In the new age of advancing technology and social media, it is becoming increasingly easier to advocate and spread awareness on social, political and environmental injustices around the world, which, in turn, has the ability to influence and educate more people. But with widespread influence comes widespread criticism, which can be so intense that it could start to alter the meaning and cultivate stereotypes of certain organisations or beliefs. An example of this is the feminist movement and the increase in negative connotations towards it. But how did this begin? Are we as a society losing sight of the core values of feminism?
Before I jump into the rise in controversy, I’ll give a brief description on the evolution of feminism. Feminism throughout the ages has been categorised into three different types. The first is known as radical feminism, which is focused on reshaping society as a whole, and claims that our civilization has been built upon patriarchy. Since it criticizes the root of the problem, many radical feminists are skeptical of political action within the current system.
The second type - cultural feminism - looks into the inherent differences between men and women (the ‘female nature’), and promotes undervalued female attributes. Last but not least, liberal or mainstream feminism believes that women are deemed inferior due to unequal opportunities and the segregation of men and women. It strives to eradicate gender inequality and integrate women into male-dominated spaces.
The current and widely advocated form of feminism is more liberal, especially with movements such as ‘MeToo’, which strives to publicize the stories of sexual assault survivors. Another example is the feminist movement acknowledging the additional struggles that women of colour have to face. Mainstream feminism is what I know to be one of the many punching bags of the internet, but for what reason, and for what cause?
Some may associate modern day feminism with ‘Buzzfeed Feminists’, a term recently coined by the internet. This brand of feminism started from women who work for the entertainment and media company Buzzfeed, who advocate for more minor issues regarding women’s rights, such as man-spreading and anti-shaving. Although these problems are valid and deserve to be discussed, Buzzfeed Feminists tend to exaggerate these issues so much that they seem more important to address than larger, serious matters that affect all types of women. This genre of feminism seems to be more tone deaf, as it caters to a small percentage of mostly rich white women who can afford to prioritise Buzzfeed Feminism. I believe that talking about these small scale topics does no harm, but when it is blown out of proportion, important issues are disregarded and buried beneath these seemingly trivial problems - it is counterproductive.
If you have been around YouTube for long enough, you may be familiar with the phase of ‘Feminists Get Rekt’ compilations (it has to be rekt spelt with a ‘k’, or else we’re not talking about the same thing). Essentially, these videos show feminists debating or speaking, and getting ‘owned’ or ‘destroyed’ by another person or a group of people, which some use as evidence that the liberal feminist movement is a man-hating, women-dominating agenda. The biggest issue is that most of these videos show Buzzfeed Feminist perspectives, and viewers immediately associate these women to the core attributes of feminism. These compilations can rack up to millions of views per video and give its young, impressionable audience an absolute field day. It may seem hard to believe, but this niche corner of YouTube is actually quite addicting once you fall prey to the endless rabbit hole of your recommended feed. Unfortunately, I know this from personal experience, as I was sucked into this void many years ago.
I promptly recovered from this stage in my life, and have finally understood, in retrospect, the reason as to why these videos are so popular. There is a sense of satisfaction and an inflation of someone’s ego when they watch a subjectively irritating person get proven wrong. It emphasizes our superiority, and we often believe that the more ridiculous the person sounds, the more justified our pleasure towards their downfall is. The majority of the viewers appear to be edgy thirteen year olds, who are known to hate things for no apparent reason other than to gain approval from their peers, which could be another reason for the attraction of these videos. However, this point may be a cause for concern, as these compilations are a doorway to much more extreme ideologies. Some examples include Men’s Rights and even incel communities, or simply thinking of feminists as ‘social justice warriors’. Consuming this type of media is equivalent to fostering a harmful environment for young, vulnerable people online.
So, what impact does this have on the women’s rights movement as a whole? As these videos start to increase in viewership and reach a wider audience, this harmful stereotype that mainstream feminism is ‘cringe’ and irrelevant makes it harder to distinguish between the core ideologies of the feminist movement (to eradicate gender inequality) and a minority of activists who choose to take into account more minor issues and disregard major, significant ones. This, I believe, is the reason why liberal feminism has gotten a bad rep. When we hear this term we might subconsciously connect it to the angry people discussing irrelevant women’s rights issues with such passion, making them look downright ridiculous from an outside perspective. This stereotype has made it harder for people to openly say that they are feminists, in fear that they might be linked to this convention and misjudged instantly.
This problem cannot be solved overnight, but it starts with distinguishing the true meaning of feminism from the false narratives that are perpetuated by compilations online. We should continue to refer back to the essential values of the feminist movement, and keep speaking about it until none of us feel the need to hesitate before saying, “I am a feminist.”
Citations:
Comments