A Curious Girl: Feminist, Jerry, not terrorist

I thought it was about time I had a feminist rant...

Being one of the parties included in the blame for the terrorist attacks according to Jerry Falwell did not best amuse me. I mean, his whole statement didn't amuse me (in that Queen Victoria not amused way); why suddenly point the finger at a few other groups of people if you're not going to do the whole hog 'All have sinned' (because we have, and I think that was the point of his whole statement - to say that the terrorists weren't the only ones committing evil in the world)?

I'm going to stick up for feminism. I really can't stand the attitude that feminists are basically sexist women (sexist men get away with it, of course). I admit to making anti-men jokes, but I also admit to laughing at male chauvinist pig jokes. It's humour, not international politcs. I love my male friends like I love my female friends, because they're friends - they behave a little differently on average, maybe, but they don't conform to feminist cliches.

Feminism shouldn't be about men-bashing. It's more about cutting sexism from the system - I realised after reading an ancient article in Bath University's library about the sexist way in which teachers had been observed to subconsciously treat their pupils that all that stuff about me having a male brain and thinking in a male way was actually a complete load of bleep. It's actually because I was lucky enough to get a fairly non-sexist education. It's about valuing people - of course, it was women primarily, as the oppressed gender - valuing people for what they can do, and not judging them straight away on their gender. Men and women do have differences but sweeping generalisations will only make matters more complicated in an attempt to simplify them.

One of the problems in establishing the balance is that it's tempting to go from men - women equals master - servant to men - women equals villain - victim, which spells disaster right from the start, as, strange as it may sound, there are mean women out there. And then there's the other labelling system which makes some women excessively career-oriented with a family and a whole house to maintain at the same time. Unless she's superwoman, it can't be done. Men lose their labels as lord protector and bread winner... and become that bloke who lifts heavy stuff. The shift of labels isn't the same as the removing of them. Feminism should be about recognising inevitable consequences of innate differences - eg. women will always be the ones who have babies - whilst removing the demands of false gender labelling (I picked that term up from Andromeda Veal in The Sacred Diary of Adrian Plass!).

The whole man hating thing really annoys me too. A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle!! What rubbish. Maybe women don't 'need' men, but on the other hand it's rather nice having them around. I think it's good that men don't have to be the providers anymore - I read in my psychology book yesterday this little passge - "When Kephart (1967) asked Americans 'If someone had all the other qualities you desired in a marriage partner, would you marry this person if you were not in love?, well over twice as many men replied 'no' as did women. When Simpson et al. (1986) repeated the study, more than 80 per cent of both men and women said 'no'." That's what I call progress. If women have to marry men for what they give and not who they are, this is a sad world that we live in.

It's not like the Bible is full of housewives either. Proverbs 31:10-31 talks about a fairly sensational woman, actually leaving us to wonder, 'Where are the men in all this?' She would actually have been a pretty good candidate for the 'We can survive without men, let's kill them all' side of feminism. But this is silly, only a content atheist hermit living on nuts and berries and animals he tamed himself can truly called himself (or herself) independent. The rest of us only call ourselves independent by common agreement that it's OK if someone else is depending on you. It's the same with men and women. We need each other.

So maybe I shouldn't call myself a feminist - an anti-sexist would be more appropriate. Both women and men have a right to use their talents - God gave us them, remember? And it's obvious from the people all around us that he didn't only give women the gifts of motherhood, housekeeping, typing and looking good in a dress. Feminism is not evil - when I call myself a feminist, I mean I try to respect people for who they are, not whether they wear a bra and shave their legs every once in a while, and I want to knock down pressures on each gender to act in a certain superficial way to attract a mate - by being skinny, by having a flash car etc., and bring back pure marriages. Oh, and I believe women who chop off bits of men's privates are just not on. Unless they're doctors conducting circumcision, of course.

Is that so wrong?

Oh yes, and women's sanitary products should be cheaper.

Random word for today:

<< last entry ... next entry >>
top of page

Give food for free.