The principal historical disadvantage of being a woman has been the deficit of choices available in life. For hundreds of years, women have been valued for their bodies and expected to maintain homes and families, instead of being able to work themselves and determine their own fates. The feminist movement arose as a resistance to these norms, demonstrated through the fight for women’s suffrage, equal working opportunities, reproductive rights and more. The common thread that unites these fights is their intent to expand women’s opportunities to have the same choices available to them as men. Recently, however, the fight for women to have equal options has turned into an added pressure for them to make these “newer” choices out of resistance to the preexisting norms, overshadowing the goals of the movement.
The pressure to make a certain choice can sometimes come from the advocates themselves or arise from opponents trying to spin the argument in a way that makes it easier to fight. When women fight for basic sociocultural rights — such as the right to work, hold powerful positions, remain unmarried or not have children — a narrative emerges that it is bad for women to not make the choices that feminists are advocating to have. If the fight is for women to have the same options as men, villainizing a certain choice maintains the inequality that existed in the first place.
The narrative that a certain decision is “right” can appear in the feminist movement. In some cases, the movement crosses the boundary from fighting to give women the choice to work, be masculine or reject traditional femininity to pressuring women to choose those roles and villainizing them if they don’t. Strong, independent women in the media are now portrayed as more masculine and less conforming to gender norms, while women who prioritize staying home, having families and presenting femininely are viewed as weaker, due to their feminine nature and “conformity” to expectations. Depending on their environment, women often experience a pressure to either fit into traditional societal roles or to break out of them, but they are rarely able to choose without pressure.
In some cases, the advocates for an issue don’t argue for limiting a choice, but it is easily turned around by the other side of the issue to seem that way. In a classic strawman approach, opponents will portray advocacy for the ability to make a choice as advocacy for a certain choice and argue against that choice instead.
This is evident through the pro-choice movement. The movement posits that “women should have the legal right to terminate pregnancies through elective abortion.” Opponents argue against the movement by calling the group “pro-abortion” instead of pro-choice and trying to paint pro-choice arguments as advocating for abortion as birth control. Even though this view is not the true belief of the pro-choice movement, their opposition will try to portray them as advocating for more abortions. Once again, the fight for women to have expanded options, such as the ability to have an abortion, is narrowed down to women fighting for that action itself in a public-facing opinion.
Whether coming directly from advocates themselves or from their opponents, the troubled fight for a specific action instead of increased choices is harmful for many reasons. First, pressuring women to make a certain decision can diminish the value of the movement by grossly misrepresenting it. This makes it harder for important movements to garner support because they are portrayed incorrectly — and often more negatively — in the media. Second, it can alienate people from the movement. In the feminist movement, women who believe in gender equality are hesitant to label themselves as feminists due to the stereotypes of feminists embodying the complete rejection of every gender norm associated with women. Lastly, it can pressure women into feeling like they have to make a certain choice, when the entire purpose of the feminist movement was to relieve women of this pressure.
To combat the pitfalls of feminism, we must change our language to emphasize the importance of having a choice free from pressure in feminist discussions. Feminism at its basis means believing that all genders deserve equal opportunities. To be inclusive and make progress, feminists must stick to this definition, instead of creating added pressure, which makes women feel isolated from the movement. We can increase inclusivity by promoting a more nuanced understanding of feminism that includes an emphasis on accepting every choice. This way, we can expand the reach of feminism and empower women to make decisions that align with their true aspirations, not with what other people think their aspirations should be. In emphasizing the presence of options in women’s lives, feminists can garner support for their movement, while combating fallacies and misinterpretations that arise.
Claudia Flynn is an Opinion Columnist who writes about cultural topics relevant to college-aged students. She can be reached at claudf@umich.edu.