Dear Online Opiners,

I agree with Vivienne's article, that 'feminism is passe because it worked'.

I would add, if someone hasn't already, a observation made by Garry Trudeau in the Doonesbury cartoon a few months back.

Observing in the U.S. the same modern disdain for 'feminism', one of his characters states that just as the feminists of the sixties, seventies and eighties did not describe themselves as 'suffragettes' or some other name from earlier activists for women's rights, so too do modern female activists hesitate to use the word 'feminist' to describe their struggles for fairness for women.

Cheers,

Tomess,
Brisbane

Tomess

I am wondering if you actually read the article. Are you saying that the word 'feminism' is passe because of negative connotations or that the struggle for equality is over.

If the latter, I have wonder what you make of the imbalance between men and women in positions of power, women's status in third world countries and, closer to home, the abuse any discussion of women's equality brings from an embittered male minority?

I think we still have a long way to go before both sexes throw off the shackles of the superficial roles we are supposed to play. One of the positives that feminism has brought about is that men are now questioning their place in the world and limitations as sole bread winner and what is perceived as 'manly' behaviour.

Sure, 'feminism' has become a reactionary word for some people, however the goal remains:

Liberty, Equality, Humanity!

Actually Tomess, the term feminism was first coined around the same time as the suffrage movement. If you look at the online etymology dictionary ( http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=feminine ) it says:

"Feminism is from 1851, but meant at first "state of being feminine;" sense of "advocacy of women's rights" is 1895. Feminist is 1894, from Fr. féministe (1872)."

Second wave feminists didn't call themselves suffragists because the suffrage movement was primarily about votes for women. As second wave feminists weren't fighting for votes for women it wouldn't really be appropriate to identify with that term.

I only skimmed through some of the numerous posts here, so forgive me if you brought this up already, but I believe the writer of the article is either incredibly naive or incredibly heartless.

Feminism has worked? By God, it hasn't even begun yet!

Do you people not consider women in non-western societies, particularly Muslim ones, where women are truly a second class species?

In Pakistan this week there is a debate going on about repealing the disgustingly barbaric Islamic law that a woman raped must produce four male witnesses and if she can't she is imprisoned, possibly even stoned to death.

I am yet to hear western feminists even comment? The way I have seen this issue develop, and I have followed it closely, is that western feminists altered their core values sometime in the 70's, where they subscribed to the irrational leftist dogma that non-whites have no agency.

In other words, they became racists who use political correctness as a cover for racist cultures who still mutilate women's genitals, commit honour killings, and generally treat women like animals.

You don't understand? Racists, yes. A racist is someone who thinks lesser of other cultures, to not be concerned about the goings on in say, Iran, for women.

Oh, there are real feminists hard at work in these nations, but they are usually ignored by the western ones, who adhere to the laughable notion of cultural relativsm.

It is incredibly ignorant to say feminism worked when in reality, it has only worked in the enlightened world, that of European cultures.

For the rest of the planet, women are suffering forced marriages, mutilations, sick notions of sexual repression by incestual males (extremely common in Afghanistan according to NGO's, and likely other Muslim nations too) and yet, here, from the comfort of this forum, people are discussing how it worked!

The world is bigger than the cultures of Europe you know...

Hi Benjamin,

I think it's a tad unfair to say that western feminists have ignored the problems of those countries where women are treated as you mentioned (i.e. fgm, rape laws, being treated as property etc.) It was actually feminist organisations in the US, like NOW, the Feminist Majority and other organisations that prevented the Taliban being considered a legitimate government by the Clinton Administration when the US wanted to run an oil pipeline through the country. That's one example of many, for example campaigning against sweatshop labour, human trafficking etc.

I think where there is some hesitation to get involved is the opposite of your statement that "they subscribed to the irrational leftist dogma that non-whites have no agency." From my understanding, western feminists don't want to take the paternalistic route and railroad over the work already being done in specific counries by the women's rights activists who are from there (and certainly have agency) and subscribe more to the approach of working together with them in already set up NGOs etc. I don't think there's much cultural relativism going on though and I don't know where you got that idea from. Culture should never be an excuse to violate human rights.

And as far as rape goes, our own laws are far from perfect (though of course far better than those in countries like Pakistan and Iran). Here, the victims are still put on trial, accused of wanting to be gang raped because they were enjoying their first kiss (as was the case with Tegan Wagner) and only about 10 percent of reported rapes end up in any kind of conviction (and that's only out of the 10-30 percent that are reported and 17 percent of those that end up in court).--These figures are from a report put out by the NSW Attorney General's rape taskforce that was set up in 2004- I think the report can be found on the AGs website).

"I think we still have a long way to go before both sexes throw off the shackles of the superficial roles we are supposed to play. One of the positives that feminism has brought about is that men are now questioning their place in the world and limitations as sole bread winner and what is perceived as 'manly' behaviour."

One area that tends to be ignored is that the behaviour of women have an enormous influence on the behaviour of men.

"If women only had sex with men who walked on their hands. Pretty soon almost half the world would be walking on their hands!" I can not remember who wrote this.

Esther Vilar in her book "The Manipulated Man" writes

"Women let men work for them, think for them and take on their responsibilities - in fact, they exploit them.

Since men are strong, intelligent and imaginative, while women are weak, unimaginative and stupid, why isn't it men who exploit women?"
http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/vilar.html

Such is the slaves happiness.