Bad Feminist

[Elle]

Someone already wrote a book with that title but I haven't yet determined how she's supposed to be a Bad Feminist. It's becoming clearer and clearer to me that I am one, however. The latest is that we feminists are supposed to favor a thing called "chestfeeding". And I do! I favor the thing. I like it when people feed their babies, as a general principle. But I do not favor the name! I don't think it does anyone any favors when we solve supposed "exclusiveness" by offering something even more "exclusive" (and false! does that even matter anymore?) in response. Nobody feeds anyone with a chest; that is simply not what mammals do no matter what sex or gender they are. Why is this a scary bad fact now?

Men have breasts. It's true. It's okay. They have breast tissue and they get breast cancer and some of them who were born men can even, on rare occasion, breastfeed. And even more men who were born women can also breastfeed! There is nothing wrong with that, it requires no erasure of the Breast or the term breastfeeding whatsoever, and talk of breastfeeding is in no way, shape, or form "exclusionary" of anyone because BREASTS are universal. The feminism I was raised with taught me that this culture already tries very hard to erase non-sexualized Breasts while promoting sexualized ones, so I cannot help seeing the term "chestfeeding" as just one more attempt to erase the non-sexual Breasts. It is wonderful we are losing some of that stigma formerly associated with nursing - this has changed even in the period of time since I started having kids. People used to debate public breastfeeding and now I would guess public opinion has shifted fairly strongly in favor of supporting nursing.

Part of the general supportiveness of nursing indeed involves transgender men who nurse their babies. All well and good. Medical professionals need to understand this unique circumstance and be able to provide the appropriate information and support. Meanwhile, the "chestfeeding" renaming not only pretends people don't have breasts but has the effect of suggesting it's not okay for a transgender man to have breasts . The limited data I've seen suggests that while some transgender men experience gender dysphoria associated with pregnancy and birth or nursing, most do not. They may be very comfortable with the idea that their bodies have the capacity to give birth or nurse, without needing to call it something else, so why should they have to? Should they rename their uteruses too? Their nipples? You may think I'm exaggerating but there are long complaints about the exclusionary language surrounding nursing, since it supposedly talks too much about women and mothers. Feminists are now supposed to be okay with scrubbing all of that language in favor of something gender neutral, and if we're not, we are bigots. Well, no. Is it impossible for other people to share in that thing by elevating it, instead of trying to take it away? Can we not say that natural mother's milk is a great thing, so great even that transmen who are able to produce it are sometimes really glad to be able to do that? That sounds like a thing to celebrate rather than a thing to erase. And you know what is really crazy about all this? I'm saying it here because I cannot say it fully in public without profoundly negative consequences.

[DMDarcs]

I'm either extremely ignorant or naive, but I don't see how calling breastfeeding chestfeeding does anything useful in society. I mean, I guess it's perceived as being gender neutral, but when I hear chestfeeding I literally think of Aliens. Men have breasts, women have breasts, but men don't use them for nursing. Can't we just accept that? Can't we accept that there are going to be physiological differences between men and women? Can't we move onto the more important issues, i.e. equal pay for equal work, rather than fight over semantics of word definition?

[Elle]

I wonder the same thing. But what bothers me most in this case is that the conversation surrounding "chestfeeding" - at least in the several articles I looked at to figure out some context for the term - is almost entirely about the feelings of the person doing the nursing, and not so much about the babies or the feeding of the babies. I find that exceedingly odd. I would have expected to see a focus on topics and inclusivity issues that might matter to a transgender man who wants to nurse, like making sure that breastpump equipment is shaped and sized appropriately, stimulating milk production, navigating the tricky waters of supplementing or using bottles, nursing in public places, and so on.

I really do not want to use words that offend people; I figure that is my job as a polite person to show consideration and respect for others. Some of our kids here are transgender; for all I know my own kids could be transgender. I definitely want the human beings involved to feel valued and respected, and if they want to nurse by golly I want to make sure they can do so freely! However, what happens when the efforts at inclusivity end up being exclusive? Why are we disrespecting nursing mothers and breasts, and how does that help anyone else feel more valued?

My body is sexualized in all manner of crazy ways I didn't choose, usually do not want, and am not free to refuse. We are told we have to cover up the breasts in public in all circumstances expect when they're being used in a sexy way to sell products. We're still being told (though I hope less often) to cover them even when feeding a baby. People get breast cancer. People experience the joys of having their breasts grabbed, groped, pinched, and pressed into unwanted hugs. Nursing, by contrast, is this entirely positive, happy thing, even when it's painful and sucks (ha ha). Yet I am also free to choose not to do it thanks to formula and sharing or selling breastmilk. In short, breastfeeding is one context where breasts = good / freedom! It should be the greatest thing since sliced bread if someone is able to breastfeed as a transgender man! It should be an occasion to wave the banner of happiness and celebrate all things breast. The breast is so freaking AMAZING that it can do this! Wow. Why would anyone NOT want to be part of that, assuming breastfeeding was a thing they wanted to do in the first place? Why have a word that specifically denies the involvement of the breast in this function, to the point of implying something false? I have a hard time not seeing that as just plain old misogyny.

[DMDarcs]

Out of curiousity, what are your feelings on the "Save the Boobies" t-shirts that show up during breast cancer events?

[Mike]

In defense of "chestfeeding" (which, for the record, I think is silly, but I understand where it's coming from):

Yes, we all have breasts. I get it. They are natural and normal, and barring accident or illness, we all have them. However, the word "breast", while technically and medically accurate, in every day conversation is generally only ever applied to women and fat guys. And in fact, unless they have a medical issue in that region, men's breast are rarely referred to as breasts at all, and instead get labeled with the more derogatory boobs or man-boobs or whatever. I don't think I've ever referred to my own breasts as breasts, but I when I do have to acknowledge them, I use "boobs" or "man-boobs," in a way that is intended to be self-deprecating.

I'm not arguing that any of the above is right or wrong. The word "breast" applied to males should not bear any stigma, and yet it does. That is our culture. The word "breast" strongly implies femininity. So in our culture, for someone who is struggling with their gender identity or struggling to have it acknowledged and honored, that strong implication of femininity to someone who is male may be hard to deal with. Add to that the fact that some trans-men grew up having feminine breasts for some or all of their lives and may have strongly resented them. So maybe they would prefer that in casual conversation, their anatomy not be referred to in what are (right or wrong) commonly accepted as feminine labels.

Having said all of that, I still think "chestfeeding" is asinine. If the word "breast" is troublesome, we have perfectly acceptable terms in "nursing" or simply "feeding" that are already used and understood without having to make a big fuss to anyone.

Yes, I agree that there should be nothing shameful about breasts in any context, male or female, but currently, in our society... there is. Breast is a female term. Shouldn't be, but it is.

[poorpete]

[Elle]

[Elle]

[Mike]

I agree with you on every point, Elle. But change takes time and isn't always what we want it to be. So for someone who is struggling with gender identity issues and all the baggage that goes with it, it may be a bridge too far to ask them to live now in the ideal world we are shaping for the future. Regardless of how things SHOULD be, the people in their reality are reacting to them based on how things are right now, and that is something that they have to deal with, regardless of whether you or I think it's a bunch of silly nonsense.

On the other hand, if you are a trans-man who is choosing to breastfeed, you clearly have larger issues to be dealing with around you than simply the word "breast", no matter how you label the act of nursing.

[Elle]

Okay but I honestly think that chestfeeding is a much much more radical change to attempt than simply using the language of breastfeeding and making sure everybody realizes that it sometimes can extend to men, just like we do with breast cancer. I think it's very telling that nobody's trying to rename that one chest cancer.

In other news my feminist credibility appears to be partially restored by shared disgust at the idea that they would ban the burquini. At my local swimming pool it is not permitted to wear the larger flowing dress version of a burka, which is imo a reasonable rule, but that's because of a completely consistent and religion-neutral rule that has to do with water safety. The beach thing isn't like that.

[Elle]

They got rid of the burkini ban, apparently. It is worth noting that men were harassing women on the beach who were NOT dressed in burkinis, so that's always nice. They try to get you coming and going: either you're forced to cover up, or you're forced not to cover up, or you uncover and enjoy being harassed. Thanks. The sexual harassment I've experienced in the context of a swimming pool alone would be a full paragraph. I just can't imagine my life is THAT weird, either. I can only imagine that other women/girls have experienced that sort of harassment, which has unfortunately become part of the fabric of everyday reality. So yeah, wear your burkini if you want. On the other hand, we can't forget that it's hard for women to exercise truly free choices in this arena when you're raised constantly, constantly told to be modest on pain of potentially severe punishment, and/or to be sexy because that's how you're most valued, etc. Pregnancy cured me forever. Once you have decided that you cannot be stopped from swimming while transformed into a sea turtle, you can't be easily restricted in general.

[Mrs.Darcs]

As someone who has been pregnant or nursing for the last 7 years of her life, I exclusively use the term "nursing" to describe how I choose to feed my babies. I don't think I've ever said the words "I'm breastfeeding" all though I have referred to the products of my pumping efforts as breastmilk (cause it is). I feel like nursing is more accurate because for me, and I won't speak for others, it's more than just feeding my child with my breasts. It's holding them, loving them, singing or talking to them, kisses, cuddles, and nourishment. That's my preferred terminology, if others prefer breastfeeding good for them.

I have never heard the term chestfeeding prior to this thread. Frankly, it makes no sense at all to me. The chest is a large portion of the torso, from the lower ribs to the shoulders in the front of the body. One can only feed their child from two points on their chests (If they choose and/or are able to do so) those points are the mammary organs, the breasts. It's not like I can latch Desmond on to my sternum and let him eat. Sounds like the people who coined this phrase are trying to get attention with forced false inclusiveness.

I don't think you could be a bad feminist if you tried, Elle. The way I was taught about feminism (at my women's college, where you have to take classes in this sort of thing) is that it isn't about humoring every moron who comes up with a clever new term, it's about women having equal rights, and opportunities as anyone else, as well as being able to make choices regarding all aspects of their lives.

So that's my never humble opinion.

[Elle]

[Mrs.Darcs]

[Elle]

Yes to that and yes to my ass!

[Elle]

Well, I am mad again. I don't know what to tell you, I just think so much of what passes for popular feminism, especially among Millenials, is utter bullshit. I am ready for the next generation's version - could be worse, better, or the same, but let's see what happens. What particularly bothers me is the way they create a real, significant rhetorical opening for their worst opponents on the Right. Trying to downplay the significance of terrorist attacks in the U.S. and violence perpetrated by migrants or refugees in Europe, even as you are really (rightfully) upset about other examples of unjust violence, permits your opponents to point out correctly that you're hypocritical and only care about certain victims, certain perpetrators. This is what happens when feminism starts to be about Identity Politics and not about freedom and equity. And IMO this gives enormous fuel to people like Trump, because people have a very low (too low, sure, but there it is) tolerance for being scolded by those who pretend greater moral purity. There are people attracted to Trump because they're pissed off about the perception that they have to be "politically correct" in some way. Jesus I WISH the election was about something that trivial! But there it is - they're annoyed by it and see this attitude (correctly) as preventing them from making common sense observations about the real problems affecting our lives. And these are people who, if they really sit down and think about what they're doing, would NOT support a lot of things Trump has been quite crystal clear that he wants to make happen. But maybe it seems like he's going to solve problems that the PC left is incapable even of permitting to be identified, much less address.

[Mike]

Example(s)?

[Elle]

The real impetus for my irritation is coming from Real Life, where it must remain. However, the news lately is enough: various millenial feminists of the internet are very upset by police shootings (as I agree we should be!) but at the same time are mocking concerns about terrorist attacks as if those were no big deal! Of course, if you don't like the new spate of kneeling during the pledge, your motives for objecting are entirely racist because the flag has nothing to do with veterans or war dead. Without the slightest hint of self-awareness or irony, these "feminists" will dismiss anything "southern" or "midwestern" or "christian", freak out if you're not completely okay with gender-neutral restrooms due to modesty concerns (I don't mean who should use which restroom, I mean everyone using the same one!), and in the same breath want to tell you burkinis are all about freedom.

[Phoebe]

There is a fascinating series of articles at the Atlantic about a group of women from a sorority at Northwestern who were interviewed by two of their group (the authors) about their lives, careers and families. The idea is to get some insight into how the whole "ambitious young smart women set sail from college ready to go get it all" thing worked out. Obvious problems affect the analysis due to the small homogeneous group (and far more so than the authors wish to pretend), but also due to tired narratives from the authors that occasionally even contradict their own stated evidence.

They're big on the idea that ambition and success doesn't have to mean in your job, as you might redefine it to mean having a job that leaves more time for hiking. That's great, but then they puzzle over the new and exhausting competitiveness of not just mothering but living via Instagram or whatever. They puzzle over their misreading of Sheryl Sandberg's supposed demand that we all forge power coupleships and pass off parenting to others. But all Sheryl is saying is that if you want the ambition to apply in the job category of life, don't hamstring yourself before you even get in there and fight for it. You can take steps to win that fight, such as... (Rest of Book here). That's who her message is for (and people who think she isn't talking to poor women or women of color are imo the true BAD feminists for thinking so, because why the heck wouldn't that message be for them?!)

Anyway, I digress. I am zero like the women in the Northwestern articles. I would count as one of their "high achievers", but married to another "high achiever" and also taking on a greater parenting and domestic role than husband. Apparently this is like being some sort of extinct beetle. They have precious little insight for me, as a result. But a few really important things leap out from their work: very long commutes and no after school care would make a life like mine impossible. Health problems for anyone can make it impossible. Lack of babysitters like grandparents is a huge factor in the whole thing. Rich women who can afford to scale back at work while pouring those talents and energies into home life are fucking up the expectations for everyone else hard. What PTA do these authors dream is setting up 136745 midday school activities for parents? Hint: it ain't the full time working moms or pops.

And speaking of pops, they didn't mention their story applies just as much to the pops. 20% of both sexes had put aside career to be a stay at home parent.

[Phoebe]

On the occasion of the women's march: let us never forget the degree to which sexism contributed to the election. Hillary has been portrayed as mendacious for years, and the EMAILS!!!#%!!#!! were the crowning achievement of that effort. Her efforts to be cautious were transformed into efforts to hide and lie. Her non-criminal actions prompted a constant refrain of Lock Her Up. Meanwhile, the dishonesty of her opponent is Legendary and like nothing we've seen before. But he and all his surrogate liars got a pass because Hillary obvs was hiding something? Come on. That doesn't happen without sexism in play, and it makes me worry we might never get a female President because that tactic is always going to be used. Women are sneaky, right?