http://www.wsusignpost.com/editorial/the-signpost-viewpoint-1.2139108
Here is the full version of my argument. Enjoy guys! :D
The subject of feminism is a hot topic in recent days. Of particular issue is the fact that Sarah Palin calls herself a feminist. Many other self-described feminist take issue with this statement. Justification for calling herself a feminist is that Palin makes her own “choices” and decides for herself how to live her life, therefore she can be called feminists despite the fact that Palin often criticizes other feminists and doesn’t agree with their views. One can also argue that every individual woman has the right to define what feminism is for her, even if she defines it as choosing to submit to and be enslaved by men.
Very reasonable arguments to make. Individualism has always trumped collectivism, certainly there can be differences between the ways different people view a certain issue or live their lives while still being considered part of the same group. Except there are a few points that need to be brought up before right-wing women can be called feministic.
When Palin defines herself as a feminist, she does so only by accompanying that statement with an explanation that her definition of feminist is different than that of “left-wing” women who’ve “hijacked” the term.
Have “left-wingers” hijacked the term feminist or is it possible that there are only certain women (and men) who actually practice feminism in the way that it should be? This brings us to the question of what feminism is defined as and what defines a feminist.
It’s no lie that feminism has taken many forms and evolved in a variety of ways throughout its history. Today contemporary feminism as it is practiced in the United States is divided into three major branches known as: Radical feminism, Liberal feminism, and Socialist/Marxist feminism. Socialists and Marxists are also not always united, and there are many other smaller branches of feminism that interpret feminism as it relates to another issue, such as, the environment, or how minority women fare as compared to those in a majority population.
The same thing can be said of the Civil Rights Movement of the past and present, and the Gay Rights Movement of today. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcom X are both cited as major figures of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 60s. But what isn’t always talked about is how much the two men disagreed with and even loathed one another. They also organized their own camps quite differently and advocated different methods of fighting social inequality between Blacks and Whites.
But what if there had been Blacks in America and European colonial empires who advocated the idea that European culture was superior to African culture. What if were Blacks who, for their own varied reasons, opposed ending slavery during the civil war. Can these few Blacks be called part of the civil rights movement? These African people would simply making their own choices as individuals and expressing themselves as individuals. Therefore, couldn’t they be called part of the Civil Rights movement and other movements before it that wanted to empower Blacks by allowing them to make their own unobstructed choices?
No they could not, because their individual choices would be obstructing the rights of other individuals like them. The main problem with Palin being called a feminist is that the things she advocates trample upon the individual rights of other women and men. An example would be Sarah Palin stating that she would deprive her daughter of the right to an abortion even if she were pregnant after being brutally raped. If Sarah Palin simply said she opposed abortion when it concerns herself as an individual, then that would be acceptable. Any woman can be opposed to abortion and be called a feminist. The problem comes when women like Palin advocate taking that right away from others simply because she disagrees with it. If feminism depends upon the individual freedom of women and men to choose their own destinies, then Palin would forfeit the title by interfering with the individual right of her daughter and others.
Furthermore, how do we know that this “choice” by Palin is actually choices? Many right-wing women may embrace their own subordination simply because it is an easier and less painful route to take. Certainly being a feminist is not easy in many parts of the United States. Battered women are a perfect example. Often times they simply accept the abuse receive and are coerced into justifying it as a way to cope with the pain and avoid perceived rejection by the men they love.
And Palin cannot be called a feminist simply for the sake of the movement being something coherent and able to organize in favor of certain major goals. Despite all the differences between the many branches of feminism, most of them agree on a few key points. One, feminism is meant to empower women (and men) in light of an oppressive patriarchy. Two, while feminists may argue on why women (and men to an extent) are oppressed, they still agree that oppression against the genders takes place regardless of its cause. These key agreements make the movement what it is. It only exists as a movement because there are certain things that everyone agrees on. If we let every individual call themselves part of a movement, yet not be in any kind of agreement at all with other members of the movement, then we are lost.
Also, any member of a movement that seeks to liberate people and defend the rights of those in its movement must not be hypocritical and argue against the same liberation for other groups of people. Therefore, “conservative” women who are anti-gay or racist cannot be called true feminists. Another reason why Palin can't be called a feminist because she has openly advocated against the rights of gays and lesbians.
As well, women on the far left who advocate misandry or show contempt for men cannot be called feminists anymore than Palin can. Most major branches of feminist thought have attempted to distance themselves from these misandrists and lunatics. Unfortunately, people on the right have taken the behavior of certain people who label themselves feminists and attempted to attribute it to the entire feminist movement.
Therefore, certain people cannot be called part of a movement unless they adhere to basic guidelines of what the movement is about. If someone’s practices and beliefs actually lead to harming the movement they claim to be a part of then for the sake of the movement and all the other individuals that are liberated by it, that person cannot be called part of the movement.
