You know, something that has been getting on my nerves lately is that it seems that every woman BUST magazine interviews these days won't call themselves a feminist.

I just read that Patti Smith interview last night, and when she was going on about her disappointment about having to be a gender, I was like, "hell yeah!" And then a question or two later, this. :-(

Sigh.

I've noticed this about Bust too, and it's really grinding my gears. It's making me not want to read it, especially when over-admired nutbags like Fergie (that might have been Jane mag) or Gwen do that whole "I'm not a feminist - I believe in equality for EVERYBODY," thing, and the reporter never calls them on their shit or even bothers to let them know that, hello, that's what feminism IS! FUCK.

I noticed it too, and it really bugs me. We need more women who say I am a feminist. Maybe they all just need to read Jessica's book.

Bjork has since gone on record as identifying more warmly with feminism: http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/bjork%20turns%20feminist

On a personal note, I saw her perform last month at Red Rocks and it was simply AMAZING. During "The Pleasure is All Mine" she did this marvelous thing where on the line "Women like us, we strengthen most," she pressed her hand to her chest then raised her arm and sort of pointed to us all. It was really powerful and totally a communication just for the women in the audience, which we got loud and clear.

(End of inarticulate fan-girl rambling.)

Huh. That's totally something I said last week when I read something about Jessica Alba saying, "I'm not a feminist or anything, BUT...". It's OK, Jessica. Guys will still think you're hot even if you go near the "F" word. :p

Ah, thanks for the link Bettieclem. I think her more recent interview in Bust did focus on how she now more identified with feminism and would *maybe* call herself a feminist. I believe the birth of her daughter caused her to look at the world differently. Like how would her daughter grow up and experience life as compared to her son's experiences?

This has been driving me crazy too - the one exception I can think of was the interview with the awesome and hilarious Amy Poehler. She is not afraid!

I wrote a paper about the frequent refusal of BUST cover girls to claim the word feminism two years ago for a feminist theory class. I agree with SoyMilkConspiracy; I want the women they interview to say it loud, say it proud, but I REALLY want BUST interviewers to call them on their shit. If I recall correctly, the interview with Susan Sarandon (I think it was fall of 05) did sort of call her out for claiming that she was a humanist rather than a feminist. The interviewer sort of said, but what you are describing IS feminism. Keep saying it, BUST ladies!

I actually just read that interview last night, and was pretty shocked myself - especially when she brought up men's rights, because she had a son and a daughter and was equally concerned for both their futures. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognize that women have it just an eensy bit harder than men in this world, and it isn't a betrayal of men to admit that we have to work an eensy bit harder on the behalf of women to balance things out.

As I woman who loves Feministing and other feminist sites, has a best friend (a man) who is a big F feminist but still doesn't call *herself* feminist (for a variety of reasons), I'm absolutely stunned (not surprised though - I get wanting to talk about it) by your focus on this. I get it, you don't like it, but is it really going to dampen your enthusiasm for someone because they make that statement?

I think it is somewhat analogous to my reaction when a really cool woman I met recently said "I consider myself a Democrat". I didn't turn away from here or file my friendship with her into the "acquaintance but not friend" category. I just told her why I am adamant about my not being called a Democrat (too far right for me).

What I hear you saying is that it doesn't matter what else a woman does, if she isn't self-identified as a feminist she's doing something wrong. What I want to know is...why? Is there just one true Way?

I really feel like it's not appropriate for them to refer to themselves as a feminist magazine and should just accept what they really are: a typical women's magazine that appeals to self identified feminists.

And it's not even very inclusive of all feminists either. Anybody ever been on the BUST boards? If you are a anti porn or a radical feminist, they rail you.

The other thing that really bothers me is that they don't seem to be very size inclusive, especially for a feminist magazine. Their fashion spreads always have the typical waifs. I don't even think they sell their t shirts beyond 2x and several of them only go to large - in American Apparel shirts at that, which is disgustingly and creepily sexist.

The only time in the last two years I can remember them having anything to do with "plus size" fashion is when Beth Ditto offered some fashion advice. And that is it as far as I know.

Has anyone else noticed their fatphobia?

I think the issue people have is that women may not identify as feminists, not because they believe and support the main ideas behind feminism but merely because they feel the label has bad connotations. Artists don't want it put on record because they buy into the idea of us being man haters, or they realize that many others believe that statement and don't feel like dealing with any negative backlash. When artists deny being feminist in a magazine definitely influenced by feminism it is almost a slap in the face for it's readers

I used to intern at BUST, and although I say bring on any critiques, I did just want to add my experience with your question about their fatphobio. I worked on their summer 2006 issue and the fashion spread, where they did go to lengths to make sure they had women of all sizes modeling swimsuits. They had three models for the shoot, and while one was traditionally "skinny" I wouldn't say she had a typical model figure. The other women were both what some would call "plus size."

lavalady,

Could you elaborate on your reasons for not identifying as a feminist? I'm honestly curious.

I agree with Olive that if someone doesn't call themselves a feminist we shouldn't dismiss them. However, I think that Bust unfairly targets feminist women by implying to be a feminist magazine, though it rarely delivers good feminist messages. As has been discussed, interviewers rarely call out these F-phobic women and I agree with MirandaJay that the models are very homogenous and skinny. Plus the fashions they advertise aren't even remotely affordable. Bust seems to be almost exclusively targeted towards white, wealthy, and especially *straight* women.

A couple issues ago Bust encouraged women to pay for their summer travel by giving blowjobs and "exploiting" poorer countries. After that issue, I do not plan on renewing my subscription.

I appreciate Bust for its girl-power and bad-ass women, but it lacks political conviction. It has a lot potential to show that feminism can be fun--but unfortunately it sells out in the process.

I have some mixed feelings about Bust. I place it firmly in the category of fluffy "women's mag," one that doesn't make me feel quite as dirty as, say, Marie Claire or Glamour.

And I completely agree, MirandaJay. I don't have any back-issues on hand so I can't say for sure, but it's my recollection that in the past they've done a better job including women of all sizes in the fashion spreads. That said, size-positivity may permeate the rest of the magazine in the shorter articles (about fat-positive burlesque troops and such), but when it comes time to feature a *cool* woman -- a starlet, or for their one-page "describe what you're wearing" fashion feature -- those women are almost universally skinny. Same goes for covergirls.

Not to say I don't look forward to Bust in my mailbox every few months. But I think a few small fixes would really greatly improve the magazine and make it more feminist.

I can see how not calling yourself feminist can be frustrating, when someone tries to define humanism as being "equally concerned about men as women." If I had to sum up a certain portion of my philosophy, humanism might fit me better than feminism, but not in the distorted way Patti Smith does (as paraphrased by evil_olive above).

Humanism may sound more wishy washy on the surface, or maybe the problem is humanism doesn't have a clear front, a clear way of identifying itself which people can latch on to and fight for. What it actually means is fighting for any kind of injustice, anything where a person is wronged by another. For instance, Martin Luther King fought against racial injustice at the beginning, but within a few years enlarged his focus more explicitly against all injustice, e.g. against white people in poverty, and against imperialist foreign policy.

Calling yourself a humanist can actually be more meaningful to more people. It doesn't relieve you from fighting for women's rights. In fact, it may even strengthen your duty to women, by basing it on a clear and fundamental right to dignity and justice that all people have. A humanist may spend a lot of time fighting feminist causes, because that's where the injustice lies. But the fundamental basis for being a humanist derives from a larger, more universal motivation.

At least, that's the way I can see this. This doesn't get Patti off the hook for not standing up for women. I just know people who are frustrated with the narrow focus of some people fighting against racial discrimination, when broader philosophies like Martin Luther King's could accomplish so much more by bringing every man, woman, and child into solidarity against the very same injustices, and making the movement universal and practically unstoppable.

Just a middle class white guy's two cents.

lavalady,
The reason this is so frustring is that the word 'feminist' has become a dirty word in modern (American) society. About a year ago I started seriously identifiying as a feminist. This did not fundamentally change who I was; I just came to the conclusion that a lot of my thoughts matched feminist theory. When I would identify myself publically as a feminist, I would get weird looks, stupid comments (Do you shave your pits? So you hate men?) and one of my male friends even said that my being a feminist was 'so cute'. Feminism has taken a beating over the years. There is a very incorrect sterotype of what a feminist is and people (women and men) are afraid to identify as a feminist because of the negative connotations. The term 'feminazi' gets thrown around an awful lot. A stigma has been placed on the word to the point where now feminist=bad.

And what is the sterotype of the feminist? A bull dyke lesbian (not that there's anything wrong with that) with hairy legs and armpits, who hates men and wants to see them as second class citizens. Oh and she just needs a good f**k to straighten her out.

When the definition of part of your identity has taken on such negative connotations, it gets a bit frustrating watching people back away from the word and not even attempt to set the definition straight. People don't want to be associated with feminism, even when their humanist ideals of equality match feminist ideals of equality.

"This has been driving me crazy too - the one exception I can think of was the interview with the awesome and hilarious Amy Poehler. She is not afraid!" - jennifer

Amy Poehler could set my apartment on fire and I would still love her for her Nancy Grace skits.

I was a bit sad when I let my BUST sub lapse, but not anymore. I can't give money to a feminist mag that can't find feminists to feature.

Which of course means I have more money to throw at Bitch!

She's always been like that. I wouldn't look to musicians for intellectual chops. Some have them, but Patti Smith is someone who's much more touchy-feely.

"A couple issues ago Bust encouraged women to pay for their summer travel by giving blowjobs and "exploiting" poorer countries. After that issue, I do not plan on renewing my subscription."

Is this true? I read Bust pretty often and don't remember this. What issue was it? Was it a joke?

I think the travel thing was in the last issue of Bust (not the current one with Chloe Sevigny on the cover). It seemed to walk a real fine line between joking and not. It focused a lot more on looking for potential sex partners while traveling abroad.

That Amy Poehler interview was great. I think I actually saved that issue because of it.

I read that issue and it was a very fine line. I thought that they were joking, but it made me very uncomfortable. They published several angry letters about it, and included and editor's note saying that they were sorry they had offended their readers, and that it WAS in fact meant to be a joke. The article after that one, actually, about women engaging in sex-tourism, made me a lot more uncomfortable. I'm not sure what was up with that issue.

Yeah, between the travel article, and the one about women going on sex tours (like it's empowering because women are the exploiters of men in less developed countries!), I've been disappointed in BUST recently. Even Bitch called them out in the last issue.

They still have some stuff I love, and I'd hate to cancel my subscription... sounds like it's time for me to write a letter and tell them so.

In her Bust interview, Lily Allen said, essentially, that she had not considered herself a feminist, but now she does. She explained that this is a result of her music career. It brought to her attention the barriers women face in the music world and now that she has some career success, she feels responsible to be a positive example for girls and young women.

One more reason I heart Lily Allen.

Maybe Bust ought to be interviewing some feminists. Just a thought. I agree it is uber-fluffy.

Bad case of semantic inertia here. Whether you shoot the messenger or not, the word "feminism" no longer means "equality for everyone", having been redefined by the most potent redefiner of all: the usus. "Feminism" now means "politicised group egoism of women" and I am afraid you will not be able to do very much about it.

This semantic change parallels the one that happened to the term "nationalism". Initially (in the 19th century) it just meant national independence movements, but then two occurences took place: 1) most of the nations that struggled for independence when the word was coined managed to gain independence, so the original meaning was no longer that much relevant, and 2) many "nationalist" organizations morphed toward policies of national separatism and sentiments of chauvinism and ethnic hatred, creating new burning problems that needed a name. So, the word "nationalism" was reused to mean what it still means today.

The word "feminism" is undergoing a similar semantic drift before our very eyes. Originally it used to mean movements for women's liberation and gender equality, but now the general public of language users considers these goals achieved (occurence 1), AND many women's lib organizations have morphed toward aggresive identity politics and sentiments of misandry and female entitlement, creating new burning problems for the society (occurence 2). The word "feminism" is currently being reused to name the new phenomenon, and we well soon be referring to the early feminists by long and descriptive terms such as "women's liberation movements of the 20th century".

As far as I know, Patti Smith isn't a feminist. She gave up her career for her husband and moved to the midwest with him. I've heard that he was quite abusive too. She only restarted her career once he'd died. Kind of sad, really.

Originally it used to mean movements for women's liberation and gender equality, but now the general public of language users considers these goals achieved (occurence 1)

So I guess we have to make it clear that that is not true, huh?

I'm going to leave your second observation to other posters.

The official definition of feminism will not easily change because too many categories & movements are already tied to the original meaning -- ecofeminism, feminist theory, feminist literature, feminist theology, etc. Alternate definitions are possible, which is what happens if you look up the word "nationalism" -- multiple meanings are listed, but one does not replace the other. There are also special slang dictionaries that attribute alternate meanings to words, and this is probably where negative connations surrounding feminism belong. Slang is usually specific to a particular time and place, and we happen to be living in a time of intense post-2nd wave feminism bashing. But to state that the actual definition of feminism has now changed implies that no one in the world cares about the true definition of feminism, or uses it as such. Which is obviously not the case, since there are many, many people out there, including those on this site, who use and understand the term based on its traditional meaning. Just not Patti Smith, apparently.

its funny, you can actually observe bust becoming less and less feminist each issue. funny as in "something funny is going on here" not "funny, ha ha". it seemed to accelerate alot after the one editor left, and then they started publishing more frequently, and now it seems like the bastard lovechild of jane and nylon with a little bit of rah rah empowerment tossed in, but not nearly enough.

sort of like when teen magazines publisher bought sassy. it pretended to still be what it was, except it wasnt at all.

and yeah, from what i understand patti smith never identified as a feminist, alot of the older female rock artists didnt. i think maybe back in the days before myspace and too that 90s indie rock explosion, it might have been scarier to place a polarizing label on yourself, if you wanted to support youself as an artist in a (still) really male identified community like rock n roll. its no excuse for her still refusing to identify as a feminist tho.

and shit like this "The word "Originally it used to mean movements for women's liberation and gender equality, but now the general public of language users considers these goals achieved (occurence 1), AND many women's lib organizations have morphed toward aggresive identity politics and sentiments of misandry and female entitlement, creating new burning problems for the society (occurence 2)." is EXACTLY why more women need to publicly identify as feminists. becos the general public is dead wrong if they think weve achieved full equality, and even moreso wrong if they think the goal of feminist groups is misandry and female entitlement unless by female entitlement you mean the belief we are entitled to be treated as human.

I remember buying my first issue of Bust magazine years ago, the one with Gloria Steinem on the cover. I was in high school then & it totally changed my life. Seeing it's decline has been painful.
It's totally turned into a hipster rag for the trust-fund set. From now on, I'm sticking to Bitch & only buying Bust if they have someone on the cover that I'm interested in.
What killed me was the Gwen Stefani interview. It was conducted by a drooling fangirl who's questions mostly consisted of cooing over whatever Gwen's baby is named.
I'd love to have some kind of letter writing campaign about this--I wrote a letter & got no response. If a hella lot of us wrote in our concerns at once, we could prolly get our problems addressed. Is anyone else interested?
OT: I HATE when people say, "I'm not a feminist, I'm a humanist." This is the definition of humanist: 1. a person having a strong interest in or concern for human welfare, values, and dignity. Believing in gender equality can be included in humanism, but it's not some alternative to feminism. Feminism believes in equality for the sexes and acknowledges that patriarchy hurts men as well as women. There are several books addressing patriarchy's effects on men.

Also, Debbie Stoller's knitting & crocheting books are FULL of mistakes. Who the heck edited them?

I have some mixed feelings about Bust. I place it firmly in the category of fluffy "women's mag," one that doesn't make me feel quite as dirty as, say, Marie Claire or Glamour.

Glamour has covered a lot of material far from "fluffy" or "dirty" lately.

I haven't read the Smith interview, but considering her past, I would hardly think she'd be at all concerned about appearing to be a man hater. Because of this, I'd imagine her humanism reasoning is probably sincere.

Bust, like any publication, needs to generate cash, so those of us working in media can pay our rents and perhaps get our teeth fixed once in a while. Maybe they've found a business model that works for them.

"Fluffy" publications and even "lad mags" have a lot of women not unlike many of the people posting here on their staffs.

I'd take part in a letter-writing campaign, Moxie.

TweedleDee - thanks for sharing, that's good to know they were thinking about it. However, their fat inclusiveness, like Ann mentioned, stops at a certain point.

I also remember in their "sex advice" section where they had information about how to have sex if you are fat, which really weirded me out. Why would they think fat women need help figuring out how to have sex? They actually said "many fat people like frottage" and stated it as a fact! Fat people like frottage? Who are they telling this to?

It seemed like the article was not meant for me, a fat woman, but rather for all the cool, sex postive girls out there. It seemed more exploitive than inclusive.

Although I admit that could just be my personal bias against them, since they actually can do not right in my eyes.

I feel like BUST in general is pretty creepy and weird. Their obsession with knitting, the golden girls and porn stars, weird sex features that pose as sex positivity (like the female sex tourism piece), hardly ever featuring feminists on their cover and a million other things like shilling me 120 dollar adidas, who use sweatshops!

I agree with everyone else, drop your subscription to BUST, read their lip gloss reviews in the shops and support Bitch and Ms.!

I must step in & defend knitting & The Golden Girls. Two awesome things! Knitting gets better while watching The Golden Girls.

i just want to say how disappointed I was with that interview, but at the interviewer and the editing, and not Patti. You interview a revolutionary like Patti Smith and what do you say?
Bust: OMG you're like so cool and nontraditional and stuff and like OMG you like dressed sexy and stuff - can you tell us about that?
And then out of all the poignant things she had to say, you make a pull quote about her fashion. And nothing against Cloe, but the cover should have been Patti's.

I appreciate what Patti had to say about humanism. Although I identify as a feminist, I think she's earned the right to say what she did. It isn't in the same tone of the recent generation's "I'm not a feminist but" - it is coming from a seasoned, respectable woman who obviously has done some analysis on the subject and decided humanism is a better fit for her identity.

Oh yeah, how about the exclusively-skinny swimsuit models in that issue? bah.

Bust is disappointing me as of late... It is turning more and more into a typical women's magazine.

This may have been said (if so, sorry), but Bitch totally calls Bust out (about the travel blurb) in their new issue. I was a little surprised, but I love Bitch.