Feminism of the 90's responded to the failures of its previous movements and is more accurately called third wave feminism, rather than the somehow more familiar term of post-feminism, orbiting in the collective consciousness.
For feminists, post-feminism is the derogatory buzz word for pundits, just as ‘politically correct’ is today's right-wing word for race, class and gender equality concerns. It is the sarcastically biting word to label those who continue to 'complain' that women lack equality, therefore today’s feminists are distancing themselves from such a suspect term.
These pundits often speak as if women's oppression belongs to an era long past, and even go on to say that women went too far with their fight for gender equality and they accuse the movements of creating 'victim' consciousness among women by exaggerating statistics of rape and sexual objectification. If anything, it is a proven fact that the statistics of rape are nowhere near the true amount of rapes occurring - because of prevailing prejudices that keep vast amount of women from reporting and seeking justice for the crime committed against them.
Apart from feminism being condemned as a philosophy of victimhood, it is charged as responsible for the breakdown of the nuclear family and the degradation of society in general. This ignores the wider implications of history, where each system goes through progressive, stagnating and decadent stages, the last always defined by the morals of the society as the whole being affected negatively.
The patriarchal, ‘nuclear’ family had not been what had sustained society. The matrimony behind the rhetoric always served as confirmation and assurance of progeny’s paternity of the male and perpetuated its own importance to exist to control the population. Commitment to one another needs not be confirmed by institutions for it to endure.
If feminism is charged with victim consciousness, it is argued back with showing men as victims rushed away from the family and cut from their children. Yet how many men leave their spouses and children of their own volition? To blame the feminists for setting out to destroy the world with their ambitions is as much baseless as it is petty. Society is held together by many factors, not just a single thread. These kind of superstitious charges don’t end there…
Some of the pundits even go so far as to suggest that date rape is a figment of the imaginations of ‘hysterical’ feminists, but it is an indisputable reality for women. Demands for women's rights are deemed as enormous acts of self-indulgence and an attack on men, yet even one of the earliest feminists, Mary Wollstonecraft stated, “I do not wish [women] to have power over men; but over themselves.” and it is still a sentiment shared by the many, who are struggling for women’s rights today.
A new expression for the movement is always called into existence if there's enough of a generational divide between older and younger feminists to warrant a whole new label. Third way feminism does differ in that it relies on competitive individualism and has done away with considering collective action as important, positing that it obscures many ways in which women are vulnerable and subjected to rape and other kinds of violence, and economically and politically underprivileged, calling for every woman to empower herself and demand an end to all oppression that stops them from living their life as fully realised human beings - and being accepted as such.
In a time where female biological autonomy is challenged again in the USA with the renewed attempts to curb the abortion laws back to where they were before Wade vs. Roe, the collective action is not obsolete, but necessary. In other words, it shouldn’t be a question of collective action vs. competitive individualism, but a balance between those two. If the consensus of this call for a change of outlook grows and there is a difference of opinions and the way of the struggle with the previous wave, we could say that the next phase of feminism has arrived and the roles of women are redefined again.
I would suggest that the need for evolution of the struggle is needed as third wave feminism has come short in some ways.
For one, the third way feminism does not address the sexual objectification with its relaxed view of women working in sex trade and pornography or their objectification in popular culture. Just because they believe that these women can empower themselves, there are no objections anymore from the feminists of third wave. Whilst the movement sees the preceding calls for the end of exploitation of them as somewhat puritanical, it does not call for the industry to challenge itself as being orientated towards male sexuality as it is and has been.
Both the industry and the third wave feminists give little regard to what women want and to working towards a resolution that would suit both genders and which would prevent the workers from being exploited...which they are. Whilst most industries have to employ safety measures, condoms are often a no-go area as ‘clients don’t want them’, therefore exposing people working in that trade to STD’s and HIV. It may be argued that it’s the risk they take, but could the same not be argued for the mineworkers and doing away with safety measures that have to be in place to protect them from dangers of their profession? With the whole industry being half submerged in the murky underground, it is readily ignored, yet it brings so much profit and permeates the society as much as other media.
The movement has not challenged the still predominant dogma and prejudice that although women are being readily offered as sexual objects, they have to deny their own sexuality and the resulting needs or accommodate it to be seen through men’s needs.
The same perception of outmoded feminists and prudes prevails when offended by images of women in popular culture. Yet the beauty standards and sexual ideals are manufactured by Hollywood and fashion industry to be near to impossible. These standards and ideals have changed drastically since Marilyn Monroe’s size 12-14 to size 0 and surgically enhanced breasts. Yet this image permeates popular culture with unrealistic images that affect self-esteem among females from early on - hence the rise in eating disorders and the rise of women dissatisfied with their appearance. Women's bodies are given over to the control and judgment of others, and what is the solution of third wave-feminists? “Go buy some Manolo Blahniks and stop your whining."
Not only does this suggest an attitude of attributing women the role of the capitalist consumer, it does not challenge the stereotypical perception of a woman as having only shallow interests. It does not reflect too well on the challenge of previous feminists for their association to needs of middle class, and neglect or ignorance of working class women. The attitudes of the third way feminists do not display the solidarity for working class at all, but suggest the rat race to possess designer items as if a working woman can afford it as the attitude to have. Their outlook in their forefront publications is as middle class as those of their predecessors.
Much of the feminist struggles have been to equal their role in man’s world, however there comes a time when women must reclaim their own identity as defined by their womanhood, not from identity attained from reflection of the man’s world and relations to its demands of projected conformity.
Some way to reclaim it could be inspired by second wave feminists of the ‘60s -70. Sexism within the civil rights and anti-war movements themselves inspired many women to form consciousness-raising groups where they could discuss their experience of sexism in everyday life. Through these groups, they channelled the energy and experiences they had gained in political organisations into promoting women's rights, leading to the growth of the women's movement in the early 1970s.
These kinds of groups seem to have paled in today‘s situation, where women simply take part in the other political and social struggles, but no longer channel the experience into their own struggle with such verve and hope as they once did… yet this is still needed.
If any movement is to succeed, and any change to take place, we need solidarity. Unfortunately the years of being pushed into passive-aggressive behaviours have torn the fabric of solidarity between women. Many will not participate, as many fear being in groups comprised of women only, and this needs to change.
Anthropology tells us that our social structure allows the men to put their differences aside and work towards a goal together as a whole group. It suggests that this is possible only between two or three women, but in general they will not co-operate like this. Life being flexible, women do have a chance to change this prevalent tendency and create a fairer social structure for themselves and for a more balanced world. If they are to adopt something from the man’s world, this should be it. Learning to put differences aside. The competitiveness suggested by third way feminists is exactly what is in the way of doing so. Ruthless competition against each other will never alleviate women from being in unfair positions within the social hierarchies.
Although third wave feminists brought out many publications, they’ve not truly addressed the problem that presents itself for women; to take a quote from Bathsheba in Far From the Maddening Crowd, “It is difficult for a woman to define her feelings in language which is chiefly made by men to express theirs.” Their language in fact reflects much of that of the masculine woman - who tries to talk with masculine emphasis to defer to and be accepted by men. Many critiques and women’s programmes range upon this attitude of gossipy aggression, they mostly also concern hobbies and interest stereotyped for women - and perpetuated by creating little alternative. They create the picture of ‘the little woman‘, who can only defend herself against the world by belittling other women as she herself is belittled in turn, deferring to men in more important issues. Although the pressure from the ‘man’s world’ for this has lessened, the generational heritage lives on in the psyche and extracts reaction as if to the past, regardless of the present.
Since women were and are judged by their flaws, whilst men by their greatness, the individual competition becomes more fierce and destructive. This can only end when the tendency reverses and both genders are judged by objective criteria, as they both should be, not through a one-sided looking glass.
Although women long to be equal, there is still little way of knowing what it represents. This uncertainty has served to divorce women from their true selves. Due to years of suppression, there is much resentment materialising in attitudes meted out towards men that were aimed at them. One cannot demand justice and be unjust in turn. Rather than the retribution of attitudes, it is much more advisable to continue to be accepted as women, and for our experience of it, being respected and allowed to coexist with the world created on a matrix of patriarchy.
Matriarchy or patriarchy should not be considered as the only options to exist as, each one protecting one gender over the other within the whole framework and both create conflicts and injustice to the other. There must be a point established to construct a fusion of both. It does seem a utopian dream, but the desire to move towards more harmonious living is within each one of us and the shackles of the past should not be holding us from trying to establish more fairness, although for that the cross-gender healing of rifts is needed. Hopefully we could agree with the third way feminists with their empowerments within each individual woman, but also affirm and realise that it is a need of both genders, if we are to be equal and respected, the same must be afforded to everyone else.
Petra Whiteley
|