Are we undermining Feminism?
I love gender equality as much as the next person. I love birth control and the freedom that gave me to postpone children until after college; after I had traveled, performed, enjoyed adulthood and done ME. I love that it gives me a break in between children, and allows my husband and I time to reconnect and feel like adults, not just parents all the time.
I love that women can vote, and are legally allowed to do any job they are capable of. This is vital.
But I'm hung up on the idea of traditional Feminism- that women should be able to do all the things that men do, and treated the way men are, because it's a huge
Hypocrisy!
Let me explain- I feel like the equality movement of Feminism is totally undermined by the underlying giant hypocrisy embedded in many of it's ideas. Which is:
How is Feminism doing any favors for women when it insists they should be able to act like men in order to be equal/good enough/have achieved enough? Aren't they good enough...as women?
Wouldn't it be better for women's cause to instead of trying to eliminate the difference between men and women (impossible?), to reawaken awareness of women's already inherent valuable traits and societal contributions as feminine employees, wives, mothers?
For example: a woman may be less likely to succeed in climbing the corporate ladder because she may not have the social freedom to be as assertive, as direct, as demanding. She's capable of it, sure. But she gets social backlash. She's called b-ad names by her co-workers, considered to be socially graceless, and has to constantly battle for respect of her male counterparts (and likely her female ones too). However, this assertiveness, lack of preoccupation with what others think etc. by a man is not only more socially acceptable, but is also lauded. "What ambition! What drive! He manages people well and gets the job done! Sure he's kind of a hard-@** at times, but the truth is, I really like him."
But what if the "Feminist" movement instead of trying to make it more okay for women to act like that, against their more diplomatic, emotionally-minded natures, instead reminded people that grace under fire, consideration of other's needs and other more typically "feminine" traits were also acceptable ways of getting to the top and allowed that process to happen organically? Anyone who doubts that these traits work in leadership hasn't seen a feminine mother in action. Moms usually run their household "company" with more political and emotional adeptness than most CEOs manage, and with much less emotionally-in-control "employees" (their children) to boot.
Another example is the stay-at-home mother, which is what I am most of the time. I have a degree in opera, and I've done an opera or two every year since college, but most of the time I consider myself a "professional household engineer" a.k.a., a full-time stay-at-home mom. I can't tell you the derision I get and plummeting of respect people show when they learn that's "all" I do. And many women feel the same lack of it- leading to pressure for moms to do it all- get educated, get a graduate degree, have a rewarding career, in addition to running a perfect household with smart, happy, talented children, a super clean house, a great photography blog, being super fit and have a side business doing something she loves that pays her enough to afford her family's vacations.
There's this insistence that for a mom to get respect, she has to show she can do everything a man can do...and more. Whether she realizes it consciously or not.
BUT!
Wouldn't a women's movement better serve women by instead of pressuring them to fulfill both gender's life tracks (work and home), insisting that their feminine roles are inherently equally as valuable to society (and even better, support it?) After all, how can fashioning new humans for the world (or using inherent nurturing strengths for co-workers, friends, etc.) be anything less than the most important thing any of us will ever do?
I'm not saying having a busy life is bad- I love being busy. And I definitely believe stay at home moms need creative outlets and time for themselves to pursue things they are passionate about (like opera, and writing! Or whatever knocks your socks off). All I'm saying is that the idea of women needing to do what a man does (or how he does it) to get respect drives out the value of inherently feminine traits, such as nurturing, diplomacy, managing many personality types at once, etc. when it insists that she should instead be able to act like a man with no social backlash. The Feminist movement would do much more for women if it reawakened the value of those inherently feminine traits.
I would LOVE to get some discussion going about this- thoughts? Holes in my argument?
All comments are welcome that are free from red herring fallacies. A list can be found here. Because it's so easy to get off course. And ain't no Momma got that kinda time!
I love that women can vote, and are legally allowed to do any job they are capable of. This is vital.
But I'm hung up on the idea of traditional Feminism- that women should be able to do all the things that men do, and treated the way men are, because it's a huge
Hypocrisy!
Let me explain- I feel like the equality movement of Feminism is totally undermined by the underlying giant hypocrisy embedded in many of it's ideas. Which is:
How is Feminism doing any favors for women when it insists they should be able to act like men in order to be equal/good enough/have achieved enough? Aren't they good enough...as women?
Wouldn't it be better for women's cause to instead of trying to eliminate the difference between men and women (impossible?), to reawaken awareness of women's already inherent valuable traits and societal contributions as feminine employees, wives, mothers?
For example: a woman may be less likely to succeed in climbing the corporate ladder because she may not have the social freedom to be as assertive, as direct, as demanding. She's capable of it, sure. But she gets social backlash. She's called b-ad names by her co-workers, considered to be socially graceless, and has to constantly battle for respect of her male counterparts (and likely her female ones too). However, this assertiveness, lack of preoccupation with what others think etc. by a man is not only more socially acceptable, but is also lauded. "What ambition! What drive! He manages people well and gets the job done! Sure he's kind of a hard-@** at times, but the truth is, I really like him."
But what if the "Feminist" movement instead of trying to make it more okay for women to act like that, against their more diplomatic, emotionally-minded natures, instead reminded people that grace under fire, consideration of other's needs and other more typically "feminine" traits were also acceptable ways of getting to the top and allowed that process to happen organically? Anyone who doubts that these traits work in leadership hasn't seen a feminine mother in action. Moms usually run their household "company" with more political and emotional adeptness than most CEOs manage, and with much less emotionally-in-control "employees" (their children) to boot.
Another example is the stay-at-home mother, which is what I am most of the time. I have a degree in opera, and I've done an opera or two every year since college, but most of the time I consider myself a "professional household engineer" a.k.a., a full-time stay-at-home mom. I can't tell you the derision I get and plummeting of respect people show when they learn that's "all" I do. And many women feel the same lack of it- leading to pressure for moms to do it all- get educated, get a graduate degree, have a rewarding career, in addition to running a perfect household with smart, happy, talented children, a super clean house, a great photography blog, being super fit and have a side business doing something she loves that pays her enough to afford her family's vacations.
There's this insistence that for a mom to get respect, she has to show she can do everything a man can do...and more. Whether she realizes it consciously or not.
BUT!
Wouldn't a women's movement better serve women by instead of pressuring them to fulfill both gender's life tracks (work and home), insisting that their feminine roles are inherently equally as valuable to society (and even better, support it?) After all, how can fashioning new humans for the world (or using inherent nurturing strengths for co-workers, friends, etc.) be anything less than the most important thing any of us will ever do?
I'm not saying having a busy life is bad- I love being busy. And I definitely believe stay at home moms need creative outlets and time for themselves to pursue things they are passionate about (like opera, and writing! Or whatever knocks your socks off). All I'm saying is that the idea of women needing to do what a man does (or how he does it) to get respect drives out the value of inherently feminine traits, such as nurturing, diplomacy, managing many personality types at once, etc. when it insists that she should instead be able to act like a man with no social backlash. The Feminist movement would do much more for women if it reawakened the value of those inherently feminine traits.
I would LOVE to get some discussion going about this- thoughts? Holes in my argument?
All comments are welcome that are free from red herring fallacies. A list can be found here. Because it's so easy to get off course. And ain't no Momma got that kinda time!
Comments
Post a Comment