September 26, 2012
-
I realized something about feminism today.
I finally realized today what it is that bothers me about feminism: It’s the mainstream feminist response to crazy radical feminism.
I’m talking about lesbian separatists, radfems, anyone who says things like “all pornography is degrading to women” or “heterosexuality is inherently patriarchal”.
They respond like a religion, like Islam really: “That’s just a minority of extremists.”
They should respond like a cohesive political movement: “That’s not feminism.“If feminism is really about equality, then this shouldn’t even be a difficult thing to say; indeed, it should feel precisely natural. Someone who hates all men because they are men is not interested in equality, and therefore should be considered just as anti-feminist as any misogynist. When feminists don’t respond this way, I find myself wondering: “Well what does feminism mean then?” By allowing in people like this, you dilute the definition of feminism and what it stands for, until… it doesn’t seem to stand for much at all.
If someone advocated for a fascist dictatorship but identified as a social democrat, we wouldn’t say “That’s a minority of extremists.” We say, “They are not social democrats. I don’t know why they call themselves that. They’re mistaken, or lying. This is not social democracy.”
In fact even political movements aren’t as good about this as they should be. Indeed, this is one thing I actually don’t like about a lot of socialist organizations for example; they try to have such a big tent that anyone who is at all leftist is included, rather than only people who actually believe in what would properly be called social democracy or democratic socialism. (And if you’re advocating for non-democratic socialism, then I do not support you so please go somewhere else.)
When this is done right, it’s a very good thing. For example, one of the things that Martin Luther King Jr. explicitly denounced any black extremists who advocated separatism or violence against whites. He didn’t say “These are extreme civil rights activists.” He said: “These are NOT civil rights activists. They are something else and we don’t support them.”
Shrinking feminism’s tent in this way would not weaken feminism. It would strengthen it—it could potentially strengthen it dramatically. Radfems and their ilk should be excluded from being allowed to call themselves feminist in the same way that fascists are excluded from calling themselves socialists (the Nazis tried!). When someone tries to co-opt your terminology in this way, you denounce them. You make it very clear that they are not what you represent.
And if that doesn’t work, how about you try a new terminology for yourself? I like “egalitarian” and “gender freedom”. How could anyone be a radical extremist egalitarian?
Comments (5)
Feminism is a form of sexism. and sexism is a form of bigotry. Be that as it may, women generally have a legitimate complaint against men for years of oppression and for having been treated as inferiors. I can see both sides. As a man I am offended when lumped into the same group with womanizers and misogynists, but I tolerate it because I know it’s not much different than making jokes about women drivers and such. Everyone just needs to grow a thicker skin and learn how to respect the opposite sex as being different; not equal, but not inferior either.
I agree with you– it’s supposed to be about equality, regardless of gender. I call myself a “feminist” in the respect that I believe in equal pay for equal work, and equal treatment of both genders. But it gets annoying to hear people demonize men all the time, or to make such generalized, sweeping statements. It also gets annoying when I label myself as a feminist and people call me a “feminazi.” I never heard the one about heterosexuality– now I have to be a lesbian just to “rightfully” call myself a feminist??! Craziness.
I tend to avoid the term “feminist” even though I suppose I am one, just because of the negative connotations it has.
I think some Islamic countries are anti-female. Not so much the religion, as individuals have more control over what they take away from the book.
I don’t think heterosexuality is patriarcal, I think our society is. I don’t hate men, but I have a bone to pick with the men who still seem to think that a woman’s place is in the kitchen, not the work force.
I don’t know if there’s a word for me? I’d like to think that my views are “normal” to be honest. Gender freedom probably comes closest I guess because I care about the freedoms and stereotypes and treatment of transgendered people as well.
@tgwiy -
I agree with your comments pretty much completely. My minor quibble is that I’m not sure what “Islam the religion” means other than how it is actually practiced in Islamic societies.
@pnrj -
I worded it poorly… and I’m not sure how to word it…properly?
A moderate Muslim woman can choose if she wants to wear a hijab or not, where as in say, Iran, it’s law for a woman to cover her head whether she’s Muslim or not. I guess that’s where I’m trying to go with it?
People interpret the same book differently, so I guess I have less of a problem with it on an individual level.