I
suspect that equality is the PC word for all those people out there
who complain feminism has made the world too PC. Everyone loves it.
They happily espouse that they are all for equality, even that they
are "equalist". I love a good made up word, but I think
that "equalitarianist" would be a much better one. It's
socially acceptable to say equality. That appeals to ideas of
fairness we hold, which is of course not unreasonable. But it is an
outrageously narrow focus of what is considered in this discussion of
equal and people carry with it a view that feminists somehow don't
want equality, but dominance. Or concessions to keep up when the
world really is about “merit”. If one really thought our cabinet
reflected the most meritorious of the LNP, one would have to wonder
how women in the LNP even manage to put their shoes on the right
feet. But
Tony was actually right – for advancing his agenda, he choose the
most capable ministers. If he could find enough women or indigenous
australians or people with disabilities to participate in his
reconstruction of 1950s Australia, he might well use them.
This
obsession with the word equality, however, gets on my goat. I keep
hearing people saying women are equal now. I don't have any problem
with feeling equal to men. Indeed, like a lot of people, I actually
have a fair dose of feeling superior to quite a lot of other people.
But it's not really about how I feel. Of course there is a place for
fighting for the liberal feminist ideals of equal
representation/wages etc, which seem to be what people mean when they
talk equality. These have probably seen more progress than any other
feminist values because they are congruent with capitalism. Equality
in representation in a capitalist world probably does have more
trickle down effect for women than capitalism does for the poor, but,
to co opt that bloody word, until I see equal numbers of those equal
men and women earning equal wages in positions of power equally
likely to wear dresses and make up, I'm afraid that the social agenda
on women hasn't changed much. It just takes the acceptable end of
debate and ignores the rest.
These
fairly simplistic versions of equality still highlight the
discrepancies, but so much of the policing of women is fixed in ideas
in our society. We all participate in the perpetuation of discourses
of what is normal and acceptable. I struggle when otherwise
intelligent, capable, independent women tell me they wear make up and
shave their legs because they like it. Change their name to their
partner's because they want to change it. Inordinate other
not-so-little things. When I see similar numbers of men and women
choosing to do these things because they like it, I will accept that
there is no social pressure in that choice. In the meanwhile, I'm
afraid it's just too convenient that women intrinsically like
preening themselves to an ideal suiting social expectations,
committing them to time consuming and not always healthy regimes and
going through a tedious process of redocumenting their lives to
someone else's name.
I
don't think feminism is really about equality. It's about freedoms
and rights. Freedom to be/do/look/act how we want. To make our own
choices. The right to be safe to do so. To be accepted and valued.
All with respect for other people's similar freedoms and rights. This
applies to all genders, sexualities, abilities, races etc. This of
course involves a massive shift in social norms and expectations, but
nothing resembling meaningful equality will result without it.
Besides, these people
saying we already have equality either lack basic observation skills
or basic maths.
No comments:
Post a Comment