on Germaine Greer, feminism, and Bingle's well, bingle

image from Wack! Art and the Feminist Revolution exhibition, from 2007

An opinion piece published in the Herald Sun the other day suggested that not only was feminism a great big fat failure, but it was also responsible for "appalling rates of teenage pregnancies, damning numbers of divorces, and more unhappy and exploited women than ever". Further, Germaine Greer's "numbingly dreary, poorly written guide" (The Female Eunuch)  was completely unsuccessful, as evidenced by factors such as the size of female Olympic volleyball player's bikini bottoms, and the Bingle/Fevola issue. Bingle is generally criticised as being some kind of sexual predator, preying on an innocent (!) then-married Fevola and the whole scenario was used as an example of how "feminism hasn't really worked, so could Germaine Greer please shoosh" (I'm paraphrasing) and as a woman who, as Alan Howe suggests "are tugging hardest at the reins that hold back their gender".
Ergh.


He also lambastes Greer for changing her opinion, and expressing said new opinion publicly, accusing her of being as media hungry as the 'big-breasted b-grade celebrities' she has previously criticised (more paraphrasing, but you get the general idea).
And this, then, is the bit that I don't understand - surely we, as intelligent, thinking people, are allowed to change our ideas and opinions? Just as society changes and evolves, surely so are our interpretations of different issues affecting society?

Furthermore, how is it that Greer is solely and wholly responsible for the failure of feminism? Surely the undoing of the works of the sisterhood are more the efforts of a patriarchal society (one that it is all too easy to succumb to) than the failures of either Greer personally, or the feminist movement as a whole?

While accept that Greer is generally conveyed as an abrasive old bat, and I'm not about to defend her for her public commentary (she's more than capable of doing this herself) what she does do, and does very well, is challenge popular discourse on an issue, regardless of whether or not she anticipates this will be well received within popular media. That is, she opens the possibility to new ideas, different modes of thinking, and a general challenge to society-at-large to question whatever the current 'group think' on an issue may be, and in doing so, effectively moves undiscussed issues (such as the female body) in to public discourse (as she did with The Female Eunuch).
Finally, I don't think she's completely responsible for the 'Greer' image we receive in the media, as a crotchety old cranky ex-pat with too much to say and not enough media to say it in. I do, however, think that the media generally take great pleasure in portraying her as such, not the least of which (as we see in Howe's article, and echoed within reader comments) is used as a validation for the media-as-a-whole's rejection of feminism and for fixating on the body and women-as-sex-objects/inferior to men and therefore the root of all evil within society... etc.

As though oppression is the fault of the oppressed, for letting themselves be exploited.



Get real.

Frida Kahlo image from here (and originally sourced from Britannica)

Oh, fuck.

I was just looking through the offbeat bride and was reminded that according to the Marriage Act 1961 our celebrant is obliged to say some crap about how, in Australia, marriage is a legally binding blah blah between a MAN AND A WOMAN to the exclusion of all others.
Now, I don't. agree. with. this. at. all.

It completely contravenes my feelings regarding love, people, and the notion that the heart knows no gender boundaries, and that marriage should be a right for all regardless of sex or sexual identity. It is at odds with everything I am trying to raise my children to understand - that laws do not dictate love (within reason: we're not talking child brides here, peoples - but then, I tend to think of this as something that is the product of religion more so) so I am at a bit of a loss as to how to circumvent this problem in our ceremony.
I'm not at all comfortable with the exclusive nature of the Australian Marriage Act.

Currently I'm trying to get my head around how I, as a feminist, can not only endorse, but actively engage in something that effectively deliniates one group of society from another, based on something as arbitrary as who they love. Not sexual preference, but love. Because to me, that's what it ultimately boils down to: N and I have (gloriously) realised that we are at a point in our relationship where we've decided, that "yeah, this is it, and it's awesome" and others, who also reach this point, cannot (legally) express this in the same fashion.
Kind of rough, isn't it?

Further, associated with marriage are all sorts of patriachal symbols that I wish to thoroughly disown. I've thought about this somewhat, though, we can condemn the symbols that oppress us, or we can reclaim them, call them our own and effectively repurpose them to represent what we want. It's the same logic I use with my frequent use of very naughty swear words.
Thus, marriage becomes not about possession and submission, but rather, strengthening and sharing the bonds of love, not just with each other, but with everyone else - friends and family alike. And I suppose that's why my family and N's family are overjoyed that we're doing this - (in my mother's words, "about bloody time") because then they too can join in (join hands? Figuratively speaking, NOT literally) and say something along the lines of "hey this makes me really happy".

I just don't like that it's so damned exclusive. And so, I continue to voice my discontent.

So, apart from blathering on about how I never planned a wedding, never dreamt of my wedding day, never envisioned myself getting married (when we played weddings at school, I was the celebrant, when we played mums and dads, I was the crazy aunty that visited occasionally from some far off corner of the world and bought the most AWESOME gifts - and wore funny hats)... and have even outwardly stated that "I don't think I'll ever get married"... but, you know, like in that Ms Jackson song, "forever never seems like a long time till you're wrong".
Mind you, I'm quite happily wrong about this.

stand up and be counted

 made some dark chocolate and raspberry muffins for the girls to take to school. Very simple recipe:
220g self raising flour (sifted)
1/2 cup caster sugar
1 tsp vanilla extract
2 tbsp cocoa (I think - I can't actually remember if I used this much or more)
1/4 of vegetable or canola oil
3/4 cup of skim milk
1 egg (lightly beaten)
150g of chopped dark chocolate and frozen raspberries. I think it was around 100g of chocolate and like, 70g of raspberries, but meh. You can put whatever you want in there (raspberries and white chocolate, for example!)

Preheat oven to 180 degrees (C). Mix dry ingredients in a bowel and make a well in centre. Mix wet ingredients and pour in to well. Combine, taking care not to over-beat - this makes the mixture tough. Add whatever additional ingredients you were going to add, stir. Pour in to muffin tins lined with patty-pans, bake for 15-20 minutes or until a skewer inserted in the middle comes out clean.

Considering the girls loved the chocolate and zucchini muffins, I imagine they're going to love these.

So, while waiting for these little chocolatey cakes of raspberry goodness to cool (So I could put them away) I was on facebook, reporting racist groups  (as I like to do, instead of sleeping). I also joined an anti-racist group, titled '"Abo" is a racist word! Don't say it, use it or think it!" ... apart from my cousin's sarcastic comments (damn it, katey, I thought of it as I read it) I was reminded of the Warumpi Band's seminal tune, "Black Fella, White Fella" - someone wrote a post about it on the wall of the group.

So here it is:



one of the most influential songs and bands in my childhood (and later, as a teen trying to find her feet in terms of social justice) and a song that reminds me of my dear old Uncle Mark (RIP). He was the kind of person that encouraged others to 'stand up and be counted'. Via Mark, I learned of Joh Bjelke-Peterson and his creation of Qld as a police state (replete with corrupt police), of Bjelke-Peterson's support of apartheid in South Africa. Bjelke-Peterson also made public protesting all but illegal, leading to some Liberal politicians crossing the floor to vote against this - the right to association and assembly - people he later accused of being traitors (well, that's the story I hear).
Further, Bjelke-Peterson seemed to do all that he could to continue to disempower and malign Australian Aboriginal people, such as pushing through an act to anull previous Native Title Claims, as well as evicting Fred Hollows and some Aboriginal Elders from a government controlled 'reserve' on the grounds that they were encouraging the Aboriginal people to enroll to vote - Hollows, of course, was there for trachoma work (though... I wouldn't put it past Fred Hollows to have been doing this!).
Bjelke-Peterson was also istrumental in the demise of the Whitlam Government.

Lovely fellow, eh?

So... because of this, and because we can, we must stand up and be counted. As La Passionara said, "better to die on your feet than to live on your knees", or, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, "Those who stand for nothing, fall for anything".