I've become so exhausted lately by people telling me I'm not really a feminist because I have a fairly traditional, hetero relationship. Or because I wear makeup and skirts and heels. Because I have a vintage jewelry fetish and I hope that when I decide to get married the proposal will include diamonds. Because I own the boxed set of every single season of Dawson's Creek. Because I love to cook and occasionally. I do it for my boyfriend. I get it people, I am traditionally feminine. You don't need to remind me. But why the fuck does that mean I can't be a feminist? How does it diminish my activism or my beliefs? But most importantly, how are these private elements of my life any of your business? I realize that through activism, I expose myself to a certain amount of criticism. However, I don't like the fact that other feminists feel that criticism should extend to my personal life. There's a reason why I strive to keep them separate.

It bothers me that people feel the need to ask questions like this in the first place. I'm not trying to say that the OP is wrong for asking. I'm saying that the people who pressured her into this corner where she feels like she needs to check off what is and isn't feminist in her life are assholes. End rant.

I chose to take my husband's name when I got married. I have been told this is an archaic sexist tradition. I took my husband's name by choice. He didn't push me to, he never thought about it. When I filed for the SSA name change, he told me, "you know I don't care, you don't have to change your name if you don't want to." But I did. My last name was my father's and I don't agree with what the last name represents to me, my father's beliefs. I like my husbands beliefs and what his name stands for to me. I'd rather be associated with my husband than my father. Not to say I don't love my father, its just a belief thing. I think feminism is about choice, just so that we don't feel obligated to take our husband's last names, or obligated to stay home with the kids, or obligated to have kids at all, or obligated to get married at all. Its all about if we want those things for ourselves. I'm sure men feel obligated to do things under an archaic system too. Obligated to buy dinner, or obligated to buy a really expensive ring. Men don't get a pricey gem at the onset of marriage. Some women don't want these things but some do. I think good men support feminism because it can take a heavy burden off them to feel the need to pay for love.

i don't really get the connection between waiting for your boyfriend to kiss you, and romance. You initiating your first shared kiss wouldn't have been romantic?

I think that Inasmuch as 'romance' still incorporates aspects of female docility and passivity, such as not initiating physical contact and thus relinquishing a small part of your autonomy in intimate situations, it is problematic. The very fact that you have any qualms about romance being anti-feminist and anti-women is maybe something you should look at more? People aren't going to judge you for being in an intimate relationship with someone - and isn't that more or less what romance is? Or is romance something more? For instance, do you believe romance is dependent on gender roles? It seems that gender roles do enter the popular conceptualisation of romance.. Can queer people not experience romance in the same way? And what would you call other forms of love and intimacy that people share, if you didn't broadly define those as romantic, and how would they differ from romance?

Romantic love is a pretty interesting topic, especially it's history and it's evolution as a recognised phenomenon in western society, it's definitely worth looking up. It is a social construct though, and constructed within the context of a patriarchal culture such as ours, you can fairly safely bet that there will be aspects of romance that function to maintain the relative social status of men and women.

This is terrific. Well done Professor Foxy.

Feminists struggled with this in the 70's and 80's and many said, "The equality didn't work and now I am divorced".

Equality is one thing while equity is another. The relationships that work the best in the lesbian and gay community have a top and bottom with one being the masculine and one being the feminine. OK, so there may be a better choice of words to use, yet I am not enough into the know to know what they are.

All I know is that there is nothing wrong with people being different. Sameness is the most boring and off putting thing I have found in my own choice of relationships. Differences on the other hand are attractive.

I'm not trying to be rude here, just pointing out a typo. She said "sexism and archaic traditions" whereas you quoted her as saying "sexist and anarchistic traditions." Kind of a big difference between antiquity and anarchy. :)

Ugh, I thought once it was over we'd stop hearing about Jessica's wedding. Yawn.

I'm a feminist who is also the girliest of girls and I like SOME traditional gender roles. I'm in a hetero relationship and I like my boyfriend to take the lead in bed, I like to cook (and cook for him), and yeah, I even like it that sometimes I "belong" to him. But that doesn't mean our relationship makes me un-feminist. My boyfriend respects me as the intelligent, capable woman I am. I own a business, have never been shy about speaking my mind, and don't take a back seat to anyone where it counts. The "traditional" feminine/masculine roles we might take on from time to time work for us. It doesn't make me un-feminist. It just makes me a woman who is enjoying her relationship the way she wants to enjoy it. If my boyfriend took advantage of those gender roles to pressure me into doing something I didn't want to, or to keep me from being a fully equal partner in our relationship, THAT would be un-feminist. But he doesn't. I pay my share, we decide things together, and he does his share of the housework.

These traditional gender roles or the things we traditionally think of as trappings of romantic love are not in and of themselves un-feminist. It's how you use that that defines them. Don't worry so much if "you're doing it right", worry that you're happy and feel fulfilled and comfortable in your relationship.

Feminism is absolutely about choice - but we need to keep evaluating what our choices are predicated upon and why we make a certain kind of choice versus another kind of choice.

I think that one can be romantic without adhering to gender roles. The best relationships I've seen are not, as one commenter said, based on having different roles based on assumptions of dominance and subordination, but are based on the desire for both people to be equally free in that relationship. That means they are free to be themselves, free to express themselves, free to have and give sexual pleasure etc...Romance does not have to be gendered, per se. I find it very romantic to give flowers to my partner (who is a man). I find it very romantic when he does small things for me. I find it romantic to initiate sex as I also find it romantic when he shows me he loves me and is sexually and emotionally attrated to me. I think that romance is what makes us feel loved, accepted, and "new" in our relationship, and that when both partners are showing each other these emotions in tangible and intangible ways that make sense to each partner's personality, then that is romantic.

I think that it IS important to have conversations with other feminists about what choices we are making and why or what feelings we have and why (i.e. Why do I fantasize about a man proposing to me when I really believe, deep down, that proposals are based on assumptions of inequality of the sexes? Why do I feel more beautiful when I wear makeup when I really believe that we as women have too much pressure to fit into an idealized norm of beauty and are thus objectified and made to feel "unpretty" when we are our natural selves?) I think that as a feminist and a woman-centered-woman, I accept whatever choices my friends ultimately make because we all have to choose our battles and find the way we can best live in the society in which we live. But, I still remain critical of my own feelings and choices when they contradict my desire for complete equality/freedom for all people in a society or if they contradict my desire to accept myself for who I am.

In all, I just want to thank the questioner for writing in about this, as she clearly wishes to remain critical and open-minded about her feelings, emotions, and choices, and seems to be seeking out advice and discussion more than defensive reactions.

I'm not quite on board with the whole "Being a feminist for me means I get to enjoy everything that symbolizes hetero-centrist, women as submissive second-class, etc. etc. without any qualms ever!" erm. So when women who are part of cultures that strictly limit their autonomy in favor of the men in their lives (fathers, husbands, brothers), as long as they state they chose that and are happy, it is feminist? I disagree with the premise that all choices, if identified as feminist by the one making the choice, are then inherently feminist. Which is not to say that nobody can make differing choices for me, the majority of feminists they meet, whatever, EVER nor that there is some Standard List of Feminist Choices that if you violate you lose your member card, but I think that critical examination of those choices is not "unfeminist" or mean or unnecessary. And sometimes biting the bullet and saying "you know what, I realize this is pretty symbolic of inequality, but I like it anyway" is okay. Personally, I would prefer that over "well I am a feminist and I choose/like it, therefore it is feminist too."

And I think we need to accept that because feminism and equality deal with fairly intimate subjects such as child-raising, relationships, appearance, careers, etc. that the personal is political. Intimate choices such as getting married are going to present challenges and questions to feminist or patriarchal ideals, and something like having a flashy proposal is amongst them.
Although A Romantic goes into how romance doesn't need to be guys doing stuff for girls, the examples utilized are not "I love seducing someone" or "I love flashy proposals, I want to do one" imply to me that that is exactly what they think romance is. The discussion does not go into how, perhaps, if attention-getting, expensive proposals are their thing, what would they think of planning one for their intended? But that isn't what makes them happy, it is being the passive recipient. Which I think goes more towards a "you know what, it might not be feminist, but I really like the idea of the guy spending a lot of time and effort to impress (the woman) me when announcing they want to get married" instead of declaring that because you are aware of feminism and like whatever, this is a feminist position. And like I said, that doesn't mean you have to turn in your feminist card.

This is a favorite topic of mine and I have no tolerance of feminists who don't allow other women to make their own choices.

Why are so many feminists all about gender expression, except for when it's a heterosexual, feminine-identified female?

Why do other feminists judge a woman for wearing heels/makeup/whatever, while they themselves are further politicizing female appearance and reiterating the importance of fashion in women's identity?

Why would you ever suggest that you know better what a woman should do than she herself, whether it be with her last name or her body?

We are all performing gender. All of us. It's as important and crucial to our identities as sexuality and religion; none of us should be shamed by others for ours.

I'm a feminist and I like the door being held open for me. I appreciate flowers and other ways of being courted that may seem old fashioned, but, are really just showing appreciation and adoration. I like charm, I miss living in the NOLA where charm is part of the culture and hospitality is just a natural part of everyday life.
As long as the felling is mutual, there is no harm in any of the things I like in a courtship/romance.

Respect is key and the number one attraction in a love interest. You can't have respect for others unless you have respect for yourself. I like confident, self respecting men.

If a man shows a controlling, jealous, obscene, sexist, offensive personality, it's an immediate end to our dating experience and there is little chance of friendship either.

If he is not pro- feminist, he wont last thru one date with me.
By pro-feminist I mean: supports equality, equal pay, equal opportunity, has respect for the female experience in all it's variations, is not a bigot, is not prejudiced, is not a sexist, is pro choice, etc.
and
yet
can be sexy enough for me to want to get his pants off.

I think what said applies to all genders and all sexual preferences. Respect is key.

I agree with the posters who say that not
all choices are feminist. We have to
realize that our choices don't exist in a
vacuum. What we do influences others. For
example, if you are a woman who likes to
"belong" to her husband, changed her last
name to match his, and cooks for him (and
he doesn't cook ever), what
kind of example do you set for any children
you may have? It won't matter to them that
you claim to be a feminist, they will see
what you do on a day to day basis and learn
gender roles from you. Actions speak louder
than words. We need to show people we are
feminists, not tell them.

Full disclosure: Although I did not take my
husband's last name, other actions of mine
are not feminist: I am encouraged to dress
"nicely" and wear makeup to work. However, I
don't believe these actions are feminist,
and I realize that my actions may make it
more difficult for other women to break
out of this patriarchical idea of what
women should look like. In other words, I
realize that I am upholding patriarchical
norms by wearing makeup and heels to work,
but that I am also helping to tear down
these norms by not changing my name to match
my husband's.

In other words, I think it is helpful to
discuss whether or not actions are feminist
or not, rather than if people are feminist
or not. Just to be clear: I am not attempting
to tell anyone what to do or claim that
any of the commenters aren't "feminist enough" I am merely saying we should be able to discuss
specific actions and whether or not these actions help
the movement or hinder it.

I think if we could keep in mind that what is feminist for one is not feminist for all then we might begin to combat the belief held by some that feminism is indoctrinating, not empowering. Still, if we go too far in this direction, we risk getting to the point that feminism stands for a bare minimum of mutually agreed upon principles.

In my own life, as I get older, I feel much less inclined to announce or advertise that my life decisions are feminist. I just do them and if they make an impact on others who notice, then so be it. That, to me, is the best way to lead by example.

Thanks for posting this question. I identify with The Romantic in that she is a romantic and likes to be seduced. I'm the same way.

I'm just getting into a new relationship and my partner is aware of my feminist views but I am still unaware of how to express them in bed. This column has helped.

Thanks, Prof Foxy.

I guess what bothers me is a lot of commentators on here who criticize posters for being traditionally feminine in wearing make-up and high heels are the same ones that would vehemently defend Muslim women's "choice" to wear the burqa. The commentators who say that wearing heels is tantamount to subjugating yourself to the patriarchy are prolly the same ones who would claim wearing a burqa can be a feminist choice.
I for one wear heels and even if I was a lesbian (I'm bi) I'd still wear heels..even if only women lived in the world.

"It is equally important that we do the same for our partners [...]"

IMHO this is the most important bit. Men like to be romanced as well. A world where it was ok to romance women but not romance men would be sexist.

I'd say give doing the romancing a try because a) doing it well can be a fun and rewarding experience, and b) it provides a cue to your partner that it is ok for him to do the same with you.

If we used all the time we spend criticizing women's choices for criticizing men's choices, there would be no more patriarchy.

"Where did the whole notion of sisterhood and solidarity go?"

I dunno. Maybe you should ask yourself and the other posters on here who are attacking me for wanting to wear heels that question. I think that you should be able to wear whatever you want. I think men should be able to wear whatever they want as well for that matter. I am a feminist who happens to be interested in fashion. My life doesn't begin and end with feminism. I'm a complete person with a multitude of interests. Some of those interests are unfeminist but I like to think that I make them my own.

I think that women who don't like to dress as I do, don't have to. But I'm not going to sacrifice feeling comfortable in my own skin to dress in a more gender-neutral way just so I can get a pat on the back from other feminists. I hate wearing pants because I find them restricting and too warm. I'm barely 5'2" so wearing heels means that I get to be involved in conversations with people of average height (men and women). And they don't hurt my feet. So when I want to go back to being stepped on by people who can't see me because I'm not in their line of vision, I'll let you know.

I would never dream of criticizing another woman for choosing a gender-neutral wardrobe. So I've gotta know, who has really forgotten about solidarity?

Belief in equal political and economic rights is SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT than whether a woman wears or does not wear makeup or embraces other aspects of "traditional" gender relationships. As long as you believe in a fair distribution of domestic labor and equal pay for an equal days work, you're a "good feminist" in my book -- who cares who gives you flowers.

That said, I do think we should all be more critical about high heels. Those things cripple your feet, y'all! A woman-wide strike on uncomfortable shoes would be awesome.

I just wanted to point out that if you attempt to define yourself within or around the terms of traditional female roles then you are still ruled by them. Make the first move if you want to or wait for him to go for it if you aren't up for it. Pick whichever one makes you comfortable and then be ok with it. Making the first move doesn't make you more or less of a feminist.

Anyone who faults a woman for shaving her legs/wearing dresses/wearing makeup because this is somehow feminine and champions her own decision not to do these things because they are NOT traditionally feminine is reinforcing a power dynamic that is detrimental to all people.

If you don't shave your legs because you don't want to and you don't care who else does or doesn't, fine. That's feminist. If you don't shave your legs and you think you're doing the "right" thing because you're fighting the patriarchy, what you're doing is reinforcing a patriarchal power dynamic by saying that the person without the shaved legs is more powerful/intelligent/right.

This thread seems to have devolved into a debate about name-taking and heel-wearing. It's kind of not the point of the question asked of Professor Foxy.

I think it's an important feminist motive to redefine romance within a context that keeps in mind the performance of gender (as Tara K pointed out), the social and historical legacies of sexism, and the capitalist and other structures constraining our choices. (I'm not a member of the "feminism is about choice" bandwagon because, as a sociologist, I don't think any choice is completely free.)

In my experience, I too am a die-hard romantic. I love romance. I'm such a sap for it. But I love to give and receive romance, usually a little more giving. I'm bisexual, and I've romanced (and been romanced by) boyfriends and girlfriends. Buying flowers, leaving love notes around, cooking a romantic dinner. These are all things I do. I also expect a level of respect and romance in return.

I think, to answer A Romantic's question, an act is romantic if it is done out of an expression of love or affection for the other person and not done because it is "supposed" to happen.

Perhaps this is the wrong venue for this comment/question, but it is something that has been on my mind throughout the time I was reading all of the comments. I guess I am questioning my 'feminism'.

I am a 31 year old female raised by a rootin' tootin' feminist. I have been with my bf for almost eleven years. We waited 10 years to move in together, and over the last couple of years we have talked about marriage (but never very seriously). Secretly, this bothers me. And not for all of the 'good' reasons my mother brings up (financial, medical, etc). My partner and I have a very stable and loving relationship, and I know we'll make it legal eventually. But part of me wants the big poufy ordeal... even while the other part of me recognizes the disturbing and damaging patriarchal connotations of a traditional 'wedding'. I often feel like just admitting some internal desire for a big traditional wedding turns off my more progressive friends and family... like it 'outs' me as a faux feminist. Does anyone else ever struggle with these kinds of things? Is it wrong to have this kind of internal struggle?

I don't know, I guess I am confused