Hello and welcome to the group formerly known as the Feminist United Network! A few of us met for Pizza and Pondering this evening and discussed the spookiness of feminism. We talked about the connotation of being labeled a "feminist" and debated changing the name of our club. We came up with a few ideas but decided that they all needed a bit of time to percolate. When we ajourned, the "Weber Feminist Community" was the front runner, but we'd love to hear your input! Will you please add your thoughts, opinions, and suggestions in the comments section below?
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
Well I'm going to keep percolating ideas, no promises though. So far, so good on this blog thingamajig. I like the voting system you added to the page too. Now let's hope we can get this thing off and running! Let me know if you need any help otherwise, I'll try to brainstorm in the meantime.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think Weber Feminist Community is no-nonsense, and encompasses what we're about very easily. Once people hear the name, they'll be able to better understand what we're doing and why we're here. I think it's good, but just to entertain the idea of going into a different direction for a bit...
ReplyDeleteWhat if we tried an almost ironic approach of using a word that could either be thought of as mildly derogatory (keep reading, I promise it isn't as bad as it sounds) or overtly feminine, and using our group to OWN it. The idea kind of stems from the controversial Lipstick Feminists in that they take things that more traditional feminist types see as "oppressors" and instead OWN them. Good examples of this type of marketing include feminist magazines like Bitch (http://bitchmagazine.org/) and Bust (http://www.bust.com/), both taking a term, in one case used to degrade feminists (Bitch) and another term that regards a part of female physicality that society is fixated on (Bust) and owning it.
There are definitely ups and downs to this kind of approach; it would not be as all encompassing as the WFC title (which I googled and the only thing that came up was Wells Fargo and the Martial Arts World Fighting Championships, so we're good with the acronym), and the "owning" of the title could be seen as controversial. The way I see it, though, is that when things AREN'T so black and white, aren't so apparent, it encourages people to act and to learn. Humans, by nature are curious beings and by having a group title that ISN'T so clear might encourage members of the community to invest time to 'see what we're all about'. Obviously, we must take our target audience into account; I doubt that people will be flocking to join a group called "bitch" or "the c-word" or something like that, but I'm definitely not the biggest fan of either of those.
I guess one of the ideas I had regarding to this approach is maybe calling the group "Blush" or something similar. The word in and of itself has many different connotations and meanings -- blush as in makeup (what? feminists can like makeup? I never knew!), blush as in emotion (speaks for itself), and to go into nerdy-verse here, blush was once a female-oriented slang term for orgasm (sexual liberation). The ambiguity of the word I think represents perfectly how feminists are not all alike, while the cosmetic connotation of the term provides an interesting irony -- and the combination, I believe, will be successful in gaining a bit of interest around the community.
Like I said before, definitely ups and downs. Not all encompassing (though things can always be clarified by adding a tag line like "Blush: coexist with feminists" or something), and having a feminine title MIGHT scare away men (though, I believe that if a man is going to join a group dedicated to giving voice to "women's issues", it's probably a REAL MEN WEAR PINK type of guy that doesn't see feminism or feminine terms as a threat to masculinity), but it's an option. :]
I think the blog is a wonderful idea and a great way to help those who can't make all of the meetings to stay involved. I'll be very interested to see how this discussion takes shape! :-)
ReplyDeleteBecca, I think that your ideas are enthusiastic and clever....I just don't think that this campus is ready for anything of the sort. To be frank, I appreciate the originality of your approach, but we've been trying to get this club off the ground for quite some time, to no avail and I think that using an obscure (unique yet somewhat confusing) title, it still will not garner any more interest than using a "black and white" title.
ReplyDeleteI'm willing to put it up for a vote though. Really though, I DO like your idea thoroughly and in a different atmosphere I'd say "love it! Let's do it!" But unfortunately I do not think that the WSU environment is ready for it. I think we gotta get em hooked on the basics before we throw anything outside of the box to em. Sorry, I guess that's just the pessimist in me coming out, as usual.
I'm not a huge fan of Weber Feminist Community. It sounds the same as Feminist United Network, and if we're going for a change (I apologize for missing the discussion. I was at a conference), we should actually change. The email sent out prior to the meeting said we were going to try to get away from the word, "Feminist" because of the negative connotations in this state. And if that's what we're doing, Weber Feminist Community fails. To me, "united" and "community" are both feel-good words that have little meaning.
ReplyDeleteMy thought for a new name was "Women Empowering Women" or "Women Empowered" or something along those lines. I think it more clearly defines what the goals are, without using the word "feminist."
Perhaps we should post what we think the goals of the club are, so I can better brainstorm.
I do really like Becca's suggestion of Blush. I think it would work really well. I think it's a fresh idea and would appeal to a lot of new faces.
I tried posting previously and it didn't post. I hope this one works this time.