Feminism Defended

Feminist Club’s co-heads and active members strongly encourage and greatly appreciate debate and open discourse both in and, especially, out of the meetings; the idea behind the PEA Needs Feminism project was to provoke thought and questions regarding why feminism is necessary. We wanted to show that feminism is not just an interest group, but a movement that is personal to many people on campus. Whether people agree or disagree with the idea of feminism, we wanted them to think about the way our lives revolve around gender in our society. We are grateful for response editorials and challenges to the movement, because they make us think, too, but we feel that Sang Park’s article, published last week on these very pages, focused on a lot of misconceptions and inaccurate assumptions.To begin, one of the submissions he cited was gravely misquoted. It read, as you can see if you take the time to visit the post on our website: “I need feminism because no one listens to my points in class if I’m wearing lipstick.” Mr. Park quoted it as the opposite, writing: “I need feminism because no one listens to my points in class if I don’t wear lipstick.” We think that the feeling of frustration the person who submitted this felt, was that he or she is not taken seriously as an intellectual when he or she wears noticeable lipstick, similar to the idea that women are taken less seriously in low-cut tops or short skirts; women who put forth an appearance that is traditionally provocative-high heels, bold lipstick, short or tight clothing, etc., are generally perceived as more superficial than those of us who take a different approach.Secondly, while misquoting, he wrote that “some of the points brought up on the website seemed to be lacking in substance.” This project was not a carefully written essay by the co-heads and active members of Fem Club — it was a collection of brief stories submitted by individuals, some regular attenders, but the vast majority were people who had never come to a meeting. We didn’t edit any of the posts or ask for proof, citations, or a connection to other posts. Whether the issues raised in the submissions were something someone might consider trivial, or, “lacking in substance,” it was not our job as moderators of the project to invalidate or belittle the problems people face. We were acknowledging everyone’s ideas on what feminism means to them— not just the ideas we agreed with or felt were the most important to any one person’s definition or interpretation of feminism.He also wrote: “they failed to clearly define what feminism is.” Last week we published a brief editorial outlining what feminism means at its core: “The belief in ‘social, political, and economical equality of the sexes’ and taking action towards eradicating the inequality of the sexes.”However, beyond this definition, there is a lot of variety in interpretations of feminism. Everyone has a personal set of ideas on how to eradicate inequality. None of the posts on the website were representative of the club’s opinions as a whole (there is no cohesive opinion that everyone who supports feminism holds), they are of individuals who submitted because they believe in feminism and they wanted to share why. Definitions of feminism were in every post. Some shared similar frustrations, some didn’t, but they all fell under the umbrella of inequality between the sexes.Mr. Park wrote that “people need solutions, not more problems.” The problems that were written on the signs were not created by being written down. They were simply brought to light. It is extremely difficult to pinpoint a perfect solution to sexism. If it were easy, the problem would be solved. The problem is rooted in how we, as a society, perceive gender. What we sought to do was challenge this perception by giving a voice to the movement, which in turn, would hopefully incite discussion and progress, which we think it did.Mr. Park also expressed that he was under the impression that men were we not part of the discussion. The submissions were posted anonymously, but many of them were from male students, and the meetings have consistently significant male representation; frequently the meetings are about half male. He also said that non-members were targeted by the signs, when the majority of the signs were submitted by people who either rarely or never attend.Another concern Mr. Park raised was that Fem Club members were antagonistic and “inflammatory” in the comment sections of the posts. We agreed as moderators of this project to not engage in angry, circular discourse, but to be open to challenging opinions and questions, which we did to the best of our ability, as long as people were asking out of curiosity or genuine interest. It is counterproductive to get riled up by jokes. The joking photos and comments were not offensive to the project. At no point did anyone representing the club or the project retaliate. Anyone who reacted with “inflammatory” comments was not a member or representative of the club or the project, only a representative of themselves. Mr. Park’s “you are extremely disrespectful” quotation was not from any of us.The experiences and beliefs that were submitted were not supposed to be experiences that every single person goes through. It is something that someone feels, that someone believes in, and because someone believes in it, it is important to acknowledge. Feminism is not about exclusion, and neither is the club. We chose the sign-holding format and social media approach because we were inspired by the internationally successful Who Needs Feminism project (whoneedsfeminism.tumblr.com), which was meaningful and effective for thousands of people.We thought to bring it to Exeter and see if it could have the same effect here. If it “alienated” the viewer or made them feel “guilty,” that was not anyone’s aim. It is perhaps inevitable that there could be discomfort when presented with something that challenges one’s perceptions. Guilt might be a sign that one is being challenged. The project was made to inspire people and to question how they think about gender and equality in their everyday lives by giving personal context to sexism. Acknowledging that these problems are real and indicative of the (We apologize for the unintended abrupt ending. A formatting error caused the text to be cut.)