NARA, Wikimedia Commons
“Women Against Feminism” is a new social media movement that has sparked a debate across the Internet, leading to discussions on what it means to be a feminist in the 21st century.
Women Against Feminism (WAF) began on Tumblr in 2013 and moved on to Facebook earlier this year. These social media sites feature pictures of girls and women holding (usually hand-written) signs explaining why they are opposed to feminism.
A wide range of reasonings can be seen, from “I like when men say compliments about my body,” to “I don’t need feminism because it reinforces the men as agents/women as victims dichotomy.”
Whether these reasonings seem superficial or profound, there have been several responses to the movement, for the most part arguing that WAF doesn’t understand what feminism is.
“It seems like a lot of these problems these women have with feminism would be solved with a five-minute conversation,” wrote Allegra Ringo of Vice. “I would, however, suggest changing their blog name to Women Who Would Really Benefit From Learning What Feminism Is.” (Note: While this Vice article is acceptable for a wide audience, not all stories on the website meet Deseret News standards)
Emily Shire of The Daily Beast agreed, writing that being a feminist does not mean conforming to any universal set of values, despite what people commonly think.
“People do not realize you can be a feminist and pro-life,” wrote Shire. “You can be a feminist and a stay-at-home mom. You can be a feminist and disagree with the birth control mandate of Obamacare.”
Others believe anti-feminism might be a deeper problem than a lack of understanding.
“I think the WAF are ultimately utilizing the same strategy I (used to utilize): Sisterhood is dangerous. Much safer to uphold the status quo, to say to your oppressor, ‘You know what? I think you're right about this whole feminism thing,’ ” wrote Emily McCombs of the feminist blog xoJane. “Aligning yourself with the dominant group and upholding their ideas is a subconscious attempt to benefit from their power.”
McCombs argued that anti-feminists are primarily taking the stance that they have because they don’t want to be perceived as confrontational, or part of a faction group. They don’t want to promote change, McCombs said.
“But there is hope, because for me at least, anti-feminism was a phase in a process of political awakening,” McCombs wrote. “The very youth of most of the women in these photos is encouraging. They have so much time to learn and grow, to be exposed to different environments and viewpoints, to educate themselves.”
But the idea that WAF members are being told by feminists that they need to educate themselves only proves the anti-feminists’ point, some argue.
“Women Against Feminism should prompt the feminist movement to re-examine its prejudices,” wrote Cathy Young of Newsday. “Instead, too many feminists have responded by mocking the dissenters as stupid, ignorant man-pleasers. Ironically, in doing so, they validate another complaint often heard from the new anti-feminists: that feminism claims to speak for all women and is intolerant of different opinions.”
Anti-feminists don’t feel represented by feminism, Young wrote, and those that argue WAF doesn't really know what feminism is are missing the point.
- Mike Lee: Change is coming to Washington
- Letter: Patriots or sheep?
- Greg Bell: Socialism vs. the safety net
- Carmen Rasmusen Herbert: New Christmas...
- David Blankenhorn: Berlin boasts a wise use...
- Letter: Police not the problem
- Charles Krauthammer: Battle must be fought...
- In our opinion: Utah sees improvement in...
- Letter: Patriots or sheep? 57
- Mike Lee: Change is coming to Washington 44
- Greg Bell: Socialism vs. the safety net 38
- Susan Roylance: Definition of the... 34
- My view: Chaffetz named... 34
- Letter: Patriots or serfs? 33
- Jay Evensen: Cuba not likely to change... 33
- My view: Torture, morality and the laws... 30