jamcmullan@watmath.UUCP (Judy McMullan) (11/02/83)
The recent submissions about whether a man should/can call himself a
feminist have prompted me to post a portion of a lecture that Margaret
Atwood gave at the University of Waterloo, last year. I was so impressed
with her definition of feminism that I copied it down. I have reproduced
it here without permission. I can't recall the exact words of the question
that she was answering but I believe it was "Are you a feminist?".
"Feminist issues are not just for women. They are human rights
issues just as war should not concern men alone though it's
mostly men in the front lines. I find men who react to women's
issues or women's studies with the standard paranoia, "Why do you
hate men?" and so forth, understandable but ignorant. A
university is not a place where ignorance should be encouraged. I
look forward, however, to the time when both feminist groups and
wars will no longer be with us, having become obsolete.
Here's another answer.
Any woman who can read and write is a feminist. People chained
themselves to fences and starved and were beaten up and killed to
get you that right.
Any woman who has legal rights over her own children is a
feminist. Remember the origin of the word "family". It comes from
Roman "familia" which meant the total group of people controlled
by a male householder including women, children and slaves.
Any woman who is allowed to vote is a feminist. We've only had
that right here [Ontario] for 52 years.
Any woman or man who believes in equal pay for equal work is a
feminist.
Any man who doesn't believe it's his God-given privilege to beat
up or kill his wife or sexually molest his children is a
feminist.
Any woman or man who is against rape and violent pornography, who
isn't turned on by movies of women being strangled, disemboweled
and hung up with meat hooks, is a feminist.
Any one, woman or man, who thinks a man should be judged as to
his worthiness by qualities such as a sense of humour,
admirableness of character, helpfulness in a tight spot, moral
integrity, inventiveness, creativity of any kind, courteousness
and courage, and not just as a money-making robot, is a feminist.
Because if women are forced to depend on men for food, that is
how they will tend to evaluate men and no man I've ever met
really likes to be loved just for his bank account.
Hands up for the feminists in this room."
--Margaret Atwood
(about) February 1982
--Judy McMullan
...!{allegra|decvax}!watmath!jamcmullancng@burdvax.UUCP (Tom Albrecht) (11/03/83)
While we might all agree with the given definition of a "feminist", unfortunately the feminist movement (i.e. the women's liberation movement) has associated itself with many causes with which some people cannot sympathize. For instance, many of the movers and shakers within the women's movement are also associated with the abortion rights movement and the lesbian/gay rights movement. I, for one, accept all of the tenents put forth by Margaret Atwood, however, I don't think that I would qualify as a "feminist" by the establishment of the women's movement, the National Organization for Women. Their platform includes the notion that abortions should be available to all women who want them (without interference by men) and that the rights of lesbians are somehow related to the more general rights of women (i.e. the right to raise a family). I do not believe that access to abortion is a right guaranteed under the Constitution. The rights of the unborn far outweigh the rights of the woman in this case. I believe the women's movement has alienated many who would otherwise support it because of these rather sordid associations. Tom Albrecht
guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris) (11/04/83)
Association with the goals of gay women's groups is "sordid"? No thanks.
It is unfortunate that many (including some who might be sympathetic to
the women's movement) are turned off by gays but that's their problem, not
gay people's problem.
Also, what is "the right to raise a family" and how does it fall under the
heading of "women's rights"? The right *not* to raise a family is more
important; back before the late 1860's blacks had a perfect right to pick
cotton on plantations, but they usually didn't have the right not to do so.
There are a lot of issues that might come under the heading of "the right
to raise a family"; the right not to be beaten up by one's husband, the right
not to have one's children beaten up by one's husband, the right not to get
stuck with all the day-to-day tasks of raising the family, the right to get
maternity leave without prejudice (and the right to have one's husband get
paternity leave, or to have both members of the couple get half-time, or
whatever other arrangement suits the couple best) - *and* the right not to
have one's children taken away because one is gay. "The right to raise a
family" isn't a very clear description, and I wouldn't class it as being
"important" while the right not to be discriminated against because of
sexual preference is "unimportant".
Guy Harris
{seismo,inhp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guyciaraldi@rochester.UUCP (Mike Ciaraldi) (11/05/83)
From: Mike Ciaraldi <ciaraldi> I am interested in this, since for years I have fancied myself a "feminist". I have had certain people say to me, "no TRUE feminist would" do whatever I had done, so maybe I am not a very good feminist. What I am looking for is a definition of "feminism" or a "feminist". It should be general and widely applicable, independent of issues as much as possible, since these may be transient or peripheral.. Using an example from politics, before World War I it was considered "conservative" to be an isolationist; today's conservatives are generally not isolationist, it is more of a "liberal" trait. As mentioned in a previous message, many issues have been considered by some to be "feminist", while others have called them "religious", "humanitarian", "libertarian", etc. May I suggest something along the lines of: "A feminist is a person who supports the improvement of the condition of women in general, and the elimination of prejudice or discrimination against them." Comments are invited. Mike Ciaraldi ciaraldi@rochester