You were probably around when I ranted in my previous post about right-wingers who don’t have the same values or agenda as feminists even though they agree that women are real. I wanted to do a bit of a dive into one reason right-wingers, especially right-wing women, are so at odds with feminism even when it’s not the fake anti-feminist genderloon style of “feminism.”
The punchline here is that this reason is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of terms.
I saw it again today. I was on a “save women’s sports”-themed Facebook page that had just shared a post about a female boxer refusing to fight a male boxer, and some woman was ranting in the comments that this was all feminism’s fault for claiming that men and women are equal. Which of course we aren’t and never will be, she said, and we should just accept that and move on.
So first off, she said this on a feminist page. Completely missing the irony, I’m sure. And secondly, no. And I was rude to her, because I’m tired of hearing this blatant nonsense and misinformation.
Here’s the problem: Equal to does not mean the same as.
We have had to explain this over and over to men who have objected to women agitating for equal rights. Apparently some women need it explained too, but I don’t usually see it explained well. So I will take a crack at that here.
Have a look at this photo. I just took it. Isn’t it great?
For those of you who are not Americans and who are also unfamiliar with our physical currency: Box A contains a coin called a nickel, which is worth five cents. Box B contains five pennies, each being worth one cent. As you can see, this represents a crude equation: A equals B. Box A contains five cents. Box B also contains five cents.
Are they the same coins? Of course not.
Is the monetary value of each box equal to the monetary value of the other box? Of course it is.
Get it?
It occurs to me that some nitwit might claim I am saying five women are equal to one man. I am claiming no such thing so sit down, Biff. All I am saying is that Person A does not have to be the same as Person B in order for Person A to be just as valuable as Person B is.
When activists claim that women are equal to men, they aren’t saying that women are the same as men or that women are men. They’re saying that women have a social and cultural value equal to that of men. They are also saying that, therefore, women should have social and legal rights equal to those of men.
This is easy to understand if you have an IQ higher than that of a cabbage. I don’t quite understand why I have to explain it, but I am also living in an age where a man can be legally recognized as a woman, so I suppose I should just consider the source. What a stupid, stupid timeline to be stuck in. Can’t we do better?
An aside: None of this is to say that I view feminism as an equality movement. Yes, gaining equal social, cultural, and legal status is very likely part of the package, but ultimately what feminism is after is simply liberating female people from the patriarchy. You should probably hope that means that all we need is the aforementioned social and cultural and legal equality. You should probably be willing to concede that and settle for it, because it could be worse. It could turn out we need something more than that. You just never know. I don’t either. But I’m willing to find out, because I am really, really tired of the fucking status quo.
So quit acting like we’re asking for the fucking moon. First off, no. Second off, we’re not asking. Good talk.
Thank you for this article! I get so, so sick of having to explain this point to people. The stupidity about the meaning of equality did predate feminism, however. When I was in high school I complained to two teachers about the lack of advanced classes at that particular school, which was the only one I was eligible to attend in the public system. Both teachers criticized me for expecting to get curricula for college bound students, because they said that most of the students at that school were headed for blue collar jobs. They accused me of being a snob, and one of them referred to the Declaration of Independence where it says that "all men are created equal." I had to explain to them that Jefferson was referring to innate worth and to equality of opportunity to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," and not to academic ability.