« Thursday Short Poem: Gluck's The Mirror | Main | Shock and discomfort »

January 13, 2005



I read the posts on "equity feminism" vs. "gender feminism" at Alas, and I think that the only difference that really matters between the two is their view on the proper role of the state in reducing sex-based discrimination. While working to change men's attitudes about supermodels and rape and sexism and gender roles are worthy goals, women and men can only be totally equal in ONE sphere in public life, and that's the law. That's one reason I'm hesitant to call myself a "feminist", (though I certainly am one) lest I be grouped in with women who insist upon using legislation (or the Constitution) as a means to solve any and every problem which may disproportionately affect women. And I just don't think that's the proper way to go about things.


Adrienne, did you read the essay on libertarian feminism I linked to in the third article? The truth is, many feminists - especially radical feminists - are very skeptical of government legilsation as a solution to any problems. Of course, those feminists are more likely to self-identify as anarchist feminists than as libertarian feminists (at least partly because libertarians are generally very unwelcoming of feminism).

That feminists in general think that legislation is the solution to "any and every problem" is simply untrue, by the way. For example, it's true that virtually all feminists want rape to be illegal, but virtually no feminists think that legislation will solve the problem of rape. With all due respect, have you considered that your views may be exaggerated by stereotypes?

* * *

Happy blog-b-day, Hugo! This has become one of my favorite blogs to read, so thanks for sticking around.

Echidne of the snakes

We used to have chinchillas when I was growing up.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Regular reads

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004