Monday, July 28, 2014

Why I Don't Need (Pointless Declarations Against) Feminism

I wasn't going to wade into the Women Against Feminism tumblr and subsequent conversation, but I wrote a quick post about it on my Facebook page, and the discussion in the comments prompted me to give a little more reflection.


My entire point in posting this was that I think there's something more insidious about posting "I don't need feminism because ______" and then filling in the blank with something that basically suggests (or outright states) gender inequality or a patriarchal societal structure does not exist.

If you actually believe there is no gender inequality or a patriarchal structure, then why would you need to criticize it in this way? It would be like me making an entire tumblr to say that #IDontNeedUnicornCatchers.

That sounds ridiculous, though, right? Perhaps a more poignant analogy would be taking an actual post I saw on the tumblr that said "I don't need feminism because my boyfriend treats me right." It would be like me posting a picture of myself that says "I don't need veganism because I had a great chicken sandwich for lunch."

There are a lot of movements and affiliations that I "don't need." There are plenty of communities based in an ethical core principle (like feminism) with which I do not identify: veganism, Rastafarianism, Catholicism, Buddhism. There are also plenty of communities based in the work of the movement (also like feminism) with which I do not personally identify: engineers, psychologists, tarot card readers, optometrists, chiropractors.

In some cases, I see value and use the work that those communities produce. In some cases, I do not. In no cases do I feel the need to create a movement trying to tear down their beliefs. It would be like going around taking people's umbrellas from them because it's not raining at my house.

"I said you don't need this!"

In the responses to my Facebook post, one commenter responded that she doesn't need feminism because she doesn't "agree with the idea that women are equal." 

If that's what the women in this tumblr project wrote on their signs, it would be a valid movement. I would completely, vehemently disagree with their perspective, but it would be a valid reason to be against feminism and those claims would be honest and productive to that particular cause. Tearing down feminism because you disagree with gender equality makes sense. 

And that's the way that I have attacked communities when I have criticized them. I have criticized affiliation with certain political parties for this reason. I disagree with their core principles, so I am attacking those on their own merit. 

Another valid criticism of feminism that I've heard in this discussion is that feminism has a class and race problem. Much of the portrayal of mainstream feminism is too focused on rich white women. It leaves little room for the experiences of poor women, women of color, and trans* women. Those, too, are completely valid criticisms. If those women were holding up signs saying "I don't need feminism because it hasn't left a place for me and silences my views," that, too, would be a productive way to criticize and maybe even deconstruct a community (as the #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen (started by Mikki Kendall) and #FeminismIsForMothersToo (sparked by Kristen Rowe-Finkbeiner) social media moves both did).

There is plenty to criticize within the feminist movement, but saying that you don't need it because the patriarchy doesn't exist is a bait and switch. That's a way to shore up the power of the very patriarchal structure that ostensibly doesn't exist. It's dishonest and unproductive.

Not everyone is going to be a feminist. Even many people who believe in the principles of feminism aren't going to identify that way. I'm not going to go knocking door to door to try to sign people up. You're free to identify and not identify however makes sense to you and your experiences.

That doesn't mean you need to go tear down someone else's house.

Photo: Ian Iott

20 comments:

  1. So well-said. Something was bothering me about the whole thing, but I couldn't quantify it. I think you just did.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "If you actually believe there is no gender inequality or a patriarchal
    structure, then why would you need to criticize it in this way?"
    Why? maybe because its been the excuse that feminist have used for close to a century to excuse everything and demand more.
    Being a firefighter/soldier/police is too hard change the requirements for me or "Patriarchy"

    If feminism is for equality when are you going to demand to be mandatory to sign for the draft to get the right to vote, to a driver licence or to hold a job in any government area? where is your patriarchy there?
    Oh right, just gibe me my CEO chair because if you don't "Patriarchy" and why just 20% of congress is female? what do you mean women count for 51% of the population and they are more likely to vote than men? Nah Nah Nah we ain't responsible for that, that is the "Patriarchy"

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am actually an advocate for removing gender bias in the draft requirement.


    How is the fact that women don't vote for other women evidence AGAINST the patriarchy? Women are just as indoctrinated by sexist cultural standards as men.


    If by "demand more," you mean demand gender equality and the full opportunity to function in society free of the barriers of gendered norms, then sure. I want more.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "How is the fact that women don't vote for other women evidence AGAINST the patriarchy?Women are just as indoctrinated by sexist cultural standards as men."

    Wow you have really low esteem for women's mental capacity there, misogynist much?

    "If by "demand more," you mean demand gender equality"

    Gender equality? What are this rights you don't have?
    In the meantime on the subject of gender equality "5 Legal Rights Women Have That Men Don't

    http://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-bloomfield/2014/08/5-legal-rights-women-have-that-men-dont/

    ReplyDelete
  5. The expansion of the rape definition to include men at all happened with support and advocacy from the feminist community. Just because the work is not complete doesn't mean feminists aren't committed to it.


    It's not misogynistic to say that the assassination of female politicians in the media (commenting on their appearance, their "hormones," etc.) impacts women as well as men. In fact, it's recognizing that men and women are equally vulnerable to those presentations.


    I support gender equality. I believe that a primary job of contemporary feminism is to break down the way that traditionally feminized roles have been excluded from men. Men should have the cultural support to be caregivers just as women should have the cultural support to be CEOs.


    You're setting up straw men, which you can continue to do, but I'm not going to continue to play along.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Still not listing one right you don't actually have that men do, I linked you to a list of 5 that women have and men don't and Im the straw men?
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHHA.

    ReplyDelete
  7. There are legal rights denied to women, particularly surrounding reproductive rights, but it is also very disingenuous to suggest that inequality can only manifest itself legislatively.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Not one right, and you have the balls to call me straw men.

    "There are legal rights denied to women, particularly surrounding reproductive rights"
    Name one.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You seriously want me to name legislative rights denied to women? There are countries where women aren't allowed to drive or go to school.

    ReplyDelete
  10. And you're really just proving the point of my entire article (which I'm seriously suspecting you didn't read beyond the title). You don't need the movement. That's fine. I'm not recruiting you. The need to tear down something that you think is pointless is what I'm criticizing. There are plenty of movements that I don't need, but I don't spend my Saturdays seeking out blogs about them to argue their futility.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You arguments are against WAF which clearly point that they are against feminism in the western world and you are going to leach on women abuses in middle eastern countries because you have not a single right denied to you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. You're right that most of the legal rights denied to women have been rectified in the United States--they got that way thanks to feminist activism.


    I never claimed that women didn't have legal equality with men in the U.S. I claimed that women don't have social equality with them.


    Feminism, though, is not limited to the borders of the US, and while feminism does have class, race, and ethnocentric problems (which I do address in the body of this post), that's not going to stop me from hoping for a feminism that does all I believe it can.


    But, in regards to this post, I didn't really claim anything about equality at all. Again, you're not talking about the content of this post. You just saw that the title included the word "feminism" and decided to spend your afternoon attacking me--someone you don't know--within the bounds of some very narrow parameters and pre-rehearsed "arguments." That's a waste of both of our times.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I asked you, one question, one, and all of the sudden I have "no genuine interest to have a conversation or in good faith"?



    You have to go to a different continent and use other women that are ACTUALLY in peril, that are ACTUALLY oppressed to justify your need for feminism in a first world western country, and I quote:

    "You seriously want me to name legislative rights denied to women? There
    are countries where women aren't allowed to drive or go to school." and then tell me you are not leaching on middle eastern countries.


    And I am not acting in good faith?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ah the shut down argument "You don't know what you are talking about, you just waist your own time" see, I point you to actual facts on gender bias on the western world laws and you have point me to... the middle east, nice argument.

    "You just saw that the title included the word "feminism" and decided to spend your afternoon attacking me"

    NOT TRUE, if I can point you to the my very first post it goes like this, you asked why WAF waisted their time (Its funny you use that waisted time A LOT) pointing that patriarchy doesn't exist and asking why do they do that and I answered (quote):

    "Why? maybe because its been the excuse that feminist have used for near to a century to excuse everything and demand more. "


    See thats clearly not part of the tittle so, again, you are wrong assuming I didn't read your post.

    ReplyDelete
  15. She answered your question. She named two rights that women are denied. It just wasn't the answer you wanted.

    You do realize that even if women were completely equal in the eyes of the law that there would still be the issue of being equal in the eyes of society, right?

    This isn't about "who has it worse". No one's saying that men (and women) can't fight for men's rights. No one's saying that men don't face discrimination.

    What the author of this article is saying is that it's silly to try and tear someone else's movement just because you don't identify with it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. You mean the middle east examples? HAHAHAHAHAHA you are funny.

    ReplyDelete
  17. There are women in the middle east, are there not?

    Anyway, since you missed it:

    She answered your question. She named two rights that women are denied. It just wasn't the answer you wanted.

    You do realize that even if women were completely equal in the eyes of the law that there would still be the issue of being equal in the eyes of society, right?

    This isn't about "who has it worse". No one's saying that men (and women) can't fight for men's rights. No one's saying that men don't face discrimination.

    What the author of this article is saying is that it's silly to try and tear someone else's movement just because you don't identify with it.

    ReplyDelete
  18. You really need to stop dodging my original question and answer directly "What rights men have and women don't in the western society?" and just to put things in perspective here you have 5 rights women have and men don't

    http://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-bloomfield/2014/08/5-legal-rights-women-have-that-men-dont/

    Me a troll? you wish.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I wasn't aware that question was aimed at me.

    I don't know what rights men have that women don't in the U.S (I'm assuming that's where you're coming from. Correct me if I'm wrong.)

    But over here, in Nigeria, it's still legal for a 60 year old man to marry a 10 year old girl.

    I think though, that I need to make it clear where I'm coming from; I believe that the law is 90% equal (forgive me for pulling that out my ass), but I don't believe that the APPLICATION of the law is equal. Feminism, Women's Rights Activism and Human Rights Activism have pressured government officials and legislatures into removing laws that unfairly disadvantage women (i.e not being able to vote, work, own property, etc), and implementing laws that puts us on an equal footing with men. I can recognise that in the eyes of the law, women and and men are (for the most part) equal. But we still have shit like laws against abortion and laws against birth control and government officials who cannot fathom for the life of them why women NEED birth control (dear lord).

    I think I need to point out that the Equal Rights Amendment actually FELL OUT OF FAVOUR. As in, the people (men) writing these laws decided that women didn't need to vote after all, and revoked the right.

    ^That is the problem, I think. That women are farther along in the law than we were in say, the 60's, but that if we cannot convince SOCIETY that women are equal, then these laws may very well "fall out of favour".

    Before you berate me for not answering your question: In Nigeria, it's legal to marry a girl 50 years younger than you (who is not even a legal adult). In Nigeria, abortion is still illegal.



    There, two rights that negatively impact women.


    As for the article: thanks for sharing it, but I think we can agree that some of those inequalities come as a result of SOCIAL inequality. It's horrible that men don't have those rights, but stopping women from gaining more rights isn't going to help shit. What we need to do is to help men gain those rights. What we need to do is help men up, not drag women down.
    I can't speak for every single feminist, but I actively advocate for men's rights wherever I see that they are at a disadvantage.


    But, honestly, you're not going to get much on the subject of legal rights from me, because I'm more into the social aspect of equality. *Kanye shrug*

    ReplyDelete