Sororities and Feminism

[SWTXBelle]

Were Nora Ephron the only self-proclaimed feminist to have some litmus test for being a feminist, I wouldn't have mentioned it. If I really wished to call myself a feminist I would, but I have no interest in labeling myself with that term. I do, however, get tired of the "Why aren't younger women calling themselves feminists?" articles and essays - it's because of the feminist gate-keepers who wish to advance some political agenda rather than simply promote equality.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Were Nora Ephron the only self-proclaimed feminist to have some litmus test for being a feminist, I wouldn't have mentioned it. If I really wished to call myself a feminist I would, but I have no interest in labeling myself with that term. I do, however, get tired of the "Why aren't younger women calling themselves feminists?" articles and essays - it's because of the feminist gate-keepers who wish to advance some political agenda rather than simply promote equality.

Okay, setting abortion aside, what do you think that feminists politicize that is unrelated to equality?

[SWTXBelle]

The problem with that question is that there are feminists who regard ALL issues as relating to equality. This leads to the "Republicans can't be feminists" argument, or "stay at home moms can't be feminists", or "those who refuse to support gun control can't be feminists", or just about any issue that can be seen through that particular lens. Admittedly, one of the problems is defining "equality".

The difference between a political party (which has a platform and elected leadership) or the Catholic Church (which has its catechism and hierarchy) is that feminism is not an institution. It should be more inclusive given the general nature of its denotative meaning. To argue that anti-abortionists can't be feminist is to commit the logical fallacy of begging the question - it is predicated on the idea that abortion is only an issue regarding the mother and that the father and the unborn baby (or fetus) have no rights. That is an entirely different argument (which I am not interested in getting into), but my point is that one can believe in the equality of women without supporting abortion. If there were to be a Feminist Political Party then I would accept the right of the members to dictate what a Feminist is required to believe. To the best of my knowledge, the late Nora Ephron was never elected spokeswoman for feminists.

Feminists hurt themselves and thus the quest for equality by making issues shibboleths for acceptance.

[HQWest]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

The problem with that question is that there are feminists who regard ALL issues as relating to equality. This leads to the "Republicans can't be feminists" argument, or "stay at home moms can't be feminists", or "those who refuse to support gun control can't be feminists", or just about any issue that can be seen through that particular lens. Admittedly, one of the problems is defining "equality".

Feminists hurt themselves and thus the quest for equality by making issues shibboleths for acceptance.

Yes and when one statement or one issue or one remarkable person is the sole deciding factor you inevitably give rise to extremism.

In this case, it is arguably defying labels rather than the ideals. This then comes back to one argument against Greek life, namely the idea that self-identifying with a label limits freedom or independence?

ETA: Assumably we are asserting our rights to assemble with others of our own ideals and interests?

[squirrely girl]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

... it's because of the feminist gate-keepers who wish to advance some political agenda rather than simply promote equality.

Why do you see the political as somehow separate from the personal?