Feminism Reprise
I had a conversation with a friend a while ago, and it became clear that my opinion on the matter is still not widely understood.
First, for the record: I strongly believe that every human being has the right to live as he desires. All choices he wishes to make are his own to make, and NO ONE ELSE'S. So long as they harm no one else in their choices (this goes back to my rants on good and evil), why should anyone care what they do?
My Chosen Spousal Unit has always been fond of the quote, "Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law," although the CSU feels it essential to add a qualifier to that, so as to state: "So long as you harm no one, do as thou wilt." And I agree about that. If everyone followed that one simple directive, everyone would be happy. Except for the people that feel a need to butt into everyone else's lives and control them; but they'll never be happy no matter what anyway, so it doesn't matter.
Anyway. So going back to my rant on feminism. As I've said before, the basic idea behind feminism is a great one. Women deserve equal rights and equal opportunities.
HOWEVER!
That being said, we get into an area that constantly irritates me. That is, people talking without knowing what they're talking about. If you don't know very much about the subject, and you want to express your opinion, that's fine. As long as two things are true: 1) You're willing to change your mind if presented with sufficient evidence to the contrary, and 2) You don't go out trying to change people's minds based on your lack of knowledge. This problem is so widespread; the reaction to genetically engineered food is one example. People who don't know how genetic engineering works, and therefore grow to fear it, and then go out and protest the production and eating of genetically engineered food, all based on what they read in pulp sci-fi novels. For the same reason that films like The Amazing Colossal Man made in 1957, when people were terrified of radiation as a result of the Cold War. Radiation does NOT make people grow into 50 foot tall mutants; but because nobody then understood how radiation works, they feared it, developed improbable theories about its effect, and then started believing those theories. So it is with genetic engineering; people who don't understand it grow to fear it, develop wild theories about it, and then spout those impossible theories as truth.
So, what we have here is a situation where the vast majority of people don't understand feminism, and some of those people are the very same ones who claim to be feminists themselves.
There are plenty of people who DO understand the ideas behind feminism, and these people I respect and admire. Just as I respect and admire the ideas behind feminism. It's everyone else that pisses me off.
For example, many people see the point of feminism is to make women into men, or to say that there is no difference between women and men. This is NOT the point of feminism!
For one thing, I think it's vital to understand that this is one area where balance is important. As mentioned in my previous post, being male or female is NOT a black-and-white dichotomy, but a sliding scale. Scientists have discovered that all embryos start out as female. As the pregnancy progresses, those embryos who are meant to be male undergo a series of hormone "washes," which affect the development of the embryo, changing certain aspects from the female default to the male alternative. Those that have none of the hormone washes remain pure female, and those who get all of the hormone washes turn into pure males.
But not everyone gets all of the washes!
The vast majority get all (or almost all) of the washes, or else get none (or very few). These make up probably 90% of all humans. But there are the other 10%, who get some of the washes, but not quite all of them. It's very rare to get somewhere in the area of half of the washes... it's far more common to get somewhere in the 85% to 100% or else the 0% to 15% area of the washes... but people who get about half of the washes DO exist. This is where hermaphrodites come from. The full scale of hormone washes doesn't happen, and they get stuck between male and female.
So, in essence, you have four extremes: masculine males, feminine females, feminine males, and masculine females. And of course every possible combination and variation in between.
In the past, society has only accepted two of the above extremes and none of the grey areas in between. If you're unlucky enough to be born anywhere between the two accepted points, they you were scorned as a deviant, cursed as an abomination, reviled as an affront to God, and so forth.
From this we discern the misunderstandings of the majority of the populace. They still see in black and white, and fail to see the shades of gray in between. They see women and men, and when a woman wants to be equal to a man, they see that woman as wanting to masculine instead of feminine. Especially given the advantages that men have historically enjoyed over women (it was only very recently, historically speaking, that women earned the right to vote, or were granted options other than becoming a mother and a housewife -- and in some places, they still don't have these privileges), they see masculinity as superior to femininity. Doubly so since our culture tends to value strength over weakness (look at the popularity of professional wrestling) and money over relationships (who is generally more highly esteemed, Donald Trump or Dr. Phil?).
And when you get people like that trying to espouse these incorrect beliefs as truth, especially those claiming to be feminists, then we have a problem.
I have been reading a book called The Wonder of Girls. At one point, it mentions the original roots of feminism. It says that there were four myths pervading popular culture that were harmful to society. The myths went something like this:
The above myths are not always true. They are true in some cases, but we must see the grey areas where they are not true, or partially true, before we can do anything meaningful with them.
The point I'm trying to make here is this: some women will want to be feminine in the old sense of the word; being obedient housewives and mothers. If that's their choice, THAT'S FINE. No one can tell them they can't do that. But most people today who consider themselves feminists don't accept that as an acceptable option, because they still see "femininity" as a form of oppression, when in fact it is not. Alternately, some women will want to follow a more "masculine" lifestyle, eschewing marriage and family for career and financial success. If that's their choice, THAT'S FINE. No one can tell them they can't do that. There are still people who don't see that as an acceptable choice for women, even though it is (or should be).
Conversely, there are some men who want to live a more "feminine" lifestyle; they eschew career and financial success for family, becoming "house-husbands" and "stay-at-home dads." If that's their choice, THAT'S FINE. No one can tell them they can't do that. But many people feel that that's an unacceptable choice for a male, even though it is (or should be). And some men still choose the traditionally masculine lifestyle: working hard at his chosen career, watching (and sometimes playing) sports, and being strong with a minimum of emotion. If that's their choice, THAT'S FINE. No one can tell them they can't do that. But many people, most notably a lot of modern feminists and even many men who claim to support the feminist views, feel that this view of masculinity is wrong, evil, bad, politically incorrect, and inherently oppressive. BUT IT'S NOT.
That's what bothers me. That (for most people; I'm talking of pop culture here, not the few people who understand what's really going on) feminism has taken us from one extreme viewpoint (an admittedly bad one) to a different extreme viewpoint. We have gone from "Men are better than women" to "Women are better than men." Why can't we find that happy medium? A few of us have, but what about everyone else? It's like the movie Chasing Amy, where Alyssa Jones (Joey Lauren Adams's character) talks about how she became a lesbian. She says at one point in the movie, "The way the world is, how seldom it is that you meet that one person who just gets you; it's so rare. My parents didn't really have it. There were no examples set for me in the world of male-female relationships. And to cut oneself off from finding that person, to immediately halve your options by eliminating the possibility of finding that one person within your own gender, that just seemed stupid to me. So I didn't. But then you came along. You, the one least likely. I mean, you were a guy... And while I was falling for you I put a ceiling on that, because you were a guy. Until I remembered why I opened the door to women in the first place: to not limit the likelihood of finding that one person who'd complement me so completely." And that's what seems to me like has happened with feminism. In order to counteract a problem, people looked for another option. But they forgot to leave the first option open.
I say it's time to open BOTH doors. Leave both options open. And open them to EVERYONE. Not just to women. Because most people (not everyone, but a lot) don't do that. And I think it's time we did.
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
/rant
First, for the record: I strongly believe that every human being has the right to live as he desires. All choices he wishes to make are his own to make, and NO ONE ELSE'S. So long as they harm no one else in their choices (this goes back to my rants on good and evil), why should anyone care what they do?
My Chosen Spousal Unit has always been fond of the quote, "Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law," although the CSU feels it essential to add a qualifier to that, so as to state: "So long as you harm no one, do as thou wilt." And I agree about that. If everyone followed that one simple directive, everyone would be happy. Except for the people that feel a need to butt into everyone else's lives and control them; but they'll never be happy no matter what anyway, so it doesn't matter.
Anyway. So going back to my rant on feminism. As I've said before, the basic idea behind feminism is a great one. Women deserve equal rights and equal opportunities.
HOWEVER!
That being said, we get into an area that constantly irritates me. That is, people talking without knowing what they're talking about. If you don't know very much about the subject, and you want to express your opinion, that's fine. As long as two things are true: 1) You're willing to change your mind if presented with sufficient evidence to the contrary, and 2) You don't go out trying to change people's minds based on your lack of knowledge. This problem is so widespread; the reaction to genetically engineered food is one example. People who don't know how genetic engineering works, and therefore grow to fear it, and then go out and protest the production and eating of genetically engineered food, all based on what they read in pulp sci-fi novels. For the same reason that films like The Amazing Colossal Man made in 1957, when people were terrified of radiation as a result of the Cold War. Radiation does NOT make people grow into 50 foot tall mutants; but because nobody then understood how radiation works, they feared it, developed improbable theories about its effect, and then started believing those theories. So it is with genetic engineering; people who don't understand it grow to fear it, develop wild theories about it, and then spout those impossible theories as truth.
So, what we have here is a situation where the vast majority of people don't understand feminism, and some of those people are the very same ones who claim to be feminists themselves.
There are plenty of people who DO understand the ideas behind feminism, and these people I respect and admire. Just as I respect and admire the ideas behind feminism. It's everyone else that pisses me off.
For example, many people see the point of feminism is to make women into men, or to say that there is no difference between women and men. This is NOT the point of feminism!
For one thing, I think it's vital to understand that this is one area where balance is important. As mentioned in my previous post, being male or female is NOT a black-and-white dichotomy, but a sliding scale. Scientists have discovered that all embryos start out as female. As the pregnancy progresses, those embryos who are meant to be male undergo a series of hormone "washes," which affect the development of the embryo, changing certain aspects from the female default to the male alternative. Those that have none of the hormone washes remain pure female, and those who get all of the hormone washes turn into pure males.
But not everyone gets all of the washes!
The vast majority get all (or almost all) of the washes, or else get none (or very few). These make up probably 90% of all humans. But there are the other 10%, who get some of the washes, but not quite all of them. It's very rare to get somewhere in the area of half of the washes... it's far more common to get somewhere in the 85% to 100% or else the 0% to 15% area of the washes... but people who get about half of the washes DO exist. This is where hermaphrodites come from. The full scale of hormone washes doesn't happen, and they get stuck between male and female.
So, in essence, you have four extremes: masculine males, feminine females, feminine males, and masculine females. And of course every possible combination and variation in between.
In the past, society has only accepted two of the above extremes and none of the grey areas in between. If you're unlucky enough to be born anywhere between the two accepted points, they you were scorned as a deviant, cursed as an abomination, reviled as an affront to God, and so forth.
From this we discern the misunderstandings of the majority of the populace. They still see in black and white, and fail to see the shades of gray in between. They see women and men, and when a woman wants to be equal to a man, they see that woman as wanting to masculine instead of feminine. Especially given the advantages that men have historically enjoyed over women (it was only very recently, historically speaking, that women earned the right to vote, or were granted options other than becoming a mother and a housewife -- and in some places, they still don't have these privileges), they see masculinity as superior to femininity. Doubly so since our culture tends to value strength over weakness (look at the popularity of professional wrestling) and money over relationships (who is generally more highly esteemed, Donald Trump or Dr. Phil?).
And when you get people like that trying to espouse these incorrect beliefs as truth, especially those claiming to be feminists, then we have a problem.
I have been reading a book called The Wonder of Girls. At one point, it mentions the original roots of feminism. It says that there were four myths pervading popular culture that were harmful to society. The myths went something like this:
- Girls' ultimate social goal is marriage, so they don't need access to as much education.
- Girls are obligated to serve men and raise their children, so don't need opportunities to become leaders in society or in business.
- Men should control women's rights, including reproductive rights, as well as others.
- Women don't deserve equal pay for equal work.
- Human nature is not very important to girls' lives. Biology has nothing to do with the way girls turn out; it's all based on socialisation.
- Women do best when they are independent. "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."
- Girls are victims. Simply by being female, woman become victims of a masculine society.
- Girls' lives are dominated by gender stereotypes. Things like advertising, expectations of housewivery, et c., are the sole cause of low self-esteem issues and other problems.
The above myths are not always true. They are true in some cases, but we must see the grey areas where they are not true, or partially true, before we can do anything meaningful with them.
The point I'm trying to make here is this: some women will want to be feminine in the old sense of the word; being obedient housewives and mothers. If that's their choice, THAT'S FINE. No one can tell them they can't do that. But most people today who consider themselves feminists don't accept that as an acceptable option, because they still see "femininity" as a form of oppression, when in fact it is not. Alternately, some women will want to follow a more "masculine" lifestyle, eschewing marriage and family for career and financial success. If that's their choice, THAT'S FINE. No one can tell them they can't do that. There are still people who don't see that as an acceptable choice for women, even though it is (or should be).
Conversely, there are some men who want to live a more "feminine" lifestyle; they eschew career and financial success for family, becoming "house-husbands" and "stay-at-home dads." If that's their choice, THAT'S FINE. No one can tell them they can't do that. But many people feel that that's an unacceptable choice for a male, even though it is (or should be). And some men still choose the traditionally masculine lifestyle: working hard at his chosen career, watching (and sometimes playing) sports, and being strong with a minimum of emotion. If that's their choice, THAT'S FINE. No one can tell them they can't do that. But many people, most notably a lot of modern feminists and even many men who claim to support the feminist views, feel that this view of masculinity is wrong, evil, bad, politically incorrect, and inherently oppressive. BUT IT'S NOT.
That's what bothers me. That (for most people; I'm talking of pop culture here, not the few people who understand what's really going on) feminism has taken us from one extreme viewpoint (an admittedly bad one) to a different extreme viewpoint. We have gone from "Men are better than women" to "Women are better than men." Why can't we find that happy medium? A few of us have, but what about everyone else? It's like the movie Chasing Amy, where Alyssa Jones (Joey Lauren Adams's character) talks about how she became a lesbian. She says at one point in the movie, "The way the world is, how seldom it is that you meet that one person who just gets you; it's so rare. My parents didn't really have it. There were no examples set for me in the world of male-female relationships. And to cut oneself off from finding that person, to immediately halve your options by eliminating the possibility of finding that one person within your own gender, that just seemed stupid to me. So I didn't. But then you came along. You, the one least likely. I mean, you were a guy... And while I was falling for you I put a ceiling on that, because you were a guy. Until I remembered why I opened the door to women in the first place: to not limit the likelihood of finding that one person who'd complement me so completely." And that's what seems to me like has happened with feminism. In order to counteract a problem, people looked for another option. But they forgot to leave the first option open.
I say it's time to open BOTH doors. Leave both options open. And open them to EVERYONE. Not just to women. Because most people (not everyone, but a lot) don't do that. And I think it's time we did.
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
/rant