Feminism is Dead
In my Comparative Politics class today, we had a discussion on gender roles and feminism. What's fascinating is that there appears to be a complete shift going on, and I'm not sure why. We started off by discussing the idea that many liberal feminists have in regards to getting an equal number of men and women elected to Parliament. The premise is that having more women representatives would result in a shift in policy and more attention brought to certain "women's issues" like child support.
Here's where things get sort of funny, and my prof brought this issue up based on his observations from teaching the course in the past few years. It appears that women want to distance themselves from being labeled "feminists" because somehow this has gotten a negative connotation. The prof was saying that it now tends to be the men who actually advocate and support feminist ideals more than women. This is a strange situation. Why do women no longer care? Do they believe they have achieved gender-parity, and that there is little worth fighting for now? Statistics paint a different picture. A woman graduating from university will, on average, earn the income that a man with a grade 9 education will. One girl in class argued that this is because of the childbearing process. Because they must take time off work, they are unable to advance their careers. This is a fact of life, and women must deal with it, according to her. This seems naive and beside the point, but raises the question of women who do not have children, and how their salaries compare to men. I would bet that there is little difference when comparing them to other women.
Gender "equality" is a funny concept that suffers from poor labeling. The basic goal of feminism has always been to make women equal to men but, depending on how you define it, this view is completely unrealistic. We can advocate for equality in regards to opportunity, salary, and rights, but it makes little sense to try and make women "equal" to men. They are not. If we push the issue of social constructivism aside for a moment, and analyze the differences between genders, we find huge differences. On a hormonal level, differences in levels of testosterone, estrogen, and others contribute dramatically to gender differences. The genders deal with conflicts in a different manner, and have certain characteristics which predispose them to prioritize issues in different ways. Another interesting fact is that the pharmacological industry has recently demonstrated that women and men feel pain completely differently.
Indeed, this is also a part of social constructivism. From a very young age, and even historically speaking, gender roles are defined by society. Hunting, for one, is traditionally a male activity in humans, but for lions, it is the females who hunt. Boys are given cars to play with, and girls are given dolls, being told that they will one day have to care for a baby like this one. Women are said to be more nurturing, and this may partially be a result from these constructions and imposed roles. Men are more aggressive, playing with G.I. Joes and the like. This is simplistic and only begins to skim the surface, but it is a good illustration. As a child, I played with Legos, trucks, G.I. Joes, Ninja Turtles, etc. My sister had Barbies, dolls, an Easy Bake Oven, teasets, and a kitchenette. How much of this was because we wanted to play with these toys from a biological perspective, or rather because society privileges these values, and punishes those who do not respect them? It is difficult to say, but the impacts on behavior later in life are clear.
It is therefore puzzling that more women seem to be losing interest in feminist ideas, even at the university level, where you would expect more women to be aware of these concepts. Why are men with little vested personal interest in the issue defending women? We should not be advocating for gender equality, as I have said, because we are not equal. We should instead seek to have an equal voice for both genders in society, so that each can bring their distinct perspectives to the table. If you're still unconvinced that there are fundamental gender differences, think back to a relationship (friendship or love) that you had with the opposite sex. It is not difficult to see how the sexes clash when it comes to dealing with situations of conflict, and even in basic things such as communication. Women think one thing, but the message does not get across. Think back to how many times you've heard: "I just don't get men/women." Some doctor made a million bucks discussing these exact same topics, when he published his bestseller Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus, and yet still today, feminism is dying.
3 Comments:
I don't think that women are shying away from feminism because they suddenly don't care anymore, but rather because they don't want to be associated to the 'typical' feminist image that is conjured. The general misconception is that feminists are the butch/lesbian/female-lumberjack type. Women don’t want to be seen like that so they tend steer clear of feminist issues.
In response to your comment about men not having any vested interest in the issue, I think you’re wrong. It’s not a “female”, it’s a societal issue; you even say that it’s part of social constructivism. I think we should stop using the term “feminism” completely; we need to look at the bigger picture. We’re all to blame (the corny adage “if you’re not part of the solution then you’re part of the problem” comes to mind), and as such we’re all responsible for righting the wrongs of the past.
The idea to let science pick up where feminist ideology supposedly failed by outlining the innate biological differences between the sexes could be the next step in sorting out gender roles and identity for good. This idea of innate differences isnt new however, the Inca had an interesting notion of gender parallelism, this notion stressed that men and women were different and should be bound to separate spheres of existence. However we musnt let history repeat itself and allow science to recreate patriarchal systems. Political institutions, scientific research groups and educational structures generating knowledge on gender differences must not consist of individuals who are seeking to perpetuate patriarchy. The first step would be to dismantle patriarchal conceptions before we can arrive at a completely new understanding of gender as such.
I think Tool's right in the sense that political ideals and social ideals should somewhat be helped by biolgical differences. If we know that by hormonial changes, and cranial scans that women are emotionally more intelligent then men, then why not have them fit the jobs that require such a thing. The same can be said for men.
It has come to a lot of people's attention that men and women don't run the same tests for jobs such as Police Officers and Fireman. The standards varies. They are both lines of work which should not have such differences put forth. Either somebody can do the job, or can't.
Gender differences should not get in the way of our evolution, but should help it.
Post a Comment
<< Home