Lately, some of my loyal readers have poised a couple questions in my comments section. It’s a slow afternoon, so I’m finally getting a chance to answer them.
Toni asks, “what’s a “token conservative”…………just wondering??…t.”
Well Toni, a “token conservative” is a joke that orginated with my liberal blogging friends from grad school. Actually, most of my friends in DC are liberals with a few libertarians thrown in the mix. I’m not sure how it started, but one night over drinks I was called the “token conservative” of the bunch. Apparently, I’m the only social conservative around. It stuck, and I adopted as my tagline.
My friend Tanzaniajue asks:
Can I ask why you find the topic of gender inequality so boring? And can I ask what you define as a feminist? The history of feminism is so complex and cloudy…everyone’s interpretation of feminism is different. I know I’m veering off course with these questions, but I’m just curious to why you “abhor all things feminist” and what defined your terms of feminism (a course at school, etc.)
This is a huge question. Like Tanzaniajue explains, “The history of feminism is so complex and cloudy…everyone’s interpretation of feminism is different.” She’s exactly right and here are my own, personal views on feminism.
Gender inequality discussions bore me because they’re over-used and usually whiney. Most people hiding behind them are trying to further their own political agendas. There are many places in the world where women are not treated equally because of culture or religion, yet modern feminists rarely stand up for these causes. Rather than fight for women around the world, they shut up and fall in lock step with the larger liberal or progressive agenda, only pulling out the gender card when it suits their own purposes or funding goals. Why aren’t feminists more upset about the state of women enslaved in Islam around the world? What about female genital mutilation or human trafficking? These are rarely discussed in the larger arguements about feminism
Feminism has become boiled down into Lifetime movies, women’s fashion magazines and crazies like the Code Pink bunch, who dishonor our brave soldiers by protesting outside of Walter Reed. Why should I want to be connected to these women? They don’t represent any of the values that I associate with strong feminine ideals.
Code Pink actually serves as a good example. They have a strong following and could actually make a difference with the issues I stated above. However, they insist on protesting the war–something that they’ll never be able to influence. What is more effective–protesting outside of Rayburn wearing a No Peace, Not P**** shirt or raising money to educate young girls in developing nations? Nothing seems more wasteful or ineffective than groups like Code Pink. Unless, of course, your only goal is media attention. If that’s true, Cindy Sheehan and Code Pink deserve awards.
Furthermore, who represents modern feminism? Nancy Pelosi and her Hermes scarves? Hillary Clinton and the Clinton political machine? Both of these women built their careers off the backs of their husbands. Cindy Sheehan? The cast of The Girls Next Door? Rosie O’Donnell? These are women heralded as role models, yet why should I look up to them?
My position on abortion is pretty clear on this blog, yet feminism has become a one-issue philosophy with so many women. Why should I identify with a group who differ so radically from my own beliefs?
I do respect many of the early Suffergettes who fought for our right to vote. However, these women valued their families and viewed abortion as the vile act that is. They understood that while men and women are created equal, they have different roles in society. Modern feminism has destroyed what it means to be a woman.
I’m also deeply offended that feminists support the hyper-sexualization of women today. Why are porn stars viewed as feminist role models? How is using your surgically-enhanced body liberating? This only objectifies women and harms them in the long-run.
Not surprisingly, my views of feminism were largely shaped by my mother. Without a doubt, she is the strongest woman that I know, and she comes from a family of equally strong women who overcame tremendous obstacles. None of these women needed a philosophy, movement or sisterhood to stand up for themselves. They simply had backbones of steel and didn’t need special interests or womyn’s herstory month for self-esteem.
During college, I also read Myrna Blythe’s Spin Sisters about women’s magazines. Aside from turning everything into a crisis!, they are the main vehicle for modern feminism. It’s a very revealing book that I highly recommend. It really makes you question how many Cosmo articles about sex you can read before feeling manipulated.
Take it or leave it. Those are some of the reasons that I “abhor feminism.”
[...] A Girl From The South believes feminists fall short in pointing out misogyny in cultures other than the West: Gender inequality discussions bore me because they’re over-used and usually whiney. Most people hiding behind them are trying to further their own political agendas. There are many places in the world where women are not treated equally because of culture or religion, yet modern feminists rarely stand up for these causes. Rather than fight for women around the world, they shut up and fall in lock step with the larger liberal or progressive agenda, only pulling out the gender card when it suits their own purposes or funding goals. Why aren’t feminists more upset about the state of women enslaved in Islam around the world? What about female genital mutilation or human trafficking? These are rarely discussed in the larger arguements about feminism. Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
I respect your interpretation- I definitely think there are one-issue feminists out there who blindly pursue their agenda without thinking of the larger context. But I also think it’s a rather narrow interpretation. I hardly think of Cosmo as a feminist publication-I think it does more harm than good. The issues you say “are rarely discussed in larger arguments about feminism” ARE discussed by serious feminists. I don’t take any feminist seriously who can’t also take criticism the movement itself, either. The “womanist” movement was an African-American response to the predominantly white, middle class feminism. I read a book in college called “In Search of Islamic Feminism” about women in the Islamic world working for equality at home (get an education, work outside the home, choose whether or not they wanted to wear hijab), while also fighting the Western feminist view that they were ‘oppressed’ because they dressed modestly and were religiously observant. I also read an article recently about Mormon feminists, working for equal treatment and respect within their religious communities. To me, feminism means the belief that a woman isn’t worth any less than a man-a sentiment I’m sure you agree with, though not the name-whether that woman is staying home to raise a family or Speaker of the House. A culture that boils feminism down to Clinton and Pelosi’s wardrobes is not a feminist culture; it’s a shallow one. A culture that respects models and actresses but not stay-at-home moms and teachers is a misguided one. So…you don’t have to consider yourself a feminist…but I consider you one;)
[...] for Adrienne and her “I’ll just make up some shit about feminism and then mock it,” I was [...]
Thanks Erin. From the outside, feminism just looks like “abortion! abortion! abortion!” and ignores other problems. Other issues are extremely relevant to any political ideology. I just wish we could rationally sit down and discuss them without bring up reproductive issues.
erin’s response is great, so I’m not going to ad much, except to say that a) you’d be hard-pressed to find any self-described feminist describing Cosmo or any other women’s magazines of the sort espousing anything coming near feminist ideals. rather, these magazines often co-opt the language of feminism as a makerting tool (i.e., how to please your man in bed as an act of feminist empowerment! or whatever). but that doesn’t make them feminst, any more than using Who songs in ads directed at baby boomers makes financial planning hip. the Cosmo et al. type of publications are also the ones largely responsible for claiming porn, stripping, all the rest is “empowerment.” While I think that the issue of all sorts of sex work is certainly deeper than empowering/victimizing paradigm would have you believe, and many feminists say the same, there are not many who buy into the whole “porn is so empowering” business; again, that’s more used by people (like those in the porn industry already) trying to co-opt the language of feminism, again. as for feminists and abortion … sure, reproductive issues do play a large role in what feminists fight for. but there are plenty of different types of feminist causes out there, as many as there are different types of feminists. And there are many, many — in academic circles, the blogosphere, and the activism world — who do concentrate on global feminisms, on helping and informing people about the plight of women all over the world.
Is it more of an image problem them? The pervasive view of feminism outside of liberal intellegentsia circles is that of a feminazi. These aspects of the movement/philosophy/ideology aren’t being promoted very well.
If true feminists aren’t reading Cosmo, and non-feminists, like myself, aren’t reading Cosmo, who is and what do the crappy messages in the magazine say for our generation?
Uh……wha? I’m not too sure that you have your finger on the pulse here dear. Do you know any feminists?
From my perspective I think you’ve hit on few themes that have some truth to them – but not got the whole picture of what feminism is to a lot of people – including me.
First – abortion. To me it’s inseparable from the larger issue of reproductive rights and control over my own body – which are an essential part of feminism. That doesn’t mean that I couldn’t count as a “feminist sister” a woman who thought abortion was wrong – but I’d be doubtful about someone who campaigned to criminalize abortion. That’s just my view – and I know it’s not yours – and I don’t think we’ll ever agree – so I’ll leave it at that.
Most people hiding behind [gender equality discussions] are trying to further their own political agendas
Well, I don’t think they’re hiding. But is there a political element? You bet. Nothing wrong with that. Some women are in tune with feminist ideals of gender equality but aren’t very politically motivated – or are motivated on other issues – so they don’t go on about feminist issues. You’re very politically motivated – including apparently about feminism. I’d suggest that your discourse on feminism is also colored by your own political agenda. Nothing wrong with that.
There are many places in the world where women are not treated equally because of culture or religion, yet modern feminists rarely stand up for these causes.
I think this is a very complex issue. I think that there are some feminists who are leftists (they don’t necessarily go hand in hand) who have bought into the anti-Western bias thing. Some of these leftist “feminist” have subverted their own agenda to the “broader” cause in the Red-Green alliance (Marxism and Islamism), so much so that there are “feminists” marching in hijab so as not to offend their hard line Islamist “brethern”. That’s an extreme example. In my view, these people are wrong. They are dangerously wrong. And they are working against women. True feminists recognise the threat of Islamism and Islamic fundamentalism and speak against it. Many feminists do not accept or condone practices that are damaging to women (e.g. FGM). But in the US – for example – these probably don’t feature on the feminist agenda. But slamming all of feminism for this would be a little like condemning a local environmental campaigner for not making a big deal out of the gold mine tailings issue in South America. It’s dreadful – but not a priority for someone trying to clean up the Little Pigeon River.
I’m also deeply offended that feminists support the hyper-sexualization of women today.
Not sure which ones these are. Many die hard feminists I know border on the puritannical when it comes to showing sexualised female flesh.
I could say more…but I have to feed my baby!
If true feminists aren’t reading Cosmo, and non-feminists, like myself, aren’t reading Cosmo, who is and what do the crappy messages in the magazine say for our generation?
Well, Cosmo’s been around for a while, and it’s message has been largely the same over time (I read a lot about it when I was writing my thesis on images of women in pop magazines), so I don’t think it really portends a problem for just our generation. And I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with reading girly mags like Cosmo, per se. I try to avoid them, because they insult me, they’re full of rabid gender stereotypes, they suppose that all women are concerned with are looking good and snagging a man, and they make you want to buy things like beauty products and expensive shoes that I wouldn’t otherwise think of needing. That said, I know a lot of the girls we’re friends with read a lot of girly magazines — not Cosmo, I don’t think, but Glamour and whatnot. Which aren’t quite as bad, but still in the same vein. I don’t think it says anything bad about them — they like shopping and makeup and whatnot, and they can separate that from the messages that that’s all they should care about.
Oh, but p.s., you know that Cosmo’s original and longtime editor, Helen Gurly Brown, considered herself a devoted anti-feminist?