Pam’s Comments (group member since Dec 29, 2016)

Pam’s comments from the Our Shared Shelf group.

Nicely done Little! You spoke well and your questions probably changed a few minds, too.

Now what you said was spot on, but what about HOW you said it?

How you would respond if someone became as passionate as you were? Would you feel... uneasy, upset, put off, receptive, passionate, etc?

How does this change given different situations or environments? In a classroom vs on a protest line vs one on one with a friend or a stranger?

And then to follow up with your question on how do we educate these people? It sounds to me that you already have a receptive teacher. Perhaps you can talk more with her about forming a group or perhaps running for a student council position.

Dead topic, I know. But I love Laci Green. She helped educate me on a lot of topics I would otherwise turn a blind eye to. Intersectionality? Wha?

Given current events I am seeing many threads around here asking what can we do? (March 8, WW3, Saudia Arabia in the UN women's commission, etc)

Last year the UN posted in 2013, there were still 757 million adults (aged 15 and over) unable to read and write, of whom two thirds were women. (http://undocs.org/E/CN.6/2017/4)

As we are a book club, I thought that this would be a great way we could give back to our communities by becoming literacy tutors.

Thoughts? Are there current tutors out there who have some insights?

Awesome~ Thanks for sharing!

Keith wrote: 2. Voting

Here here! Local and State elections are the big ones! Primaries for those in the US are coming up in May so make you are registered to vote! https://www.vote.org/ and take some time to look up the issues.

Keith wrote: 4. Stand Together As Feminists And Offer Feminist Solutions And this is a big one. We need to listen to others, to actively go outside of our comfort zone. This is not necessarily something we can do from our favorite reading chair. But it is something we can do from our schools (creating clubs or joining like minded organization - holding events, etc) from our places of work (joining toastmasters, joining high performance teams, networking!) and from our communities.

Fun facts:

Last year's commission:
Priority theme: Women’s economic empowerment in the changing world of work
Review theme: Challenges and achievements in the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals for women and girls (agreed conclusions of the fifty-eighth session)
Emerging issue/Focus area: The empowerment of indigenous women

2017 Commission (CSW61) was led by: Brazil, Egypt, Bosnia & Herzegovnia, Japan, and Germany. With 39 other countries assisting in the review.

(a) Thirteen members from African States
(b) Eleven members from Asia-Pacific States
(c) Nine members from Latin American and Caribbean States
(d) Eight members from Western European and other States
(e) Four members from Eastern European States.

Iran, for example, will be part of the commission until 2019.
http://www.unwomen.org/en/csw/csw61-2017 (I highly recommend reviewing the policies too listed under official documents)

2018 Commission Theme (CSW62):
Priority theme: Challenges and opportunities in achieving gender equality and the empowerment of rural women and girls;
Review theme: Participation in and access of women to the media, and information and communications technologies and their impact on and use as an instrument for the advancement and empowerment of women (agreed conclusions of the forty-seventh session);

Which, all and all, seems like a great place for Saudis to begin.

http://www.unwomen.org/en/csw/csw62-2018

"At least five EU states voted in a secret ballot (a voting method where your election is anonymous) for the Saudis to serve a four-year term on the commission, according to Mr Neuer." ...

"The vote was greeted warmly by Helen Clark, former administrator of the UN Development Programme and prime minister of New Zealand. Asked about the election of the Saudis to the commission on Twitter, Ms Clark said: “It's important to support those in the country who are working for change for women. Things are changing, but slowly.”

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor...

Saudi Arabia did recently put together a girl's council meeting. It is possible that they are genuine in their desire to advance women's rights and shaping global standards. In this manner, they would not have an excuse to say that their voices were not heard or that they didn't know about the policy's existence.

I am very skeptical myself for all the reasons listed here by Sascha and Keith.

But as I live in a nation where we have never had a female president nor have an equal pay wage and are still constantly fighting over a woman's dominance over her own body (read uterus) then perhaps I should not judge too harshly.

I hope this is eye opening for the Saudis. And more so, I hope they begin to implement/ enact female positive policies within their nation.

Yes.

So to summarize: if society abolished gender roles trans people would still be around as a community.

We, as a society and species, may progress to the point where social dysphoria and physically dysphoria are no longer an issue. But the population that endured these will still band together and self identify as Trans.

Indigo wrote: "...I could go on really with how we do have virtual worlds even today (such as Second Life), but most still play out fantasies of their ideal bodies and lives, with purely human forms, a limited palate of skin tones and features, and limited body part differences.

And with the chance to really experiment with new forms of society now that they're removed from a lot of their previous limitations.... the players still by and large saw fit to replicate and keep using their old societal patterns"

I understand your point. But I would also remind you that a) technology being as it is currently that we replicate ourselves based on what the programmers provide. b) we are still living the first generation of computer programming. i.e. computer users are still in our infancy. Who knows what will develop with our voices clamoring for different realities where we can challenge the norms from the previous generations. This of course starts to derail the conversation.

Indego wrote "Why not try to correct that in the world we must deal with for the time being, in bodies we must confront and live with, so that when we do come to your future, then we won't have as much holding us back from really playing with those possibilities?"

Absolutely agree. Again, I think I was getting hung up on why if do we still care about something that is only constant by today's standards. In the future, we create those standards. I think anything is possible with a set number of generations. Because society shifts due to technology, social pressures, and other external factors. We today cannot perceive these changes as individuals because there are thinkers out there who are still dreaming it up. And our children have not yet grown up who grew up with the new factors let alone our grandchildren hearing stories of yester years.

So if we abolished gender roles, whose to say that we also don't abolish dysphoria?

Society at large would not jam a soul into a set label. I assume then physical dysphoria would be similar to that of puberty. The person would undergo a process and people would just accept it that its happening. Hormone supplements could be purchased next to hair dye and vitamins at a drug store, for example. Surgery would be as common if not with a more favorable opinion than that of plastic surgery.

So where social and physical dysphoria not present because gender roles are long gone and our civilization is not burdened by the simplicity of our 21st century silliness... would trans-people still be around?

I assume the use of the prefix is used to honor your journey. To honor those who have come before and will come after. And more so, to make sure their is a community and awareness around the topic. Please correct me if not.

But if changing your physical gender is as accepted as puberty (for example) would there still be a need for that community?

Indigo wrote: "Just because none of those are tied to any particular gender roles doesn't mean they get all abolished because of that. They're still there and will still be there. And different cultures will still interpret the same color and label differently, due to their individual history and environment?"

Hmm. I suppose I need more context. Again, please forgive me. I am not trying to dismiss your insights or the reality faced by David Reimer, Leelah Alcorn, or others experiencing disphoria. I suppose I am trying to understand your world without gender roles.

Maybe I have read to many science fiction novels in the sense that in 50 years you will most definitely still see the same society as today. Rules that guide us now, even with laws and social mores in place.

But 200 years? A thousand years from now... would this still be a thing.

For example.... let's say that we live in a world where it is all "online" and it's all a virtual reality. Like a nicer version of the Matrix where your "body" is a pod somewhere and your mind is in a completely self contained world all of your making. You can interact with others or filter them out as needed.

So in this world where your mind and conscious determines what is allowed and not allowed, would gender roles still exist? In this world, removed completely from social expectations and physical demands where you could be and look however you wanted to be or look where everything is accepted because it is your utopia - remembering of course that you can specifically program out haters or those who differ from your world view..would gender roles exist?

Would disphoria still be a thing? Would the term feminism or masculine still exist or would they be as meaningless to you as a internet password is to an ant?

If the entire world agreed tomorrow that there is no such thing as a boy or a girl would we still have the concept of boy and girl 200 years or 1000 years later?

I have had two female assistants who I adore and respect immensely.

- One gave me WAY too much information at the very beginning of our time together. To the point where instead of weekly project updates we would have therapy sessions. She was a widow, from an interracial marriage, who was abused in all the worst ways as a child. She was also old enough to be my mother. And yet, despite all of these pain points she was one of the classier ladies I have ever met. I do not think she opened up to too many people, instead she was this bedazzling hostess with others. Being able to peer behind her mask made my appreciate her strength all the more.

- Second assistant instead is also a woman who could be old enough to be my mother who also happens to be one of the most calmest and at peace individuals I have ever met. She is a genuine presence who delights in polka music and acting zany, yet with the grace of a woman used to working in law offices. Fastidious, generous, and genuine. She is a delight.

I try to emulate their best qualities and live up to their standards.

Sherrie wrote: "They were children. Do y'all remember being 12? 15? She's acting like a pretty normal teenager who, by the end of the books, has grown into a more emotionally stable, mature young woman.."

Emotionally stable is all conjecture and love on our parts as fans though. We get a snip bit of her future, but that doesn't necessarily mean she is stable. Abusers tend to be on their best behavior when they are in public. When others can see them. When they don't have complete control.

But regardless. HP aside, this is of course all comes down to your own personal choices on violence. How far does it go until it is abuse? What level of pain can you cause before your actions are inexcusable or unforgivable?

I am curious to hear from parents on this topic. How have you raised your children? What have you taught them on what is considered violent? How have they responded?

Dana wrote: "I just discovered that "Handmaid's Tale" is included in Prime Reading. That means you can add the ebook to your Kindle Library for free!"

Dana, you are my new favorite friend. THANK YOU! Recommend that you also add this to the pay it forward thread too, so if others are looking...

I have to admit, I never gave this book a second glance. Handmaiden = lady in waiting or princess helper in my mind. And goodness did I not want to ready something frilly.

I look forward to checking this out and proving my stereotypes wrong.

Clarissa,

First, my thanks for authoring such a dense book of soul-defining poetry. I chewed and wrestled many a-night on your insights.

It has been two decades since your book has been written. What do you think of your legacy so far? And as a follow up, what do you hope your legacy will become two decades from here?

Additionally, What gives you hope for the future? What do you see today that makes you smile? Maybe it's still growing into a final form, maybe it's already there? What should we keep our eyes on?

Thank you.

And thank you Emma for picking this book and talking with Dr. Estes!

Please forgive me, but I do not understand.

If there are no gender roles, would we have such words like feminine or masculine? Similar to how the words baldam, gudgeon, or habliment are no longer in use. If gender roles are not present, then wouldn't our culture and therefore our language also progress as well?

Would we still need a word to describe these antics that are not prescribed to one or another but is what it is? Like an apendex, it's there, but we don't have too much of a conscious need?

The book was written in the '93 if it's any help.

The big debate of the time whether a single woman could be allowed to raise a child out of wedlock without a husband was THE issue of the day. The US, at least, was just beginning to accept gay and lesbians after the Aids scare.

This in no way diminishes the request of the trans individual. I think it would be a good idea to remember this for the conversation Emma will have with the author. If Estes was to release a new addition, would it have a chapter or an introduction for trans individuals? Are there any wild woman myths about trans women etc?

James wrote: "But, for those who dont feel like there was any abuse or that it wasnt abusive if you were to flip the script and it was Ron attacking her with birds or Ron hitting her with a bag of heavy objects and throwing stones would that change your perception?"

Ah thank you for posting this!

A credit to JK where it is due, she created very complex characters that we could analyze for some time. Hermione's violent use of magic and physicality being one of them.

Another look into this was also the war setting. Someone else mentioned that Hermione, trying always to prove herself, would be constantly be fighting. Fighting to be the top student, fighting to keep her friends alive, fighting to make sure Ron heard her and understood her, fighting adults who were actually trying to hurt her if not kill her. This aggressive upbringing doesn't actually create a safe place where she can see the wonder of magic / or learn how to deal with problems in a calm collected manner. Hermione was always "better" when she could prepare (extra reading, her parent's memory charm, etc). But when confronted in the moment, she would resort to what she was taught - fight back.

Was she abusive to Ron? Yes.
Would she have grown out of it in the years to come? Possibly. I turn to JK's own interpretation in The Cursed Child, where if Hermione didn't marry Ron she would have been a bitter shrew like or worse than Snape.

Keith wrote: "However, I challenge anyone to call a Bond film 'female-empowering"

Skyfall was empowering! Off the top of my head:

- Female Director of a Spy Agency
- Female Spy who after some reflection decides that her path is her path and she is going to do the best that she can at it
- Female Spy as a person of color who is not killed by end of film
- Fun sexy time with mutual interest x3 (I think, can't remember)
- Older Woman as seen as a viable character with multiple layers
- Most of the females had lines and names!

The fact that these things occurred in a Bond movie - the quintessential guy's guy film, is HUGE. Not every female needs to be strong kick ass. But we do want to see more female characters on screen that interacts with the world around them in such a way that tells a unique- interconnected story.

Aimee wrote: "Ross' point about films having to pass the spirit of the test as well is a very good point. There are plenty of films that technically pass the Bechdel test - i.e. two named female characters speak..."

Grousing here, but the test would not be the Bechdel Test if it was just asking 'Does it have an empowered Female lead? or 'Does the female lead display strength of character?' The test was originally created to make sure that women are being represented and represented as something other than the love interest.

Yes. Lord of the Rings - Fails. Star Wars- Fails. Do they have empowered women? Sure. But they are still love interests. The Test asks us... if these women were not the love interest would producers / script writers / directors still have them in there? Would Leia still be leading the rebellion? Or would she be thrown in a small roll like Mon Mothma?

Gravity has a female lead. Which is amazing! But the Test says it fails because that's not good enough. We need more women represented. Why wasn't there a woman behind the controls back on Earth or even a mission control who wished her luck before her voyage? Don't settle here people. We can have more than 1 kick ass female in a movie. We can have female support characters that are not interested in men but are doing their jobs.

Ellen wrote..." her work is in psychology which I feel often neglects wider social historical factors looking at certain phenomena - whereas most feminist theory is embedded in Sociology. "

An excellent point. Thank you for offering the comparison.

I'm assuming that this distance also goes into what Briana was getting at: That​ the feminist movement was evolving from second wave into the third wave. More progressive texts, as you stated, were out there at the same time as Wolves.

Though, I have to ask, how readable were these progressive texts. I.e. on an adoption curve, who was reading them?
- feminists
- early adopters
- early majority
- late majority
- laggards

I admit, as a child in the 90's in a strict conservative household: Madonna was a bad word. I had to push myself to read the Vagina Monologues just a few months ago, so I would consider myself as a laggard / late majority (if you squint).

I would argue that, and look to you for guidance, that while there were more progressive texts by feminists, that those texts weren't that accepted amongst the masses ( early or late majority).

Whereas Estes book, as it did not have the feminist stamp, if you will, appealed to a wider audience.

Would you consider Estes work to be a gateway feminist text? In other words does Wolves pique interest to expand feminists thought without being intentionally a feminist text?