A Case Against Calling It Feminism

There is little point in doubting the origins of Feminism. The inherited narrative of women running in front of horses never fails to leave teenage women in awe. As a movement for gender equality, it is true that for many years, its activities were, with reason, exclusively focused on women’s rights. And so, the movement was titled Feminism to best reflect its preoccupation. However, the use of a gender biased word to represent gender egalitarianism seems now to be far from adequate.

Firstly, the flat refusal to rename Feminism must represent one of two equally troubling beliefs. Either, this stubbornness stems from a belief that by definition, men are incapable of being oppressed, or that a key element in the fight for gender egalitarianism is retributive justice. In the first instance, given that men can never be thought of as oppressed, any activity for egalitarianism will ipso facto always be an activity to exclusively promote women’s rights. In the second instance, if men are being oppressed they should have to name their fight for gender egalitarianism with a feminine biased word, which is perfectly acceptable given the historical masculine bias in language. Even a dim wit would scoff at this ‘two wrongs make a right’ logic and the sexism that Feminism allegedly opposes.

Secondly, Feminism invites young men to instantly disengage with it. A good title should represent the driving principle of that which they describe. Other movements are quite capable of grasping the fact that Communism, Anarchism, Secularism and countless others respectively represent the fight for a communist state, anarchy, and a secular state. What would we expect Feminism to represent? Quite understandably, when raised in countries where women are, by law, offered the same opportunities as men, adolescent males expect it to be a movement exclusively about and for women.

How many times do we need to hear “I’m all for gender equality but I don’t call myself a feminist”, before we understand that something is going wrong? Men are arguably deprived of a movement to fight for their issues because feminism at onces owns any claim to this function, whilst seemingly wishing to punish men for centuries of oppression.

It’s also worth mentioning that this change wouldn’t just be in the interest of men. If gender means the sex with which an individual identifies, Feminism will also isolate and exclude an increasing number of genders that need a platform far more than men do.

There will naturally arise the accusation of overlooking the historical struggle of women. This is not the case. All the necessary importance of women’s struggles will be proportionally remembered, accounted for and appreciated in no diminished manner under the title of Gender Egalitarianism. It will even be remembered that the oppression was so one sided that egalitarians were blind to the hypocrisy of feeding their opponents with that which they sought to eradicate. We wouldn’t allow African Americans to enslave white people to balance the scales of oppression, so why reason any differently with women?