Emily Flaherty
Staff Writer
“I wouldn’t call myself a feminist; I’d call myself a humanist because I believe in equality for both genders. Feminism is the equivalent of chauvinism”. That’s what she said; and that’s why I decided to write this – because it was a “she” that said it. A female who very definitely defined herself as Not a feminist. Why would a woman distance herself from a movement which is pro-her?
Many women are unwilling to identify themselves as feminist. Some are very definitely Not feminists. Others claim not to be interested. Those that do identify themselves as feminists feel the need to qualify what they mean; they are only feminists to “a certain extent”. They need time to consider to what extent, because they wouldn’t want to give you the wrong impression. Apparently you cannot just be a feminist – it is necessary to explain what type of feminist you are.
It is also necessary to explain why you are a feminist, as in this country men and women have equal rights. Surely feminism is obsolete if equality has been attained. But has it been attained? Trinity students are divided on this matter. Some worry that we may switch from a patriarchal society to a matriarchal one, implying that we have bypassed equality and may arrive at a new inequality. Others are satisfied with society as it is and suggest that any inequalities are confined to statistics. One student, who empathically answered “No” when asked whether she was a feminist, was just as empathic in rejecting the claim that equality had been reached. Matthew Corbally, auditor of the Gender Equality Society, stated that while the society discusses male and female issues, most of their discussions centre on feminism, indicating that it is still relevant to students. Indeed the existence of a Gender Equality Society implies that its members feel that there is no equality; otherwise the society would not need to exist. Whilst many students believe that our society is equal; enough express discontent as to render feminism relevant.
If feminism is still relevant, why do women distance themselves from it? (Whilst there are many male feminists, I’m discussing women’s attitude to feminism, because it is not illogical to assume that most women would be interested in their own rights). To return to what “she” said, “Feminism is the equivalent of chauvinism”, or to paraphrase; feminists are stereotypically moustachioed lesbians who rant about his-story versus her-story and slam doors in the faces of men who’ve held them open. For some reason, this extreme feminist has become the representative of all feminists. One BESS student said “women are their own worst enemies” and, certainly, extreme feminists or the idea of extreme feminism corrupt the whole barrel of feminism. But how many of these female chauvinists are there? Is the stereotype greater than the statistical reality? Corbally states that these female chauvinists are very much in the minority and most feminists are “just interested in working against the patriarchal restrictions that hold back society”. This is not anti-men feeling and is a type of feminism that would be acceptable to most people. However female chauvinists or the very notion of them drives women away from feminism, until feminism becomes defined exclusively as female chauvinism. Furthermore, accordingly to Corbally this stigma allows feminists to be ridiculed and ignored and sidelines the movement.
So how does the movement move away from female chauvinism? It is not an unfair generalisation to state that many men dislike feminism, because they mistake it for female chauvinism, which is understandable given the stigma that surrounds feminism. It is also understandable that men would dislike a movement they would perceive as being anti-them. In order to change this perception, feminism needs to be perceived as being pro-men as well as pro-women. There are male issues, such as the issue of single fathers not having access to their children, which feminism can take a stand on, and thus broaden its appeal. The emphasis should switch from women’s rights to equality.
These days, feminism has become the Gender Equality movement, and we have a society of that name. The society said that their choice of title was “a moral decision rather than a strategic one”. While this may be true, strategically it was a good move. It modernises the movement and makes it all-inclusive. The only negative is that people cannot identify with Gender Equality the way they did with feminism, and it is unlikely that the movement will inspire the same fervour that the feminist movement of the’60s did. Gender Equality does not inspire people the way feminism inspired women but perhaps that’s the way it should be, as feminism, whilst it is still relevant, simply does not excite people as much anymore.
