It’s not just the writers that provide news. What I find more telling about the temperature of mainstream feminism and how far (or not) we have come, is the comment section. Comments can range from supportive and affirming to downright knee-slapping hilarious for its ridiculousness.
Right now, there is a post that I genuinely support and am eager to read how others are reacting. As a contributing writer and editor at make/shift magazine, I always feel a thrill when a significant article, like Heather Bowlan’s Power to the Parents, is picked up by another outlet, like Utne.
And then there’s more thrill when it’s mentioned in the feminist blogosphere.
My curiosity set in, though, when NO comments were made in the post. None. Not even a “thanks for posting the link,” or “I disagree because collective childcare is _____ ” kind of comment.
Or, is it no interest?
What does that say about feminist readers? Or is it just Feministe readers? What does it say that when feminist sites cover news about abortion signs or Planned Parenthood, media goes crazy and the readers respond. But when an article reports of a much needed service in the activist circles, the voices of support or even of mild inquiry are nowhere to be found. When the subject is redefining the family and broadening inclusion in the “movement,” why is there an echo in the room? For all of the cries of “liberal” and “progressive” readers, where is the interest in the news when it reports a piece of information that actually DOES something to make a difference in the lives of women?
Is there no reaction to this amazing effort by China Martens and others who work to try and include children in the movement for justice and peace?
Or is this more telling about the disinterest the capital *F feministers have when it comes to women who are not white, heterosexual, partnered, and without dependents of any kind? What does a “no comments” section mean about the vested interest in a truly pro-life (non-political term usage here), pro-women, pro-family effort?