Feminist Politics of the 2d\3d Wave

Waves Crashing Hampton Beach, 2011, ddensmore photographer

If you are a feminist over 40, you fall into the age group that younger feminists and historians refer to as "second wave." This group includes people like Hillary Rodham Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Gloria Steinem, etc. Age-wise, I certainly fall into this group.

Second wave beliefs tend to interlace the political and the cultural, seeing them as inextricably linked. For this reason, one of the current manifestations of the second wave is the idea that Hillary Clinton must break that ultimate glass ceiling to validate the dreams of any woman with political aspirations in America. Hillary  has arguably worked her whole life toward this goal, and many thought it was swept out from under her by Barack Obama. Now that she has a second opportunity to catch the brass ring, many second wave feminists are both frustrated and angry that the young feminists, especially the women, of the third wave aren't racing to Hillary's political bandwagon.

What does all this mean, though? Is that really what this is about? 

My 23 year old daughter and her friends are all third wave feminists. In discussing politics, a few of them have shared with me some of their thoughts from a third wave perspective. Though I don't claim to have heard the definitive answer, I do think these young adults may be representative of a larger group from the third wave. To me, it seems clear that the chastisement from the likes of Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright has not done much to endear the second wave paradigm to this newer cast of players. They seem convinced that these older feminists are totally not getting them, so it seemed important to ask how they see it, and do my best to listen to what they had to say.

So, these third wave feminists - what are they saying?

One of the things made the most clear in our discussion is that voting for a woman because she is a woman is not how these young people interpret feminism at all. One should vote for the candidate that most aligns with a personal paradigm, not allow the vote to become a knee-jerk response to the pain of history. The point of feminism is to make gender a non-issue, and the second wave insistence that the gender blindness has to come after a success story makes these young people give the "Oh, really?" look made popular on hundreds of Internet memes. That they think that feminism is about equality and neutrality is a success story, whether the woman comes out the winner or not. They shake their heads at the thought that we may not perceive it this way.

There is also the fact that these young people don't see Hillary as the feminist icon that many in the second wave do. They see the waffling on things that are important to them, the monies coming in from corporate special interests, and they don't see these things as positive. For example, she fought hard for universal health care in the 90's, and yet was quoted recently as saying that single payer will "never ever come to pass." Many young people see this, in conjunction with the large amount of money she has received for speaking to those in the health care industry, as a classic "sell out."

In spite of being younger than Bernie Sanders, Hillary is very much perceived as the establishment candidate. She represents a vision that many young people would rather not perpetuate. Would she be a good president? If asked, they will echo Robert Reich's comments from his January 17th post on Facebook:

"If you assume Washington is not changeable and that the vicious cycle of wealth and power dominating our politics and economics is unalterable, Hillary's experience is relevant; she will make a first-class president for the system we now have. But if you believe Washington must be changed, and that system can be altered for the benefit of the many and not the few, Bernie’s leadership is more relevant; he is heading up a political movement."

Hillary does not represent the highest dreams of these young feminists. If anything, she is like a parent trying to be cool and not quite making it. I made a point of asking about the anger question - you know, why is it that Bernie can speak angrily on the campaign trail, but Hillary can't? The response? Hillary doesn't sound authentic when she speaks. This generation craves authenticity at least as much as it craves the ubuntu message of social justice and unity ('I am because we are'). They will quickly point to Elizabeth Warren as an example of a woman politician who can speak with anger and be heard by all. Hers is an authentic righteous anger which is acknowledged, and even applauded.

For all these things (and probably more that we never discussed), the young people I know are all feeling the Bern. Youth always wants to change the world. Their champion just happens to have wild white hair and speak with a Brooklyn accent. When asked, they mostly indicated that they will vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination. However, I did not get the impression that the enthusiasm would transfer. I can't help but wonder if, in a general election, they would pull as hard for Hillary as they seem determined to do for Bernie? What would that do to the end game leading to November, should she win?

Stay tuned, and we'll find out together how this all plays out.




Disclaimer: In the interest of full disclosure, I will be clear up front that I have never been a huge fan of Hillary Clinton. My reaction to her is with regard to her politics. I sit far to the left of the spot where Hillary Clinton apparently feels most comfortable. This would not prevent me from voting in her favor, but I would be voting against those even further to the right, not truly voting FOR her. 

A Turn in the Road

One thing that stays the same is change (death and taxes being the other two). I haven't posted here in quite a while. A lot has changed. I not only have a different job, but I have changed my whole lifestyle by exploring the science behind plant-based nutrition. I even got a certificate from Cornell (eCornell, actually) that says I know a bit about the topic. These last few years have really been a turn in the road for me, especially that food thing ....

Giving up eating meat was way easier than I thought it would be. It wasn't long before I could really feel the difference, and knowing that every meal where I ate only whole plant-based foods, I was reducing not only my risk for "diseases of affluence," but I was reducing my carbon footprint, saving the lives of animals, and basically being a good eco-steward of the planet. Seems like a win-win to me.

I did this after reading up on the science of it. I saw Forks Over Knives, read the China Study, and started following up on the studies referenced in it. It was a rabbit hole for sure. There are literally thousands of studies out there by dozens of first-rate Universities that show the correlation between diet and disease. I am not kidding. Science-wise, this is a no-brainer.

The part I didn't expect was that I would wake up one day and think, "I am doing really well with this way of eating. I am THRIVING, not just getting by. Dang it, I feel healthier than I ever have. I have more energy. I am constantly getting comments about my glow. This is awesome." Okay, I kind of expected that part. THIS is the part I wasn't expecting, "Huh. So, that must mean that eating meat has been a choice all this time. I didn't need to let animals die for me to be healthy. We humans truly are not obligate carnivores."

WTF? Seriously? 

I don't want to be one of "those" people. I refuse to sit in judgment on the people around me that still eat meat. 

So, how do I process this? We choose to eat meat in our society. We make artificial distinctions between our beloved cat or dog and the cow in the pasture. They each have the same capacity for emotion, self-awareness, and suffering. If we call it murder when the crazy veterinarian shot a cat with a bow and arrow, how is it not murder when a cow or a sheep is led to the slaughter? If we don't actually need meat to thrive, how is it acceptable to kill a self-aware being to feast on their flesh? 

So, I am sitting here, chewing on this. I am excited about the science and what it has shown me with regard to my own personal health and well-being, and I am stunned at the thought that I have been part of a system that routinely rapes (artificial insemination), murders, and devours beings that have never done me any harm, and whose flesh I DO NOT NEED TO THRIVE. I chose this?!?!

9/11 Thoughts

I have an interesting mix of thoughts in my head this morning:

First, it is September 11th ... or 9/11 as we Americans often call it these days. This is the anniversary of the date when the World Trade Center towers were attacked and brought to the ground by terrorists. A lot of people died that day, and the death toll continued to climb through the tragedies of the first responders, the crash of Flight 93, the attack on the Pentagon, then through the wars that have been tied back to this event. As an American, I can't help but think back to that day, what I was doing (working at the state of Wisconsin), and all the emotions that steamrolled through my day, leaving me numb and in shock.

Second, I find it slightly ironic that today I saw the announcement on Facebook regarding the Blog Action Day for 2012. The topic is going to be The Power of We, and though I will join the international blogging community with a post about that specific topic on October 15th, I wanted to mention it today because it ties in to my memories of 9/11.

There are a lot of horrific moments associated with this date in 2001. The scales falling from our eyes that someone hated America and Americans enough to do this to us. It was shocking! The days that followed saw a lot of "us versus them" type talk, but I also remember some amazing and powerful reactions worldwide. Everyone, other than the terrorists themselves, stood with us that day. The entire world reacted as an American and people let us know that they felt our pain, they shared our sorrow and grief. The international community reached out in support and caring, wanting to help. Truly, the power of WE was evident world-wide.

I so wish we could have harnessed that moment somehow. I think we could have transformed the world. Out of an unbelievable tragedy was made visible a connectedness that many average citizens had never felt or seen before. As a global community, we cried together and held space for one another to express pain. It was one of the most powerful things I can ever remember.

As we continue to move forward and slowly heal from that day in infamy, I would never want to forget that we can all come together in unity. As horrible as that day was, I would like to think that we will all look back one day and remember, not just the days of pain, but that the pain brought us together in a way that had never before been experienced to that degree - and gave birth to the possibility of a new way of looking at the world. I dream that we might see it as the beginning of our global awakening in unity.

As John Lennon once famously said, "I am a dreamer, but I am not the only one."

Geek Squeal

So, switching back to tech-type geekolisciousness for a moment ... I have been hearing rumors that US Cellular is finally thinking about moving in the iPhone direction. Apple is supposed to be working on an LTE version of the phone and once they do, US Cellular is rumored to be "interested." I have to say, that I think that would be a total WIN. I love US Cellular connectivity and customer service. In my part of the world (Wisconsin), they are far and away the most stable carrier with the best coverage. Add to that one of the most coveted phones in the US, and it just sounds amazing.

The only possible hesitation is that they have to get the LTE iPhone connectivity right. A great phone on a geat network won't get you very far if they don't play together nice.

So, I am crossing my fingers (and saving my pennies!)

w00t!

2011: TEOTWAWKI

I was shaking my head this morning, thinking about how Mayor Bloomberg and his riot police forcibly evicted the people of Occupy Wall Street, and when they came back with copies of the court order stating they had the right to be there, they found themselves under arrest. As I type, they are massing at the park, waiting for final word from a judge on whether this is their peaceable place of assembly or not. I look around at what has been happening in Ohio, Florida, Maine, California, and my own state of Wisconsin and I look beyond our borders to Italy, Egypt, England ... the world is being shaken. The hierarchy of power is being questioned world-wide, and as I write, no one really knows if the entrenched powerful will be able to quell the masses or not.

I think of the song by REM: "It's the end of the world as we know it ...." and I realize that the outcome of all these various confrontations is going to change the world, one way or another. The question is not *whether* the world will change, but *how* it will change. Will we continue heading toward a modern version of serfdom, explore a world oligarchy (Robocop, anyone?), or settle on fascism? Are corporations the final arbiters of what is important in life? Is profit the most critical deciding factor in creating policy? Do we continuously need to grow (money, population, ownership)? Do we make policy decisions based on the power of profit or do we explore the Happiness Index? Which way is it going to go?

The other side of the spectrum doesn't offer much improvement. Power, in even the most idealistic system corrupts the leaders. I believe that neither socialism, nor communism is the answer. Frankly, I have never been a fan of any pure "-ism." Dogma, by definition, closes minds to any other option. Sometimes, it makes sense to go in one direction. Other times, other situations, other paths to a solution. The world is too varied to allow for a bi-tonal world. I know it is simpler to only answer yes or no questions, but that isn't reality. Reality is a huge range of vibrant colors, including many that our eyes can't even see. Yes or no, left or right, these are too simplistic for the long term health of any society.

How do we come up with a societal structure that allows for the flexibilty required for general well-being and the pursuit of happiness for the greatest percentage of our society? That is what 'The Great Experiment' was all about. Almost 250 years later, we have become so bloated by outdated laws, so controlled by the way the fiscally powerful want to shape the world, that we are in danger of imploding on ourselves. We have lost our way, and I wonder who among us knows how to lead us out of this mess? If we can't even agree on what is wrong, how can we move in any direction at all?

In my naivete, I thought that everyone would agree that it is of paramount importance to have the greatest good for the greatest number, but I didn't realize that we don't all agree on even what qualifies as 'good.' For example, I believe that universal healthcare is a good thing. Others tell me that they pay their own way, and they should not have to pay more so that others can live. They even tell me that it is a bad thing to give any support at all to those suffering from drug or alcohol addictions, street people who have no job or place to live, or those who might not be here legally. It doesn't matter if they are human. They don't count. Too, I believe that no one should starve or freeze to death in the richest country the world has ever known. When I have debated this topic, I have been told that we are so rich because of our profit motive and there is no profit in helping the incapacitated poor live long enough to breed (yes, that is almost verbatim). And I am shocked that people cheered the idea of a non-insured man hypothetically dying from lack of care at the Republican debates. In so many words, I have had it explained to me that we have no intrinsic societal value as human beings, but that a person's worth is determined only by the value they add to our economy. Even that can be downplayed, if the value added is not enough to compensate for the value removed by needing health care or food, clothing or shelter. How can I discuss possible approaches to our societal problems, if we can't even agree that every human being has an intrinsic value? How to approach the idea that everyone deserves compassion, food, shelter and basic healthcare?

At some point, the scales are going to tip in one direction or another. I truly believe that this tension can't last indefinitely. Whichever side of these world-wide confrontations winds up with the policy-making authority, the world is going to change. The end of the world as we know it is happening right before our eyes. It isn't some future event, and we don't have to wait for 2012 or a world cataclysm. And with a little luck, we will be able to avoid escalating it into WWIII before we agree as to which way we want to go.

The Incredible Shrinking World

Several times in recent weeks, I have seen people complain when alternate views on a topic are posted on someone's wall or discussion board. Once, I was even the person getting told that "If you don't agree with me, don't post on my wall." I understand that nobody wants their wall to become a flamewar in progress. I also understand that stating one's opinion is different than trying to start a war. The person who was upset with me claimed that somehow I was violating his 1st ammendment rights by disagreeing with him. The idea that "my rights end where yours begin" is a concept we seem to be losing in our current culture. It is both a question of respect, and a willingness to be open to change. (In the interest of full disclosure, I told the person that if he only wanted people who agreed with him to be his friends, I might not be a good choice - so, he "unfriended" me. A wise move on his part.)

When we listen to Eli Pariser on the TED video (linked in the blog title), discussing the concept of online filter bubbles, it seems to be referencing the same mentality. Our world is shrinking, but it isn't just that technology is making it possible for anyone to talk real-time to friends in China for free via Skype. It is also about the fact that many of us are painting ourselves into a corner.

We have so much information available to us, and I think we sit on the cusp of information overload for a large part of our lives. I try to be understanding of this. We each have an awful lot to process every day.

However, if I only read articles slanted to my existing point of view, if I only accept data that validates my opinion, if I only allow those who agree with me to post on my wall, I am limiting my opportunities for growth, change, and even my ability to impact those who disagree with me. By controlling the discussion, I am limiting the potential for conflict, and that may seem like a good thing. Very few people want to spend their "relaxation time" in heated discussions, defending opinons. Think about it, though. If your conversation is only with those that already agree with you, you could be led to a mistaken impression that your point of view is more popular or common than it is. You may be ignoring a ton of evidence that suggests you might want to modify that opinion. There are lots of ways a healthy debate can be a positive influence. Also, I truly believe that respect for differing opinions is a character trait that is essential for a healthy democracy. We can't lose the capacity for civil discussion on controversial issues. If we do, we're done!

When we share our ideas, we need to be respectful of the other person's right to their opinion. That doesn't mean we have to avoid expressing contrary thoughts, or sharing statistics and data to back up our opinion. The fine line is there between inciting an argument and sharing a contrary opinion, and it isn't always clear-cut.

I am asking you to consider how much you are limiting yourself when avoiding confrontation is the be-all, end-all of your life. It shrinks your world, and there is an amazing, huge, abundant universe out here. You don't want to miss any of it!

International Food Day

Today is International Food Day, and the #BAD11 (Blogger Action Day 2011) has chosen this topic as the theme. I didn't actually sign up to participate, but I was always one of those strange students who enjoyed writing essays, so I figure, "Why not?" Maybe I can sign up after the fact?!

There are so many options that fall into my geekoliscious sensibilities, when it comes to food. I am a foodie, actually ... love exploring new restaurants, new tastes and new dishes. I was thinking I'd write on a favorite dish or restaurant, or maybe on the politics of food. That would tie in my political geekiness, too.

I don't know if you will call this political, but I decided to go with a something that hit me last night. I was watching TV with my sweetie and an ad came on for a program whose entire topic appears to be throwing pumpkins, smashing them, or watching them explode. Suddenly, it struck me how insane this was. We have so much food in this country that we not only throw a ton away, but we actively destroy food as entertainment.

This bothered me, though I recognize that this is hardly the only time I've seen food wasted on TV. I sat and thought about it, and I realize that whether it is on tv or not, pumpkin tossing is something that has become a popular pasttime in certain circles. Beyond that, we carve pumpkins all the time, not eating them (except for possibly the seeds). Pumpkins may have caught my attention, but I throw out bad food every time I clean the fridge. At other times, I go out to eat and don't bring home a "doggie bag." I am just as guilty as anyone.

So, it is one thing to make a list of ways food has been wasted, but it is much more productive to come up with ways to minimize that waste. The saying is that you have to be the change you want to see in the world. So, I went searching the interwebs, and here are some tips I found to get me thinking about food waste differently:

* Planet Green had some ideas to get me started: 5 Ways to Cut back on Food Waste

* OrganizeIT is a UK site and their starter list is definitely doable, in my opinion.

* NPR has tips from an Anthropologist who says that Americans waste almost *half* the food we grow!

So, I now have plenty of ideas to get me started. An added benefit to this is that, if I am successful, I should have more change in my pocket, too. Maybe, I can save enough for that MacBook Air that keeps calling my name ...