The Women's Movement and the Reaction Against It
A Critique By Laure Akai

There is no homogenous women's movement. Right away my title has created a certain ambiguity and rightly so; people have different ideas about what the "women's movement" actually is, not only because of the mental perceptions that are carried over into their conceptions of it, but also beacuse of the ideologies they've met which have claimed to be part of the women's movement.

Feminists can range from the Helen Gurly Browns to the Andrea Dworkins. Trying to redesign feminism to echo your ideological sentiments is of little help; in the end the problems that women face in the world are bigger than what feminism can accomplish because feminism is only a movement of women's liberation, not of human liberation.

Women have for a long time been suffering various problems stemming from gender based bias. The feminist movement was obviously created to help encourage women to fight against this, and therefore its parameters are more or less set to encompass only these struggles. (There may be, say, feminist ecologists, but the ecology is a human issue, and as it is removed from the sphere of gender bias, it cannot fall under the rubric of a feminist issue.) This is probably the least of its weak points.

Feminism is a national liberation movement. Like politically defined national liberation movements, the oppressor is named and the fight is to free the nation (in this case the nation of sisterhood) from its domination. There are obvious problems that arise from this and perhaps it would be best to list them categorically.

1) The idea of homogenous groups of people bearing the same characteristics (and not grouped because of them) is a falsehood.

2) Bearing this in mind, we obviously cannot categorically place people into groups as oppressor and oppressed simply on the basis of their gender.

3) Once we realize that gender bias is encultured we must admit that we are all potential recipients of this enculturation. If we are to assess that different people will react to this in different ways, we will come to the conclusion that some people will embody this to different degrees and others will not. Any woman or man can uphold the status quo or ignore it.

4) Tactics are an issue as separatists exist, offering ideas contrary to mainstream feminism. Separatism has given up on appealing to men as a sensitive portion of our population. Exclusion of men irregardless of their mentalities is unfair to men. The tactics of the feminist movement tend to exclude rather than include men in the process of liberation. Inclusions of men tend to be in the form of accusations in hopes of admissions of guilt, changes of behaviour. (This rarely helps men as many of their problems with themselves, enculturation and other situations go ignored. This often recreates resentment.)

5) Only the most broad issues could be agreed upon in forming a front against oppression.

This doesn't even take into account the fact that women (as well as men) will have to live under hundreds of other forms of domination not even remotely related to gender.

Criticism of feminism also varies. There is criticism that comes from fearful men whose sexist behaviour is threatened to be brought under scrutiny. There are women who have made a successful career for themselves out of being doormats. But there are also criticisms of tendencies in feminist discourse/behaviour that were born in opposition to sex roles. As it would be hard for anybody to accuse me of blindness towards sexism, many people have said for a long time that I should be the one to make this critique.

I think it's shitty that a few of my male friends who have the same opinions are too afraid to express them to any 'feminist' out of fear of being called closet women haters. They may well know that they aren't but might be condemned as such because they have a penis between their legs. Part of the problem in feminist circles is to categorically refuse to listen to the objections of men, even when there is some intelligence to them (which does rarely occur), just because they are men.

As I noted before, we are all potential victims of enculturation. Women however are not strongly criticized by other women for succumbing to this enculturation. The same understanding is not afforded to men. (I am not speaking about sexism in the most overt forms of domination.)

Although I am not now nor have ever been a man I feel that I know enough about some problems males face that I can address a few. The sex roles placed on men are also stringent. "Male privilege" certainly does not belong to every male, and many males find themselves in a position where they feel inadequate. The way that males compensate for this is sometimes more hateful towards women, sometimes not.

Women camouflage their hatred of men and often categorically deny it. Although the typical male exaggerates his vision of the woman seeking power over him--the one that plays mind games, manipulates, uses him, etc.--this does exist and is as equally painful to a man (or another woman) when it happens as when a man does these things to a woman. The tactics are often the same--ranging from withdrawal of affection to verbal abuse, from feeding on someone's insecurities to sexual objectification. This cannot be talked about by feminists because it weakens their clear cut boundaries of who is biologically determined victim and who is oppressor.

Too much of feminist ideology is based in victimization. The victim always has the moral upper hand so once a person becomes a victim it is morally decrepit to suggest that the victim did anything to lend to her/his victimization. With the notion of 'victim' is almost always associated the notion of 'innocent'.

Finally, much of what is forgiven in relations between women and in behaviour of women towards men is misconstrued when men do it. Often this is because there are different conceptions of what is sexist. For example, if I were to say (in the company of men or women) that I would like to get into some guy's pants, the reaction would not be the same as if a man said this of a woman. Some sexual remarkds about women are thought to be degrading only because society views sex as a degrading experience for women.

Insensitivity is not gender exclusive.

As I wrote earlier, much criticism of feminism is brought out by women haters. I find it interesting to listen to these people. Many people I've known who have exhibited misogynistic behaviour were actually men whose psyches were so dependent on the approval of women that when they didn't receive it they exerted their anger instead of internalizing it. Unfortunately, the situation is not that clear cut. Most men (at least where I live, anyway) are not outright women-haters. In fact, most men act in a manner which is consistent with how women think of women.

Sisterhood is not simply undermined by competition for the man. Sisterhood is undermined by the fact that people can have wildly different characters.

Without getting sidetracked (which I could do by discussing why many people are actually happy with the status quo), I'd like to say that when I hear the mildly sexist man with some complaint about a woman, I generally feel uncomfortable about how they present the complaint. I am actually interested in some of these stories, even if only to get a clue as to what bothers men, but when people start accusing all women of the same behaviour as one, I get angry. I often think men must feel the same way when put in that situation.

Then again, if the man starts crying and playing the innocent victim people will feel sorry for him. I guess what they say is true: it's all in the delivery.

Reprinted from Anarchy #31/Winter 1992, page 18. Anticopyright.
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

This is the part where I could go on with a trite little prescription about how we are all interconnected and need to heal each other. Although it's been said many times, there is some sense to that message.

I am a little hesitant about making this critique in these politically conservative times. In no way am I excusing any male person of awful sexist behaviour (if he is guilty of it). But if behaviour is to be scrutinized, it must be done so from all around. Necessarily some defensive men will like my criticism because to them it's all a tit for tat guilt allotment, and the more guilt attached to the actions of women, the better. Fear of giving these defensive people de facto corroboration however did not hold me back from saying what I had to say; they would continue on without me. This critique was meant as an introduction to the discussion of improving the equilibium between men and women. Readers are encouraged to make further observations and comments.