Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"

Anonymous

As a note: GAG insists on putting this MyTake into "Sexual Behavior" and I have no idea why. If someone is able to put it into "Society & Culture" instead, that'd be great, thanks.



Whether or not I'm a feminist is debatable because so many people are hung up on what they believe to be the "dictionary definition" of feminism.



I don't support "equality" (I'll explain why later) so people will say, "Well, if you don't support equality, then you're not a feminist, because DICTIONARY DEFINITION!"



Little do most people know, the “equality” definition is NOT the only dictionary definition of “feminism”, just like the racial definition is NOT the only dictionary definition of “white”.



Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"


If I’m not a feminist because I don’t fit the first definition (i.e. supporting “equality” of the sexes), even though I DO fall under the second definition of feminism (i.e. “supporting women’s rights and interests”)…



then am I not "white" because I don't fit the first definition (i.e. free from color, or LITERALLY "of the color of new snow") & I sure as hell don't fit the third definition (i.e. "free from spot or blemish"), even though I DO fit the second definition (i.e. I'm the member of a race characterized by light pigmentation of the skin)?


Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"

No. I'm still white, even though I don't fit all dictionary definitions, and I'm still a feminist, although I don't fit all dictionary definitions.


Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"

There are so many different variations of feminism with different goals and beliefs, many of which completely oppose each other (for instance, radical feminists oppose pornography, whereas lipstick feminists support it).


Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"

What is one common characteristic of all of these? They (at least intend to) support women's interests. Some of these are about "equality".


Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"


Some of them decidedly are not. For instance, take difference feminism:



Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"


It explicitly states that it does not support "equality."


Why do difference feminists not support equality? Because they desire supremacy? Not necessarily (although some do). In contrast:


Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"
Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"



The man (yes, man - it turns out men can be feminists!) who coined the term feminism, actually didn’t advocate the concept of “equality”. From the New World Encyclopedia:



[Charles] Fourier coined the word féminisme in 1837 and was a strong advocate for the rights of women… However, he did not advocate equality of the sexes because there were real differences between them. He rejected patriarchy, believing that the existing family structure was partially responsible for the oppression of women.




Looking at some of his texts, specifically “Degradation of Women in Civilization,” we see that he advocated that “happy results…come from the extension of women’s privileges.”



From What Is Feminism?:



By 1900 a veritable taxonomy of self-described or imputed feminisms had sprung into being: “familial feminists,” “integral feminists, “Christian feminists,” “socialist feminists,” “radical feminists, and "male feminists,” among others...and...they referred far more often to the "rights of women" than to "rights equal to those of men."




So we see that even since the conception of feminism, a goal of "equality" was not necessarily an essential component.



Believe it or not, some feminists (“domestic feminists”) were actually anti-suffrage. They advocated freedom & rights for women within the home, but they feared that getting the right to vote for women would end up with women being added to the draft, because “how would it be fair for women to vote for politicians that might send men, but not women, to war?”



I can see their logic...but in my eyes, if it’s fair for men to vote for politicians who might outlaw abortion & contraception, thereby forcing women, but not men, to carry pregnancies to term & give birth against their will (even in the case of rape), then it’s fair for women to vote for politicians who might send men, but not women, to war.



Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"


You explain to them what I just did.



There are many different types of feminism. Their common goal? Advocacy for women.



Then you explain YOUR goals in YOUR specific type of feminism. If you're a pro-porn feminist, then don't say, for instance, "feminism does NOT oppose porn, it views it as empowering for women," because there are some types of feminism that adamantly oppose porn. Say "different types of feminism have different views on porn, but MY brand of feminism supports porn."



This way, people will stop assuming someone's beliefs whenever someone says that they're a feminist.


Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"

No. For some feminists, feminism IS about equality.


Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"


I don't support "equality" because far too often, people assume that everybody should be treated the exact same, no matter their differences. Often, this comes up when people want to treat women & men as though they're physically exactly the same when this couldn't be further from the truth.



For instance, I saw one guy say earlier: “if you expect equality will women help me lift things that weigh 220-400 pounds?” I’m 81 pounds. I can barely lift my cat who is 13 pounds. "Equality" in that sense is impossible.



Also, the notion that it's not worse for men to hit women than the other way around. Of course it's worse for men to hit women. Most men have more brute strength than most women (source), and men's faces are better designed to take punches (source). Don't get me wrong: it's wrong to be violent towards anyone. But because it is worse for a stronger person to hit a weaker person than vice versa: yes, it is worse for men to hit women than the other way around.



Then we get the people who say "if feminists want equality, why don't they advocate women sign up for the draft?" First off, some feminists do support that; the National Organization for Women has supported it since the 70s, and even Gloria Steinem said that she supported including women in a draft.



Personally, I think that drafting women is idiotic considering 86% of women, in comparison to only 3% of men, do NOT pass combat standards. (source) Placing millions of female names in the drafting pool will cost 25 million dollars (source), and WEAKEN the military by expanding the drafting pool to make it certain that many men, who would've been very capable for combat, will be passed up.



Evidence has also found that mixed-gender units perform more poorly than male-only units (source). So that'll increase our likelihood of losing the war. & Don't suggest that we make female-only units. That's literally national suicide. Even sports teams are segregated for a reason. If women can't even compete against men in sports, than how will women compete against men in battle?*



Before someone says that women shouldn't have equal rights if they aren't drafted...



Should the elderly have to be drafted in order to have equal rights? (Don't say that older men already signed up for the draft; some of them arrived in the U.S. when they were older than drafting age.)



I mean, old people want equality, and to fight against ageism, right? Older men in particular have fought against ageism in the military for decades. From Retiring Men:



The ageism of the draft law...frustrated some older men. 'In my opinion...there are plenty of people about the 40 to 50 age limit right here in Chicago simply aching to get into action."[...] J. Wohlfarth...wrote to the New York Times in 1917 to complain about the "absurdity"...since he was "physically able" despite his more than 55 years of age... After all, "Some men are old at 40...some are young at 60 or even 70."





So, if old people WANT EQUALITY, should they have to sign up for the draft? Obviously not. The fact is, if you want to win a war with as few casualties as possible, you send your most suitable fighters. Those are young men.



Of course, I disagree with the draft in general. But my point still stands.



*No, the physical differences between women and men do not make women inferior. Women are superior at nonphysical peacemaking. From Inclusive Security:



Where women are more empowered in multiple spheres of life, countries are less likely to go to war with their neighbors, to be in bad standing with the international community, or to be rife with crime and violence within their society...
As the percentage of women in parliament increases by 5%, a state is 5 times less likely to use violence when faced with an international crisis…
& A study of 58 conflict-affected states between 1980 and 2003 found that when no women are represented in the legislature, the risk of relapse [after conflict] increases over time, but “when 35% of the legislature is female…the risk of relapse is near zero.”...
A study of 40 peace processes in 35 countries over the last 3 decades showed that when women’s groups were able to effectively influence a peace process, an agreement was almost always reached—only 1 case presented an exception.
When women did not participate, the rate of reaching an agreement was much lower. Once an agreement was reached, the influence of women’s groups was also associated with much higher rates of implementation.27


Statistical analysis of a larger dataset also shows that when women participate in peace processes, peace is more likely to endure [for a longer time].




This is what I believe women need to be doing instead of trying to prove that we can be just as murderous as men by joining the military. We need to be using our peacemaking skills to be making sure there’s no war to begin with. We don't need to become men in order to be valuable.



Various different feminists throughout history have agreed with me. From War and Gender:



Regarding war, difference feminists argue that women, because of their greater experience with nurturing and human relations, are generally more effective than men in conflict resolution and group decision–making, and less effective than men in combat…


In this view, women’s caregiving roles and potential for motherhood best suit them to give life, not take it. Women are more likely than men to oppose war, and more likely to find alternatives to violence in resolving conflicts…
Thus, according to difference feminism, women have unique abilities as peacemakers.



All the way back to Mary Wollstonecraft:



Many difference feminists have long believed that women cannot change masculine institutions by joining them, and are better off remaining apart from them (thus preserving valued feminine qualities). In 1792, Mary Wollstonecraft argued that women deserved equal rights with men, but should not participate in war…
By integrating into existing power structures including military forces and the war system without changing them, women merely prop up a male–dominated world instead of transforming it.




However, back to the original subject: many feminists also disagree with me. I already gave the National Organization for Women & Gloria Steinem as examples. I will continue to quote War and Gender:



Liberal feminists argue that women equal men in ability, and that the gendering of war reflects male discrimination against women... Starting in the late 1970s, liberal US feminists supported extension of the military draft to include women: “Liberal feminists…[argue that] the best way to insure women’s equal treatment with men is to render them equally vulnerable with men to the political will of the state.” Liberal feminists reject the idea that women are any more peaceful than men by nature.



Got that? In conclusion:



Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"

This will show you that most feminists are not as "hypocritical" as you think they are. Most contradictory statements come from different feminists who support different types of feminism.



The ones that say that "women can do everything a man can do", for instance, are typically not the same ones saying that women shouldn't be included in the draft (most of those explicitly state that men and women are different & have different abilities & that yes, men are better at women in some things, just like vice versa is also true), etcetera.


Both Anti-Feminists and Many Feminists Are Wrong About Whether Feminism Advocates "Equality"
30 Opinion