A Fresh Focus on Feminism
October 12, 2009 • By Rachel Dozier, The Breeze
Print This Post
Email This Post
“Wanna hear a joke?…women’s rights.”
Did you just laugh or become highly offended?
When the term feminist is brought up, one automatically pictures bra burnings, poorly dressed women and short haircuts. Feminism or “women’s liberation” has done many wonderful things in America to help the every day woman’s plight. Women have the right to vote and have new sexual freedoms through activists such as Margaret Sanger, who promoted legalization of birth control in America.
However, radical feminists turn off both the male and female population. Many males find radical feminists intimidating, abrasive and difficult to have a normal conversation with. These women tend to have a general dislike of and unwelcoming nature toward men. Their deep resentment of the homemaker stereotype and being “forced” to serve men has left most feminists with a new stereotype, the manhater.
That goes to say, men should not get better jobs based on gender and women shouldn’t be held back from certain occupations due to presumed physical setbacks. However, if a man is more qualified for a job or has a better performance, accusing the company of being “sexist” only makes women sound like sore losers. I know that there are definitely real cases of gender discrimination in the workplace and beyond, but that should only inspire women to work harder. We are by no means a minority, especially at JMU where the ratio of women to men is 61 to 39, according to the Office of Admissions. It’s time that women stop taking on the “victim” persona and start showing their worth.
Sure men may make fun of us, implying that we’re inferior, but honestly, suck it up. Jokes about weak or dainty women are just that. While they could have some basis in the joke teller’s actual opinion, who cares? Outside of the work environment we shouldn’t be treated equally. Men and women are for the most part, completely different, and everyone would do better to embrace those differences than to fight them.
The most recent wave of feminism is known as the “3rd Wave.” It provides a new look into an old concept. While this group of feminists still “complains” about discrimination against women, they also look for ways to improve their situation. On its Web site www.3rdwwwave.com, the group states “we’re not looking just to complain. We’ve come a long way, even though we still have a long way to go, and we’re more interested in finding solutions to the problems that confront us than concentrating only on the problems themselves.”
Now there’s something to support. No more bra burnings or saying that men are evil and bringing us down. The ways of the past, while effective in terms of getting women certain rights, have also added a negative stigma to the term feminist. If women really want change, they need to stop protesting and show it in the job force, on an athletic field or in society in general.
The movie “Nine to Five,” featuring Jane Fonda, Lily Tomlin and Dolly Parton, is a perfect example of a positive and effective form of feminist propaganda. The women in the movie are not treated well, and they do something about it. While their solution to a sexist boss was extreme (they kidnapped him and ran the company), their active resistance was inspiring. In the musical adaptation by Dolly Parton, the song “Change It” perfectly exemplifies taking a stand against injustice. The lines “If you don’t take the reins, it’s gonna stay the same. Nothin’s gonna change if you don’t change it!” are what should inspire today’s women.
It’s OK to cook dinner for your husband and dress up when you go out. That doesn’t make you a slave or a man’s “property,” it shows you care about your significant other and your appearance. Men should always be willing to help you out as well, and if they do treat you like a slave then that’s not OK. When you perform daily tasks, it should be because you want to, not because you’re being forced to. However, men and women are completely different creatures. Sometimes women are better cooks or dressers. This shouldn’t mean that we cast out our skills because we are worried about becoming society’s stereotype of a woman.
To a certain extent, radical feminists have stinted the everyday woman’s growth. They have made it seem as if being a stay-at-home mom or taking care of one’s husband is shameful to the female population. It’s not. If you want to cook, cook, or if you feel wronged in some way, do something about it. The real battle takes place in your everyday life. If a woman can show her worth in this day and age, it won’t go unnoticed for long. The power of your own efforts is so much stronger than a rallying, bra-less crowd.
Rachel Dozier is a sophomore media arts & design major and Life editor at The Breeze.
Contact Rachel Dozier at dozierra@jmu.edu
Comments
19 Responses to “A Fresh Focus on Feminism”
Got something to say?
Check Out New Videos!
March 4, 2010 Issue in Print
2010 Baseball & Softball Guide
Your column just draws more attention to the fact that there are gender disparities. The fact that you segregate the sexes proves that men and women will never be equal because they will always be first categorized as man or woman. If you really wanted to be an “effective feminist” you would drop all language and arguments that automatically set females apart from males. The goal of gender equality should be to forget that we have prescribed “genders” and judge individuals on an individual basis. The “feminism” of today is called gender equality, and it applies to more than just “man” and “woman.”
This is what a feminist looks like
By Meredith Burns, Elizabeth Hogan, and the rest of the JMU feminist community
A fresh focus? We beg to differ. Rachel Dozier’s article on feminism is more like a rehashing of all of the negative stereotypes and unfounded myths about feminists. Ever. The reason that women are afraid of these words today is because of those exact myths we are trying to debunk. Though we will have to take a break from our bra burning ritual to write this, we believe it is well worth the sacrifice.
First, there is a complete misunderstanding of feminism. Feminism is about equality and about choice. The choice to stay home or to work. The choice to have children or not have children. The choice to take you husband’s name or to keep your own. These individual choices should be honored and respected on a systematic level.
Secondly, who are these radical feminists that both women and men alike loathe? These generalizations and stereotypes stem from a marginal group of feminists in the sixties who are no longer the same feminists as today. Despite their reputation, radical feminists did a great deal of good with establishing rape and battered women’s centers, recognizing rape as a weapon of war, tracing global human trafficking, and establishing women’s studies programs at universities.
In “Fresh focus,” Dozier neglects to show any relevant statistics showing that males and females are annoyed with feminists, yet is able to tell us about a movie from 1980—almost 30 years ago. Wow. She neglected to even obtain the viewpoints of key feminist groups on campus because her request for information was poorly worded and obviously biased. Hm. She completely ignored most of the accomplishments of second wave feminism and failed to do a simple search on NOW or any other website to examine the action of older feminists; a simple search immediately disproves the traditional bra-burning myth while showing the massive gains they’ve made for human rights. Dozier neglects to point out recent court cases that feminists have fought for and against. She trots out tired arguments saying men and women are different. Of course we are different, but we are both human with human wants and needs. Though some differences are biological, many, such as gender roles are learned rather than inherent, depending on the culture in which one is raised.
Inequality between the sexes is real. Women working hard is also real. We don’t need someone telling us to “suck it up,” but rather, we need to encourage and support one another as a community of women working towards equality.
Essentially, all of the archaic ideas that Dozier espouses are all red herrings to distract people from what feminists are actually about. We are concerned with eliminating sexual assault and domestic abuse, creating more equitable valuations of female labor, lessening income disparity between men and women, stopping discrimination and segregation in education and the workplace, eliminating barriers to reproductive freedom, and overall equality for women all of the world. We are fighting for women’s rights as human rights.
If one really wants to know what a feminist looks like, he or she should look into taking women’s studies courses and joining feminist organizations on campus such as NOW, CARE, Sister Speak, Her Two Cents, and the Take Back the Night coalition. We are not or one mind or one appearance. We are human beings that will continue to fight for equality and justice for women, LGBT folks, minorities, and any person who has had their rights trampled on. If that makes us aggressive and abrasive, so be it.
Dozier’s entire opinion piece is an example of the current political climate of a feminist backlash, which relied on the support tired stereotypes rather than interviews with actual feminists or facts from any recent feminist publication. Had she done her homework, she probably would have felt pretty embarrassed publishing such trite and ignorant claims. Perhaps before writing about a topic she clearly has not researched, Rachel Dozier should enroll in WMST 200. I’m sure there’s room.
In reply to Burns & Hogan, your post will not help your cause. Look at your statements:
“Dozier neglects to show any relevant statistics showing that males and females are annoyed with feminists”
Not everything in life can be measured by statistics. What makes you believe this is an applicable test, or that the data exists? Your post doesn’t say, but instead drops the subject as if it you’ve proven the opposite to be true. Invoking “the current political climate of a feminist backlash” suggests you actually agree with the above quote, which is contradictory.
“These generalizations and stereotypes stem from a marginal group of feminists in the sixties who are no longer the same feminists as today. Despite their reputation, radical feminists did a great deal of good… ”
Your intent is unclear. The first sentence appears to disavow radical feminists, but the next sentence endorses them. Or have you shifted topics mid-paragraph without identifying the change? Is the “marginal group of feminists” the same as “radical feminists”?
“…and the rest of the JMU feminist community”
Do you really speak for every single person at JMU who identifies as feminist? They were all there with you when you submitted this post in the wee hours of the morning? It’s an implausible claim that damages credibility, and reveals a hazy sense of audience. Do you expect the average reader to agree with you, or is the post written to a small circle of the like-minded? The quote above suggests the former, but the the extremes of rhetoric suggest the latter. If so, it only reinforces Dozier’s point, that radical feminists have become increasingly irrelevant to society in general.
This is the most biased article I’ve ever read by a woman. I wish I could be more composed like my fellow feminists but I am so enraged by your “fresh focus” that I have to critique your opinions. I am a radical feminist. I don’t complain. I do my research and I have opinions. I am militant. I am everything you seem to despise in a feminist but I am effective and I do contribute to society. That’s the thing about the radicals. We are women of action. We are women who care. And you miss Dozier are no better than the men who commit acts of war against women.
Yes Brad, people should just pull stuff out of their butt and ask random people what they think about feminists and write an article about it. Statistics, polls, bah!
Wanna hear a joke…if you substitute the words men and women with white and black…this sounds racist as crap
Take for example:
That goes to say, men (white people) should not get better jobs based on gender (race) and women (black people) shouldn’t be held back from certain occupations due to presumed physical setbacks. However, if a man (white person) is more qualified for a job or has a better performance, accusing the company of being “sexist” (racist) only makes women (black person) sound like sore losers. I know that there are definitely real cases of gender (racial) discrimination in the workplace and beyond, but that should only inspire women (black people) to work harder…Sure men (white people) may make fun of us, implying that we’re (black people) inferior, but honestly, suck it up.
I wanted to point this out, because we all understand the implications behind racial discrimination, but Dozier thinks that talking about women in this context is somehow a “fresh focus” when it’s just the same old ideas…
Here’s another take on swapping black people for women. Picture this quote in the breeze “It’s time that black people stop taking on the “victim” persona and start showing their worth.” Obviously racist, right? and how is it not sexist again?
“Yes Brad, people should just pull stuff out of their butt and ask random people what they think about feminists and write an article about it. Statistics, polls, bah!”
Another unclear statement. I can see disagreement and sarcasm, but no evident intent or meaning.
“And you miss Dozier are no better than the men who commit acts of war against women.”
Really? This article is the equivalent of forcible rape or worse? The comments have been suspiciously similar in use over-extended metaphors. Are they all by the same person or small group who conferred before writing? A situation like this only illustrates Dozier’s point, that radical feminists do not care to work towards social equality, but are insular and self-obsessed.
Rachel Dozier…Will you marry me?
“However, if a man (white person) is more qualified for a job or has a better performance, accusing the company of being “sexist” (racist) only makes women (black person) sound like sore losers.”
You would consider such a statement racist? Then you’ve revealed you’re an extremist in more ways than one, again reinforcing Dozier’s point.
Gee Brad they’re so self obssesed. Those damn feminists put on benefit concerts and hold bake sales for domestic violence shelters. And show movies to educated people about social inequalities. Ooh and some even participate in Take Back the Night to raise awareness of sexual assault. But, they only care about themselves. Oh my intent is to point out that you obviously haven’t educated yourself in case that wasn’t in any way clear. Because every radical feminist must be the same person with the same ideas and values…
I’m so glad that Meredith Burns and Elizabeth Hogan so eloquently stated my exact thoughts. I was outraged by the inadequacies of Dozier’s article, and would like to recommend some helpful reading resources for her to pursue prior to assuming any understanding of contemporary feminism in the future:
Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions: Classic and Contemporary Readings, by Susan Shaw and Janet Lee
Our Bodies, Ourselves by the Boston Women’s Health Book Collective
Cunt: A Declaration of Independence by Inga Muscio
One link that’s fairly comprehensive through JMU:
http://www.jmu.edu/womenstudies/resources.shtml
Women’s studies classes at JMU are fantastic, I’d encourage you to consider one to challenge the assumptions you have thrown out in your article. If you think they’ll stand up, hopefully you’ll accept the challenge.
Please look into these and more. You are radically underinformed, and it’s embarrassingl to women and James Madison University that you wrote such ridiculous things.
Brad, if you are Dozier’s boyfriend then good for you for standing up for her… with all of your writing critiques. Your ignorancy baffles my brain.
Miss Dozier,
I would just like to be provided with a small explanation of one the sentences in your piece.
“Outside of the work environment we shouldn’t be treated equally.”
In what ways should I, as a woman, not be treated equally? Should I not be able to attain a bank loan, own property, divorce my husband, be my son or daughter’s caretaker, have freedom of speech, etc. ?
Thanks.
“In what ways should I, as a woman, not be treated equally? Should I not be able to attain a bank loan, own property, divorce my husband, be my son or daughter’s caretaker, have freedom of speech, etc. ?”
The above is an example of an adequate response. It asks specific questions in response to specific statements, and it addresses an actual weakness of Dozier’s wording. She probably should have said “not identical or interchangeable,” but instead used the overly general term “equal,” as well as the overly general phrase “Outside of the work environment.” Contrast that to the following:
“Those damn feminists put on benefit concerts and hold bake sales for domestic violence shelters. And show movies to educated people about social inequalities. Ooh and some even participate in Take Back the Night to raise awareness of sexual assault.”
This does not address Dozier’s criticisms. Do the domestic violence shelters treat violence perpetrated by both males and females in an evenhanded way? What are the social inequalities, are they something that a reasonable person would consider inequalities? How does Take Back the Night define sexual assault?
Or this one:
“…would like to recommend some helpful reading resources for her to pursue prior to assuming any understanding of contemporary feminism in the future:
Women’s Voices,.. Women’s studies classes at JMU are fantastic…”
This is just a list of titles, without any explanation of content. Any writing prof can tell you that an unelaborated list is the quickest path to a failing grade. When replies resort to name-calling or are so vague as to be meaningless, they indicate that the writers are not concerned with convincing others of their views, but instead have the intent of self-gratification or status with others who already agree with you.
Keep in mind that Dozier’s thesis is not a rejection of feminism in general, but of extremist views that alienate most men and women, with the stated goal of improving feminism’s capability for positive social change. If you believe the essay does not meet that goal, let us know how and where.
While I might have not worded my thoughts the same as Ms. Dozier, I do understand her point.
My beef, however, is more with individuals like Ms. Burns and Ms. Hogan. Ladies, you might not realize it, but women like yourselves are often what drive women like Ms. Dozier and myself to resent the “feminist movement.” Organizations like NOW (which Burns and Hogan suggest we “try” in order to experience true feminism) are exceptionally more liberal than much of the female population. On NOW’s webpage, two of their “Priority Issues” are “reproductive rights” and “lesbian rights.” Of course, I’m going to be tarred and feathered for saying this, but as a woman I support neither of those “rights.” I do not believe it is a “right” to terminate the life of an innocent being, nor do I believe it is the “right” of a homosexual woman to enter into the same legal union as a heterosexual one. Go ahead, bring on the insults–I’m used to being lambasted by the “tolerant left” for my opinions. Oh the irony.
My point is, feminists like Burns and Hogan do not represent much of the female population, and we do not appreciate their organizations like NOW pretending to speak for the whole female community. 49% of women in 2009 identified themselves as pro-life, as opposed to 44% who identified as pro-choice (that’s according to Gallup, one of the most trusted names in the business). Now, I wasn’t a math major, but I’m pretty sure that those stats indicate more women disagree with NOW’s “reproductive rights” position than agree. I’m sorry, Ms. Burns and Ms. Hogan, but you can’t blame people like Ms. Dozier and myself for becoming annoyed with you and your organizations when you incorrectly represent the sentiments of our gender.
Just as men and women are different, women differ from each other as well. How about we all stop making blanket statements in general? We’ve all seen Mean Girls–we know this can get pretty ugly.
1. Most of this article is very sexist, sorry.
2. Everyone is allowed to have a cause, whether it be anti-feminist or feminist.
3. I liked the example of substituting words for black and white, makes perfect sense.
4. Inequality exists everywhere, and no, it shouldn’t be ignored, so stand up for what is right.
5. Y’all stress out over the little things.
The End.
some advice: do some RESEARCH before you decide to publish such an ignorant article.
To Ms. Dozier -
I am really trying to understand where you are coming from in this piece, and I’m assuming it has something to do with being “feminine” while supposedly being a “feminist.” Tragically, in the process you managed to alienate virtually everyone but Brad the Douchebag. Regardless of your intent, the content of your article was both insulting and demeaning to women of every status. That’s interesting that YOU are ok with being subordinate to men out of the workplace. Odd, but interesting. However, I hope you can understand why the rest of us are not. Even out of the workplace - I am an individual. An individual who can think independently, behaves of my own conscious, and can hold on my own. Even out of the workplace I consider us equals, and I think its sad thats where the battle ends for you. You don’t need to be a feminist to want to be treated fairly. And while this has been reiterated throughout the comments, your research is both faulty and outdated - if there was any beyond your one website search. Bra-burning was rare and hardly a reality - NO ONE DOES THAT ANYMORE. In fact, people rarely even did that in the 60’s. And oh how the battle has changed since the 60’s! Feminism has grown to encompass roles outside of the workplace, and not just for women. These same women have been fighting for other minority rights for decades and it’s a shame that also gets ignored. I could go on, and I don’t mean to attack you - but please darling; it would be best if you stopped writing these comment pieces. Or actually - Brad. It would be best if you stopped commenting. No sense in riling up us bra-burners.