On International Women’s Day, let’s remember that feminism isn’t really about ‘equality’

While words like “equality,” “diversity,” “inclusion,” and “intersectionality” might sound nice, they don’t address the root problem of patriarchy and they erase feminism’s real aims. On International Women’s Day, let’s remember what feminism is really about.

Ashley Judd, Annabella Sciorra, and Salma Hayek at the 2018 Oscars.

On Sunday night at the Oscars, the big #MeToo moment was brought to us by Ashley Judd, Salma Hayek, and Annabella Sciorra. While these women have been incredibly brave in sharing their stories of abuse and harassment in Hollywood, it seems the industry is still dictating the message.

“This year many spoke their truth and the journey ahead is long but slowly a new path has emerged,” Sciorra said. And while a new path has indeed emerged, as women have banded together to speak out against men’s abuse in numbers I have never witnessed in my lifetime, I’m left wondering where that path will lead us, without a clear understand of the issues at hand.

“The changes we are witnessing is being driven by the powerful sound of new voices, of different voices, of our voices, joining together in a mighty chorus that is finally saying, ‘Time’s up,'” Judd said. “And we work together to make sure the next 90 years empower these limitless possibilities of equality, diversity, inclusion, intersectionality.”

But what is truly powerful about the voices leading #TimesUp and #MeToo was strangely excluded from Judd’s list of “limitless possibilities”: women.

This past year has been made possible only by the feminist movement. Our understanding that sexual assault and sexual harassment are bad things is a direct result of the work women have done to show how men’s power is systemic and how their violence is normalized because women are constructed as less-than-human under patriarchy. Feminists’ work analyzing and articulating sexual objectification underlies what preceded this mass conversation, allowing comments about grabbing women “by the pussy” to be seen as a literal manifestation of that objectification. So to hear three women who took great risks in speaking out about what Harvey Weinstein did to them, in order to contribute to a larger conversation about how men’s dehumanization of women leads to violence and to hold men accountable for behaviour they’ve gotten away with for centuries, because of a system that institutionalizes men’s dominance, without mentioning either women or the feminist movement was shocking to me.

While all good and progressive concepts, neither “equality,” nor “diversity,” nor “inclusion,” nor “intersectionality” will stop men’s violence. None of these vague, gender-neutral terms address the system that offers up women as things to be used and abused by men. Indeed, these terms have been used to usurp the women’s liberation movement, in large part because of their lack of clarity and political investment in ending patriarchy, specifically.

“Diversity,” for example, can easily be (and, consequently, has been) manipulated to defend the idea that simply allowing more diverse people and bodies to be objectified will resolve any problematic aspects of, for example, the beauty industry or sex industry. Hugh Hefner touted himself as a champion of diversity for allowing a black woman to sell his magazines for him, making Jennifer Jackson Miss March in 1965. He was similarly self-congratulatory (and celebrated) for putting trans model Caroline “Tula” Cossey in the magazine in 1991. In an attempt to escape their sexist reputation, American Apparel, a company then-run by a man famous for sexually harassing and exploiting his young female staff, launched “The Next Big Thing,” a contest to find plus-size models.

Clearly, these are not people or companies invested in women’s liberation… Yet, it’s easy for them to pose as allies when we offer up vague, gender-neutral terms to replace more accurate ones. Similar to “diversity” and “equality,” terms like “body acceptance,” “strength,” and “empowerment” have all been co-opted to further sell porn culture and objectification for the same reason: lack of specificity.

What’s so great about the term “feminism” is that it is specific about its focus on women and it’s opposition specifically to patriarchy. Though many attempt to water-down its radical roots and and meaning, the term “feminism” is not in fact about “equality.” Women do not want equal access to misogynist systems, we want an end to those systems.

The notion that “rights” and “equality” for marginalized people will be achieved by fitting them into a patriarchal vision of the world is exactly the problem with these words. “Including” women of colour or women who don’t fit conventional standards of beauty in pornography or other misogynist industries does not address the problems with those industries.

While it is necessary for Hollywood to address it’s white-centric, male-centric blind spots, it’s disappointing to see what is truly a feminist movement erase its roots and radical aims. What’s even worse is that I’m certain this was done in order to avoid making those not on board with the feminist project uncomfortable. In other words, these actresses were likely concerned about alienating men in the room.

But there’s a very good reason that feminism makes men uncomfortable: it centers women, and refuses to cater to male feelings and preferences. For once, we have a movement that is about us and us alone. Altering the language to avoid the uncomfortable feelings men might have about their power being named and challenged strikes me as contrary to our goals.

Feminists have long championed the mantra, “name the problem.” If anything, that is what #MeToo has done. Let’s not stop now.

Meghan Murphy
Meghan Murphy

Founder & Editor

Meghan Murphy is a freelance writer and journalist. She has been podcasting and writing about feminism since 2010 and has published work in numerous national and international publications, including New Statesman, Vice, Al Jazeera, The Globe and Mail, I-D, Truthdig, and more. Meghan completed a Masters degree in the department of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at Simon Fraser University in 2012 and lives in Vancouver, B.C. with her dog.

Like this article? Tip Feminist Current!

$
Personal Info

Donation Total: $1

  • m.k. jaks

    A bit of sanity. Thank you.

    I’m weary of being expected to champion EVERYONE ELSE except me.

  • Simone Firestone

    Ms. Murphy, your commentaries give me life. For me, it’s not only shocking but also maddening. Although I already had an inkling that this is what was going to the happen at the awards show as expected of Hollywood and its superficiality.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/89aeb27febddc5ff8a2a7cbfc349c4d35b6439bc154f91bce27499c14cc268d2.jpg

    • Meghan Murphy

      Solidarity, sister!

    • Goddess_of_Dischord

      Agreed Meghan is the best! I want to throw her a thank you party lol

      • Meghan Murphy

        I *do* love parties! 🙂

  • Rachael

    I love that you so easily cut through the bullshit and get to the heart of it. I’ve had enough of the watered down, sanitised versions of feminism that are happy and cuddly and oh-so-lovely and include everyone, and our thrown in our faces across all media as being THE feminism. Do lib-fems truly not understand that it’s nothing but more of the same old passive bullshit we’ve been told to be, as females, our whole lives? Feminism is a movement and yet this particular brand of libfeminism is stagnant.

    Keep going, radfems!

    • Meghan Murphy

      I honestly don’t understand the point of being a feminist if you aren’t willing to rock the boat. I mean, did they join the movement thinking everyone was going to be happy with them all the time? It’s strange.

  • Tinfoil the Hat

    “Women do not want equal access to misogynist systems, we want an end to those systems.“

    THIS. THANK YOU.

  • Cassandra

    This is so articulate and succinct and great as always, Meghan. If I hear the term “inclusive” one more time… It’s really just about the stupidest, most meaningless, least challenging and bland term ever and it has infected *everything.*

    So evil how the dominant system has stolen and boomegrang-ed language. A pox upon them all.

    • This is an interesting point. I think if we substituted the word “inclusivity” everywhere the faux feminists use it with “infection” or “dick infection” it would cut through the newspeak and describe what they’re doing.

  • Karla Gjini

    y r u so smrt

    • Meghan Murphy

      <3 <3

  • northernTNT

    Best possible statement for the day.

    • Meghan Murphy

      xx

  • m.k. jaks

    Superb. Thanks.

  • Robert Gonzalez

    I love this.

    • Meghan Murphy

      Thanks Robert!

  • VLCampbell

    This was very, very good.

    • Meghan Murphy

      Thanks VLCampbell!

  • Alienigena

    Start Quote
    On International Women’s Day, Susan Sarandon also told 5 live that there will “always be a casting couch” in Hollywood.
    “I think what will go away is the unwanted exchange.
    “But I think that giving yourself sexually, or being drawn to power and wanting to have sex with someone that’s in power, is also a choice.
    “What we don’t want to have is being exploited and have the Harvey Weinsteins of the world holding it over your head and holding it over your project.
    End Quote

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43330356

    “…giving yourself sexually, or being drawn to power and wanting to have sex with someone that’s in power, is also a choice.”
    I guess this is why liberal or choice feminism fails. Because it doesn’t seem to recognise that choice doesn’t really factor into it. Because choices can be coerced or choosing to do something doesn’t automatically validate it or make it a feminist choice. The power dynamics are skewed between men and women, especially between younger women and older men or men with more decision-making and financial power than women.

    • Elara

      “Because choices can be coerced or choosing to do something doesn’t automatically validate it or make it a feminist choice.”

      True. Hiding behind “feminism” to avoid any form of criticism for the choices one makes is a typical liberal feminist move.

    • Jani

      OMFG. She drank all Kool Aid and asked for more.

  • marv

    Believing in gender equality parallels and criss crosses faith in god. Both aren’t real but have wrought oppression nonetheless. (Not sayin women haven’t derived any benefits from gender equality initiatives).

    Women’s liberation is a stumbling block to gender egalitarians as feminist based atheism is to religious diversity.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Some of those actresses also lost their careers for trying to speak out/push back, though, of course… I’m not saying that Hollywood women are necessarily ideal feminist role models, of course. In general, I am opposed to celebrity idols, but I do want to support all women who speak out about their victimization.

    • Jani

      Yes. And it’s also an unfortunate fact that Hollywood actresses talking about “sex” is going to get a whole lot more media coverage than the anonymous woman on the street. But that’s why it took for this movement to gather momentum and power. To point at the women and say, “Well they’re rich and privileged” is missing the point that they’re the only ones who have a global audience. And it’s also making the point that the rest of us are unheard.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Right on, sister!

  • Meghan Murphy

    Happy Women’s Day!

  • Wren

    By that logic a woman can’t be a feminist role model in any field, really, since she always has to put up with men’s bullshit, and “act” like she’s okay with status quo the majority of the time or be labelled difficult or targeted for more abuse. Women have to participate in patriarchy to a certain extent if we want to survive.

  • Jani

    I fear it’s back to business as usual now. Once you realise that women (and women’s bodies) are the commodity, you see the gowns and the red carpet for what it is —like a sanitised distillation of a brothel line or a shop window in Amsterdam. It’s about women presenting as bankable commodities. Agree, there are some very talented women who “play the game” because that’s how it’s set up. But in the light of Weinstein — who was a cultural gatekeeper — and the gratuitous sex scenes in Hollywood movies (Salma Hayek’s “lesbian” scene in Frida was at the insistence of Weinstein otherwise he’d pull the plug on the entire project), women were commodities. Their bodies were used as saleable commodities. I seriously believe #MeToo is losing its momentum. If actresses still play that game it will be no surprise that the same old boys club will be running Hollywood in 5 years time, and 10 years time.

  • Dana

    People are ignoring the fact that this movement was originally called the women’s liberation movement, and feminists “women’s libbers.” So there’s not much point in arguing about equality versus equity or parity. Don’t men own something like 90 percent of the property (land) in the world? Aren’t most women still far too dependent on men to survive? (I sure am.) Part of the reason I don’t lose my shit over women being cops or soldiers is that these professions pay a living wage and allow us to be more independent of men, at least in theory. Of course we also have to keep putting up with their shit to KEEP those jobs. As far as hierarchy, which you seem to be confusing with patriarchy (which is a specialized type of hierarchy), females of many social species have that too. I get lorded over (ladied over?) by women almost as much as I am by men and I suspect that might still be the case if we ended patriarchy tomorrow. If we didn’t fight over men we’d fight over resources, especially at our current world population. Our problems in this world are complex and difficult. We have so many things to solve. It’s one reason I like following Deep Green Resistance’s posts, they seem to understand that.

  • Dana

    Dingdingdingdingding nailed it. No point having “equality” on paper if they won’t freaking reinforce it. I STILL have to explain TO OTHER WOMEN why paying women less is bad, when we can’t even follow the advice of sexists and “negotiate” for higher pay without being seen as bitches.

  • Dana

    We’re different because of our reproductive organs and our hormones. (Aside from the general differences that any person of any sex has versus any other person on the planet.) There’s such a thing as equality if you are more specific about what you mean by that term–say, equality before the law, or whatever. But it doesn’t mean anything if it’s not enforced. And there are systems we need to change as well, it’s not enough to have full legal rights in a fucked-up country. (Not that we have full legal rights. I literally, as a woman of reproductive age, have fewer rights than a cadaver.)

  • Omzig Online

    This reminds me of an article I read a few years ago about a young girl with Down Syndrome that wanted to become a fashion designer. The article featured pictures of the adolescent girl in her underwear, with a headline that read something like “Teen With Down Syndrome Turns Our Perceptions of Beauty on its Head.”

    The trouble was she wasn’t changing anyone’s perception of beauty. She was demonstrating how closely she could conform to already existing male-centered beauty standards. This meant that she felt she needed to show the world that she, too, can make a man’s dick happy in order to feel visible.

    I couldn’t believe the magazine was applauding the sexualization of a child with DS under the pretense of “diversity and inclusiveness.” Was she a pretty young lady? Of course she was. Should she have to perform for the male gaze in her underwear in order to be viewed as valuable, worthy, and attractive? Absolutely fucking not.

    I died a little on the inside that day.

  • Meghan Murphy

    But it makes no sense to say we should be treated equally because we aren’t equal… And ‘treated equally’ on what basis? In the context that already exists? Under patriarchy? Doesn’t work, as far as I’m concerned.

  • Rich Garcia

    There is ALWAYS a choice. Or has Feminism become about women being weak in the face of oppression, rather than being a strong opposition to it? I’m sick of the excuses coming from Western women who clearly benefit from being white and/or heterosexual in a Western Patriarchy.

    And I’ma throw that out there, because as of late you’re not even allowed to talk about the ways in which women can and do benefit from class privilege. Or how women conspire to keep each other down, and how they act in their own best interests and in the interests of their patriarchies.

    • Jani

      “I’m sick of the excuses coming from Western women who clearly benefit from being white and/or heterosexual in a Western Patriarchy.”

      Not all “white” women (or “white” men for that matter) benefit from class privilege. My political beliefs are based on the inequalities of economic and social class, not identity. Class privilege is based on wealth. It’s the unequal distribution of wealth that creates privilege for the few but disadvantages far more people. Many women disadvantaged under the class system regardless of ethnicity.

    • Hanakai

      In terms of equality, is anyone arguing that legal equality as a reality or a goal is a bad thing? It was not that long ago historically when legally women were considered chattel, things, (chattel being derived from the word for cattle) and could not vote, were barred from education, were not allowed to become lawyers, could not get credit or own property in her name. Increasing legal equality — such as the right to vote, the right to credit in her own name, access to education, access to the professions — has increased women’s power and sovereignty over their own lives. Increasing legal equality has not toppled the patriarchy or predatory capitalism, but seriously, the weight of 6,000 years of oppression will unlikely dissipate overnight.

      Where equality is an insufficient concept is the reality that the patriarchy is etched deep into the mind. Raised amidst the subtle ubiquitous myriad subtle conditionings of patriarchal and male supremacist ideology, the patriarchy early establishes outposts in the mind. Most people do not much escape their conditioning, and so men and women end up believing and buying into patriarchal thinking and ideology, as well as learning and internalizing modes of behavior acceptable to the patriarchal dictates. So, yes, of course, the patriarchy exists with the complicity of women — indeed, Andrea Dworkin wrote of this in Right-Wing Women. Most women love men, especially their sons, too much, and themselves too little, and are unlikely to rise up and overthrow male rule.

      So, it will take a change of mind to change the oppression of patriarchy. As always, there is a vanguard, the people in whom the patriarchal conditioning was imperfect or for some reason did not take. Historically what happens is that if this minority vanguard can create and articulate a vision and successfully communicate it to the masses, change happens. The task is figuring out how to do that.

      Like Rich Garcia, I, too, have seen horrible female police, judges, of various races. This tells me that simply slotting women into positions where the creation and values are patriarchal, masculinist, racist is not going to help a great deal. The real struggle is not with structures, but with the hearts and minds.

      I also agree that at some point women need to say we are responsible for our choices and stop with excuses. Humans fear almost nothing more than they fear freedom, because with freedom comes responsibility. Your life as it is is what you decided to do with your freedom. Free beings have choice. Slaves and prisoners do not. We are born into a time and circumstances within which we have choice, with those of us privileged to live in the rich nations having an overabundance of choice. What do you do with your choice and freedom?

    • Wren

      I’m sick of your misogyny, Rich. Clearly, even us women here, doing what we can to fight back against the violence and oppression we’ve faced while trying to survive, are not doing ENOUGH to satisfy you.

      I wonder, with all the time you take posting on feminist sites about how women are privileged and pathetic, do you spend as much time talking to men of color about how they shouldn’t beat or rape women?? Are you doing enough??

  • acommentator

    “Back in the day we referred to liberal feminists as equal rights feminists as opposed to radical feminists. But those equal rights feminists almost look good compared to today’s liberal feminists: they did not view prostitution as empowering, they did not think transvestites were women, they did not center men, etc. Of course they subscribed absolutely to capitalism and the American way.”

    FWIW, I strongly agree. There is nothing liberal about the mindset under discussion. This no platforming at universities, the great push to silence opposing, or even merely critical voices, is not liberal. The idea that words are violence. That disagreeing with someone’s view of themselves “erases” them. The rejection of biology. The extreme subjectivity of everything, and the privileging of feelings above facts. This things are not liberal (or conservative) as we traditionally understood those terms.

    I am not sufficiently familiar with the origin of this kind of thinking to know if “post modern” or some other term fits best. But I don’t believe it is a kind of liberalism. More of a rejection of liberalism, and conservatism too, IMO.

  • Jani

    Or totally brainwashed by the cult of Hollywood.

    • Tinfoil the Hat

      Plenty of women in Hollywood weren’t “brainwashed” enough to use their fame to denigrate women as “vagina voters.”

  • Jani

    How depressing. Even worse were the promotional emails I received trying to sell me “sexy”’apparel “in celebration of IWD”. You know, like it was the new Valentines Day or something. Un-fucking-believable.

  • marv

    The Man Class needs a subordinate class to keep the former’s higher status. Equal treatment doesn’t mean dismantling class stratification. To illustrate, could the proletariat ever join the capital class? Equal treatment is smoke and mirrors.

  • Jani

    They’re always young women showing a lot of flesh and cleavage in these “body positive” articles. How depressing. I’ve nothing against people standing up the fashion business and the diet and beauty industries — the more people who do, the better as far as I’m concerned. What I do see is that these businesses have woken up to this vast potential market for “plus size” women. That’s all.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Feel free to talk about equal rights all you want, but it is not accurate to replace the word ‘feminism’ with ‘equality’.

    • foamreality

      Fantastic article Meghan. I often wonder if ‘equal rights’ between men and women might be less important to society than ‘equal rights’ between wealth classes (perhaps that would benefit most women more – as well as a lot of men – which might in turn prevent their rage against women) . I’m so cynical – perhaps the reason womens ‘equality’ is even discussed in the mainstream media is because it benefits capital: it distracts from excessive wealth inequality by peddling the idea women should aspire and have equal opportunity to earn a million quid a year just like men. Ug. In the UK at least, the media seem hell bent on portraying feminism as a right for women to earn equally excessive wages as men. All the while aspirational working class and middle class women are cajoled into cheer-leading excessively wealthy women who work for powerful corporations to demand more money. In the name of feminism. Meanwhile most of the worlds women are struggling to feed and cloth themselves or their children. And most of the worlds men for that matter – men trained to feel ’emasculated’ by their own poverty wages and to beat women for it.

  • marv

    It corresponds to women becoming ministers, priests, popes, imams, rabbis, gurus, etc. Religious institutions have to be abolished because they are inherently patriarchal and senseless (no god exists). Consider monarchies, slave owners and bankers as well.

    I am not against women integrating into men’s roles. They deserve what they can take. Nevertheless assimilation further legitimizes these formations which are obstacles to liberation.

  • Meghan Murphy

    “Now you go along with your newfound ability to point out how men of color mistreat their womenfolk whenever it’s brought up that women of status and authority conspire to abuse other women out of bias or some sort of power trip.”

    What?!?!? Honestly, your behaviour here does often make it seem like you hate women, Rich… Or at least feminists…

    • Rich Garcia

      @meghan_murphy:disqus Since when is criticism of women misogyny? And I know I am not alone in asking this question. You can criticize males all you want for their sex, race, or class privilege.

      Yet, when I question the manner in which women can and do benefit from systems of power, and how this holds other women back, all of a sudden I have to be reminded that men of disadvantaged groups (like myself) mistreat their womenfolk, and therefore I have no right to criticize any woman.

      • Meghan Murphy

        You are attacking Wren without basis. You’re not offering any criticism in good faith, in this particular incidence.

        • Rich Garcia

          I’m tired of defending women from leftists who label me a “right-winger” (of all things!) for acknowledging that biological sex exists, from rightists who call me an “SJW” for saying anything that is remotely in defense of women. And now I am somehow not allowed to question or disagree with women, because to do so makes me a misogynist.

          Nothing that I have said was meant to attack anyone. But I respond in the same way I am responded to, and I can’t keep my cool anymore when speaking truth to power, and pointing out how women can and do benefit from it, is blasphemy. Just like being left-leaning comes with the condition that I HAVE to support transgenders and the myth of gendered brains, or else I get labeled a right-winger.

          • Meghan Murphy

            As Wren as pointed out, your comments too often convey a lack of respect — outright contempt, even — for women as a whole. Which is not appropriate on this particular site. Of course it’s fine to criticize the actions of individual women, but your attitude conveys something beyond that.

  • Wren

    Whenever you post here, all you ever say is that women (feminist or not) are handmaidens, or weak, or racist, or privileged or too stupid to see how it all works (but somehow YOU’VE got it all figured out, huh?).You have your fucking meltdowns and tell us that feminism is dead because we are all of the things I just mentioned. You confessed that you’re sexist and a danger to women. But oh my, how dare I point out that this mentality of superiority and rage bleeds out of every word you type???

    You’ve never said one fucking word of support or respect to Meghan or anyone else here, yet you expect us to pander to you, even sooth the savage-beast you when you get all emotional. Wahh!! You come here for attention from women when you’ve given up on getting it elsewhere. Other men here have pointed all of this out to you before, but you never listen to anyone. You’ve always got some stupid excuse (like WE attack YOU, ha!).

    Regarding telling me that I’m racist: All men beat and abuse women, but I bring this up with YOU because you never do anything but criticize feminists and your responsibility in this battle lies elsewhere. But now I see that the objective for you isn’t to stop sexism, rather, it is to indulge your own sexist nature by ripping us up. This is what gives you pleasure. Asking you to address the violence of men would be no fun.

    • Rich Garcia

      Why don’t you direct some of that rage towards the men on the Left who have abandoned you so they can fight on behalf of their precious crossdressers. Don’t get mad at me because I as a man admit what so many other women know to be true: that Patriarchy is nothing without women to help prop it up.

      That’s all I have been saying, because if I don’t tell you this shit, then women of more marginalized groups eventually will. And let’s pretend like I haven’t addressed the violence of men either, as if my entire time spent on this website consists of solely bashing women.

  • mail_turtle

    Indeed I may be missing the point (because when reading that article, which I really liked too, I could also not understand why the authors were bashing the word “equality”).

    Do you agree that when someone says “I want equality” then it’s commonly understood that they want equal rights and opportunities? If so, how is that a stupid aim?

    • foamreality

      Well, lets say women have equal right to work as men. If the pay of both of those is then halved, but made exactly the same. Its more equal than now. Is that progress? Because I think thats the kind of thing that neoliberalism is trying on. Heres another mad real world example I found today: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/10/help-men-work-less-to-close-gender-pay-gap-says-thinktank

      ‘men need to work fewer hours and women need to work more.”

      Surely the better solution should be men and women should all work less. Im not against equality. But the devil is in the detail. What matters is egalitarianism. Fighting for equal rights has in some ways just made womens lives worse. Children should be seen as a burden (even if you choose to have them) and getting back to work for an asshole boss should be your top priority, because thats progress, feminisim and equality! My ass.

      Sorry, to answer you question, I don’t think people who want equal rights and opportunities are stupid, I think most want what I want, a better fairer, freer, egalitarian world. But language is manipulative and we can be effected by the words we use without knowing, often causing us to loose sight of the meaning. For example: Climate change is less immediately concerning than catastrophic Global Warming. Whats the effect on our behaviour and thinking?

  • Alienigena

    “Likewise there are men who have much less privileges than some women. Are those men exempt from being called out for misogyny? Not on my watch.”

    Agree. Because there is always the potential they will behave badly towards women in their own communities. Which the headlines posted on What’s New show to be a likely eventuality on a daily basis.

  • acommentator

    “So no, the proletariat could never join the capital class”

    Workers move into the capitalist class all the time, in my understanding of the term. They start small businesses, they borrow money and invest it in equipment and inventory. They employ the labor of others for a wage. If that is not capitalist, I don’t understand the term.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Thanks Joel!

  • will

    ^^^Agree 100%^^^

  • Goddess_of_Dischord

    Actually when I think of equality vs equity I think of equality being everyone given the same no matter the circumstance vs equity being given something to help you because of your circumstance. Like equality is parking being first come first served, equity is having spaces for handicapped and pregnant people….ANYWAYS…I actual get what your saying…women hold up half the sky and the same is true with misogyny. Women perpetuate misogny just as much as men. Women slut-shame and victim blame each other, women tell their sons not to cry, women try to keep other women out(think of female rappers). I remember seeing a news report on other women who’s job is to keep other women in line and beat them if they weren’t wearing appropriate attire(I guess choice feminism would say those women were empowered when they did that though so it can be considered feminist right?). Personally I find it shameful. Us women should be banding against the patriarchy not participating in it. There is also a lot of discussion around women’s “choice” and women who choose to go into careers which degrade women such as porn, stripping, and prostitution. While it is one thing if the woman had no choice to do that, there are many women, esp in America, who have chosen to participate in those careers and then say that it is feminist for them to do so because they made a “Choice”. but sorry just cuz you are female and made a choice doesn’t mean you did something empowering…that’s like a female saying as long she’s choosing to smoke it’s healthy cuz she chose to do it…um no cigarettes are still terrible for you and the atmosphere(2nd hand smoke kills ya know). I wish these females would stop patting themselves on the back because they were able to make some money off the sexual objectification of their bodies, which hurts females as a whole because men are able to view us as their property(also the men who control these industries make way more than the dispensable models). While women do not have the same privileges and opportunities in life as men, there is a certain point where women who are more fortunate due to class and race need to be held accountable, because they are adults who have made decisions which allow the patriarchy and misogyny to continue. As long as there are women opting into their own oppression and the oppression of others there will never be equality.

  • Goddess_of_Dischord

    Beautiful comment…yes although women are not as privileged as men we still hold responsibility. Just as black men are less privileged than white man does not mean they should be waived of their responsibility for holding up misogyny. I could have easily decided to be a stripper, but I knew doing that meant I was allowing men to think it was OK to view women as objects, and perpetuating the idea of women being objects, who do not having a say in anything and are not players in this world, just prettythings for males, so instead I busted my ass to get a degree although I was broke and had a baby. I of course would never shame a girl who was less privileged than me and had no choice to work that job, but there are many girls now who are choosing to do it cuz it’s the easy way out. I blame these girls, maybe not just as much but almost as much, as the men who are consumers of women’s bodies.