The history of feminism... let's see how far we've come

Thus far, the United States has witnessed two waves of feminism, although it is debatable if we are currently in the presence of a third and it is certainly unknown how many waves there will be before we can consider the term feminism an unnecessary one. According to Ellen Dubois, the first wave occurred from 1835 to 1920, culminating in a woman’s right to vote, and the second began sometime in the mid 1960s. Interestingly enough, both waves were initiated as a result of other reform movements: the abolitionist movement of the 19^th century and the civil rights movement of the 20^th. When attempting to join such reform movements, women began to recognize they were not being treated as political equals. Within the group efforts, women were still expected to fulfill purely “feminine roles”—women could be the background and organizational workers of the movement, but the decisions and the recognition were purely for men. Isn’t it ironic that in the midst of fighting for racial equality, gender equality could still be ignored? When the 14^th Amendment was finally passed, it was restricted to those of the male sex, a formal exclusion of half the population! What frightens me is that, in many regards, I still believe women are still seen in the same light. It is the exception, and not the rule, that a woman is the CEO or decision maker of a company. According to stereotypical gender roles, women still fulfill the administrative and organizational roles that they were relegated to during these movements. Since other reform movements prompted the first two waves of feminism, what will provide the impetus for future waves?

Written in 1848 during the first wave of feminism referenced by Dubois, the Declaration of the Seneca Falls Convention was modeled after the US Declaration of Independence and demanded that women be afforded equal rights as all other individuals. The Declaration cites several crimes committed by men against women: inability to vote, lack of representation in government, monopolization of all profitable employments, denial of higher education, etc. Again, some of these issues are still issues that we face today, over 150 years later! Yes, women have been given the right to vote and female politicians do exist, but have we ever had a female president? Do we have equal representation in government? No. Is there equality in the workplace, either in terms of representation or in terms of pay? No. Divorce and property laws, among others, have changed, but is this enough? I do not want to underscore the achievements of the first two waves of feminism, but looking back at the demands of women then as compared to now unsettles me. How far have we really come? The Declaration of Sentiments reads “he has endeavored, in every way that he could, to destroy her confidence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life.” While this is certainly strongly worded, it still rings true to me in terms of today’s society. Women’s self confidence is greatly shattered by the images of the ideal woman and her body portrayed by the media and applauded by men (think about plastic surgery, anorexia, etc.). Women are still fighting to break into certain professions and in other situations, find themselves forced into a life of dependency when they are asked to remain at home as mothers and housewives. With a turn into raunch culture, the situation is certainly different in many ways from 150 years ago, but the many of the same underlying issues are still relevant.

It is also important to note that splits within the feminist movement may have made it more difficult to mobilize forces and create effective change. A few years later in 1851 Sojourner Truth asks, “Ain’t I a woman?” in reference to all the supposed differences between men and women that her personal experiences have refuted. Unlike her white female counterparts, Sojourner Truth had been forced to work and labor (which she did as successfully as her male counterparts!); she had not lived that same protected and sheltered life that white housewives had. White females were asking not to sexually objectified, but black females were viewed as sexless. So, with different issues facing them, it was difficult to fight as a cohesive unit and some women were forced to choose an identity and participate in either the civil rights or feminist movement. Other divisions would also occur in the feminist movement over the years (anti or pro-porn, liberal or radical feminists, etc.) and in some circumstances likely made it more difficult to achieve their goals. Again, these ideas bring me back to the two questions I always ask (although I am trying not to be a pessimist!): Where is the sisterhood and solidarity between women? And how far have we really come?

Have your CAKE, and eat it too

One of the main topics in Levy's second chapter, "The Future that Never Happened," concerns a group that throws parties where women have the "freedom" to experiment with their sexuality in public, dancing on tables in little to no clothing as a display of "feminism in action." The ironic part of this organization is that it is not just for women to rip off their clothes and have a good time with one another, but it's also open to men, who watch this type of "feminism," play out their fantasies. Levy says, "many of the conflicts between the women's liberation movement and the sexual revolution and within the women's movement itself were left unresolved thirty years ago...what we are seeing today is the residue of that confusion" (Levy 74).

What Levy is referring to thirty years ago is what Alice Echols calls the "woman question." Around the 1960's, organizations such as the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) ran parallel to the fight for women's rights. Unfortunately, however, these organizations experienced sexism within the groups; men were often in charge and women were put on the backburner. As one women pointed out, "[w]omen were effective, but men were the stars." Conflicts also arose when white women became involved with black men. Their options became limited to being labelled either loose or racist, depending on whether or not they accepted a black man's advance.

These issues are still played out today. Even with more "freedom," women still feel the need to put on a show for men; men are still in charge of the movement. Similar to how women were once labelled either racist or loose, today we can choose between loose or the "innocent school girl." All the mistakes of the past are still present in some form, and it is up to women to take the reigns away from men, whether it be in their role in organizations for women's rights or simply in the way our minds work. Organizations like CAKE that claim to be "feminism in action," are only for one thing: attention. Women CRAVE male attention, and because of that, men continue to feel empowered and superior to their female counterparts. How can we change the way women think so that they are fulfilled simply because they like themselves? Because they feel good about who they are and what they do, and not because a man thinks they are attractive?

Betty Friedan discusses the "problem that has no name," the idea in the 50's and 60's that women were priviledged to be able to stay home and take care of their children, while their husbands brought home the bacon. Many women found themselves depressed and alone thinking "is this all?" and also feeling guilty for that thought. I feel as though many women still feel that way. We aren't necessarily stuck in homes with children at early ages, but we are still expected to act certain ways regardless of our career roles. Back to Katie Couric...despite the fact that she is a successful woman and well respected, she still felt the need to show some skin on TV to feel accepted as a women. To some extent, we are still stuck in that box.

It gets confusing to have all this material saying different things. We don't want to be stuck at home, but we're mad at our fellow females for going out and flaunting their goodies too. We don't want to stay home, but we make mothers feel bad for leaving their kids alone. It makes for a very narrow definition of what a feminist is, and that's never good. I think the real problem isn't in the actions but in the mindsets. If women want to dance on tables with mini skirts and bras then do it...do whatever you want to do. Become a CEO and don't take any shit from your employees. If you want to be a stay at home mom and spend your days making finger paintings, more power to you. Whatever you do, do it for yourself, not for the men.

One a smaller scale, women at Colgate are feeding into the nonsense. I'm not saying that it is all our fault, because the box exists here...but it is within our reach to change it. Freidan said the problem was also, "and finally, dismissed by shrugging that there are no solutions: this is what being a woman means, and what is wrong with American women that they can't accept their role gracefully?" We can't shrug it off. Dress for yourself, not for the men. Take a weekend and boycott a frat party for a girls night out. Go out with your girlfriends and go HOME with your girlfriends too. Don't settle for a hookup, hold out for a boyfriend. Easier said than done, but change happens on a small level before it can become a revolution.

Shed Sexism NOT Your Shirt

Strippers, pasties, lap dance, babes, tight tiny uniforms, unclothed. These are the words that I encountered as I read page one of Ariel Levy’s Female Chauvinist Pigs. However, they are not just words, but words to describe some women today. I had to put down the book for a second, and think to myself that maybe we’re no longer moving forward in the feminist movement, but rather backward. Are women enhancing sexism?

Today, women can essentially do everything that men can do. But by wearing clothes that practically expose everything, are women enhancing the stereotype that women are simply sex? Are we supporting the negative way in which some men view us by bringing ourselves down to the way in which we would like men to see us?

The whole girls-gone-wild phenomenon raises exponential questions. While it may be liberating for the three seconds you flash someone, you’ll wake up the next morning regretting what you did. And when some bro yells, “What’s your problem? Just show them your tits,” a woman should not feel belittled and certainly should not feel the need to listen to the perverted man. Women today need to stand up, and yell just as loudly as the bro who said, “Just show them your tits,” NO. Men need to know that women are not some product, not something that they can control. Today, women are strong, independent, and determined. We are on a mission for equality.

Women participate in all kinds of sports from tee-ball to high school athletics to collegiate competition and even the Olympics and professional leagues like the WNBA. It is mortifying that female Olympians such as Amy Acuff, Amanda Beard, and Haley Clark would appear naked in a magazine such as Playboy or FHM. With these pictures, many who view them will forget what these women’s true talents are and they will simply become an image pleasing to the naked eye. The pictures turn the women into one thing, sex. Their athletic skills are masked by their nudity. It’s heartbreaking that naked pictures of women hold a higher standing in society today than Olympians and politicians. I play varsity field hockey here at Colgate and I know that I would always want to be known for my athleticism and never in a million years for my body. We should be embracing our unique talents, not taking off our clothes and hiding our many skills. If we continue to undress, we’re enhancing the sexist movement rather than the feminist movement.

Today, lots of women strive for big boobs, big lips, tiny waists, skimpy clothes and mountains of make-up. Many will do whatever it takes to be visually appealing, sexy, or hot. The VH1 TV show, “For the Love of Ray J,” is about a young R&B star looking for love. Women are chosen for the show and then feel the need to completely change who they are in order to make Ray J fall in love with them. They will change their appearance, their personality, everything about themselves if they even slightly believe that the change will make it easier for Ray J to fall in love with them. We can’t go changing ourselves to please men; it is just proving that they have power over us. We should not need to be sexy in order to be worthwhile; we should be worthwhile no matter what. Women should change themselves for no one but themselves.

Our reflex should not be to take our clothes off; our reflex should be to be who we are--women. We are not in the post-women’s movement; the movement is only beginning.

Clip from "For The Love of Ray J"

http://www.vh1.com/video/play.jhtml?id=1604934&vid=341160