Equality is quite the buzzword in modern mainstream society, but like the terms feminism and atheism, I don’t think folks know what equality means. Now, before I go further, allow me to back track and clarify something. I don’t identify as a feminist. Not that I disagree with feminism in ideal and indeed, I support many of the concepts of it. I look at feminism in much the same was as I do the MRA. Both are sex-centric rights organization with a mission to protect the segment of society they represent. No harm, no foul. I can see the appeal of picking a side to fight for and I don’t denigrate anyone for doing so. For my own personal tastes however, I choose to pick up the cause for the LGBT community as well as champion the rights of both men and women. In that regard, I also choose my battles accordingly. Indeed, I can feel the same kind of righteous indignation when I hear that a man has to automatically pay alimony after a divorce regardless of his circumstances, as I would for a woman who is publicly slut shamed on a college campus cause she was wearing hot pants.
Unfortunately, I find that, in spite of my attempts towards reasoned balance (of course I am a bisexual woman so the injustices that affect me personally will get more of a rise), whenever I champion a female cause I am automatically labelled a feminist. This is strange, seeing as, when I stand up for male rights, just as vociferously, I might add, I am not thought to be an MRA member. Couple this with the fact that feminism has now became a dirty word because of the likes of Rush Limbaugh and even fellow Atheists like T. J. Kirk, and I know that the aim was to demean my point. What an individual, male or female, hopes to gain by rendering my viewpoint null and void in this way, is beyond me.
Which leads me to my focus on equality, and in particular, gender equality.
When I encounter woman hating atheist types who says insane things like, “Well, you’re the ones who wanted equality…” after a woman has some kind of misadventure, or “woman want equality but they don’t want to pay for their own dinners and open their own doors,” I just have to cock my head to the side in confused little puppy fashion. This dismissive sleight of hand manages to misrepresent what feminism and equality are all in one fell stroke.
People, I just have to ask…
1) What is wrong with wanting equal treatment under the law? What in the hell does, “Well, you’re the ones who wanted equality!” even mean? That is like saying, “Well, you’re the ones who wanted to eat, breathe air and drink water.” Of course we want legal equality. Just what do you mean by equality here anyway? The equality most feminists, the MRA and humanists like myself are fighting for is the idea that we have the freedom to make our own choices, for our own lives that we are given the same opportunities in life across the board. Yes, I am smart enough to know that equal opportunity doesn’t mean equal outcome, but if you block my way to those opportunities, how will I know what kind of outcomes I COULD have?
2) What does the opening of a door or paying for dinner have to do with desiring basic human rights? In this regard, the “go make me a sammich” brigade is truly missing the point. The reason many women hate that whole “Get in the kitchen bitch” type o’ thing is because the Christian Right would often say things like, a woman’s place is in the home or in the kitchen. This was the mantra of both men and women when ladies desired to join the work force and get into positions that had been long held by men. The term barefoot and pregnant comes to mind. When guys, who think they are being cute and counterculture, say things like, “get in the kitchen, ho” they are saying the equivalent of “get back into the cotton fields niggah”, to a person of color. Which leads me back to the ideas of equality in the dating world. What are you trying to say with your admonishment of supposed female privilege here? That some women, many of whom are probably NOT feminists, who enjoy courtesies like a man opening a door or paying for dinner shows that chicks really want to be stripped of life options and relegated to a life of making sandwiches? I don’t get it.
In the end, all human beings want to be treated like, well, human beings. That is the basis for human rights. Of course a woman wants the right to choose between being mother or giving her life to mission work. No one wants all their choices made for them, or have their life arranged and mapped out without their input. That’s called slavery. Man, woman, gay or straight, we want our chance at the pursuit of happiness promised to all of us in the Bill of Rights.
The special treatment, dinner argument just never makes sense to me anyways. Equality is not a tit for tat exercise. For example, if you gave me an apple and I gave you a pear, you can’t then scream, “That’s’ not equal–you gave me a pear! I gave you an apple! How can you want equality when you treated me so differently!”
Dating scenarios and rituals are a different animal outside the human rights landscape. Couples can and should decide for themselves how to handle a given situation and believe it or not many women can and do pay for their own shit, especially feminists. I often joke that the men who have an issue opening doors or paying for meals should date a feminist. Feminism is a concept not only based on the idea of female equality but also, female self-sufficiency. Most will give you a hard look if you open a door for them, or smack your hand if you dared to pay for her dinner.
But, I am not a feminist and I love being treated to a night out. Does this mean I don’t believe in feminine equality? Not at all. I deem the opening of a door as a courtesy that has little to do with gender roles. I open doors for women, men and kids. Why? So the door doesn’t smack them in the head as I exit the building. It is a courtesy. Giving everyone equal regard under the law, doesn’t mean we do away with basic civility and common courtesy.
Now, I completely get that it is unfair that men have to automatically pay alimony in most cases, but men need be aware that women often pay alimony to ex spouses too. I do think the laws need to change to either eradicate spousal payments altogether or make them more strictly case by case. Example, if financial assets are built up during the marriage due to the hard work of both spouses, then there should be a fair and equitable dissolvement of those assets. But, if you bring gazillions into your marriage, you should be able to leave with your gazillions, unless you yourself feel inclined to do otherwise (not all divorces end bitterly). However, let’s say a married couple decides to have a kid. The man agrees that the wife makes more money than he does and leaves his job to stay at home. Yes, I know it is often the other way around, but I actually do know of a couple who did this. The woman was a CEO and he had a high paying repairman gig. They both believed that one parent should be home with the kiddos and had already discussed the fact that who ever was the biggest bread-winner would keep their job when they decided to become parents.
They honored this idea when the first babe was born and dude became a stay at home dad. The couple is still happily married, but I can’t help but ponder if, lets say, they were heading towards splitsville. what would-be fair here. Would it, for example, be fair to just toss dude out with the bath water with no means of support after he gave up his own livelihood to stay home with their offspring? In such a case, I think an award of alimony would be fair for a short time until the man could get a job in his chosen field and support himself (if that hadn’t already occurred).
This is what I would call a decent and fair moral decision backed up by the law, but this STILL doesn’t fall under the real of basic human rights and legal equality. Separate things.
Lookit–I am aware that a woman just can’t bench press the same weight as a man…but if a woman wants to try, let her. If she fails in the attempt — so what? Does this fact mean I should go back to the days when all decisions for a woman’s life was made for her?
Humans are not all equal. Some are better looking than others, some are tall while others are short. There are folks who are smarter, faster, bigger, richer, stronger, weaker, more privileged, than others. The idea that we are all equal is a fallacy. Even so, this doesn’t mean that the beautiful, privileged, tall man gets to have more opportunities than the weak, short and unnattractive short man. The short man should have the same rights as a tall man under the law. What happens outside of that is well–I dunno…the general fluctations of life?
Getting back to the dating ritual thang, I will say this. My hubby and I both agree that the individual doing the asking should pay. When I was single, I asked men out and when I did so, I picked up the check. But to the fellahs reading this, please ask yourself what is really behind this anger at treating a woman to a night out and displaying courtesy by opening a door. Do you really have to get a complete, I do this, you do that, tit for tat out of it to enjoy the night? What does that say about your true intentions?
Dating is a getting to know one another, social process. It ain’t marriage, nor is it a fast track to easy sex. Go into it with minimal expectations and pure intentions and you will have less of a chance to get all bitter and claim both sides have so-called “privilege”.
Folks, please, let us stop getting distracted by the dumb shit and keep our eyes on the prize. Equality is about choice–our own individualistic choices–all the rest that goes along with that is what gets sorted out in the mix once the goal of across the board equality is achieved.
That will be very happy work should that day ever come.