Feminism: The moral voice?

[Valenteenah.]

Being an avid reader of newspapers and articles published both by the established and ‘alternative’ media; I have noticed a rather fascinating trend. Today’s emerging moral baton-holders all seem to be feminists. It occurs to me that modern feminism has become the one remaining upholder of decency and morality in the West.

 

The people you see most protesting against the revolting (and decidedly misogynistic) images and ideas promoted by popular culture, other than religious groups, tend to be feminists. Most of the writers advocating for public decency and human dignity also tend to be feminists. How come, I ask myself? How have Feminists, who have invariably been portrayed as sad lesbians suffering from penis envy who believe they can appropriate men’s God-given status, come to be the only people taking a stand against the smut and trash sweeping these societies?

 

I know this must be killing those of you who foam at the mouth at the mere mention of the F-word, but do feminists have something to contribute to society after all?

 

Below is a rather smart and thought-provoking article written by a young teen in response to some moronic remarks made by a popular radio-personality.

 

Enjoy.

[Valenteenah.]

Attention Seeker

 

The Radio 1 broadcaster Sara Cox recently complained about not getting whistled at and "leched" after by men in the steet. Rosa wonders what affect her example is having on young women and takes issue with Cox's insistence that there is "no such thing as unwanted attention".

 

 

Ah, let us all pity poor Sara Cox, radio broadcaster who, in a column for the Guardian supplement G2 on the 14th of June [i've Still Got It], admitted that one of the things she was refusing to accept about motherhood was the fact that men no longer whistle as she walks past the building site or the vans at traffic lights, just because she’s hidden behind her newborn daughter.

 

I must admit that I know very little about Sara Cox, and I’ve never heard her radio show. So I began to read her article with an open mind, and even when I saw the heading, “Just because I’m 30 and pushing a pram doesn’t mean I don’t want men to whistle and lech after me†I was merely mildly intrigued as to what she had to say. And it was interesting, not because I especially care what she thinks, but because her view reflects the attitude many young women take, which, although it’s not necessarily ‘anti-feminist’, is an attitude that certainly holds feminism back.

 

It’s part of this ladette culture that you see in the nightclubs and bars late every night in town. They drink beer to excess, flirt and dance with men as if the world is about to end, and then quite simply throw up in the middle of the street, right next to the pissing blokes. Many consider it a backlash of lad culture, because these women, although not at all to be considered submissive, and most certainly more empowered than the women of decades ago, are still conforming to the degrading culture of the ‘lad’ that many contemporary feminists are fighting to withstand. Often throwing themselves at men and taking pride in the fact that strangers find them so sexually alluring that they have to draw attention to it in public, it is this aspect of ladette culture that is evident in the article by Sara Cox, and it is this that really irks me.

 

The model-turned-broadcaster admits right at the beginning that to enjoy being leered at by complete strangers is, “(I know it’s) pathetic, shallow as a teaspoon and just a touch vain†and yet continues to announce that she is proud of this. This is something I’m coming across more and more often these days, where women (and they always seem to be women) will happily admit that they act pathetically and are very shallow, and yet not only do they continue on in this way, but they also take pride, pride in this quality of their personality. Since when is being shallow and pathetic seen as a good thing?!

 

The answer is since women began adapting to the rise in lad culture over the past few decades, which in itself is considered a backlash of feminism. It’s been a gradual process, and has coincided with the rise in popularity of the lad magazines (such as Nuts and Zoo) that populate the shelves in shops, and ever since men took that it was perfectly acceptable to make it quite clear in public, often using obscene language and gestures, exactly what they want some women to do with them.

 

Admittedly, Sara Cox does not regard “raunchy requests†and “drooling†as at all desirable, but accepts that whistling is somehow ‘alright’, despite the fact that the same thoughts and motives are behind it. However, I could not judge her, and for a brief moment I felt something close to admiration for the woman who had quite shamelessly picked her nose to ward off the advances of “two men of definite dad-age in the car next to mine.†But that was until I read the next part, where the young mother began to notice a pattern.

 

It was to do with her daughter. When walking along childless, she noticed that she could still get the occasional whistle, even if her appearance was less than her normal well-groomed self. But when accompanied by baby Lola, even with “swaying buttocks snugly hugged by tight denim, hair swishing like a thoroughbred’s tail and just a hint of cleavage, steeling myself for the deafening catcalls as I pass the building site…†shock, horror!, not one man will whistle. Not only that, but she seems quite disappointed by it, even comparing it to “when a funeral cortege drives by, they lower their eyes as if mourning the passing of my whistlebility.â€

 

But now it’s my turn to be stunned. Did she really just compare the worth of her own apparent attractiveness to that of a human life?! Does her ‘whistlebility’ really mean so much to her?! How is it that such a seemingly headstrong young woman can really value the way in which strangers make it clear how little they value her as a human being? Because that’s what it’s all about. We all know that men don’t whistle at you because they think you might be an interesting/kind/sensitive/funny person to get to know, they do it because they view you as a sexual object, and they want you to know that. And they do it not to make you feel good about yourself but to fit in with the lads, announcing to the whole world exactly what it is about you that makes them want to sleep with you.

 

Of course, everyone is different, and I’m in no position to tell anyone what to think or how to behave. But it does worry me to see exactly how integrated within our society this tendency is. Sara Cox hosts a radio show every Saturday and Sunday on Radio 1, broadcasting to a vast number of listeners, most of whom are of the younger generation. When what young women really need are decent role models, this is what is available? How are we expected to defy the sexist male attitude that sees women as objects to be admired, when all we get from those women in the media is a happy declaration that being whistled at in the street is a Good Thing? Surely we should be challenging this view, not accepting it!

 

And what about her daughter? Does she want her daughter to grow up believing that to be valued you must be attractive to men? After all, this is the purpose of the female sex isn’t it? This is what they want and we should all be glad for being able to please. To parade in front of men, teasing them and flirting with them, hoping against hope that they’ll notice us, because otherwise our worth will simply count for nothing. Because, according to her, “there’s no such thing as unwanted attention.†This is a simple call to all men that to act as sexist as they want in front of children.

 

As Naomi Wolf once said, “To live in a culture in which women are routinely naked where men aren’t is to learn inequality in little ways all along,†and isn’t this just another ‘little way’ in which the younger generation are learning inequality? Frankly, I think Sara should be glad that the men who work on the building site near her are being so considerate by refraining from whistling, because there are many women out there who are still intimidated by those who couldn’t care less that you’re walking with your children. It doesn’t take long to find stories on message boards on the internet of women all over the world who suffer the indignity and humiliation in front of their children, after men have shouted obscenities or treated them with less than respect, simply because of their gender.

 

And even for women without children, they should not be treated as if they are merely objects of desire. I’m fine with those who think these things about passing strangers, but when you voice those opinions or desires in such an intimidating way, you’re degrading the one you’re desiring, and taking away their dignity. For a broadcaster to declare that women should be proud of their ability to attract the attention of men (who, incidentally, should be concentrating on their building work), is not only reinforcing the stereotypes of male sand females that drives the wedge between the sexes in even deeper, but it’s also patronising and also dangerously damaging to the feminist movement.

 

Street harassment is a hot topic for feminists, and a cause of great annoyance. But for me, the fact that it was a young woman openly praising this trend in our culture, was what made the article surprising and worrying. I can’t help but wonder what effect this has on the woman’s audience, on the younger generation, who are more likely to be influenced by the media’s misconception and often degrading treatment of women. And surely this cannot help the situation.

 

And Sara can say all she wants about how fabulous it is to be noticed and to receive attention for such shallow reasons, and perhaps for some women she speaks the truth, but her last words, "there's no such thing as unwanted attention", are so final, so decisive, it hands the power back to the men. They still have the upper hand, and now they have permission to continue in their ways. But she’s wrong. Because believe it or not, there is such a thing as unwanted attention, even if women like her have no concept of it.

 

By Rosa,

6th form student

Source

[Mariana]

Any view other than Sara Cox's would have been a moral stand.

 

Can I ask why your on a feminist website?

[Baashi]

Who, feminists! a moral voice? Well, may be! Wait yeah I do have a right to take a maternal leave; an awesome privilege enjoyed by married employees with children :cool: . Pundits say it was feminists' initiative that successfully highlighted the need for family-friendly work place. In addition, feminists took part in the fight for social justice - issues such as sexual harassment, equal pay, maternity leave, and domestic violence. In some cases, feminists led the fight.

 

However, one would be hard pressed to assert that the very group that introduced, advocated, and championed sexual revolution, abortion, and queerism have a morality to their madness. Yes, madness I said! And I do acknowledge the gender inequality and gender oppression in what essentially can be referred to a patriarchal society. Nevertheless to single out one oppression among many (race, class, etc) and elevate it to religion-like fervor with ant-male prejudice defeats the purposes and in some cases borders madness.

 

By_the_way, I was very careful not to foam in the mouth ala she-camel .

[Socod_badne]

Aeronwan,

 

What is feminism? It is a term with variegated meanings. But the broadest meaning I think is this: equal treatment among the opposite sexes before Religion, Law and Society.

 

Under that definition, feminism-- in moderation -- CAN be a moral force. What is amoral about equality?

 

However, there are couple of things I disagree with in your first post which I'll comment on later.

[Johnny B]

Originally posted by Baashi:

By_the_way, I was very careful not to foam in the mouth ala she-camel

.

I just like my graad !!

A feminist at her best can ONLY get macho enough to roll her own tampongs .(just a metaphor)

 

Aeronwen, sooner or later someone is gonna toss a verse or two at you, so i thought i better wrap ya with this cost-effective plastic bag project of mine.

 

Rosa(Lilith ),the most important femme fatale of mankind lore.

God creates Adam and Rosa from the same dust of the earth and at the same time

Now follow closely because this is where it starts to get confusing, and where the debate rages even with scholars of the SOL.

When the time comes to engage in coitus and fulfill the first commandment

Rosa demands that she be allowed to straddle Adam and be on top,a proposition that Adam vehemently refuses, in response to which Rosa curses Adam and his seed and vows to steal the seed of mankind forever (Rosa is blamed for all nocturnal emissions, aka wet dreams). It is at this point that God sees Adam is alone and decides that it is not good for him to be alone and creates Eve(Sara Cox) from his body as a servant and helpmeet to him.

 

Now, can anyone demand a more sorbile of it for easy consumption?

[Valenteenah.]

Hi all,

 

LoL @ Johhny...behave.

 

 

Baashi,

 

I believe there's more to feminism than that. For millions of women, feminism isn't about sexual revolution, abortion or queerism. It is about simple survival. However, that's beside the point. The focus of the thread isn't to debate the philosophy of feminism per se. It is to discuss the possibility that feminists may have inadvertently become the remaining activists for public morality.

 

I have read so many articles discussing the fraying fabric of society as well as the negative impact of popular culture (sex, drugs and rock & roll). And I am always surprised to learn that the authors are feminists. Isn't that interesting? The only people who seem to care about these issues being feminists? Those who, according to so many people, should be glorifying in these 'freedoms'?

 

Makes you think, doesn't it?

 

 

Can I ask why your on a feminist website?

You could say I am attracted to the dark side.

 

 

[Cara.]

Feminists have always been a moral force in the world.

 

In the industrial revolution, when young children were being exploited in factories, feminists raised hell.

 

In the US, feminists (black and white) numbered among the earliest and most vocal abolitionists.

 

Feminists "humanized" corporations (maternal leave is the least of their legacy; look into the history of minimum wages and labor unions).

 

Feminists begat the welfare state.

 

Feminists have been the leaders in environmentalism, international aid, healthcare, and education.

 

Baashi bemoans the sexual revolution. In parts of the world, where unending pregnancy and childbirth kills mothers and orphans children daily, where teenage girls are "given" in marriage to married men old enough to be their grandfathers so that they too can partake of the circle of childbirth and childdeath, a little sexual revolution wouldn't go amiss.

[Animal Farm]

I think often the dominant reading in which feminists get in the mainstream media is that they’re all radical, there are practical feminists. Within feminism there are ideological divisions, for example, liberal feminists, conservative feminists, Marxist feminists, and so forth. So it depends on which reading we take of the term feminism, and it depends on the context in which the term is used.

 

For example the objectification of women in advertising is clearly wrong, because it’s clearly wrong to see women half naked, when they should be covered up, hence, this is a conservative reading of feminist thought. Within this particular issue there are differing positions held by liberal and radical feminists.

 

We have to be careful the way we label people into categories, the Nazi’s did it and we can see how that turned out. There’s nothing wrong with being a feminist, but rather what should matter is whether that person is deploying a particular perspective. If there is a sister who is against the depiction of women, or if she is advocates the basic rights of women to improve their social status, then there is nothing wrong with that.

 

Even rappers, the arch nemeses of feminists occasionally support feminist issues. In the past they did when they became accomplished, like 2 Pac in his music, but when young artists such as Sunny advocate female issues, then I’d say feminists made progress.

 

Sunny feat. Latif – Babygirl

 

You should watch Killing Us Softly 3, I saw this movie today in my Digital Media Production Class, its funny, yet serious. The talks about the depiction of women in advertising, the video is kind of old, but still relevant.

 

On thing that is unnerving about feminists is their ability to disregard men from other cultures, they have they this preconceived notions of other cultures, that they are womanizers, especially Muslim men, in that sense they are narrow-minded, and they often jump to conclusions. When women have more rights within the institution of marriage then men, and they often have a hard time believing this.

 

PS Disregard my signature, it was just a little Lil Wayne freestyle quote, not mine.

[Baluug]

Originally posted by Callypso:

Baashi bemoans the sexual revolution. In parts of the world, where unending pregnancy and childbirth kills mothers and orphans children daily, where teenage girls are "given" in marriage to married men old enough to be their grandfathers so that they too can partake of the circle of childbirth and childdeath, a little sexual revolution wouldn't go amiss.

Anything that is planned by Allah SWT to happen,will happen.We have no choice.

As for the teenage girls being given to middle-aged men,they cannot be married without their permission.So if they are being forced into marriage against their will,then the marriage is not halal.This is no "sexual revolution",this is halal marriage.They are not going around and screwing whoever they want like the "revolution" Baashi is talking about.

[Kruella]

Well I don't think it has to do with feminism.... it comes down to the spirit of activism and leadership. When it comes to morality anyone with a grain of sincerity and God given intelligence can advocate for it. Half of those who prescribe to the feminist movement are the proverbial bra-burning-dyke-loving-men-hating-butch-looking types (I should know, I work with them). The other half constitute of truly GREAT activists who are relentlessly in pursuit of equity and social justice. It’s not the feminists who are the only voices of morality rather it is the non-conformists, the seekers of truth and justice, namely those who tend to shake things up. The way I see it, there are 3 categories of people in regards to the debate of morality. There are those who carry the torch, those who run after those carrying the torch, and those sitting in the side lines wallowing in the dirt. Their titles, their faiths, their alliances are inconsequential because in the end morality is a universal value.

 

Salamz

[Valenteenah.]

^ You make a valid point. :cool:

 

 

Callypso,

 

You're quite right. Feminists have been at the forefront of every struggle, be it Women's, Civil, Worker's, Children's or Refugee rights and everything in between.

[NGONGE]

[Nephissa]

^ God bless her soul. A down-to-earth person whose courage helped to make a difference in the lives of many. A woman we should all emulate!

[Cara.]

Liibaan:

 

Anything that is planned by Allah SWT to happen,will happen.We have no choice.

Really? None at all?

 

As for the teenage girls being given to middle-aged men,they cannot be married without their permission.

I thought they would have no choice, as per your first comment?

 

This is no "sexual revolution",this is halal marriage.They are not going around and screwing whoever they want like the "revolution" Baashi is talking about.

Well, the concept of "halal marriage" has been around for some time, and made little difference in the lifes of countless girls. Effective contraceptives, on the other, have made a huge difference in the few decades since they were introduced.