The hotly anticipated topic of Feminisms was broached in Jurisprudence this week. It sparked many debates among the class as we all chimed in with our views. It made for an interesting hour to say the least.
There are four types of Feminisms:
While they all stand for very different types of feminism, they develop from each other and build on foundations set before them. The most controversial type was arguably Radical, which believes that oppression based on gender is the fundamental oppression in society. Their belief is that the social strutures and values under which we operate are permeated with male orientated hearing which consistently tips the balance in favour of men. This extreme way of thinking is what is often thought of when one hears of feminism, a hatred a men and all that society has awarded them, but that is not the case.
One question we found ourselves asking was why, in order to be equal to men, women needed to assume typically male behaviours. Does equality lie in our similarities, not our differences? The majority of the class were in agreement over the best course of equality being in the post-modernism brand of feminism. The belief is that there is no such thing as an ‘essential woman’ and recognises the multiple forms of discrimination against women. Like the cultural feminists, post-modernists are concerned with differences between men and women but also seek to champion the standpoint of the outsider in society.
It was an eventful lecture, we got the opportunity to examine closely our own feelings on feminisms and which type we most agreed with. It caused me to rethink any articles or posts I had previously read regarding feminism and categorize them with my new understanding of the term.