The New F-Word

Feminism, by popular definition, is the search for political, economic and social equality for the sexes. It has achieved universal suffrage, it has closed the wage gap, it has quashed sexism but has, according to many, had its day. By Urban Dictionary’s most popular definition, feminism is ‘a spent force which was so blinded by its own arrogance that, given enough rope to hang itself, it duly did so.’ Is it right? Has feminism, having conquered all, poisoned it’s own chalice with radicalism and raucous irrationalism? Do we have a new F-word – and is it ‘feminist’?

The argument put forward by Piers Morgan and his menagerie of meninists (a satirical spoof of the word feminist, apparently), is that feminism has been hijacked by the radicals, the man-haters and the aggressive stereotypes of the movement. In making this argument, they have distorted the public image of a feminist as this rabid and horrifying caricature which revels in the #MeToo movement solely for its ability to ruin men. These radical feminists are figments of the imagination, a fictitious excuse that acts as a cloak for ignorance and a weak justification for misogyny. In a survey carried out by Refinery29 and CBC last year, 54% of American women said they would not describe themselves as feminists, arguably because they do not like the connotations of the word. In many cases, self-identifying as a feminist is in itself seen as being radical, as being difficult, as being embarrassing. Prominent female celebrities such as Madonna and Katy Perry have in recent years forgone the word ‘feminist’ for ‘humanist.’ Kelly Clarkson has said that she believes the word feminism to be ‘too strong’, saying that when people hear the word, ‘it’s like, ‘Get out of my way, I don’t need anyone.’ I love that I’m being taken care of and I have a man that’s a leader. I’m not a feminist in that sense.’ What is it about the feminist movement that even women believe it needs to be watered down, that it needs to be made more palatable?

Online, the words ‘feminist’ and ‘feminazi’ are almost interchangeable. The term, a portmanteau of ‘feminist’ and ‘nazi,’ is defined by the Oxford Dictionary of American Slang as ‘a committed feminist or a strong-willed woman’ – a definition which many are quick to distance themselves from, as if ‘feminist’ is a word which should be whispered, a curse too heinous to be uttered aloud. For some, although believing in gender equality, ‘feminist’ is an exclusionary term which alienates men and paints them as villains. For fear of being tarred with the same brush as ‘the bad men,’ the good men abhor feminism. For fear of being tarred with the same brush as ‘the radicals,’ the women abhor feminism too. When the movement is seen as a solely female issue, when issues such as abortion are seen as solely female issues, we are minimising the magnitude of dilemmas facing both halves of the planet’s population.

When we consider the feminist movement as solely female, we are forgetting the definism of feminism – it fights for the equality of the sexes, plural. There is a very pronounced argument that the movement seeks to conquer men in the plight against toxic masculinity – this is not the case. In equalising the genders, feminism seeks to abolish stereotypes and norms which poison both masculinity and femininity. The same restraints which retire women to the domestic, are the same ones which bind men to this idea that emotion is not theirs to share. When we absolve the idea that crying is feminine, that opening up about mental health is not masculine, we are achieving feminism. By encouraging women into renowned careers, we are lifting them up and by whittling away at the toxic aspects of masculinity, we are removing the pedestal upon which we set men. We are seeing each as equal and each as vital as the other.

In her TedTalk entitled ‘We Should All Be Feminists,’ Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie said:

‘We do a great disservice to boys in how we raise them. We stifle their humanity. Masculinity becomes this hard, small cage and we put boys inside the cage. We teach boys to be afraid of fear, of weakness, of vulnerability… We leave them with very fragile egos. [But] we do a much greater disservice to girls in how we raise them. We teach them to cater to the fragile egos, to shrink themselves… We teach girls shame. Close your legs. Cover yourself. We make them feel as though by being born female, they are already guilty of something. And so girls grow up to be women who cannot say they have desire. Who silence themselves. Who cannot say what they truly think. Who have turned pretence into an art form.’ Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

While Adichie’s TedTalk was applauded, she was vilified by many who do not merit feminism as a modern movement. Instead, considering it a ‘spent force’ that is too occupied with gender disparities that are not explicit enough consequences of sexism to be legitimate. This belief, that the gender pay gap is not a consequence of being female but is instead due to personal choices, values and economic and institutional realities, is widespread. In 2016, women in the EU were recorded as earning an average income 16.2% less than men and the disparity was owed to the fact women will leave the workforce to raise a family and will return to the promotion of their male peers while they remain stagnant. This is an economic reality led by choice, women choose to prioritise family over career and can still choose to do the opposite. It does not make it fair, it is the product of internalised and institutionalised sexism that spills over into our contemporary society after all, but it is rooted in choice. While there are steps which must be taken to balance this gap, the fact the choice is there is a sign of the existence of feminism.

The movement is not a mythological creature which materialises wearing cat-eared hats when you whisper the word three times in the mirror. To ignore it’s relevance and necessity in 2019 is an ignorant sign of privilege. Dr Ciara Kelly of Newstalk has said that ‘the women who say they don’t need [feminism] are standing on the shoulders of generations of feminists, without whom they wouldn’t even be in a position to be asked the question [of needing feminism].’ The lack of intersectionality of mainstream feminism is what is causing the movement to self-destruct, not the fact it is no longer needed. When feminism becomes ‘white,’ when it becomes a brand rather than a political movement, when it becomes preoccupied with prioritising the voices of cisgender, straight, white women – we do not need that feminism. It is the septic strand feminism which is the most reported on because it is the most sensational, existing in a bubble of traffic lights and ‘man-size’ tissues which do nothing to further the cause of women who are globally suffering from gendered and racial violence, from genital mutilation to child marriage to sex trafficking to sexual assault. As long as there is inequality, we will need feminism and feminists. Say the word, and be proud of it.

#feminism #Opinion #politics