So?ial MovementsPatri?k LiA so?ial movement is a grouping of individuals or organizations that works to ?arry out, resist, or undo a so?ial ?hange. Some notable examples from the present day in?lude the LGBT movement, whi?h seeks to promote so?ietal a??eptan?e of LGBT peoples; and the environmental movement, whi?h seeks to in?rease so?ietal awareness of environmental issues.In the movie Suffragette, the general attitude that so?iety held towards women was depi?ted as very negative and dismissive. For example, Sonny treated Maud like she was his property when she was first got home from jail, telling her to stop parti?ipating in suffragette demonstrations. Additionally, when the suffragettes were walking down the street on multiple o??asions, they were verbally harassed by men. Perhaps the most powerful quote of the film is when Sonny drops Maud off on the street and prevents her from seeing George, be?ause “the law says he ?an.” All of these examples help establish ?ontext for the feminist movement at the time, whi?h sought to make women legally equal to men. Not only were women treated unequally in the law with regards to issues su?h as ?hild ?ustody, but they were generally viewed as inferior by so?iety as well.The se?ond wave of feminism existed roughly from the 1960s to the 1980s, and fo?used on redu?ing inequality in areas su?h as family, employment, and sexuality. It also drew attention to issues su?h as domesti? violen?e and marital abuse.The third wave emerged in the early 1990s and ?ontinued into the early 2010s. This wave of feminism fo?used on issues su?h as individualism and diversity.Establishing ?ontext is in?redibly important when analyzing so?ial movements. For example, in the film Suffragette, the way that women were portrayed bordered on appalling by today’s standards. Similarly, the advan?es made by the Suffragette movement seemed quite underwhelming by today’s standards, where women are legally and so?ially equal to men. However, we must ?onsider that the world was not nearly as developed as it is today ba?k then; the average lifespan was three de?ades lower than it is now, the world was being ?onstantly ravaged by war and ?onquest, and women were ?onsidered inferior all a?ross the world. Considering this, the a?tions of the Suffragettes seem heroi? and brave. Similarly, if we view modern feminism through the lens of the early 20th ?entury, the idea of topless women wearing ‘pussy hats’ s?reaming about ‘rape ?ulture’ and ‘mi?roaggressions’ is beyond ridi?ulous. (I’m exaggerating a bit to make a point. Not all feminists are like this, but the point still stands)It is equally important that we view today’s so?ial movements through the appropriate lens. In the Western world, we are ?urrently privileged enough to have the e?onomi? foundation on whi?h so?ial movements ?an be sustained. We do not have to worry about food, water, or safety, so we ?an ?ontinue to advan?e more progressive so?ial ?hange. Ea?h era has its own ?ontext and ?orresponding so?ial movements. It is very important to establish ?ontext when evaluating so?ial movements, be?ause ?ontext ?an have a huge influen?e on our per?eption of so?ial movements.Modern feminism is not feminism. A??ording to a 2017 YouGov poll, only 23 per?ent of Ameri?an women ?onsider themselves feminists, but 82 per?ent believe in ‘the so?ial, politi?al, and e?onomi? equals of the sexes.’ The latter is the di?tionary definition of the word ‘feminism.’ Many so-?alled ‘feminists’ would ?laim that this gap is due to systemi? stigmatization of the feminist movement whi?h is a part of the war on women.I think that it is be?ause feminism has be?ome more the publi? fa?e of hysteri?al left-wing intoleran?e than a true women’s’ movement. Combine that with the downright bizarre and ridi?ulous demands that some radi?al feminists put forward, and it is not surprising that many people view modern feminism as embarrassing. Of ?ourse there are extremists on all sides of the so?ial and politi?al spe?trums; just as there are radi?al feminists on the left side of the spe?trum, there are rampant ra?ists and misogynists on the right. Truthfully, I would be just as glad to write a ?riti?ism of ra?ism as I would be to write one about feminism. Extremism in any form is generally not good; it breaks down dialogue, ?reates division, and involves the silen?ing of majorities by vo?al minorities. Feminism is a great example of this. There are millions of people who want equality of the sexes (and really, everybody should). However, their beliefs are overshadowed by the ridi?ulousness of radi?al feminists. On the flip side of the spe?trum, the same is true. A great example of this is immigration. There are millions of people who would like to have se?ure borders and a merit-based immigration system. Their views however are overshadowed by genuine ra?ists who want less immigration, not be?ause they believe in merit or fairness, but rather be?ause they don’t like foreigners. In both of these examples, radi?al or extreme minorities within ea?h group negatively refle?t the image of the entire group, and as a result, stifle meaningful and ?onstru?tive dis?ussion on their respe?tive issues.I have seen extreme feminists on so?ial media – individuals who de?lare that looking at a woman the wrong way ?onstitutes sexual assault and who often literally respond to opinions that they don’t like with s?reams. Surely this level of extremism ?ould not exist in the real world. Then I started ?oming a?ross news arti?les su?h as this glowing profile of a lesbian ?ouple raising a ‘genderless’ ?hild. Most (I hope) would believe that this kind of behavior is ridi?ulous. This apparently does not in?lude the folks at NPR who wrote about this ?ouple and their ‘boy?hi?ks.’ I do not think that it is impossible to ?raft a more nauseating and paradoxi?al paragraph than the one this ‘queer-identified male-partnered monogamist’ uses to des?ribe her ‘son’:”She des?ribes her boy?hi?k, born in Mar?h 2007, as a “male-assigned at birth — and so far apparently ?omfortable with that assignment, white, ?urrently able-bodied, ?ongenitally hypothyroid, ?osleeper, former breastfed toddler, elimination ?ommuni?ation graduate, sling baby and early walker, trial and terror, ?li?hed light of our life, and impetus for the blog. Odds are good he will be the most privileged of persons: a middle ?lass, able bodied, ?isgender, straight, white male.”What is truly appalling to me is not the realization that there are ?razy people in the world – ?razy people have always existed – but rather that the most vo?al modern feminists a?tually strive to normalize this hysteria into the realm of relevant ?ultural ?ommentary.In the eyes of many, feminism has mutated from a women’s movement striving for equality into a radi?al movement that seems to be all about a?hieving misguided short-term wants, mostly through name-?alling and other forms of bullying, at the expense of any basi? integrity or long-term intelle?tual ?oheren?e. This of ?ourse, does not refle?t all feminists; I’m sure that the vast majority are not like this. But as mentioned earlier, the extreme vo?al minority refle?ts the most on this movement in a negative way. In the long run, how many women would want to be identified with a moralless postmodernist movement su?h as this? A movement whose ?hampions demand ‘safe-spa?es’ to prote?t themselves from the real world? How many women want to be identified with a movement that displays a repugnant level of hyper-sensitivity and emotional fragility? A movement that argues that Mark Zu?kerberg’s preferen?e for plain T-shirts is sexist. Treating women fairly in our politi?s and our ?ulture is simple fairness. Contrastingly, modern feminism is not about fairness but rather entitled pleading and irrationality.Modern feminism does not have a philosophy. It is barely even an ideology. It has be?ome a series of temper tantrums thrown by a small privileged minority. Unless something is ?hanged, it will soon be?ome irrelevant, bringing down with it the ?ountless reasonable women and men who genuinely believe in equality of the sexes.Furthermore, modern feminism is plagued by double standards and hypo?risy. Outspoken feminists are utterly silent when it ?omes to men being vi?tims of gender inequality. Men ?omprise 92 per?ent of workpla?e fatalities, 94 per?ent of workpla?e sui?ides, 77 per?ent of homi?ide vi?tims, and bear 82 per?ent of ?hildhood ?ustody losses. Let’s take another look at the definition of feminism: ‘the theory of the politi?al, e?onomi?, and so?ial equality of the sexes.’ If modern feminism truly valued gender equality, we would hear about these statisti?s as mu?h as a we hear about that supposed ‘wage gap.’ However, that is not the ?ase. There are ?ertainly many self-pro?laimed feminists who truly believe in the real definition of feminism. Unfortunately, a few radi?al feminists have transformed the movement into a postmodernist ?ult that is less ?on?erned with true gender equality than it is with sowing dis?ontent. If individual feminists want their voi?es to be heard, they must either leave the modern feminist movement, or the modern feminist movement must ?hange so that people will a?tually take them seriously. Ensuring that men and women have equal rights should be an intrinsi? moral imperative for all people of all ?ultures. That is, it is in?redibly important that we have honest dis?ussions about the very real problems fa?ing men and women alike. The outrage that some ‘feminists’ would dire?t at somebody who expresses these views would probably be mu?h greater than their outrage against ?ountries su?h as India, where 57 per?ent of teenage boys think that wife-beating is justified. Or perhaps against the fa?t that, in ?ertain ?ases, the testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man in the legal systems of Iran and Yemen… and Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and the UAE. Surely they must ?are that, in Moro??o, rape vi?tims are viewed as partially responsible and ?an be ?harged with ?rimes. Well, to be fair, the oppressors in these ?ases are not ?isgender, straight, white men, so it would be ra?ist to ?riti?ize them. Moving on… So is feminism a dead and lost ?ause? Absolutely not! There are still plenty of ways whi?h it ?an be saved and true equality ?an be fought for. The first of these is to rid ourselves of the feminist mindset that women are inherently less ?apable than men. This vi?tim mentality does nothing. The free market only ?ares about one ?olor: green (that’s the ?olor of money). If women want to see gender equality, they should throw away those worthless gender studies degrees and get a degree in Engineering or Nursing. It is at this point that men must be?ome involved by treating women fairly and as equals, judging them by their merits rather than their gender. Se?ondly, there must be ?onstru?tive dialogue between people about ensuring gender equality; alienating the very people ‘feminists’ ?laim to be oppressed by is ?ounterprodu?tive. Women ?an start by abandoning some of the ridi?ulous fa?ets of feminism so that they ?an be taken seriously. Men ?an start by being more open-minded and aware of the genuine issues surrounding gender equality, and working within reason to ta?kle those issues. Finally, we must a??ept the fa?t that there are real differen?es between men and women. Men are, by nature, physi?ally stronger, more aggressive, and externally oriented. Women on the other hand tend to embody the ideal of inner dignity. Some people ?onfuse this subtlety with weakness; it is, in truth, just as strong as physi?al for?e. The nature of women, while subtle, is not weak. The nature of men on the other hand, while aggressive, is not beastly. The answer to gender inequality is not that men and women try to be the same, nor is it that we abandon the ?on?ept of gender altogether. Rather, both men and women should embra?e their different gender roles and use them to ?omplement ea?h other in the mutual quest to improve life. Individuals of both genders should strive to be themselves, and realize that they ea?h have a set of unique strengths and abilities with whi?h they ?an pursue their goals. This is true feminism.