This week in Social Problems we covered inequalities of sex and gender. To conclude the week, I talked a bit about feminism and showed different examples of feminist sites and arguments. Then I asked my students to reflect on feminism. Do they call themselves feminists? Is feminism still necessary? Why or why not?
Nobody claimed the feminist label, but 69% (18/26) argued that feminism is still important and useful. Of those who said it was important but did not claim the label for themselves, about half indicated it's because they personally do not fight for gender equality. They believe there should be equality, they believe there currently isn't, and they believe this is wrong. However, for them, feminism involves taking active polital stance to rectify the situation. As such, labeling oneself 'feminist' is not the same sort of self-categorization as labeling oneself 'liberal.'
The other half either didn't claim the label because they don't like to label themselves, or for no specified reason.
Of the eight that do not still feel feminism is useful:
All of them agree that gender inequality still exists. Three dislike feminism because it is too White and middle class. They feel gender inequality is worth fighting against, but they feel like calling themselves feminists means they would be favoring the fight for one at the expense of others.
The other five feel that gender inequality is natural and - yes - even good. There are biological differences, and men make naturally better leaders. It's God's intention, or they just prefer for men to rule (these are women making such arguments).
There was another interesting tidbit regarding the belief about feminist battles. Most students favored (you know, IF they were to be a feminist) a more essentialist approach to gender equality. They feel that many of the differences we see between men and women are natural and we don't really need to bother with that - socialization amplifies differences that are already there. Inequality mainly results from our society's tendency to favor male attributes and contributions. In other words, feminism should focus less on getting rid of gender stereotypes and more on valuing the feminine. Though many of those same students are quick to argue that we shouldn't punish people when their gender performance does deviate from the norm.
So, they seem to interpret gender differences as being aggregate traits rather than categorical ones. They are true on average, but not in total. In other words, maybe the categories are socially constructed, and socialization further shifts these gender differences into even more of a binary, but the basis is still biological to some extent.
I think there might be a research project in this...
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Undergraduates and Feminism
Posted by
Anomie
at
12:54 PM
Labels: sex and gender
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting. I really know nothing about the sociology of gender (except for maybe Wnedy McElroy and her individualist feminism). Out of curiousity, what kinds of feminism did you bring up to them? What are the most "popular" academic strands out there today?
Hmmm. Here's what I'd've said had I been in the class...
Why don't I consider myself a feminist?
1. It's no longer about de jure equality of opportunity for men and women. To the extent that an equal distribution of benefits (privilege or wealth or status) to the genders is sought rather than equality of opportunity, it's contrary to my values (and my self-interest). To the extent that it focuses on the non-political (personal attitudes, our relationships, entertainment) it is cultural advocacy rather than the pursuit of justice.
2. 'The personal is political' is either false, or it is trivially true (and it isn't consistent with claiming extensive privacy rights to puts some matters fundamentally beyond the reach of the state).
3. Modern feminists take a view of the moral status of prenates which I find completely illogical.
4. Rule-based ethics, the assumption that rationality and an attitude of abstract detachment produces better decisions, and even formal logic are devalued by some feminist theorists in order to promote alternative ways of thinking which are ostensibly less 'male-centric'. (!) If I were a woman I'd find this insulting- but since I'm not I merely consider it goofy.
5. Self-described feminists (in my opinion) implicitly subscribe to the view that one's status in certain categories (gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation) has inherent moral significance - by letting the degree to which a disadvantage is considered unjust be affected by that status (even when the disadvantage doesn't result from it). This legitimizes regarding a person as a part of a mereolgical whole where these categories are concerned. This is arbitrary. It minimizes the importance of other categories that are at least as significant (as gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation,etc).
Post a Comment