Many conservatives are quick to spout criticism of “feminists”
and how the push modern drive for women’s rights has damaged the nation.
However, in my experience, true feminists and conservative republicans really
share many core beliefs, and the movement itself was rooted in a fundamental
understanding of the principles upon which our nation was founded. It has certainly
been corrupted in recent years, but I would argue that true feminism is a
strong ally to the Republican Party, and a vital component to winning the
cultural war before us today.
The Merriam Webster dictionary offers a few interesting
definitions for "Feminism" that will help illustrate my primary
thesis:
1: The theory of the political, economic, and social
equality of the sexes.
2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and
interests.
Both of these definitions offer some insight into the basis
of the "feminist movement" - I would blend these definitions to
something akin to the following -
"an organized activity on behalf on women's rights and interests, predicated upon the theory that women ought to be politically, economically, and socially equal to men in all respects."
Forgetting other components of the
movement, I would argue that this definition is deeply rooted in an understanding
of Republican values. In fact, I will go one step further – this definition
fits perfectly within a conservative Christian view of American politics.
The truth is, Christianity is, in many ways, responsible
for the cultural respect for the value of women in society. There is extensive
evidence that nations lacking Western traditions –deeply rooted in religious
traditions – also have greater levels of human rights violations and abuse of
women. I have spent time in the past describing how “Christian” the founding of
America really was, but I will condense this argument, for now, to the simple
statement that our founders recognized that Christian morals were vital to the
nation’s survival. Even those that were personally deists or atheists, still
recognized that Christian values were necessary.
John Adams once wrote that “our constitution was made
only for a moral and religious people; it is wholly inadequate to the government
of any other.” These same founding fathers argued that “all men are created
equal” and that they possessed “inalienable rights” such as life, liberty, and
property. This understanding of natural rights is what allowed the women’s
liberation movement to take steam, as well as the Civil Rights movement of the
1960s – recognizing that all of mankind possesses God-given rights. The
Feminist
Yet somehow, in recent years, that same movement has
entangled itself with the LGBT community, advocating less for equal status for
women, and more for legislation recognizing “gender identity” – a concept that
is actually detrimental the very values that represent the core of the feminist
movement.
On June
26, 2014, Slate published an
article on the subject of
gender identity, claiming that a doctor declaring your newborn as male or
female is "infant gender assignment," which causes your baby's life
to be:
...instantly and brutally reduced from such infinite potentials down to one concrete set of expectations and stereotypes, and any behavioral deviation from that will be severely punished - both intentionally through bigotry, and unintentionally through ignorance.
The author advocates that parents should object to a doctor
"assigning" your child's gender at birth because "Infant gender
assignment might just be Russian roulette with your baby's life."
Do true feminists really wish to create a society where
biology is ignored in favor of a euphoric belief that one’s identity is a
choice?
As the Slate article illustrates, many in today’s
society feel that recognizing one’s biology has “reduced” them to “one concrete
set of expectations and stereotypes.” This is diametrically opposed to feminist
thought, which advocates
that in order to achieve equality among the sexes, gender stereotypes must be
broken down and both sexes should be allowed to pursue their own interests. Have
feminists abandoned their own cause in favor of another?
Finally,
while gender neutrality is more of a concept than an actual movement, it
also has great potential harm for feminists in the future. Once the concept of
male and female is blurred, there is very little opportunity for legislation
and regulation that ensures that “women” have equal opportunities as men. If
people can pick their own gender identity, how long will it be before
biologically female individuals once again find themselves underrepresented?
 |
| "Tyler" |
I’ll wrap up with the story of a girl named Kathryn,
whose parents have made her into a key figure in the transgender movement.
According to reporters, at the age of 2 she insisted she was a boy. The parents
then accepted it, and allowed their “son” to change her to “Tyler.” She’s now 7
years old. The Washington Post
records the evidence of how good their “son” is doing now that [s]he’s accepted
the change:
“Come on! Let’s play Batman!” he screamed to my younger son, his partner in crime on a recent play date. The two boys swam together, compared Lego guys and had sword fights. Whenever the family watches television, Tyler roots for the boy characters. His home looks like a house with a son. Karate gear, soccer balls, cars, trucks and pirate swords abound. At school, he’s a boy. Plain and simple. (Washington Post)
Now, I may not completely share the same view as many modern feminists – I do believe that there are differences between men and women both physically and emotionally. I think that there are areas that
men are more suited to, and women are more suited to. In addition, in many ways, parents fail to establish how much of a gift gender is and how the differences between men and women actually compliment each other and lead to a more balanced family and society. However, I also recognize that there are exceptions - not all women fit a mold, nor do all men - there are plenty of tomboyish girls, and more feminine boys.Which is why I find it
incredibly fascinating that the evidence presented for “Tyler” being a true “boy”
was her interest in perceived “masculine” activities. Most of all, though, I find it
disheartening that feminists would accept such a stereotype and condemn a 5 year
old girl to a life as a mascot of the LGBT community simply because she dared
to have interests in “masculine” activities.
In the end, I believe that conservatives and true
feminists really have a great deal of common ground on many of these issues. If
these two unlikely allies can find it in their power to unite and remember our common heritage and values, there is a chance
that both our goals can be reached. If there are women that truly
wish to fight to allow for greater equality of opportunity and representation, they
must unite with conservatives that wish to resist the trend toward gender identity
and neutrality legislation which is detrimental to this very objective and to our families, and our nation at large.
No comments:
Post a Comment