Today’s feminism is 20th century feminism. It differs from 19th century feminism, the feminism of the suffragettes. Both of those movements wanted equality for women. Both were and are sexist at their core. That is the nature of feminism.
In the beginning
The 19th century suffragettes stressed the particular virtues of women. They admit their comparative physical weakness to men. They were at the same time stressing the virtues women as more moral. The argument went: Give them the vote. They will improve our politics. They will purify it from these drunkard husbands; males who are corrupting our country. Their equality was really that women were superior in some respects and inferior in others. Taken together, they and men were, generally speaking, equal.
And then they were equal
In the 20th century, Simone de Beauvoir argued that it is the nature of feminism that the two sexes are identical almost. She couldn’t quite go the whole way. That equality can only be achieved by being similar to or the same as the other sex. This means women were claiming not to be better than men. Rather they were more deserving.
They were more deserving because they have been under represented. In important occupations, ones that receive recognition women were victims. Women now would have a preference so as to achieve the same recognition as men. They’d always received less: “just your mother, your wife.” Very fine. But it doesn’t give you a door in an office with your name on it. So now there would be this all-around equality. Only the children lost.
Equal is not the same
So opportunity was made by force. But it turns out when women go to work; they are more vulnerable than men. They’re subject to sexual harassment. And all kinds of changes must be made in the workplace. Measures have to be taken about sexual harassment.
They were not necessary when men dominated the workplace. Now men’s domination had to be much more carefully mentored, watched over, and measures taken against it. It’s name is reverse discrimination. It was the predecessor of race based affirmative action.
This exposes the kind of contradiction in present-day feminism between the equality of women. Often meaning women are equally as strong as men. And the vulnerability of women that are not equally as strong as men. Those weaker are subject to bullying, inducement to misbehave and generally put upon.
The reversal
It’s an accusation which has something to it. The life of a woman is, in some ways, being constantly, at least under the threat of being put upon. Men push her around. For the most part men who do this are oblivious to what they’re doing . And nastily aware of it on occasion. So you can have either experience in it. And that is part of being a woman, to live that way. One has to understand this as part of the picture. But still it is a contradiction.
So there’s a desire among the feminist women for women to have a safe space. It is where they’re not uncomfortable. Life is not disagreeable to them by having to face or confront contradictory views. This had been very much the method of the success of 20th century feminism. It succeeded by what it called, raising consciousness. The way to raise consciousness was to make men aware of the way in which they “mistreat” women.
And one of the ways to do it is through pronouns. You talk about a doctor and then you sort of unconsciously say, he. It is as if it’s a necessary thing that a doctor has to be a male. This is a way the feminists talk. So we must correct the use of pronouns, and so it was. And it was a success. They really have changed the face of American culture.
Conclusion
This meant that they didn’t really argue in the way that the 19th century suffragettes did. Why it is that women are equal? That was just the assumption. And who were you to stand up against this obvious injustice and pay no attention to it? That’s terrible. The difference is positional. Lawyers will tell you, buy the assumption, lose the argument. That is what has happened. We bought the assumption. But then again, that is the nature of feminism.