Hello!

I am Megan, a brand new face to Antigone, but excited to be starting up a new column here focusing on the female political leaders. Political Mavens will be talking to the women who are hard working within government to get something done about feminist issues, among many other things.

Introducing our first change-maker: Mira Hall

Mira Hall (Yellowknife, NT – pictured RIGHT) is studying political economics and pursuing a career in policy development relating to food security and affordable housing.  Mira is employed at the Centre for Northern Families where she provides a range of family support and community outreach services. Mira was once roommates with Antigone Magazine Editor Amanda Reaume when they were both delegates to the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women. This past fall, Mira ran for School Trustee in Yellowknife District 1 and won!

1. How and why did you get involved in politics?

I have always been politically active. My mother is an activist and she always encouraged me to be involved in the work that she was doing, or work that she saw others doing that she supported. I think that I was reluctant for a long time out of rebelliousness. At the end of the day I really care about community, about reducing marginalization, and I’m too passionate to stay away from politics.

2. Why do you think women should get involved in politics?

I think that women are the best qualified to represent women’s perspectives in government. For too long we have trusted that our male counterparts could represent our interests when they shape the policy that shapes our lives, but they haven’t been women so they couldn’t possibly have as deep an understanding of what our interests are as we do.

This was illustrated to me vividly during a forum during the last territorial election. Candidates were asked why they thought women weren’t participating in trades and non-traditional employment and how they as MLAs would encourage women’s economic participation in the lucrative employment opportunities provided by mining, oil and gas. The only candidate who pointed out that mothers aren’t often able to find childcare for the full two weeks that a standard camp rotation would be and that many mothers be unwilling to leave their children for two weeks out of every month was a mother of three.

3. What issue do you see as particularly important for women?

I think women’s economic independence is the number one issue for me, and that many other issues that women face are a direct result of their economic dependence. There is a persistent wage gap between men and women in Canada, and women are still structurally excluded from some types of employment.

The other issues that rank highly for me are violence against women, child apprehension, and the feminization of poverty.

4. Have you ever experienced any discrimination as a woman in politics? If so, describe your experiences and how you handled them.

Any discrimination that I notice is pretty subversive, and is rarely directed right at me in my presence. Although I notice that it seems to be women who are hardest on me and on other female candidates. I hear women calling female candidates things like “bitch,” “crazy,” “slut” and “shit-disturber,” generally when I hear the comments about male politicians and candidates the worst is “crazy” or “useless.” It makes me sad that women aren’t more supportive of each other.

It reminds me (as someone who is not affiliated to any party) of how leftists cling to the idea that Conservatives are “anti-woman” but in Canada they can claim the first female Prime Minister, and in the US they ran Sarah Palin. Leftist women are the first to say “well, they don’t really count” for whatever reason, and yet the “pro-woman” parties don’t even give us women “who don’t count.” They just keep feeding us “pro-woman” men. I’m really hoping that there is drastic change coming and that women step up and are supported by their parties and their communities.

5. What issues are you passionate about?

I suspect that all of my passions can be boiled down to “reducing marginalization.” I think that every school should be reflective of all the populations that share our community. Every school should be inclusive for girls and boys, for people with varying “ability,” for a variety of ethnicities and socio-economic backgrounds, and for fluid identities within those demographics. And not only should our schools be reflective of our multifaceted society, but our neighborhoods too, and our workplaces!

6. What is your dream for women?

My dream is to live in a world where each person can be both proud of their own culture, identity, and place in society as well as be loving and accepting of those who are different.

7. What advice do you have for young women?

Keep your chin up and know that no one can represent you or your demographic better than you! Change the world, and keep pushing!

Do you have dreams for women?

Send it to:

Antigone Magazine
C/O WILLA
Box 61 – 6138 SUB Blvd
Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z1
OR antigonemagazine(at)hotmail.com

Discuss in the comments below or see more postcards.

Welcome to the first post of Feminists Who Totally Rock!

 Today I am pleased to present two interviews, one with Rebeca Monzo and one with Terrie Chan. Read on and enjoy!

 Rebeca Monzo is one of the head co-ordinators of the Beautiful One Conference as well as an ordained minister!

 What was it that inspired you to become a feminist?

To be honest I have never really thought of myself as a feminist.  That being said I have always had a strong desire to work with teen girls.  That desire was inspired by the obvious need to shine a light on the unrealistic standards and expectations that are placed on girls by pop culture. I want to encourage, empower and equip teenage girls to live their life to its potential.

What kind of work do you do?

I work with youth both in the church setting as well as in the community where I mentor teen girls and help coach a Sr. Girl’s volleyball team.  I also work with girls through the Beautiful One Conference which is a faith based yearly event designed to empower, equip and encourage teen girls.  

What feminist issue is particularly important to you?

I believe that every girl should be afforded the opportunity to pursue education allowing them to achieve their goals and live out their dreams no matter where they live.

 What is your dream for Women?

My dream for women is that they would be confident in who they are and live out that confidence in every area of their life. 

Which unknown or young feminist would you like the world to know about?

This is a tough one.  I know a lot of strong women who are actively making a difference in the lives of girls and women.        

Terrie Chan is a student at UBC Vancouver. This summer she worked for a non-governmental organization in Hong Kong called The Women’s Foundation.

1) What was it that inspired you to become a feminist?

I was inspired to become a feminist for many reasons. The most prominent reason being that women are not, no matter how many people say that we have, won our equal standing in society- or at least in Canada. There are [still] many [areas] in life that women can[not] participate fully [in], or be treated as an equal. There are also many things to be done in order to protect the safety of girls and women, or simply  to be viewed just as valuable as a male counterpart. 

 2) What kind of work do you do?

I try to fit in feminism in my life and to reflect this to my friends and family. Whenever I get the chance, I talk about the situation of women and girls around the world, which I think is an issue needing attention. In terms of work with credentials, I spent one month in Hong Kong this summer with an NGO named The Women’s Foundation for an internship. That was my first experience with a NGO with a focus on women and girls.

3) Which feminist issue is particularly important to you?

I am most interested in sex trafficking, domestic violence, and women within law. 

 4) What is your Dream for Women:

 My dream for women is for all women to understand their self-worth and that it is not okay when a man treats you as his possession or simply in a bad way, and for all women to understand they deserve respect. It is my hope that all women will have that self-confidence, and that they will stop blaming themselves when a man does them harm. I also hope that women can finally see that they can be just as successful as any man or woman on the planet. Finally, I think we need to accept a norm wherein women do not feel pressured to be sexy or possess a certain ‘male trait’ to be successful. Hopefully this will allow men who have this attitude to discover something other than their present normative thinking-that women are somehow of lesser value compared to men.

This fall, we are launching a number of exciting blog features and  columns! They are designed to engage in important conversations and to introduce you to amazing women. Over the years, we have met a lot of fabulous female politicians and feminists and we have unfortunately not been able to include them all in our print magazine.

And then we realized that we had a blog and could features whomever we wanted!

So, please welcome our new columns and columnists! They will be posting bi-weekly so look out for their content!

Political Mavens
By Megan Ryland
This column will feature interviews with awesome female politicians and candidates!

Feminists Who Totally Rock
By Emily Yakashiro
This column will feature interviews with awesome feminists who totally rock!

The Feminist Scholar
By Kaitlin Blanchard
This column will feature discussion of ongoing issues in feminist academia!

The Cultural Critic
By Raquel Baldwinson
This column will feature criticism of culture!

We will also be offering other blogs the opportunity to syndicate these columns on their blogs for free! To learn more about how you can publish one of these great columns on your blog (or Dreams for Women!) e-mail us at antigonemagazine@hotmail.com!

If you are interested in starting your own weekly or bi-weekly column we would LOVE to have you! E-mail us at antigonemagazine@hotmail.com

Ashley Wagner, U.S. Women’s Figure Skating Team

Robbi Weldon, Canadian Para-Nordic Skiing Team

Virginia Johnston, First Nations Snowboard Team

Katie Willis, Canadian Women’s Ski Jumpers Team

Sara Renner, Canada Women’s Cross Country Team

Angela Ruggiero, U.S. Women’s Hockey Team

These are just a sampling of the beautiful postcards that are featured in the 2010 Dreams for Women Calendar featuring North American female athletes who will be competing in the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games!

As an organization based in Vancouver, we wanted to highlight the powerful women who will be competing in the Games and work with them to bring attention to the importance of women’s leadership and women’s equality! We believe that these women are fabulous role models for young women and we wanted to work with them to ensure that the Vancouver Olympics has a legacy of leadership for young Canadian women!

The amazing athletes who are featured are:

Pre-Order your calendar today and save 20% (Until November 15th!). Calendars are only $16 for quantities under 7 and $8 for quantities over 7! Learn how you can use the calendar to fundraise for your group!

BUY YOUR CALENDAR TODAY – CLICK HERE

Check out I.M.O.W.’s latest exhibition Economica: Women and the Global Economy.

Economica travels the world and asks, “What difference do women make in the world’s economy?” A series of evocative audio slideshows give the answers by showing women’s experiences from Morocco, China, Egypt, Bolivia, and beyond. These powerful visual stories provide entry points for examining different economic systems and values. Also check out their resources page for podcasts and an awesome book and film list.

Our goal in creating the Economica exhibition is to showcase women’s broad experiences as well as their exceptional expertise. We aim to illuminate what is going on in different corners of the world, why and what can be done to make things better. We want to acknowledge that women are a powerful engine of economic growth, but also help visitors dive beneath the jargon of economics to discover deeper causes and effects and probe how things might be different. Through women’s stories, we pose questions that do not have ready answers and we offer alternatives from those working locally and globally, not only to empower women, but also to transform the economy.

- Masum Momaya, Curator

Affecting Others: The Passionate Feminist (A Fairy Story)

I’m going to start this entry with a personal anecdote because it touched me, and this, as I will argue, is part of my point. Sitting having tea with a former professor of mine the other day, she told me a fairy story which she had heard when she was young in order to illustrate a small, but not insignificant, story about being-with-others. The story tells the tale of a young knight who unknowingly falls in love with a fairy. The woman disappears during the night and always comes back disheveled and bearing traces of her adventures. He follows her into the woods one night and comes upon her in a fairy circle, whereupon he is told that because he has done this and violated her trust he has to give her up entirely. Walking home dejected, he sees a cloaked figure ahead of him in the road. The figure turns and it is the woman: he had to give her up to win her back.

While seemingly a very quaint and archetypal tale, the story illustrates a vital point, one which I think much theory has lost sight of. That is, in trying to master its objects, theory often reproduces the same divides it criticizes. It reifies the structure of binary oppositions that it seeks to undermine, leaving very little room for growth or contingency. So while it may be a necessary, and potent force, the theory we produce is not always palatable. Unlike the knight who loses the “fight” for love in a binary relation, only to win it back because he has grown, theory and correspondingly its practioners tend to embrace rather rigid formulae for their analyses. I want to suggest that perhaps we, as feminist critics, like the knight, need to give something up in order to win it back.

The Dali Lama came to UBC in September and spoke to a select audience. He called himself a feminist. Many celebrated this. However, he also said that “many feminists have too much emotion, and that he doesn’t like…” (September 28, 2009). This statement rankles as many as his previous statement enheartened. I am not a buddhist so I will not pretend to analyze the statement within its context, but I would like to perhaps infer that when he says emotion he means a certain kind of passion. Passion, as we understand it now, is, I believe, a kind of feverish identification with a particular affective state. It is, in all cases, exorbitant, overwhelming, powerful, and compelling. However, and this may seem rather facile for now, I think there is a kind of passion we can embrace as indeed rational in itself.

Anyone who has graduated from theory kindergarten will easily disassemble the claims I’m going to make as essentialisms, at the very least, but bear with me. I’m wondering why it is that passion has been characterized as “excessive” and used more commonly as a pejorative qualifier in relation to the affective states it describes. In other words, have we cordoned off excess in the same way we have cordoned off the subject? Radical feminists, those who practice a kind of reverse sexism have long been rejected by the movement at large, and I think largely for good reason, but not because they are passionate. Rather, because they are not being “rational” or perhaps more accurately reasonable. Reasonable is a good word to focus on here because it connotes a kind of moderateness, an Aristotelian mean, of sorts sans the classicist consequences. However, it also signifies a capacity for reason, but not necessarily the practice of it. Reason itself, on the other hand, recalls perhaps the most insidious and pervasive binary of all: logic and passion. I want to suggest that passion itself can in fact be reasonable; that is, capable of acting according to a logic or following a series of syllogisms. Passion, can be, in other words not restrained, but moderate and most importantly careful and caring.

I do not seek here to limit the rapturous and the sublime as impossibilities, but I want to suggest that passion, as a practice, is valuable when it takes its actions into account, when it makes a narrative of its feelings–the affects it discerns from others and the environment.(I borrow here from Teresa Brennan). The Freudian ego has long been touted as the mediator between the persuasive social conscience of the superego and the willful and desirous id. Really, this account of human subjectivity leaves no room for feeling: the ego is structured as a rational entity, one which carries out decisions according to their positive value to the subject. And this is my point, the ego is a primarily reactionary, and dare I say fearfully anxious conscience whose purpose is to preserve the status quo of the subject or advance its safety and prosperity. Are not anxiety and fear affects–and negative affects at that? Maybe then, when the Dali Lama says he does not like feminists who have too much emotion, we might understand that statement, not in its buddhist context, but as a maxim which warns against being possessed by the negative affects.

To bring this all back down to the ground again, in practice this would mean for feminism, a much more organic kind of theorizing, one much closer to the kinds of grassroots activism which brings communities together to form a common front. It means taking account of the affects in the air which carry us beyond ourselves, beyond the moment of feeling and into the uncertain future of anxiety. No movement which takes as its goal the furtherance of human rights and equality should embrace a modality which is fundamentally fearful.

Of course, there will always be some degree of the subjunctive in feminism, the “if’s” contain as much hope as they can fear. My point is that perhaps we ought to begin to let go of these structures of deconstruction, which have served us so well, in order to embrace the roots of our movement more firmly. Maybe we need to give up our objects in order to lose the fear and anxiety which colours our thinking about them. We need to let go of the self-centered and passifying affects of fear and anxiety in order to begin to analyzing our struggles in their moment. We need to mourn our relationships in order to re-order them; we need to feel others, rather than fear for them. This may mean giving up “women’s” studies, but certainly not the intent of feminisms. Maybe, just maybe, we need to let go of our’selves’ in order to realize just who and what has affected them and then, maybe then, we can begin to really affect the change we need to as caring and careful theorists….

I was in Montreal this weekend attending a training session as a Regional Network Leader for the Women’s Worlds 2011 conference (find out more here www.womensworlds.ca). The organizing committee chose two representatives from six regions across Canada to help coordinate the participation of grassroots women’s groups (particularly those from groups that are typically excluded) in the International Conference in Ottawa in 2011. The goal of the network leaders is also to assist in creating a regional network that will continue on after the conference and strengthen women’s organizing in the region. The video above is the work that two of the women present are doing with aboriginal youth. I have one word for that video and the amazing women who helped make it: wow.

But, there are not even words to describe my experience this weekend. Not only did I have the privilege and the honor of sharing in the Women’s Worlds vision, conceptualized by a number of activists and academics and sheparded by women like the fabulous Lise Martin and Pam Kapoor, but I also had the opportunity to connect with The Girls Action Foundation, RebELLES and with the fabulous women that will be working as Regional Leaders across Canada.

I cannot truly encompass the experience in this short blog post but you will be hearing far more about this team of amazing people as we get closer to the 2011 conference. I can only say that I have never before had a weekend as filled with laughter, feminism, fun, stimulating conversation and concerted planning. Despite my inevitable jetlag (which we BCers experience in any of our trips to East) I enjoyed every minute of it.

I feel like I have begun a journey with these fellow feminists that will only snowball as more women are brought together. I strongly believe that this conference will be an important moment in Canadian feminism and I feel so lucky to be able to be a part of it. The women that I met this weekend have become a part of my heart and they have informed and strengthened my activism. I hope to share many of their stories with you and in turn the stories of the women they work with. We are going to be launching a series of interviews with Canadian feminists called Feminists Who Totally Rock! You WILL be hearing more about these women and their work.

If the spirit and love that radiated through our meeting is any indication of what Women’s World will bring, this amazing conference WILL have a lasting and transformative effect on women’s activism and organizing in Canada.

With love,

AR

Do you have dreams for women?

Paint, draw, write, sketch, or decoupage and send it to:

Antigone Magazine
C/O WILLA
Box 61 – 6138 SUB Blvd
Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z1
OR antigonemagazine(at)hotmail.com

Discuss in the comments below or see more postcards.

“I’ll be Post-Feminist in a Post-Patriarchy”:

The Boundaries of Privilege between Wo(men)

This week’s entry is, I think, rife with debates which I struggle with in my advocacy and I am therefore going to draw upon the words and experiences of some of my inspiring fellow feminists in Vancouver to discuss the problem of privilege.

********************************

To my mind, one of feminism’s greatest strengths is its insistence on self-reflection as the cornerstone of any ethical inquiry into the lives and experiences of others. In other words, it insists that we examine privilege. One of the greatest struggles for me personally is my position of privilege within the movement itself as a white woman. I cannot and should not to presume to speak for others unless I can situate myself in a manner which neither appropriates nor collapses the processes of representation by which other women make their voices heard–the means to which, I’ll admit, still escapes me.

While I certainly agree that we can no longer use woman as a category–and certainly not as an additive position from which all women can speak, since indeed white feminists have a legacy of that kind of thought–there is a part of me which still buys the necessity of difference. This is not to say I seek to revive the second wave, but rather that there are many injustices and oppressions still suffered by many women at the hands of colonialism, imperialism, racism, heteronormativism, and perhaps the most insidious ism of them all neoliberalism. But enough with the ‘isms’: what do I mean you ask? Well, I’m going to cite the current debate within our feminist community at UBC as to whether the “women’s centre” should remain the “womyn’s centre” and the political ramifications of changing a single vowel within an admittedly loaded word.

The deconstructionist in me prefers “women” because it maintains the interrelatedness of the genders and the inextricable-ness of one sign from an’other.’ Nonetheless, I also sympathize with the statement made in claiming the ‘y’ in the word. To resignify ‘womyn’ is to rebirth the category as a safe space distinct from the systemic oppression inherent in the very patriarchal nature of language itself. I quote from the current debate on the topic within their group’s website. Anoushka Ratnarajah sums up the debate quickly and efficiently:

As for the womyn thing, it comes from a legacy of feminism that seeks to challenge privilege within the construction of language. It’s not because we want to banish all thoughts and evidence of men by reworking the word; we simply seek an eye catching way to make people think about the connotations of power inherent within language. And Woman or women are words that can and have been reclaimed by feminists from their patriarchal legacy. To use women, womyn, wimmin interchangeably, is a way of pointing out the ways in which language is steeped in legacies of sexism, and show how the reclaiming or reworking of language can be an empowering experience for the oppressed.

She continues on to explain the rationale behind maintaining the ‘y’ form of the term and equally the need for spaces which do not erect boundries:

Women’s only spaces exist because they need to. Safe spaces for marginalized people need to exist, because the rest of world is very often a place where they experience personal and political violence. By encroaching on this space, folks with more privilege will create more anxiety and anger in marginalized people. There is an equal need for allied spaces, for only if we work together, can we defeat systems of oppression. However, until systematic and personal violence against women ends, we will need places and spaces where we feel safe and accepted. Many women on campus have experienced violence at the hands of men, and therefore feel like they need JUST ONE ROOM in which they feel safe. A group of marginalized people coming together to support each other is not about the exclusion of privileged groups. It is about making a space in which we feel safe to support each other, to vent, to cry, to get angry, to celebrate our successes and work together to challenge our oppressions. We need that. We need to be able to speak freely, without fear of being shut down, for being called angry feminists, or angry colored people, or angry homos. We need people around us who know what we’re going through, because we have a similar embodied experience of oppression, our struggles and victories. Spaces exclusive to marginalized people ARE problematic, but they are only problematic because the reason they need to exist is because patriarchy, colonialism and heteronormativity have excluded marginalized people from participating in many spaces in the world.

In such a view a womyn’s centre takes on the task of edifying a boundary in order to create a safe space within which those who are too painfully familiar with the oppression of the current system can begin to examine their experiences. These sorts of spaces are very necessary and I think create very self-reflexive boundaries. They seek, in other words, to erect a wall in order to break it down. Trauma is usually conceptualized as absent from the conscious minds of its sufferers; it needs to be symbolized in order to be worked through. I speak here not of the systemic violence which we all regardless of gender, race, sexuality, class etc… are subject to in a patriarchal culture, but of rape or violence as an ‘exceptionally’ embodied violation–exceptional as both outside of and singularly violent. The centre quite literally excludes in order to include: to give victims back a sense of their self which we normally take for granted.

One of the comments made by a very self-satisfied commenter regarding the debate annoyed me. He claims:

You can rehash all your college lectures on women[']s studies that you feel have put you in a place of authority on the subject, and you can give me textbook tirades on how tough you have it, but the fact remains that no issue is one sided. This idea that a dominating male perspective is overly pervasive in everything one ever does takes the onus of responsibility away from the individual and instead places them in a category of victim, where one can repeat “I’ve been wronged! I’ve been wronged!” without actually changing anything. I feel like the stance you take is so polarizing that it eliminates any prospect of the progressive movement you’re trying to advocate for.”

All I can say is: you’ve entirely missed the point buddy. The fact that the individual carries the burden of responsibility for his or her difference, violation, victimization, and experience of oppression is patriarchy at its very best. Feminism works to break down the idiotic and harmful illusion of individuality which we cling to and which results in the mind-boggling policy decisions made by the likes of Sarah Palin in making rape victims pay for their own rape kits.

One of the most insidious and likely enduring facets of neoliberalism is its edification of the individual through the misnomer of choice. That is, capitalism reinforces the individualism which Western society embraced in the 18th century by offering ‘choice’ as a means to self-definition. In a consumer society, continued consumption and thus the success of a market economy depends on the ability of the consumer to gain something unique from his or her transactions in society. We gain some sense of uniqueness or individuality through the way we ’style’ or choose our manner of consumption. Of course, the very illusion of choice is only a front designed to get us to continue consuming under the pretense that we can find our authenticity through exercising that age-old tokenism of democracy ‘free will.’ Forgive my sarcasm, but, in such a system anyone who claims, like our oh-so-honourable PM Harper that women’s equality or those who pursue it comprise a left-wing fringe group, is off their bloody rocker!!! We will not be equal unless and untill we start to examine the need we have to assert this very authenticity. What is it? What does it mean? I tend to regard it as another form of privilege in disguise, but that is a discussion for another time.

When young women my age ask me if “I hate men” or why I think feminism is still necessary, I groan inwardly every single time. Feminism is as much about interrogating how patriarchy and all other forms of oppression work against women and men alike as it is about the history of women’s oppression. Masculinism, as a discourse which paints feminism as reverse sexism misses the point. Working toward equality as I’ve said before discriminates against no one. Sexism is a discursive apparatus which effects men and women. Feminists don’t engage in reverse discrimination in attacking what are usually predominantly white-male dominated institutions, they are simply asking that we reflect on how patriarchy reproduces and reinforces itself. I may be born white, but that doesn’t mean I can’t effect change, I just need to acknowledge my position.

Thus, I come to my opinion on the debate between e and y. I personally feel that while safe spaces are very necessary and valuable undertakings, and that we should continue to protect them, we are at a crossroads in the feminist movement and in order to sustain the kind of inquiry which Women’s Studies departments undertake we need, as Ratnarajah notes, to create “allied spaces.” If I were a young woman seeking to learn more about feminism and who had no knowledge of the movement, as is likely to happen because Gender studies are commonly excluded from highschool curriculums, I would feel alienated by and likely unsure of my ability to contribute and participate in a group which used a ‘y.’ This could of course be mediated by community education and aggressive ‘marketing.’ But frankly, we have reached the crest of what could be a very fast downward spiral into the grave of gender studies. We just don’t have the resources to do that kind of re-education unless and until we break down the walls within the movement itself. At this point, we need to bring people together more than we need to divide them. Perhaps, then, it should be people like Ratnarajah leading the charge so that these allied spaces do not reproduce the very systems which they seek to challenge.