What's In a Name?: The Problem with "Feminism"

The least binaristic representation of gender equality I could find. (Source)

As you've probably noticed, the "F-word" has quite the sordid reputation. "Feminism" can mean so many different things that the concept to which it refers is often misinterpreted, misrepresented, and misappropriated, to the detriment of all genders. Among contemporary feminists, the generally agreed upon definition of feminism  - quoted so eloquently by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie in her book and her TEDx Talk - is the belief in "the social, political, and economic equality of the [genders]” (I've replaced “sexes” with “genders” to align my work with theories distinguishing between the two). The popular perception of feminism, however, ranges from minor confusion to downright ignorance: that feminists hate men, that we think we are better than men, that we willfully ignore intersectional concerns, and even that gender equality should no longer be an issue because it has supposedly been achieved, are all allegations that stem not only from mislabeling certain people (like those who unequivocally hate all men) as feminists, but also from a misconception of feminism itself.

Clearly this is just one of many cases in which the connotative and denotative meanings of a word are so disconnected that they indicate the need for serious reassessment of certain aspects of our language. I propose that the backlash against feminism is partially a function of the word "feminism" itself: it not only excludes genders other than feminine, it also represents the concept as monolithic, as if all feminists and non-feminists agree on a single definition (which they clearly don't) and as if it has always meant the same thing. Arguments against this idea are varied, coming from feminists and non-feminists alike, although there are definitely proponents on both sides as well (as evidenced by this Debate.org page).

One of the main arguments against my position (found in articles like these) is that changing the word will do little to assuage the resistance against gender equality, that the word we use is irrelevant when confronting a population in denial about the persistent systemic and institutional gender inequality historically entrenched in some of "Western" culture's most basic values and assumptions. Aside from the disturbing pessimism inherent in this argument, it also makes little sense from a contemporary sociolinguistic perspective. Another argument is that using umbrella terms (like gender equality or equalism) further marginalizes already marginalized groups, like women, and focuses attention only on the dominant population. I'd respond (with just one of the many possible counter-arguments) that reactionary ideologies like men's rights activism, which has been steadily gaining traction (much to the dismay of people who actually understand gender issues), do even more to marginalize, silence, and erase non-dominant groups than an inclusive, catch-all term would.

Suffice it to say that this is an issue that requires more redress than space currently permits. The "F-word" creates more barriers than it opens opportunities for frank, productive conversations about gender issues. It is practically as alienating as that other ubiquitous f-word, and alienation is the exact opposite of what feminism is supposed to be promoting. This is by no means an original or unique position; I would simply like to examine this issue from a more analytical and theoretically-grounded perspective than I see public intellectuals engaging with.

How We Say What We Think May Not Be All There is To Know!

Language and How You Think

All humans communicate through a language, either vocally or through sign. Over the past sixty to seventy years, researchers have been studying what our brains actually do with spoken words. A recent study found that the sounds of languages are identified in the brain in much smaller scale than features. Dr. Edward Chang and his peers at the University of California, San Francisco and Berkeley unraveled a bit of the mystery. “It’s about how small or microscopic neural responses can be recorded” Scientists Map Your Brain. In the process of watching the brain listen to sounds in English, they were able to measure in more finite terms how the superior temporal gyrus translates “auditory signals into something the brain ‘hears’” by putting electrodes directly onto the participants' brains Scientists Map Your Brain.

Learning what and how the brain hears may have tremendous effect on what and how we think the world over. Benjamin Lee Whorf's infamous notions in his 1940 article said "that talking is merely an incidental process concerned strictly with communication, not with formulation of ideas” Science and Linguistics. As we grow, humans become unconscious of what Whorf calls natural logic due to the confines of their language. Each language creates a parameter of sorts with how we think, not just how we hear. “Talking, or the use of language, is supposed only to “express” what is essentially already formulated nonlinguistically. Formulation is an independent process, called thought or thinking, and is supposed to be largely indifferent to the nature of particular languages” Science and Linguistics.

Language confines the natural space of a culture according to Whorf. If we were to really analyze the language of Native American tribes or African groups we would see that their form of communication and grammatical sense varies tremendously. This led Whorf to the idea that we do not all think alike. It is the language and the structure of sounds and words that formulate our thoughts. “The Hopi actually call insect, airplane, and aviator all by the same word, and feel no difficulty about it” Science and Linguistics.

Whorf was eventually debunked as there was no factual evidence to support his claims. The New York Times Magazine in 2010 revisited the ideas Whorf wrote about and stated that the question remains how we actually do view life with our separate languages. “The renowned linguist Roman Jakobson pointed out a crucial fact about differences between languages…‘Languages differ essentially in what they must convey and not in what they may convey” Language and How You Think.

How we say what we think may influence us perhaps to pay attention to specific details in one language over another. For example, “When I speak English, I may say about a bed that ‘it’ is too soft, but as a native Hebrew speaker, I actually feel ‘she’ is too soft. ‘She stays feminine all the way from the lungs up to the glottis and is neutered only when she reaches the tip of the tongue” Language and How You Think. Perhaps one day soon we will be able to put it all together and be able to communicate no matter the language!

Public Schools Stifling Spanish: The English Language Learner Dilemma

            Picture this: it’s your first day of kindergarten. You may have just moved to a new neighborhood, one that is middle class compared to the block you used to live on. You are excited to meet new friends and learn all about new subjects at school…there’s just one problem. You don’t speak English.



A classroom depicts diversity in their students’ languages.

            This scenario happens all too often nationally in our public schools. Teachers are not equipped to teach or understand Spanish, so the children that come into class with this perceived “deficit” are pushed to the wayside. They are labeled incompetent, delayed, and even learning disabled. They are pushed further and further down the ranks of the educational class level hierarchy, until they are forced to be in class levels inappropriate to their skills, if only given the right chance. It is imperative that these discriminatory situations be abolished, but for that to happen one must educate themselves on the wrongs of our education system.

            In her article in The Atlantic, Melinda D. Anderson states that "one in four school children ages 5 to 17 speak a language other than English at home.” This striking statistic should be enough to jolt those in the education system to reevaluate the direction that our schools are taking to educate students who are not from a purely American background, and who do not speak the same language as their born-and-bred American classmates. Another issue regarding ELL students is the debate over whether it is more important for those who are considered ELLs to leave their culture behind and adopt the American way of life, or whether it should be their school’s priority to make them feel accepted in what may be foreign territory to them. To create even more difficulty for these students, the newly enacted Common Core Standards are holding all students to more difficult and rigorous standards, but now English Language Learners have another hurdle to clear. The critical thinking and vocabulary demands on students under these standards are more intense than ever, pushing students who may not be proficient in English into a deeper rut when trying to achieve in school using their second language. On the elementary level, it is concerning to come to terms with the fact that these students simply are not getting the correct pedagogical education that they need to succeed in the future. The controversial nature of these tests determining the futures of English language proficient students is one which is in the forefront, while struggling ELLs are left to add another reason to their list of why they will potentially not attend their dream college or be destined to follow the career paths of their immigrant parents because the American school system dictated to them that once again, they were not good enough. Closing the achievement gap for these students will be one of the most important issues for public school officials to grapple with in the future of standardized testing and curriculum shifts to come.

            American public schools must learn the origin of the detriment of their English Language Learners is not to stifle their original language, but to allow it to thrive and perpetuate learning. Made example by Anderson through research on public schools in California, the move toward not singularly teaching students in English has shown benefits for the English Language Learner population. By interweaving the cultures of these exceptional learners, the classroom will reap the benefits of multicultural learning and closing the learning and cultural representation gap for all students. By doing this, we can exemplify the exclamation made in the image above, and support bilingual classrooms for the betterment of all students.