Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Rethinking feminism: Poverty and health care

Guest post by Aspazia of Mad Melancholic Feminista

(Ed. note: I'm extremely pleased to welcome Aspazia to The Reaction as a new guest blogger. Aspazia, who writes a wonderful blog called Mad Melancholic Feminista, is, by her own admission, a philosophy professor in rural Pennsylvania and a feminist activist. Indeed, her blog offers "a feminist analysis of what it means to live in the Prozac Nation". Intriguing, no? Aspazia is an excellent writer, and, whether she's addressing present-day issues like poverty and health care within a feminist framework, as in this post, or defending her beloved Continental philosophy against its critics (see here), her blogging consists of what I would call thought-posts. I encourage you to take the time to read this one, the first of what I hope will be many here. And I encourage you to check out Mad Melancholic Feminista regularly. -- MJWS)

**********

I imagine that over the next few weeks I will be exploring what I think are the challenges for feminists in this new century. This past year I have devoted a lot of time to rethinking not only what feminists need to do politically, but also how Women's Studies programs need to change to remain relevant to this generation of students we are teaching. I don't yet have a plan for how I will be addressing these issues in my posts, but today I will focus on health care, reproductive rights, and poverty.

A month ago, I decided to transfer all of my OBGYN care to Planned Parenthood. I want Planned Parenthood to get my money and continue to stay in business in this small county, and so I gave up some of my privilege to basically attend a free clinic to get my yearly exams and birth control. I am not going to pretend that this has been an easy decision, or that I don’t consider switching back to the clean, sparkling, and less crowded office of my old gynecologist.

Sitting in the waiting room of Planned Parenthood, when you have never had to spend time in such a setting for health care, is unsettling. I had an appointment at 4, and didn’t get into see the nurse practitioner until 6. Furthermore, the waiting room is rather dingy, with dilapidated furniture, low lighting, and packed with all the residents in my county that I would never have occasion to meet, talk to, or spend time with. Planned Parenthood is one of the most popular providers to the migrant population here. They do not perform any abortions at our clinic site, but rather spend a lot of time offering affordable health care to men and women in Adams County. Half of the patients sitting with me in the waiting room spoke no English, a third were young girls who already had children or feared they were pregnant, and the last third were men.

I sat in my chair, listening to the conversations around me, mainly teenage girls with dead-end jobs, and two children, talking about their loser boyfriends who drank too much and didn’t help out with the kids. These young women were the age of many of my students, but clearly were never encouraged to attend college, especially the private college where I teach. These women were poor: they were raised in poverty and likely to continue the cycle. They had probably dropped out of high school once they got pregnant, and were now likely to raise their kids in the same environment they grew up in. Almost all of these young women were church going folk, and none of them were self-proclaimed feminists. They were at Planned Parenthood because that was the only health care provider they could afford. Moreover, they were likely to be treated with some dignity there. At least two young women, perhaps students at my college, came in to get birth control and the difference between them and these young mothers was stark. In fact, these young mothers shot angry glances at the well dressed, blonde, bejeweled, young, college women coming in for pills, especially when one was sweetly playing with one mother's little boy.

When I finally got in to see the nurse practitioner, the first question she asked me was why I was coming here to get my pap smear. "For solidarity," I said. She lit up, patted my back, and then proceeded with my exam. She apologized for the wait, and I dismissed it as no big deal. Of course, I hated it, but I was trying to consciously question my economic and race privilege and thereby force myself to live what I teach my students. I ask my students to work in agencies like Planned Parenthood, with this population of local residents almost every year, and yet, I don’t put myself in the same situation I ask my students to be in. So, this was "putting my money where my mouth is".

The health care, however, was excellent. Having a feminist nurse practitioner talk to me about the negative reactions I might have to the form of birth control I use (the Nuva-Ring) was amazing. No other doctor had taken the time to go over all of these issues with me in such detail before. She was also human; she seemed interested in my life, my goals, and my health. While my other gynecologist was efficient and had a pristine office setting, he had never talked to me for more than 5 minutes before.

I have chewed on this experience for over a month, and wanted to write about it to start thinking more about what I think should be the priority issues for feminists in this day and age. And, while having the right to control one’s fertility is paramount, I also think that we should be striving in general for better health care information and access for all of our citizens.

While I have participated in or read numerous debates on health care all over the blogosphere, at dinner parties, or with my students, nothing will ever bring this point home to you until you put yourself in the same situation as the poor in our country. If you are someone who argues that we should set up "medical savings accounts" or that we should pass more of the cost of insurance onto the “consumer” rather than the employer, then sit for a few hours in a clinic or hospital E.R. room and pay attention to the kind of health care available to the poor in this country. You don’t have to go to Guatemala on a church missionary trip or volunteer with Doctors Without Borders to see what crushing poverty does to the self-esteem and thereby future life chances of people. That kind of crushing poverty is right here in our communities.

Young girls and boys grow up without any well care visits, without the nutrition they need, and for certain, without any knowledge of their bodies. If you add on top of that school programs, targeting precisely this population -- which is lower income White, African-American, Latino, and around here a Russian immigrants -- with the misinformation of abstinence only programs, you are guaranteeing an even harder life for these folks. Rather than being treated with the same dignity that many of us can expect due to health insurance, middle class income, and white privilege, these young children grow up being reminded daily that no one cares about them: whether that be their neighbors, their government, their educators, their physicians (if they even have any), or their employers.

Just sitting in a depressing waiting room of a health clinic (let me note, however, that thanks to Kate Michelman, Planned Parenthood does a reasonably good job creating settings that enable their patients to feel they are being treated with dignity more than other clinic providers) gives you a sense of what these children grow up expecting about how life is, how others will treat them, and what they deserve. It doesn’t look good.

Sure, I am bound to hear from commenters, and perhaps from some of my former students, who will give me a lecture on "personal responsibility". Fine, you know what, I support and embrace "personal responsibility," too. But where I part company with many of the personal responsibility crowd is that I recognize that much of what we have, who we are, and where we are going has been the product of others who have invested in us, cared about us, and given us the opportunity to see a bright future. While I could go on and on judging these young women for getting pregnant so young, or the young men who irresponsibly impregnated them, and for all of them giving up on a better future, what exactly would I be accomplishing?

The fact is that these young women and young men need our attention, our resources, and a sense that we give a damn about them as much as we do children born to the kind of privilege that I was born into. Yes, ultimately, we are the product of many choices that we made. But, to make good choices in life, you need good information, you need to be given a sense that you matter or that you have value. Churches are certainly places well equipped to do the latter work. And, thank goodness many churches do actually fulfill Jesus’ mission to care for the poorest among us. But many other "Christians" in this day and age would rather blame the victim, and deny them the help they need, justifying this behavior by calling these young people "sinners" or "wicked". Certainly this rhetoric is a helpful way to blind us from our own complicity in their poverty.

I started this with the intention of tying this into what I think the future of feminism should look like. And my bottom line here is that feminists need to care about poverty (and believe me, I know that many of us do). They don’t just need to care about poor women, or the poor women who have had to degrade themselves by becoming "exotic dancers" or who have been raped or molested. Certainly we do need to care about these women. But we need to reach out and work with those who we might have dismissed in the past as "the patriarchy" or "conservatives" to fight the poverty that is right in our backyards and likely to turn our "1st World Nation" into a populace that is simply not literate enough to maintain a democracy.

We need to invest in all of our citizens, and fight the labels, rhetoric, and bigotry that justify our continued mistreatment of the poor. Perhaps more of us need to give up some of our privileges in order to ensure that more of us get the basics. We need to be open to all solutions for getting good health care to every citizen, and not allow partisan bickering to divide us. I know that we can transcend politics, especially if we start in our local communities.

The risk here for many feminists is that we would be neglecting the specific agenda already laid out. But, I am sorry, I just don’t believe that feminist politics -- whether we are talking about NOW or Feminist Majority -- are going to be effective until they give up the old paradigms, and the old political rhetoric, and start attracting more men and women to participate in their activism.

We may need to rethink how we sell our message, what we call ourselves in the public realm, and how we frame our issues. If we don’t do this, we are simply inefficacious. We are sacrificing good works for purity of message.

Bookmark and Share

12 Comments:

  • I have a lot of problems with this. First, I think there are few people that oppose ameliorating poverty (although it has certainly not been the issue it should be). But the question is not should we address poverty, but how, and that takes more than mouthing some mantra about dignity and respect. Of course, everyone should be treated with dignity and respect. But that's not really the issue--the issue is getting people to a point where they are not poor.

    Second, I get tired of people railing about the "privileged" in this country. Maybe she feels guilty about not being poor but I don't. (Maybe because I didn't grow up in a nice upper middle class suburb.) I see her experience as a middle class person slumming so she can pretend to some kind of "solidarity." Those people she met probably think she is an idiot for going to the clinic.

    Finally, the whole thing about "We need to invest in all of our citizens, and fight the labels, rhetoric, and bigotry that justify our continued mistreatment of the poor. Perhaps more of us need to give up some of our privileges in order to ensure that more of us get the basics." What crap. What are these "privileges" to which she refers that we all have? Do you mean private doctors? What labels are we talking about? Wouldn't we be better off trying to help people improve their lives rather than making others' worse?

    To me, this is nothing more than liberal cliches designed to provide a moral aura to the author. It does nothing to address the real economic and social issues involved; indeed, I suspect she has little idea of how to address these. I'm not a conservative and I do think that society has a responsibility to address poverty. But pitching guilt isn't going to help.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:14 AM  

  • Dear Marc--

    Well, thanks for your generous comments. First of all, this post is not necessarily geared toward you, unless you are with me in thinking about (a process I am just engaging in) how to make current feminist politics relevant as well as effective in the 21st century. Since I am an active member of NOW, I have a very good idea of why they are almost completely ineffective in this day and age. Part of it is because they still only really speak to feminists who are sick of "the patriarchy" and are convinced that most political issues on the radar are some sort of hostile act against women. In this post, I am trying to broaden the concerns of feminists and begin articulating how we might engage with diverse political groups to tackle health care issue, especially among the poor.

    Now, I realize that you think my slumming, self-loathing, guilt-producing rhetoric gives an aura that I have no brain for economics or real political solutions. That is your choice to make such an assumption. But, to begin with, I think the big hand out we have given to Big Pharma with Medicare D needs to go. Secondly, it would be nice if someone could tackle the greed of the insurance industry--far too many of our dollars are going into the "administrative costs" than actual health care. It turns out, as you probably know since you are not a conservative, that government programs such as Medicare are far more efficient than private insurance. So, finally, its clear to me that the long term solution lies not in trying to make the consumer more efficient in his or her spending through medical savings accounts (things, btw, that only folks who have decent paying jobs--something hard to come by in an era where real wages are continually falling). The solution is single-payer health care.

    Now to the slumming rap. Look, its a matter of perspective. You can smolder and feel better about your self and struggles by painting me as an overprivileged guilt-ridden liberal who slums once and awhile to feel better. But, that is simply your snotty view that, perhaps, comes from a rather angry view of someone who might actually want to participate in political change in her community. Now, perhaps you have made a lot of assumptions about me: that I just did this once and therefore I can go back to my middle class lifestyle after it's over, or that I am good at making people feel guilty about their luck of being born to more privileges (largely unearned if their parents were better able to earn $ because historically they had access to education). However, it might be more interesting to consider that perhaps I actually care about these issues and that by thinking about how to deal with these issues in my community (first step), particularly through transcending political snarkiness, I can help make a difference. However saccharine you find that sentiment, I think that this is part of being a moral person.

    By Blogger Aspazia, at 10:37 AM  

  • Aspazia I think that this was a very good post. I believe that Feminism can be a lot more powerful if it were incluvsive of others, and I believe that your theory of inclusion into the activism needs to be applied immediately.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:49 AM  

  • I understand the notion of being a moral person, however, do you propose any concrete changes? A centralized healthcare system is a great idea, but who has the resources and the influence to take on the HMOs? What are we as caring citizens supposed to do to remedy the problem. We volunteer in soup kitchens and donate clothes, food, and money to non-profit organizations, but that simply isn't enough.
    Let's look at the European model of healthcare. Countries such as Germany provide federal healthcare that is free to all citizens wich is paid by the citizens' tax dollars. The average rate tax rate in Germany is 33%, while it is 28% in the United States. Do you honestly think that the citizens of this country will be willing to pay the extra 5% percent in taxes for "someone else's healthcare"?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:01 PM  

  • "I understand the notion of being a moral person, however, do you propose any concrete changes? A centralized healthcare system is a great idea, but who has the resources and the influence to take on the HMOs?"

    Let me get this straight. Your criticism is that I haven't given a concrete plan. Right, ok, well I guess I am suppose to appoint myself to fix the health care system here. I'll give it a shot. Some ideas in no particular order: First of all, it is good business for a single-payer system. As it stands now, businesses can't compete if they have to provide increasingly pricey insurance benefits--they also do so by taking it out of wages. It appears that playing to the self-interest of buisness folks (small or corporate) and enlisting them to take on the (a) insurance industry, (b) push for universal health care is one place to start. I also think that the work that SEIU is doing to organize the entire service industry--under the leadership of Andy Stern--is smart. Particularly because SEIU is trying to organize workers in China, which will help fight the "race to the bottom" of real wages in this country. Again, even George Will supports Stern's efforts to organize labor in China. I am even quite sympathetic to some efforts to curb "frivolous law suits" and ridiculous regulations (many of which doctors probably brought on themselves). Now it seems to me that if you tell workers that they will earn more wages rather than wages + benefits (while giving them health care, is increasingly becoming costly nonetheless as insurance companies try to dump the cost of procedures on the consumer--even if the doc orders them), then paying into a single-payer system via taxes, especially if it will ultimately fray the costs of health care expenditures, is not such a hard sell, is it? It's just smart money management.

    By Blogger Aspazia, at 12:20 PM  

  • Btw, especially for Marc, you might want to take a read of my colleague's post on "personal responsibility" over at Philospher's Playground.

    By Blogger Aspazia, at 12:39 PM  

  • Btw, I just realized that I should clarify for Marc the solidarity comment. What I was saying to the nurse practitioner was that I wanted to keep PP in business (feminist solidarity).

    By Blogger Aspazia, at 1:33 PM  

  • First, I apologize for comments that attacked you personally. That was not my intent. And, I have to be honest, it was snotty and I misread some of your comments. Upon re-reading, I think you make a lot of very good points. It's my fault for not reading more closely and for letting my emotions run away.

    However, my objection was to the general tone of the argument and the implication that its "privileged" middle-class Americans that are standing in the way of addressing poverty. That kind of rhetoric bothers me. I don't know what privileged means to be frank. It seems to be a kind of all-purpose term to indicate the idea that we (particularly white males)have manna falling on them from the sky and are so besotted with materialism so that all we do is look for the latest boat to buy. I am quite willing to advocate and pay higher taxes to provide a better society for all. But, I don't know what "privileges" we should be giving up--I live a comfortable life but I don't have a second home in the Hamptons.

    I never said or implied anything about your view of personal responsbility of which I know nothing. I assume from what you say that you do believe in the concept. I'm not angry at anyone and I certainly don't blame the poor for being poor. At the same time, I don't think the poor are in some way more virtuous by virtue of being poor.

    Finally, I have problems with the idea that its bigotry or middle-class attitudes that causes us to mistreat the poor. Certainly, there are people that look at the poor as being unworthy but I don't think that's the majority attitude. Inevitably, in a society focused on success, people will look at the poor as being anamolous. But I think most people sympathize with the poor but don't know how to help. What we need is not an attitude change, but a political change--to accept the idea that government can be a tool for positive change.

    As for the solidarity language, again, I understand your point and apologize for my misreading.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:11 PM  

  • Hi Marc--

    I appreciate your response, particularly that you articulated what you perceived to be my tone. The reason I directed you to SteveG's post on personal responsibility was more for his insights on how "white guilt" has "a short shelf life." Clearly my use of the word "privileged" is what set you off. And, I want to be more attuned to exactly which words seem to set people off.

    So, let me explain again that part of the intention of this post is to start thinking about how to get men on board with feminist issues. I appreciate (and fully believe) that you have been chastised for being a white male. Shit, I have been chastised for being a white female plenty, particularly in my grad program by other, far more wealthier white female students. I get that. And, I am not interested in that sort of diatribe.

    You asked me to clarify this notion of privilege I am using. I am not necessarily talking about wealth, disposable income, and rampant consumerism. I certainly didn't have the image in my mind of a rich white guy buying a boat. What I was thinking about was basic things I got, simply because I was born to my parents and not to less well off folks. I wasn't born in a third world country, nor an impoverished, ghettoized section of the U.S. The neighborhood I lived in was safe, the schools I attended were excellent, and my health care was phenomenal (in large part because my father is a physician). Now, what I am saying here is that all of these "gifts" I got were not something I "earned." I was just got lucky in the birth lottery. So, when I talk about "privilege," I mean basic amenities: food, shelter, education and health care, that I got without regardless of merit. Arguably, my situation now is far more a reflection of merit (but let's leave that to the side for the moment).

    My post is asking us to think about how our class-based society actually requires many of our citizens to live like "3rd World" folks, at our expense. My favorite example is public education. Children in this country, as Jonathan Kozol put it, are born with price tags on their heads. My public school was excellent, solely because my parents had the means to live in middle class neighborhood with a higher tax base. So, I got "more" at the expense of children who live in impoverished neighborhoods.

    I can think of a lot of privileges we could give up, but we won't. For example, no one that I know, who has the ability to attend well-funded public schools are going to move into less-funded districts to give more money to those schools via taxes or help improve its facilities via fund drives or participating in the PTA. When it comes to our children, we are simply unwilling to enact our politics out on them. But, if we don't give up our privilges in the way I did to keep PP afloat, then we better think of something else.

    Now to this:

    "Finally, I have problems with the idea that its bigotry or middle-class attitudes that causes us to mistreat the poor."

    I never said that. I appreciate why that would bug you.

    "Certainly, there are people that look at the poor as being unworthy but I don't think that's the majority attitude."

    I can only speak from the experience I have with VERY wealthy students. First, they tend to think that poor people are lazy, unmotivated, and selfish. Or, they don't have any clue what poverty means, outside of abstract notions gleaned from novels or films. Thirdly, even when they do understand some of the political/economic issues, they don't really care enough, at the end of the day to actually do something to fight profound inequalities in our health care or education systems (for example). Some of them do care, and thank goodness. They motivate me to keep working in my community. But, what usually gets them to care is when they hear the stories of the folks that live below the poverty line in my county. What happens is they start to identify with them, to see their humanity, and to care more profoundly about improving their future. They are less likely to get that fired up if they "study" issues of poverty.

    "Inevitably, in a society focused on success, people will look at the poor as being anamolous."

    I am not sure what you mean.

    "But I think most people sympathize with the poor but don't know how to help. What we need is not an attitude change, but a political change--to accept the idea that government can be a tool for positive change."

    Amen brother. But, first you need to motivate the rest of us to care.

    Again, thanks for this exchange.

    By Blogger Aspazia, at 7:18 PM  

  • What a wonderful post. It is important that we shed the old paradigms since we are not fighting the same fight that our mothers and grandmothers did. We make up more than half of the workforce, so it’s no longer about being accepted, and equal pay means nothing if all working people are continually losing ground. Healthcare, education and childcare are primary issues that concern us all, men and women of all classes (well, not so much at the top) but they also adversely affect women disproportionately. These seem like logical places for feminists to focus because they are fundamental to the lives of women, but they concern men as well (especially considering that men are increasingly finding themselves taking care of children on their own).

    And poverty. It is of fundamental importance that we deal with this issue, as a society, and as feminists. I applaud your “putting your money where your mouth is” approach to women’s health, more of us middle class women should do the same. I used to go to Planned Parenthood, but once I got a job that provided health insurance, I went somewhere better. It never occurred to me to move from being a drain on their resources to providing them with some, but now I will. It is about solidarity, and we must recognize that just because some of us have thrived thanks to feminism doesn’t mean all of us have, and leaving our sisters behind is unconscionable. We also must focus more on the things that will make a positive difference in women’s lives (single payer healthcare, birth through college education, family wage jobs) rather than only paying attention to crisis situations. Fixing the root problems will alleviate crisis and there’s the added benefit that they enjoy broad support.

    Thanks again for the post Aspazia. It was inspiring and thought provoking for sure.

    By Blogger The (liberal)Girl Next Door, at 9:04 PM  

  • Dear (Liberal) Girl Next Door---

    Damn. Thanks for the praise. It's truly inspiring. I am glad it resonated with you . . . I hope to lay out some more of my thoughts about changing the message of feminist politics.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:10 PM  

  • aspazia,

    Clearly, I agree with many of your points. My concern (and, after reading your further comments, I think you agree) is that we not use language or labels to sterotype people. I grew up in the South, so clearly I saw a lot of stereotyping, especially racial sterotyping, in my youth. However, since I have moved up north, I lots of stereotyping by liberals of southerners, men,conservatives, etc. Especially since I read a lot of academic writing (in a variety of fields) that, IMO, fixates on race/class/gender issues in ways that I think create more polarization. (I'm not denying, however, that these issues exist.) In terms of privilege, you are certainly correct that people are privileged to be born here rather than in a third world country or, for that matter, to be born into a middle-class family. Certainly, people often ascribe their success solely to their own efforts without considering the social context in which they occur. On the other hand, and perhaps this is only my own perception again, much academic writing seems to define privilege in a much more sinister way, as if the middle class (especially males)were a feudal class, consciously trying to oppress the lower classes. Clearly, this is not what you meant.

    I agree with you that poverty has not received nearly as much attention as it deserves in this country. I think that poverty has many causes and that addressing it requires multi-dimensional approaches (which I think you agree with). And I think it's important that we not dismiss different approaches based on a rigid ideological mindset.

    You are right about getting people to care. Many people have come to accept homeless people, for example, as just a part of the urban landscape. But I think one problem is that people think that the problem is hopeless. Moreover, some activists have, IMO, exacerbated the problem by advocating policies that are self-defeating, such as the right for people to sleep in the streets. I agree that everyone should be treated with dignity and respect but it makes no sense to conflate dignity and respect with abstract "rights" that simply leave the homeless out on the streets and alienate the people whose support is needed to ameliorate poverty.

    Sorry for the rambling. I enjoy discussing these issues and I tend to digress. And I am sorry again for the nature of my original comments.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:11 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home