Why people think you can’t do both of these things baffles me. Why is it, that in 2013, we still think that in order for a woman to really love a man, it’s a requirement that she give up her independence or strength? I’m watching Beyonce’s “Next Chapter” and Oprah, who is a very modern woman, says to her: “You balance the fierce woman with obviously a woman who adores and loves her man,” as if one concept has anything to do with the other. When Destiny’s Child released “Cater 2 U” in 2004, so many cried out “Beyonce` was on ‘Independent Women,’ now she’s talking about catering to her man? She’s contradicting herself, she’s flipped the script!” Again, I wondered what the correlation was. How was Beyonce` relinquishing her individual power by singing about rewarding her partner for being a quality mate? Successful, self-sufficient men don’t get accused of being hypocrites if they’re dedicated to their mate. A last Beyonce` example, my father saw her video for “Run the World” and came charging in the room saying “Well, if girls run the world, what does she need Jay-Z for?” implying that Beyonce` would only be with Jay-Z because she needs him to do something. Maybe the divorce rate wouldn’t be as high if we stop approaching or viewing relationships as an exchange of services or roles; I’ll cook a meal and you’ll take out the trash, or as a form of imprisonment and submission.

Even some feminists perpetuate the notion that women can’t be both individually strong and devoted to their partner, as some have negative opinions of marriage and stay-at-home mothers. Stereotypes that “independent” women are selfish and incapable of giving their home-life proper attention and that housewives are weak pushovers both stem from our society’s painful history with gender politics.

The origins of the feminist movement began when a woman’s existence was limited to being a wife and mother, with little command over her own life or input in her marriage. That being said, marriage and home-life seemed to be a woman’s primary oppressor. Despite progress away from this tone, gender bias still affects relationships as we (men and women) struggle as a culture to shake free of our conditioning and former way of thinking. As we did then, we are still forcing women to choose and are missing the point. The movement wasn’t and isn’t about living an independent (or “fierce,” as Oprah put it) life versus a marital life. It’s about choices and freedom; the opportunity to choose either path or both and having freedom within such. A woman is not forfeiting her power in loving a man unless she loses her identity, defines herself by or allows herself to be disrespected or silenced in her relationship. Being true to oneself doesn’t prevent one from being able to love fully. Actually, if “fierceness” and loving are related at all, lack of it would hurt your relationship because as RuPaul says “If you can’t love yourself, how in the hell are you gonna love somebody else? Can I get an ‘Amen’?!”

Male or female, if your partner measures your love by how much you yield to or dim your light for them, then they don’t know what love is about. As cliché` as it may sound, your partner should always want the best for you (even if it’s not them) and encourage you to grow and shine your light as bright as you can. Instead of stifling or negating your voice, they should want to hear it and be considerate of how you think and feel. A caring partner isn’t going to look at your “fierceness” as an infringement on theirs; they’re going to love that ish and respect it. So yeah, Beyonce` can be Crazy, Dangerously & Still in Love (all song titles) with her man and be the Bootylicious, Independent Survivor (also all song titles) mega-entrepreneur-entertainer that she is. Blue Ivy in one hand, mic in the other, man beside her.  

Not long ago, one of my guy friends complained that women “have too many issues with themselves and how they look.” One of my female friends argued that men aren’t as emotional as we are. I call poppycock on both of these ideas. It’s a stereotype that women have more self-esteem issues and are more emotional than men. Women’s image and self-esteem issues tend to be at the forefront because of how intensely women are objectified and sexually exploited, particularly in the media. Additionally, the desire to meet resulting, unreasonable beauty standards sometimes leads to extreme behaviors, like eating disorders. Women are viewed as more “sensitive” and likely to cry and openly discuss their feelings, so it’s assumed their driven by emotions and more fragile. The truth is that men struggle with self-esteem as well and are equally emotional; it just shows up in a different way.

 In American culture, a man must be attractive, have sexual prowess or a large penis, strength and substantial income (comes from the paradigm that men are the “providers”) to have “value.” Should a man fail to meet any of these expectations, he feels less than or is criticized. We won’t talk about this candidly because men are supposed be invincible and can’t possibly have a shaky self-concept, which brings me to emotions. Again, men are expected to be pillars of constant strength, therefore the only emotion socially acceptable for them to express is anger. By the way, anger IS an emotion. If a woman bawls her eyes out, she’s weak and “emotional,” but if a man punches a hole in the wall, he’s just angry. What a contradictory double standard. Anyhow, being limited to anger leads to covert, sometimes passive-aggressive expression, like withdrawal or avoidance. Being controlling, possessive, jealous or manipulative, cheating to meet needs or having resentment from a bruised ego are all examples of emotionally-motivated behavior. Thoughts and feelings aren’t sexist and don’t discriminate.

By C. Dyer, contributing writer
Note: This article is in response to a piece written by J.Says, entitled "Women's Rights: More Than Just Abortion."

According to many early feminists, abortion reflects not female empowerment, but a society in which being male is still the ideal. Rather than appreciating things that are uniquely female and powerful, like the ability to bear a child, society asserts that women must become like men in form and function to receive respect. Men still find social advancement easier than women who want to be mothers. This reality was reflected in President Obama's statement that Roe v. Wade allowed "our daughters [to] have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams." Abortion has done no more to resolve the problems of sexism than heavy makeup does to resolve racism. Financial success is still revered more than motherhood, as though moving up in the corporate world were more important than shaping the next generation.

"When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading for women to treat their children as property, to be disposed of as they see fit."-feminist Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1873)

The concept of children as property is an ancient idea we never fully abandoned. Child abuse first gained national attention in the late 1800's. The ownership of one's children was considered so personal and private, there wasn't even an institution for the prevention of child abuse. In fact, the first prosecuted child abuse case in the U.S. was brought by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. In many ways, we continue this tradition today. Many liberal Democrats would consider it cruel to shoot a cat or dog that inconveniences them, but would accept a woman's right to abort for the same reason. 

Two of the major questions in the abortion argument are "when does life begin to matter?" and "how far do abortion rights extend?" Catholics and other religious groups might contend that value begins at conception. Some atheists and pro-choice advocates believe it matters when the entity develops a self-concept. Both ideas are difficult to prove. Because of this, scientists choose different measures. Recently, many states have outlawed abortions occurring after 22 weeks because of ample scientific evidence that a fetus of that age can feel and react to pain. Even the federal government was willing to recognize some limits on abortion by upholding a partial-birth abortion ban. Most people, regardless of political affiliation, would concede that abortions past the point of viability are unethical. A layer of tissue is the only difference between an infant born a month early and an 8 month old fetus. To allow the abortion of an 8 month fetus would make opposition to infanticide seem hypocritical. The question of viability has been used by some to extend the abortion argument to young infants. There was a recent article in the Journal of Medical Ethics entitled "After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?" The authors received death-threats for their publication, but it raises some valid points. It argues that parents should have the option to "abort" their infant if they discover disabilities that medical exams didn't show. Many of the arguments for or against adoption in such a case would still hold true.

In the middle of a conversation, my friend says “you think women are more important than men.” I replied “That’s not true. What makes you say that?” and she responded “I don’t know. I just think you do.” I couldn’t help but think she felt that way because I’m a self-proclaimed feminist. My assumption was later on confirmed. Later on that day, I was reading an article about women who want to jump on the female empowerment bandwagon, but are hesitant because of the negative stigmas and notions surrounding the word “feminist.” Guess I have to write another stigma-busting article.

Game-changing movements are always met with countering adversity because they challenge long-held beliefs and seek to change our way of life. When the feminist movement of the 1960’s started (1960s-1990s is considered the 2nd major wave of the movement), both men and women were uncomfortable with it because feminism protested traditional gender ideals and a relational dynamic they had been used to. Some men felt threatened; women wondered if it wasn’t lady like or improper to step out of the mold placed upon them. Combine uncertainty, fear and traditionalism and you have anger. Many ferociously opposed feminism, claiming that it would be the downfall of our society (because without gender discrimination, we'd surely fall apart) and its supporters were misguided and classless. Feminism was the Grinch that stole gender Christmas. A bevy of other inimical conceptualizations were attached and fast forward to 2012, "feminism" or "feminist" is STILL kind of a bad word. There are multiple false stereotypes about the movement, but here are the main ones that grind my gears. 

Feminists are lesbian baby-killers.
Feminists are often assumed to be lesbians for a number of reasons; chiefly the movement's centralization on women and the belief that feminists are misandrist (misandry: the hated of men and boys) and anti-marriage (both beliefs are false; I'll get to those later). There are many feminist lesbians, but not all lesbians are feminist and vice versa. As a matter of fact, several of the movement’s key figures (such as Gloria Steinem) are heterosexual. Lesbian and women's issues can sometimes overlap, as sexism is a contributor to prejudice against lesbians.

The accusation that feminists are 'baby-killers' stems from the movement's role in supporting the availability of contraception and legalization of abortion. Some view abortion as a moral issue and wonder why it would be considered a gender issue. Obviously, pregnancy and abortion are a part of women’s health concerns and any legislation governing such is worth analyzing, as gender-bias or lack of sensitivity or awareness of the female experience may impact voting. Additionally, conservative or traditional views regarding women and child birth may be an influence. Abortion legalization support doesn’t mean feminists believe abortion should be used as a form of birth control or that women should approach it causally. Legalization is backed because feminists believe women should have the right to choose what happens with their bodies. Furthermore, it’s important to note that not all feminists support abortion legalization. During the 1970’s, there was a pro-life feminist group called Feminists for Life.

Feminists are against marriage and childbirth.
I addressed this myth in a previous article last year. In short, feminists are against the idea that’s it’s a woman’s DUTY to marry and procreate. Feminists are against the idea of a woman’s value being measured by her marital or childbearing status. Feminists are against women being treated like subordinates or property if they do indeed get married. Yes, some feminists are against marriage and others have chosen to remain unmarried, but that, again, isn’t everyone and the movement as a whole isn’t about being anti-nuptial.

Feminism is about eliminating and/or degrading men.
This is hands-down the biggest misconception about feminism, in my opinion. It makes NO SENSE to try to combat prejudice with prejudice. Feminism isn’t about hating, eliminating or devaluing men. It’s about pursuing equality for women and fighting gender-based injustice. We aren’t saying we’re more important than men; we’re saying we’re equally important.  A few of my male friends feel that feminism is about “reducing the power of men.” Why is it a problem if women feel empowered or just as powerful as you? It doesn’t make a man any less strong, powerful or awesome for woman to be strong, powerful and awesome. Also, there may be only a few, but male feminists do exist.  Any man can actively support causes for women.

Feminists are angry and bitter.
Passionate and outspoken, yes. And yeah, people being prejudiced against us based on our gender makes us a little angry. Wouldn’t prejudice against you make you angry? 

Feminism is useless and unimportant.
Women’s history should seriously be included in grade-school curriculum. I feel many of today’s women and men have no idea how far we’ve come in terms of gender quality. For example, until the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974, women couldn’t apply for a credit card unless their father or husband was a co-signer. My parents were in high school then. My parents are older than that act. Until 1978, it was completely legal to deny a woman employment or fire her if she was pregnant. 1980 was the first time that Equal Employment Opportunity Commission established concrete regulations against sexual harassment in workplace. All of these institutional changes were a result of efforts made by the feminist movement. Privileges we take for granted that we haven’t had for long. Thanks to the feminist movement, women have the right to vote in political elections, establishments can now be prosecuted for gender-discrimination, a number of domestic and sexual abuse centers exist, marital rape laws are in place, women have the same access to education as men, employment classifieds are no longer divided by gender and the list goes on and on. Many of the freedoms and opportunities women enjoy today were provided for by feminists, and the movement is not a thing of the past as sexism is still alive and well.

I’ve had multiple discussions with various people about the origins, impact and application of traditional gender roles and I always end up feeling the same way about them: I kind of think they should be abolished. I feel they do more harm than good, and that might be because of how they’re typically applied, but that’s how I feel. In terms of their usual function in marriage and family dynamics, traditional gender roles can be counteractive to familial bonds, border on being oppressive or paralyzing and build resentment between partners and family members. Under a conservative gender-role model, men are supposed to be the main (if not the only) source of income, manage all the finances/business matters of the home (ex. insurance) and perform any remote physical labor involved in maintaining the household (ex. mowing the lawn or taking out the trash). Women are to handle the child-care, cook and clean.
Resentment can easily build as partners may feel burdened by having to be the only one to do a certain task and desire additional help and/or feel like their contributions are taken for granted, underestimated or undervalued (for example, a man being viewed as an inadequate caretaker because family income is low or some feeling that being a housewife is not “real” work). Resentment can also develop if partners feel forced into or limited by their roles, and judged if they seek to step out of them (ex. a woman being made to feel guilty or that she’s a less efficient mother if she has a demanding job, or a man being labeled as weak for being a house-husband). Counteraction to familial bonds can occur with this model as fathers may be more emotionally detached or distant from their children due to mothers taking a more involved, daily role. Also, children can feel neglected by or detached from their opposite sex parent if parental involvement is delegated by gender (ex. things related to Bobby are handled by daddy and things related to Laura are handled by mommy).

Strictly-implemented gender roles can lead to paralyzation in the event that the other partner is not available to perform their designated duty due to death, disability, incapacitation or abandonment (ex. if a woman has never handled the family’s finances nor has any knowledge of how to do it, and her husband is incapacitated, major complications may arise). It only makes sense to me to gender assign responsibilities if it’s based on the physical differences between men and women. Men are generally stronger than women; there are tasks that women will have an immensely difficult time performing. Other than that, if both individuals are capable of completing a task, I don’t see why both can’t do it.

In our society, traditional ideas about gender permeate almost every aspect of our daily lives to excess. Children can’t even willfully choose what toys to play with because of such stringent ideas on what’s a “boy toy” and a “girl toy.” Not to mention “boy toys” and “girl toys” are hard-lined gender-role reinforcers: girls get accustomed to child-care early with urinating baby-dolls and boys get the notion that they’re the only ones that can serve the country with G.I. Joe “action figures” (forbid they’re called dolls instead of action figures). This saturated application is why I find rigid gender roles to be more harmful than helpful. They’ve created a sense of competition between men and women and an obsession with power as individuals ferociously seek to avoid being in a subordinate position. It’s also at the root of inferiority/superiority complexes and self-esteem issues (ex. why a male feels less than if he hasn’t had sexual intercourse by particular age or why females are so obsessed with reaching beauty standards). Why is it that when a male is sexually-assaulted or domestically abused, no one believes him or he's labeled as frail? Gender role ideas. Why was Nancy Pelosi asked who would take care of her children when she was seeking a governmental career? Male politicians don’t get asked that. Gender role ideas. Why was there a male heckler with a sign that read “Iron My Shirt” at a Hillary Clinton rally? Gender role ideas. Behind sexism, misandry, misogyny, gender-bias and gender-stereotypes are traditional roles.

When confronted with the concept of altering the gender-role model or eradicating it, some people fight it tooth and nail. I think some fight against it so hard because they don’t know life without gender-roles. People are afraid of or confused by what they’re not familiar with. Transitioning to a more egalitarian model won’t be easy, considering how conditioned we are, but it can be done. It begins with openness.