Female Chauvinism

Ariel Levy got it wrong. In the feminist author’s 2005 book, Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture, Levy posits that female chauvinism entails a celebration of sex at the expense of one’s dignity. She sites soft-core porn offerings, such as Girls Gone Wild, as evidence of the feminist movement’s inadvertent effects and bemoans the fact that women are now empowering themselves through sexual exploitation. While I could pen reams of criticism on the ill effects of so called “raunch culture”, I must find fault with Levy’s definition of female chauvinism. In my estimation, female chauvinism is what feminism has become.

If you look at the literal definition of chauvinism…

1: excessive or blind patriotism
2: undue partiality or attachment to a group or place to which one belongs or has belonged
3: an attitude of superiority toward members of the opposite sex; also : behavior expressive of such an attitude (definition via Merriam-Webster)

…one can’t help but see the similarity to modern feminism. It needn’t be an issue of believing women superior to men; the ‘undue partiality or attachment to a group’ will suffice. The most marked aspect of modern feminism is the immutability. There is a dogmatic devotion to their beliefs, and no amount of evidence will shake it. Any dissent is blasted and characterized as ‘misogynistic’ no matter how cogent or sincere. People who agree with feminism at its core, but find fault with some tenets of the movement, are simply not welcome at the clam bake. 

The idea that women should be afforded more choices than merely wife and mother, or that all human beings should be equal in the eyes of the law, are hardly radical notions. Certainly they do not appear that way to a 28 year old that’s been told her entire life, both explicitly and implicitly, that she was superior to those lowly boys so beset by their primitive instincts.

As a teenager I identified with feminism, more so out of societal pressure than a genuine desire to become part of the movement. I spent my adolescence in the 1990s, a surprisingly liberal and earth-friendly period of time, having many similarities to the current ‘green’ movement and mainstreaming of feminist theory. I was schooled on Sassy, the only feminist teen magazine. I idolized people like Courtney Love and Kathleen Hanna for their aggressiveness and masculine rock star poses. Eventually I grew out of it. My opinions became more nuanced. Suddenly, feminist theory looked rife with holes and inconsistencies. When I couldn’t make my personal beliefs jibe with the feminist party line, I had to abandon it.

Honoring full disclosure, I’ve always been at odds with most women. I am attracted by masculine power and domination, I value autonomy, and I am uniformly repelled by western women’s culture, offering utopian romance, sensitive men, celebrity gossip, chick lit, soap operas, etc. Conversely, I revel in my femininity to some degree; I take pride in my appearance, I enjoy the positive response from men for this, I believe that women are freer to explore all aspects of their personalities (unlike heterosexual men, who are often beholden to at least some of the norms of masculinity), I am charmed by chivalry and machismo, etc. But, most importantly, I realize my worth and it is independent of external forces. Going back to the issue of autonomy, I determine what is best for me, I represent no group, and my decisions, right or wrong, are my own. When I fail, I’ve only myself to blame, not the spectral patriarchy, not other women, not society, but me. I don’t claim to be the most successful woman in the world, or the happiest, but I am completely content with where my choices have taken me and frequently feel grateful for all I have when considering the lives of others.

My aversion to modern feminism is frequently mistaken as a desire for a return to traditional roles, which couldn’t be farther from the truth. I value my independence above all. However, I also value personal responsibility greatly, and that seems to be wholly lacking from modern feminism. When it’s offered as a solution, it’s dismissed as ‘blaming the victim’. In actuality, I’d prefer that the victim didn’t exist, and that can be afforded by women making smarter choices.

Modern feminism entails a certain amount of naïveté; about society, about men, about sexuality, about family, about the motivations of people, about the virtue of women. This is, perhaps, the most troubling. Modern feminism attempts to paint all women as uniformly virtuous in some vain attempt at solidarity and sisterhood. Take the highly contentious issue of spousal abuse. Of course, violence is usually misguided (save for instances of self defense) and any person who strikes another for no good reason is rightly subject to punishment. However, what do you make of women who, time and again, exhibit the same pattern of complicity with their abuse; they are mistreated, struck, abused, the man is punished for his misdeeds, and the woman forgives him, or finds another man of similar character. While I feel for a woman with such low self esteem that she would participate in her own abuse, I can’t relate to her, nor do I wish to rationalize her motivations. There is no rationality involved in the conscious decision to be a doormat or a punching bag. Feminism does this woman a disservice by painting her as a victim. It is similar to a drug addict; in the end, the responsibility to end their addiction is theirs. While they may interact with immoral dealers, and may be spurred by a relentless desire to consume their drug of choice, they are ultimately responsible for buying the product. Women who ritualistically return to abusive relationships of their own volition (not out of fear of retribution, but even then, one must wonder why someone in this situation would not seek help from law enforcement) are ultimately responsible for their mistreatment. While the abusive men in their lives are abominable, they would have no one to abuse if these women thought more of themselves and refused to be treated in such a way.

In some cases, feminist theory does more harm than good, especially in the hands of those using the cause as retribution for the awful things that have happened to them. A feminist activist named Jennifer Baumgardner came up with this glorious idea: she fashioned t-shirts with the words ‘I Was Raped’ on them, in the hopes that she could make the subject of rape ‘mundane’. I don’t know about you, but I would hate to live in a world where rape was considered mundane. Mundanity implies that all men are potential rapists, which is a wholly unfair assertion. Most, if not all, rapists share some kind of mental disturbance that is evident in their inability to empathize with their victims and the total lack of impulse control. Ms. Baumgardner wants you to believe that almost every man is a potential rapist, when the reverse is true. Very few men would ever stoop so low, and those who do can be categorized as criminally insane. If you regarded every man you saw as a potential predator, this would not render you any safer. However, it would make you extremely bitter and unhappy. It’s wholly disgusting to commodify such traumatic experience and it might bring unwanted attention to already fragile women who’ve been subjected to the horror of rape in the past.

For a less odious instance of female chauvinism, consider Cynthia Good, an Atlanta magazine editor, who became so incensed by common men at work construction signs she was compelled to vandalize them. When confronted with the issue of her vandalism, she cried sexism and pestered county officials into changing the signs. It’s abundantly clear that Ms.Good is quite adept at racking focus from her criminal misdeeds to a nonsensical, perceived offense that probably seems profoundly moving to a child. But the awful truth is most women grow up and move on from these non-slights. The purpose of the sign is to warn drivers of road work in the immediate area, not to underline the epic battle of the sexes, which only exists in the minds of the emotionally stunted and immature.

We are the generation with no wars to fight, as Chuck Palahniuk said, and that goes for younger feminists as well. They are thrilled by the concept of revolution (as are most with a beating heart) yet have no real injustices to fight. While their fore mothers were fighting battles for legitimate issues, these women resort to rallying around trivialities: changing signs to something more androgynous, scapegoating fashion models for their supposed influence on the prevalence of eating disorders in young women, belittling those who chose more traditional pursuits, supporting political candidates based solely on what’s housed in their unmentionables. The feminism espoused by the younger generation of women is a clunky, histrionic manifesto, steeped in platitudes and a rose colored view of the world. Quite commonly, masculinity is portrayed as bad, femininity is good, and god help those rational men and women caught in the middle of this Battle Royale of male vs. female chauvinism.