Why some women don't identify with feminism

[happysmiley]

I aaw on another tread someone saying that the more they thought about it, the more they thought they weren't a feminist. Someone else on a different thread said that the Feminism topic has a "reputation" elsewhere. I know that if I were to ask most of my female friends if they were feminists, I'd probably just get a puzzled look, maybe a reluctant "yes" but not much enthusiasm.

So why is this? Why don't women identify with feminism?

And what can we do to get women on board? Because if women aren't willing to sign up, men hardly will.

I'm very much a feminist, but I don't engage in a war of the sexes - I'm not a man hater or a victim of a patriarchal world. A lot of so-called feminists give feminism a really bad name by trying to blame their own failings on men, rather than trying to become stronger human beings in their own right.

Bit late to this debate but, I a fairly sure the "women should not get the wote as the working class woman couldn't cope with it" was the stance taken by anti-suffragists.

Gertrude Bell's mum (I've forgotten her name) wrote quite eloquently on the subject. There was a view that if you gave women the vote it would overburden working class women who had more than enough to cope with bringing up 14 children in 2 rooms on 2p a week. This neatly gave a gender debate a class slant...good old England, eh?

I always found it deeply ironcic that those who said don't give these poor women the vote could not see that, if the poor women actually had a vote it was more likely someone would be elected who might alleviate their poverty and misery.

And the suffragettes were the middle and upper classes generally as they had the time and money to access books on the subject and discuss ideas. Working class woemn being too worn out to even think about things.

That said,it was mainly middle class and upper class women and men who argued against slavery, campaigned to have children outlawed from working under the age of 9, campaigned for stiopping children and women working in coal mines...I don't think somewone's class should be used to attack their moral stance.

No one said "well Martin Luther King was essentially middle class so he can't really speak about racism" or "the Dalai Lama comes from peasant stock so really can't comment on equality".

If soemone is trying to fight for the under priviledged their class is irrelevant, surely?

Also, I think the BNP gets slagged off almost as much as feminists, so at least we are not alone in being considered contemptible.

'feminists have dared to suggest that women are human too' - cant quite remember who said that but i think it gives a reminder of why feminists currently seem to rank at the bottom of what women aspire to be. It depresses me greatly to read that more women would want to be classed as a MILF (or GILF) than a feminist. enlightened sexism grows.

I buggered off to do the ironing but have found myself thinking about this the whole time!

Am I right in thinking that it's me that's being referred to with the "one person was nasty to me so I think all feminists are.." stuff?

If so, that's incorrect, because my posts clearly give the information that this is something I have encountered more than once.

Plus, I don't think it is unreasonable to judge a belief, a group, a movement, based on the people we encounter who declare themselves to be part of it. I certainly do that for all groups. I take a person who presents themselves as representing a group, to be representative of that group. And judge accordingly.

But back to the OP question, which I've been thinking about while I burned all my husband's shirts I am shit at ironing ..

I think I am not a feminist because I do not prioritise the rights of women above the rights of any and all other groups in the world. By that I don't mean that women who do think that women are more important than other groups, just that their focus is more on women than other groups.

I say this based on my understanding of feminism as the belief that women are all oppressed and the desire of a feminist to fight to change that.

I believe that yes, there is inequality between the sexes that needs to be addressed. Yes, women in some areas of the world are oppressed. Yes some women in all areas of the world are oppressed. But also, black people in many areas of the world are oppressed and not treated equally. People with disabilities face discrimination. In some parts of the world you try being openly gay and see how long you live!

I see feminists as people who focus on women, (not saying they don't care about other things, other groups, clearly they do, deeply, but to identify themselves as fighting for women's rights as opposed to fighting for human equality they must surely have female oppression as their main focus?) whereas I focus equally on humans who for whatever reason - suffer oppression, inequality, danger.

Happysmiley, I have to say I do read some of these feminism threads, and find them interesting.

I don't contribute because I don't really have anything to say.

Perhaps because I think there are valid reasons why women's position is such in the current (male dominated) capitalist society. And that there is no viable alternative to the current position that would not swing too far in women's favour.

I will continue to scour the feminism threads for a solution as to how women's work in the home and hearth can be valued in a way that is economically workable.

blueshoes - women's work in home and hearth will not be valued under our current neo classic economic approach . I dont agree with this dominant view that this work is @valueless@ in economic generation terms. maybe only when we have a total rethink of the systems will this work then be recognised and valued.

"Personally, I have all the rights that I want, i.e. I am equal to anyone and can do whatever I please, whenever I please.
So what should I be fighting for? "

"A lot of so-called feminists give feminism a really bad name by trying to blame their own failings on men, rather than trying to become stronger human beings in their own right. "

These two statements seem to me to tie together. The idea that equality has been achieved, and if any women are not experiencing that equality, then they are doing something wrong.

I look at the gender pay gap. Is this the fault of individual women? How can they fight for what they deserve if they don't even know it's happening half the time? Is it really the case that the solution lies with one woman who finds out she is being cheated, rather than the huge powerful company who is cheating her?

Or is it a systemic problem in our society that should be tackled by our society?

The rape conviction rate is very poor.Is that the fault of individual women deciding not to report their attacks, for deciding not to prosecute in the face of unhelpful police and prosectors, for not being able to face teh trial and have her behaviour scrutinised? Or is it the fault of our society and police and prosecutors for failing women who report rapes (john warbouys type stuff).

And if these things haven't happened to you personally, is it really OK to just shrug when they happen to other people.

I'm not gay, I don't shrug when I read about a homophobic attack, and say "well gay people are accepted in our society, that gay person muct have done something wrong". When women (or anyone for that matter) read about other women being conned, cheated, beaten, raped and so on, can they really just shrug and turn away?

JMTPW, being a feminist doesn't mean that you prioritise the rights of women above the rights of any and all other groups in the world. I'm a feminist because I'm a woman. I'm a member of the oppressed group. So it affects my life directly. That doesn't mean I don't give a shit about other oppressed groups. I'm also working class and one of the reasons I've only recently engaged with feminism properly is that previously I've been more focused on class politics, in part because there's a tradition of class politics in my family and, more pertinent to this thread, because being a bit of a leftie doesn't attract the same level of hate that being a feminist does. I think feminists have to be bloody brave to constantly cope with being put down, as they are. It's very easy to say "oh, I believe in equality for all oppressed groups" - it's something few would disagree with and it's a seizure of the moral high ground. But all the gains that have been made for oppressed groups have been made by people within those oppressed groups getting together and taking political action. Luckily they didn't give up before they even started because they felt it was 'unfair' to fight for 'their' cause and not all causes. These groups don't operate in isolation either. The civil rights movement, the women's movement and other, similar political groups can and do interact and inspire each other.

weeonion, I am listening if you can elaborate on after existing systems are torn down it can be re-worked in a way that is viable as well as to the satisfaction of feminists.

That is the fundamental flaw in feminists' argument. Is there an alternative that works?

HFTBETW - that's fine. No-one's forcing you to be a feminist if you don't want to be a feminist. But just because you don't perceive women's oppression as relevant to your life, doesn't mean it doesn't exist or isn't a reality in others' lives.

I'm not opppressed. But then I never iron - see comments above. Is this our key issue - real women and feminists would rather enter the gates of hell than wield an iron?

Why is the woman above ironing the shirts and not the man? How bizarre in 2010. Doesn't he have arms?

dittany, I read about the 'nappy headed hos' incident () in that Kat Banyard book - didn't know about Jesse Jackson's and and Al Sharpton's comments on it - perfect example.

The idea of a political movement fighting on behalf of all oppressed groups sounds great, but in a sense, the women's movement, civil rights movement etc are just that. They're not really 'single issue' movements because their impact goes way beyond those within that particular oppressed group.

Another example that springs to mind is the politicizing of miners' wives during the miners' strike in the 80s. Ostensibly they were fighting alongside their husbands for a particular cause, but this led to a sharpening of those women's political consciousness which led some into other areas of political activism like feminism. Similar to this, I was listening to an interview with Nancy Fraser and she spoke about how the women's movement grew out of the 'New Left' in the 60s. Many of the 2nd wave feminists were politically active in other areas - opposing the Vietnam war, for example - but their experience of sexism from their male colleagues led to their involvement with/formation of the women's movement (PS I'm sure this is a little too simplistic and there were other routes into the women's movement, but it is another example of one cause interacting with others).

If you belong to a relatively powerless group in society it takes a lot of will and energy to fight that oppression, which tends to come from a direct, personal experience of being oppressed. A generalized 'let's stop all oppression' movement would never generate the necessary anger and coherence to get off the ground. So for that reason I think it's a cop out to reject feminism on the grounds that it's too narrow in scope and somehow entails a lack of concern with any other oppressed group.

Xenia, what are your thoughts on violence against women? The low conviction rate for rape, for example?

I think the problem about using the word "oppression" is that a lot of people immediately react to it by thinking "Well,I'm not oppressed".
That is my reaction too.But that doesn't mean you are not experiencing adverse effects in your life just because you are a woman.

Kat Banyard's book quoted an experiment which showed that in an interview situation men who negotiated for more money were looked on favorably - women were penalised.The deduction made was that women can choose to push for more money,and be seen as "less nice",and therefore risk losing out in the workplace,or they can play nice and therefore end up earning less than their male counterparts.
So I would disagree with you,HFTBETW when you say your life hasn't been affected directly - it is quite likely that it has,but possibly not in such a way that you feel oppressed!

I label myself as feminist, despite being told not all of my views are feminist enough.

I can well imagine that I'm not the only one to have come across that particular attitude, and can understand why other people would distance themselves from it as a label. Seems a lot of hassle to keep having to defend the choice of word.

Also, not labelling yourself a feminist doesn't mean that you don't try and do anything to improve the way women are treated.