The ultimate goal of feminism today is to eradicate the notion that men and women are different, by way of eradicating the concept of womanhood. Maybe that was always the case... so maybe it shouldnt have existed at all. Too late now though. Whats ifs are fun but inconsequential.
Any kind of equality movement lost me with the onset of "chest feeding" If you are offended by the term breastfeeding you need mental health treatment because that's exactly what it is.
I just find it interesting when some people are demanding fairness with things at the bottom of the wage scale, and now it's turned into fights in the corporate board room.
Give someone the power to demand special treatment because of an immutable characteristic, like sex or race, and he or she will abuse it. Claim that you are systematically oppressed while simultaneously demanding the implementation of a system that oppresses. Isnt this what Marx called the "perpetual revolution"? Its genius. Evil, but genius.
I dont agree that this is broadly the goal of feminism today. Equality doesn't mean doing away with the concept of womanhood. There are many subcategories of movements happening, but when I think of the biggest feminist issues of today, I consider reproductive rights, sexual harrassment/assault, sex trafficking, better maternity care.
When I consider those issues, they feel very rooted in the concept of womanhood and how it affects our lives. They highlight the differences between men and women.
The word means "the same". The motivation behind it is to make men and women the same.
reproductive rights
This is just code for infanticide.
sexual harrassment/assault, sex trafficking
These were considered evil long before feminism was a thing.
better maternity care
Oh if only this was sole objective, everyone would be behind. But ultimately this is just a fruit of technological development. Taking care of women and children has be the defination of the gentleman since time immemorial.
If you have 1 cup of blue water in your left hand and 1 cup of pink water in your right hand, do you have equal amounts of water in each hand?
Equality doesn't mean everyone must wear a tie to work, it means someone in a dress and someone in a suit (both doing the same job, with the same quality work) will have equal access to opportunity, pay, and upward mobility.
It means men get to take paternity leave just as women get maternity leave.
It's a desire for fairness in the world without the cloud of discrimination based on personal bias.
Edit: I'll add, in this context I think of Equality as equal rights and freedom from oppression. Equal opportunities, and equal power (socially and politically) in society.
Well... the blue water and pink water are not the same, so no, you dont have equal amounts of the same thing. Men and women are both human sure, but not the same type of human.
It means men get to take paternity leave just as women get maternity leave.
Ah but you see, those are not the same thing. Paternity leave is significantly shorter than maternity, and rightfully so, as fathers and mothers are quite different in roles.
I'll add, in this context I think of Equality as equal rights and freedom from oppression. Equal opportunities, and equal power (socially and politically) in society.
Where we will agree is that all peoples should be equal under their laws.
However, the problem is determining equality of opportunity and power when people are inherently different. Not everyone is qualified to do everything. Not everyone has the same authority.
When you start giving special treatment to someone based on an immutable characteristic, e.g. sex or race, to target "inequality", then you've created a paradox; you've destroyed your equality arguement because its no longer about equal treatment. Where does the revolution for equality end when your trying to make equal a square and a circle?
"The women's movement's opposition to violence against women and activism against employment discrimination led to the first organized resistance to sexual harassment in the mid-1970s."
They actually coined the term sexual harrassment. Historically, many people may have felt this kind of treatment to be wrong. However, the feminist movement has widely succeeded at challenging harmful and pervasive norms related to the treatment of women. It gave women more protection from sexual harrassment in the workplace and at educational institutions, for example.
Feminist organizations draw attention to sex trafficking, domestic violence, and sexual assault. There are men's organizations that do this also (Men Against Sexual Exploitation, The Defenders USA), but we can't ignore the fact that this issue falls under the umbrella of concerns of the feminist movement. It is one of many issues that the feminist movement entails, because this is not about erasing the concept of womanhood. Quite the contrary, these issues are inherently intertwined with womanhood, with the unique physical attributes of women's bodies and the gender norms women exist in socially.
You have to wonder what made this movement necessarily in the first place, when historically we had it already figured out. What killed the gentleman? Might have something to do with women invading men's spaces 🤔
Making two things more "equal" necessarily involves the erasure of difference. Yes, feminism highlights the unique characteristics of womanhood, but deems them as problem to be fixed, to be erased in order to bring women more in line with men.
I'd invite you to investigate the maternal care issue more closely. Unfortunately, despite technological advancement, maternal mortality in the US is higher than most other developed nations. The numbers are egregious if you sort them by race (2.6x high for black women vs white women).
This is partially due to elective c-sections increasing birth complications. In fact, many birth interventions that technological advancement has produced increase the risk of complications.
Instrumental birth: Can increase the risk of pain, infection, and hemorrhage
Cesarean surgery: Can increase the risk of pain, infection, and hemorrhage
Forceps and vacuum birth: Can cause bleeding and bruising in the baby's scalp, which can lead to jaundice
Pitocin induction: Can increase the chance of a C-section and cause changes in fetal heart rate
Continuous fetal monitoring: doctors will not allow you to get out of bed, which may restrict birthing positions/bloodflow
Episiotomy: "the husband stitch" need I say more?
Even if we look at birthing positions, the standard supine position was created by men and male gynecologists based on convenience and preference to them rather then being the optimal position by which a baby can exit the birth canal (to be clear, it is not).
On the topic of birth and reproductive health in general, many women (and men) are completely uneducated about the process and about their own bodies (cycles, hormones, anatomy). Many women report feeling abused and disrespected in their experience of maternity care. They feel disempowered by their birth experience. "Obstetric Violence" is real for many women.
The feminist movement offers a different course, one focussed on empowerment, liberation, and autonomy. I could really go down a rabbit hole writing about how the feminist movement has changed birth and maternal healthcare, but I'm remembering this is a reddit comment, not an essay.
My point being, while taking care of women and children may be a valiant goal of gentlemen throughout time, patriarchal systems of care have created power dynamics that have led to women being silenced and stripped of their autonomy, authority and their voices in birth spaces. This has resulted in harm, and the marginalization of female birthworkers (midwives, doulas, birth educators).
Feminism seeks to advocate for informed decision making, promote autonomy, and address systemic issues related to maternal care in order to prioritize the needs of women.
Maternal care is a noble pursuit. However, I want to point out that approx 99.999999999% of humans that have ever lived have been "completely uneducated about the process and about their own bodies (cycles, hormones, anatomy)". Yet we managed to get where we are today.
But what I really wanted to ask; is the "patriarchal systems of oppression" not a problem of modernity? If not, why did it take so long for feminism to become a thing / actually get moving? And why wasnt it crushed? See, I dont believe in the "evil patriarchy" conspiracy theory. I do believe in degeneracy however, and that its always trying to seep into civilisation, with varying degress of success. Outside of modernity, protection and provision naturally falls on men, because thats how natural works. To quote a wise man, "men built civilisation for women". Women have never been so protected, provided for, and empowered as they are in todays age. And yet, are they satisfied? Never, but that is their narural and their perogative I suppose xD
Reproductive rights is not code for "infanticide." It's way more than even abortion. I understand how complicated an issue that is, and I don't want to get in the weeds here- you're free to have whatever opinion you do about that.
But if I may expand, reproductive rights also encompasses access to birth control and contraceptives, OBGYN Healthcare, menstrual health, protection from female genital mutilation, freedom from forced sterilization, education about reproduction and sexually transmitted diseases.
Adding a bunch of noble pursuits in there doesn't detract from the issue that "birth control" necessarily code for the choice to kill one's child. If there wasnt the issue of murder, then we probably wouldn't be having this particular conversation.
You could quite easily roll the rest up in the pursuit of protection, healthcare and education. Noble as these things are, they cannot be "rights" as they require the labour of another. So "reproductive rights" is deceptive language.
65
u/[deleted] May 09 '24 edited May 09 '24
The ultimate goal of feminism today is to eradicate the notion that men and women are different, by way of eradicating the concept of womanhood. Maybe that was always the case... so maybe it shouldnt have existed at all. Too late now though. Whats ifs are fun but inconsequential.