My ears always prick up when someone talks about feminism. I always wonder when someone is being negative about the movement, what type of feminism are they actually referring to?
Do they know the difference between Liberal Feminism (which seeks to establish equal rights through policy change), Cultural Feminism (which seeks to establish competitive female power structures) and Radical Feminism (which seeks the total abolition of gender as we know it.)
And when they talk about Feminism, are they referring to the early days of Women’s Liberation or modern Feminism?
First-wave feminism
1800 – 1945. Centered on securing basic civil rights, such as the right to vote and to own property
Second-wave feminism
1945 – 1980. Centered on achieving equality in the workplace, protecting reproductive choice, and attempting to pass the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment).
Third-wave feminism
1980 to date. Incorporates racial justice, LGBT rights, and class oppression into the main feminist worldview which seeks practical equality for all women.
Can men be Feminists? Is Feminism dead?
Because the label “Feminist” needs further clarification, the argument that Feminism as a concept is dead and should be re-branded as Humanism is certainly compelling. In my humble opinion, whether you call yourself a Humanist or a Feminist, the issues that modern Feminism (the Third-wave) are fighting to raise awareness of and overcome affect all humans, men and women.
Calling it Humanism won’t change the spirit of the enterprise and at least calling it Feminism takes into account the historical path.
And as for men… why wouldn’t men be comfortable calling themselves Feminists?
Feminism is not about division of the sexes.
Feminism is not about hating or emasculating men.
Feminism is not about judging men and women for the choices that they make.
Feminism is about re-educating both men and women about:
1) the institutions that restrict their choices and define how they “should” look or behave or feel
2) the factors that contribute towards the cultural climate and taking positive action against both.
As a movement it began to allow women the freedom to live on equal terms with men and not be made subservient by law or culture. I think we can argue that in terms of men and law we are more equal and less subservient than in previous waves, but in terms of culture we have never been anything less than subservient. And THAT is what has to change.
What IS the current cultural climate?
The way women are presented in the media: Headless, fetishised body parts with no personality, agenda, opinions. Pure objectification. We’re numbed to it! We’re so used to the adverts, the celebrity features, to pornography saturating our culture in posters, magazines, on television, on the internet.
Magazines are filled with articles on how to increase our self esteem, yet filled with adverts for beauty products, surgical procedures and crash diets. On one page a celebrity is bewailed for being painfully thin, and on the next, a circle is drawn around another’s cellulite.
In this age of supposed equality, where women are world leaders, scientists, entrepreneurs, Nobel prize winners, journalists, authors – the media still reduces them to their physicality, gender, sexuality.
Why is the size of their breasts, or the length of their legs, relevant? Why is their job title prefaced with their gender or sexuality?
When Obama became president, he was constantly referred to as a “black president” – an adjective which is completely irrelevant to his role. It’s the same with women – they’re not a woman CEO, they’re a CEO. They’re not a Bisexual CEO, they’re a CEO.
The pressure put on women to look a certain way is enormous, and whether they do or don’t conform to the media ideal – they are judged by it. The media peddles images of women who are degraded, sexually harassed and suffering body dysmorphia. Of women who are waxed, made up and airbrushed to look different from the way real, healthy women actually look. The representation of women by the media is a major cause of gender inequality and the premature-sexualisation of children.
Campaigns like #NoMorePage3 attempt to raise awareness of the way women are represented in the media and call for a change.
What are they met with? Ah those hairy-legged porn hating feminists! Lighten up – it’s just a bit of cheeky fun…
Myth: Feminists hate porn
Modern feminists do not say that pornography should be banned. They strive to ensure that we recognise the impact of pornography on children, teen and adult relationships, female body image and call for content which is less accessible to those under age and does not demean or enslave women, but rather reflects a healthy view of human sexuality.
Myth: Feminists don’t wear sexy clothes or have cosmetic surgery
Modern feminists do not say that women should not have cosmetic surgery, wear makeup, be feminine or glamorous. They suggest that the media be responsible for what they project and perpetuate, and that women are not under pressure from men, from women, from society as a whole to look a certain way.
Campaigns like #EverydaySexism attempt to raise awareness of sexism experienced by people (not just women…) on a day to day basis. It’s a catalogue of “serious” and “minor” instances, both the obviously offensive and the easily dismissable.
What is your view on Feminism? Are you a Feminist? And if not – why?
Lianne
Part of the problem, to which your article points, is that the definition of feminism has become so broad as to be, at times, almost meaningless. On a very subjective level this isn’t a problem. For example, lots of people have long called themselves socialists without any greater understanding of the concept than a vague sense of working class solidarity. I think feminism is similar in that, in general, it’s become a vague expression of solidarity between, or with, women. And in this vague sense even men can call themselves feminists. However, while being pro-equality, I wouldn’t call myself a feminist, and I’m sure many feminists would also object to those men that do.
While feminism started out as a movement for equality, if anything defines feminism it is the theory of Patriarchy. Feminist begins with the particular experience of women, from which Patriarchy developed as a general theory of society. Patriarchy suggests there is an ahistorical dynamic based on male dominance over women, rooted in men’s very nature. So you may argue that feminism is about ‘re-educating’ everyone, but it’s hard to imagine how that could overcome the idea of fundamental biological difference in how we understand the world, and on which feminism itself is based. This also makes it difficult to reconcile feminism and humanism.
Humanism expresses a positive belief in the human potential – something very much under attack today in our increasingly misanthropic times. Crucially, humanism is universalist in its outlook. It believes that what we have in common is more important than the differences of culture and biology, whereas feminism puts forward a particular female view of the world, based on subjective experience. This also explains why it has fragmented into many different ‘feminisms’. Some see the fact feminism can mean anything to anyone as a strength, but before feminism can fight ‘to raise awareness of and overcome [issues that] affect all humanity’, it would first have to develop a theory that could unite all humanity. The problem is it would then not be feminism.
Paul