Gender Equality Misunderstood As Gender Neutrality
Just because feminists want equality between men and women doesn’t mean that we abdicate our “feminine” side.
By Agnessa Kasumyan
For as long as I can remember, identifying as a feminist was problematic — not because of its values, but because of the misconceptions associated with feminist culture. When the topic came up, I was often met with questions or statements like “Don’t you want to get married and have kids one day?” or my personal favorite, “You’re angry at men. Why you hatin’?”
Normally, I would respond with a 360 degree eye-roll or a sarcastic comment about how my admiration for a young Paul Newman and slightly neurotic infatuation with Winston Churchill would suggest otherwise. But these statements bothered me on a level that hit my core, especially when they came from other women.
When first and second wave feminism emerged in the 19th and 20th centuries, activists sought to achieve gender equality — to make women equal to men in the eyes of the law, although second-wave feminism touched on social issues such as equal pay, abortion, and tougher laws protecting women against sexual assault. The purpose was not, as many critics of the movement claim, to abolish femininity or to put mens’ rights on the back burner.
Gender equality is not gender neutrality. Women do not have to masculinize themselves or completely eliminate what they consider their feminine identity to make men more comfortable with who they are.
I am a feminist, but I like to wear dresses, spend a little too much money on lipstick from Sephora, and widen my eyes in horror when I think I’ve forgotten to shave my legs. Gender equality doesn’t mean surrendering femininity, and women, nor men, should feel obligated to hide their feminine side to adhere to a masculine standard of comfort, particularly in the professional world.
Nor should women who identify with traditionally masculine qualities feel the need to adopt feminine ones. Identifying as either “feminine” or “masculine” is perfectly acceptable, but what’s not acceptable is the unequal treatment of either one.
Feminists are unfairly identified as ball-busting, bra-burning baby killers who resent men, and the idea that pro-choice feminists are “baby killers” is particularly troubling.
There is no doubt that radical misandrists have played their part in perpetuating the “man hater” stereotype, but misandrists do not accurately represent the purpose and messages associated with the feminist movement.
But misandry is not the only factor at play. After centuries of oppression, women have a right to be angry — as long as that anger is manifested into healthy steps for reform. They have a right to make unprecedented demands to secure an equal role in society.
Naturally, society’s initial response was to resist and paint feminists in a negative light because they pushed for change that defied a deep-rooted tradition of inequality. This sociological back and forth sparked anger on both sides of the movement, but it also led to instrumental reforms.
Through more education about the key values of feminism and a little more time to get society used to rising equality, the image of the “angry, man-hating feminist” will hopefully disappear with time.
Reach Contributor Agnessa Kasumyan here.
