Work and Gender

I've been tracking this blog, Les Femmes Folles, for awhile now-- it's very simple interviews with Nebraska women in the arts. It began not long after we began our Womanhouse meetings. I'm especially intrigued by the answers to the question she asks everyone: "Do you think being a woman has made any impact on your career?" A sampling:

"Has my talent been judged by the sway in my hip or the curve of my lip? The list could go on and on but it’s not good feminism to hold on to such things."

"Wow, that is a touchy subject right now. Yes, I absolutely think it has had an impact."

"I’m not interested in being an angry feminist or subservient maid..."

"I think for the women of my generation it’s not all about getting a woman in the White House (which I’m completely in favor of), it’s more about a girl being the funniest kid in school, or not having to be a tomboy to be as cool as the boys."

"Certainly being a woman has its own set of challenges, but I don’t know that I’d write any differently if I were a man. But since I don’t know what that particular experience is like either, I can’t really say. (How’s that for a non-committed answer?!)"

"Yes, I mean I have definitely encountered sexism in my industry, but I simply choose not to continue my relationships with those people.  You would be surprised at how quickly you can weed them out.  But mostly, I feel that I have my career because I am female.  My work simply wouldn’t be the same if I didn’t come from a distinctly feminine perspective."



"You know….. I’m honestly not sure if it has. My path has more so been dictated by passion and a deep sense of civic responsibility than gender. My heart has ruled my career choices..."


The overwhelming feeling I get from these responses is we don't want gender to rule over our personalities and ambition--our selves. Sometimes it does, but we either shouldn't focus on it or we should stick to the positives. Is this part of a push to become more gender-neutral in the arts or is it more disassociation from "angry" feminism (I wonder what good feminism is)? How often do you think about your own gender and balancing the (culturally perceived) feminine and masculine traits in your work and career choices?

Womanhouse does some yarn bombing

As Womanhouse's first project draws to a close, let's look back at some pictures! Thanks to all who participated! It was great fun and great practice for the proposed future project of clothing downtown statues.

Laurel Nakadate

Came across the work of Laurel Nakadate recently. At first glance I thought she was exploitative, vain and quite frankly, annoying. However the longer I stayed with the work the more it revealed itself to be innovative and fearless (I love when that happens by the way). She takes on the relations between male/female and the privileged/ marginalized in a deeply personal and absolutely shocking way. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the work and I'm wondering what other people think about it.



http://ps1.org/exhibitions/view/321

Random thoughts for the day

A great slide-show in the NYT of yarn bombing, starting with the Rocky statue at the Philadelphia Museum of Art.

A great collaborative endeavor by Jen Kennedy and Liz Linden - I'm particularly inspired by the feminist book swap...

A visual culture clash of biology and gender. Way to go, Barnes & Noble.

Why are you a feminist?

Hi Everyone,

After commenting on the Summer Reading List post, I'm thinking about what books, people, & events got me into feminism in the first place.

So, I was wondering...
What got you into feminism?
Something you read? Someone you met? A conversation you had? A piece of music?

Thought it'd be interesting to hear where everyone's coming from & how they got here.


-Lindsay

Cinco de Mayo meeting

Sam and Scott. Sam likes fluorescents even his in drinks.

Trudie and Emma- margarita time

Kim, Regina and Victoria. Good times, good times.

It was a lovely evening for some patio chicken watching and margaritas. Thank you, Marissa, for hosting! This meeting was great to get to know each other more and brainstorm ideas we want to work with. I'm posting a general list of things we talked about- if I forgot some, please add on in the comments!

1. Time of exhibition- we are thinking Jan/Feb might be too cold and too expensive with heating bills. We all seemed to agree May/June would be better.
2. Do we still want a house? Or store-front? There are pros and cons to both. Here is the Lancaster County Assessor site- you can look up who owns what building or home. One of our ongoing assignments is to check out spaces, take pictures, do some research, call people, etc. Don't be afraid to initiate if you find something you think would be perfect!
3. Grants. Hixson-Lied Undergrad deadline is Oct 1, Graduate is Dec 1. There are also numerous other grants we need to look into over the summer.
4. The success of Ying's recent call for a sewing circle got many of us thinking. What was an overwhelming task (covering a room with tiny paper towel pillows) was made possible-- and perhaps more enjoyable-- with extra hands.
5. This led to ideas such as covering the Great Plains Art Museum's statue with clothing, yarn-bombing, clean graffiti and guerilla gardening.

6. Then we had to bring it back... what issues do we want to discuss? Why are we here? How are we engaging in feminist dialog? Who do we want to talk to?

And that's what we talked about for the remaining time. What our beef is with the world and why we want to change things. We don't have an official meeting time for June but Wendy has offered to teach us crocheting which is very exciting- thank you!

Until then, consider posting on the blog as your "assignment." 
-Victoria

Title IX and Gender Inequity

Katie Thomas' article in yesterday's New York Times addresses the deceptive maneuvers of some colleges and universities in their reporting of male and female athletes on the official rosters of the school's sports teams, and their blatant disregard for the intentions of Title IX. Thomas writes: Ever since Congress passed the federal gender-equity law known as Title IX, universities have opened their gyms and athletic fields to millions of women who previously did not have chances to play. But as women have surged into a majority on campus in recent years, many institutions have resorted to subterfuge to make it look as if they are offering more spots to women.
Title IX, enacted in 1972, states that: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance..." Thanks to the passing of Title IX 40 years ago, the numbers of women competing in college-level sports has risen 500%. However, as Thomas reports, these numbers are skewed, as loopholes within the law allow for men who practice on women's teams to be counted as females, and for female athletes to be counted multiple times (the same person can be reported on the rosters of outdoor track, indoor track, and cross-country, and count three separate times). Therefore the numbers may seem high overall, but the actual number of female athletes is lower given the double-and-triple counting of participants.
In my opinion, the biggest issue (besides the shady practices of university officials) is the lack of scholarship opportunities for women who participate in college sports. Football players, whether they play or not, are routinely offered large scholarships, which are often not scholastically deserved nor maintained. With football rosters teetering around 100, much money is diverted to male participants. As the general female population on college campuses nears 57%, there is a growing need to support young women attending college and prevent them from falling into massive debt paying their tuition bills. Scholarships, both athletic and academic, are sorely needed during this time of rising college costs. Financial issues are a major feminist concern, as women have historically been pigeonholed into jobs and profession with low wages...or ones with no pay at all (homemaker). For more on this subject, check out Barbara Ehrenreich's writing, specifically Nickel and Dimed.

Summer Reading List

Now that summer is almost upon us, I'm soliciting suggestions for some good feminist reads...and will share some of my own, starting with Penelope Mortimer's The Pumpkin Eater (1962).

Friday Humor

It's Raining on Men: Balls Deep at the Conference on Male Studies

If you need more of a teaser than that excellent title:

Men, Mr. Gilbert said, will obviously still dominate in "action fields"—"science, technology, the gaming industry and what's left of muscle work"—but the encroachment of women in what we might, crudely, call "women's work" (magazines, teaching, the humanities professoriate) threatens to demolish the whole evolutionary foundation of the species, which is "the eternal pair-bond bargain."

Put in other words, even if women are simply more capable at everything, they must accede to a sort of affirmative action for men lest the latter lash out for wont of things to do. "We know what happens," Mr. Garcia warned wanly, "when men have no hope—they turn to violence." (Women, you'll remember, already get to menstruate.)

Really, it's quite funny.

Louise Bourgeois and the Femme Maison

In the mid-1940s, the amazing Louise Bourgeois created a series of works entitled Femme Maison, or Woman House. There are fascinating connections to be made between the projects, which I will explore further this summer in my own writing and on this blog.
-Marissa Vigneault