Grassroots: Awhaa for who for whaa?

Yeah. So, last month, i went out to New Brunswick, NJ to meet up with the unstoppable Mary S-R for a book talk given by Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards, the authors of Manifesta. i kinda picked through Manifesta, finding it problematic in some of the "well, yeah, but how is this gonna actually be accomplished" areas, but intriguing in its conversational, light hearted approach and attention to some important ideas. Overall, if body positionings are the preferred method of review, i woulda given that book a shrug.

Now, the duo were out promoting their new book Grassroots: A Field Guide for Feminist Activists. Mary and i went. And wow, did that talk piss the shit outta me. i won't even say what sort of non-pristine body gestures i would give as this book's review. i left incensed. in-CENSED! Steam billowed from my ears, i was so irritated. i was angry. i was an angry woman.

They were talking the next week at a bookstore down the street from me in Manhattan, so i decided to let things settle and process, and go again. i hate the idea of second/third wave rifts. Wanted to try again, and see if maybe i misunderstood, maybe i was just cold of heart, and needed time to open up to this better way of thinking about this cherished area. Maybe this time, it would be different, it would be better. So, i went. And, well. Nope. i have a page of rabid, angry notes from this one -- much, i am guessing, like the notes you find yourself with after a State of the Nation address from Geeeyyeeeehhhaaaaa-eorge. Wow did they make me angry.

i asked questions both times -- don't remember the first, but in the second, i introduced myself as a grassroots, feminist, activist of some form, and told em i was confused by their understanding of grassroots activism. Asked em how they felt what they were discussing could be achieved with individual, non-collaborative efforts, and without attention to overarching cultural insitutions or structures. Their answers infuriated me even more. One of the author's answers more than the other. i don't want to pull any low-blows here, but she is a dingbat. A ding-bat. A dangerous one, too.

Interestingly, Mary P and i were the only one asking kinda "huh? whaa?"-like questions at either event. i was the only one at the second -- and this was pretty startling in the formerly feminist and now way progressive bookstore the reading was held in on the LES. Ah, another idealized liberal bastion of thought crashes to reality. Another hero falls. We are what we want to become. Actually, those who knew better prolly just stayed away.

So, anyway, i realized before the second talk that one of the reasons why this was getting to me so much was because the title of their book contained words that are almost religion to me: Grassroots. Feminism. Activist. And, in their hands, under their "I'm ok, you're ok" "Hey, yeah! Anything goes!" "Oh, what the hell, we'll call you a feminist too!" me-based useage of these terms to include comments like "Want to make social change? Leave your copy of Bust magazine at the doctor's office waiting room next time you go!" (giggle) felt like something very akin to cultural appropriation. (ok. there was no giggle. and giggling hardly deserves such maligning by association.) This is totally not what bell hooks meant in writing Feminism is for Everybody.

But that's right. Cultural appropriation. These authors. Cultural appropriators. i stand by it.

This book is another example of how Robert' Putnam's Bowling Alone has proven prophetic: within this culture, we are moving quickly away from the powerful confines of the group to our own decidedly individual endeavors. Have you read that book? It's a goodun. (...ahem) With the loss of both the collective power and the bridging of othernesses that occurs in unions, special interest groups, and communities, this idea of mass surburban-like herding in of individuals is scary enough in thinking quality of life and political ramifications (think big, ol, forever adamently bowling alone Texas). And, oh. The poor bowling leagues! When it comes to the ripple effect this momentum has on activism as a whole, it is equally terrifying. Fight injustice by doing your own thing! Follow your own passions and it will all be ok! And it will! You have the resources to get by doing what you want to do. i mean, what needs to be done beyond that? And, of course, you can call on your rich friends' daddies to donate supplies and grub from their publically traded businesses when yer in a pinch and want to throw some fun fundraising functions! The chickens have come home to roost. And wow are they ugly, them thar chicks.

Oh, and that last part -- the friends' daddies -- that was actually mentioned. The whole money thing loomed large in both talks. It came up in things like that, another time when one of the authors mentioned how she got support for one event she was throwing by "just calling all of her friends who had Saabs, and asking them if they or their parents could donate something," and in a lovely little discussion the one that angers me so held in both sessions about how they were not sure they wanted to call it "activism," and how they thought that "service," or maybe "charity," might be more appropriate. At all of these times, I realized that they were not talking to me. This book was not written for me, or my kind of people -- us non-daddied, non-family-luxury-vehicled, non-Saabed common folk who had volunteered in soup kitchens and homeless centers but had never done a day of "charity" in our lives. Still. These were meaningful, universal terms they were using. My meaningful, universal terms. Emma Goldman's and Mary Lee Sargent's and Margaret Sanger's and Bella Abzug's and GirlZone's and Grrr Crist's universal terms. Grassroots feminist fucking activist. This means something specific. And it does NOT mean what this stupid field guide says it means. They bastardize these words, and apoliticise them, wring the life out of them, and make them masterbatorial, presenting them to people to take and fit cleanly into their lives and say: "Oh, what a little powerhouse i am! I went to that girls' basketball game at the high school last week (well, the first quarter, really. After that, i had my mani/pedi i needed to jet to!). But i went to watch the girls! I am a grassroots feminist activist! I am doing my part. I am doing enough. I am making some changes. Yes! Here we go, girls!" Bullshit.

Ok. You might think i'm being harsh here, but here's the thing: While many of the ideas they raise are actually pretty durned powerful in their own right as individually feminist, progressive, or even grassroots efforts, they are disturbing when called "grassroots feminist activism." Goikng to the hs girls' game is awesome. But it is NOT grassroots feminist activism. This is something that takes thought about others, about institutions and systems, about culture, about change. After running a passion-driven, efficient, beautiful, powerful, NEEDED, grassroots feminist activism endeavor for eight years, and failing repeatedly and horribly in sustaining its existence by both not having or realizing the "importance" of networks of rich daddies to ongoing sustainability, and by continued snubbing for funding and support from the existing anti-feminist, anti-grassroots, anti-activist incestuous social service systems of corporate suited so-called-"community" boards that control the purse strings and the access routes in the conservative heartland, I feel more than simple anger in hearing the casual dismissal of this important institutional reality in explaining these terms to those who sincerely want to take part in social justice -- particularly when it comes in the form of arrogant "field guides" that purport to tell you how to do this for your communities, but instead have you do it all in feel-good isolation. But it's ok! Just do what you want! You'll be doing your part, and then some! Whaat?!!

It's like brainwashing, you know? Like some kinda bad B-grade movie we're in where the fascist government recruits body-morphing aliens to come down to earth disguised as firecracker comedians to wipe any trace of comendy off the planet. The aliens write a radical, accessible new comedy manual that all of the kids want to read (because they're tired of them and their classmates not being funny, and really want change to make things better!) and go on nation-wide book tours to promote the best-seller. There, they gain the trust of all people in attendance at all their events (cause they can body morph and just generally seem appealing to everyone in their own way -- wholesome anti-choice mothers, tough bisexual city girls, rural abortion clinic supportive optimists, slutty outsider individualist bikers... they got em all covered in the morph), then, afterwards, end up showing up at the people's homes, being invited in as honored guests, and devouring every audience member who came out to hear them, along with their families and all of the people in their communities. And all of their ancestors. And then they take their new positions in the government which presides over a world in which nobody is ever funny again, and nobody remains who remembers what it was ever like to be funny. Yeah.

In GirlZone, we were all idiots. Well intentioned, hard working, idealistic, know-nothing-about-how-things-work-in-the-world idiots trying to do grassroots feminist activism. And it was beautiful. And efforts that idealistic and good at heart should exist. They need to exist. They're the ones that need flourish. But to do so, the structures that do not want them to fit in and that kill off their ability to survive need to be called out. THEY NEED TO BE CALLED OUT. They need to be acknowledged, and recognized as unsupportive of our goals, they need to be continually challenged, then need to feel no ease that we give them when we are complicit, and leave them out of the discussion on our work and our efforts. To quote Ms. Abzug "The establishment is made up of little men, very frightened." Men aren't the problem. Men are lovely, for the most part. But the structures run by the establishment that like things to remain the same need to be examined and questioned if real, sustainable, meaningful grassroots change is to happen. "It's not about simply mainstreaming women. It's not about women joining the polluted stream. It's about cleaning the stream, changing stagnant pools into fresh, flowing waters. " This needs to happen for this type of breezy work to be able to someday make any kind of real difference. Otherwise, its just ignoring other's oppression in your own bliss, which is not feminist or grassroots. It's an affront to me now to hear this left out by those who know the importance.

And they wonder why the second wave has, uh, problems with the third (not that this is any example of third wave feminism, or any poster child of anything at all.)

Grassroots feminist activism, BY DEFINITION, needs to go beyond the "now" and "we can do it, so we will, and we'll be ok!" naivte to look at sustainability and the felling the structures that keep naivte like this called this, rather than being seen as just good, clear, powerful thinking.

i felt that the publisher should recall all of these books, and re-release them under the name: "Grassroots: Some suggestions to feel-good, girl-power efforts for the slightly guilty trust fund sect who have resources and backing and networks in place to support their own passionate pursuits and random proclivities, and who are not impeded by or concerned with the little people who do not." As a subtitle, they can have: Hey there, Muffy! Don't give up your SUV; Make true change and get an IUD! ('cause birth control = grassroots feminist activism! lol!) Could you pull some strings to get this started, perhaps? Worth asking.

Publisher's Weekly likened feminism to punk rock's diy philospohy in its review of this book. i agree that, in some powerful ways, feminism is like punk. But i do not in any way appreciate the linking of punk rock's diy with this work cause it's nothing the same. And, listen here, sista loves:
It is NOT punk rock to be wishy washy in stating what you claim to believe in order to make everyone happy and feel comfortable fitting in.
It is NOT punk rock to bely the histories that have got you to the place you have the power to speak from.
It is NOT punk rock to not think outside of your own small, self-absorbed world.
It is NOT punk rock to keep it all to yourself.
And it is NOT punk rock to stay giddily content by choosing to not question the powers that be who you may choose to believe do not fuck with you, but who you know fuck with others.

Make no mistakes about it, this book is NOT punk rock. Rather, it is the essence of Hot Topic, punk rock's appropriation outlet boutique -- you know, the one in "the mall." Like Hot Topic, Grassroots is sexy, substanceless window dressing for the young'uns and richie wanna-bes charged with just the right amount of cutural credo to make the user look valid, worldy, hip, and informed, yet designed primarily to fit current conservative trends and make blending in to the unthinking fashionista masses painless and fast-foodish in accessiblity, while, all along, laying seige to progressive history pop-culture style by forsaking of its connection to anything political. Yep. If you got the bucks, it's all yers, sweetheart.

i gots lotsa random thoughts written down in deeply pressed pen on numerous papers scattered about on this. am gonna write an article on it all. might needta have a timeline. and needta get down thoughts. also needta be less snarky. needta, needta, needta. more to come. sorry to be so longwinded. sheesh.