In the UK, us girls are pretty lucky. Thanks to past generations, and some not too long ago, we are secure in the knowledge that we have sexual freedom, are able to plan if and when we have children, and now, divorce is a viable way out of an unhappy marriage, an action no longer stigmatised by society. Yet, we still have 'Women's Hour' and talk of the sisterhood; it looks like we're still fighting for something. It's clear to see why: the glass ceiling is still a real problem, with women earning 14.9% less than men per hour, and FGM on the rise in this country, a shocking trend in our liberal democracy. At this point, then, it seems logical, nay, wholly correct that feminism is still seen as relevant and necessary to us, even in a 'progressive' society like ours. Surely?
I want to make it absolutely clear that I don't intend for this post to be a rant, or a tirade against men. What I hope to do is try to piece together a clearer picture of how people respond to the 'F' word, particularly men, because I think that theirs is a perspective that is often dismissed in this discussion.
All this started when the aforementioned word came up in conversation with a male relative of mine, who quipped that women don't need feminism anymore, as it does more damage than good. In his mind, all it does is widen the gap between men and women, something very few of us want. I pressed him, asking that he recognise that there are issues which women face, such as the glass ceiling, and many others. This he didn't deny, but what crept beneath the surface of his argument was the perception that feminism, as it is understood today, wishes to supplant men, to out-do them and prove that women are somehow bigger and better. Now, I'll admit that at first, I was aghast. How could he make such an outlandish statement?! Needless to say, we proceeded to have a rather heated debate about the issue, ending, finally, with the age-old attempt at diplomacy: 'let's agree to disagree.' Me being me, I wasn't satisfied, so I decided to look for answers from more people.
I took to Facebook & Twitter (as you do these days) to do a little research. I waspretty very excited when Cherry Healey responded to the title of this post, answering: 'It depends on your definition. If it's 'equality& freedom of choice', then I hope it is.' Isn't this the crux of the issue? Isn't this what Emmeline Pankhurst and Mary Wollstonecraft were fighting for? Yes, of course it is, but as I have had to realise, this idealised picture of feminism and its goals isn't always accurate.
After talking to a few men about it, I have come to appreciate that there is a very real issue: there are some feminist voices which can alienate men, and even intimidate them. Why? After talking to a few blokes about this, I began to understand that it's an all too frequent reality that feminists, or feminism, are seen to create a divide between men and women, perpetuating a 'battle of the sexes' of sorts, in which us girls are seen to pit ourselves against men, staunchly dedicated to a game of one-upmanship. It's this breed of feminism which is oh so close to looking like women want to supplant men, and unfortunately, tips gender balance over the edge: a symptom we should always be wary of, whichever sex it disadvantages. I won't deny that women do still face gender inequality, trust me, this is something I don't wish to downplay. Aside from the really serious offences, such as FGM and pay inequality, the objectification of women is an issue that needs to be tackled. Yet, let's not forget that men face it too- even if it doesn't happen as often. I wonder... if 'Magic Mike' was a facile portrayal a band of female strippers in Amsterdam's red light district and their woes, with bits bouncing around, would feminist groups rise up in protest, or no? Think about it. What makes it OK to paint men as sexual objects, implying that their worth depends solely on their physicality, when it's definitely unacceptable for this to happen to women?
After listening to some men who were quite clearly wary of the 'F' word, it became evident that the question of whether feminism is relevant or not depends on a return to its original aims: the achievement of gender equality and respect for men and women in equal and just measure. Remember, men face gender inequality too. There's a good reason why Fathers for Justice are in existence, and the underlying issues which provoke the organisation should be a concern for all of us, including feminists.
What I'm trying to say, is that if we want feminism to be relevant, we need to make it relevant. Somewhere down the line, it's become a dirty word, something to shy away from. Maybe this is why I got defensive when I was quizzed about my feminism, instantly insisting that I have not, and probably never will, burn one of my bras. I admit that my reaction was naive because the original ideals the 'F' word represents are still in demand, and it's thanks to the actions of women of past generations that we've come so far. While gender inequality persists (whoever it disadvantages), these values need to be put into practise, let's just do it in a way that puts well-thinking people on side, not solely other women. As Jane Galvin Lewis put it bluntly: 'You don't have to be anti-man to be pro-woman.'
Miss D x
I want to make it absolutely clear that I don't intend for this post to be a rant, or a tirade against men. What I hope to do is try to piece together a clearer picture of how people respond to the 'F' word, particularly men, because I think that theirs is a perspective that is often dismissed in this discussion.
All this started when the aforementioned word came up in conversation with a male relative of mine, who quipped that women don't need feminism anymore, as it does more damage than good. In his mind, all it does is widen the gap between men and women, something very few of us want. I pressed him, asking that he recognise that there are issues which women face, such as the glass ceiling, and many others. This he didn't deny, but what crept beneath the surface of his argument was the perception that feminism, as it is understood today, wishes to supplant men, to out-do them and prove that women are somehow bigger and better. Now, I'll admit that at first, I was aghast. How could he make such an outlandish statement?! Needless to say, we proceeded to have a rather heated debate about the issue, ending, finally, with the age-old attempt at diplomacy: 'let's agree to disagree.' Me being me, I wasn't satisfied, so I decided to look for answers from more people.
I took to Facebook & Twitter (as you do these days) to do a little research. I was
After talking to a few men about it, I have come to appreciate that there is a very real issue: there are some feminist voices which can alienate men, and even intimidate them. Why? After talking to a few blokes about this, I began to understand that it's an all too frequent reality that feminists, or feminism, are seen to create a divide between men and women, perpetuating a 'battle of the sexes' of sorts, in which us girls are seen to pit ourselves against men, staunchly dedicated to a game of one-upmanship. It's this breed of feminism which is oh so close to looking like women want to supplant men, and unfortunately, tips gender balance over the edge: a symptom we should always be wary of, whichever sex it disadvantages. I won't deny that women do still face gender inequality, trust me, this is something I don't wish to downplay. Aside from the really serious offences, such as FGM and pay inequality, the objectification of women is an issue that needs to be tackled. Yet, let's not forget that men face it too- even if it doesn't happen as often. I wonder... if 'Magic Mike' was a facile portrayal a band of female strippers in Amsterdam's red light district and their woes, with bits bouncing around, would feminist groups rise up in protest, or no? Think about it. What makes it OK to paint men as sexual objects, implying that their worth depends solely on their physicality, when it's definitely unacceptable for this to happen to women?
After listening to some men who were quite clearly wary of the 'F' word, it became evident that the question of whether feminism is relevant or not depends on a return to its original aims: the achievement of gender equality and respect for men and women in equal and just measure. Remember, men face gender inequality too. There's a good reason why Fathers for Justice are in existence, and the underlying issues which provoke the organisation should be a concern for all of us, including feminists.
What I'm trying to say, is that if we want feminism to be relevant, we need to make it relevant. Somewhere down the line, it's become a dirty word, something to shy away from. Maybe this is why I got defensive when I was quizzed about my feminism, instantly insisting that I have not, and probably never will, burn one of my bras. I admit that my reaction was naive because the original ideals the 'F' word represents are still in demand, and it's thanks to the actions of women of past generations that we've come so far. While gender inequality persists (whoever it disadvantages), these values need to be put into practise, let's just do it in a way that puts well-thinking people on side, not solely other women. As Jane Galvin Lewis put it bluntly: 'You don't have to be anti-man to be pro-woman.'
 |
| See? Obama gets it! {Via Stephanie Speer on Pinterest} |
Miss D x
No comments:
Post a Comment