Feminism Goes to Seed
By Rebecca Merrill Groothuis
[Rebecca Merrill Groothuis is the author
of Good News for Women: A Biblical Picture of Gender Equality (Baker
Books, 1997) and Women Caught in the Conflict: The Culture War Between
traditionalism and Feminism (Wipf and Stock, 1997). Her web page is:
www.gospelcom.net/ivpress/groothuis.]
Modern feminism, which has always left a
great deal to be desired, had at least one legitimate concept at its
inception in the 1960s and 1970s, namely, the notion that women, as well
as men, should have the opportunity to aspire to be all that they can be;
it should not be assumed that the fixed essence of femaleness is being in
the service of a man. But note that at the root of this eminently
reasonable claim is the quintessentially feminist beef that women have
always ended up with a mere sliver of the pie of cultural power. Aha! says
the antifeminist, all this talk of women using their talents to the full
for the general good is a mere rhetorical cover for their real agenda of
gaining the upper hand over men upsetting the balance of power in society
at large and in personal relationships. This prospect, of course,
terrifies the average man.
Behind the scenes here, manipulating many of these views and concerns like
puppets on strings, is the primitive power of the female body over the
male. Women and men have always been aware of this sometimes unsavory fact
of life. What changes across cultures and history is the use to which this
fact of life is put. In times past, when men felt obligated to restrain
themselves for the sake of moral virtue and/or social order, those men who
found this to be a formidable project (that is to say, most men) fell back
on the venerable solution of culturally subjugating women; men evidently
figured that if they had power over women, women would not have power over
them.
But no matter. Women have always adapted to this arrangement by wielding
their sexual power over men in covert, manipulative ways in order to get
men to do what they want men to do for them. Women's submission is often
marketed in conservative religious circles as useful for just this
purpose: make him feel like he's the big, strong man in charge and he'll
do anything for you. Feminine wiles in Christian guise.
The essence of feminism is a rejection of this ageold arrangement and an
affirmation of women's right to exercise power directly. One feminism
differs from another in terms of what sort of power women exercise in what
way, and to what purpose. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries,
feminist women wanted to exercise political power by voting, as men do. In
the 1960s and 1970s, they wanted to exercise personal power by pursuing
the vocation of their choice, as men do. Much of feminism today in
apparent capitulation to the pornographic American culture of the last
decade has devolved into the simple, sordid matter of women freely
flaunting their sexual power over men. In our sexually careless society,
little impetus remains on the part of either men or women to control or
contain the power of female sexuality.
This is feminism at its worst: the power of "the second sex"
reduced to the power of sex. It is as antifeminist as it can get and still
be reckoned feminist. It is antifeminist in that as in all traditional
cultures women are being defined as sexual beings, and men as human
beings. It is feminist in that women are ostensibly doing what they want
to do (overtly exercising their sexual power), not what they must do in
order to accommodate and negotiate the constraints of a male power
structure (standard procedure for women in prefeminist or antifeminist
cultures). Such a "feminism," however, easily boils down to
women using their sexual power in order to gain some secondary access to
the cultural power society normally reserved for men. It is a
"feminism' that serves well the fundamental agenda of that
unconquerable deity, the male ego.
Until recently in modern American society, there have been two categories
of women outside that of the full-time homemaker: the professional career
woman and the bimbo, the sex siren. Those two categories, previously
assumed to be mutually exclusive, have now merged to form the new feminist
ideal: the bimbo career woman, with emphasis on the bimbo. The
significance of the career is seen primarily in terms of the opportunities
it provides for a woman to have a high-powered sex life, without being
financially dependent on her sex partner(s). The popular media are replete
with such preposterous heroines, from Ally McBeal (unreal TV character) to
Monica Lewinsky (surreal real-life character).
This is feminism gone to seed-along with the rest of our culturally
exhausted postmodern society. The reasoning is: "Nothing means
anything anymore. All that remains is recycled silliness. So just enjoy
asserting your power-sexual power, that is, the only power women get to
have. And don't hesitate to use it as a weapon if that's what makes you
feel personally empowered."
But the power of postfeminism is fallacious. Women who seek to exercise
power by flaunting their sexual power-whether in actual promiscuity or
merely in clothing themselves immodestly-end up losing power, the power
that comes from possessing personal integrity and winning the respect of
both women and men.
Updated Wednesday, December 27, 2000
|