Katelyn’s Comments (group member since Jan 07, 2016)

Katelyn’s comments from the Our Shared Shelf group.

Valerie wrote: "I'm 30 and married, no kids. I would like to have kids but current circumstances make it an unwise decision. One thing I'm noticing is the older I get, the more the idea scares/unnerves me. Has any..."

Yup. I'm only 24, and growing up I always assumed I'd have kids, like Stacy said, because that's just what people did! But as I've gotten older, and the reality that people my age are actually becoming parents... it's very scary and intimidating. I'm in a place where I don't want to have children, but I don't know if that's how I feel right now or if that will continue. I have this unsettling feeling that I won't want to have kids until the fear disappears, but I also get the sense that it never will.

I'm just going to step in here and remind everyone to be respectful.

I am in complete agreement that all of these issues need to be discussed, and they are not easy topics. So things are going to get heated and uncomfortable, and that's fine.

But please keep in mind that this particular thread was started to discuss the positive aspects of the book. The title asks a particular question that merited an answer, and everyone has a different opinion on that. But I am noticing a lot of threads being taken over with the same arguments between the same people and it is discouraging other members from participating.

I would like to remind everyone that there are people from all over the world and of different backgrounds trying to be involved here. Some have less facility with English. Some are younger. Some have had less access to education. I think I have to mention that these concepts, which are very important, are new to a lot of people. Some may never have encountered them before at all. It's great that they can be exposed to them here. But please keep in mind that at the time of reading the book, they may not have been actively thinking about these concepts, and so they may want to have a discussion about things that they liked.

Basically, I think it is appropriate to voice these opinions anywhere and everywhere, but there is already a lengthy discussion about the "white perspective" of this book happening, and it would make it easier for a larger number of members to participate on this group if we gave them some space to discuss their thoughts. Then we can respond to new members' thoughts rather than preventing them from feeling comfortable voicing their thoughts at all.

It is just important that we be respectful and patient.

Also, as far as I know, there are no plans for this book club to end after a year. Emma recently announced a year-long hiatus from acting to focus on her work in gender equality, but that was announced after this club began. I don't believe that there are plans for the club to end after a year.

Adrienne wrote: "Morning all,

Finished How to Be a Woman by Caitlin Moranover the weekend and then ran to Tesco and bought Moranifesto in hardback (£10). I cant WAIT to read it. Unf..."

Hi Adrienne, glad you enjoyed the book! If you check around other parts of the discussion board, there may be an area where you can tell our story and get advice where people will be more likely to notice and respond. Perhaps in the "feminism" folder there may be a relevant topic already open, or you can start your own if you don't find anything. We try to avoid bringing threads off-topic, so that might be a better way to get feedback :)

Bunny wrote: "I'm just concerned that we don't end up in a place where we are implying that poor people got that way by not being responsible, whereas rich people are sober, hardworking, job creators. Alcohol an..."

Agreed! I wasn't disagreeing with you, in case that wasn't clear, I was simply adding to your point.

Substance abuse trends are different for different socioeconomic groups, as well. For example, prescription abuse tends to be higher among the more affluent. These are generalizations, of course, but statistically...

It's also a pretty common stereotype that marijuana is mostly a problem in a poorer communities, but that's definitely not true. At least in the U.S., from what I understand (and also from my experience growing up), it is pretty much ubiquitous regardless. Not that I'm comparing weed to other more addictive/destructive drugs... I'm pro-legalization. But in the popular imagination as a gateway drug, and as a tool for locking up poor kids, usually PoC... it's crazy and baseless. Everyone smokes pot these days!

Bunny wrote: "Before we go too far down this road I do feel the need to point out that alcohol and substance abuse isn't something that is limited to lower class or poor people. There are lots of upper class and..."

+ can afford treatment, or have lifestyles that make it easier to manage/conceal... Stigma is different for these reasons (and others, don't mean to essentialize here). And also gendered, but I guess that goes without saying on this particular forum ;)

Just to clarify, this was one of the first posts in the group at the beginning of January when OSS was first announced. I don't think the OP was necessarily linking the two issues, but looking to draw attention to them in hopes that Emma would make an effort to include them as she makes her book selections. There were a few similar posts that we started with the intention of saying "Hey, can we make an effort to be intersectional in this group?" that prompted ongoing discussion.

Hope that helps make sense of the OP title.

And Etta, thank you for sharing. The point you make about socialization is really interesting, and not something I've actively thought about before in the context of aspergers/autism spectrum... Is there research/literature on this in combination gender/sexuality/etc. ?

I think the gray area is the fact that this kind of a service provides a temporary cure to a symptom (women are hesitant to travel alone) of a larger problem (women are disproportionately victims of violence).

So taken to its extreme conclusion, a misogynistic society has one more excuse for blaming the woman when she is attacked: you should have dressed more conservatively, you shouldn't have had so much to drink, you should have taken the women-only car service...

Moved to Miscellaneous folder

Laurelei wrote: "I think one could feasibly write in a memoir of why one's experiences are not intersectional. If it's an issue of isolation -- why?
I think the idea that white women shouldn't write of experiences ..."

I think it's a very fine line. I guess I'm just not convinced that every book on feminism, regardless of genre or topic, throw in a disclaimer... When does that just become lip service?

I agree that the problems with the book are symptomatic of larger issues, absolutely. Cultural and systemic issues to which her book contributes, but I think by the very nature of such issues, the individual is not wholly responsible for missteps. For that reason, I don't fault Moran 100% for her memoir lacking in these areas, but criticisms are still legitimate and necessary. Has anyone read any of her subsequent books? I'd be curious if she took these criticisms and learned from them. If not, that's when I think she becomes absolutely responsible for contributing to harmful white feminism.

Emily wrote: "I was just discussing this with my coworker yesterday. It reminds me of those guys a few years ago who invented nail polish that changes color when it came into contact with roofies. Inventions and..."

I agree with you there. At the same time, people have different skills and goals, and while some may be working toward overturning the partiarchal system that perpetuates these problems, others might create opportunities for greater safety within the system while we wait for things to improve. Not everyone is going to be devoted to making radical political statements. And those kinds of revolutions don't happen overnight. So I think there is room for both initiatives, and I don't think they are contradictory.

Laurelei wrote: "That seems to unfairly place the burden on certain groups. White women should be just as capable and responsible for doing intersectional work, even if they are straight, able-bodied, middle-class,..."

Well, I would question where in this book it would have been appropriate for her to discuss issues outside of her experience, as it is structured primarily as a memoir.

I think feminists with privilege need to use their platforms to expand the playing field for women in general to be successful. It would be inappropriate for a white woman to discuss experiences that are not her own, especially to profit off that, and to come across as a savior or as if she is trying to speak for minority groups. The larger problem is that there aren't enough opportunities for women who are not the quintessential privileged feminist to have the spotlight.

The main issue with Moran's work is that her humor does not always translate, and her language is at times careless, and this results in a feeling of exclusion.

Ines wrote: "I grew up poor. So poor that we did not have a phone and received government aid. My dad worked partially two jobs. My mom always worked. This was kind of unheard in my area... We were the exceptio..."

Wow, that is a very inspiring story. Thank you for sharing! I think the point you make about having to learn certain behaviors and skills that come naturally to others who were raised in a more affluent environment is really key to class privilege. The literal lack of money is obvious, but most people probably don't think about the other aspects.

Ana wrote: "Hi guys! This is my first post on this group, so I will try to make it clear! I hope I am doing this right :) I finished the book a couple of hours ago.

I've tried to read most of the comments on ..."

Thanks for joining us Ana, and for your insightful comments! Do check the folder devoted to the book on the discussion board where you will find more in depth conversations about the book, and many of the issues you've brought up in your post here :)

I think it could definitely be one small part of why we expect women to be so thin.

While it derives from binary, cis standard, that makes sense for a problematic culturally applied expectation of body type. If indeed it is part of the cause of how we expect men and women to look, then it is part of the reason that some people don't pass. So it is arguably even more damaging for them.

But I would also agree that it has more to do with standards of "masculinity" being more varied, although I would argue that men who are "too skinny" are often under scrutiny related to assumptions about their sexuality (and other assumptions as well, I'm sure).

Marina wrote: "@Katelyn, she doesn't seem to realize that WOC face downright dehumanization when they don't shave, whereas white women are "just" called unattractive and maybe a bit unhygienic. But yeah I don't k..."

She mostly talks about pubic hair and the standards perpetuated by the porn industry. She categorizes issues about other body hair separately, because the reason for shaving is about a lot of people seeing it rather than sexually motivated. I hesitate to make any claims about whether this is passively exclusive, it probably is, but she's mostly criticizing the way that porn industry standards have translated to "real life." So it's less about "Women shouldn't shave because society! Feminists don't shave!" It comes down to one line where she says (paraphrasing) why are we holding women to a standard that was created for professionals? We shouldn't be scheduling our lives according to if we might get laid and therefore have to schedule time to shave/wax/etc. down there just in case. If one prefers being hairless down there, then it's less about "omg someone might see my pubes" and more about "I will get rid of this hair because I like it that way, and I don't need to schedule my life around it because it's an effort that is part of my routine reflecting personal preference."
This summary just seems far afield from the issue of dehumanization resulting from hairiness... To me her argument seems like a different facet of the same issue, maybe?

Marina wrote: "Also, once again she ignores the experience of women of colour http://www.gal-dem.com/shavingforwoc/"

That's a great article. But I'm unsure of how it relates to Caitlin Moran? If I recall, She does not say anything about "you have to be hairy or else you're not a feminist." In fact, she argues that there should be a different approach to how to understand pubic hair and other body hair. She mostly just takes down the imposed standard of hairless pubic areas, but still seemed to leave it up to choice. She doesn't address this issues brought up in this article, but I also don't think she writes anything in this chapter that would be directly at odds, either. I understand the point that the absence of inclusion = passive exclusion, but in this case, I think that her discussion supports the freedom of choice to shave if that's how you feel more comfortable.
But if I'm misunderstanding the point you are making, please do clarify.

Bunny wrote: "I want to challenge something. I see a number of comments that in one form or another seem to be sliding into an assumption that Intersectionality or discussing racism or studying and unpacking old..."

I had many of these same thoughts catching up on all these messages!

I'll also add that it's interesting to me that people seem to think that the U.S. is this amazingly diverse melting pot where there are POC everywhere. In fact, a great portion of the country (I hesitate to say majority, but that probably wouldn't be too far off) is rural area dotted with small towns that are all white. When I went to college, even in a state like NY, many of my classmates had come from small towns in NY where they had never met any black people (or there was only one black family in the town).

I just wanted to clarify that. And with that, argue that if our small town population is expected to confront racism, I would expect that globally as well. Not saying that anyone is trying to avoid it, but I think the argument that you're not actually interacting with POC on a daily basis is an excuse for ignorance is weak. Again, not saying anyone is making that claim, but that would be the extreme direction to go in with that line of thinking. I'm just spitballing here.

In the U.S. we learn about slavery in school when we are very young. I've been told by European friends that many countries do not teach students in school about their colonialist histories. Obviously that is something that needs to be changed. Perhaps that would help with these issues a bit. This is all to the point that the individual isn't wholly responsible for any gaps in their understanding of these complicated issues. There needs to be systemic reform. But this is why it's so important for people to make an effort to learn via forums like this, and I think this discussion, though heated at times, is a great example!

Bunny wrote: "I'm giggling in a very friendly way at the notion of Gloria Steinem being a radical. It's true we do come from very different places in this group! I respect Steinham but to me she's about as radic..."

I was putting myself in a mom's shoes ;) I think to the average non-feminist or someone without affiliation to another cause, anyone who devotes their life to something in a way that Steinem has would seem radical.

Bunny wrote: "One of the things I learned first hand when I was poor is that poor people are subjected to a lot of predatory and discriminatory conditions. For example if you can't get the money together to pay ..."

All of which can make it next to impossible for someone to accumulate generational wealth. It's another thing people miss when they discuss poverty. It's not just about someone's paycheck being a bit smaller than someone else's. It's a cycle that is incredibly challenging to break out of. And at least in the U.S., welfare doesn't help much, and often can make things even more difficult given other factors like stigma. Not to mention all of the complicated fine print tied in with receiving welfare... But I digress!

Emma wrote: "@Janice, I think this book and its style could be good for introducing people like your mom to feminism. It definitely showed me the non-serious and non-academic side to feminism! Different people ..."

I think it might also be a good starting place for older women who may have an idea in their minds that feminism is only for either highly educated people (academics, etc.) or super radical people (activists like Gloria Steinem). Even though she's pretty high profile, Caitlin Moran's life comes across as perhaps more relatable in that way. She's just a woman doing her job, and she's had all these relatively normal experiences. I think my mom might be a bit scandalized by the humor, not to mention unfamiliar with the British-isms, but otherwise I'd recommend it to her as a white woman who has had many of the same life experiences as Moran (lots of siblings, working class, motherhood, etc.).