The post 13 Oblivion mods that should not have been has been getting a lot of attention lately. It’s a great list, but I think the author forgot to include this mod necessary for anyone who wanted to play as a woman and didn’t want a handicap that could potentially affect gameplay: The Oblivion Equalizer.
Author: tekanji
Dinosaur Comics on the male gaze
It’s as the subject line says. Go and read, it is entertaining and educational!
Via revena.
Catholic League Plays the Victim Blaming Card
“As for the alleged abuse, it’s time to ask some tough questions. First, there is a huge difference between being groped and being raped, so which was it Mr. Foley? Second, why didn’t you just smack the clergyman in the face? After all, most 15-year-old teenage boys wouldn’t allow themselves to be molested. So why did you?â€
Getting victim blamed for abuse and molestation ain’t just for the girls, apparently. Not exactly the kind of “gender parity” I’d like to see, though.
Via Darth Sidhe.
Female Villains Can't Win
NWN2 Villains
The lineup for the villains in the next Never Winter Nights game has gotten some press over at Joystiq. Despite neither of the female villains being the “evil hot babe[s] we’ve grown accustomed to in the role playing genre”, the contrast between their stances and that of the male villain are striking.
He’s hunched slightly, in a way that looks like he’s going to charge you; a very active stance, and not one that draws attention to either his sexual organs or his musculature (the former being the trope for “powerful” women and the latter being the trope for “powerful” men). Described by Joystiq’s Alan Rose as “a frenzied berserker”, this “bald dude” seems to typify the Brute; he’s not exactly a high class villain, but even so he’s only one of many types of villain archetypes that one can choose from.
Which brings me to the next villain in the lineup; the “blue chick”. In terms of body type, if you took away the blue skin, changed her head, and upped her breast size a cup, she could almost be the twin of the other female villain. Of course, the one-size-fits-all female body type isn’t an issue confined to NWN (or even video games), and I gotta give the company points for the differences that are there.
In some ways, the blue villain isn’t the ideal of beauty: most notably, she has an odd-shaped head. But, looking at her posturing and her outfit there is definitely an element of sexuality that isn’t there with the Brute. While, with her sword raised high there’s no doubt that there’s an element to power in the blue villain’s posture, she’s shown in a 3/4 pose that causes the lines of her arms form a V that emphasises her chest. Costume wise, though I’m not sure what’s skin and what’s fabric, she appears to be wearing a chainmail loincloth and a halter top that is open to cleavage.
Finally, we have the last villain. Though her face is the recipient of Rose’s criticism (“Seriously, if you take away the flotation devices, we’ve got some serious androgyny going on here.”), I rather like that her face is less feminine than the blue villain’s. No, it’s not because I hate attractiveness, but rather because it seems to be one step in the direction of portraying many different types of women.
That said, she, too, is sexualized for all of her supposed androgyny. Her hands-on-hips position is, again, one of power (in this case its’ the power of defiance), but it also emphasizes her hips in a way that makes it clear that she’s supposed to be read as feminine. Her costume, with the focal point being her cleavage, does the same.
Honestly, I feel bad for the female villains out there — not only do they have to contend with the sexist digs if they don’t fit the “hot villain babe” category, but they still can’t seem to get away from sexualization even when it seems that their characters aren’t there to be sexualized! Come on, video game companies, won’t somebody think of the villains?
That's not Mii!
Update Dec 30, 2006: I’m admitting it straight up: I jumped the gun on this one and looked foolish because of that. I should have taken the time to frame it properly (examining why the preview program was this way, rather than addressing the Mii system, which wasn’t out yet) and then waited for the Wii to come out to do a comparison with the actual Mii system (which has its flaws as well as its good points).
However, my mistake is not an invitation to break the discussion rules. Commenters seem to be incapable of pointing out my flawed logic without calling me “stupid” or using terms like “whining” or “crying”. Since those kinds of comments are the only one this post continues to receive, I’m shutting off all comments. I’m not sure there’s anything else to be said on this issue, anyway, unless I make a new post that discusses the actual Mii system.
***
For those of you not in the gamer-know, one of the features that’s going to be available on Nintendo’s upcoming console, the Wii, is that you’ll be able to make an avatar of yourself, which will appear Mii channels and even represent you in some of the games. Sounds cool, right?
Well, not if you’re a glasses-wearing, green-haired loving, spiky haired woman who wants an avatar that even slightly resembles her. That’s right, folks, your resident blogger has checked out the Mii preview that was recently leaked.
Male-normative mindset, meet gaming avatar.
Since there is only one body type to choose from, the only ways I could signifiy my gender are long hair, eyelashes, and red lips. Every other combination I’ve tried resulted in it looking like a man. I’m not a man, I’m just not a wide-eyed, lip-puckering, long-haired girl. But that doesn’t make me any less female, or any less interested in having a Mii who, I dunno, looks even somewhat like me.
Since this is pre-launch, there’s still hope that they’ll introduce more body shapes. Maybe even some non-human ones (’cause sometimes I don’t want a freaky chibi-styled human to represent me, even if it did look like the correct gender). I’m hoping, because otherwise it’ll put a serious dent in my willingness to buy a Wii — especially if the avatar-using games are popular.
New Blog: The Silence of Our Friends
The Silence of Our Friends seems to have come about because of the recent Clinton blogger lunch debacle. Personally, I’d call this blog the silver lining to a dark, dark cloud.
An excerpt from Donna’s most recent post:
One example is when discussing racially divisive issues a white person will pipe up that we should leave behind identity politics and concentrate our efforts on the greater good. But the greater good generally means that white people determine what issues are important and in our collective best interests, and this may be of very little service to POC. We think that the collective good should be working towards ALL of our interests, not just yours. You can not find out what we believe is in our interest if you aren’t even willing to listen to us, and instead dismiss us. This does not mean that we expect to only work on our issues, we expect to discuss and compromise; it is the white person who expects to only work on what they choose as important while we are expected to be quiet and go along to get along.
One other thing, when white people do recognize institutional racism many times they do not speak out. They think it’s not their problem and look the other way. This is why there was so much anger expressed over the Clinton blogger lunch by POC. Our allies abandon us when we need them. The bloggers there did not make it a priority to find out why diverse voices weren’t included and explain to their readers. And the blogosphere in general either did not see a problem, or were afraid of the reaction of their peers if they sided with POC, for instance by delinking or banning them.
Stalker King
You think Burger King thought of this possibility when they commissioned their game Sneak King?
This is where the King gets slapped with a restraining order.
All I gotta say is that BK is batting 0 for 2 in my book.
Via Joystiq.
A Deeper Look at "Minority Spaces"
So, a while back I got an e-mail from a reader about my Nice Guy list. Finding it interesting, I decided to make it the subject of a post. That was, as I said, a while ago. I am nothing if not a procrastinator.
Anyway, the e-mail (reprinted with permission) is as follows:
Hi,
I read the article “How To Be A Real Nice Guy” and most of the comments to it last night, and I am somewhat confused by what is really a core premise of the article that isn’t fully articulated, namely what exactly you are saying qualifies as a Minority Space. The definition given is “Minority spaces exist, whether they be safe-spaces, places where we can go to not have to focus on priviliged groups for once, or even exclusionary ones.” This leaves me with a number of questions. For example, is a blog on feminist issues by default a Minority Space by virtue of its subject matter being one of concern to the Minority rather than an issue that caters to the privileged group? Or would there need to be more specific and/or explicit criteria followed for it to constitute a Minority Space? Further confusing me is that certain parts of the article appear to treat the concept of entering a Minority Space interchangably with having a conversation with a member of a Minority.
There is in your article a strong emphasis on the idea that members of a Majority who are in a Minority Space should listen and learn (without requiring active teaching) and refrain from actively participating, and in particular, to be extremely cautious when comparing the experiences of that Minority group to their own as a member of another Minority group and not to compare said experiences at all to the experience of the Majority. I certainly agree that members of a Minority should be free to construct such a space if that is their wish, and there are certain spaces that could be assumed by their very function to be, unless otherwise noted, a Minority Space of this type (eg a rape survivor peer counselling group). But a broad definition of Minority Space that encompasses any space where members of the Minority engage in discussion about issues of concern to their Minority, combined with all members of the Majority who participate following your suggestions (a perhaps unlikely hypothetical) would largely preclude direct discussion between members of the Minority and members of the Majority on those subjects, which would be an unfortunate result.
(Of course, it could be that what I see as the inherent benefits of direct discussion between members of the Minority and members of the Majority- that the insights of all parties, both as individual thinkers and as people with the respective experiences of being part of the Minority and the Majority, will together allow understanding that would not have been possible otherwise- is a viewpoint derived from my position of privilege, and that such discussion is not actually beneficial to the Minority. Nevertheless, I believe that such benefits do exist.)
Nicolas
So, first, the simple answer: a “minority space” is a space created by minority groups, for minority groups. It may allow privileged groups to listen to or participate in discussion, and it may not. It differs from a “privileged space” in that its exclusionary nature is not designed to uphold established power structures (as with gentlemen’s clubs and the like), but rather to provide a safe environment for minority groups to discuss issues that are not able to get airtime in “default” spaces due to those spaces being primarily focused on so-called “real” issues which too often amount to issues that the privileged group cares about.
The longer answer to Nicolas’ questions will be behind the cut.
I. Is it a “Minority Space” or Not?
For example, is a blog on feminist issues by default a Minority Space by virtue of its subject matter being one of concern to the Minority rather than an issue that caters to the privileged group? Or would there need to be more specific and/or explicit criteria followed for it to constitute a Minority Space? Further confusing me is that certain parts of the article appear to treat the concept of entering a Minority Space interchangably with having a conversation with a member of a Minority.
Whether or not a space is a “minority space” is a question that can only be decided by the membership and/or proprietors of said space. It also can vary depending on the subject matter — this blog is primarily a minority space, but we’re one that welcomes all voices that follow the discussion rules, and there are a few posts that specifically address and invite the participation of privileged groups (such as the “Nice Guy” list).
I should also point out that, while I tend to conflate “minority spaces” with “safe spaces” in my “Nice Guy” post, they aren’t the same things. A “safe space” is one that has strict rules of support, many of which I have drawn on for my guidelines to approaching a minority space, and is, in general, not a debate space — not even for the minority members of that community. Minority spaces that are debate spaces can open the floor to discussion of privileged issues with minority groups and spaces. These spaces will sometimes invite privileged people to engage in the discussions in the hopes of fostering dialogue.
In general, though, I’m going to say that I think it’s best to treat any space populated primarily or wholly by a minority group as a safe space, unless specifically told to do otherwise. Even then, I’d say it would be a good idea to follow some of the same guidelines of a minority space even when it’s a minority issue in a default space. Sort of a it’s better to err on the side of politeness than on the side of rudeness kind of thing.
On that note, that idea — of treating conversations about minority issues as if they are taking place in a minority space — may be one reason that I seem to interchange the idea of a minority space with conversations about minorities/with minority individuals. While the two are not exactly the same, I believe that the fundamentals of a privileged person entering a minority space with respect and willingness to listen are the same fundamentals that are required when dealing with a minority individual as well.
II. Privileged Participation in Minority Issues
But a broad definition of Minority Space that encompasses any space where members of the Minority engage in discussion about issues of concern to their Minority, combined with all members of the Majority who participate following your suggestions (a perhaps unlikely hypothetical) would largely preclude direct discussion between members of the Minority and members of the Majority on those subjects, which would be an unfortunate result.
The role of a privileged person in a minority discussion is not one that is easy to define. The reason I emphasise the “listening instead of talking” and not trying to always compare a privileged situation to that of a minority problem in my list is because, more often than not, talking instead of listening and bringing up how an issue does/does not affect their group are methods used by privileged people that, by their nature, shut down discussion.
This doesn’t mean that one can never have a discussion about a minority that one isn’t part of. If that were the case, then I would have broken that rule on more than one occassion — I occassionally like to stick my nose in racial issues and I assure you that, despite being an Ashkenazi Jew (which in some places really is an ethnic minority), I am as lilly-white as they come and steeped deeply in my own privilege. But, at the same time, I’ve been doing this long enough to know when to keep my mouth shut and when to add my voice to the issue — and when I screw up (and we all screw up sometimes) and get called on it, I don’t argue but rather try to understand why I got called out so as to not repeat it in the future.
So, when have you learned enough that you can start speaking about minority issues without raising the ire of minority groups every time? I really don’t know. I think a big part of it is when being asked to check your privilege isn’t immediately answered with a defensive reply — “it’s not that I’m privileged, it’s that I disagree!” (the two aren’t mutually exclusive; in fact, I’d rather say that the privileged response necessitates disagreement, though not the other way around).
As for the rest… well, in terms of the way I do it, it’s all about carefully thinking about why I’m posting on the issue, what I hope to accomplish (which, in my case, has always been to show solidarity on the issue and, more importantly, to try to educate other people of my privileged class), and then check and re-check to make sure that I haven’t said anything offensive. If I do and get called on it, I apologize and take note of it for the next time.
In shorter terms, I look as myself as guest when I discuss their issues. I am not the one in charge, I am not the authority; I am a guest in their territory and therefore I need to treat them — and discussions that involve them — with the same respect I would someone who opened their home to me.
III. Conclusion
All in all, I have to say that “minority space” is a flawed term that doesn’t begin to define the complexity of privileged/minority interactions. Not only that, but not everyone will have the same exact definition of a minority space, nor the guidelines for interacting within that space, or even with a minority individual. Especially with the latter, because, being individuals, one person’s preferred interaction will differ from another’s.
Still, I use the term as a generalization in order to make clear my even more general point about privilege. Flawed as it is, I don’t think it’s altogether a bad set of guidelines for beginners interacting with groups that they are not a part of. The definitions that I use for minority spaces are used because I think that they offer solutions for some of the common problems that plague privileged/minority interactions (therefore shutting down any meaningful dialgoue) and will open up a path to greater understanding of the dynamics that govern our lives. In turn, that theoretically opens the way for discussion and, ideally, solutions to these problems.
The 55 Greatest Moments in Gaming… as long as you aren't a woman
So, GamePro did this feature on The 55 Greatest Moments in Gaming (you may have to reload the page to get past the ad). I check it out ’cause, hey, I’d like to see what others find memorable about video games. Now, mind you, when I clicked on the link I knew what I was getting into: the video game industry is historically a “boy’s club” environment and I’m going to take a wild guess and say that the three editors who created the list are all guys.
But, hey, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t call the list out on its gender representation, so here goes. I’m going to look at some numbers regarding the games chosen and the way the article framed said games, then I’m going to organize the relevant games into three categories: 1) Sex and Sexuality, 2) Sacrifice as Heroism, and 3) Miscellaneous. The tropes that I criticize here, I might add, are not confined to this list; indeed, they are pretty common when looking at women in fiction and that includes gaming.
I. Crunching Numbers
So, I’ve done a little breakdown of the gendered references in the list. Mind you, there is a certain element of subjectivity to these lists, especially with the second one because I chose designate references of “you” to mean the character as N/A, even if the character was obviously male. But, still, I think it’s worth taking note of.
Gender of Player Characters in Chosen Game
| Female | Male | Both | Neither |
| 2 | 32 | 12 | 9 |
Gender References in Article
| Female | Male | Both | N/A |
| 4 | 10 | 3 | 38 |
So, what do these numbers mean? Well, firstly that the editors found more memorable moments in games with male protagonists than with any other game. This is, no doubt, due in part to the prevalence of male-only games — heck, they list Fable, which was supposed to be this amazing game where you could choose everything about your character down to his sexual preferences, and yet, somehow, they thought that “gender” wasn’t one of those important choices players would like to have.
Anyway, aside from lack of availability, another possibility is that we tend to grativate towards characters like us in a lot of cases. Growing up, if there was a time where a female character was an option, I’d take it. Unfortunately, those times were very few, so I had to settle for male characters more often than not. But the men out there don’t have that problem, so I can see why there would be an imbalance.
As for the references, well, overall I believe most of the references fell under “N/A” because they were highlighting specific features of the game — most of which weren’t relevant to gender. That the “male” references outnumber the “female” ones is, I think, a product of the games chosen — if the games focus on men (male protagonists, male main characters driving the storyline, etc), then it’s only logical for them to have more references. It should also be noted, that the “female” references outnumber the amount of games highlighted with female protagonists, though not ones with female player characters.
Now that the background is out of the way, we can move on to examining the way that the references to women were treated.
II. Sex and Sexuality
That the number one type of reference to women is in relation to their sex and sexuality is in no way surprising. How many times have we heard the old “sex sells” adage when yet another game sexualizing women comes out? In this world, women are always viewed through a lens of sexuality in a way that men are not, and that lens extends to video games and other forms of popular culture.
55. Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball (Xbox): That very first game with the D.O.A. girls changes your appreciation for game visuals. It’s rumored that the release of DOAX coincided with an…er, spike in the demand for computer animation courses in high schools and universities as gamers across the country sought to better understand the exquisite mystery that is “jiggle” physics.
Though last on the list, it’s first to be seen. The DoA series has become legendary because of its so-called “jiggle physics”. While the game is entirely populated by women — something pretty much unheard of in most video games — their purpose is primarily for titilation and the gameplay is made secondary to that. Not exactly the most memorable in terms of making strides for gender equality in video games.
Which brings us to the next one on the list…
47. Leisure Suit Larry in the Land of the Lounge Lizards (PC): Walking out of the bathroom with toilet paper on your shoe in this masterpiece of crude humor and soft-core debauchery, from the days when there was no ratings system and sixteen color EGA graphics were state-of-the-art.
I’m not sure what kind of fame the Leisure Suit Larry games had, but when I was little I knew about them, and if you search Abandonware sites you will find that it has no shortage of games in the series. While there’s no specific references to women here, seeing as the entire premise of the game is to get Larry laid, I’d say that it has a firm place in the “sex and sexuality” category. While this series is certainly memorable in terms of being one of the pioneers of adult PC games, I’d have to say that it gets a “pass” on gender parity, or, really, anything relating to the positive portrayal of women.
41. Smash TV (Arcade): Laying waste to countless foes, collecting ten keys, progressing to the correct part of the map, and making it into the elusive (and babe-filled) Pleasure Dome.
I can’t comment on the game itself, as I haven’t heard of it outside of this reference, but I think that the goal of the game being the “babe-filled” Pleasure Dome says it all. Again, male entitlement to women’s bodies isn’t exactly the most progressive idea here.
21. Combo Pack: Super Mario 64 (N64) and Tomb Raider (PS): The one-two punch in the polygonal revolution changed video games forever– moveable cameras and true three-dimensional gameplay put these two games a full step ahead of everything that had come before. Remember what it was like to look at those games for the first time?
You may ask why I include this one in this section. To those of you, I have two words: Lara Croft.
Love her, hate her, think of her as helping women or hurting them, there is one truth of her: she is a sexualized character. Even as the capable protagonist of her own series, made into not one but two movies, and still going strong many years later, when we think of Lara Croft, the first thing that comes to mind isn’t usually her puzzle-solving prowess, but rather her T&A.
I can’t say what affect the Tomb Raider series has had on the portrayal of gender in video games, but I’m not ready to put Lara into the “solution” category when so much of her fame is dependent on her sexuality.
III. Sacrifice as Heroism
Women as nobly sacrificing themselves, or otherwise dying to aid the cause of the (normally male) protagonist is a longstanding trope in fiction. So, again, it’s not surprising that it made a couple appearances on this list.
25. Breath of Fire II (SNES): Mina sacrifices herself to become Nina’s “wings.” Tragic, but sacrificial game progression earns Breath of Fire II bonus style points.
For the record, I hated that part of BoF II. Hated, hated, hated it! Tag-along sister sacrifices herself so that her sister can carry Ryu, the hero, and his band of merry followers to challenge the evil goddess? Annoying, not tragic. Ranks up there with Tiga asking Ryu if he could marry Katt. I hated that scene so much that I retconned it in my mind that she kicked the crap outta Tiga and he respected her after that. Too bad the reality was that she coddled him after he treated her like property.
But, personal opinion aside, I’m insulted that they chose that as the defining moment of BoF II. I mean, hello, if we’re talking game dynamics (which they do), what about the Shaman system? It wasn’t exactly user-friendly, but it was one of the most innovative gameplay options I had seen since Dragon Warrior IV. I mean, is it just me, or is that a hell of a lot more memorable than some cliche trope of sacrifice?
1. Final Fantasy VII (PlayStation): Aeris is killed by Sepiroth in one of the most heartbreaking scenes ever in a video game. Those big, cute eyes will never blink again under the wrath of Sepiroth. You’d only be lying if you said you didn’t cry.
Which brings us to the “most memorable event”; the death of Aeris. I’m going to admit something right off the bat — I never saw this scene. I got my PSX waaay after FFVII came out and, well, I never played it. I heard about it when my friend came in one day wailing about how Sephiroth killed his favourite character. I heard that it was very well done.
So, really, I can’t offer too much of a comment on their choice to include this point — which, in terms of what I saw of fan reactions, really does seem to deserve the title of “most memorable” — but rather that it’s interesting that the most memorable event is of a woman who died so that she could later protect the hero, Cloud.
IV. Miscellaneous
Then there are one-offs that are stand alones or I don’t really know how to categorize.
53. Final Fantasy VI (SNES): The opera house sequence with Celes and Locke.
I was always a fan of Celes, although the whole attempted suicide thing rather bugged me. Locke was okay, but I was never all that into the idea of them in a relationship. Regardless, the opera house sequence was my all-time favourite part of FFVI aside from, maybe, the fact that Terra was this kick ass esper who, despite her emotional issues, was the love of my life. I mean, green hair, devastating attacks… GREEN HAIR. Did I mention that my all time favourite FF character is Rydia? I sometimes wonder how much of my personality was molded by that character.
But, I digress. I’m not entirely sure how to categorize this one, except perhaps tagging it with being romance related. But I dunno.
11. Prey (PC): We won’t ruin it for you, but suffice it to say that the big reunion with your abducted girlfriend isn’t quite what you were expecting.
Never played this game, but from the blurb it seems to be some sort of play on the “Damsel in Distress” trope. Would have to play the game, or talk to someone who did, to figure out how they utilized it. It seems like there was some sort of twist, but that could be anything from the fact that your gf wasn’t kidnapped but was rather part of the organization that “kidnapped” her to the people who kidnapped her turning her into a monster who is the final boss. Like I said, didn’t play it, don’t know, can’t offer a real comment.
Update: A reader has e-mailed me with a visual walkthrough that reveals the truth about the twist. At the risk of being spoilery (though the original list completely spoilered the ending of Shadow of the Colossus, which would have pissed me off if I hadn’t already beaten it, so I don’t feel too bad here) I guessed right about the “twist” — it was my latter supposition. Aside from it being a horrible cliche — having a person guess the “omg memorable twist” without having played the game and knowing nothing of it aside from a screenshot and a blurb ain’t exactly the paragon of excellent writing — seeing as it wasn’t a “twist” on the concept of a damsel in distress, I gotta give this one a thumbs down for gender as well.
3. Metroid (NES): You beat the Mother Brain, race through the tunnels, and when you reach the surface of the planet…blammo! You discover that your hero Samus Aran is a woman. The sneaky game manual referred to Samus as a “he” making the revelation all the more surprising. Cool feature: you could replay the game with Samus sans spacesuit.
That last line almost had me put it into the “sex and sexuality” category because even Samus, this hardcore fighter who kicks the crap out of metroids in a non-sexy space suit, has to have the lens of sexuality applied to her as soon as her true gender is revealed. Not exactly Empowerment 101.
But, still, I remember when Metroid first came out, and how happy mom and I were when we beat it and realized that our kickass Samus was the same gender as us. And, if we look at later Metroid games, it’s not like she’s running around in a bikini, but rather continues in her traditional suit. So, at the very least, it seems that aside from that “shock reveal” Samus is still Samus, even if we now know that she has boobs and a vagina.
V. Conclusion
I’m not saying that I think these items shouldn’t have been included, but rather that the list is unsettlingly unbalanced. The game industry is not exactly known for its female-friendly games (and no, I’m not talking Nintendogs here, I’m talking games that don’t patronize women in some way), but have the editors never played Beyond Good and Evil? The Longest Journey? Kings Quest 7? Kyrandia 2? I’m not blaming the editors, or GamePro, or even the developers who made this game. This isn’t about blame; this is about noticing a pattern and putting a stop to it.
You want more women to game? You want more women buying your products, subscribing to your magazines, and participating in the gaming community? Then stop boxing women in games into a small subset of tropes like those seen above, stop believing that the only people you’re writing to are young, white, heterosexual men and boys. And, for those games, publishers, magazines, and people who have started catching on that women — yes, even women gamers — are people, too, good for you. Keep up what you’re doing because this gamer, for one, appreciates it.
To all feminists: Stop using the word "choice feminism"!
It has come to my attention recently that the term “choice feminism” is gaining popularity in the feminist blogsphere, used by feminists on feminists. This has got to stop. Why? Simply put, there are some words that should not be in the feminist lexicon. “Choice feminism” is one of them and I’m going to tell y’all why.
First, some backstory. One of the widely accepted terms that feminists do not lob at each other is “feminazi”. There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, the term was coined popularized by Rush Limbaugh specifically to discredit feminists. [Note: the term was actually coined by Tom Hazlett. I apologize for my mistake.] Through its usage, it has gained enough popularity to be listed in dictionaries such as Dictionary.com.
Secondly, because it is used to describe “extreme feminists” — which is itself a very subjective term — it is commonly used to reinforce the strawfeminist version of femiism: that we’re all angry, hairy legged, militant man-haters. For reasons like these, if feminists use that rhetoric against each other, we all lose, so, as a matter of principle, most of us don’t use it.
Now, as for “choice feminism” let’s first look at the origins. Linda Hirshman — who I have criticized for her anti-feminist rhetoric — coined the term specifically to create this pretend group of feminists who she could then attack.
So, parallels to the term “feminazi”. Created with the intention of discrediting certain feminists? Check. Is a term that no feminist self-identifies as, but rather is designed to create a strawfeminist that can be used to attack anyone who disagrees? Check. The popularization of it is contributing to the bad rap that feminists get? Well, no hard evidence on that one, but I personally think so.
Not to mention that the terminology tars with a rather large brush — to those unfamiliar with the nuances of the word, it is all too likely that they’d assume that any feminist advocating free choice as a driving factor of feminism is part of this crazy “choice feminism” that so many feminists have been ragging on.
The bottom line is that we don’t need any more terms used to attack feminists by creating these imaginary groups that don’t really exist. We don’t need to give our opponents more fodder, or give non-feminists yet another reason to distance themselves from us. And we most certainly don’t need any more divisive tactics.
So, I’ll say it again, if you’re a feminist who uses “choice feminism” please drop it from your lexicon. You’ll be doing us all a big favor.
