Why so many female critics of feminism?

[SweetDreamerGirl]

Are female critics against the entire concept of feminism or are they mainly against specific details?

I suspect that some of the anti-feminism-as-a-concept women have bought into the myth that feminists are trying to steal society from men, castrating men into oblivion. Stealing is bad and women should not do such a bad thing. After all, that would be so un-ladylike and un-feminine.

What motivates such a women to support her own discrimination/oppression? They seem determined to stick up for the rights of men who are not currently oppressed but whom they assume would become oppressed in a feminist people-centred (i.e. female AND male-friendly) world. They seem to expect feminism to contiue to make the mistakes of the patriarchal past, with dominance of one group over the other, but they lack evidence for that assertion. Perhaps they also mistakenly equate feminism with lesbianism with all the homophobia that entails? Personally, I equate feminism more with not wanting to be a doormat.

One problem I have with women dismissing feminism-as-a-whole is that it implies to me that men are seen as the legitimate owners of society in the first place. I challenge that and think men do not have legitimate ownership of the "man's world" that we find ourselves inhabiting.

I have respect for some women who are against specific "policy details" of feminism - it's a fair political/operational difference of opinion. Perhaps these women are not actually anti-feminist, merely unwilling to call themselves feminists.

Melted,
Yes the SAHM/WOHM thing is just something that the patriarchy have made up to keep women down and at each other instead of focusing on the real enemy.

My feminism is influenced by European socialism. I think striving for individaul fulfilment at any cost only benefits the few, and often does not benefit women, and by consequence, children. PUre capitalism for example benefits men as a group, whereas pure socialism benefits women as a group.

I don't think child-bearing is a 'woman's vocation' per se, not in the Islamic sense, but there are two things that are important to me

1. that women's contribution of child-bearing be given its rightful dues by society. Right now it is not. It is seen as something women do, sort of messing around with babies before they get on with 'real' work again. I think patriarchy's trivialisaion of what women do is a real issue.

2. THat child-rearing is a vocation (done by the mother, father, grandparent, nanny or day-carer). That it's not a life-style choice, that real resources need to be given to every child born, no matter whether you think the child's mother 'deserves' it or not. I do not think city bankers 'deserve' bonuses. I don't think the CEO of Lehman brothers 'deserved' to have enough spare cash to buy five mansions with tennis courts and swimming pools, because he was shit at his job. BUt society obviously felt that he 'deserved' that, whereas young mothers don't deserve anything. This is a big problem.

Elephant, I read the first chapter of The Feminine Mystique online. It looks very interesting and I might order it. BUt remember that it only applies to American women. When Friedan was writing The Feminine Mystique Russian women were already astronauts, nuclear physicists-- everything really; they were also the first women to enter university. So European and American feminism has a very different history.

EandM
Wrt to your question about the SAHM thing and children leaving the nest. I think that its despicable that a person who has taken time out to raise children is then told 'Ner ner ner ner ner , missed your chance, you can't back on the ladder now.' That, to me is patriarchy.
Look at all the knobs in their jobs who drove us towards the credit crunch. Perhaps if they'd spent time with children they would have matured a bit and been able to do their jobs like grown-ups.

I remember that city lawyer who committed suicide (last year?) She had three kids, a 6 month old baby, and she was back in work when she committed suicide because she knew if she didn't go back it would be used against her. The disregard for women's contribution to society is despicable to me.

dittany Oh, was Activate talking about you? I just took it for granted she was talking about me!

I mean I think she committed suicide because she was still in the very vulnerable post-partum period when she returned to work. It was all so unecessary, but I can only begin to imagine the pressure she was under to keep up with the men.

becasue its so bloody hard to be confronted with just how bad it actually is.

sometimes i really wish i wasnt a feminist. so i get why women are obstructive and critisize and dismiss.

i watched glee the other day and they had a madonna episode where it was all about being an empowered woman. so i should have enjoyed it right? NNnnnnooooo. because the whole thing was a joke. the discussion about how badly women werebeing treated by the boys was all about how the women needed to change their behaviour in order for things to change. and then the boys 'made things right' towards the girls by telling them that it was ok to be who they were.

i wanted to scream.

i also wished i could have just watched it lile my mate who has no feminist 'filter' and just sang along and had a great time.

sighs

haha, I know, the 'feminist filter'. It makes life so difficult, doesn't it... That's the point of mass-brainwashing women I suppose.
I had the shock of my life the other day. DH was given some Disney freebies from his work. Has anyone seen those new Tinkerbell fairies?? Basically women in sex poses and scantily clad, oh yes, with fairy wings on, so that makes it ok for little girls (DD is 3).
To top that, the merchandise had 5 fairies on them, who were apparently from different races. The blonde blue eyed one was in the middle and huge, the black, Asian and redhead were sort of circling around her.
DH didn't know what I was on about when I freaked out. I put it all in the bin.
DO you want your daughter to think this is her purpose in life???!!! I said.
Poor DH. It's not his fault is it!

Ha, oh dear, in my researches about what's happened to Tinkerbell I came across this on the Disney site. What caught my eye was the fact that all the fairies were standing in that weird cross-legged way that was discussed on the "beauty standard" thread. It's bizarre, the legs are all twisted up (to "look thin" presumably, oh goody) and their arms are posed like 1950s bathing beauties. The one boy fairy, Terence, is all wide stance and hands on hips, ready for anything. This really is grim stuff, isn't it?

Rosetta is apparently known for "her charming accent!", and Terence's favourite flowers are "morning glories, because they're up at dawn, just like Terence"

you have to be shitting me.

terences favorite flowers are MORNING GLORIES ?????!!!!!!!!

I miss the stories about the queen of the fairies, who was for ever imprisoning people in fairyland, and kidnapping musicians

afraid not, frik. I snorted aloud when I read that.

EandM, Why do these fairies have to be sexy buxom women with long thin legs? Couldn't they be sort of light and fluffy little girls at least?

ROFL@frik

I just looked at that link. The twisted up leg thing is the motive behind high heels. Heels give your legs shape because the calf muscle sticks out. Obviously it'd be too risque to put high heels on these fairies (they can fly after all, I suppose), but if they stand on tippy toes, you still get that sexy leg effect...

HopeForTheBestExpectTheWorst, thanks for responding to my original post.

Yes, feminism is a fairly broad movement . I do think it does have a few core principles however, that one is free to either sign up to or not.

I respect your position to not describe yourself as a feminist. You have not come across in your post as anti-feminist either, more live-and-let-live. Let me know if I have misread your position. It is anti-feminist women I was wondering about when I started the thread.

I'd be interested to hear some more details of the "lots of other stuff" that leads you to not label yourself as a feminist.

HFTBETW, i also hear what you are saying, but for me i guess the first part of your post is a big enough agenda (that men and women should have the same legal and social rights) for me to describe myself as a feminist.

and the other things you mention are not enough of a deal breaker to lable myself ANTI feminist. if you see what i mean.

The reason I'm going to give why some women are critical of feminism is possibly related to FOAS's thread about her DH finding the topic distressing.

I think that a lot of the stuff that happens to women, or is said about women, is humilating and degrading. It is distressing to think about.

But if you turn a blind eye, and make out it is a bunch of mad feminists exaggerating and making stuff up, and pretend that the stuff that happens is just someone having a laugh, or that until it happens to you you are protected from it somehow, then you can hide that distress.

If you acknowledge that as a woman you are a human being, and as a human being the things that are being said about you or done to you are humiliating and degrading, then you acknowledge to the people doing it how humiliated you are, and that acknowledgement makes the humiliation worse. So it is easier sometimes to be critical of feminism, so that people can go thinking that women are not really people, and all the stuff that goes on has no real impact on you.

SO true MIllyR. Denial is powerful.

Wow, that came accross as too flippant.
NO, I meant I have read a lot of research about abused children, the same principle applies.
If you acknowledge your humiliation, you have to deal with it, so it's often safer to bury it.