By Anna Peterson
Feminism, like almost everything, evolves over time. The fight for women’s rights has evolved, and some say polluted. The sexualization of women and rejection of traditional roles offends many people, including members of the LDS Church. And I have to say I see their point.
Does being an active member of the LDS Church mean I have to forsake my upbringing as a feminist? I shouldn’t have to choose, but I feel as if I can’t reconcile the two. It makes me wonder: Is something lost in translation?
The crusade for equal job opportunity and the ability to choose work over traditional female roles has translated to a fight for equal pay and recognition in the workplace, as well as a continuation of the sexual revolution.
Just like our “foremothers,” we feminists like to make a splash. Instead of the disposing of our under-things and “wearing mini-skirt[s] and a button that said ‘c— power,’” as Gloria Steinem told the New York Observer, many women embrace the sexual side of their personalities and promote it.
The HBO show “Sex and the City,” for example, documents the lives and friendships of four women in New York City. The focus on their sex lives has been viewed as something of a modern sexual revolution; they view their experiences as men would, which was uncommon on television.
This gives me pause. Does having casual sex give women empowerment or have women conformed to a male paradigm instead of creating their own sexual identities?
The recent image of an “empowered woman” promoted in the media shows women who are empowered because they choose to be sexual objects as opposed to having the role forced on them. What happened to bra burning?
My religious beliefs and moral code prevent me from many of the behaviors that these feminists participate in. But why should I have to conform to these behaviors in order to be a feminist?
The feminist movement, to me, promotes the ability for women to take on any roles they like without facing discrimination.
Many people find my religion sexist because of its emphasis on traditional female roles of wife and mother. Many feminists regard the role of stay-at-home mom with disdain, as it represents years of female oppression before the feminist movement.
To these critics, I say: Isn’t some kind of reverse sexism to discriminate against a woman who chooses to embrace the role of wife and mother? Does one have to be a CEO or sex symbol to fit the modern ideal of feminist?
So much of feminist ideology has been polluted by modern society. Many young women regard Kim Kardashian as a kind of role model.
Let’s face it: She runs a successful business with her sisters, she is beautiful and she has lots of money. Her behavior, however, is so antithetical to feminist ideals it makes my head want to explode.
The images of “strong females” give a false sense of empowerment to women. I don’t need to be sexualized in order to take control over my life.
Kim Kardashian is a feminist because she runs a business. The short-lived “The Playboy Club” promoted female empowerment because a bunny can wear a corset and heels while killing a major mob boss. Again, I’d like a match and a bra, please.
The choices a woman makes should be taken into account. There is no need to conform to the male paradigm; a woman does not need to be masculine or overtly feminine to assert her role in society.
As a feminist, it’s my right to choose.
By Anna Peterson