I was sitting in a room full of engaging, accomplished men and women who would, when asked by perfect strangers, declare their feminist convictions. I felt at home in this setting as I too align myself with feminist ideologies (See the first entry on my blog which defines feminism from where I sit) We were learning about my new friend Leah’s project called “Maternicity”. It was a phenomenal portrayal of motherhood – as experienced both pre and post partum. As an aspiring OB/Gyn it furthered feelings of personal satisfaction by participating in a discussion examining, through art, the paradoxical coupling of euphoria and despair that accompanies experiences of a primigravida woman. One of the women sitting in the living room expressed her firm belief in what she called, “natural” child birth. The women in the room nodded their heads with apparent approval and passion over the matter. Here enters the lessons learned from Dr. Seuss’ Star-bellied Sneetches.
Approximately 7 years ago, feminists near and far decided that “natural” child birth was the superior means of bringing life into the world. The men and women sitting in the room with me that night agreed. This determination of the superiority of “natural” child birth was an apparent response to the feminist movement of the early and mid-80’s. A movement that preferred bra burning, man-bashing and finding alternative names for the male-o-centric identifiers such as wo-man, per-son and so forth, all the while accusing motherhood as yet another means for men to control women and cause them undue pain and unilateral sacrifice and consequently that mothers were oppressed and should find their true worth and identity anywhere but in cage called “the home”. Unlike feminists from the 80’s, many of us realize now what the foundational feminist movement already knew; that is motherhood and feminism are not mutually exclusive but rather beautifully compatible. So what has changed?
Sitting among my friends was a bit illustrative of the direction that feminism has turned – woman against woman. No longer are we fighting the oppression accepted and formulated by traditions built upon Biblical misunderstandings; beginning from the apple and the first woman and the consequent weakness, sin and implied roles burdening the shoulders of her daughters through the generations. Men no longer need oppress but simply reap the benefits implicit in our self-destruction. We as women compare, criticize, judge against women who have a nanny, women who don’t have any children, women who feed their kids sugar cereal, women who are prettier, smarter, funnier or look better in black, women who stay in the home, women who… (*put your life choice here and it would unfortunately apply).
“Natural” childbirth has become a platform in which superiority is dealt amongst feminist. Does it follow that a woman who chooses to have a child “naturally” somehow is stronger, more powerful, filled with more resolve and consequently more dedicated than a woman who chooses to have an epidural? That a greater bond is felt between man and woman in this case because of her screams and “expanded” efforts? That a woman who survives the trauma will consequently be more tied to that child’s welfare? These things may be of great importance to that woman who chooses not to have an epidural, and the beauty of the feminist movement is that she can choose! But the key is: why have women decided that epidurals dismiss the strength and miracle of the experience for that woman? The point is once again, not WHAT the outcome of choice is but rather that she could CHOOSE.
I hesitated to use my friends to illustrate my point. Our discussion that night was merely a sample of the broadened effort women have made against women all in the name of feminism. Freedom to choose for one’s self and having freedom to implement her choices make women equal. This is the triumph of our gender.
If we are not careful, our reckless judgments of our sisters will cause self-destruction much like the Star Belly Sneetches. Arbitrary measures of empowerment decided by some women with “stars” are placed against women without “stars”,
"until neither the Plain nor the Star-Bellies knew
whether this one was that one or that one was this one
or which one was what one... or what one was who."
Approximately 7 years ago, feminists near and far decided that “natural” child birth was the superior means of bringing life into the world. The men and women sitting in the room with me that night agreed. This determination of the superiority of “natural” child birth was an apparent response to the feminist movement of the early and mid-80’s. A movement that preferred bra burning, man-bashing and finding alternative names for the male-o-centric identifiers such as wo-man, per-son and so forth, all the while accusing motherhood as yet another means for men to control women and cause them undue pain and unilateral sacrifice and consequently that mothers were oppressed and should find their true worth and identity anywhere but in cage called “the home”. Unlike feminists from the 80’s, many of us realize now what the foundational feminist movement already knew; that is motherhood and feminism are not mutually exclusive but rather beautifully compatible. So what has changed?
Sitting among my friends was a bit illustrative of the direction that feminism has turned – woman against woman. No longer are we fighting the oppression accepted and formulated by traditions built upon Biblical misunderstandings; beginning from the apple and the first woman and the consequent weakness, sin and implied roles burdening the shoulders of her daughters through the generations. Men no longer need oppress but simply reap the benefits implicit in our self-destruction. We as women compare, criticize, judge against women who have a nanny, women who don’t have any children, women who feed their kids sugar cereal, women who are prettier, smarter, funnier or look better in black, women who stay in the home, women who… (*put your life choice here and it would unfortunately apply).
“Natural” childbirth has become a platform in which superiority is dealt amongst feminist. Does it follow that a woman who chooses to have a child “naturally” somehow is stronger, more powerful, filled with more resolve and consequently more dedicated than a woman who chooses to have an epidural? That a greater bond is felt between man and woman in this case because of her screams and “expanded” efforts? That a woman who survives the trauma will consequently be more tied to that child’s welfare? These things may be of great importance to that woman who chooses not to have an epidural, and the beauty of the feminist movement is that she can choose! But the key is: why have women decided that epidurals dismiss the strength and miracle of the experience for that woman? The point is once again, not WHAT the outcome of choice is but rather that she could CHOOSE.
I hesitated to use my friends to illustrate my point. Our discussion that night was merely a sample of the broadened effort women have made against women all in the name of feminism. Freedom to choose for one’s self and having freedom to implement her choices make women equal. This is the triumph of our gender.
If we are not careful, our reckless judgments of our sisters will cause self-destruction much like the Star Belly Sneetches. Arbitrary measures of empowerment decided by some women with “stars” are placed against women without “stars”,
"until neither the Plain nor the Star-Bellies knew
whether this one was that one or that one was this one
or which one was what one... or what one was who."
6 comments:
Gimme the epidural, gimme gimme.
yes, but you are part of the medical community - we convince many people to "pharm"-up. So your opinion, although a woman, doesn't count in the matter. (it does to me...just to be clear)
I love your blog! It feels a little like being back in your zone meetings(only with secular topics). I salute you Sgt. Allison, and I especially appreciate your addressing this topic.
How tragically true! We are our own enemies. We keep each other from rising up. I think we (men and women) need to give each other a chance. Does that make me a humanist instead of a feminist? And for the record, I had 3 epidurals in the same birth.
hi allison this is "sister stevenson" from the chicago mission, not sure if you remember me but i linked to your blog via Emily Harts blog, sorry for all the lower case I am typing with a nursing baby in my arms. I just wanted to comment that there are many reasons for wanting a natural birth (more specifically a home birth)for me my desire stems from the negative experiences I have had in the hospital not so much from labor and delivery but the recovery care or lack there of (dealing mostly with the "nursery") I have had epidurals with both of my children and while i have been mildly disappointed for "caving in" lol that is not my largest concern with Hosptial intervention(every area is a litte diffrent, it is fairly bad here in vegas), anyhow i just wanted to touch upon another side of natural birth, I don't think you ment to imply that "proving your strength" was the only reason women opt for natural birth but comes off the strongest and realizing that the point of the post was to simply illistrate one of the many ways women pit themselfs against each other which is too true!
Speaking of women being hard on each other...I just read a book called "Be Happy without Being Perfect." A lot of the insecurities that the author talked about were from women comparing themselves to each other, and being convinced that the women around them were doing such a better job. I read one story about a woman who was convinced she was large. A group of women were gathered and she was asked to say where she thought she fit in size wise (her thighs in this case, because she was insecure about them). She thought she was one of the bigger ones in the group. In the end, she found out that she was the smallest person there. I think we all need to stop being so hard on ourselves!
Post a Comment