Please note: This piece is a reflection on the Cohn and Ruddick article titled "A Feminist Ethical Perspective on Weapons of Mass Destruction". I suggest going here to read it if you find my response contrary to your perceptions of modern liberal feminism. Thanks!
--------------------------
Having grown up in a military family wherein my mother was always in some sort of commanding position or role (she still doesn't know how to properly whisper), along with the certain perceptions of patriotism and the potential strength of women that life brought me, I will say that I find difficulty in fully accepting feminist theory as a legitimate one - I feel it cheapens the achievements of American women in particular and doesn't give enough weight to the individual desires of women vs. the roles that society has supposedly "chosen" for them. I see their argument as outdated and further reaffirming the ceiling that we're supposed to be moving beyond. The true legitimizing I see on these issues is when they are applying their theories to societies outside of America - giving a rationale for certain behaviors as a product of general society rather than defining them as simply unacceptable consequences of oppressive environments.
I see challenges as something to be overcome - if being a woman makes the road more difficult, then I will be at an advantage over the others from the lessons I learn in my journey. Rather than changing society by appealing to emotions alone, women should be able to discredit previously held notions of their roles and capabilities through their actions. Truth be told however, there are biological differences that predispose women to certain roles over others. Not all women will follow such patterns of course, and their unique presence will provide them with unique opportunities. They are the exception however, that will not and should not create the rule.
The feminist theory both tries to discredit gender theories based on biology and then tries to argue that "masculine" actions unfairly affect women based on their biologically predisposed roles (motherhood to caretaker). It seems absurd to complain about being classified by certain characteristics because they are untrue and then argue to be treated differently because you can't help those same characteristics that you just argued were untrue.
While their perspective (in particular the "antiwar feminist") adds to the the war debate by presenting additional thought for consideration, their ambitions create more insecurity by appealing only to those societies which already avoid armed conflict with one another for the reasons they present. It is the actor that cannot be reasoned with that demands the presence of the weapons that they base their theories on. In theory, implementing policies that embrace sympathies to feminine issues (which feminism both argues against the perspective of such and for their acceptance as limitations which society must accommodate) would work given the best of all circumstances. However, it is those roles viewed as "masculine" that have, in practice, been successful over the span of history and one must realize reality while hoping for a new point of order.
In sum, feminist theory does more to work against itself than it does to help - at least in the manner shown these days. Rather than encouraging women to empower themselves as a strong part of society by joining the existing traditional structure, they encourage women to destroy it by demanding that their views be heard and implemented when historically those policies have not proven incredibly successful or effective. For instance, rather than encourage women to rise to their male counterparts, they demand that their male counterparts lower their standards so that women may join. Women should not be celebrated because they did well "for a girl" - they should excel among all peers or at least match them if they truly want to change the status quo. If feminists truly want to erase gendered perspectives, women should be more integrated into traditionally "masculine" activities instead of attempting to force men into embracing a feminine perspective. If these so-called gendered roles truly exist as a false predisposition, then they have been ingrained into thousands of years of human history. That said, the best way to begin to blur those definitions will not be by demanding change from the sidelines with no evidence in their support - it will be by playing by the existing rule book and making it work for them. If women are perceived as lower than men, then it would be a social promotion to receive the same respect as a man. One does not receive a promotion from simply stating an idea - he or she receives it by making a valuable contribution or achievement through following the same rules as everyone else.
If I may: “There's no crying in baseball!”
Comments
It's interesting that the writer is criticizing feminism without actually understanding what it really is. If she did she would be shocked to find that her point of view is actually very much in line with traditional feminism. Feminism isn't about 'lowering standards" or "demanding change from the sidelines". It is about breaking down barriers that have historically systematically prohibited women from entering fields that were considered the exclusive domain of males, such as business and academia. The writer of this article has unfortunately bought in to the anti-feminist dogma that portrays feminists denying biological gender differences and sees women as merely victims. The fact is that without feminism she would hardly have the professional and academic opportunities she currently takes for granted. In fact, Ms. Marshall is a feminist.
Putting aside for a moment how poorly written this article is, I can't help but think "Don't hate the player, hate the game." In other words, just because the game (i.e. "masculine" rules being the default) has been ocurring for millenia, doesn't mean that it is a good game or the right game.
Feminists have spent countless years fighting against arbitrary rules and idea (such as women are incapable of reigours academic study) to enable women to partake in "masculine" pursuits. Like law school. Just because men were traditionally lawyers doesn't mean that women were incapbale of being lawyers or needed to have the standards lowered to become one. Yet this was a system perpetuated by beliefs that women were less capable than men.
Feminists fought against those standards and continue to fight against standards which exist only through a tradition of misogyny and not based on any rational ideas. Equating new "feminine" ideas to "bad" ideas is actually just sexism.
I am stunned. This is terrible. We all understand that biological differences exist in men and women, but what does that have to do with feminism? The author is saying that instead of fighting for equality in endeavors such as education, career choices and politics, women should embrace these differences as "challenges" in those specific pursuits in which gender should never had any bearing to begin with. This belief is itself inherently sexist.
And embarrassingly dumb...
Perhaps I should stay away from critiquing liberal policy articles and refer to the sound-byte worthy chants that these comments refer to. This article was inspired by a Cohn and Ruddick article explaining the feminist position on WMD proliferation - the title of the article is "A Feminist Ethical Perspective on Weapons of Mass Destruction – Cohn and Ruddick". I suggest you read it and then come back to critique my writing.
Feminism as a matter of allowing women to participate at all is one thing - I don't call that simply feminism...it's a matter of equal rights that needs to be addressed across a broad spectrum, not just women. The feminism I refer to is the kind that inhibits institutions from any further progress because of their focus on what's fair as a matter of sex instead of a matter of personal work ethic and achievement.
Nani -
The article specifically states that it rejects the idea that traditional gender roles are biologically related and extensively describes women as victims of a masculine-dominated world.
Lis -
Not poorly written - just not written in a manner that's clear to you. My entire point is that we have our foot in the door, so we need to run with it - not drag progress by complaining and making demands that don't apply on an even playing field (where men and women work in the same fields, which they can and do if they are qualified). Everyone has obstacles and faces prejudices for a multitude of women - I think women are less capable of cooperating with one another than they are with men actually, hindering each other's progress instead of encouraging it.
One more note - on being a woman vs. the challenges it brings making us stronger:
We are defined by the choices we make no matter our gender, race, creed, sexuality, etc. - if, as women, we choose to enter a field dominated by high-energy-testosterone-driven-crude colleagues, we need to compete on that level, not complain and demand that it be toned down to suit our more "feminine" natures.
Okay, I get it. The problem with feminism is...it is harming WOMEN! Well we just better do something about that, and right now!!
" the game (i.e. "masculine" rules being the default)'
Someone is delusional. The cure is to read Jack Kammer's "If Men Have All the Power, How Come Women Make the Rules?"
It is short, easy to read, and is available on lulu.com for small fee download. So there is no excuse not to take your medicine:)
" the game (i.e. "masculine" rules being the default)'
Someone is delusional. The cure is to read Jack Kammer's "If Men Have All the Power, How Come Women Make the Rules?"
It is short, easy to read, and is available on lulu.com for small fee download. So there is no excuse not to take your medicine:)
MRA -
Actually, a Google search will reveal it sans-fee. Thanks for the suggestion. It can be summarized by the popular bumper sticker: "That's MISS Bitch to you!"
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!