Anti-feminism In The Name Of Feminism

Feminism refers to advocating for women’s rights on the basis of equality of all genders. I am sure we have all read that a gazillion times. Anti-feminism, however, is a nascent concept that is antithetical to certain aspects of feminism. In the 20th century, we witnessed how a plethora of favourable conditions engendered the feminism movement across the globe. In the 21st century, we now witness the dilapidating and decimating nature of this movement and the rise of a new movement, with a much wider masculine base and a rather definitive approach with regards to combating any forms of feminism- the anti-feminist movement.

Retrospectively, it is quite interesting to see the evolutionary path feminism as a concept has taken. We have all studied Darwinism, a theory of evolution which states that the species of organisms which is most well adapted to their dynamic surroundings survive in the struggle for existence while the others perish. We probably have all studied that same example of Biston Betularia time and again. However, have you ever thought if human psychology has evolved at the same pace as other parameters such as morphology, our alacritous responses to external stimuli, technology and standard of living? Don’t get me wrong, our brain is still undergoing rapid evolution, but are we mentally and emotionally equipped to process those changes and evolve ever so rapidly?

Back then we used to ask questions like ‘How to stop war?’, ‘How to empower all sections of society?’ and now we ask questions like ‘What is a woman?’ or rather ‘Why should she be treated any different than a man?’. This so-called pseudo-intellectual ‘woke’ section of society has time and again failed to understand that feminism is neither a fight to prove that women are superior to men nor to deteriorate the status of men. Feminism is not about wondering why it is called ‘History’ and not ‘Herstory’. Feminism is not about asking for privileges to be handed over to women. Feminism was never about demanding more writing time in examinations than men.

Feminism was initially the fight for cerebral equality and adequate opportunity. Women never wanted to be given special treatment, they never wanted to intentionally put down men and treat them as their inferior counterparts. Women weren’t allowed to vote, they weren’t allowed to work in factories, they weren’t allowed to dress the way they wanted to, and they were bound to follow each and every command given to them. When someone’s rights are suppressed for so long, they begin to retaliate and fight for what rightfully belongs to them. We have all read tweets like ‘When women go to work and are posted at higher ranks, it becomes a huge topic for news channels to cover. However, when a man does household chores, no one even glances a second time at him.’

There are myriad issues with a statement like this, the major one being misunderstanding the very reason why news channels want to highlight such incidences. The exigent issue is that women were not allowed to work previously. Certain chores were expected from them and their lives revolved around their families. They never even dreamed of stepping outside and being recognised as someone other than ‘Dolly’s mother’ or ‘Deepak’s wife’. However, have you ever read that men were historically barred from assisting in household chores? It is often esoteric that men were always allowed to lend a helping hand and this was a rather common practice in several European countries. This is precisely why, when women became Presidents, Prime Ministers, CEOs, and government officers, it became imperative to highlight these achievements for their entire race.

The feminist movement commenced in 1848, when a group of women, with Elizabeth Cady Stanton as their luminary, held the Seneca Falls Convention where overt demands were made for women’s rights for the first time. Their preliminary objective at the time was to rightfully earn their right to vote. Thus began the ‘cult of feminism’ and this convention became an antecedent for a plethora more to follow. Egregiously, the only reason women were allowed to vote in 1920 in the United States was not because the people actually cared for equal rights but because the men were out fighting World War I. Therefore, the government sincerely ‘appreciated’ their efforts to keep the economy functional and ‘rewarded’ women by granting them adult suffrage. They had to toil and work strenuously hard for something which men were granted within an instant.

Moreover, when women were finally granted voting rights, it set an impetuous impetus for women all across the world and became a catalyst for the burgeoning feminist movement globally. Women finally became consciously cognizant of the fact that they have been oppressed, misrepresented, neglected, trivialised and entrenched by the incessant barriers that the draconian society had put between them and the realisation of their self-worth. Now, we cannot actually hold one person or one section of society or even men largely responsible for this. Acceptance was not a popular trend back then due to the authoritarian and austere ideologies people were brought up with.

However, the feminist movement still managed to persevere and made multidimensional progress in various facets. From obtaining the right to have a property in your name to merit being the basis of admission into colleges, universities and jobs; we have certainly made tremendous progress. From demanding the same seat as a white man in a bus to making equal pay a necessity; from equality in education to getting the same opportunities as their male counterparts.

The paramount issue that has arisen in the feminist movement is not backlash and differences in opinions but the existence of pseudo-feminists. Pseudo-feminism by definition refers to ‘support the advancement of females ahead of other genders, and the active targeting of males to right the wrongs of the past’. Quasi-feminism, on the contrary, refers to ‘someone who believes men and women should be treated equally in most, but not all, aspects of their lives’. And lastly, egalitarian feminism refers to considering all individuals on earth to be equal, be it physically or mentally. It is crucial for our generation to be able to differentiate between pseudo-feminists and quasi-feminists. A pseudo-feminist woman will consider men inferior to her, a quasi-feminist won’t. A quasi-feminist will agree that men are physiologically built stronger than women, that women and men both are superior in their own respective spheres and that notwithstanding their differences, they are still humans. While it is the duty of every man and woman, feminist or not, to advocate for the rights of women, it is also necessary to ensure that men do not become the receiving end of the immense backlash faced due to the erroneous actions of their ancestors. According to a survey conducted, 45 per cent of men aged 18-29 feel that they have been on the receiving end of undeserved discrimination.

So, in conclusion, feminism or anti-feminism? I personally feel that while everyone is entitled to their opinion, there is no need to have a rigid caveat that categorises people into such categories. At the end of the day, we are all humans and advocating for the rights of other humans and supporting their endeavours in our own capacity should be our ultimate objective, be it viz a viz movements like the feminism movement or not. Humanism is what unites us together and concomitantly diversifies us. Any infinitesimal change we make in someone’s life or in our own mindset is a step ahead. That and the feeling of mutual respect for all other humans, in itself, will make the world we live in an infinitely better place.

The author is a student of Cathedral & John Connon School