Someone asked me a most thought provoking question the other day: “Are you a feminist or a womanist?” Having graduated from a very liberal, intellectually stimulating all women’s college, I had always beamed with pride as I proclaimed myself a feminist. “In my heart, I feel a woman has two choices: either she’s a feminist or a masochist.” Gloria Steinem’s words became my mantra. She did not suggest “womanist” as being an option, so would that mean a “womanist” identifies with the “masochist?”
I still expect men to hold the door. I think it polite when a feller offers his seat to a lady on a crowded train. I believe that men, if in a financial position to do so, should pay for a first date. These are topics associated with the practice of good etiquette. In our society, if a man acts in a compliant manner to any of the situations listed above, he is labeled as a gentleman- a respectful and well brought up human being. After all, no woman wants to date or marry a cad, and simple gestures such as those mentioned above suggest that the man in question is probably not one (it is, however, entirely possible that a man may very well be a cad and still conduct himself within the arena of what would be called “good etiquette.”). A man might also not exemplify himself as a “gentleman” in the afore mentioned situations and yet, he may still actually be a decent human being or a good catch (it may be more likely that the author of this blog is being much too charitable). Do my expectations of men mean that I am an anti-feminist since it seems that I am advocating gender roles? No, it simply means that I am in favor of good manners (I, after all, have held the door for hundreds of men thus far in my life and expect the gesture to be reciprocated by laws of common decency in the very least.).
Do feminism and womanism have to compete as separate philosophies? A feminist, for certain, is also a womanist. Is a womanist, however, a feminist? Not necessarily so. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/), “feminism” is defined as “1. the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes; 2. organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests.” Whereas, “womanism" (which, by the way, is not a word recognized by spell-check... could this possibly be a reflection of our technology driven, male dominated society?!) is defined by Dictionary.com as “believing in and respecting the abilities and talents of women; acknowledging women's contributions to society.” The definitions are therefore separated by sociological implications. A man can be a “womanist” if he believes that women are just as capable and talented as men, but does not support the political aspects of the matter, even if he maintains the philosophical. It is important to remember that both terms should not be strictly limited to women, as the practice of feminism encourages respect of both genders and dissuades animosity toward either (no matter how hard that seems at times!)
Despite conflicting ideologies, there is no one way to be a feminist. Feminists come into battle adorned with the armor of many different opinions, faiths, political ideas, etc. The common ground they share is the desire for the betterment of women. Feminists simply have different ideas about what is "best" for the gender. For example, there are feminists who are pro-life, as contradictory as that may sound to pro-choice feminists. In a lesser known branch of feminism known as “Eco Feminism,” those who follow the theories constantly find themselves at odds with each other in the case of this issue. “Eco-Feminists” (very briefly) view the planet as a female entity and see the “rape” of the land, Mother Earth, as the symbolic rape of themselves. They view females as being particularly responsible for the welfare of the earth, as they are the vehicles of creation.
There is not a right or wrong way to be a womanist. Man or woman, a womanist welcomes and encourages women to participate at the forefront of the many facets in our society. Therefore, I believe that a feminist is just as much a womanist.
I still expect men to hold the door. I think it polite when a feller offers his seat to a lady on a crowded train. I believe that men, if in a financial position to do so, should pay for a first date. These are topics associated with the practice of good etiquette. In our society, if a man acts in a compliant manner to any of the situations listed above, he is labeled as a gentleman- a respectful and well brought up human being. After all, no woman wants to date or marry a cad, and simple gestures such as those mentioned above suggest that the man in question is probably not one (it is, however, entirely possible that a man may very well be a cad and still conduct himself within the arena of what would be called “good etiquette.”). A man might also not exemplify himself as a “gentleman” in the afore mentioned situations and yet, he may still actually be a decent human being or a good catch (it may be more likely that the author of this blog is being much too charitable). Do my expectations of men mean that I am an anti-feminist since it seems that I am advocating gender roles? No, it simply means that I am in favor of good manners (I, after all, have held the door for hundreds of men thus far in my life and expect the gesture to be reciprocated by laws of common decency in the very least.).
Do feminism and womanism have to compete as separate philosophies? A feminist, for certain, is also a womanist. Is a womanist, however, a feminist? Not necessarily so. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com/), “feminism” is defined as “1. the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes; 2. organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests.” Whereas, “womanism" (which, by the way, is not a word recognized by spell-check... could this possibly be a reflection of our technology driven, male dominated society?!) is defined by Dictionary.com as “believing in and respecting the abilities and talents of women; acknowledging women's contributions to society.” The definitions are therefore separated by sociological implications. A man can be a “womanist” if he believes that women are just as capable and talented as men, but does not support the political aspects of the matter, even if he maintains the philosophical. It is important to remember that both terms should not be strictly limited to women, as the practice of feminism encourages respect of both genders and dissuades animosity toward either (no matter how hard that seems at times!)
Despite conflicting ideologies, there is no one way to be a feminist. Feminists come into battle adorned with the armor of many different opinions, faiths, political ideas, etc. The common ground they share is the desire for the betterment of women. Feminists simply have different ideas about what is "best" for the gender. For example, there are feminists who are pro-life, as contradictory as that may sound to pro-choice feminists. In a lesser known branch of feminism known as “Eco Feminism,” those who follow the theories constantly find themselves at odds with each other in the case of this issue. “Eco-Feminists” (very briefly) view the planet as a female entity and see the “rape” of the land, Mother Earth, as the symbolic rape of themselves. They view females as being particularly responsible for the welfare of the earth, as they are the vehicles of creation.
There is not a right or wrong way to be a womanist. Man or woman, a womanist welcomes and encourages women to participate at the forefront of the many facets in our society. Therefore, I believe that a feminist is just as much a womanist.
Many people today may view the "Feminist" quest as outdated- something associated with spinsters and Friedan's 1960's society-changing work, The Feminist Mystique. Even many women, I am flabbergasted to report, seem to take little interest in feminism in its modern form. They either do not see the matter as integral in their lives, or no longer relevant. They feel we have achieved the ultimate goal of women's rights in procuring suffrage. Ah, we have not only achieved- but we are still achieving. I recognize that the idea of "feminism" is a work in progress every time I am privy to my male friends' conversations. I am frequently the sole female entity among my circle of companions, and being such, I am offered a candid view into the male psyche which I find quite valuable for my own informal research. Many men (not all... it is paramount that you, dear reader, realize I am not stereotyping all men- but let's face it- the stereotype is out there for a reason. So, if you do not want to be lumped together with the uncouth, unevolved, cavemen-like, bottom feeders of your gender, join the revolution!) view women as a sexual conquest and little or nothing more. It is often difficult for women to rise above the stigma that men as an unidentified whole have created for them. It is everywhere- magazines, movies, media. Adolescent girls are brainwashed into thinking that they must fit some kind of mold created by society and they try to conform to it throughout their lives. It begins with Barbie in the early years (this notion will be continued in a future edition of The Blonde Philosopher). For me, this is the stuff feminism is made out of; subjects so frequently overlooked that are still mountains of relevance despite the amount of progress we have made.
When poised the initial question, I began to wonder if my own self declaration of feminist was the result of the pressures of my educational institution. Then, I thought, no. I was a feminist by choice from an early age. I chose the institution because I believe in the works of Alice Paul, Susan B. Anthony, thousands of nameless women who fought for suffrage and maybe even my own unborn daughters. I chose feminist because I want to live in a world in which I can thrive, not just symbolically- despite my gender. I chose feminist because I want my unborn daughters to live in a world in which they can be leaders, without being subject to the anti-feminist idioms of “bitch,” “slut,” or “fragile” and will instead be replaced by “strong,” “powerful” and “determined.”
When poised the initial question, I began to wonder if my own self declaration of feminist was the result of the pressures of my educational institution. Then, I thought, no. I was a feminist by choice from an early age. I chose the institution because I believe in the works of Alice Paul, Susan B. Anthony, thousands of nameless women who fought for suffrage and maybe even my own unborn daughters. I chose feminist because I want to live in a world in which I can thrive, not just symbolically- despite my gender. I chose feminist because I want my unborn daughters to live in a world in which they can be leaders, without being subject to the anti-feminist idioms of “bitch,” “slut,” or “fragile” and will instead be replaced by “strong,” “powerful” and “determined.”
No comments:
Post a Comment