As two current threads on equality are unravelling to marvellous effect for one and all – by golly, we’ve learnt a lot - I thought it must be time to have a canter through the darker, cobwebbier corners of the People’s Republic and explain my own prejudices. Because I am aware in all discussions like those I have linked to, that I am coming from a slightly different angle, and if I sound a little ratty in what follows, I think it’s the cumulative effect of being subtly and continuously, over several years, told so.
It’s a commonplace that some women are outraged when other women (particularly intelligent and beautiful ones, for some reason, as if that makes the tiniest bean of difference) claim not to be feminists. Jo A repeats this. On balance I would say that I am a feminist, for the simple reason that feminism grew out of the pressing need for equal pay, equal opportunities, and a healthier perception of the importance of women’s role as family-makers. We haven’t achieved those things, they are the sine qua non of a civilised society as all sane people agree, ergo, I am a feminist.
But I have never had any patience with the notion that I should therefore conform to angry and impassioned typecasting, react to all criticism as an insult to Woman, or that I should like some people more than others just because we have ovaries in common.* I understand – over the last day I have understood much better – why some women are absolutely compelled by their own histories to approach feminism in this way. Which is fine, but it doesn’t work for me, and no amount of hectoring will change that. That highly self-conscious feminism - wimminism, if you will - seems to me to put limitations on the individual, and also undermines the dignity of womanhood in general. It is a simple psychological truth that as a set of people women are no less varied in temperament, in character, in beliefs, in thought patterns than men – why are we still inclined to straitjacket ourselves into one pattern of progressive womanhood? And I know I am not alone in this. For every nexus of wimminism, there is a hesitant woman on the sidelines saying in a very small voice, But that’s not me, that’s not how I think. Does that make me a bad person? Of course not.
Wimminism is something I have only really become aware of since leaving university. I was in single-sex education from age 13, then went on to a college with a very proud women’s tradition (mutters, and Margaret Thatcher as an alumna, gyaaargh), and Oxbridge women are (let’s face it) an exceptionally mixed bag, so I had no trouble finding others like me who were more interested, always, in going ahead and doing the thing rather than talking about it. The flipside of this privileged upbringing, of course, is that while I am by no means from a wealthy background, and went to a state school, I nevertheless spent my formative years in a “nice” environment, where it was never intimated to me for a moment that I couldn’t be as good as or better than men. It’s a testament to my education, my parents and the happy socio-economic stars of my birth that I am extremely, extremely unscrewed-up about this.
But it has totally screwed me in another way. I can’t fit in with self-consciously feminist women now. Ever since leaving university, I have encountered a sense of being excluded from groups of women for somehow not being quite right, being a little bit frighteningly different. I wasn’t particularly a tomboy, I had and have perfectly good and sane relationships with both my parents, and I’m straight (well, straightish) – it’s not any of that. I just don’t fit into any of the pigeonholes that many women, it seems to me, actively seek to climb into in a sort of communal comfort exercise. As a result, I find I am far more natural and happy, far more myself, sitting around with a bunch of men than with a bunch of women, unless I go far enough back with the women to know that they accept me as I am. That automatic confidence that people will like you just isn’t there when I sit down with a group of women, because I know quite well that some of them are going to find me a bit odd, too rational, not angry enough, with altogether the wrong sense of humour, in short, just a little too damn much like a man. And the sense of personal slight I have occasionally encountered as a result does tend, to be honest, to put me off devoting my own resources to tackling inequality problems.
So for future reference, this is my pitch for equality. I think vocal feminism would do well to remember that human dignity – for everyone - lies in our being individuals. For that reason, and because feminism has not so far made those final steps towards equal pay and equal opportunity, I believe liberalism, and not feminism, is the creed that ultimately will change women’s lives, and it’s on that basis that I think we should proceed.
* I mean, that we both have ovaries. Two each, hopefully. Not that we share them. That would just be weird.
November 30, 2007 at 2:16 pm
Alix I am quite aware that all women are different. You are quite welcome to come to your own conclusions as to how we should approach equality with men.
I was brought up with a very strong sense of being able to be whatever I wanted to be – to not place limits on myself or other people – half my childhood was spent with two parents, the other with one. So I feel I have a had a very varied and inspirational beginning in life.
My parents gave me very varied toys and presents – ranging from dolls to trains and cars. I can think of several instances where they made sure I never felt inferior to other children.
However, I know that to achieve change and to get noticed and valued as women in society I will have to sit down and for an hour or so think of myself as purely a woman in politics without any external factors coming in to play, and come up with some real solutions to the very real problems we have in this party.
November 30, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Top answer. I am much calmer having written that post. Writing is better than therapy.
November 30, 2007 at 3:30 pm
“But I have never had any patience with the notion that I should therefore conform to angry and impassioned typecasting, react to all criticism as an insult to Woman, or that I should like some people more than others just because we have ovaries in common.”
Alix, sounds to me that what you’re describing there is ‘radical feminism’…which is, I agree, eugh!! There are, of course, as many different types of feminism as there is any other political ideology.
If forced to define my particular brand of feminism (which I don’t really like to do, as it’s very personal) then I’d probably plump for being a liberal feminist of the Mary Wollstonecraft type, as my basic premise is that it is just illogical to think that men and women are unequal. Or, that men are inherently more logical, rational or resilient than me. (Grrr!) I’m very aware that not all women are as good at sticking up for themselves as I am and that is why I talk about it.
I, like you, am often much more comfortable in the company of a group of men than a group of women; which is a good job really, because in work and in politics I often find that I am the only women in the room.
My feminist frustration rails again the system which has a habit of discriminating against me on the basis of my sex; not against men. I also think that more equality will free up men as well…it is a win/win situation.
And, I will say, my favourite feminists of all, are male feminists! Very sexy; often inspiring in me a strong desire on my part to kick off my shoes, swoon at their feet and offer to do all their housework for the next 30 years!! Hmmm, I see what they’re doing there…….
I went on the ‘Reclaim the Night’ march on Saturday with my Mum. It was a women’s only march and there were 1500 of us; it was fantastic fun! I went on it because I think that it’s wrong to expect women to change their behaviour to accommodate male violence rather than violent men to change their behaviour to accommodate the freedom of women. For me this is rooted completely in liberal feminism.
However, there were loads of different types of feminists there, some of them quite radical and I find it very hard to understand how they ever manage to smile! If you read some of their blogs they are so full of anger and hate! So, if you are equating ‘wimminsim’ with radical feminism then I agree with you, but radical feminism is just a very loud and extreme form of feminism and not the only type.
November 30, 2007 at 3:38 pm
All hail women called Jo!!!
November 30, 2007 at 4:44 pm
All hail women and men called Jo(e), equally, I say.
November 30, 2007 at 6:36 pm
Bah, who let a man on here?
Jo C-S, what you say makes a lot of sense, I’ve never been very well up on my gender studies. But oddly, I was thinking of Mary Wollstonecraft as I was writing. What a gal.
November 30, 2007 at 9:19 pm
The Wikipedia entry on Wollstonecraft’s ‘Vindication of the Rights of Men‘ was yesterday’s Featured Article on the front page of Wikipedia. It’s quite humbling to know that there were people making this much sense centuries ago, yet there are still (lots of) people today who don’t get it.
November 30, 2007 at 10:50 pm
* joins you in the blokey corner *
Wanna squee over motorbikes with me? I like the Triumph Sprint ST very much, I do.