HYPOTHESIS:
In San Francisco, as with the rest of the United States and Europe, women no longer present a united front of the subject of Feminism. That fact is overwhelmingly obvious to anyone who steps into that world and makes a few pragmatic observations. At the same time, we all must be aware that if it is the truth as it appears, it will certainly not remain the status quo for long. Women, of course, cannot be stopped. That is certain.
The moment the hypothesis above was typed onto the page, a French philosopher Elisabeth Bandinter stepped forward to alert us with an example of the chaos that personifies the present condition of Feminism. She asserts that, “Western women are forsaking the gains of emancipation and embracing their grandmother’s values instead.”
First of all, who exactly is this woman? Is she a credible voice in the world that this series of articles examines? Pulling all the records on the subject of the woman’s movement reveals that she was a high profile character during the period called the “second-wave” of feminism (from the 60s through the 80s).
You remember the 70s, don’t you? Oral contraceptives had been on the market for ten years and changed the female sexual mores forever, students were revolting in France and setting new watermarks for those demanding self-determination, the Miss America contest of under attack as being purely sexist, and marching in the streets, waving their bras and demanding the annihilation of sex roles were Germaine Greer, Shulamith Firestone, Kate Millet, Gloria Steinem, Ann Oakley, Adrienne Rich, Dorothy Dinnerstein, Mary Daly, Nancy Chodorow and our pal, Bandinter.
Today, one wonders if they were marching for more practical women’s rights in the workplace as well as in every room in the home, or, more theatrically (as was certainly being acted out here in San Francisco), for women’s liberation? Is there a distinction between Feminism and Emancipation? Sure. One is about gaining equal rights and the other is about obtaining political rights. Emancipation came first. Feminism stands on the shoulders of Emancipation. This Examiner is well aware that there will be little or no agreement on this idea. There is, in fact, little agreement to be found in any part of this landscape – or could one call it minefield.
Back to our dear old grandma’s values that are said to be the basis of a movement that if not stopped in its tracks will certainly lead us back into the 18th century. Oh my God, all these women will be breast-feeding and staying home with the children. Babies, it turns out, are now the best ally of masculine domination says Ms. Bandinter. How and why have the current generation’s flurry of smart and highly educated U.S. young women failed her compulsory definition of feminism? By simply wanting to be mothers? The young modern women that have offered their views on the subject call it free choice and the right of self-determination. These women aren’t having children and staying home because their husbands all said so. Not at all. They have chosen freely to be mothers and to raise a family. The decision to make a mark in society outside the home will be considered carefully as time passes. This is evidence of progress in the feminist movement.
Based on this Examiner’s observations, there is brewing a new form of feminism. Its working title is Compulsory Feminism. Can that be could for women? Would that be good men in a similar scenario? Of course not. It has not been assigned an official name as yet. Perhaps we’ll put out a call for name suggestions. What is the primary characteristic? The answer is the western feminist notion that it must be compulsory to undervalue men and overvalue women.
##
Comments