Faux Feminism or something else?

[QuestioningFeminism]

I've been a very strong supporter of feminism for years as the survivor of violence against women and girls. However something seems to have shifted in society recently and it really has me questioning if I fit into any kind of modern day feminism anymore.

I have seen the following general ideas pushed by women online claiming to be feminists recently that have led me to start questioning.

-Marriage has no value and only benefits men. Women who get married are stupid and oppresing themselves.

-Relationships that aren't LGBT+ are antifeminist.

-Stay at home mothers are oppresing themselves and should be mocked as "tradwives".

-The only relationships that have value are friendships.

-Having children is a laughable waste of time for women and should be avoided at all costs. Motherhood is the ultimate form of oppression against women and anyone who chooses Motherhood is setting herself up for failure.

-Romance and families in general are antifeminist

-Everyone is happier single and will always be that way. Casual sex is the only option that will lead to true happiness and sexual freedom.

-Heterosexual relationships are dangerous/problematic and therefore should be avoided. If a woman is stupid enough to sign herself onto one, anything bad that happens to her after she deserves because everyone knows that men are dangerous by default.

The people claiming these things honestly don't seem like trolls. They really seem to believe them. It seems we've pushed the idea that women are vulnerable and men are bad so hard that we've possibly given heterosexual/bisexual women the idea that life in the very general sense should be avoided.

The idea that friendship is the only valuable relationship worries me. Yes friendship is incredibly valuable but what happens when your friends get busy with their own lives? I myself went through a period of quiet when a few of my friend got married and had children. If it wasn't for my own family I probably would have been quite lost. I can only hope these users were very young and naive.

There also seems to be a notion that the only way to find true happiness is to be single for the rest of your life.

But I don't know. I feel quite saddened by these attitudes. I've seen quite a few mumsneters getting attacked by users with these ideas. Specifically the more "traditional" type women. Married, mothers, and stay at home mothers and housewives particularly seem to be targeted.

One thread I saw actually disturbed me as it was a woman who said she always wanted to be a stay at home mother. She was mocked viciously and one user even went so far as to tell her her husband works definitely divorce her if she did this and she would deserve it.

I thought the whole idea was giving women choices but now it seems we have simply changed what choices are socially acceptable rather than giving women more choices.

I don't know. It all kind of makes me want to stop calling myself a feminist if this is what feminism stands for. If falling in love getting married (even with the risks) and having children which is in my opinion very natural and a part of life, are all considered anti feminists then I don't really want to be a part of that.

In my personal view it feels a bit like escapism and an extreme fear of failure to me.

Maybe I'm becoming an old fashioned hag. But I can live with that I guess.

Thise are all claims the antifeminists / antiwomen people claim feminists are about.

Do you have any links or can you tell where you have actually read these comments?
By feminists, not claims what feminists wants and say.

I doubt you, because I’ve been trying to find feminist places that aren’t all about hetero relationships, arguing with each other is taking a man’s name feminism, about chores and how important children are.
Tbh, I’ve been pretty dissapointed how conventional and conservative feminists have been.

There still a push and strong pressure for women to date men/ have sex / marry them / have kids. Sadly.
Anyone not falling in line is still look at something wrong with them.

So personally I welcome more options for women. And dismantling autonormative society.

Reads like a Queer Theory reinterpretation of various bits of historical feminist discourse (some of which was pretty wild and fell by the wayside when the theory clearly didn’t hold up against reality).

The idea that human mammals will completely stop making babies is laughable and not based on material reality - and currently it’s still the case that unless a woman is already independently wealthy, she is almost always better off having babies after making the legal contract of marriage or civil partnership.

I think it’s a fantastic thing that women can now choose to be childfree but the reality is that the majority of women (and men!) do want to have families.

Seems a bit weird to cast marriage and parenthood as part of boring old heteronormativity at a period in time when both M and F same sex couples are getting wed and are having/adopting babies of their own, and the law recognises their parental responsibility in the same ways as with opposite sex couples*.

That said, I did recently come across the term ‘homonormative’ for the first time, which was used as a perjorative (and I assume referred to gay and lesbian people who have ‘normie’ family orientated lifestyles much like their straight friends and neighbours!)

*not yet in all countries, obvs.

The idea that marriage is bad for women is not new.

i don’t think many women here support it- in general woman seem to be advised that is is a form of security- I think I’m in a minority in being anti marriage, which is a stance I’ve had since about the ‘80s.

These sound like the beliefs of the very young. Some of those don't stand up well to hard reality where female humans start to realise that they can't identify or argue their way out of the disadvantages of being in a female body.

Women that are not married to their partner can be royally fucked over with a terrible impact on her if the relationship breaks up. This IS the reality. When you find yourself homeless, career five years behind you and the sole carer and breadwinner for several kids while your male partner swans off with life and pension intact and batchelorhood reclaimed, this generally starts to dawn on you. What did my grandmother used to say? 'Fine words butter no parsnips'.

As a homosexual female (I am over and done with the word Lesbian having seen the exciting new 'umbrella') I'm also antifeminist. So at this point the word has lost all meaning really, and so has LGBT+. I think LGBT+ now largely means 'very cool person scolding everyone else for not being as cool as them with definite male supremacist leanings'. Often clings to the fond belief that their views are left and socialist. So not being in a relationship with one is bad, but then pretty much at this point everyone's bad and cancelled, why worry?

Stay at home mothers are often providing childcare that the relationship otherwise couldn't afford and increasingly many are not there by choice but there because their children with SEND needs are being damaged in the school system. It's almost always the mother who stays at home, not the father.

The anti child rhetoric is pretty front and centre, no point in going into all that. I'd have made a lot of these noises after a couple of pints in the student union aged 19. Life experience tends to radicalise you if you're female.

As a homosexual female (I am over and done with the word Lesbian having seen the exciting new 'umbrella') I'm also antifeminist.

Not by choice, I should add. It's not an exciting identity. It's just that I've been depersoned by the champions of the rainbow.

I’m not letting go of lesbian, but I’ll have fuck all to do with LGBTetc. The longer that acronym gets, the more anti-lesbian it becomes.

And ‘queer’ is even worse.

There have always been people like this around. Mostly they are idiots or very young.

The exception, IME, is the anti-child stuff. I've found that has become a lot worse. And some of it very dehumanizing of mothers and children.

I'd say the people youve seen posting have got confused between queer theory and feminism.

Easy mistake to make if you're a bit thick

I'm not anti-marriage, I'm disappointed by the fact that women have been socialised to be validated by marriage. I understood that the roots of marriage were in property ownership, (fathers giving away their daughters to their future husbands), but fortunately in most(?) countries that's irrelevant now.

It's a luxury to be a stay at home parent, you have to survive on one income and trust your other half not to penalise you for that or dismiss the fact that you may have missed many years of career progression.
This is usually the woman in a mixed sex partnership (as if career progression for women didn't have enough hurdles). Marriage can give you more legal protection I believe.
I have known a few women with STEM qualifications who became childminders so they could earn income and stay home with their young children. I have met one couple whose family income derives from both parents childminding.
I also note that staying at home with small children is not something everyone is good at.

Experience has made me more protective of the word feminism. When aiming for the same goal infighting is unproductive.

Again, where do these amazing feminist actually hang at?

No urban myths, let me find them!

See this sort of comment is why I love the women on here. Very astute and to the point!

Ask Judith Butler for a recommendation.

She has a kid, can’t be that revolutionary…

Even revolutionary humans are mammals.

Feminism is the belief that women are fully human, are as important as men, and should be treated as equals. If you don't think that describes you, then by all means reject the term!

Of course, feminism takes different forms depending on time, place, and demographics. I'm not sure where you are seeing the comments that you find objectionable, except online (general ideas pushed by women online claiming to be feminists) and/or particularly on MN (I've seen quite a few mumsneters getting attacked...)?

-Marriage has no value and only benefits men. Women who get married are stupid and oppresing themselves. I've overwhelmingly seen the opposite here: if you take a quick look at the Relationships board, you often see posters pointing out that UK women who have children with their carefree male "partners" and then take on an unequal share of childcare and housework are at a disadvantage versus someone in the exact same situation who is married. This will vary by jurisdiction, though.

-Relationships that aren't LGBT+ are antifeminist. Relationships, and people, can't be LGBT+. Is the message perhaps that a woman having a relationship with a man is antifeminist? This is an old 2nd wave take common among radical (separatist) women. The idea of women only communities is still worth considering as a thought exercise, but generally contemporary feminsts don't believe that anyone should be shamed or disadvantaged because of sexual orientation.

-Stay at home mothers are oppresing themselves and should be mocked as "tradwives". These are two different things, but there are relevant feminist comments on being a SAHM, which are substantively different from feminist criticisms of being a SAHD or SAHP.

-The only relationships that have value are friendships. This is intriguing - can you tell us where you saw this?

-Having children is a laughable waste of time for women and should be avoided at all costs. Motherhood is the ultimate form of oppression against women and anyone who chooses Motherhood is setting herself up for failure. This sounds like it might be coming from childfree people rather than specifically from feminists.

-Romance and families in general are antifeminist. Need more info. These things certainly can take antifeminist forms.

-Everyone is happier single and will always be that way. Are you sure people weren't saying that you need to be happy on your own before entering into a healthy long-term, pair bond relationship? Because that is a common feminist belief, and it's sound. Casual sex is the only option that will lead to true happiness and sexual freedom. Depends on the person - I think we all know that - but feminists are likely to point out that the risks inherent in casual sex are structurally unequal for men and for women.

-Heterosexual relationships are dangerous/problematic and therefore should be avoided. If a woman is stupid enough to sign herself onto one, anything bad that happens to her after she deserves because everyone knows that men are dangerous by default. "She deserves it" as a general observation is not a feminist take.

It seems we've pushed the idea that women are vulnerable and men are bad so hard that we've possibly given heterosexual/bisexual women the idea that life in the very general sense should be avoided. Is this true, or are you seeing individual hetero women despairing that they can't find many potential male partners who aren't misogynist/steeped in porn/wedded to or at least tolerant of rape culture/rape apologism? I've seen the latter much more than the former.

I thought the whole idea was giving women choices but now it seems we have simply changed what choices are socially acceptable rather than giving women more choices. Feminism had and has the EFFECT of giving women more choices, but not every choice made by a woman is feminist. As above, feminism is the belief that women are fully human, are as important as men, and should be treated as equals. If your choice undermines women's rights, it isn't feminist even though you are a woman.

Who can actually make choices.
It’s not an excuse.
We aren’t mindless, without no power.

Thank you everyone for your comments. I really appreciate your time and thoughts.

I did not know about queer theory but now I'm interested in reading up on it to better understand it.

I agree that it is sad how lesbians have gotten the shit end of the stick with recent events. It's very unpleasant how they've been treated and certainly deserve better.

@2013isback thank you very much for your well thought out comment. It's given me a lot to think about. It can get overwhelming at times. You're right. I do believe that women are fully human and just as deserving as men. But if feminism as a whole were to change and other values attached to it that were to change then I'm not sure I could agree that I'm a feminist. You're probably right though. They might be getting feminist mixed up as something else or I might be interpreting what I think to be a feminist when in reality they have a different goal.

I especially believe that we cannot be truly feminist if we were to detach women from what gives many meaning in our lives. For many that meaning in life might include love, romance, marriage, children and sometimes traditional values or lifestyles. I do see some chanting that trans rights ARE women's rights for example so that I sorely disagree with.

It's almost as if some people think the only way to make women equal to men is to strip women away from our bodily experiences and the very things that make us women and unique to men in the first place which is that we were born with female reproductive organs. This I think it's a toxic form of escapism.

For those asking for proof. I say you don't need to believe me. It's okay if you don't. I feel that posting links would not only make me uncomfortable though but also be asking for trouble as I worry that the OP or those with the offending comments might come under attack. And that's really not want I want.

I’m not making ‘excuses’ for Judith bloody Butler 😅

OP I don't think anyone is asking for "proof"

in my case, I just wonder where you hear such things.

I'm single and childfree and (try to) prioritise friendship and mostly feel society thinks I'm wrong and a bad person.

You have to make a difference between feminisms as frameworks or theories of which there are many, and between individual feminist writers with their own opinions.

There have always been an enormous number of views of the latter kind, but fewer frameworks or theories.

Some of the theories do argue that the extraction of the female resources (sexual and reproductive labour, unpaid care labour) by the patriarchy are achieved through its institutions so that something like traditional marriage was never created to benefit women, but to guarantee men access to sons and sex, pretty much.

From the most radical angle, then, marriage, taking the man's name (joining his tribe and leaving your own tribe), the old rules which gave men the custody of children etc. could not be changed into something that would benefit everyone, so should be rejected.

But other feminist theoretical frameworks argue that it's possible to have an egalitarian marriage, child-rearing arrangements etc., and that it's important to put equal value on the traditionally female roles in society but to encourage men, too, to choose those roles.

After a long time spent in feminism I would be hesitant to try to see any universal views among today's feminist, though the majority probably still view the oppression of women as sex-based. Where the different schools put their main emphasis varies greatly, however. And some new schools of feminism, in my opinion, are not feminist at all, because they have erased sex from their framework altogether.

So you are just trolling then, op.
Seriosly, no one else but anti-feminist have ever seen these kinds of claims.

And if marriage to me and children are the most important thing, mixed with traditional values, where the hell do you even beed feminism?
Women are bot only suppoerted, but told and threatened to date/marry/fuck men are bore their offsprings.
Why do you need feminist to hold your hand as well on top of everything and everyone else?

I don’t understand this post.

Lost your reading specs, Batman?

Or perhaps started your Saturday night early by skipping your team and going straight in with a quadruple whiskey?

It’s your post that is confusing.

What team and what whiskey?
Are you always this insulting?

OP, there's a lot of history to feminism that you might find interesting to read, such as the different waves of feminism. I grew up just thinking of feminism as a 'value' rather than a political movement, and it was only when I came over to this board that I started learning and understanding more about it. I also fairly recently understood that there are different views of feminism relating either to the individual (opportunities, individual freedom) or to the structural (preventing oppression of women as a sex class).

@YouAreNotBatman - I’m sorry, I don’t understand your post either. It reads as quite aggressive, though. Was that your intent?