On why semantics matter
NS November 30th, 2007
I’ve been engaged in the same debate on two different forums I belong to and it’s been on my mind for days now — what is wrong with the word feminism? I started a poll on each, asking the (mainly female) participants if they consider themselves feminist or not, as I often encounter women who say they identify with the feminist movement but would never call themselves an actual feminist. So I had to ask: Why?
The consensus seems to be that the majority of women polled do call themselves feminst but a significant, very vocal, minority do not merely because of what the word brings to mind. I find this execise in semantics-turned-political-debate endlessly fascinating, even if I did get a bit too worked up last night and had to walk away from the computer lest I break it. It may be ‘just a word’ to those arguing against its use and so no big deal if it were to change, but to me it is an attempt to subvert the message itself, water it down until it’s nothing more than a glass of ice lemonade left in the sun too long and allowed to melt because no one drank it fast enough.
When those arguing against the word ‘feminism’ suggested that we change the word to something friendlier, more inclusive of men, I wanted to scream. Mostly because I used to feel the same way. I wanted everyone to play nice and get the ‘opposing team’ involved for brainstorming powwows and group therapy sessions. I naively believed that if we worked together, we could achieve our goal. But as I’ve delved further and further into the world of gender politics, that ball of sunshine high in my throat has settled like dusk in a Western sky and now resides, fiery and bursting with smoldering red light, in the pit of my stomach. My passion has been awoken and I can no longer bear the thought of waiting for the men in power to give us that which we deserve. Every day that I wait, every right I concede, every time someone tells me I have to include my gender’s oppressors in our liberation…it’s too little verging on too late.We don’t need a new word, we need a new way of thinking.
Then the argument comes that if we don’t include men in the solution, they have no incentive to help solve the problem. Apparently, some believe that this could be aided by changing the word ‘feminism’ to ‘gender equality.’ The rationale is that feminism is about only women whereas gender equality signifies men and women working together for equality. But I ask: What is so scary or wrong about something being just about women? It’s been just about men for a long, long time. Why do we always have to defer to them, make them involved as if we need their leadership or their permission to do what they haven’t done for us since humans came into existence? If they haven’t given us equality by now, will they ever? I don’t think they will, sadly. And if somebody won’t give something that is yours, even after every ‘nice’ tactic and compromise in the book has been exercised, you start demanding it.
You march
You get in their face and shout a little louder
You refuse to back down and wear your badge proudly
And that’s exactly what I’m doing and will continue to do. If that makes me a radical feminist, so be it. I embrace the term. There is nothing wrong with being either and, in fact, the two words only benefit from being put together. Radical means “Arising from or going to a root or source; Favoring or effecting fundamental or revolutionary changes in current practices, conditions, or institutions.” So to those who think these are dirty words, consider yourself cleansed. You can call whatever form of activism you participate in whatever you want. Call it ‘gender neautrality’ or ‘gender equality’ or ‘lucy in the sky with diamonds.’ I don’t care.
Just don’t take away my feminism.
