Author:
Abe Haim
[ Edit | View ]
|
Date Posted: 15:40:35 01/31/03 Fri
WHY IM NOT A FEMINIST
Creating real gender egalitarianism
By Abe Haim
In an article for a local zine entitled Male Feminism, the author Nick Taylor rhetorically asks why isnt everybody a feminist? I have a number of reasons for not classifying myself under that ism. I believe in equality, so I consider myself an egalitarianist. When it comes to gender issues, I call my philosophy gender-egalitarianism. But whats the point, you might ask, of quibbling over semantics? Feminism is all about equality, so if you really believe in equality then why arent you a feminist?
My first critique of feminism is of the word itself, and its implications. Im a firm believer in social linguistics - That is looking at our choice in words and seeing what is embodied in our language.
Feminists have a long tradition of doing just this. For example, they examined the word woman and its etymology, and found that it came from a combination of womb and man. Thus there was a bias embodied in our very language that viewed women as mere reproductive units. Now many feminists use words like wumon in its place.
But I have yet to see a feminist take a critical look at the word feminism itself. S/he may well be surprised by what we find
Feminism consists of two essential word parts. The first part, femin, is a shortening of feminine, which of course means female. The second part, ism, which is almost exclusively used as a suffix, means an ideology or belief system. The meaning of a given ism is determined by what precedes it in the word. For example, capitalism is an ideology based on money, or capital, while a racist follows an ideology based on race.
So what does it mean when you put feminine together with ism? In short, its a form of sexism. Feminists often use the word sexism, which is generally used to describe an ideology of male superiority over women. But the word really means any ideology based on sex. It can be made more specific. To describe a male based sexism, we could use the term masculism, while a female based sexism would be called feminism. So certainly feminism is a very poor choice of word to describe a desire for equality of the sexes.
While few people have analyzed the word quite as scientifically as I just did, many are still very disturbed by the idea of an ideology, or ism, based on one of the sexes. They simply dont want to be a part of anything like that. Many of these same people, on the other hand, would be quite pleased with egalitarianism, and gladly identify with a movement that is obviously based on equality. Over the last two decades, I believe, the continued use of the word feminism has hurt the movement much more than any help it may have given in familiarity and continuity.
Well, ok youre probably saying now, sure, maybe feminism isnt the best word, but whats really wrong with the feminist movement? Its certainly not sexist, even if thats what its etymology might imply. If (hypothetically speaking) feminism was sexist, wed expect it to at best be an ideology based entirely on the female sex, that only discusses males as victimizers, and at worst to be irrationally anti-male. And in practice, feminism has generally been the former, and all too often the latter.
Feminism began as a womens liberation movement, so its female-centric ideology is certainly understandable. But for there to be a vital movement of men and women that will transform society and bring equality, we need a broader vision. Men are gonna be part of any new society we create, so its vision cannot be centered around just half of the population. This has been one of feminisms most damaging weaknesses its inability to come up with a positive male vision.
Feminism has also been guilty of stereotyping men and failing to appreciate the true diversity of the male population. Its basically assumed that if youre a heterosexual male then you must be privileged, so therefore you owe a certain debt to women. For men who actually grew up feeling accepted and privileged in their society (to later become enlightened), this makes sense to them and they gladly hop on the feminist bandwagon. But for many of us that wasnt the case at all.
One case of this is what I call secondary sexual orientation. For example, a large minority of heterosexual males (including myself) are whats been described as male-lesbians. Were only attracted to women, and were not at all transsexual or transvestite. But romantically, we emotionally identify a lot more with whats traditionally been considered feminine. Weve long been persecuted and discriminated against, but unlike other groups, such as gays, we generally dont have a recognized identity or support network. One might think that, given our natural inclination to egalitarian relationships and our common oppressor of sexism, that wed be celebrated by feminists. But I have yet to hear a feminist make mention of us. We just get lumped in with the rest of those damn hetero-males.
Irrational anti-male sentiment, though generally far more subtle than your stereotypical rabid man-hating rant, a la SCUM Manifesto, is still quite prevalent in the feminist movement and the larger progressive culture. While its understandable that many women would have anti-male sentiments, due to the horrible things many men have done, its not ok to put-down men as a whole. Only those men who have actually done the horrible things. Derogatory statements about men, and/or male sexuality as a whole, are common place in feminist lectures and presentations, the lyrics of feminist music, and comments by individuals in social settings. Though these statements are often theoretically made in jest, they are none the less damaging and counterproductive. They can be especially traumatic for sensitive young men. And ironically, its the very men who have the most respect for women, and the strongest belief in equality, who are likely to hear feminist lectures and music. So as a thank you for our solidarity, we are unjustly insulted.
Ive also found that irrational anti-male sentiment is often fueled more by personal romantic angst than real political grievances. Lesbians, in my experience, are far less likely to be irrationally anti-male. This is not to deny the validity of actual damaged caused by some sexist men in relationships. The angst Im referring to is the universal kind that everyone has felt, from rejection and neglect. If hetero males were to channel this sort of rage into a political agenda, it would give misogyny a whole new meaning. Ive been present on all too many occasions when a group of women who had recently been dumped was sitting around talking about how men suck! My reaction has always been that its not men that suck, but rather your choice in men.
Which brings me to my last critique empowerment vs. victimhood. While feminism is supposed to be about empowering women, it so often disempowers them by reinforcing their victim role. At one feminist lecture I attended, the speaker had the brilliant idea that women could go on strike that is refuse do certain things for their boyfriends, husbands, bosses, etc. until they got the respect they deserved. Its just this sort of thinking thats needed to get beyond victimhood and take real responsibility. For example, feminists are always griping about guys who are sexist macho jerks, but last time I checked, these guys werent having any trouble finding dates. And just in my experience, I have personally witnessed over a dozen feminists go out with such men. It doesnt take a Ph.D. in behavioral science to know that its not too difficult to modify a groups behavior if you control the supply of what they want. So feminists can complain into the next century about how men arent respecting them, but women could change all that over night if they simply decided to never date such men.
All this said, Im not really anti-feminist per se, Im just very aware of feminisms faults and shortcomings. The womens empowerment movement, often under the name feminist, has done a lot of great things for women in recent decades. It has made women as a whole much more aware and proud of their bodies, intellect, creativity, spirituality, and sexuality.
But the same still needs to be done for men. To achieve real gender egalitarianism, new male identities need to be explored and studied. Many feminists scoff at the idea of having mens studies departments at universities, yet this sort of thing is exactly what we need. The full range of male identities deserves serious scholarly study. And not just under the umbrella of womens studies. Likewise, male identity needs to be freely explored in our social and activist communities, outside the confines of the movement thats been known as feminism.
So my recommendation is that we abandon the word feminism, because its a poor word choice with embodied biases and counterproductive implications. A term like gender-egalitarianism is a far more accurate description of what we need in society and how it can be attained. What has been known to this point as the feminist movement should be replaced with womens empowerment and mens empowerment movements working in solidarity as part of a larger movement for equality.
|
Feedback: 
