Many of us who consider ourselves feminists find it pretty cool that so many female celebrities (Beyoncé, Lena Dunham and now Emma Watson) have come out publicly as feminists and pretty uncool that some others (Shailene Woodley of “Divergent” and Taylor Swift until very recently) have rejected the label.
Those in the latter category often cite a discomfort with the term itself, which has become widely associated with a mythical cult of succubi warming themselves beside a pyre of bras while plotting to destroy all men. This isn’t relegated to famous people. The Tumblr account, Women Against Feminism, in which women post pictures of themselves holding up signs decrying feminism, has met the scorn of feminists who argue that these women are merely responding to feminist stereotypes and are misinformed on the definition of feminism: “the theory of the political, economic and social equality of the sexes.”
As with defining racism, Merriam-Webster can be an unhelpful ally in these discussions.
When we talk about racism, we talk not about an individual’s belief in the superiority of one’s own race but about power structures that privilege one race over another. And when we talk about feminism with a capital F, we are often talking not about a basic belief in the equality of women but about an organized movement many perceive as racist, hostile, exclusive and anti-male.
The image of all feminists as bitter, misandrist victims is a ridiculous stereotype that needs to be corrected, but not all women who decline to be called feminists believe in this trope.
Plenty of intelligent, empowered women avoid the label for more informed reasons. Feminism is not and never has been a monolithic movement in the interests of all women; queer and non-white women have been shoved to its political sidelines since Seneca Falls.
Alternatives to capital-F feminism abound, notably Alice Walker’s theory of womanism. So why do we insist that everyone call herself a feminist, as if the term itself had the power to unite all people in support for women’s equality?
Attempting to herd everyone under the feminist label offers an easy sense of community and conveniently ignores the rifts of opinion within it.
Read any two contemporary feminist theorists, and you’re bound to encounter contradictory ideas on what it means to be a feminist, or even a woman.
Feminism cannot be pigeonholed according to a preconceived set of ideas; when we pressure women to adopt the term, we make the same mistake as self-described anti-feminists.
People cannot be split into binary camps of feminist and non-feminist just because we think this would be a simpler way of spotting who our friends are. Women should be free to define themselves however they choose, whether as feminists or womanists or humanists or nothing at all.
It is counter-intuitive to scorn women, under the guise of empowerment, for the ways they choose to identify themselves. By not castigating women who choose not to identify as feminists, we could quit the tiresome business of classifying people and focus our energy on advocating for what actually matters: the lives and opportunities of women, not terminology.
Charles McCrory is a junior English major from Florence
