Viva La Feminista! If anything women are more prominent and dominant in the workplace and on the political stage than ever before. Feminism is alive and well but has been redefined and revamped for a new generation of women bringing a different female awareness to their psyche. Being a "feminist", or aware of one's rights as a woman does not mean being dressed up like a nouveau hippy in socks and birkenstocks espousing the works of Ms. Greer and Simone De Bouviour any more. Today women who speak out against domestic violence, protect women's rights and value women's role in society like demanding equality in the work place, equal shares in property and land, equal pay and voice their objectives for help with child care and domestic chores are all following traditional feminist ideas but don't necessarily have to label themselves as "feminists" per se.
Indeed, the positive success of this movement as pioneered decades ago by Emily Pankhurst and the Suffragette movement is seen throughout the daily lives of women all over the United States and Western world in general. The progress that has been made is reflected throughout society at all levels from school girls being allowed to play soccer to women being licensed as truck drivers on the road, but as with all social movements, feminism still needs to reach the most vulnerable and the most needy. Feminism by its very nature is a highly controversial concept in new democracies or places where women have no access to freedoms in the most conventional sense.
Women still, however, need support in education, skills and training programs to ensure they remain within the work place and further, women still need to be treated on an equal footing with their male counterparts in traditionally male dominated professions. How often, for example, do we see a road construction builder who is female or a plumber or forklift driver?
Running parallel to this idea is that "real" feminism is steeped in the fundamental belief that women are not only equal but often superior to men, and this is easily expressed in contempoary lifestyles and the concept of "power females" similar to and analagous with "alpha males." For instance, Madonna as an iconic figure in female liberation has revolutionized the classic notion of feminism without losing her sass and style. In the earlier part of her career she used her overt sexuality to challenge barriers in the music world and then in the boardroom. Later on as her career progreseed she relaunched herself as a music diva and became the benchmark of the new female generation. These women were the ones who shopped hard, played hard and worked hard, brought up on a diet of "Sex and the City" fast living and feisty independence. These women didn't rely on men to buy their Cosmopolitans or their Harry Winston watches -- they did it all themselves. Que Destiny's child and their famous song which had all the women "proud to be independent", "Sisters doin' it for themselves " no longer meant ditch the lipstick and burn the bra, it meant celebrate and enjoy being a woman. The essence of feminism had radically altered as women realized that now they could have their cake and eat it too. They didn't have to adopt machoistic qualities to be respected; they could still wiggle around in their Christian Loubtins, have a "mani" and a "pedi" and still be treated with due deference.
But what of those women who enjoy using men as "meal tickets" and expect men to provide for them? Are these women betraying the cause or are they just espousing feminism in another context? Quid Pro quo on a very crass level the man with the "trophy wife" gets the "look" the "model" and "make" of woman he wants and in return, she gets all of her bills paid. Is this something that is acceptable to women or do all women feel they have to pay to belong? A Citi executive recently separated from his long-term girlfriend because she had no money and he did not want to support her financially... was he right, or was he wrong? On the flip side a hedge fund CEO supported her unemployed fiancee for 4 years until he eventually found work... why would it be any different in this scenario? Why is it that the woman is usually the one denounced as a "gold digger" when in similar circumstances the man is not?
Then there are those women who actually make a living out of preying on and some would argue even exploiting men: strippers, table dancers, adult entertainers, maybe even the waitress at your local Hooters -- the man gets to gawp, drool and stare for a while but who is the winner in this situation, the femme fatale or the hapless scumbag looking for his next dance? Should women like this be celebrated for their entrepenurial flair, or are they demeaning feminsim? On one level some would argue that these women are at the forefront of the feminist revolution -- they work, they get paid and they rank superior to men in these industries as more men use these industries than their female counterparts.
Feminism takes shape in many forms, but there is still an enormous gap between women living in the affluent West and women living in the developing world. In countries where women are not offered a voice and denied their basic and fundamental freedoms "feminism" does not truly exist. It is a redundant notion, and until all women everywhere have "equal rights", "equal pay" and an "equal say" in their lives the quest for change will continue.
Indeed, the positive success of this movement as pioneered decades ago by Emily Pankhurst and the Suffragette movement is seen throughout the daily lives of women all over the United States and Western world in general. The progress that has been made is reflected throughout society at all levels from school girls being allowed to play soccer to women being licensed as truck drivers on the road, but as with all social movements, feminism still needs to reach the most vulnerable and the most needy. Feminism by its very nature is a highly controversial concept in new democracies or places where women have no access to freedoms in the most conventional sense.
Women still, however, need support in education, skills and training programs to ensure they remain within the work place and further, women still need to be treated on an equal footing with their male counterparts in traditionally male dominated professions. How often, for example, do we see a road construction builder who is female or a plumber or forklift driver?
Running parallel to this idea is that "real" feminism is steeped in the fundamental belief that women are not only equal but often superior to men, and this is easily expressed in contempoary lifestyles and the concept of "power females" similar to and analagous with "alpha males." For instance, Madonna as an iconic figure in female liberation has revolutionized the classic notion of feminism without losing her sass and style. In the earlier part of her career she used her overt sexuality to challenge barriers in the music world and then in the boardroom. Later on as her career progreseed she relaunched herself as a music diva and became the benchmark of the new female generation. These women were the ones who shopped hard, played hard and worked hard, brought up on a diet of "Sex and the City" fast living and feisty independence. These women didn't rely on men to buy their Cosmopolitans or their Harry Winston watches -- they did it all themselves. Que Destiny's child and their famous song which had all the women "proud to be independent", "Sisters doin' it for themselves " no longer meant ditch the lipstick and burn the bra, it meant celebrate and enjoy being a woman. The essence of feminism had radically altered as women realized that now they could have their cake and eat it too. They didn't have to adopt machoistic qualities to be respected; they could still wiggle around in their Christian Loubtins, have a "mani" and a "pedi" and still be treated with due deference.
But what of those women who enjoy using men as "meal tickets" and expect men to provide for them? Are these women betraying the cause or are they just espousing feminism in another context? Quid Pro quo on a very crass level the man with the "trophy wife" gets the "look" the "model" and "make" of woman he wants and in return, she gets all of her bills paid. Is this something that is acceptable to women or do all women feel they have to pay to belong? A Citi executive recently separated from his long-term girlfriend because she had no money and he did not want to support her financially... was he right, or was he wrong? On the flip side a hedge fund CEO supported her unemployed fiancee for 4 years until he eventually found work... why would it be any different in this scenario? Why is it that the woman is usually the one denounced as a "gold digger" when in similar circumstances the man is not?
Then there are those women who actually make a living out of preying on and some would argue even exploiting men: strippers, table dancers, adult entertainers, maybe even the waitress at your local Hooters -- the man gets to gawp, drool and stare for a while but who is the winner in this situation, the femme fatale or the hapless scumbag looking for his next dance? Should women like this be celebrated for their entrepenurial flair, or are they demeaning feminsim? On one level some would argue that these women are at the forefront of the feminist revolution -- they work, they get paid and they rank superior to men in these industries as more men use these industries than their female counterparts.
Feminism takes shape in many forms, but there is still an enormous gap between women living in the affluent West and women living in the developing world. In countries where women are not offered a voice and denied their basic and fundamental freedoms "feminism" does not truly exist. It is a redundant notion, and until all women everywhere have "equal rights", "equal pay" and an "equal say" in their lives the quest for change will continue.
No comments:
Post a Comment