Knitting as a feminist project?

WSIF-01677; No of Pages 12 Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Women's Studies International Forum journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wsif

Knitting as a feminist project? Maura Kelly Department of Sociology, Portland State University, 1721 SW Broadway, #217, Portland, OR 97201, United States

a r t i c l e Available online xxxx

i n f o

s y n o p s i s As a site of feminist politics, knitting potentially represents a redefinition of a devalued and traditionally domestic feminine craft as empowering and creative. Further, it potentially contributes to the construction of alternative masculinities and femininities and promotes the creation of new feminist communities. However, questions remain about the specific contexts in which knitting represents an intentional political activity. In this article, I examine the possibilities of knitting as a feminist project, drawing on ethnographic research in stitch 'n bitch knitting groups and online knitting communities as well as interviews with knitters. I conclude that the meaning of knitting is context-specific and that the engagement with feminist politics by individual knitters and knitting communities in everyday life is limited. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction Writers and scholars identify knitting as part of contemporary feminist culture and argue that knitting is part of a larger feminist project (Baumgardner & Richards, 2000; Groeneveld, 2010; Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007; Myzelev, 2009; Pentney, 2008; Robertson, 2011; Stoller, 2003; Wills, 2007). Beth Ann Pentney (2008) offers a continuum of feminist knitting practices that range from appreciation of knitting as a domestic art and community building to outreach and fundraising activities to the use of knitting in art and activism. Pentney describes feminist knitting practices as “active and purposeful knitting projects used in the spirit of feminist goals of empowerment, social justice, and women's community building” (2008:1). In taking this broad definition, Pentney provides the opportunity to consider a variety of knitting practices as feminist. However, Pentney suggests the caveat: “Clearly not all acts of knitting can or should be considered feminist in intent, and this too must be explored more carefully to identify the limitations of an overly optimistic conception of feminist knitting practices” (2008:13). Scholars such as Pentney (2008) have argued that knitting provides an opportunity to reclaim a devalued feminine craft. Further, knitting practices can trouble gender norms and contribute to the construction of alternative masculinities

and femininities. Local knitting groups (often called “stitch 'n bitch” groups) as well as online knitting communities can challenge the public/private divide and create locations for feminist communities. However, there are still important questions about the conditions under which knitting represents intentional engagement with feminist activism or participation in a larger feminist project without articulated intentionality. In this article, I first examine the ways in which feminist writers and scholars have conceptualized knitting as a feminist project. I then engage in an exploration of the experience of “everyday knitters,” drawing on ethnographic research in stitch 'n bitch knitting groups and online knitting communities as well as interviews with knitters. I assess the ways in which knitting may represent an intentional engagement with feminist activism and the ways in which knitting may contribute to a larger feminist project without explicit intentionality. I build on previous discussions of knitting and feminism that have been primarily theoretical and/or drawn on public examples of knitting as art or activism. This paper empirically examines the meaning of knitting practices through a case study of local and online knitting groups and interviews with knitters. I engage with the broader literature on social movements' tactical repertoires in order to situate knitting as a potential strategy for creating change in the context of feminist activism.

0277-5395/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

2

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Literature Review Knitting as a feminist practice Previous scholarly work on knitting as a feminist practice has largely focused on the ways in which artists and activists have used knitting (as well as other fiber arts) as a medium for artistic and political expression. One example of feminist knitted art is an exhibition titled Radical Lace & Subversive Knitting held at the Museum of Arts & Design in New York City held in 2007 (Pentney, 2008; Robertson, 2011). Pentney (2008) suggests that feminist art and activism occupy one end of the continuum of feminist knitting practices. Betsy Greer (2011) describes the practice of “craftivism,” which occurs at the intersection of craft and activism. One example of a “craftivist” project is a knit breast prosthesis for use after a mastectomy, such as the “tit bits” created by Canadian feminist, educator, and knitter Beryl Tsang and published in Knitty, the free online knitting magazine (Pentney, 2008). Pentney (2008) suggests “tit bits” pose a challenge to the options available to mastectomy patients and enable women to engage in creative self-healing. However, it is not clear whether (or under what conditions) women knitting this pattern for themselves view it as feminist. A visible example of a group “craftivist” project is a Canadian group called “The Revolutionary Knitting Circle,” which uses knitting groups to promote an anti-corporate anti-globalist agenda (Black & Burisch, 2011; Pentney, 2008; Robertson, 2011). As Anthea Black and Nicole Burisch describe: “The group also participates in marches, rallies, and protests by conducting group ‘knit-ins’ or by carrying the large, cooperatively knitted Peace Knits banner. The public knit-ins and the banner serve as peaceful and accessible rallying points for action, discussion, and awareness” (Black & Burisch, 2011:206). Another example of public knitting projects that may be conducted by individuals or groups is “yarn bombing” or “knit graffiti.” Yarn bombing involves stealthily covering objects with yarn in public places, such as stop signs and benches. The book Yarn Bombing: The Art of Crochet and Knit Graffiti by Mandy Moore and Leanne Prain (2009) offers examples as well as instructions on how to create knit graffiti. The actual purpose is open to interpretation by those participating. For some, it may be a comment on the contemporary cultural and political climate but for others it may be just about esthetics. As the “Knit Graffitti” Ravelry group notes on its page “Whether you're out there bringing a welcome warmth of whimsy to the urban jungle or you're angrily stitching it to the hegemony, we want to hear about your adventures in knitted and crocheted graffiti.” The example of yarn bombing suggests that the meaning of knitting is dependent on the intention of the knitter and is context-specific. Although not all knitted art is explicitly “political” and not all political knitted art is explicitly “feminist,” the use of knitting as a medium often results in messages about gender reflected in the projects (for further discussion of knitting and other fiber crafts as art and activism, see Black & Burisch, 2011; Greer, 2011; Parker, 1984; Pentney, 2008; Robertson, 2011). Pentney (2008) notes that fundraising and outreach represent a middle area on the continuum of feminist knitting practices. Knitting as a fundraising strategy or “charity knitting” may or may not be political, depending on whether or not it seeks to challenge existing social structures or practices. Charity knitting is an important part of many knitting communities

(Groeneveld, 2010; Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007; Pentney, 2008; Wills, 2007). At the far end of Pentney's (2008) continuum is an appreciation of knitting as a domestic art and community building. She includes online knitting communities, which others have referred to as examples of “cyberfeminism” (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007). While some scholars emphasize knitting as “craftivism,” others are more cautious. After reviewing various ways in which knitting practices are taken up, Elizabeth Groenveld argues “what these diverse samples from across the political spectrum suggest is that knitting itself is not necessarily inherently political but rather can be mobilized for a variety of different ends and that the politics of knitting are context-specific (2010:266).” Overall, these examples, particularly those of artists and activists, suggest compelling evidence for possibilities of knitting as a feminist practice in certain contexts. However, these discussions open new questions about what knitting means to the many individuals who knit as a hobby and do not necessarily identify as artists or activists. I take up these questions in the analysis. But first, I assess how knitting might be understood as a feminist practice in the context of the literature on social movements' tactical repertoires. Social movements' tactical repertoires Scholars have outlined various criteria for evaluating communities and practices as political. Some focus on opposition to the state (e.g. Tilly, 2004). Others also include identity and culture as political goals for social movements (e.g. Armstrong & Bernstein, 2008; Bobel, 2010; Reger, 2012; Staggenborg, 1995; Taylor & Van Dyke, 2004). Verta Taylor and Nella Van Dyke (2004) suggested three criteria for social movement tactics: contestation, intentionality, and collective identity. First, Taylor and Van Dyke (2004) argue that in order for a practice to be a part of a social movement's tactical repertoire, it must be a site of contestation “in which bodies, symbols, identities, practices, and discourses are used to pursue or prevent change in institutionalized power relations” (2004:268). Writers and scholars have examined knitting and knitting communities as a site of contestation in which gender norms are challenged as part of a larger feminist project of agitating for gender equality (Baumgardner & Richards, 2000; Groeneveld, 2010; Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007, 2011; Myzelev, 2009; Pentney, 2008; Robertson, 2011; Stoller, 2003; Wills, 2007). There are several possibilities for the ways in which the everyday practice knitting may be subversive. First, knitting offers opportunities for the creation of alternative femininities and masculinities. Second, knitting groups can be locations for developing feminist communities and challenging the public/private divide. One way of understanding knitting as a site of contestation involves subverting ideas about femininity by defining knitting as something that women do for pleasure rather than because it is expected or required. For some, the redefinition of knitting includes a politicized rejection of commodification and consumerism, locating knitting within a larger do-it-yourself (DIY) community (Wills, 2007). However, critiques of the feminist crafting have also addressed the consumerism inherent in these often expensive hobbies and the relationship to the global economy (Groeneveld, 2010; Robertson, 2011). In reviewing the coverage of knitting in BUST magazine, Groeneveld (2010) notes the lack of attention to the classed dimensions of crafting.

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

She argues “The failure of third-wave periodicals to acknowledge the class dynamics inherent in crafting cultures suggests a broader lapse within some branches of third-wave feminism, when it comes to engaging critically with the intersection of race, class, age, ability, and gender” (Groeneveld, 2010:270). In articulating knitting as a feminist practice, writers and scholars suggest that contemporary knitting is actively redefining or reclaiming a traditionally domestic feminine craft as empowering and creative (Baumgardner & Richards, 2000; Groeneveld, 2010; Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007, 2011; Myzelev, 2009; Pentney, 2008; Robertson, 2011; Stoller, 2003; Wills, 2007). From this perspective, knitting is redefined as young, hip, and sexy (Myzelev, 2009; Stoller, 2003). Several scholars have challenged some of these claims and have sought to place the “new” knitting movement in historical context by connecting it to previous feminist activism (Groeneveld, 2010; Robertson, 2011). An extreme version of alternative femininity offered by knitting is demonstrated by Debbie Stoller, author of the Stitch 'n Bitch books and editor of BUST magazine. Stoller presents a version of contemporary knitting clearly influenced by popular culture, the fashion industry, as well as by sexpositive and third wave feminism. There are some significant contradictions in Stoller's conception of feminism; although she purports to challenge beauty standards and promote a body-positive feminism, her books and magazine almost exclusively feature thin, white, young models. Some of Stoller's knitting patterns are sexualized, with patterns such as the “ribbed for her pleasure scarf” and “queen of hearts bikini.” However, Stoller's sex-positive politics lack feminist critique. For example, the description of the “mud flap girl tank” (a knit tank with the outline of a woman in a sexual pose based on an image used on the mud flaps of trucks) states “…This tank was designed for all the strong, sassy, female-positive women everywhere. What's better than a sexy girl sporting a sexy girl image and taking it as her own?” (Stoller, 2003:132). It may be possible to reclaim the image of the “mud flap girl” as part of a feminist project, but this sort of appropriation must be problematized. Here a discourse of choice (i.e. women can choose to appropriate images and wear them as a feminist act) has become intertwined with a discourse of female empowerment. This version of feminism is consistent with the third wave articulation of “girlie feminists” who “reclaimed girl culture, which is made up of such formerly disparaged girl things as knitting, the color pink, nail polish, and fun” (Baumgardner & Richards, 2000:80). While the concept of “choice” has been very important to feminist discourse (e.g. reproductive choice) by reframing the terms of the debate from structural factors to individual choice serves to minimize the relevance of structural gender inequality. For male knitters, knitting can be a site of contestation through challenging traditional definitions of masculinity. Just as some women seek to redefine knitting as part of an empowered femininity, some men seek to reclaim knitting as a masculine pursuit. This argument is articulated in a book targeted at male knitters titled Knitting with Balls: A Hands-On Guide to Knitting for the Modern Man (Del Vecchio, 2006). As Michael Del Vecchio writes: This book is here to prove those people wrong who talk about knitting not being a proper hobby for boys. Today many people feel that men don't knit, never have, and

3

ultimately shouldn't, because knitting is part of the “women's domain.” To my mind, the fact that men are knitting, and have always knit, is part of what makes the draft so cool and, in some respects, so revolutionary. Gentlemen, take up your needles! (2006:7) Discussions of men and knitting can take up different discourses. For example, men's knitting can be “reclaimed” as a masculine hobby, often drawing on the long history of men's knitting (e.g. Del Vecchio, 2006; Rutt, 2003). This can represent an attempt to distance knitting from femininity. On the other hand, men's knitting can be viewed as a purposeful challenge to gender norms or the creation of alternative masculinities that embrace activities associated with femininity. Another way that knitting can be interpreted as a site of contestation that can contribute to a feminist project is in the opportunity for knitting groups to contribute to the creation of new feminist communities (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007; Pentney, 2008). These can be local groups (often referred to as “stitch 'n bitch” groups) or online communities. These communities may or may not be explicitly feminist. Stella Minahan and Julie Wolfram Cox (2007) identify stitch 'n bitch groups as a site of resistance or “a new protest movement using craft as a subversive vehicle for comment on gender as well as on the increasing commodification of society and technology (2007:11).” Scholars argue that local stitch 'n bitch knitting groups that meet in public have can challenge the public/ private divide (Groeneveld, 2010; Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007, 2011). Further, they may replicate some aspects of the consciousness raising groups associated with second wave feminism (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007). Online knitting communities may serve as a site for building feminist communities, or “cyberfeminism” (Hawthorne & Klein, 1999; Plant, 1996; Reiche & Kuni, 2004; Wajcman, 2004). Minahan and Wolfram Cox described online knitting communities (focusing on knitting blogs) as examples of cyberfeminism, “a construct developed to allow a voice to women who wish to participate in technology on their own terms” (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007:9). Taylor and Van Dyke (2004) suggest that tactical repertoires must also demonstrate intentionality. However, as Pentney (2008) argues, it is also important to consider the possibility that knitting may represent a site of contestation and feminist politics without the explicit intentionality on the part of participants. The practice of knitting raises questions about not only the intentionality of the actor but also the reception of the audience. Men who may not aim to make a political statement may unintentionally do so by defying gender norms in public. In contrast, women's knitting may be interpreted as participation in a traditionally feminine craft, even if knitters intend for their knitting to be subversive. Some activist knitting communities, such as “The Revolutionary Knitting Circle,” may represent an expression of collective identity, which Taylor and Van Dyke (2004) argue is an essential component of collective action. Social movements scholars define collective identity as “an individual's cognitive, moral, and emotional connection with a broader community, category, practice, or institution” (Polletta & Jasper, 2001:285). On the one hand, some knitting communities may represent locations for creating collective feminist identities, but this leaves open questions about the conditions under which this may occur. In

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

4

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

her recent book, Everywhere and Nowhere: Contemporary Feminism in the United States, Jo Reger (2012), examined three feminist communities and argued that feminism can appear to be both “everywhere” (an ideology shaping individuals' worldviews) and “nowhere” (limited visibility of explicitly feminism activism). Knitting communities certainly have the potential to demonstrate similar orientations to feminism. While social movement scholars view collective identity as an essential component of social movements' political tactics, “third wave” feminism also places significant value on individual resistance, described as “everyday activism” or “everyday feminism” (Baumgardner & Richards, 2000; Findlen, 2001; Hernández & Rehman, 2002; Heywood & Drake, 1997). As a tactic for social change, everyday feminism has been critiqued as weak, but offers the promise of an easily accessible and personally empowering way to engage with feminism. Chris Bobel notes “Everyday feminism also includes daily acts of resistance that may or may not be enacted under the feminist banner… Though it may seem to stretch the definition of feminism rather thin, the point here is to expand feminism to embrace the mundane daily actions that, in the aggregate, constitute an accomplished life led with purpose and strength” (2010:23–24). In this analysis, I seek to examine the places where knitting can represent a site of contestation, intentionality, and collective action. I take seriously the possibilities for “everyday feminism” and broader definitions of what “counts” as political. In this analysis, I draw on 28 interviews with men and women in the knitting community, ethnographic research in several local knitting groups, and participation in Ravelry, an online knitting community. First, I discuss the ways in which the knitters I interviewed articulated (or rejected) connections between feminism and knitting. I then go on to discuss the ways in which knitters redefine masculinity and femininity through their knitting practices. I examine the ways in which it may contribute to a larger feminist project of challenging gender norms. I then draw my ethnographic research to assess feminist practices in local stitch 'n bitch groups. Finally, I discuss Ravelry, an online knitting community, and evaluate it as a site of “cyberfeminism.” Methods In order to investigate contemporary knitting culture as a site of feminist politics, I conducted interviews and ethnographic research in local and online knitting communities. Previous scholars had placed particular emphasis on the “stitch 'n bitch” knitting group as a location for feminist politics; however, these claims have not been empirically investigated (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007). My primary ethnographic site was a stitch 'n bitch group in a Northeastern U.S. state. I attended the meetings of the group from fall 2007 through summer 2010. Prior to attending the first meeting, I emailed the organizer and told her I was a graduate student researcher interested in knitting groups. She checked with the group and then gave me permission to be a participant observer in the group. Throughout my time as a member of the group, my identity as a researcher was generally known to the other members. My consistent and long-term participation in the group permitted me to be viewed as an “insider.” The stitch 'n bitch group met twice a

week in a coffee shop in a strip mall located just off a major highway. Membership fluctuated over the years, but the group generally had a dozen or so regularly attending core members. Three to ten people usually attended each meeting with the largest meetings consisting of fifteen people. In addition to the extended participation in my primary group, I also attended several meetings of three other knitting groups (I obtained permission from organizers prior to attending these groups as well). I also attended fiber festivals and other (knitting and non-knitting) social events with members of my primary stitch 'n bitch group. The sites for my ethnographic work were selected based on convenience and are not intended to be representative of all knitting groups. As with all ethnographic research, the meanings articulated by members are context-specific. Knitting groups in other locations or time periods may significantly differ. However, empirically examining local knitting groups provides an important contribution to a discussion that has been primarily theoretical and/or drawn on public examples of knitting as art or activism. It allows for close examination the ways in which knitting groups may (or may not) be explicitly feminist and may (or may not) be participating in a larger feminist project without explicitly feminist intentions. Over the same time period, I participated in Ravelry, an online knitting community (www.ravelry.com). In the course of my ethnographic work, I found that Ravelry was widely used by knitters and all of the members of my primary stitch 'n bitch group were active participants. Ravelry is both a social networking site with a wide variety of groups and forums as well as a place to share information about patterns, techniques, and tools associated with knitting, crocheting, spinning (a fiber art in which fiber such as wool or silk is made into yarn using a spinning wheel or drop spindle), and other fiber arts. In the context of “third wave” feminism and “cyberfeminism,” scholars have emphasized the potential for the use of technology in supporting feminist communities and activism (Duncan, 2005; Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007). In examining Ravelry as a location of feminist culture and politics, I considered both the online community as a whole as well as the explicitly “feminist” spaces on Ravelry, primarily focusing on the “This is What a Feminist Knits Like” group. I also conducted 28 semi-structured interviews (10 men and 18 women) involved in the knitting community in two Northeastern U.S. states. I recruited knitters through Ravelry, the online knitting community, as well as knitters I met at knitting groups and events. In order to focus on the experiences of men and women who came of age after second wave feminism, I initially limited my participants to those who were born after 1964, the census definition of the birth year of youngest of the “baby boomers.” However, given the difficulty in recruiting men who knit, I also interviewed two men born before 1964 (these two men were born in 1961 and 1962). As in the larger knitting community, most of my participants were European American, although I made an effort to invite women and men of color to participate in the study. All of the participants had completed some college or more and a few were pursuing advanced degrees. Overall, the participants had fairly privileged class backgrounds. However, two participants had recently been laid off as a result of an economic recession, one participant was unemployed due to health issues, and another had recently applied for public

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

assistance after separating from her husband. The majority (but not all) of female participants identified as heterosexual. About half of the men identified as gay, one identified as “mostly straight,” and the remainder identified as heterosexual. Both married and single participants were represented (at the time of the study, both states included in the sample had legalized marriage for same gender couples). Six female participants and one male participant had children. I asked my participants a wide variety of questions about their experiences with knitting as well as their participation in local stitch 'n bitch groups and online knitting communities. I also asked about their views on feminism and their thoughts about the connection between feminism and knitting. As with the ethnographic research, interview participants are not intended to be representative of all knitters. However, I find a range of orientations towards feminism and a variety of views about the connection between knitting and feminism that make this sample useful in considering the multiple meanings of knitting. Most interviews took place in coffee shops or participants' homes and five were conducted over the phone. The length of the interviews ranged from 40 to 160 minutes. All interviews were tape recorded and transcribed. I analyzed the data using inductive coding techniques (Charmaz, 2006). I coded for theoretically important themes identified in previous work as well as emerging themes in the data. Findings Feminists, knitters, and feminist knitters Although there are many feminists in the knitting community and knitting is often cited as an example of contemporary feminist culture, some of the knitters I interviewed had never heard anyone make a connection between knitting and feminism. When asked if he saw a connection between feminism and knitting, one self-identified feminist responded “Not really. Never viewed knitting that way. I just… It's recreation, stress relieving. Never really got into the whole political aspect of knitting” (Mark, 38). Some knitters explicitly rejected the connection between knitting and feminism, particularly focusing on the rhetoric of reclaiming knitting. As one feminist participant argued: “I just look at it as something fun and relaxing, and as a creative outlet… I know there's been some claiming of it as feminist, like BUST magazine and stuff. But I know I don't really see a correlation to be honest. There's all this business about reclaiming shit… I think that's a total crock” (Emma, 25). This suggests that although some knitters are aware of the connection that others make between knitting and feminism, they do not find this connection relevant. However, over half of the participants did see a connection between knitting and feminism. Some strongly believed that it was a feminist practice while others stated that they believed it could be feminist or thought that other people might see it as feminist. In addition to asking about the relationship between knitting and feminism generally, I also asked feminist-identified participants whether or not they saw knitting as connected to their own feminist identity. Four feminist participants described some connection between their own feminist identities and knitting. Kate (34) said “Yeah. [I see my knitting as feminist] In a lot of ways. Going

5

back to the idea that I can make choices around doing what I want, no matter what other people think of me or how they perceive me.” Among those who discussed a connection between knitting and feminism, it was framed as an act of individual resistance, consistent with the “third wave” feminist articulation of “everyday feminism” (e.g. Baumgardner & Richards, 2000). Some knitters focused on the Do-It-Yourself (DIY) aspect as a subversive component of knitting. As one knitter commented “you're getting that young, DIY culture coming in. It's a lot of young women just learning things and doing all that, expressing themselves. [Knitting] is just another way for them to express themselves and do some really creative things” (Roger, 43). Among the people I interviewed, I found some evidence of the adoption of a DIY esthetic in the ways that participants described an appreciation for the production of handmade goods. However, I found very little explicit rejection of consumerism. In fact, a central component of knitting as a leisure activity is shopping for yarn, patterns, and supplies. Within the knitting community, there is not a consensus that knitting is feminist; however, the argument that knitting is anti-feminist is almost always soundly rejected by feminist and non-feminist knitters alike. The argument that knitting is anti-feminist suggests that by taking up the practice of knitting, women are conforming to an outdated model of femininity and even “setting feminism back” by engaging in an activity traditionally associated with the domestic sphere. I have found few actual examples of individuals (within or outside the knitting community) arguing that knitting is anti-feminist. However, there is commonly held belief in the knitting community that some people believe knitting is anti-feminist. For example, Jessie (33) stated: Somebody recently posted [on Ravelry] that they were told that by knitting they were setting feminism back fifty years. And of course, if you are a knitter, you are like “What the hell?” … I think it's the choice that we have now to do it. And that's the biggest argument I have against the people who say that we set feminism back. Knitting is so different today than what it was back in the thirties or fifties or 1800's. Because it was a necessity. And now we have this choice to be able to do it. And we can go out and express ourselves through our knitting. So I think that in that way it is a positive thing for the feminists. [pause] It is very interesting to hear someone who would say that it is not. Because I love everything about knitting. Everything makes me happy. What would be wrong with doing something that makes you happy? Isn't it the core of what the whole feminism movement is about is to figure out what makes you happy and do it? For me, I don't want to go out and drive race cars or drive a dump truck or something in a male-dominated field. I just want to sit at home and knit to my heart's content on whatever fiber and whatever color I want to do. So it's great that I have that opportunity to do that. Although Jessie later stated that she identified as a feminist, here Jessie distanced herself from “the feminists” but made an argument about the ways in which knitting could be considered feminist, drawing on narrative of reclaiming and redefining knitting as well as the discourse of choice. However,

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

6

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

this also represents a distortion of feminist discourse, specifically regarding “the core” or goals of feminism. While there is significant debate about what “the core” of feminism is, I would suggest that feminists are more likely to define the core of feminism as “challenging gender inequality” rather than to “be happy.” The use of the terms “choice” and “happy” represents the influence of a neo-liberal discourse and some slippage in the use of key feminist concepts. Although most knitters strongly rejected the view that knitting was anti-feminist, one feminist knitter offered more nuanced discussion in considering the diversity of political views within the knitting community: Oh, I'm suspicious of [the critique that knitting is antifeminist] and disappointed with it. I mean, I see where that comes from a bit. I've seen some of those groups on Ravelry. The homemakers, you know, proud homemakers, proud wives, and the things that they knit. So yeah, it exists. It's kind of weird, you know, to go to a festival and realize that the person you're buying some hand-painted yarn from is actually some kind of submissive wife or conservative Christian and totally has different politics from you. I've tried to be ready for that, because at first it just totally took me by surprise. Do I really want my money going to those people? Well, not especially, but they exist in the same groups…. What are you going to do? They're knitters too, but I'm not going to let them hijack the definition of knitting (Shelley, 30). In this quote, Shelley differentiated the motivations of knitters in evaluating whether or not knitting could be considered feminist. She argued that the meaning of knitting is not fixed, that it can be used to challenge gender norms or to uphold them. The implication is that knitting is not inherently feminist or anti-feminist, but rather, the meaning depends on the intentions of the knitter and how the practice is interpreted (Taylor & Van Dyke, 2004). As Shelley pointed out, the politics of knitters in the knitting community are extremely diverse and there is a conservative segment of the knitting community (Robertson, 2011). Within Ravelry, very conservative ideas about gender and gender roles can be found in the main forums as well as in forums of groups with conservative and/or religious themes. One such group, called the “Submitted Wifestyle” describes itself as follows: The idea of being a submitted wife relates directly to the biblical mandate “Wives, be submitted to your husbands, as unto the Lord” as well as various verses throughout the Old and new testament which, when combined to interpret each other, suggest that woman was created for man, and that in a God-centered marriage, it behooves both parties to take on their God-given role as prescribed by the Word… men to lead and women to follow, men to provide and protect, and women to be “keepers at home,” men to be the glory of God and woman to be the glory of their man. These very conservative views about gender (and the resulting relationship between knitting and gender) are a small minority of those expressed in the forums on Ravelry and were entirely absent in the interviews I conducted. Overall, my research suggests multiple interpretations of knitting as feminist, not feminist, and anti-feminist. I found a few

examples of individuals and online groups who conceptualized knitting as a site of intentional feminist contestation (Taylor & Van Dyke, 2004). Among feminist knitters I interviewed, however, I find little evidence of a collective identity, which is one of Taylor and Van Dyke's (2004) criteria for political activism. My participants' understandings of knitting as feminist are based on an individual rather than group practice. Thus, knitting may best be considered a form of “everyday feminism,” that is, everyday resistance on an individual level that may be individually empowering, although unlikely to have a significant contribution to structural change.

Creation of alternative femininities and masculinities Some female knitters explicitly reject the stereotype of the “granny” knitter and seek to re-invent knitting as something creative, hip, fun, and sexy. This use of knitting in creating alternative femininities is connected with a feminist project, at least for some knitters. As two participants noted: I think the fact that it's sometimes perceived as, you know, woman's work, woman's chore, kind of grandmotherly thing. People didn't do it in public. And it wasn't acceptable for, like, younger people to do it before. And the fact that that's changing is very much feminist to me. Just the idea, “We can choose to do what we want to do and not necessarily caring how other people perceive us.” Or, yeah, I think that piece of it is very much feminist. And I think the feminist, the women's movement, has allowed things like that to happen, whereas, you know, before it was perceived one way and now it's perceived very differently (Kate, 34). I think it's kind of a…it's very empowering… No, but it's like you really are taking over something that was considered to be like… it's just that little thing that women do. And the movement today is so different that it's not just the “little women” thing. It's something that we do because it's fun or it's interesting or it's educational or it's social or something. And you see things like subversive knitting that kind of break those…like willie warmers and stuff like that where they break the whole idea of what you're supposed to knit. I think that that, in that way, it does…it's because of feminism, because of the movement, has kind of allowed that to open up (Jessie, 33). Female knitters mark a clear distinction for their own reasons for knitting compared to women of previous generations, arguing that knitting is taken up as one of many choices that women can make today. However, feminists must question whether “choice” always equates to “empowerment.” Further, the “choice” to knit seems a small victory, given the larger structural inequalities with which feminists engage. The subversive aspects of knitting potentially become visible when women and men knit in public. However, in many situations, the subversive aspect of knitting is not apparent to observers. This poses a serious limitation of the potential for viewing women's knitting as resistance to gender norms. This issue arises because the knitting community seeks to reclaim the symbolic meaning without altering the physical act. Although there are many patterns

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

available for knit bikinis, “willie warmers,” and the like, most projects are more functional. Projects knit by contemporary knitters may be colorful, creatively designed, and fashionable; however, the sweaters, socks, hats, scarves, shawls, baby items, and blankets most commonly made by young knitters today bear very close resemblance to the kinds of items produced by previous generations of knitters. I did not observe any knitters working on more racy or explicitly political items described earlier, such as “willie warmers,” sexualized patterns from the Stitch 'n Bitch books, or “tit bits.” A few participants I interviewed identified as activists or artists, but most declined to interpret their knitting as explicitly political. As noted above, I do not claim that the groups I observed are representative of all knitting groups. However, one way to check on the representativeness of the knitting projects I observed is to view the first several hundred most popular (i.e. most commonly knit) patterns on Ravelry, which are the same sorts of (non-political) patterns described by interview participants and knit by the knitters I observed in my ethnographic research. To illustrate how the similarity in patterns leads to some difficulty in presenting knitting as subversive, I recall one time I was knitting a sock while waiting for take-out food, an older man looked at me approvingly and said “It is so nice to see young women knitting again.” A young female knitter posting on Ravelry similarly reported that while knitting in a coffee shop, an older man told her “With all the crazy feminists and liberals running around out there it's refreshing to see a nice, conservative, churchgoing, old-fashioned woman who's not afraid to do her needlework anywhere she pleases.” In this case, the woman wrote that she was joined by her “flagrantly gay” male friend who also began knitting, to the horror of the older man. Baring the appropriately-timed entrance of a gay male friend who knits, the opportunity for knitting to be perceived as subversive can be undermined by the fact that it may be interpreted by observers as women returning to a traditionally feminine craft rather than engaging in a redefined activity. In asking men about their masculine identity and knitting practice, all of the men I interviewed stated that they did not personally feel a conflict, but a few mentioned that they believed others did. As Paul (47), a self-identified feminist, stated “I'm very aware of the dissonance that has been placed on it, but it's all of a peace with me. And, because I am male and have a male identity, it's at peace with me. So it's, I don't see it as a conflict within my own self and personhood.” Despite the potential “dissonance,” the male knitters integrated their identities as knitters with their identities as men, resulting in alternative forms of masculinity. However, in some cases, this alternative masculinity falls back on aspects of hegemonic masculinity. For examine, in discussing the value of producing handmade items, David (35) described how he felt as a man who produced knit items for his family: I think there's something very special about being able to… I mean, as a father, and a husband, and a son, I… One of my roles in life is to take care of my family. I honestly see clothing them and keeping them warm as part of taking care of them. So I can turn around, and I can make socks, or scarves, or hats, or blankets, or whatever, and I have now used my own creative side to do my job as a father and husband.

7

In David's narrative, the concept of “taking care” of the family can be understood in both in terms of caring or loving (associated with the feminine) as well as providing for his family (associated with the masculine). David refers to himself in specifically gendered roles of the father and husband, referencing his own masculinity. In this quote, David ties his knitting practice back to his masculinity and heterosexuality in a way that both upholds and challenges hegemonic masculinity. Some men experience negative reactions to knitting in public, which center around assumptions about men's masculinity and sexuality. While members of the knitting community know that many heterosexual men knit, male knitters often perceived as gay by non-knitters. One (unscientific) internet poll conducted by a Ravelry member found that out of 120 men, 38% were straight, 52% were gay, and 9% identified as bisexual and 2% “something else.” There was quite a response to this poll on the Ravelry forums. Some suggested that the poll itself was offensive and that it should not matter if male knitters were gay or straight. Others suggested that the poll would underestimate the number of straight knitters. As one man stated “I think we straight guys are in the minority among male knitters, but perhaps not by as much as one might think. I think there are probably a lot of ‘in the closet’ straight males who knit but simply won't publicly admit it out of fear of being insulted or made fun of by others.” While the term “closet knitter” can be used in reference to all people (men and women, straight and gay) who knit but not publically, it is most often used in reference to straight men, as straight men are assumed to face the most stigma and thus are the most likely to hide their knitting. As one gay male knitter posed on Ravelry “Gay and bi men who are out are already used to flouting social convention about what ‘real men’ do and so it is a small step to be out as a knitter. Straight men are not used to that level of disapproval and resistance.” However, this line of reasoning suggests that gay men are always comfortable being “outed” by their knitting, which is obviously problematic. Mark (38), a selfidentified gay man, described his reluctance to expose himself in that way in the following conversation: Maura: Do you knit in public? Mark: Yeah, I've knitted at [a local yarn shop]. So, yeah. I mean, I wouldn't go out to a restaurant and start knitting but I have… If I feel it's a safe place, I'll knit there. Maura: What would make it not safe? Mark: I mean, you don't know how other people are going to perceive it. Like, I don't want them like “oh, what the hell is going on over there?” Do you know what I mean? It's, like, even for women…I have heard a lot of women say they don't like to knit in public just because it's perceived as an old granny's thing or a woman's thing. And I don't want to have to explain myself to somebody if they come over, if they start being abusive. Not that I would ever expect that, but you never know. People are funny. I know what it feels like. I mean, I'm gay so I know what it feel like to be that… people are like thinking that you're different or whatever. So unless it's safe … Further, the experiences of some gay men suggest that gay men may resist knitting (or knitting in public) as it marks

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

8

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

them as “too gay,” that is, they are reluctant to embody stereotypes about gay men. In the knitting community, female knitters express strong support and encouragement of men who knit. For example, one participant stated, “I think it's great [that men knit]. Because there's no reason that anyone can't sort of do something that they find pleasure in. I think that guys who knit have to be a little bit brave, and I can appreciate that. In particular, somebody who would go out and knit in public” (Lily, 36). Like Lily, many female knitters suggest that men should not be excluded from participating in an enjoyable activity. Others go further to connect men's knitting to a larger shift in gender roles. From this perspective, men's knitting takes on significant symbolic importance. This view is demonstrated in the following conversation with Kara (26), a self-identified feminist: Kara: I think [men's knitting] also kind of plays into leveling the playing field between men and women. Because I think women are also out in the workplace but they're also still expected to be more, you know, like head of the household, like taking care of all that. So I think it kind of gives women the feeling we're equals now. For men there's still the stigma. Men are kind of not as equal. Because they're supposed to be out working and it doesn't bring the two worlds together. Maura: So women would see themselves as more similar to men if women were not only doing masculine things, but if men were doing feminine things? Kara: Yeah. But also, its men doing laundry or men helping around the house. Kara is clearly making a connection between the increasing number of men knitting and larger shifts in gender roles in the workplace and in the home. A male knitter had a similar thought: I think that women would appreciate it more if a guy did knit. I don't think that the two sides will ever balance out, but just filling up the men's side a little more might be good… Well, it's the age of equality. Just like I said, balancing that scale out. Getting it a little bit more level. Getting guys to learn to go outside their boundaries, outside of their comfort zone (Ben, 36). Although Ben is less specific about the ways in which knitting might challenge gender roles, he does suggest that men's knitting has symbolic meaning and may contribute progression towards to gender equality. While young female knitters may want to challenge stereotypes about knitters as “grannies,” male knitters have little choice in their participation in subverting gender norms when they knit in public. Male knitters generally attract more attention than women in public spaces and some male knitters express pleasure in doing so. One knitter posted on Ravelry “I enjoy pushing gender roles. I think we as a society are too constricted by gender roles and need to be more focused on individual preferences. In my mind there is something about a 6′2″ 300 lb man knitting on public transit that will either make people sit up in shock, or smile. And if I have done either, then my day is worthwhile.” Despite the stereotypes about men who knit and the risk of hostile

responses, most of the men I interviewed stated that they regularly knit in public. However, some men expressed reluctance to do so, such as Mark who only knit in “safe places.” Ben (36) further describes the ways in which stereotypes associated with male knitters can result in uncomfortable situations: My friends have actually laughed at me at times. I think it is a little bit stranger for them. A knitter isn't fazed but a non-knitter seeing a guy knit… there's definitely a lot of negative connotations there that immediately spring to mind. So yeah, I think that a lot of non-knitters aren't willing to let go of their stereotypes at first… [which are] that I'm insane. You know, I could be gay. But, I mean, that's all untrue and I think once I tell them that I get to hang out with like ten to twelve hot chicks each week [at my stitch 'n bitch group]… In the quote above, Ben specifically identifies the assumption that male knitters are gay. While he is comfortable engaging in an activity that exposes him to this sort of stereotype, he notably also references his heterosexuality. Male knitters, particularly straight men, regularly use references to masculinity and heterosexuality as a way to counteract the stigma of knitting. In Ravelry posts, men joke that knitting is a great way to attract women. While these statements may be playful, it seems that these references also serve to shore up the masculinity and heterosexuality that is challenged when men knit. Local knitting communities Writers and scholars have discussed the possibilities for local knitting groups as sites of feminist communities (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007; Stoller, 2003). In Stitch 'n Bitch: The Knitter's Handbook, Debbie Stoller (2003) writes that stitch 'n bitch groups were originally conceptualized as an explicitly feminist project that would challenge the public/private spheres, reclaim a devalued female craft, challenge stereotypes about knitters, and trouble gender norms. Stitch 'n bitch groups challenge the public/private divide by purposefully shifting an activity traditionally performed alone in the domestic sphere into an unexpected public group performance. I examine how local stitch 'n bitch groups may be locations for intentional feminist politics as well as locations of subversive opposition. I found that the topic of feminism very rarely came up at my primary stitch 'n bitch group. For example, Becky mentioned that an online group she had started for plus-sized women knitters had “grrls” in the title. She said that it would “be easy to remember.” I asked her if it was a “feminist thing” and she said “sort of, but it's not like I used ‘womyn’ or anything.” In an interview that occurred fairly early in my fieldwork, I discussed the presence of feminists in the knitting community with Ben (36), a member of the primary stitch 'n bitch group I attended. I asked him how the group would react if an outspoken feminist joined the group: Ben: I think like if one came into our group and started soap boxing with us, I think we would definitely, even if we shared some of her views, either downplay her or tell her to knock it off, because we get together as a more social aspect. There might be groups, and especially on Ravelry, that fall into that category of feminists issues, hot

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

button topics. And they're fine to discuss it there. But when coming into something that we view more as a social aspect I don't think it would be welcomed 100 percent. It might come up in conversation, but if it kept coming up week after week it would probably put a little bit of a, you know, back burner on the fun aspect. Maura: In our group, people don't really talk about their political views very much. Ben: Oh, no. No, we really don't at ours. At our group we don't. We really don't. Things, you know, that are like abortion and gay rights and politics and who we're voting for just don't really come up. No. Maura: Why do you think that is? Ben: I think that people are more or less happy just talking about movies and the [knitting] project they're working on. They get enough of that probably in day-today life or talking with their spouses or their SOs [significant others] or just their friends… We're like an oasis away from that all where you can just be goofy. Over time, the group shifted somewhat in terms of discussing political issues. Particularly during the 2008 elections, the candidates and issues were regularly discussed. One of the group members worked for the state Democratic Party and would occasionally report to the group on the status of various issues being address in state politics. The majority of the group members identified as liberal and several identified as feminists. However, there were also several who identified as Libertarian or Republican. There were also others who expressed they had no interest in politics. Given the diversity in political views, there was potential for heated discussions of Ben's “hot button” topics; however, this never occurred. Discussions of political issues were limited and carefully moderated in order to maintain a peaceful and “fun” atmosphere in the group. None of the knitters I interviewed described the stitch 'n bitch groups they attended as feminist. This is consistent with my observations in four knitting groups and other fiber arts events; the groups I observed were largely apolitical and cannot be described as engaging in an explicitly feminist project. In her profiles of various knitting groups in the book Stitch 'n Bitch Nation, Debbie Stoller (2004) included a few profiles that included descriptions of the group or group members as “feminist”; however, most profiles did not describe groups in this way. Thus, while there are explicitly feminist stitch 'n bitch groups, not all groups identify in this way. Although participants in stitch 'n bitch groups may not necessarily describe their knitting groups as feminist, there a several ways in which these groups may be contributing to a larger feminist project. One way is through charity knitting, which Pentney (2008) considers a middle location on the continuum of feminist knitting practices. Most of the individuals I interviewed or met in my ethnographic fieldwork had participated in some form of charity knitting. The charity knitting I observed and participated in included both group and individual projects. One of the knitters I interviewed was a co-founder of a group whose mission was “knitting for peace.” The group's volunteers knit a variety of items, which were sold at fundraising events. All the proceeds were donated to local organizations promoting “peace” (broadly defined), such as an organization providing low-cost counseling to the community

9

and a cultural center. Through the fundraising events, the group also sought to educate the public about the organizations that receive the donations. Thus, this organization was explicitly political, although not explicitly feminist, in that it sought to both raise money for non-profit organizations and raise awareness about social justice issues. Members of the stitch 'n bitch group where I conducted my primary fieldwork discussed yarn bombing several times. At one meeting it was suggested that the group do a yarn bombing project together, but the group never followed through. The group discussed where the project might occur but the meaning of these proposed actions was never discussed. As noted above, the practice of yarn bombing has multiple meanings, ranging from an esthetic statement to political protest. However, without explicit intentionality, the inclusion of this practice as part of a tactical repertoire is questionable (Taylor & Van Dyke, 2004). The knitting groups I observed can be read as subversive in the way that they seek to reclaim a traditional female craft and challenge the public/private divide (Stoller, 2003). Many knitters seek to distance knitting from both traditional femininity and the domestic sphere. As noted above, knitters I interviewed argued that their knitting is fundamentally different from knitting in previous generations because women today are choosing to do participate in a craft requiring skill and creativity rather than mandated by gender norms to perform a domestic chore. Part of this project is to trouble the connections between the domestic sphere and knitting. Stitch 'n bitch groups are often successful in eliciting a reaction from observers. In my ethnographic work, I found that most people that approach knitters are genuinely interested and thoughtful in their questions and comments. At my primary stitch 'n bitch group, one particularly memorable man exclaimed “Knitting! That's awesome! That's the shit!” Members of primary my stitch 'n bitch group almost always engaged strangers in conversation and people who expressed interest in knitting were usually invited to join the group (a few took our group up on this offer). As Jessie (a member of this group) stated in an interview, “One of the reasons I knit in public is because I want people to see me. I want people to ask. I want people to get interested. I just want people to know. I always say I'm a textile evangelist. I want to preach the word!” Knitters I interviewed articulated the desire to bring knitting into the public sphere and distance knitting from traditional domestic femininity. Many knitters do enjoy challenging gender norms and stereotypes about knitters through the performance of knitting in public. As noted earlier, a limitation of the potential for resistance is that in many situations, the subversive aspect of knitting fails to become apparent to observers. As noted earlier, the types of projects I observed being knit closely resembled “traditional” knitting. Further, most groups are primarily or entirely composed of women, thus reinforcing that these crafts are only “for women.” At one stitch 'n bitch meeting I attended, a small boy approached the group, entranced by the two women using spinning wheels. As he watched, his father told him “That's only for girls.” While one group member was quick to interject “Oh no its not,” it is not clear that the stitch 'n bitch group always successfully relayed this message to observers.

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

10

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Online knitting communities Writers and scholars have also discussed knitting groups as sites of feminist communities (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007; Stoller, 2003). Ravelry, an online knitting community, provides a site for building feminist communities online, or “cyberfeminism” (Hawthorne & Klein, 1999; Plant, 1996; Reiche & Kuni, 2004; Wajcman, 2004). Feminists and discussions of feminism can be found in groups on Ravelry, such as “This is What a Feminist Knits Like,” “Femiknitters,” and “Busties Knit” (a group for fans of BUST magazine). These forums provide space for feminist knitters to discuss personal and political challenges of feminism. For example, in the long-running thread in the “This is What a Feminist Knits Like” group titled “What pisses you off?” feminists describe a variety of forms of sexism, homophobia, heteronormativity, racism, and classism that “piss them off.” A small sampling of other posts include: [When someone says] girlfriend/friend/partner after I've already said wife. When my friend was trying to get an estimate on a new tub/shower and the salesman refused to make an appointment unless her husband would be home.

general forum. Most discussion threads that were explicitly about feminism involved reoccurring debates about what feminism means and whether or not a specific behavior or choice is feminist or anti-feminist. Some examples of these “feminist or not” debates include: knitting and other forms of “domesticity” (e.g. sewing, cooking), make up, women staying home with children, women taking a husband's last name, and using Ms. versus Mrs. In these threads, both feminists and non-feminists weighed in on how they interpreted feminism and a wide variety of orientations towards feminism are demonstrated. In other locations on Ravelry, such the “Submitted Wifestyle” group discussed earlier, clearly anti-feminist views predominate. In examining these online discussions of feminism, there is some evidence for the claim that Ravelry is a “feminist space” or site of “cyberfeminism.” There are some explicitly feminist spaces, such as the “This is What a Feminist Knits Like” group, that allow for discussion of feminism and creation of feminist community. In the larger Ravelry community, there are a wide variety of views on feminism, including negative attitudes towards feminism. Further, although feminism is discussed, people may easily choose not to read about it. Notably, only a few of the knitters I interviewed (including the self-identified feminists who regularly used the site) reported ever reading about feminism on Ravelry.

Anyone calling an adult woman a “girl.” Conclusion I am mad that people (mostly men) think I should not have control over my own body… I am mad at the person who shot Dr. Tiller [a doctor who performed abortions] and the person who shot the anti-choice demonstrator… I am mad that people think being pro-choice is being proabortion. Republicans. When my mom calls it, “your feminist thing, issues, or whatever.” This board provides feminist knitters a space to discuss both structural inequalities as well as everyday acts of oppression. Participants on the board reaffirm one another, offer similar experience, suggest possibilities for creating structural change, and offer ways to interrupt experiences of oppression. The group “This is What a Feminist Knits Like” is consistent with discussions of online knitting communities as a site of “cyberfeminism,” (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007) where women can engage with information technology to promote progressive feminist politics. The discussion of feminism in the larger Ravelry community is both limited and somewhat problematic. In 2009, the organizers of Ravelry instituted a new rule that no discussions related to “politics or religion” were to be permitted on the main forums (although participants were encouraged to pursue political debates on other forums). In 2011, the organizers of Ravelry closed the general forum dedicated to topics not about knitting, citing the fact that it was too large and too difficult to moderate. Prior to 2011, there were many examples of individuals referencing feminism or their feminist identity in threads on a wide variety of topics on the

My research suggests that there is much variation in the degree to which individual knitters and knitting communities engage with feminist politics. My findings are, in some ways, similar to Pentney's (2008) discussion of a continuum of feminist knitting, which includes examples ranging from knitting as an explicitly feminist activism and/or art to charity knitting and fundraising activities to the celebration of knitting as a domestic art and building of community. In my research, I found some examples of knitting as explicitly feminist, notably among a few feminist knitters I interviewed who identified their knitting as a form of “everyday feminism” (e.g. Baumgardner & Richards, 2000). Further, I found explicitly feminist communities within the feminist forums on Ravelry, which fit with definitions of “cyberfeminism” (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007). In other cases, individuals and communities interpreted knitting practices as subversive (although not necessarily feminist). I also found examples of individual knitters and knitting communities that are clearly not feminist and are largely apolitical, such as the stitch 'n bitch where I did my primary ethnographic research and the larger Ravelry community (outside of the explicitly feminist spaces within the community). In my research, I also noted explicitly antifeminist views within knitting communities, such as the conservative forum “Submissive Wifestyle” on Ravelry. In my interviews and ethnographic work, I found a few examples of feminist knitters engaging in “craftivism” (Greer, 2011), such as the woman who started the “knitting for peace” group. In comparison to Pentney (2008), I am more skeptical about the possibilities for knitting as a feminist practice in everyday life. My conclusion aligns with Groeneveld's (2010) argument about the limited and context-specific nature of feminist knitting practices. I find that although knitting practices may

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

not be explicitly feminist, they can still contribute to larger feminist projects. Overall, my research suggests that there are some clear examples of contestation within knitting communities, that is, action that seeks to upset oppressive power relations (Taylor & Van Dyke, 2004). There are some explicitly feminist individual and communities. More broadly, knitting offers the opportunity to both male and female knitters to challenge gender norms. For men, knitting in public challenges gender norms by questioning assumptions about what sorts of hobbies men can take up and what those hobbies say about masculinity (Del Vecchio, 2006). By participating in a traditionally feminine craft, men may face criticism from others as well as assumptions about their masculinity and sexuality. Some men seek to reassert their heterosexual masculinity. Others are more comfortable with their gender transgression, adopting an alternative form of masculinity. In discussing intentionality as a criterion for tactical repertoires, Taylor and Van Dyke argued, “we should be asking what are the intentions of the actors and whether a particular set of actors are consciously and strategically promoting or resisting change in dominant relations of power” (2008:270). Among men who knit, the violation of gender norms may or may not be intentional; however, in this case, the act is still political in the sense that it contributes to the feminist project of challenging gender norms. Some men enjoy troubling gender, while other men seek to minimize perceptions of their practice of knitting as subversive, for example, by seeking to reaffirm their masculinity and heterosexuality. For women, the creation of alternative femininities can be more subtle, redefining a traditionally feminine craft into a creative artistic outlet. While knitters seek to create empowering alternative femininities, the new forms of femininity being promoted can be problematic, as in the example of the sexualized images of the “mud flap girl.” Knitting, as well as aspects of the discourse of third wave “girlie feminism” more generally (e.g. Baumgardner & Richards, 2000), can fall into the trap of the uncritical use of the “choice” discourse that suggests that any choice a woman makes might be feminist without analysis of the ways in which it may (or may not) contribute to the feminist project of achieving gender equality. Further, the politicized intention of knitting can be limited by the possibility of misinterpretation by onlookers. Finally, only a few of the feminists I interviewed saw any connection between their own feminist identity and their knitting. Even among those who saw a connection between knitting and feminism were not purposefully engaging in knitting as a feminist practice; most of my participants were feminists who knit, not feminist knitters. Further, some knitters see their practice of knitting is fully in line with dominant relations of power. Knitting communities demonstrate aspects of the “everywhere and nowhere” feminism described by Reger (2012). Feminism is “everywhere” in the knitting community in that there are many self-identified feminists in the community and knitting has been described as part of feminist culture (e.g. Baumgardner & Richards, 2000). Yet, feminism is also “nowhere,” that is, there is relatively little explicit discussion of feminism and little visible feminist activism in knitting groups, outside of explicitly feminist spaces, such as the “This is What a Feminist Knits Like” group.

11

The data I draw on for this analysis, particularly the ethnographic research and the interview participants, are not intended to be representative of the entire knitting community. However, through this close look at the knitting practices and meanings of “everyday knitters,” who do not necessarily identify as artists or activists, I am able to contribute to the larger discussion about the multiple meanings of knitting. Further, by including analysis of the online community Ravelry, I am able to include a broader range of orientations towards feminism and knitting. Future research seeking to further engage these discussions might identify explicitly feminist stitch 'n bitch groups and compare the ways in which knitting practices are taken up in these sites. Thus, based on my interviews and ethnographic research in knitting communities, I argue that scholars and others writing about knitting primarily as art and activism have been “overly optimistic” about the potential for knitting as a location for feminist politics (Minahan & Wolfram Cox, 2007; Pentney, 2008; Robertson, 2011). However, there are elements that are subversive and that can contribute to a feminist project of social change. For example, men who knit unarguably trouble gender norms in a way that can only be progressive. I see a further connection to feminist goals in reclaiming a traditionally domestic feminine craft, contributing to the creation of alternative femininities and masculinities, challenging the public/private divide, developing communities, and making positive change through charity knitting. Ultimately, while knitting can be a part of a feminist project, the contested meanings of knitting practices suggest limited and contextspecific possibilities for knitting as a feminist project. Acknowledgments This project was funded by a Doctoral Dissertation Extraordinary Expense Award at the University of Connecticut. The author would like to thank Mary Bernstein, Nancy Naples, David Weakliem, Gordon Gauchat, and Natalie Peluso for their helpful comments on drafts of this manuscript. A version of this paper was presented at the American Sociological Association meeting in Boston MA in 2008. References Armstrong, Elizabeth A., & Bernstein, Mary (2008). Culture, power, and institution: A multi-institutional politics approach to social movements. Sociological Theory, 26(1), 74–99. Baumgardner, Jennifer, & Richards, Amy (2000). Manifesta: Young women, feminism, and the future (1st ed.)New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Black, Anthea, & Burisch, Nicole (2011). Craft hard die free: Radical curatorial strategies for craftivism. In Maria Elena Buszek (Ed.), Extra/ordinary: Craft and contemporary art (pp. 204–221). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Bobel, Chris (2010). New blood: Third-wave feminism and the politics of menstruation. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press. Charmaz, Kathy (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Del Vecchio, Michael (2006). Knitting with balls: A hands-on guide to knitting for the modern man (1st American ed.)New York: DK. Duncan, Barbara (2005). Searching for a home place: Online in the third wave. In Jo Reger (Ed.), Different wavelengths: Studies of the contemporary women's movement (pp. 161–178). New York: Routledge. Findlen, Barbara (2001). Listen up: Voices from the next feminist generation (New expanded ed.)Seattle, WA: Seal Press. Greer, Betsy (2011). Craftivist history. In Maria Elena Buszer (Ed.), Extra/ ordinary: Craft and contemporary art. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011

12

M. Kelly / Women's Studies International Forum xxx (2013) xxx–xxx

Groeneveld, Elizabeth (2010). ‘Join the knitting revolution’: Third wave feminist magazines and the politics of domesticity. Canadian Review of American Studies, 40(2), 259–277. Hawthorne, Susan, & Klein, Renate (1999). Cyberfeminism: Connectivity, critique and creativity. Hernández, Daisy, & Rehman, Bushra (2002). Colonize this! Young women of color on today's feminism. New York: Seal Press. Heywood, Leslie, & Drake, Jennifer (1997). Third wave agenda: Being feminist, doing feminism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Minahan, Stella, & Wolfram Cox, Julie (2007). Stitch 'n bitch: Cyberfeminism, a third place and the new materiality. Journal of Material Culture, 12(1), 5–21. Minahan, Stella, & Wolfram Cox, Julie (2011). The inner nana, the list mum and me: Knitting identity. Material Culture Review/Revue de la Culture Materielle, 72, 38–50. Moore, Mandy, & Prain, Leanne (2009). Yarn bombing: The art of crochet and knit graffiti. Vancouver, BC: Arsenal Pulp Press. Myzelev, Alla (2009). Whip your hobby into shape: Knitting, feminism and construction of gender. Textile: The Journal of Cloth and Culture, 7(2), 148–163. Parker, Rozsika (1984). The subversive stitch: Embroidery and the making of the feminine. London: The Women's Press. Pentney, Beth Ann (2008). Feminism, activism, and knitting: Are the fibre arts a viable mode for feminist political action? Thirdspace: A journal of feminist theory and culture, 8(1). Plant, Sadie (1996). On the matrix: Cyberfeminist simulations. In Rob Shields (Ed.), Cultures of internet: Virtual spaces, real histories, living bodies (pp. 181–182). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Polletta, Francesca, & Jasper, James M. (2001). Collective identity and social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 283–305. Reger, Jo (2012). Everywhere and nowhere: Contemporary feminism in the United States. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reiche, Claudia, & Kuni, Verena (2004). Cyberfeminism: Next protocols. Robertson, Kirsty (2011). Rebellious doilies and subversive stitches: Writing a craftivist history. In Maria Elena Buszer (Ed.), Extra/ordinary: Craft and contemporary art. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Rutt, Richard (2003). A history of hand knitting (U.S. ed.)Loveland, CO: Interweave Press. Staggenborg, Suzanne (1995). Can feminist organizations be effective? In Myra Marx Ferree, & Patrica Yancey Martin (Eds.), Feminist organizations: Harvest of the new women's movement (pp. 339–355). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Stoller, Debbie (2003). Stitch 'n bitch: The knitter's handbook. New York: Workman. Stoller, Debbie (2004). Stitch 'n bitch nation. New York: Workman. Taylor, Verta, & Van Dyke, Nella (2004). ‘Get up, stand up’: Tactical repertoires of social movements. In David A. Snow, Sarah Anne Soule, & Hanspeter Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 262–293). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Tilly, Charles (2004). Social movements, 1768–2004. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers. Wajcman, Judy (2004). Technofeminism. Cambridge: Polity. Wills, Kerry (2007). The close-knit circle: American knitters today. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Please cite this article as: Kelly, M., Knitting as a feminist project? Women's Studies International Forum (2013), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.10.011