I hate this question.
Alright. Hate is a strong word. Perhaps I don't hate it. I just don't understand it.
Defining something like feminism seems to detract from the purpose of it. And defining it generally narrows the scope of the word. Maybe that's the point. For example, in my lit class, we were reading this book Fight Like a Girl: How to be a Fearless Feminist and the discussion ended up centering on what feminism is exactly. Feminism to me is an all-encompassing term. It's not just about equal rights for women (although that is a huge component). It's about equal rights for everybody regardless of class, sex, age, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, etc.
According to my professor (and others in the class), I'm wrong. What I've just defined is egalitarianism. Maybe that's true. But why does feminism have to be such a limiting word? Why can't it be the fight for equal rights for all? And really, why do we need to define everything?
Defining terms like feminist or liberal or conservative, whatever word you want to choose, only serves to alienate people. Why doesn't everyone who wants equal rights for women (or for all) call themselves a feminist? Because the word has taken on this other, more intense meaning. And it's hard to reclaim it when so-called feminists are fighting about the definition of a word instead of fighting for the purpose of the word.
Again, maybe I'm in the wrong here. But I'm just missing the point. Or maybe this is just my further rejection of labels and boxes for everything. I'm not sure. But I am sure that I hated the discussions in class about feminism and I'm glad to be done with this book. (Sorry, Megan Seely.)
No comments:
Post a Comment