Nash Grier, Feminism, and a Parent and Daughter's Response.

If you live in North America and have a teenage daughter, you will mostly likely have heard of Nash Grier. Nash is a 'Vine' star, YouTuber, and Twitterer with a sense of importance that vastly surpasses his limited comedic ability. Frankly, the only honest claim to any sort of merit he has (and that itself is unearned), are his "dazzling blue eyes," as more than one teenager puts it.

A few weeks ago, this 16 year old, along with two of his pals (also YouTube famous), posted a video entitled, “What guys look for in girls,” to a following of close to 5 million fans (99% female).
While seated together all comfy on the couch, the three proceeded to spend the next 9 plus minutes telling impressionable girls what boys (meaning them), like in girls. Each buffoon had the gall to express his sexist, misogynistic opinion. Insulting the majority of girls, they attempted to fit the female exuberance and plentitude into their sickening, hollywood-inspired concept of what a girl should be.

According to these foolish boys, in order for them to find a girl attractive,  the girl needs to, "get a personality," "be natural," "be spontaneous," "don’t be too loud and obnoxious," "be funny,"  "know how to be quiet."

Do you have a bucket at the ready? You’ll need it if you plan to make it through to the end of the video..
"Entertain me." That is what Nash said.
That. Is. What. Nash. Said.
These privileged, white males are looking for girls who can challenge them; who can “improve them," "I like girls that will stay on top of you," "girls that make you a better you,"... "girls that have talent." "It's cool to be captain of the cheer team," "if the girls have their own ambitions  they are going somewhere," according to these visionaries.

"Shave!' they command your daughters. "Get rid of your peach fuzz, get rid of your armpit hair (and I’m thinking somewhere else too—one woman in her 30s told me that growing up, her friends and herself believed that they needed to look like porn stars with shaved public hair in order to be "hot," and therefore "acceptable to the male gaze.").

"Be yourself," they conclude, their thumbs up—after spending the entire video telling girls that they need to be something else in order to please their trivial fantasies.

Naturally, girls of colour need not apply.

The depth of contempt these males display towards any female who doesn't fit their criteria for attractiveness is breathtaking.
It would be laughable, easily dismissible, except Nash has close to 5 million girl fans. Did I already say that?

So.. if your daughter still likes them, looks like you might have a problem..the problem of internalized misogyny.

Parents, teach your children well.

If you have sons, it is crucial that you teach them girls are not put on the earth to serve them. Girls are not here for their pleasure.  They will not entertain.
Parents with daughters: Girls are individuals who are not here to please nor cater to the male gaze. They are not here to ‘improve’ your sons.

I am fortunate to have daughters who are not hoodwinked or diminished by such arrogance.
My youngest called this video to my attention. When she showed us the video—myself and her older sisters—as well as the responses,  one daughter wanted to show her "spontaneity" in more than one way, (like offering them a knuckle sandwich).
The senior, a long time social justice activist, was able to add a deeper perspective to the entire conversation—explaining to us that though many of the responses to the video were justified in their outrage, indeed this was still a ""My First Feminism" type thing, where the basic acquired knowledge of a liberal feminist would suffice in a response."

She helpfully pointed out that in her more advanced social justice circles, because this type of display is such a really shallow, surface expression of patriarchy, "there generally wasn't a lot to do, beyond criticizing their entitlement and body-shaming."

Here's how she put it:

"It's babysteps. Everyone has an entrance point when it comes to being a feminist. The most common is the patriarchal gaze, which is on women from the moment we are born (before we are born!). How we are expected to present, being told to look a certain way for the sake of boys and men, being told to smile, being told that we can't dress a certain way because it's too slutty or too matronly or whatever."

A less mature feminism doesn't necessarily realize the correlation between sexism and other forms of oppression. 

"It is usually completely ignorant to the way in which the beauty standard is particularly harmful to women of colour, trans women, women with disabilities, etc. I went through that phase two years ago. That was when I thought you could only really devote yourself to one cause because I didn't understand intersectionality. The gaze is also cissexist, because it intrinsically links gender identity with assigned sex! Which, again, is something that a lot of cisgender feminists (especially ones who are new to the movement) don't understand!"Where ever you are along the feminist path, the way in which you physically present yourself does not determine your worth: Your value is not defined by whether boys like you.

Awesome!

Feminism and Unschooling

Ever had people ask you, "How can you be a feminist and stay home all the time?"
 I have. Here is an interview I did with Becky Ellis in March 2008 for the Briarpatch Magazine.
What do you think the public perception is of homeschoolers, in regard to women and family structure? 
The response I often get from people is"Wow! you're brave!" This can mean that they genuinely think "I admire you. I wish I could do that."  This response, I think, is derived from an awareness of the negative aspects of school, it's not necessarily coming from a place that honours authentic learning- learning that honours the passionate interests of the leaner.
Or the response might mean, "You must be crazy; or stupid."  Seriously,  I actually had a guy say that to me.
Then they're thinking "Why the sacrifice lady?  Why would someone actually want to hang out with their kids for such a large hunk of the day?  Weird. Give up your freedom and your chance at a career?"
They forget that there are many ways to have a full and satisfying life. That children can be a significant part of that satisfying life.
 From a feminist point of view, do you feel that homeschooling provides benefits to mothers and/or children? Please explain:
If feminists care about a good future for women then looking at institutions that oppress and degrade women and children ought to extend into looking at the places where some of these have their beginnings; namely the school.
If, as a facilitator of your child's education you're modelling self-directedness and initiative to your child, and if you are encouraging your child's curiosity, inquisitiveness and questioning of all that they see, then I think you can raise some pretty tough minded feminist children -  female or male.
From a feminist point of view, do you feel that homeschooling provides any challenges for feminist mothers or to feminism?
The challenge for many women who have taken this route is that often the family has to live on less-money, as often they are full time at homeschooling or working part time hours (often from the home). In our society where worth (including self worth)  is measured by how much money you make you can see that homeschooling poses a problem.
Also if you are at home you tend to be making more messes and those messes need to be cleaned up. Who cleans them? The woman. Sadly, doing chores still does not inspire admiration. So you certainly don't get an overabundance of positive strokes.
 Is there tension within the homeschooling movement between feminist homeschoolers and more conservative homeschooling families? How do these manifest?
I don't know. I tend to have my own group of people my family and I do things with and they tend to be more of the unschooly type. I think the same can be said about conservative homeschoolers. So there is a fairly distinct divide, two largely separate spheres of influence driven largely, I'd venture, by isolationist and/or ideological parents, rather than the children.
Have you received (or heard of) critcisms from non-homeschooling feminist or other progressives about homeschooling? What are they and how did you respond? 
 I have heard this criticism: that the idea that it is an unfair situation since not ALL families can benefit from this kind of education (either they are economically disadvantaged, or there is illness, or less educated, etc), so why should only some?
The concern is that it is only an elite that can do this - and where is the social equality in that?  But I respond "it's like saying free people shouldn't have helped those escaping from slavery because not every enslaved person could be helped."  That makes no sense at all!
Please share any other thoughts, ideas, and experiences: 
Homeschooling or unschooling are just one way of getting educated, there's a lot of choice out there. It's great to have many alternatives available because we all learn differently and at various stages of our lives we might need a different approach. So that flexibility is great to have in the way culture approaches learning.
What I like best about unschooling is that my kids really have the freedom and the time to engage in meaningful ( to them) learning. For example, my nine year old has just come up to me asking me to help her with a campaign to alert residents of our town about the plight of species facing extinction due to climate change. They are curious and confident and not afraid of trying out new things. I think that's a pretty good way to be in this world.