-educated, straight white able-bodied women. And then you wonder why we're not interested."

"Exactly!" says the woman in the wheelchair. "Exactly!"

"Meh," says the woman sweeping the floor. "It's always been that way. The rich monopolize and coopt social movements and prevent any real change. Any social movement quickly becomes about how to increase access for a privileged few of a disadvantaged group, and the few that are chosen are always the ones who least need it. So feminism, which was supposed to be about and for all women, became about and for wealthy, white, well-educated, straight, able-bodied women. It's the way of the world. Thus the central hierarchy is preserved, no real threat to patriarchy is entertained, and the wealthy white boys at the top are only forced to share with their wives and daughters. With just enough exceptions so that they can point to a few tokens and say, 'see? We're changing!'" She dumps the dust in the garbage can.

Just then, a street-walker enters the room. "Listen," she says, "Let me tell you about abuse and rape. You don't know from abuse and rape...."

"Oh!" shrieks the Sisterhood. "You poor thing! Let us get you a job! Let us get you a home! Let us get you a rehab program! No no, don't exert yourself, don't say a single word. We know exactly what you need. You need anti-pornography laws and anti-prostitution laws and better access to programs to get you off the street! You also need a decent pair of pants and something to cover that bra you're wearing. You just sit right there and don't lift a finger, dearie."

Feminism has managed to evolve in thirty years, and large portions of it have now moved beyond the patronization and narrow-mindedness that I parodied in the above example. But you still don't have to look too hard to find feminists passionate about The Sisterhood of All Women, distressed over the lack of x community in The Movement, who don't realize and can't be taught that the Movement has been so narrowly defined in their minds already that it cannot represent the interests of anyone but themselves. Like, you know, Hirshman. "Feminism is about wealthy well-educated women going out and getting high-status well-paid jobs, working their asses off while hiring household help to attain the highest ranks possible, and then changing the world by fiat from the top because, once they get there, they of course will know how to change it so as to benefit women from vastly different circumstances, even though they've never bothered to listen to them before." Right.

The difference was that before, I was in The Sisterhood, watching its antics with a slack jaw, but not myself excluded in any important way. Now?

Now I am a welcome member of the fabulous mommyblogger Community, so long as I agree that talking about motherhood means talking about diapers and formula and bottles and toys and "choosing" whether to stay at home or go to work and daycare and fathers doing their bit around the house, and that the Mother's Movement consists of discussions about tax policy, daycare policy, husbands doing housework, and "work-life balance." The Mother's Movement does not include the rights of first mothers or their children once removed from their care. It does not include the right of low-income women to better wages or benefits. It does not include the right to stay home even if your husband isn't a billionaire. It does not include status and dignity and recognition for welfare mamas. It does not include increases to social assistance levels. It does not, for some strange reason, include any discussion of the division of labour in two-mom families. It does not include marriage or adoption rights for GLBT families. It does not include the expansion of Canada's "fabulous" maternity benefits to cover more than the 40% of women who are currently eligible for it. It does not include public facilities or access for disabled or delayed kids or their parents. It does not include recognizing the legitimate need of some parents with disabled kids or children with developmental delays to stay home with their children so they can manage the merry-go-round of weekly specialists' visits, and the need for replacement income in those circumstances. No. All of these circumstances have been defined right out of the picture in this fabulous, so-civil, very-friendly mommbyblogger Community.

Especially, don't talk about how the underlying -isms of those exclusions are reflected in The Community. Don't talk about how racism, classism, ableism and heterosexism are reflected in the status structures of the blogosphere.

If you do speak up, expect people to say, "Well that's kind of interesting, but you're wrong. I have no evidence. It's just my gut feeling." Or, "That's not important. Why do you care about being excluded on the blogosphere?" Or, "Yes but does it really matter who's more popular than who?" Or, "If someone isn't popular, it's because they aren't working hard enough." Or, my favourite, "It's because you're not interesting."

(Of course! We all know that only wealthy, white, healthy kids with straight married parents are interesting.)

Which, for justifications of privilege, could have been taken right from the Patriarchy Crib Sheet; and if they'd come from a wealthy white guy talking about the over-representation of his community in parliament or congress or in the business world, would have drawn screaming fits from the very same people who have no problem popping it out when it benefits them.

This is one reason why Beanie Baby is changing. I can't say I have a whole lot of interest in keeping a mommy blog right now.

~~~~~

I'm posting it because it's still true; but it's not the whole truth anymore. It wasn't then, either, but I was too angry to see it.

The truth is that while the community is deeply, structurally flawed in ways so fundamental I'm not sure it can ever be repaired, I've found some really amazing, generous, intelligent, funny, warm people here. People who will make by hand and mail presents for someone they've never met. People who will call and visit and send cards and organize conference presentations. People who will bring gifts to that conference for their co-presenters, and invite them to creativity workshops afterwards gratis. People who will stand up for me when I say the unpopular things I feel that I have to say. People who, when I kvetch about my daughter's fashion options, will offer to sew her underwear.

It may seem like an odd moment for an epiphany, but I think it was that gesture that turned my disgust into something more temperate. It was disgust; for a few weeks, every post was one from the hopper, something that had been sitting around for weeks, because I didn't want to touch this thing with a ten-foot pole. I was gritting my teeth and forcing myself to continue simply because I had this presentation coming up in October and it seemed dishonest somehow to present about mommyblogging if I was no longer a mommyblogger.

Now that the conference is over, I'm no longer a mommyblogger. Ah, freedom.

I'm also going to disengage myself from a lot of the less savoury aspects of the momosphere. For instance, blogrolling: did you know that blogroll is a pun on logroll, a political practice of greasing hands through reciprocal favours to pass legislation? Yeah. I mean, blogrolling has nothing to do with politics with that kind of etymology, does it? Clearly I am insane.

Anyway, bye-bye blogroll. Hello something else--I'm not sure what to call it, but my plan is to rotate through links to a few blogs that I'm enjoying or that are new finds for me. So instead of a massive and static and hard-to-update list of "everything I like everywhere," just a few--say, three--that I think some of you might enjoy, and no longer restricted to mommyblogs or even personal blogs. Expect to see some that don't seem to fit in here at all.

And bye-bye blogrings. Bye-bye directories. Bye-bye blogtopsites. Most of you never found me that way anyway. (Rachel, I also changed the text colour to a dark web-safe green. If it still shows up weak, it's definitely your monitors.)

Bye-bye daily posts--I know, just in time for NaBloPoMo (National Blog Posting Month). I am doomed to swim against the currents, it seems; but not only is the daily posting too much for me, I'm beginning to suspect it's too much for you. It wouldn't be if I could ever master brevity, but since I can't (or haven't yet, at any rate) it seems unkind to forcefeed you all a dissertation every weekday. I'm aiming for shorter and less frequent. We'll see if I can do it--some days it's hard to limit myself to one post. But hey, if I can't put it here, maybe I'll start submitting more of it to print markets. You never know.

I'm also going to aim for less didacticism and more fun (of course, I have a lot of the old-style ones in the hopper, and I'm not giving them up totally--just more of a mix). To that end I'm adding a "fiction" category of stuff that is not representative of reality at all, and if anyone ever asks me "but did that really happen Andrea?" of a fiction post I will hunt them down and tap them gently with a two-by-four. I'm also going to try for more images, more crafty stuff, and yes--indeed--more topics. Because I don't write about enough stuff already. And shorter. I've failed for this post, but there's always tomorrow.

Hallowe'en is known as Samhain (pronounced Sow-in) in Wicca, and besides being the day when we say goodbye to those we've lost in the previous year, it's also the New Year. It seems an appropriate time to make some changes. Happy New Year!

~~~~~

*And then complain about group-think.

**I would like to stress that all of these examples are drawn from reading, not from life. If I inadvertently offend with my characterizations, please accept my deepest apologies and, not that it's anyone's job to educate me, but feel free to set me straight.

Posted by Andrea at November 2, 2006 10:51 AM under Friends and Others

EMAIL this entry

(comments fields are below this section)