|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Summary
People fault feminism for being a disservice to women based on a number of misconceptions around history, economics, biology and personality. The article addresses each claim by situating them in the right context.
People often disparage feminism for some of its impact towards women’s material reality, and this sentiment is fuelled by several misconceptions.
They think feminism is (and has been) an unfair movement that challenges women’s social status as being more suited to the home and its environment while simultaneously championing their inclusion in more prominent parts of society such as schools and workplaces. They yearn for a return to the ‘system of old’ in which men worked and women tended homes, but as evidence shows, this dynamic is far from true and is relative from culture to culture.
For some, their grievance with feminism lies in dissatisfaction with modern economic structures, but the spurt of feminist activism coinciding with major industrial changes shares no causal relationship. Chances are that if women had historically been represented in economic fields and development, they would have contributed and inculcated favourable working conditions and business norms that would have accommodated the unique needs of women, as research has proven them to be better leaders than men.
Still, for others, based on an erroneous application of reason on the average 28-day menstrual cycle for women, they conclude that women are not suited for a ‘9-5’ job or any other kind of corporate job. First, every woman’s menstrual cycle is not strictly 28-days long, and while it is important for women to be aware of their hormonal changes and their impact on their mood and productivity, to better manage themselves and plan their itinerary, they are not ultimately subjected to their ‘hormones.’ Drive, discipline, passion, will, commitment—all the ranges of personality traits that make women human, and are necessary for success in a chosen field or endeavour are equally at play.
Second, unless a total life of sloth was the objective, a woman being unemployed but labouring at home or in any other venture would still deal with her menstrual cycle. Being in a “low mood” is hardly an excuse not to attend to a toddler who has just finished using the potty.
The subject of choice is also one to consider. Corporate jobs certainly are not for everyone, and they also are not the only path towards a career. A career, simply defined, is what one does for a living, and it could be centred around one’s ‘calling’ or ‘value’ (e.g., money). Choosing to engage in other jobs that are more ‘feminine-aligned’ or with an unstructured, ‘lifestyle-feel’ system does not make less of work, and it lends credence to the feminist aim of women being financially self-reliant.
For another subset, they see feminism as a burden. A charade women were deceived into and made to lose on two fronts–at home and at work. Equality refers to the potential capabilities and the ranges of human traits both men and women possess, and so, in a relationship of equals, a mutual partnership, sharing duties and responsibilities in an equitable way should be a given. That many men are shirking their homely responsibilities is no fault of feminism but is rather much a result of inequality. The marriage of a working woman and a working man who also leaves the bulk of chores to the woman is an unhealthy one, and this should not be the case.
Yet another group of critics are opposed to feminism in a more radically patriarchal way. They believe women have no space whatsoever in a formal, functional society beyond their reproductive abilities. Needless to say, that is a regressive, barbaric and anti-human perspective to hold, and such a view should not be espoused in a free, civil society.
Women are more than their biological functions, and they are worthy of respect, dignity, compassion, and representation as their male counterparts are. They are their own persons and do not need to have their humanity validated by proximity or relation to a man. If they have the zeal, they can thrive in the sphere of human activity.
