- Share This Post
- submit
- 9
-
Sparkle (0)
Feminism, to me anyway, is about creating a society in which people are not proscribed by sex and gender roles. It is about women and men having the flexibility to decide for one’s self how her or his life should be lived. This is a lovely sentiment, but of course sex and gender do not exist in a bubble as influences on one’s life options. Race/ethnicity, class, religion, sexuality, etc. all play a critical role with gender in shaping opportunities for people.
With all of these pressures in mind, it is not surprising how much diversity and range there are among the feminist ranks, and how difficult it can be to define who a feminist is as a result. As hard as we all try to respect one another’s beliefs, it is clear that because feminism cuts across so many critical life issues, we may never agree on a set, official definition; saying “I am a feminist†will probably always mean different things to different people. I think that is OK, although it obviously presents challenges as we move forward with slightly differing agendas, but with the same goal in mind of freedom for women (and men) to live their lives to their utmost potential, however we define that. I also think we can agree that it is not OK for some women to have more choices and options at the expense of other women.
That said, perhaps one thing we can all agree on is who is not a feminist, regardless of whether they sport a sparkly engagement ring or not. I have only one criterion that qualifies someone as an “anti-feminist:†she is a woman who uses the advances made for women by feminism to argue that feminism and other women are useless. Generally, anti-feminists rise to power by abusing other women. As Lisa Jervis, editor of Bitch Magazine noted in a reading of Bitchfest that I attended on Friday, women are not any more innately good than men are. In fact, if we generally abuse power less than men, it is likely because we have less power to abuse. Given the opportunity, women can do terrible damage. Anti-feminists love to do so.
These anti-feminists can unite us on at least one topic. To get the discussion going (as if it needs stoking!), here my five top anti-feminists:
Ann Coulter - Ann is my personal favorite. Her complete lack of regard for facts makes me put her at the top of the list. She has a special hatred in her coal heart for feminists, although she clearly would have trouble living her life as an outspoken, unmarried, childless woman in her 40s if it were not for feminists. Instead, she’d be known as an unloved harridan spinster; a woman to be pitied. Ann also refuses to acknowledge the path forged for her by first wave feminists, who were attacked and imprisoned at the turn of the century and a decade beyond in order to obtain the right to vote. If not for our suffragist trailblazers, Ann would not be able to vote for the women-hating right-wing nut jobs that she so adores. In fact, Ann goes a step beyond inappreciativeness. On Feb. 26, 2001, Ann announced on Politically Incorrect that:
I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote. No, they all have to give up their vote, not just, you know, the lady clapping and me. The problem with women voting -- and your Communists will back me up on this -- is that, you know, women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it. And when they take these polls, it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care.
Perhaps if she would follow her own advice and not vote, not only would she not be under investigation for voting fraud in Florida (where she is registered to vote under her real estate agent’s home and not her own), but we would all be a bit better off in the world.
Christina Hoff Sommers - Anyone whose books appear on the “Recommended Reading†list of the Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute under “feminism†is a top candidate for an anti-feminist award. (See also: Ann Coulter.) Sommers has two books on “feminism†that they recommend,
