Gap Year

Can you avoid adulthood? For me: so far so good. 

We make excuses for ourselves in answering, "What are you going to do with yourself?"
At least I do.

High school: "I don't even know what college I want to attend, I'm too young to decide yet."
College Freshman: "I'll just take my GenEd requirements, then I'll figure it out."
College Sophomore: "I'll just study this, work here for now and worry about that later."
College Senior: "I'll go to Europe and when I get home I'll be ready to figure out my next step."

How am I figuring it out?
I'm working a minimum wage job and living at my parent's house. I'm working out, playing (pretending to play) my guitar, reading books, walking my dog, drinking coffee,... and wine.  I'm going to the farmer's market, socializing and watching Netflix.  But I'm working hard, spending little, and saving all that I can but always answering, "So what's next?" Here's what:

I'm taking a gap year.

When I went to Europe this summer, I thought I would return having 'found myself'.
That I'd be tired of meandering and want to be rooted.
But I 've hardly stretched my branches.

I came back with more questions than answers, hungrier than before I left. I met people who changed my world. Women younger than I am who took a year off their work or school to travel the world, alone. My mother thinks that is just unsafe. But I think I've been kept safe long enough.  Travelers who quit their jobs, sell their things and survive on experiences. They run with bulls, sandboard in the Sahara, and swim with sharks. They cliff dive, drink until 5 am, speak three languages (at least) and don't think twice about it.  And we, us college graduates, we don't do this so we can answer that, "what's next?" question. 

What's next?
I am next.

Unlike most all other cultures, Americans aren't encouraged to take a gap year between high school and college. We aren't allotted a time to travel or to desire knowledge on our own terms. So I'm demanding it now. I'll work a shit job and build up some dust on my degree because all I want is this adventure ahead.  Don't teach children to chase their dreams if you're going to keep their feet on the ground. Americans only give their children shoes to walk to their next job interview.

But my mom, she gave me wings you see... you better believe I'm using them.

Not all those who wander are lost.

It's a dangerous business going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to, but: 

"You can trust us to stick to you through thick and thin--to the bitter end. And you can trust to keep any secret of yours--closer than you keep it yourself. But you cannot trust us to let you face trouble alone, and go off without a word. We are your friends, Frodo. Anyway: there it is. We know most of what Gandalf has told you. We know a good deal about the Ring. We are horribly afraid-- but we are coming with you; or following you like hounds."

#GoGreek #TalkShit

Not talking shit about people or organizations is generally a good rule of thumb.

For example: Greek Unity.

Working together to recreate a positive perspective of the Greek community and supporting one another's philanthropies and social events. Cool. Great. Go for it. Whatever.

BUT

Sometimes people deserve to be talked about.
There should have been more talking.  
There should have been more questions.

In light of the recent news of Delta Chi there has been a lot of defense from the Greek community, and understandably.  Most of the Greek people I know are genuinely good people, plenty of my friends belong to a fraternity or sorority.  The good things they do are valid and real and appreciated and recognized.  They told us time and time again that one fraternity doesn't represent them all.  To stop stereotyping Greek Life... Which is exactly what Delta Chi said... one member being a rapist doesn't make us all rapists, so we shouldn't all be punished should we?

But you supported them. 
You created an environment where their behavior was acceptable.
Someone had to take on the role of the "douchey-fraternity" right?
And we looked the other way because
boys will be boys.
And some boys will be rapists.

I've been disgusted with Delta Chi since I was a freshman and was groped at a party. Lesson learned. I've always talked shit about Greek life, particularly Delta Chi.  I've got a list of grievances.  But whenever I would talk to someone in that community about them, I heard nothing in return.

We've all known they were horrible and we just let them be horrible.  

So much of the Greek community is based off tradition and keeping them a secret.  And clearly they're good at keeping their mouths shut. Real leaders acknowledge the flaws of their organization and actively try to improve. REAL LEADERS stand up for what is right, even if it against "one of their own".  Real leaders ignore a gag-order.

Despite that, some action has finally come around... but my heart is still screaming. You went to their parties, supported their philanthropies, you know what they were capable of and continue to stay silent.

Silence condones behavior.

I know I wish I would've done more.
Because I could have.
We all could have.
This is Delta Chi's problem
This is the Greek Community's problem
This is our problem too.
This is our world, our campus and our students.

I weep because I know the only concrete and long-lasting change that can happen to Greek culture has to come within the community itself. And I'm afraid it never will. They are so good at keep their traditions quite. 

We need to talk shit sometimes
and make sure we're heard.



What incident am I referring to you ask?
http://www.cm-life.com/2014/01/13/details-behind-delta-chi-suspension-uncovered-after-foia-request-incidents-date-back-15-years/

What Thought Catalog Didn't Tell Me.

• They didn't tell me at 18 how to not screw up my 20's, they told me when I was 22. 
• There will be plenty of days when you don't like your life. And it's your fault. Because you created it. 
• You can stand up for what you believe in, but there will always be someone who makes you feel stupid.  It's probably someone close to you, or an internet troll, either way, sometimes you lose.
• You can adore Jennifer Lawrence and say the same body positive things as her, but no one will ever like you as much as they like her. Until you're rich obviously. 
• You can't always indulge yourself in sadness, you should just deal with it. 
• Watching Netflix all day isn't excusable, you just find an excuse. 
• Being twenty something isn't an excuse for all those times you were drunk instead of studying. That's just you being stupid.

They forget to tell you that one day all your friends will have boyfriends (or find a better friend than you) and they will love you the same BUT things won't be the same.  You'll stay in your bed watching Breaking Bad while they are at Half Off Apps together. You'll ask them if they want to work out, but they already went to the gym with their boyfriend.  Instead of crying on their shoulder when you're sad... you'll cry by yourself and tell them next week if it comes up in conversation.   And it will be hard to be satisfied with loving yourself. 

You were too busy kissing boys instead of talking to them.  You wanted to fool around instead of fall in love. That's why you don't ever like anyone & it will probably take a while until you do.

Bad guys win.

You'll often want to punch your sibling in the face

and maybe one day you will. 

Stop looking at Pinterest unless you actually have the time to craft.

Traveling the world is a nice dream, but takes years of saving and for most people isn't realistic.

Being young isn't an excuse anymore.

There are a million angles on every problem and you'll never pick the right one.

If you need to post on Facebook a love letter to your boyfriend, just know that is a sure sign of your relationships NOT being as dreamy as you posted. Because... why didn't you just call him to tell him?

Good intentions don't mean shit. "Almost" is the same as "not".  And calling someone "sweetheart" when you consider it endearing, could probably insult them.

Graduating is fucking terrifying. And no, everything won't just "work out". Your life will be the product of your choices, and it's not all going to be ok just because your were in your twenties when you messed up. It will all be ok when you decide to create the life you want. And maybe you can't do that. Then you will have to learn to pretend that the life you have is the life you want.

And that's the truth.

Not as inspiring, I know. But i needed to stop letting people make excuses for me.

But then again, what good is the truth anyway?

Can you be a Christian and a Feminist?

This is my last college research paper ever and I still don't know how to use MLA and still stay up for 24 hours straight to finish it... psh responsibility.  But I was excited to get a chance to find some rational to why I've never felt Christianity was empowering.  It's always been an internal struggle, so I decided to write a feminist critique on Christianity....

            Concern for the compatibility of faith and feminism is rooted in my experience and observation.  Growing up attending youth groups and Sunday school, I always felt out of place.  As I got older and began to question and analyze the stories I have been taught, my skepticism started to make sense.  I didn’t feel like I belonged in the church, I didn’t see my place in Christianity, I saw other strong women struggle as well because Christianity wasn’t made for me.  What I see now is that Christianity was created within a patriarchy, a system of oppression for women, so it is systematically and inherently oppressive towards women and beneficial towards men.  So it came in to question, can I be a Christian and a feminist?

Oppression

            Frye describes oppression in her article, Oppression, through the element of “press”, to reduce, flatten, mold, caught between forces that restrains mobility.  This restriction creates their subordination to a dominant group.   Frye would say that it isn’t one particular act that is oppressive, but several acts that accumulate, comparing it to bars in a birdcage.  The dangers of cages, is that when you are inside one, you may not even know it, it may be the only world you know and you may even find comfort in its protection.  Frye also explains that they most effective element in oppression is to convince the oppressed that their subordination is natural and inevitable (Frye). 

            Oppression is most successful when members of the oppressed group reinforce the restrictions upon their own group.  For women to degrade other women for working outside the home or label them whores or sluts based on personal choices, they are policing other women and reinforcing the patriarchy.  This happens from oppressed peoples internalizing and naturalizing the disadvantages of their oppression.  Like Frye said, “It must seem natural that individuals of one category are dominated by individuals of another, and that groups, one dominates the other” (Frye, 34).  For example, a woman getting paid less than men is rationalized because women tend to take jobs that are lower salaried.  Although this outcome seems natural, since women are inclined to take them, their tendencies are socialized from an oppressive culture that values a woman’s work less than man.  This oppression is the “birdcage” women live in, under submission of a dominant group, a cage in which some bars are formed from things like capitalism, sexism and as I will discuss, Christianity.

Christianity

Christianity is the largest religious group in the world according to a demographic study by pewforum.org.  Considering that the teachings of the Bible are the most prevalent moral teachings, these lessons have a profound impact on the way our world functions.  Although Christianity has many sub-categories and denominations, they are all founded on the teachings in the same Bible.  The disagreement between the categories comes from the way the Bible is interpreted, as well and the translation of the Bible.  As a way to mesh modern movements with biblical teaching, factors such as historical context and time period can be drawn out.  Whether taken literally or as a parable, the main message is the same, God sent His Son to die on a cross for the forgiveness of your sins. A feminist critique of some of the teachings in the Bible can help rationalize how Christianity can be oppressive for women. 

There is something to be said about a male-gendered God and having Him be worshipped that would translate into human life, modeling the teaching of their religion.    Carol P. Christ in her discussion on Why Women Need The Goddess said, “Religious symbol systems focused around exclusively male images of divinity create the impression that female power can never be fully legitimate or wholly beneficial”(Christ).  What is male is to be worshipped, what is female is not.  Simone Beauvoir would say that a patriarchal religion limits transcendence to men and confines women to immanence or objectification (Young).  Men can rise up and women can worship their status, but never rise to their level.  At the very least, this can lead a person to question the effects of a patriarchal religion on women.

In The Beginning

            Women introduced evil into the world from the very beginning.  The parable of Adam and Eve, (Genesis 2:18-25) God created Woman as a helper of Man.  After examining the animals God created, he did not see an animal fit for Adam, and created Eve from Adam’s rib.  Eve is not a standalone character; she does not exist outside of Adam. This is true of the majority of women in the Bible; they do not exist outside of man, which is appropriate for their assigned submissive role in relationship with men.  The Bible is not a story of women uniting to save, heal or teach, but of men guiding and creating the women.

If the Bible were to be analyzed through the Bechdal test, a formula to identify gender bias in modern day movies, it would fail.  Its simple standards require two named female characters speak to each other about something other than a man according to bechdeltest.com.  It is used to identify gender bias in media, but can be a helpful tool to identify how often women are excluded, including the Bible.  Only two of the 66 books in the Bible are named after women, Ruth and Ester, exemplifying the value of women.  When women are not included in the conversation, their needs are unlikely to be identified.  If God is assumed as gender-neutral, despite being referred to as “He”, the results slightly change, but the majority of the books in the Bible remaining male-dominated. 

When a male dominated group decides the world for women to live in, their solutions tend to benefit men, not women.  For example, the recent controversy of an all male panel discussing issues on funding of birth control, something they have no direct experience with, is a clear example of women being excluded.  Instead of the intended conversation with concern for women’s health, it was a panel concerned with freedom of religion and restriction on women (Thistlethwaite).  What looked like a discussion to help women was actually a discussion on how to maintain control of women based on men’s moral standards.

Linda Alcoff discussed the problem of speaking for others; not only is the social location “epistemically salient, but certain privileged locations are discursively dangerous” and can often reinforce oppression.  She says that it is important for the oppressed to work on behalf of the oppressed, because the practice of speaking for others is enrooted in “a desire of mastery” of knowledge and praise (Alcoff).  Men’s desire to morally guide women in purity and faith is tainted by the desire of dominance and therefore cannot be relied upon.

Evil Woman

            Genesis 3 continues on the story of Adam and Eve and how Eve causes the downfall of man.  Eve tempts her husband Adam with the fruit of knowledge and they ate it as God commanded them not to.  In consequence to this, woman is cursed with the pain of childbearing as well as, “Your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you (Genesis 3:16).”  Placing the woman under the power of man, by God’s will.  This is an example of naturalizing female subordination, which as we discussed earlier was a key element Frye pointed out in maintaining oppression.

            In Genesis, pregnancy is described as a curse and punishment upon women for their sins.  It is not discussed as a miracle or powerful position.  The main biological distinction between men and woman is the female’s ability to birth children, a distinction that is biblically associated as a negative consequence.  Gynocentric feminism defines oppression as the “denial and devaluation of specifically feminine virtues by an overly instrumentalized and authoritarian masculinist culture”(Young).  The Bible is directly condoning the devaluation of specifically female traits, the ability to give birth.  The liberation of women would require traits like this to be praised.  Women are seen as frail in pregnancy, not the strong and life-sustaining entity they are.

            The story of Eve tempting Adam and causing his fall supports a whole woman-blaming culture.  This translates into victim blaming, framing women as temptresses and causing men to “fall in to sin” and perpetuating rape-culture.  This defense is often used to attempt to clear rapists of blame by placing it on their victim; the victim’s short skirt is to a rapist as the apple is to Adam, an excuse to blame women.  In reality, a rapist is at fault for raping and Adam is at fault for eating the apple, particularly in a patriarchy because they are allotted the most agency.  Mackinnon discusses in her article, “ Sex and Violence” that in terms of prosecution of a rapist, it comes down to his words against hers, her perspective against his.  The harm is that the law is written in his perspective and woman have been depicted as temptresses and liars, so who why would we believe them? Sex is defined by male pleasure and ejaculation.  In that framework, men and their intentions would also define rape, which robs women of their experience with assault (Mackinnon).

Submission

            It is continually quoted in scripture that a woman’s role in the family is to be submissive to her husband.  Although modern Christians claim this to be mutual submission, the Bible never commands the husband to submit to his wife.  Ephesians 5:22 says, “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. ²³ For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. ²⁴ Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.”  This scripture is direction for how to be a Christian woman, submit to your husband in everything.  This verse does require man to submit to God, creating a hierarchy; woman can only reach God through man but man can attain it on his own. 

            Practicing Christian women don’t frequently resist the command of submission because it is easier to agree with the patriarchy than live with the consequences of resisting it.  This would be an example of naturalizing and internalizing female oppression.  As mentioned earlier, Frye says oppression is most successful when the oppressed feels their oppression is natural or inevitable. In choosing submission, women are desiring and eroticizing male dominance (MacKinnon, 1989).  Women have been socialized to be attracted to dominance so feel their attraction to submission is natural and inevitable.

Qualities that have been attributed to the “biological” components of femininity are socially constructed to support women’s oppression.  They are socialized to be “naturally” inclined to the role of caretaker, homemaker, babymaker and peacemaker.  “Women value care because men have valued us according to the care we give them, and we could probably use some” (MacKinnon).  The desire is not innate, but commanded, socially reinforced, rewarded and taught.  It is taught in Titus 2:5,  “…and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, ⁵ to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.”  Women become what they believe to be valued and what Christianity taught them is valued.

Purity

            Jessica Valenti describes the culture and obsession Americans have with virginity, which is supported by the predominant Christian faith, in her book The Purity Myth.  The book focuses on how valuing and promoting virginity ultimately equates it to a woman’s worth in the world.  Attempting to desexualize women and focusing on abstinence and virginity, actually focuses on their sex-life, oversexualized them and places their value in their virginity rather than sexualization as defined by society.

            This virginity that is so worshipped in women is ambiguous.  What counts as “sex”? What constitutes a “virgin”?  We currently have no functioning medical definition for “virgin”(Valenti, 20). The sign of a broken hymen on a wedding night has traditionally been the marker of marrying a virgin, even though “it can be rupture by nonsexual experience, such as athletics” (Chozick).  This undefined virtue that is the moral standard of women doesn’t technically exist, but is socially constructed as a way to control women’s sexuality.  

Hebrew 13:4 says, “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.”  The only appropriate time for a woman to engage in sexual acts is once she is married to a man, again giving men power over woman.  “Purity” is the quality most focused on in teaching young girls their place in Christianity.  “Virginity is pretty much all about women.  Even the dictionary definitions of “virgin” cite an “unmarried girl or woman” or a “religious woman, esp. a saint.”  No such definition exists for men or boys” (Valenti, 21).  From Purity Balls, to Virginity Vouchers and abstinence-only education, the pressure is placed on women to maintain their virtue through their virginity, a pressure not applied to men.  

This expectation of virginity is detrimental to women.  Not only is their moral value questioned on an ambiguous standard, but fetishizes virginity creating an even more harmful situation for young girls.  With virginity being so closely tied with youth, valorizing innocence positions adult women at the opposite spectrum of “bad”.  This creates a desire by men and women of “perpetual girlhood” leaving girls vulnerable to those men who desire youth and can use the patriarchal power bestowed upon them to take advantage of it (Valenti pg 72).  It is also true that girls who make a virginity pledge are more likely to engage in more high risk sexual activities of anal or oral sex, to maintain this said virtue (Valenti, 218). Conclusively, the patriarchal pressure to maintain virginity puts women in danger physically and emotionally.  

Modern Day Christianity’s War On Women

            There is a difference in what Christianity is intended to look like and what it actually looks like in our modern world.  The Republican Party has a platform supporting the return to traditional families, enforcing gender roles, and a dominant Christian religion.  The Republican Party is also notorious for legislating and supporting the limit of freedoms for women.

The “Concerned Women for America”, a Christian based organization, wrote an open letter to Congress urging to resist the feminist agenda and degradation of families by passing the Violence Against Women Act.  The VAWA provides women with resources to escape dangerous situations and leave abusive husbands, disrupting the traditional family, threatening patriarchy and liberating women.  Often the bible verses for submission of women are used in defense in domestic violence.

The terror ensues in issues of contraception.  Rush Limbaugh went on record calling Sandra Fluke, an advocate for insurance coverage of birth control.  If this wasn’t absurd enough, Christian Conservatives such as Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney did not contest Limbaugh’s accusations and Rick Santorum went as far as demonizing birth control as well (Talbot).

In 2011, there were 80 new restrictions on access to abortion passed in state legislature (Talbot).  Supported by representatives like Rick Santorum, who did not stop his crusade at slut-shaming, but also thanking God for rape.  Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock repeated Santorum’s claim that rape is by God’s will in October 2010, “I came to realize that life is a gift from God. And even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that is something God intended to happen” (Foster).  Christian Conservatives continue to ostracize women from God, implying God intended for their sufferings.

Although extreme depictions of Christians like mentioned are often rejected by other Christians, the fact of the matter is that this is what is being heard about God and women.  Even if this image does not represent the majority of Christians, Christians are still devoted to their religion in spite of knowing what their religious leaders say about women.  Christianity is used a defense of having the right to oppress women, whether or not that it the intention, that is the reality.

When would Christianity be feminist?

            If we argue that Christianity does not make a proper and equal place for women, what would a feminist version of Christianity look like? A fundamental complaint of male-dominated Christianity would be depicted in a male gendered God that women are commanded to worship.  Carol Christ would argue that women need a female symbol “[to affirm] female power, the female will and women’s bonds and heritage” (Christ).  Although the Catholic religion includes Mother Mary in their rituals and worship, she is still merely a vessel to the Father God.  As the creator of the Earth, it almost makes more sense for God to be female.  Women have the power to create life, as God has the power to create life.  In relation to Gynocentric feminism, the ability to give birth and create life would be worshipped and valued as male qualities of dominance and power are worshipped.

            Relations between women would be plentiful and celebrated.  Christianity has praised Father-Son relations and even Mother-Son relations, but not the relationships of mother and daughter (Christ).  Women are not encouraged to gather with each other and support one another, but to seek male support.  Mother-daughter relationships within a patriarchal religion are harmed when the mother is forced to teach her daughter the subordinate position of the woman (Christ).  Women would be profits, teachers, and leaders. They would gather and converse and their contributions would be celebrated.

There lays some responsibility in women to identify and work against their own social construction.  Women would also have to reconstruct the eroticism of male dominance and their personal expression of heterosexuality (bell hooks).  Women can longer be attracted to men who actively benefit from the patriarchy and embrace the macho-man role; it only reinforces and rewards hyper-masculinity. 

Your Choice

            Based on the research and readings of several scholarly feminist theorists, I think they would agree that Christianity is inherently oppressive towards women.  The question of ‘Can I be a Christian and a feminist?’ remains unanswered.  In my personal feminist philosophy, I cannot tell a woman what she can and cannot believe.  If she chooses to recognize the obstacles I have addressed and the social construction of her choices, then denying her agency would be the opposite of empowering women, which feminism aims to do.  She is free to decide for herself what is an acceptable and true philosophy.

            My idea of a Christian feminist would be one to recognize the oppression of women within Christianity and work to solve those injustices.  They would need to do things like point out the discrimination of not allowing female pastors in a Lutheran church and break that gender based bias.  A Christian feminist would not be a bystander and allow the women of her religion to suffer.  I do not believe a Christian feminist would promote the idea of submission, buy in to the purity myth, or support legislation that limits women’s choices and freedoms. 

            I do not find a happy marriage of Christianity and feminism.  In general I believe it is difficult to put faith in to two, possibly opposing theologies and fully believe them both.  In the end, you choose what brings you comfort, for some that is tradition and for some that is progress.  In feminism I found the freedom Christianity always promised me: the knowledge of my own social construction, practicing the unwavering voice of women, seeking solutions to injustice and ability to decide for myself. 

Works Cited

Alcoff, Linda. "The Problem of Speaking for Others." Theorizing Feminisms 1 (1991): 78-91. Print.

"Bechdel Test Movie List." Bechdel Test Movie List. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. <http://bechdeltest.com/>.

Chozick, Amy. "Virgin Territory: U.S. Women Seek A Second First Time." The Wall Street Journal. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Dec. 2013. <http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB113461752102323170>.

Christ, Carol. "Why Women Need the Goddess: Phenomenological, Psychological, and Political Reflections."Theorizing Feminisms 1 (1978): 211-219. Print.

Foster, Stephen. "The Party Of Rape Culture: 40 Republican Rape Quotes Everyone Should Remember." Addicting Info. N.p., 17 Nov. 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2013. <http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/16/the-party-of-rape-culture-40-republican-rape-quotes-everyone-should-remember/>.

Frye, Marilyn. "Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory." Theorizing Feminisms 1 (1983): 1-16. Print.

Hooks, Bell. "Seduced by Violence No More." Theorizing Feminisms 1 (1993): 333-335. Print.

MacKinnon, Catharine . "Difference and Dominance: On Sex Discrimination."Theorizing Feminisms 1 (1987): 244-255. Print.

MacKinnon, Catharine. "Feminism, Marxism, Method and the State: An Agenda for Theory." JSTOR 7.3 (1982): 515-544. Columbia Law. Web. 7 Sept. 2008.

MacKinnon, Catharine. "Desire and Power." Theorizing Feminisms 1 (1987): 256-265. Print.

Talbot, Margaret. "Taking Control." The NewYorker [New York] 19 Mar. 2010, sec. Comment: n. pag. The NewYorker. Web. 3 Dec. 2013.

"The Global Religious Landscape." Pew Research Centers Religion Public Life Project RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Dec. 2013. <http://www.pewforum.org/2012/12/18/global-religious-landscape-christians/>.

Thistlethwaite, Susan. "Women’s religious freedom violated: Photo of all male birth control witnesses tells the viral truth."Washington Post. The Washington Post, 16 Feb. 2012. Web. 5 Dec. 2013. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/womens-religious-freedom-violated-photo-of-all-male-birth-control-witnesses-tells-the-viral-truth/2012/02/16/gIQAeyykIR_blog.html>.

Valenti, Jessica. The purity myth: how America's obsession with virginity is hurting young women. Berkeley, Calif.: Seal Press, 2009. Print.

Young, Iris. "Humanism, Gynocentrism and Feminist Politics." Theorizing Feminisms 1 (2006): 174-187. Print.

Dating While Feminist

I wouldn’t exactly agree with Marilyn Frye, she’s a radical chick.  My issues with dating and feminism is not exactly the thinking that I am resigning to the patriarchal script of heterosexuality and betraying the tenants of feminism when I am attracted to men. 

My problem is: I recognized the products of my socialization.  

My socialized desires conflict with my feminist desires.

My feminist ideal, Disney Complex and American Dream combine to make one hell of a confusing culture for me to figure out and impossible standard for someone to meet.

EX: I hate the feeling of having a crush, that out-of-control anxiety where someone else occupies your thoughts and time. The feeling of whether or not a guy texted me that day effects my mood.   ((So I avoid those feelings, because I don’t have power over them.  When I do have them, I hate them and inadvertently hate that person for giving me those feelings.))  But that's romantic right? That's how it works in the movies? No. It sounds absolutely horrifying to me. 

Dating seems like relinquishing power to another. They have power in your thoughts, feelings, schedule, choices, future... this doesn't make sense to me. Why do I want this?

It’s a vicious cycle of strength/independence… like “Look at me, walking alone, conquering the world”… to being self-conscious/seeking validation… like “look at me, conquering the world... all alone."

I get strong 

then get weak 

then feel guilty for being weak 

and it makes me strong again.

So when I do seek validation, I always end up with guys I say I wouldn’t want to date.  I am attracted to the masculine, powerful, dominant but need the kind, generous and sensitive.  Traits that aren’t typically paired together. 

I just want to date someone who can teach me to fix my car but also understands the social construct of gender and sexuality.  Who challenges me but doesn’t belittle my point of view.  I want to date a man who identifies as a feminist and I don’t have to explain it to him or defend it.  I want to stop ever feeling sad about being single.  I want to resist the socialized part of me that tells me I am better with a man.

But there I go again.  

Looking for a Feminist Prince Charming.  

My love life and real life are the biggest contradictions.

To All The Boys I've Kissed Before:

I'm sorry.

I tried really hard to like you and you really wanted to like me. But we didn't.  I'm cute enough to look at yet charming enough to ignore everything else. So I kissed you or cooked for you, because I like kissing and eating.  I thought it would help me like you more.  I thought you would like me more. We didn't.

We were doing a poor job of temporarily filling empty places we've fictionally come to believe we need to fill.

And you always liked me more in my imagination. I created our relationship from the two sentences of affirmation you gave me 8 months ago. Pretended we were more than what you actually intended us to be.

So this is who I really wanted to write my letter to,

To All The Boys I Should Have Kissed: 

I'm sorry

I knew I could fall in love with you, so I didn't want much to do with you at all.  I wanted to keep you in my pocket, because I'm not a very good cook and I look like a naked mole rat without my make-up and I'm not very funny and... I don't know who to be when the charm wears off.

& I've given all the wrong boys the wrong kind of chances.

Because to be honest: I am horrible to boys. Specifically the kind, generous and sensitive ones. I'm no less than self-absorbed, manipulative and soul-crushing.  I like the ones who don't like me, unless they actually start to like me, I don't like that.  I don't actually like anyone. 

----
& maybe that's why I've never been kissed as a display of affection, merely a reaction to an erection
I've never been told by someone that they loved me, except how they'd love to fuck me
I think I have chosen to be alone because I'm tired of being asked if I want to bone.
I'm tired of my kisses being empty because I know kisses have power to free me.