My family, simultaneously feminist and not

Recently during one of our class discussions the conversation turned to the topic of our own family figures and family history. This led to me to a moment of self-reflection where I noticed the strange ways that my family is simultaneously "feminist" and "traditional/non-feminist." I continue to reflect on this even now, weeks since the class. I wonder whether outsiders would view my family as more feminist than non-feminist or vice versa. I will leave that for you to decide as I share a few facts about my family.

I will begin with my grandparents. My maternal grandparents were very much a traditional Mexican couple. My grandfather focused on tending to the farm, handling the animals, and bringing in the money while my grandmother focused on cleaning, cooking, and making sure everything in the house ran smoothly. One experience I shared in class involved my first ever trip to Mexico to visit my grandparents. I am not sure exactly how old I was but I know I was still a child, not even a teenager yet. Every morning my job was to accompany my grandpa and cousins to the farm to tend to the cows and other animals. I enjoyed it the experience but after a few days I was no longer thrilled about it. One day I decided I would much rather sleep in and help my grandmother around the house instead of accompanying my grandfather. My grandparents were okay with it; instead of accompanying my grandpa I stayed back and helped my grandma clean the house. When my mother found out she was very upset. She asked me why I rather stay in and work like a woman instead of going out with the men. Not only did this upset me, it confused me. I did not understand why it was considered improper for me to help my grandmother instead of my grandfather. When I looked back on this experience later in life I realized that my mother had simply grown up in a very traditional family where traditional gender roles were very much the norm.

My paternal grandparents were a bit different from my maternal grandparents. They were still very traditional; my grandma was extremely religious and probably would have been a nun if she had not married and had kids my grandpa. My paternal grandparents, however, ran the family quite differently from my maternal grandparents. On my father's side, it was quite clear that my grandmother ran the show. She certainly seemed like the head decision maker. My grandmother also worked outside of the home. There are a few things that I believe explain this. For starters, my paternal grandparents moved to the United States before I was born. My grandmother worked out of necessity. Additionally, my grandfather battled many demons throughout his life which caused him to be absent. This forced my grandmother to step into the role of head of household. While my grandma was a very strong female leading a large family, often on her own, she was still held very traditional beliefs about modesty and gender roles.

Moving on towards my parents, they are an even more perplexing mix of feminist and non-feminist. My mother is a business owner. Her and my godmother have owned and operated their own hair salon for almost my entire life. My mother is a dance instructor, she teaches Zumba lessons at various places throughout the week. My mother partakes in various workout classes that require her to leave the house daily around 5 a.m. My mother is a very powerful authority figure in our family, she makes makes important decisions for the family on a daily basis. When my father lost his job, and had to wait nearly two years to find quality work again, my mother continued to work as much as she could to keep the family afloat. On the flip side, my mother is still typically the one who cooks for the family every day. My mother does all the laundry, cleans the house, usually washes the dishes, and still believes that certain tasks are meant for women while other are meant for men. This does not mean that my father, brother, and I are not expected to clean, wash dishes, etc. but I believe that she sees these kinds of tasks as predominantly her and my sister's responsibilities.

Much like my mother, my father also exists in ways that are outside of traditional gender roles. My father often cooks for the family, including big holiday meals. My father does plenty of household chores around the house every day. My father defers to my mother on many important family matters. At the same time, my father has always believed that outdoor work is for the men to take care of. I know this because on many weekends I was forced to help my dad with all sorts of outdoor tasks for hours on end. To this day whenever we have people coming over I am assigned to clean up the backyard and do all the outdoor work while my mom and sister cook and clean inside. Both of my parents certainly empowered my sister to stay in school and become a professional like they did with me and like they are doing with my younger brother. At the same time, they have often treated my sister differently from how they have treated my brother and I. While both of my siblings and I were pestered about eating healthy, exercising, and not being lazy, my sister certainly received the most criticism. She was especially expected to be slim and not eat too much fattening food. She receives certain criticisms about being unladylike that my brother and I never received. It feels like my parents have different expectations of my sister than they do of my brother and I.

Three of my grandparents have passed away. I never got the chance to ask them about feminism. I also have not asked my remaining living grandmother about what she thinks of feminism or gender. Surprisingly, I also have not had conversations directly on the matter with my mother or sister either. While I have not had these conversations, I have never once heard any of them mention a connection to any larger feminist movement or philosophy. I have never heard any of these women in my life say they do things which objectively seem "feminist" because it makes them feel empowered. I also have never heard my grandfathers or father say they consciously break gender stereotypes because they believe they are wrong or because they believe in empowering women. I do not want to attribute beliefs to them which are inaccurate and based on assumptions; I do not know why anyone in my family acts the way that they do. I simply find it fascinating that many of the women and men in my family, perhaps subconsciously, do not conform to traditional gender roles in a way that could be described as "feminist." Certainly, many of the gender roles that my family does subscribe to were socialized into them but what about the feminist ideas that they seemingly unknowingly follow? I highly doubt my grandmothers or mother studied feminism in school or read feminist theory, yet they exist in many ways that can be classified as feminist. Ultimately the question I am most curious about is how the decisions were made and lines were drawn regarding what traditional gender ideas these women were okay with and which ones they tossed out the window. Perhaps these were conscious decisions, perhaps they were fueled by necessity, or perhaps this is all simply one big coincidence.

MacKinnon: From Sexual Agency to Desire

After reading excerpts from Catherine MacKinnon’s works, I wonder: do we enjoy sexual agency? MacKinnon’s dominance framework suggests that women do not because their sexual agency is an illusion that furthers their subjugation within our patriarchal state. In other words, women’s sexual agency is a form of false consciousness that conceals how women’s sexuality within heterosexual relations benefits men.

I don’t wholly agree with MacKinnon, but I do agree with her milder proposition that sexual agency is constrained. Indeed, not only is sexual agency constrained along gender, sexual orientation, and erotic lines, it’s also constrained by numerous institutions, fields, and practices emanating from and operating within our patriarchal state. For example, until recently, the medical field constrained sexual agency by medicalizing certain sexual practices, including some fetishisms and BDSM. Yet, MacKinnon elides over how our patriarchal state may also constrain men’s sexual agency. Our justice system, for example, used to constrain men’s sexual agency by criminalizing same-sex sexual conduct among men through the selective application of sodomy laws. Thus, if MacKinnon is correct and heterosexuality buttresses our patriarchal state, then clearly gay cis-men do not enjoy the same degree of sexual agency that straight cis-men do. 

I do not agree, however, with MacKinnon’s implication that because women’s sexual agency is constrained women therefore lack sexual agency. Instead, all individuals face constraints within which they exercise their sexual agency. And, in turn, individuals use whatever sexual agency they possess to negotiate the boundaries of those constraints, which are effectively in flux. Take the protagonist Ana Steele in the movie Fifty Shades of Grey. At first, her sexual agency is constrained by her libido: her pronounced sexual attraction to Christian Grey, and her quest for sexual pleasure. This prompts her to coyly negotiate a detailed BDSM-contract with Grey that outlines the sexual practices he’s allowed to perform on her. And though neither character tendered consideration to seal the deal, Ana had a voice during negotiations: she rejected the use of tape during bondage play. As silly as the scene may be, it illustrates that Ana had some sexual agency even if patriarchy loomed in the background. But I am sure that MacKinnon knew that much, so there must be more to her argument of sexual agency than meets the eye.

I think MacKinnon’s work raises a more provocative question: is a woman’s sexual desire her own? Or, more generally, are our sexual desires our own? This is a more provocative question because desire, being psychological in nature, may precede and shape individuals’ sexual agency. Further, it is difficult to imagine sexual desire as existing outside what is socially and sexually intelligible, and thus socially and sexually possible. But as dominance theory implies, it is our patriarchal state that moderates what is intelligible. If this is so, then Ana Steele didn’t have bargaining power at the table. Instead, she was a slave to her patriarchally moderated desires. But couldn’t the same be said of Christian Grey?

The numerous questions and responses that MacKinnon’s structuralist analysis elicits confirm the value of her work. Does MacKinnon’s dominance theory explain gender relations? Only partly. Does her theory elide over how our patriarchal state also subjugates men? Yes. Nevertheless, MacKinnon’s dominance theory provides a nice segue into more nuanced analyses of gender, sexuality, and erotic practices. Indeed, MacKinnon’s suggestion that our patriarchal state delimits what is socially and sexually possible (for women), is reminiscent of Judith Butler’s “matrix of intelligibility,” which is what allows for (gender) identities to be socially viable.

Thank you MacKinnon for pushing me to question my sexual agency, and desires!