Faux feminism
By
Indira Dammu |
IDS
POSTED AT
11:00 PM ON Sep. 2, 2008
| PRINT |
Email
| SHARE
| COMMENTS (9)
To say that Senator John McCain has a problem with women is an understatement. The Republican presidential candidate has recommended his wife for a topless biker pageant, joked about rape and even expressed his opposition to legislation seeking equal pay for women. So perhaps it was a shrewd move when the senator recently picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate in an effort to humanize him. Of course, it helps with the supposedly disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters, too, or at least that’s the calculation here.
At first glance, both women have much in common – they are smart and independent professionals who have juggled both family obligations and careers. Unfortunately for Palin, that’s where the similarities end. For one, Palin is strongly opposed to abortion. She has been a member of Feminists for Life, a rabidly anti-choice “feminist” group since 2006. The organization professes the rejection of violence and discrimination of violence while promoting “better choices” for women. As it turns out, this choice doesn’t include abortion.
Faux-feminists like Palin have been masterful at appropriating the word “choice,” casting it as a catchall phrase for abortion. In reality, “choice” has less to do with abortion and more to do with giving women the tools to make their own bodily decisions. Indeed, agency and autonomy are at the core of reproductive rights, and this is why I just can’t understand the reasoning behind calling oneself a “pro-life” feminist. The truth is, there is no such thing.
Such confusion about the pro-choice agenda and feminism in general is nothing new. Much of it is our own doing – feminism is one of the few movements that calls for some ambiguity and relativity. This degree of variance has deftly been exploited by faux-feminists, making this beloved movement utterly incomprehensible nowadays.
Everything from “Sex and the City” to the Pussycat Dolls has been labeled a statement in empowerment and girl power. And, while I am certainly not an authority on feminism, I can assure you that neither would make Betty Freidan proud.
Perhaps the nomination of Palin is a good thing because it allows me to clear up a few misconceptions about feminism. Contrary to anti-feminist propaganda, the movement has never been about elevating women’s rights above men. Moreover, feminism is not about promoting equality between the sexes. In fact, the movement seeks to guarantee only equal opportunity and access for women – there’s a difference between the two.
Lastly, a message to all Republicans – appointing strong women like Carly Fiorina and Palin to deliver anti-woman messages doesn’t make your party platform agenda any more legitimate. The Republican Party hasn’t been very good to women, so forgive my skepticism when I hear them talk about glass ceilings and empowerment. Palin’s nomination is a giant step backward for women everywhere, and we shouldn’t have to pretend otherwise.