Backlash Against the Feminist Movement - Essay Example

Backlash Against the Feminist Movement The feminist movement is often portrayed as inherently radical in nature. This portrayal is not entirely prejudicial as the movement has often adopted radical rhetoric in its presentation of its case for gender equality. A consequence of the said radicalism has been the so-called "backlash" against the feminist movement, culminating in the reluctance of Canadian women to identify themselves as feminists or, indeed, to openly and publicly embrace the movement (Feminism and I am not a feminist, 2008, p. 6). The backlash against the feminist movement and the reluctance of Canadian women to identify themselves with feminist does not mean to imply a stance against gender equality, however. The backlash against feminism is an interesting and complex phenomenon. The backlash, according to Trimble's analysis of the phenomenon (cited in Feminism and I am not a feminist, 2008, p. 12), "was born out of the rise of neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism in the 1980s and 1990s." At that point in time, the popular belief was that the movement had successfully accomplished its primary objectives and that Canadian women, as a consequence, had attained a status of absolute equality with males. Women had attained the basic rights for which they had agitated and fought. As the movement had been initiated by the absence of these rights and its goal had been the attainment of these rights, their accomplishment was interpreted as a successful conclusion to the movement. As such, the backlash refers, not to the right of women to equality or their earlier struggle for the attainment of equality, but to the current, "third wave" of feminism (p. 12). The backlash, in other words, is directed against feminism as a socio-political and ideological movement. Canadian women have not, historically, embraced feminism. According to Trimble, O'Neil and Faludi (cited in Feminism and I am not a feminist, 2008, pp. 6-7), the feminist movement has, to a large degree, failed to capture Canadian imagination or take root in popular culture. It is within the context of the stated that Trimble's survey results can best be understood. As she questioned her Canadian female students on their identification with the feminist movement, she found that only 12% definitely identified themselves with the movement. This is not simply expressive of the backlash against feminism but of popular rejection of radicalism, coupled with the certitude of gender equality. Quite simply stated, gender equality is an unquestionable principle in Canada and the equality of the sexes is neither contested nor debated. The implication here is that Canadian women do not feel that they have to embrace feminism in order to attain equality and do not embrace it because they are averse to radicalism. From a personal perspective, feminism is not something which I identify with. While I most definitely understand the roots of the movement and acknowledge that were it not for the earlier generations of feminists, I would not be enjoying the freedoms which I take for granted today, I do not understand its present-day purposes or motives. Men and women are equal and this is something which we, as women, no longer need to argue or to prove. The notion that we must constantly prove and argue our equality does not reflect positively on us as a gender and, subjectively speaking, is somewhat demeaning. It seems to say that we are not persuaded of our own equality and therefore, need to constantly remind ourselves and others of it. It is, thus, that I see myself as a human rights advocate but not a feminist. I do not question the equality of the sexes and do not assume that we are not equal. Instead, I question equality between people and whether, in fact, all people, irrespective of colour, class, religion or ethnic heritage, are treated and regarded as equal. As I believe they should, and must, be, I support human rights but not feminism. Royal Commission on the Status of Women The Royal Commission on the Status of Women was established in 1967. The rationale behind the formation of this commission was the investigation of female political representation in Canada and whether political representation levels were adequate or not. While the formation of the Commission, in and by itself, indicates a general awareness of the inadequacy of female political representation levels, the Commission's work was very important. Its importance stems from the fact that it investigated the reasons behind unacceptable representation levels, possible strategies for the effective confrontation of the female representation and political participation deficit and, in so doing, furnished the Canadian feminist movement with its impetus. Indeed, it would hardly be an exaggeration were one to posit the claim that the work of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women was tremendously important to the Canadian feminist movement. The Commission was established to investigate the role of Canadian women in politics. The purpose of the Commission and the authorities awarded it are best understood if the concept of Royal Commissions is first defined and their role is historically contextualised. As Kernaghan and Seigal (1999, p. 144 cited in Ride the wave, 2008, p. 22), Royal Commissions are "temporary organizations created to investigate either specific incidents or general policy concerns and report to government." An overview of Canadian history indicates that Royal Commissions have traditionally been established for the purposes of gathering information deemed essential for the identification of policy approaches to a particular problem or concern. In direct relation to the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, the concern was the degree to which women were awarded political participation in Canadian political life and, if not, what may be done to correct the problem. The commission in question has been subjected to rather strenuous criticisms. Writing more than three decades later, Arscott (1998, cited in Ride the wave, 2008, p. 22) criticizes the Commission's limited focus and the scope of its concerns. As she notes, the commission primarily focused on the fact that "too few women sought and gained entry into public life" and not on whether the socio-political environment was conducive to female participation in politics (Arscott, 1998, cited in Ride the wave, 2008, p. 22). Even if that were the case, this does not detract from the importance of the commission or the contribution it made to the Canadian feminist movement. Quite simply stated, in its investigation of the defined concern, the commission concluded that women were not adequately represented and did not engage in public political participation. It, accordingly, forwarded a set of important recommendations for the reversal of the situation. These recommendations, insofar as they were designed to incite female participation in Canadian political life, did two things. The first was the creation of awareness regarding the imperatives of female participation and the second was the provision of recommendations designed, if implemented, to achieve the stated objective. It is, thus, that the commission's findings were important to the Canadian feminist movement. As may have been inferred from the foregoing discussion, the importance of the Commission's findings to the Canadian feminist movement can hardly be minimized. The commission drew public attention to a problem which was contributing to gender inequality and, in so doing, provided the feminist movement with semi-official endorsement to agitate for participation. It also recruited the aid of government bodies to the feminist movement by emphasising the importance of encouraging participation. In other words, the commission legitimized the movement's agitation for female political participation and through its recommendations, gave the movement a framework for action. It is, thus, the despite criticisms, that the commission is important to the feminist movement in Canada. Read More