What's worse?
The title of this article from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Is ‘Third Wave feminism’ counterproductive?
Or the fact that IWF's Carrie Lukas co-opts the term "third wave" for herself:
"There’s greater respect with third wave feminism, with women having equal opportunities, not necessarily equal outcomes. The most detrimental thing about earlier feminism was the idea of men or traditional families as the enemy. The assumption was that men had the right priorities and women had the short end of the stick, as if there was no value as a person in staying home and raising kids. Now, having the choice is healthy.�
You know, come to think of it...there's too many fucked things about this article to make a decision.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: What's worse?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/4139
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I was active in the feminist movement in the 1970s and that lie was circulating then, too.
But it wasn't the feminists making it.
Once while actually marching in a women's parade on Fifth Ave in New York, a smirking man walked along beside me, and took a swipe on his own wife.
"I admire you," he said, "My wife doesn't work, she just stays home with our two kids."
To that asshole I replied, "Two kids are a lot of work," and walked on.
I love the response.
"Choice isn’t just about whether to wear a pair of stiletto heels. It’s about Johnny wearing those heels too – if he chooses."
I think that about sums it up. What drives me batty about conservatives and even many modern self-identifying feminists is that they co-opt the choice language -- and *then go and focus on only one choice*! They're doing exactly what they accuse old-school feminists of doing, only in reverse. Of course conservatives aren't going to argue with women who want to look pretty and stay home with kids. Focusing on this completely misses the point of feminism. And if you're missing the point, then you're not really supporting the movement and it's deceitful of you to pretend you are.
The rebuttal gets it, though. Sure, there's nothing wrong with a woman staying home to raise her kids -- as long as we recognize as equally legitimate a woman who never marries and never has children and pours herself into her career because that is what she finds fulfilling. And the point that *always* gets missed in this -- we're huge proponents of men's choice too! If Johnny wants to wear stilletos and a skirt to work, *he should have this right just the same as a woman does*. If he wants to stay at home and raise his four kids, *he should have this right just the same as a woman does*. If he wants to marry the man of his dreams, *he should have this right just the same as a woman does*.
But conservatives ignore the important and integral part of feminism that preaches men's choice. They're just as interested in holding men down as they are in holding women down. After all, it's much easier to exert power over a person if you make him or her feel powerless in all aspects of life.
"But conservatives ignore the important and integral part of feminism that preaches men's choice."
They also ignore the part where we analyze and understand the power dynamics that inform our choices--that my decision to shave my legs because I think it looks better (which I do), or my decision to wear make-up (which I also do) isn't some kind of valance-free idea that popped into my head out of nowhere. It's informed by the culture I belong to, and understanding what goes into those choices is also part of feminism.