The Reinvention of Female Identity

In true Kiwi fashion, New Zealand was the first to grant female suffrage in 1883. The Commonwealth Franchise Act 1902 enabled Australian women over 21 to vote in federal elections. Switzerland, surprisingly, was one of the last European nations to allow women’s suffrage in 1971. In 2015, Saudi Arabia was one of the last nations in the world to grant women the vote.

First-wave feminism operated, as Cheris Kramarae put it, on the radical notion that women are human beings. During the interwar period, the notion of female inferiority—physical or psychological—became invalid, considering their immense contributions to the total war effort. The shift from domestic housewife to munitions factory operator had planted the flag of female power within the public arena, a patriotically charged flag that simultaneously united and divided the human population.

With a moral code as seemingly irrefutable as the science backing climate change, the feminist movement is arguably the most controversial topic at the forefront of public discourse. The feminist maxim seems simply straightforward: a movement for gender equality. As neutral, agreeable and inclusive it sounds, increasing numbers of men and women have emerged in opposition to it, claiming it to be an unnecessary female agenda for world domination.

Despite various—dominantly extremist right-winged—claims of the irrelevance of the movement, the Australian Workplace Gender Equality Agency reports a current 14% earnings gap, with women earning $242.90 less than men per week. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reports that 1 in 3 women is subject to domestic violence, compared to 1 in 5 men, with one woman a week being killed by a current or former partner, compared to a man a month.

Clearly, the feminist movement is a valid one. So what’s the issue?

The issue lies within its conflated identity. Feminism as a term is often perceived as an ode to the angry bra-burning and man-hate of the second wave, the proud feminist flag isolating great portions of the population. To this day, the movement harbours resentment towards anyone who is not a woman—with the definition of a woman being one dictated by the occupant of the podium.

Robin Morgan, along with many self-described radical feminists, are of the school of thought that “years of suffering in this androcentric society, and of surviving, [are what] earn the title ‘woman.’” This excludes those not born into a female body. By the radical feminist approach, a trans woman’s demand to be accepted as a woman is an exercise of male entitlement.

Modern feminism worships the working woman, the badass boss, the Katniss Everdeen—an independent woman, who does not need a man, who rejects any notion of maternity, who is focussed on her career, preferably the CEO of her own entrepreneurial venture. In an attempt to encourage women to break from the one mould society has constructed over centuries, have we not just created another one? A harshly angular woman, in a suit, under a dark flag of defiance?

We don’t need a radical movement towards gender equality. We need a collective global shift of mindset.

Human beings should be allowed access to equal opportunity, regardless of gender, race, religion, sexuality. Women should not have to ascribe to contrived classifications of femininity, just as men should not have to ascribe to contrived classifications of masculinity. The future is about removing artificial social divides we, as a society, place between genders.

Feminism is not the answer.

The power of empowerment lies within the power to reinvent our identity. The power of choice. The choice to stand under a truly united flag of humanity.