Conservative Feminism?

[Eileen]

I'm going with defining the objective as "ensuring a fairer, safer, more just, more equitable world for women," which might require us to define a few problems that get in the way of that.

-lack of equal pay for equal work
-glass ceilings
-mommy tracking
-the biological reality that women can have babies and men can't, therefore resulting in a bodily experience that primarily affects individual women
-stereotypes about female abilities in male-dominated occupations (even politics)

[Peguy]

Originally Posted by Eileen

I'm going with defining the objective as "ensuring a fairer, safer, more just, more equitable world for women," which might require us to define a few problems that get in the way of that.

-lack of equal pay for equal work
-glass ceilings
-mommy tracking
-the biological reality that women can have babies and men can't, therefore resulting in a bodily experience that primarily affects individual women
-stereotypes about female abilities in male-dominated occupations (even politics)

This seems to be under the assumption that women should be become more like men, and do things men can do. I guess a more "conservative" approach to feminism would stress more the unqiue qualities of women in particularly feminine areas of life, and that these attributes deserve the same amount of dignity and respect as masculine qualities. So men and women are equal, but different.

The main feminine area of life they tend to doiminate is the home. Nowadays to say this implies you're denegrading female roles. Quite the contrary, the home has always been the main foundation for culture in any authentic sense.

[Eileen]

Well, what about the economic reality that families need two incomes to be solvent these days?

[Orangey]

Originally Posted by Peguy

Sorry, I always get those names mixed up.



Yes but by 1980, she revised her views saying that women find the most fufillment within the nuturing of the home.

She was often at odds with more radical Feminists, stating once

"I’m at odds with the radical feminists because I’m not anti-marriage and anti-family. I always thought it was dangerous to go against the idea of the family. I don’t even like the phrase ‘women’s liberation’ because that idea of being set free from everything doesn’t seem right to me."

I think you need to put that in context. Radical feminism is an almost cult-like subgroup of the broad category of 'feminism' that is known for being well and away the most obnoxious one. These are the lesbian separatists, the ones who start all women colonies and write 'man-hating' literature. So yes, Betty Friedan had more of a classical liberal view of feminism than that, and this caused her to butt heads with that part of the movement when it was strong. However that is not to say that she believed domesticity to be part of the innate nature of women, which I don't think is true.

[Peguy]

Originally Posted by Eileen

Well, what about the economic reality that families need two incomes to be solvent these days?

Yeah and that's a direct result of women entering the workplace. Before, the common demand was for a family living wage. This was a demand shared by both traditionalists and many radicals. A classic example of the former was Pope Leo XIII's encyclical on workers' rights Rerum Novarum.

[Peguy]

Originally Posted by Orangey

So yes, Betty Friedan had more of a classical liberal view of feminism than that, and this caused her to butt heads with that part of the movement when it was strong. However that is not to say that she believed domesticity to be part of the innate nature of women, which I don't think is true.

She clearly stated in The Second Stage that a woman's sense of identity is found through "love, nurture, home."

[Eileen]

I can appreciate celebrating distinctly feminine activities and roles, but what about the women who don't want that/don't fit there? What do conservative feminists do with that?

I would say that I am a very, very moderate feminist when I say that I believe that women should be able to choose their lifestyles--professional, domestic, whatever--without judgment.

[Lateralus]

I would say that I am a very, very moderate feminist when I say that I believe that women should be able to choose their lifestyles--professional, domestic, whatever--without judgment.

'Without judgment'? I could agree to 'without impediment', but not to 'without judgment'.

[Eileen]

If all conservative feminism does is reinforce and celebrate traditional feminine roles, what is the social objective? Does it just elevate women from second-class to people who make real (domestic) contributions? Is there any way that conservative feminism would strive towards more fairness/safety/justice for women?

[Eileen]

Originally Posted by Lateralus

'Without judgment'? I could agree to 'without impediment', but not to 'without judgment'.

Why do you have a problem with "without judgment"? Why should a woman who wants to be a stay-at-home-mom be judged for that? Or why should a woman who wants to be in the army be judged for that? Or why should a woman who wants to be a CEO of a major corporation be judged for that? I agree, "without impediment" is good. But why not without judgment too?