Not long ago, I was startled to read a very negative view of feminists in an interview with hot English girl-group of the minute, Stooshe. I'd never heard of them before, but I'd picked up the latest issue of DIVA magazine and was skimming it when I saw that the women in Stooshe adamantly say they are not feminists.
They were quoted as saying, "We're not going out to say women rock and men are nothing compared to us." Apparently, that was their understanding of feminism. When interviewer Charlotte Andrews Richardson pushed them by asking, "Do you not think feminism can be about having fun? It doesn't necessarily mean being in opposition to men, it can just mean being empowered and confident women", the band responded by saying, "Then it won't be called feminism."
That left me momentarily befuddled. If feminism isn't about "being empowered and confident women", then what is it?
Frankly, the ladies in Stooshe are the befuddled ones. And a quick trawl through the internet informs me that they aren't the only ones.
Other recent celebrities to come out as being against feminism include Lady Gaga, Sarah Jessica Parker, Juliette Binoche, Bjork, and Demi Moore. Rather shocking, considering that most of these women wouldn't have had careers without, you know, that dirty concept they are quick to distance themselves from: feminism.
Is this just down to a lack of knowledge about history and about what we still need to fight for? I think it partly is that. Presumably some women such as Sarah Jessica Parker and Juliette Binoche feel that they can have their glamorous careers and exciting lives because things have moved on so much in society, and therefore women have all the rights they could possibly need.
Another issue is that people are unsure about what the term "feminist" actually means or they dislike some of the connotations that the word sometimes comes with. Stooshe believing that feminism was about saying "women rock and men are nothing" exemplifies that. Some of my students have told me that they won't say they're feminists because "it means you don't like men" or "that you don't shave your legs". This shows a lack of understanding about the definition of the word.
Then there's the issue of how some people choose not to identify as feminists because they feel that the feminist movement is too white, too middle-class, or in some other way lacking and/or characterised by traits they don't agree with. But what they don't seem to understand is that if you call yourself a feminist, you are not thereby co-opted into a larger group or movement.
Saying you believe in equal rights for all people is not the same thing as saying that you endorse all the views of all the feminists who have come before you. It's the same situation as if you vote for a political party because you believe it is the strongest choice, but don't necessarily believe in everything the party leader spouts. No group is homogenous; thus, feminism is not a homogenous movement, but this seems hard to understand.
But perhaps the largest issue here, I believe, is that successful, strong women don't want to be seen as just that. In their minds, calling themselves feminists would make them seem too successful and too strong; maybe they also worry about being considered man-haters or man-eaters. Some women seem to be concerned that if men feel challenged by women's successes, those men would be less likely to pick feminists as mates, or even to want to promote them or help them succeed. Stooshe, for example, sing explicitly about their desire to sleep with men (even the one lesbian in the group, Courtney Rumbold, jokes about "swallowing", though she then says she doesn't "do dick"), so they're making it clear that no matter how "empowered and confident" they might be, they still want to appeal to men.
Unfortunately, then, it seems that the women who are best placed to speak for the feminist movement's ideals - equal rights, the fair integration of women into all areas of society, etc - instead do the movement harm by stubbornly claiming no interest in it (not to mention no gratitude to it, despite owing their successes directly to it). By distancing themselves from the feminist movement, the message they are sending to young girls is, "I've succeeded, but I'm not going to do anything to help you succeed." That seems pretty anti-feminist to me.
Maybe some brave celebrity - male or female - will proudly take on the feminist label and will explain that being a feminist is, at its most basic, about being interested in equality. If "I'm a feminist" weren't such a dirty thing to say any more, that could help create a new generation of "empowered and confident" people.
Follow B.J. Epstein on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bjepstein
Catherine Balavage: Is Feminism Still Worth It?
Charlotte Lytton: The Fun Side of Feminism
Sirena Bergman: Modern Feminism: Caitlin Moran vs E.L. James
Well actually, you are. That's what feminism is, a very large activist movement, unless I'm missing something?
"By distancing themselves from the feminist movement, the message they are sending to young girls is, "I've succeeded, but I'm not going to do anything to help you succeed." That seems pretty anti-feminist to me."
Rubbish. The label does not neccessarily correlate with being a pro-active activist that "helps" young girls. Why must everything be either feminist or anti-feminist? Why must we play divide and conquer like this? Why are feminists always right and everyone else wrong, and idiot or a masochist?
This attitude of you're either with us or against us is not appealing, confusing and not worth my time (I can only speak for myself). Instead of getting annoyed over how people chose to label themselves I feel it's better to redirect my energy towards working towards social good. Call yourself a feminist if it helps you achieve those goals, but don't get angry because some people chose not to. It's pointless.
Cory
http://alyssaroyse.wordpress.com/2012/04/08/why-im-not-a-feminist-its-okay-if-you-are/
I'm pro-equal rights and do lots of activist work, but I've recently decided to drop the feminist label for the exact same reasons the author in the post in that link describes (if anyone is going to respond to this comment please check out the link, it's a fantastically articulate and intelligent post and will probably answer any questions you pose to me).
And why get so upset over how someone chooses to label themselves? If they're still a smart, liberal, reasonable person, what difference does it make? None.
Maybe we've just outgrown gender rights as a "female only" issue. Men are still overwhelmingly in positions of power, influence and wealth, yes, but increasingly men are becoming sensitive to the limitations imposed on them by their gender (with respect to parenting, divorce laws etc). Things can't just change for one gender without affecting the other - maybe feminist needs to become more holistic (and rebrand itself in the process) if it wants to survive as an ideology that people can be proud of.
Feminism is not about equality. It is not about treating men and women equally. It is about women gaining benefits without incurring the risks that men take on to accrue those benefits.
The problem is that people hear "feminism" and think "hairy man-haters". Rather than "feminsim? it used to mean X I wonder if it still means X or if it now means something else" movements and groups evolve. Look at the political parties- the conservatives of the 70s probably wouldn't ally themselves with the conservatives of today.
Feminism today has many many goals and is actualy all about gender equality. Not about taking rights away from men. Not about putting men down. Gaining more rights for women is not the same thing as taking them away from men!
Until people stop saying "I know what feminism menas- you all hate men and want to take our children away from us but still want us to pay all your bills" (which by the way is total rubbish) and start saying "I know what I think feminism means but I'll be open minded about what people who are actively involved in feminsim say it's about- maybe they know" then we'll be stuck with this unhelpful perception.
But while we're at it, why don't you name a single feminist organization that has supported equal parenting legislation? Please describe what it did in its support. You expended 3/4 of your "response" to my post talking about things like "hairy man-haters" that I neither said nor implied. You did so rather than name a single feminist organization that's gone to bat for equal parenting.
Do you support equal parenting legislation? If you do, have you urged your state NOW to do so? If not, why not? What have you done in support of equal parenting laws/bills?
You can't do away with the facts about feminism by pretending they don't exist. That may satisfy you, but not others, including me.
There are an increasing number of male rights issues (such as paternity rights and the stigma of being viewed as a peadophile for being around children) that affect only men. There are also an increasing number of issues portrayed by feminists as solely a women's issue that are affecting men such as rape and domestic violence. I can see why people would want to distance themselves from these ideas. Why should a group interested in women's rights not be equally concerned with men's or transpeople's? The answer is that if they are, they are gender egalitarians, if they are not, they are bigots and deserve to be ignored and condemmed. This doesn't mean that anyone who assosiated as a gender egalitarian disagrees that the fight for gender equality doesn't need more work on the female side, it just means that those that align themselves with only the female side of the argument are inherently sexist.
It's a good sign that strong women don't assosiate with feminism, its a sign of how far we have come as a result of feminism. Now lets leave that title behind and just focus on equality for all.
1. The Glass Ceiling Stories. Tell me how breaking through corporate glass ceilings - so often, so tediously often, portrayed as feminist victories - helps the vast majority of women? How does it help AT ALL working-class and poor women across the world that there are now women on the board of some exploitative corporations? Really? How?
2. Debasement as a Trend. Media aimed at younger middle-class women, especially glossy magazines, debase the concept of feminism by applying it to trivial contexts. If its edgy and iconic it must be feminist.
3. Gays hating heteros. There is an increasing trend of hetero-bashing by gays who declare straight culture is oppressive. Lesbian aspect of this is man-hating. This undermines reputation of feminism by redefining it as misandrous .
4. Isolation of the Academic Ticket. Intellectualized feminism is a cultural industry with no interface with social reality beyond a few off-campus wholefood shops.
5. The failure of feminists to confront oppression of women in premodern cultures (migrant or elsewhere).
How can you be a multiculturalist AND a feminist? Feminism is committed to secularism and the rule of law and the destruction - the TOTAL destruction - of oppressive traditions. Feminists in UK have colluded and connived with oppressive traditionalists in order to be happy happy multiculturalists.
Feminism needs a rethink.
Feminists are also losing sympathy because of their total absence from the battle against discrimination by Islamists in the West, as symbolized by the rise of the burqa, honor killings, genital mutilation etc. Feminists are still ranting about Western men but they're not paying any attention against the new threats to equal rights.
Or better yet, an education. As a 58 year old man, I'm proud to consider myself a feminist. I have often been depressed when my female university students show no understanding of what feminism is or what it has achieved in the UK over the last century. Their assumptions ("Feminists hate men") often reflect those of Stooshe, or - at best - are that Feminism had a role in gaining women the vote, but is now irrelevant "because we're all equal now".
The continued lack of true equality throughout the world, and that this equality is worth fighting for in a spirit of true 'brotherhood' between both sexes and all colours and religions is a message which needs to be re-addressed with each generation.
People chose to reject the label for a variety of reasons, and no one deserves to be told to get a life/education merely because they chose different personal labels to you. This is a great example of cherry picking examples of people who reject the f word for naive reasons and then claiming that anyone who doesn't self-identify as feminist is an idiot.
There really is no need for this animosity.
As a sixty year old male living in the US who has been studying feminism for forty years, I can clearly state that long ago the original decent goals of feminism morphed into: male hating, big government handouts, and economic/political advancement at the expense of the very males who once helped them, with no regard for fairness, truth, or honor.
That is what feminism has become and why many young women refuse to have anything to do with it. They've seen what it has done to their fathers, brothers, husbands and sons.
Sometime in the future, historians will look back on feminism and recognize it for what it truly is - a cult - seeking power and using subterfuge to reach its goals.
Yes, a neutral party will certainly wonder. Only goes to show that "absolute power corrupts, absolutely" - no matter the sex...
What about the gender pay gap? Over £10,000 currently I believe.