Women Against Feminism
a qualitative research into the understanding of modern western anti-feminism in the context of an online community
Master Thesis Research Universiteit van Amsterdam
Sociology track; Gender, Sexuality and Society Melody Jap-Sam 10655794
melody_jap-sam@hotmail.com July 9th 2018
word count 26.284
Supervisor Marie-Louise Janssen Second supervisor Anna Aalten
Index
Abstract 3
Disclaimer 4
Introduction 5
Chapter 1. A conversation between theory and data 7
1.1 Content and discourse analysis 7
1. 2 Interviewing in a digital context 10
1.3 Entering hostile territory of ‘Women Against Feminism’ 13
1.4 shortcomings and strengths 14
Chapter 2. Feminist versus anti feminist 16
2.1 Western feminism 17
2.2 Western Anti-feminism 18
2.3 Neoliberalism 20
2.4 Crisis in masculinity 23
2.5 The online resurgence of anti-feminist politics 24
Chapter 3. Meet the women against feminism 26
3.1 The rejection of feminism by ‘WAF’ 26
3.2 The transference of feminist ideals 29
Chapter 4. Neo-liberalism 32
4.1 The simplistic definition of equality 33
4.2 The ‘Self-made’ Women 35
4.3 Choice as a modality of constraint 39
4.4 The de-politicization of social issues 42
Chapter 5 Masculinity 45
5.1 The precarious position of masculine power 45
5.2 Condemning of weak men 49
5.3 “It is just locker room talk” 52
Chapter 6. ‘Onliness’ and the culture of transgression 55
6.1 The emergence of the alt-right 56
6.2 The online culture war 58
6.3 The fight for freedom of speech 59
6.4 “Trump is the New Punk Rock” 61
Conclusion 66
Bibliography 71
Abstract
In this research an attempt is made to create a theoretical in depth understanding of female support of modern western anti feminism. Anti-feminism is researched in the context of the online community of ‘Women Against Feminism’. Through a content and discourse analyses of blog posts and interviews, insights are gathered into discursive and rhetoric elements that make up the anti-feminist discourse of ‘WAF’ and the anxieties and concerns underlying this discourse. The online context in which this movement exists, creates discursive
characteristics that were once related to the political socialist left. The culture of
transgression, creates the idea that this community is part of the ‘anti-establishment’ fighting against feminist ‘established’ mainstream. This research concludes that while traditional anti feminist elements are still visible, it is the neoliberal ideology and subjectivities related to the ‘post-feminist’ era that differentiates modern anti feminism from its predecessor. These neoliberal subjectivities create an anti-feminist discourse in which victimization is rejected and language of ‘female individualism’, ‘agency’ and ‘choice’ is embraced. However, the co-existence of both neoliberal and traditional elements in the discourse results in choice becoming a modality of constraint, which in turn perpetuates gendered structures.
Disclaimer
All views expressed in this research are those of members of ‘Women Against Feminism’ and do not, in any way, express my own opinions and beliefs. Regardless of whether or not the issues described by members of ‘WAF’, are as they say they are, I will follow their line of argumentation to explore their understanding of matters. As a researcher I have tried to be as objective as possible in the analysis of the data. However, incorporating one’s subjective view on reality in the analysis of qualitative data is unavoidable and must be taken into account. “One never really sees or talks about the world, per se. One only sees and talks about what one's values dictate. A world may exist beyond values, but it can never be known as it is, only as values shape our knowledge of it” (Ratner, 2002, p. 1).
Introduction
“Women Against Feminism feels like a tiny light at the end of a really dark tunnel to me and I want to say why that is. The thing is I am agnostic, but I am traditional. I have never been a feminist, I have always viewed feminism as strange. Even before I fully explored the feminist and anti-feminist movements, feminism never sat well with me” (Women Against Feminism administration, 2017).
This is an excerpt from a blog called ‘ Women Against Feminism, Gynocentrism and why I am an anti-feminist’ (2017). In this excerpt a woman expresses her dislike of feminism. This blog, like many other blogs on www.womenagainstfeminism.com declares the rejection of feminism. Feminism has increasingly become popular within mainstream discourse in western society and it is visibly present within politics, academics and media. While a new found interest in feminism can be detected in mainstream discourse, a rise in anti-feminist sentiments is also argued within gender studies (Tennent & Jackson, 2017; Anderson, 2015; Cerulli, 2016; Nagle, 2017). According to gender theorist Kristin Anderson, there is a
widespread belief that, within modern western society, feminism has done its job. Equality between men and women has been achieved and feminism is no longer needed (2015). In her book ‘modern misogyny’, Kristin Anderson argues that the backlash against feminism is apparent in individual behaviour, print, social media and public policies (Anderson, 2015). Supporters of this backlash support the demise of feminism (Cerulli, 2016). According to journalist and author Angela Nagle (2017), this comeback of feminism was not only set in motion by popular culture, but also by the rise of online social spaces. The internet has increasingly become a part of social movements, in which both feminist and anti feminist movements have flourished. Social media has created the space for anti feminists to form their online community. “These movements focus on digitalization as this creates new opportunities of expansion and appealing to diverse groups” (Ling, 2017, p. 95). According to social scientist Erin Steuter (1991); “it is difficult for feminists to understand how women who are intelligent, articulate and strong, as many anti-feminists are, can ignore oppressive acts done against women and instead fight changes that would end those oppressions” (Steuter, 1992, p. 288). This research will focus on the modern western anti-feminism
embraced by the online community ‘ Women Against Feminism’. While ‘WAF’ may represent an anti feminist discourse that differs from member to member as they are influenced by different societal and historical context, by focussing on western anti-feminism and by
including an extensive amount of literature focussed on western anti-feminism, an important contribution can be made to the theoretical understanding of female anti-feminism and the influence of ‘onlineness’ on anti feminist communities. In this research I purposefully start with explaining the methodology before elaborating on the theoretical framework. I believe a carefully planned out methodology is imperative in this research. The methodology is central in understanding anti-feminism and therefore holds a central position in this thesis. What I aim to accomplish with this thesis is to create a better understanding of modern western anti-feminism in the context of the internet, and provide more insight into the reasons why women support this discourse. This research could then hopefully open up the realm of discussion between feminists and anti-feminists. Because; “when conversation is limited to those who occupy similar social positions, agreement among them is likely to be less an indication of human universals than of the limits of their shared perspective” (Sprague, 1997, p. 90). In light of this, I think it is important for both anti feminists and feminists from different backgrounds to be in conversation with each other in order to broaden their perspectives.
In this research the discourse of ‘ Women Against Feminism’ is explored, what lies behind the vehement rejection of feminism by this group of women? In the desire to find the essence of this anti-feminism embodied by women in the online community, I will ask the questions;
Why do members of the online community 'Women Against Feminism' relate to modern western anti-feminism and how does their discourse contribute to anti-feminism?
This question is divided in sub questions; 1. What is modern western anti-feminism?
2. What central themes can be identified in the anti-feminism expressed/embodied by members of ‘Women Against Feminism’(WAF)?
3. What anxieties underlie modern western anti-feminism in the context of ‘WAF’? 4. What rhetoric and discourse is being used by ‘WAF’?
5. What role does the internet play in the development/existence of modern western anti-feminism?
Chapter 1. A conversation between theory and data
For this research a content and discourse analysis of data has been performed. Online blog posts from the website; ‘www.womenagainstfeminism.com’, blogs shared on the facebook page of ‘Women Against Feminism’ (WAF), and data retrieved from semi structured in-depth interviews, is collected and analysed. The content and discourse analysis approach helps to understand the anti feminism portrayed by ‘WAF’ and it establishes a theoretical relationship between the discourse used by this community and relevant sociological theories. The data retrieved from blog posts and interviews, were analysed not only on what was said, through content analysis, but also how it was said, through discourse analysis. In this chapter, the process of gathering and analysing data and the operationalisation of the concepts are discussed.
1.1 Content and discourse analysis
I approached the research question: Why do members of the online community 'Women
Against Feminism' relate to modern western anti-feminism and how does their discourse contribute to anti-feminism? By dividing it into sub questions:
1. What is modern western anti-feminism?
2. What central themes can be identified in the anti-feminism expressed by members of ‘Women Against Feminism’?
3. What anxieties underlie modern western anti-feminism in the context of ‘ WAF’? 4. What rhetoric and discourse is being used by ‘WAF’?
5. How has ‘onlineness’ and the internet influenced/facilitated the development of modern western anti-feminism?
Answering these questions, started with coding and analysing data retrieved from blog posts. A total of 22 blogs were randomly selected within a time period of 2 years (from 2016 till 2018). Blogs of about 1,5 pages long were selected. The blogs originated
predominantly from the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. It became clear that most members of ‘Women Against Feminism’ originated from these countries. The
contextual situatedness of these members has a significant influence on their understanding of feminism and anti-feminism. How this context influenced the data will be further
discussed in chapter 4. Though not all blogs originate from english speaking countries, all blogs are written in english to allow a wide and international membership base. Further information about the blogs (title, date/place of publication, author, etc.), can be found in
Appendix A.
The first step in the process of analysis was to form initial codes. Initial codes to
identify what was said, were for instance; ‘calling feminists liars’, ‘claiming equality between
men and women’, ‘focussing on responsibility’. These codes were then “sorted, synthesized, integrated and organized” (Charmaz, 2014, p. 113). This signifies the end of open coding and the beginning of focussed coding (Priest, Roberts & Woods, 2002). Focussed coding created categories that grouped existing codes together and signified central themes within the data. For example the codes ‘calling feminists liars’, ‘claiming feminism hates men’, could be categorized underneath ‘critiquing/delegitimizing feminism’. After analysing the first data set, a second data set was selected that fit within a previously formed central themes. After selecting the blog posts, my general procedure was to view a blog, assess the message(s), code them initially, and then see if they generally fit within the central themes and key concepts. If they did not fit within the predetermined central themes, new topics or themes were created as they could possibly expand or contradict the previously formed theme. I also used codes that emerged from preexisting theories such as ‘neoliberal attitude’, ‘individualism’, and ‘agency’. These codes became important during the process of focussed coding. Codes from the data such as; ‘claiming equality between men and women’, ‘focussing on responsibility’ , could be categorized under the focus code ‘neoliberal attitude’. To analyse the data and establish the central themes and concepts, I created diagrams of the most important codes. These diagrams can be found in appendix B. The blog selection stopped when it felt like saturation had been achieved. As the process of coding and analysing continued, adjustments to certain main themes and categories became fewer and fewer until new data was only used to clarify, reduce and delimit the categories and theory (Glaser, 1965). For example, once it became clear that ‘masculinity’ was portrayed as the strong, dominant leader and weakness in men was condemned, it felt pointless to keep analyzing data that illustrated this point. This empirical finding was saturated and could be included in the analysis. Once it became clear that enough data was gathered on my central topics, the collection of data stopped. After gathering and coding data, memos were also written in which ideas related to the data were described. What is discussed in the memos provides the structure and, partially, the content of the analysis. Writing the analysis then consisted of grouping all memos according to their category or main theme, summarizing them, turning back to the coded data for necessary illustration and turn to pre existing theory for possible validation.
“Words, and concepts change in their meaning and their effect as they are deployed within different discourses” (Bacchi, 2000, p. 46 ). A text cannot be looked at in isolation; anti feminist blog posts cannot be analysed without considering the political message behind
what is said. It is therefore important to focus on the underlying reason something is said,
how it is said and who decides what is said. Discourse can have many meanings. In this research Bacchi’s (2000) definition of ‘policy as discourse’ is used, in which, analysts shine a light on meaning making. Meanings in a text are related to historical conditions and power relations. Sources of power need to be identified and challenged (Bacchi, 2000). Analysts in this approach draw attention not to social problems, but to problematization, how social problems are created in discourse (Bacchi, 2000).
In my discourse analysis, I focused on a few discursive and rhetoric elements. Firstly, I focussed on conceptualizations in the texts. What words are used, why are they used and what is their meaning? Words that were used often were created into codes, such as ‘misandry’, ‘agency’, ‘victimization’, ‘feminist myths’. ‘Misandry’ was used to talk about feminism and the mistreatment of men. This word is the opposite of ‘misogyny’; the hatred or mistreatment of women. ‘Misogyny’ is a term often used by feminists. The word ‘misandry’ was deliberately chosen to oppose a word commonly used in feminism. Therefore, the use of the word ‘misandry’, does not only express the mistreatment of men, but it is also shows the opposition against feminist discourse. ‘Feminist myths’ was often used to talk about feminist theories such as the ‘wage gap’ or ‘patriarchy’. The word ‘myth’ means a widely held but false believe. By choosing this word to describe feminist theories, the disagreement of anti feminists is expressed, together with the complete denial and implied ‘falsehood’ of feminist theories. These examples illustrate the versatility of words, and the expressive power words can have. Secondly, I focussed on metaphors, analogies, comparisons, examples and
expressions used in the data. What is meant when these expressions are used and what are they implying? An interesting expression used in a blog was, for example; ‘Nice guys finish
last’. This expression means that men, who have a kind, gentil attitude, will not be successful in life. This expression is used to emphasize the need for strength in men in order to be successful. Another interesting metaphor pertaining to masculinity used in the data, is the ‘Alpha male’. This metaphor refers to dominant men. These metaphors and expressions give a certain definition to what it means to be a man. In doing so, they are perpetuating ideas of a strong, dominant hegemonic masculinity. Another interesting expression used in the data, when discussing sexual harassment and #Metoo, was: ‘It takes two to tango’. This means, in order for something, with more than one person involved, to occur, all involved must actively participate. This illustrates the believe that, for sexual harassment to take place, both parties have sufficient agency to act on or against it, and both have responsibility for the
consequences. This is relatable to the condemnation of victimization which will be discussed in chapter 4.
Lastly, in my discourse analysis I focussed on what was not said. What did I expect to be there,when discussing certain topics, but was omitted and why? I focused on how
problems were defined; What is being seen as worthy of including in the discourse and what is ignored and who is being silenced? For example, when looking at how ‘rape’ was discussed, the role of the man was ignored. Rape was often connected to ‘false accusation’, ‘ male
injustice’, ‘revenge’ , ‘the myth of rape culture’, ‘hypocrisy’. Creating the assumption that rape accusation were often false, and ignoring the act, the culprit and its victims. By ignoring male agency and responsibility, gender inequality is perpetuated; women are blamed or held responsible while men are relieved of responsibility of their actions. This shows how social problems are not only created in discourse, but also refuted or ignored with discourse.
1. 2 Interviewing in a digital context
The data retrieved from blog posts were complemented with data retrieved from interviews. For this research I conducted interviews with 5 members of ‘Women Against Feminism’. These members responded to my facebook post requesting for interviewees, which was posted in the facebook community of ‘WAF’. The selection was based on who responded first and who, in their response, seemed serious about participating in the research. 8 members were selected and messaged. However, only 5 out of 8 selected
members came through and were able to participate in the research. Respondent 1 through 4 were female members of ‘WAF’ (Including the head of administration). Respondent 5 was the male, ‘moderator’ of the group. Further information about the respondents can be found in appendix C.
After interviewing, it became clear to me that my respondents could mostly be characterised as white, western, ‘middle class’ women (and one male member), around the age of 20-40. Middle class is an ambiguous concept that needs to be operationalised. Social class in this research is established by looking at the socio-economic background. In the interviews, respondents were asked about their occupational status and educational attainment. Occupation is a strong indicator of social class, it also determines someone's economic position. In this research middle class occupations are defined as white collar work. This consists of educated workers; professionals or semi-professionals with economic
stability. This differs from blue-collar work, which is often linked to the ‘working class’ and consists of manual, unskilled, physically challenging labour such as factory work, with high economic insecurity. More information can be found on how the middle class, in terms of occupation is defined in appendix D. However, determining respondents social class by looking at occupation is difficult, seen as many of the women interviewed were ‘stay at home
mothers’. While they might not fill a middle class occupation, their household could be categorised as a middle class home. I therefore also asked about previous occupations and educational attainment. A 4 year college degrees, suggests a middle class or upper middle class position.
Central themes found in blog posts further influenced the collection of data as they created the topic list for the interviews. The themes from the blogpost were used to divide interview questions into categories which can be seen in the topic list (see Appendix E). For each theme a few interview questions were formed. These questions were used to discuss interesting opinions discovered in the blogs, or to discuss the views of the respondents. The Interviews not only helped identify central themes in the anti feminist discourse, but also helped to dig deeper into the underlying anxieties and worries these members have. For this research an internet based interview method was used. Interviews were conducted through online video calls and chat conversations. This method helped overcome distance, cost and other practical consideration related to the geographically dispersed online community of ‘WAF’ (James and Busher, 2009). A disadvantage of online interviewing, is that certain visual cues are only visible during face-to- face contact. This could lead to a distance between the researcher and respondent (Illingworth, 2001). However, this distance can be bridged by focussing on different communicational cues found in text embedded in digital spaces (Linabary & Hamel, 2017). These cues can be traced back in use of language and discourse. When done correctly, online qualitative interviews can provide in- depth data similar to traditional interviews (McCoyd and Kerson, 2006; Kazmer and Xie, 2008). While internet based interviews might hold disadvantages that face to face interviews do not, I argue that this method has significant value for my research. It is suitable within the context of this research because, given that the study is in relation to online engagement, participants are already engaged in expressing themselves online. They are familiar with using the internet to communicate in written, textual form. The natural context in which these women connect is a digital one. ‘Women Against Feminism’ is a “digital context in which these women find themselves that does not replace or exclude their local context, but rather exists alongside it” (Linabary & Hamel, 2017, p. 103). In this sense, conducting interviews online preserves the ‘contextual naturalness’ of this research (Mann and Stewart, 2002).
Conducting the first two interviews felt challenging. However, once I had gotten used to the interviewing process and the interviewees, it felt surprisingly satisfying. It was important, in dealing with unconventional and opposing views, to ‘check my own beliefs at the door’. I was able to embody a detached concern (Hermanowicz, 2002, p. 429). Like Hermanowicz states; self-control is crucial in interviewing. The interviewer is supposed to express respect,
self-confidence and quiet concern without expressing too many emotions (Ibid.). I believe this was done successfully during the interviews. I eliminated the element of surprise in my reactions. This was helped by the initial research into blog posts. Many of the opinions expressed during the interviews, I had already encountered in the blogs and were of no surprise to me. I was able to restrain from expressing criticism and disagreement and in doing so, I displayed genuine interest and established a bond with the respondents. This is evident in the personal stories that respondents shared with me. Through establishing a bond with the respondents and expressing genuine interest, I had created an environment in which respondents felt comfortable enough to discuss issues such as rape and abuse. This
comfortableness was also created by using communicative cues; expressing agreement and affirmative language. Moreover, I think that the context of the interview being online through video chat, rather then face to face, helped conceal possible physical signs of disagreement or criticism. As mentioned earlier, the distancing of the researcher, due to the online interview method, could be considered a disadvantage. However, in this research it helped create a distance that was needed to avoid possible friction. It concealed possible physical displays of disagreement, allowing the respondents to feel comfortable and not judged. Whether the results of the interviews would have been the same in a face-to face context, is unknown.
Dealing with a group that faces continuous critique from mainstream media sources, feminists organisations and other individuals who oppose their beliefs, I was faced with an ethical dilemma during the gathering of respondents. Many respondents would only agree to participate if their anonymity was safeguarded. In order to protect their privacy a consent form was created. This consent form was send to all respondent and needed to be signed before starting the interview process (see appendix F for consent form). In this way I could safeguard the privacy of my respondents and legally protect myself and my data in case a dispute or disagreement with a respondent would occur, during or after the research process, that could lead to legal ramifications.
1.3 Entering hostile territory of ‘Women Against Feminism’
Entering this research field was not without its complications. The process of searching and collecting respondents got off to a rocky start. The online community of ‘Women Against Feminism’ (WAF), is organized in such a way that ‘outsiders’ are kept at a distance.
Contacting individual members through their facebook group is near to impossible due to the administration’s control on what is posted on their facebook wall, and who is invited into the group. The administration members are essentially the gatekeepers of the group. In order to
gain access to respondents, a relationship and rapport needed to be built with the administration members. On learning about my research questions and goals, the
gatekeepers could either grant me access or delete me from the group completely, making it clear that I was walking on thin ice. While coming in contact with the head of administration, it became clear that she was sceptic towards my research. Rather than viewing me as an unbiased researcher with genuine interests, she saw me as an enemy to their group. After having been ‘tested’ and ‘sized up’ by the head of administration, to see what my true intentions were, she agreed to participate in the interview to evaluate my questions. After this, a decision would be made in regards to access to the group. Access to the group would only be granted if she felt comfortable enough and deemed my questions acceptable.
According to Broadhead and Rist (1976), gatekeepers influence research. “They can limit your conditions of entry to your research field, they can define problem areas of the study, they can limit your access to data and respondents, they can limit the scope of your analysis, or they exert influence on publication of your research” (Broadhead & Rist, 1976, p. 325).
The reluctance of accepting me in the group was partly due to the constant harassment the group endures of people who disagree with their anti-feminism. The ‘gatekeeper’
explained that their community is subject to constant smear, libel, mis representation, and politically biased reports. However, the reluctance towards accepting me in the group was not only to keep me out and protect the members from my possibly critical view of the group, it was also to warn me of the extremism that could potentially become visible while doing research on the group. Outsiders are not always met with kindness by members as I would soon discover, and the administration wanted me to know that, due to the diversity in the group, some people might have more extreme and offensive views, than others. The
administration wanted to assure me that this was not the opinion of everyone and I should not view it in such a way. When access was finally granted, my search for respondents was met with negative comments by some members. However, it was the administration that vouched for me, and assured my trustworthiness towards the members. It became clear that building rapport with the head of administration had been fruitful. The initial hostility that I was so obviously met with would soon subside and turn into friendliness. Once accepted in the group, after it became clear to the members that the head of administration ‘trusted’ me, many members showed kindness, helpfulness and eagerness to be a part of my research. I was no longer viewed as a threat. This illustrates the power and control these gatekeepers have over members of a group. Broadhead and Rist (1976) argue that there are still not enough strategies developed within the research field, to manage pressure from gatekeepers. However, I believe pressure from gatekeepers was managed successfully during this research.
My strategy in dealing with this as a researcher was to sit back and shut up, it was my time to
listen.
1.4 shortcomings and strengths
Research in the field of group dynamics and controverse ideologies deals with many difficulties. Not only is the physical accessibility a problem, it is also the accessibility to ‘real’ and ‘honest’ data that is precarious due to things like ‘political correctness’ and the sceptical attitude this groups has towards researchers. Like Glaser (1965) stated when discussing qualitative research methods;
“Because these areas (social problems) raise problems of secrecy, sensitivity, taboo topics, stigma, and legality, and because people in these situations are usually adept at covering the facts when necessary, often the only way a researcher can obtain any data, or data that is accurate, is some combination of observing what is going on, talking in rather loose, sharing, fashion with the people in the situation, and reading some form of document that they have written”(Glaser, 1965, p. 436).
Deciding to only use interviews as data could have screwed my data or only looking at blogs could have given me a one sided view of only the most outspoken members of the group. It is the combination of both, talking to people in these situations, and reading documents that members have written that allows the depth in this research. However, It could be argued that during the interviews, in some instances, politeness might have gotten the better of me, for fear of discomforting my respondents. Probing and persisting by paraphrasing, restating questions, which are essential tools in uncovering deeper meanings and understanding in interviews, became difficult. Like Hermanowicz states; “We must develop the muscle to ask the hard questions” (Ibid, p. 490). The muscle lacked in some instances during interviewing, because I did not want to offend or trigger my respondents by seeming critical. Especially the interview with the head of administration felt influenced by this concern. Nevertheless, I feel that by ‘playing the innocent’, I was able to “appeal to the altruistic side of these women” (Hermanowicz, 2002, p. 486). This meant, for example, repeatedly pretending not to know what was meant with words like ‘misandry’, or asking; “Can you help me understand what you mean by this..” and emphasizing the genuine desire for understanding anti-feminism. With this approach, I tried to dig deeper into their understanding while avoiding criticizing questions. Notwithstanding, critique is important when analysing and if space for probing and persisting remains, important questions stay unanswered.
Like Glaser suggested, the problem with qualitative analysis is ensuring credibility of a research (Glaser, 1965). Qualitative data does not lend itself to be easily concluded and summarised as evidence. Readers need to understand how a researcher obtained his/her findings. Usage of codes can help create an understanding of the analysis process (Ibid.). With the diagrams in which the most important codes are illustrated and the explanation of my discourse analysis, I hope to create visibility in my analysis process. But it is always an impression of the data a researcher is working with. In this research a constant comparison method was used. While coding a blog or interview, previously coded data was used for comparison. Using a constant comparative method increases a researchers ability to create an intricate theory that complements and stays close to the data (Glaser, 1965). However, the assumption that new theories emerge purely from data without theoretical preconception, is not the position taken in this research (Timmermans & Tavory, 2012). The arguments in this research ought to be read as a conversation between data and theory. Existing sociological theories and categories were used in this research and helped illustrate and explain the intricate aspects in the analysis. Qualitative research is an interactive and iterative process between data and existing theoretical knowledge (Charmaz 2009). This research therefore uses abductive analysis in combination with the constant comparison method (Timmermans & Tavory, 2012). I approached this research with a layering of pre-existing theoretical tools such as neoliberalism, individualism and conceptualizations of masculinity. Nevertheless, this does not mean that we as researchers need to be led by the fixed categories. Positions taken up by the members of ‘Women Against Feminism’ are complex. They are not only influenced by the obvious race, class and gender trifecta, but also by specific histories and individual biographies (Timmermans & Savory, 2012). Basing research only on existing theoretical insight and making the data ‘fit’ within preexisting categories would ignore the richness and complexity of the social reality these members live in.
Chapter 2. Feminist versus anti feminist
Prior to delving into the understanding of anti feminism according to members of ‘WAF’, it is useful to provide theoretical background on both feminism and anti-feminism. This research will focus on the development of these concepts in western context. Building a framework surrounding relevant definitions and conceptualisations of these contested concept is vital for creating an understanding of anti feminism specific to ‘WAF’. In this chapter a brief historical context of western feminism and it’s countermovement will be described. What western feminism is, how it’s countermovement anti feminism originated, main concepts related to modern anti feminism and how this differs from its predecessor will be analysed. According to sociologist Erin Steuter, who examined feminist social movements and anti-feminist countermovements (1991), a social movement is;
“Having shared values, a goal or objective, sustained by an ideology; a sense of membership or participation; a distinction between those who are for and those who are against the goals of the movement; and an organizational structure of some kind that tends to differentiate between the leaders and followers within the movement” (Steuter, 1992, p. 289).
Historically, ‘anti’ movements have accompanied social movements. These ‘anti’ movements can be described as a collective effort to oppose or reverse social change produced by a social movement (Steuter, 1992). Therefore, change made by social movements and the counter movement, can be seen as a dialectical process. In order to understand this process it needs to be analysed in its entirety, “as part of the continuity of development, conflict and social change” (Steuter, 1992, p. 289). Whether or not ‘Women Against Feminism’ can be
considered a social movement, will be discussed further in the next chapter. It is important to note that the development of western feminism and it’s countermovements are specific to their societal and historical context. However, by focusing on the premise of both concepts, and incorporating theoretical work from different western societal contexts, an analysis can be made about the overall structure and key elements of these movements present in modern western society.
2.1 Western feminism
The meaning of the words feminism and anti-feminism has been highly disputed. The ambiguity surrounding the meaning of these concept is an indication of their politically fueled complexity (Mertz, 2005). Historian, Thomas Mertz (2005), argues that both feminists and anti feminists activist and thinkers have tried to control the discourse by defining
opposite sides, while refusing definitions that the other side transfers onto them. For example, in the anti-feminist discourse of ‘Women Against Feminism’, meaning is given to the concept of feminism, while feminist definitions of anti feminism as ‘women hating’ or ‘against equality’ is strongly rejected. In order to understand anti feminism, we must first understand that which it opposes. Many scholars have tried to pin down the definition of feminism. According to historian Karen Offen (1988), the dictionary definition of feminism is, “a theory and/or movement concerned with advancing the position of women through such means as achievement of political, legal, or economic rights equal to those granted men” (ibid., p. 123). This definition influenced the perspective of the women’s suffrage movement which fought for the female right to vote, in the United States in 1848 (Offen, 1988). Similar to the development of feminism in the United States, the women’s suffrage movement, marks the beginning of feminism in other western countries. In the context of the Netherlands, the women’s suffrage movement was triggered when Aletta Jacobs petitioned for the right to vote in 1883 (Ruiz, 2012). Although the definitions of feminism and the development of women’s suffrage movements differ slightly between societal contexts, what most western countries have in common, is that the development of feminism was a response to male domination in society. Feminism attacks and critiques some form of patriarchy (Mertz, 2005). Beyond that, Feminists core ideas have changed through time.
It is common to identify three waves of feminism within the west, which signify the changing of feminist main ideas and objectives. The first wave of feminism can be seen as the movement that fought for equal rights and status for men and women in the public realm, such as equal voting rights. This wave became significantly visible in western countries after the first world war around 1920 (Crusmac, 2017). The second wave of feminism came around the 1960’s which introduced the idea of ‘the personal is political’, and concerned itself mostly with the private sphere. In this wave, it was argued that personal aspects need to be brought to public discourse in order for women to be treated equally to men. The motivation for this approach came from the realisation that, although women gained equal public rights, in the private sphere they were still not treated equally to men (Crusmac, 2017, p. 18).
successes achieved by second wave feminists. “The biggest flaw of the first and second wave of feminism was the lack of representation of women other than white, middle class,
heterosexual, western women”(Crusmac, 2017, p. 18). Issues that were related to poor women, women of colour or lesbian women, were ignored. This flaw brought about a new wave of feminism. This wave emerged at the end of the 1980’s, which some say is still currently developing (ibid.). In this wave the focus is put on differences between women instead of differences between men and women.
During the third wave of feminism, another development occured; post-feminism. This development can be associated with the backlash against feminism. According to Mcrobbie (2004), we live in a post-feminist era. Mcrobbie understands post-feminism to be the active process of undermining feminist achievements. Freedom and choice, which are now available for many young women, created the idea that feminism is redundant; equality has been achieved (Ibid.). Political issues related to feminism, seem to have been recognized and dealt with. Feminist ideas have in some ways become common sense. It is suggested that “young women have now won the battle for equality, they have gained recognition as subjects worthy of governmental attention, and this has replaced any need for the feminist critiques of
hegemonic masculinities” (Mcrobbie, 2004, p. 721). These ideas on individualism and choice are related to neoliberalism and create new understandings and meanings associated with this post-feminist era. What these new understandings and meanings are, and how
neoliberalism gave rise to them will be discussed in the paragraph 2.3.
2.2 Western Anti-feminism
According to Steuter (1992), it is suggested that “a women’s anti-feminist countermovement will develop only when a feminist social movement threatens or appears to threaten the traditional role and status of women in a given society” (Steuter, 1992, p. 293). Anti-feminism can only exist in the presence of feminism. It is always relational and connected to feminism. In the 19th century, anti-feminism could both be seen as resistance against undoing male supremacy and as a weapon against men and women seeking better social, moral, economic or political positions. At the core of the anti feminist discourse is the desire to maintain gender based, social, economic and political differences. A basic principle in anti feminism is the believe in biological differences between men and women and that, as such, inequality of treatment is necessary (Mertz, 2005). This believe is used to justify the exclusion of women from certain professions and pursuits (Mertz, 2005). However, difference thinking is not inherently linked to anti feminism. Difference thinking is also present in feminism.
thinking influenced the second wave of feminism, when the personal became the political. During this wave of feminism it was believed that, because of the biological differences between men and women, men cannot represent women politically. Women therefore need to have the opportunity to fully participate in society (Mertz, 2005). Policy must take into account the different needs of both genders. How this difference thinking in feminism is dissimilar from the difference thinking in the modern anti-feminism of ‘WAF’ will be answered in chapter 4.
When rights for women increased in western society during the first wave of feminism, two types of reactions were evoked within anti feminism (Mertz, 2005). By calling on science and nature, anti feminists tried to dismiss the idea that, like men, women were autonomous individuals, who deserved equal rights. According to this argumentation, women lacked the ability to think rationally which was required for an independent member of society.
However, as the evidence of women’s capabilities kept growing, disputing womens intelligence became harder and harder. Anti feminists therefore turned to a different
approach; appealing to tradition and religion (Mertz, 2005). It was this approach that spoke to a broader public. Many theories differ in explaining female support of anti feminism however, according to Steuter, theorists seem to agree that the most important argument why women oppose women’s suffrage in the early 20th century, is that; “quick social change threatened family and the traditional roles women had” (Steuter, 1992, p. 291). Preserving traditional roles and functions as wife and mother is held in high regards by many women, anti-feminism in the early 20th century was therefore focused predominantly on protecting the family and marriage.
During the second wave of feminism the personal became the political. Questions about the family, children, sexuality and women’s social role were brought to the political debate. When the political right became aware of this approach, they started to organize around it. In the 60’s and 70’s, they began opposing changes concerning child care, marriage and sexual behaviour. This ‘new’ political right saw feminism as an attack on the church and family and eventually as an “attack upon the very basis of an orderly society” (Steuter, 1992, p. 295). In Australia, the countermovement ‘Women Who Want To Be Women’, was formed in 1979 (Steuter, 1992). This anti-feminist movement concerned itself with enhancing the social status of motherhood. Resembling christian ideals, they wanted motherhood to be seen as the centre of society. They blamed feminism for creating an inferior position for women who chose motherhood or being a housewife (Steuter, 1992). However, as time goes on, feminism changes, and so does its countermovement. According to sociologists Ralph Turner and Lewis Killian, who researched social movements, countermovements find themselves in
an ongoing conflict that is rarely truly won. They are interdependent on each other, resulting in ascendance between programs, ideologies and strategies. In the process of extracting power from the movement it opposes, countermovements take up successful elements of the initial movement. “The most important determinant of changes in the ideology of a
countermovement is the increasing success or failure of the initial social movement” (Turner & Killian, 1972, p. 295). Notions and values that were characteristic of feminism can now also be found in anti-feminist discourse. Where traditional anti-feminism focuses predominantly on keeping women in their traditional gendered role, modern anti-feminism takes on the rhetoric of ‘female freedom’, ‘choice’ and ‘agency’. Liberal notions on sexuality, marriage and religion are also found in current anti-feminist discourse. It is this which differentiates modern anti-feminism from its traditional predecessor. As we dive into the discourse expressed by ‘Women Against Feminism’, this will become visible. These changes in anti-feminist discourse, can also be related to a bigger societal change; the rise of neoliberalism.
2.3 Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism has profoundly shaped modern politics and activism (Richardson, 2005). Consequently, it has also influenced modern western anti-feminism. Gender theorist Kristin Anderson also emphasised the relationship between neoliberal individualism and modern anti-feminism (Anderson, 2014). Neoliberalism is oftentimes linked to right wing politics, for example in U.S politics, neoliberalism is currently being linked to Trump. Yet,
neoliberalism is not inherently linked to a particular political stance (Richardson, 2015, p. 264). It can just as well be linked to LGBTQ politics as it can to anti-feminist politics. The term neoliberalism is therefore contested and can be defined and conceptualized in various ways (Ibid.). Social scientist Wendy Larner looks at neoliberalism on three different levels (2000). Neoliberalism as a form of governmentality, neoliberalism as policy framework and neoliberalism as an ideology. Neoliberalism as policy framework is used when referencing to the ‘free market economy’, dominant in western politics and economics. Neoliberalism as an ideology at the core of these policies, is a certain system of ideas and values linked to
individualism, the notion of freedom of ‘choice’, consumerism, professionalization and managerialism (Richardson, 2015).
Neoliberalism as governmentality can be linked to processes of individualisation. Individuals are thought to have greater freedom and choice in life, but at the same time self-regulation and self-surveillance restricting these freedoms is becoming more and more a part of society and replacing state regulation. Central to this ‘new governance’ is the process
of ‘normalisation’ (Richardson, 2015). Certain norms of behaviour are identified, normalized, and reproduced within the population. In this model of citizenship the notion of the ‘common good’ is emphasized in which people are enabled and stimulated to think and behave in ways that are considered normal and desirable (Richardson, 2015, p. 264). The goal of government is to create ‘normal’ responsible citizens through self-governing, who voluntarily comply with the interests and needs of the state (Ibid.). In neoliberalism as policy framework, there is an emphasis on individual right as opposed to group rights. Connected to this neoliberal formulation of equality is the idea that worth is not confirmed and given to a group, but worth is related to the individual (Phillips, 2006).
In analysing neoliberalism as governmentality, new forms of subjectivity are produced; “the individualistic assumption that underpin neoliberalism undermine collectiveness” (Richardson, 2015, p. 265). Collective organisation and activism are undermined and social issues are de-politized. This creates the notion that activism is no longer needed or relevant. Individual rights rather then collective rights are emphasized. This framing ignores
governance and structures that legitimizes and reproduces inequalities while it focuses on the individual (Ibid.). The new subjectivity focussed on individualism and free choice results in people believing in the notion that men and women are free to make their own choices. Eventually, as collective resources of welfare are reduced and taken away, the individual is left to self blame when success is not found. This relieves men, in particular, from any accountability for their oppressive actions (Ewing & Schacht, 1998). “Equal rights have been established, the playing field is now level, hence it is their own fault when women do not measure up” (Ewing & Schacht, 1998, p 7).
Neoliberalism as an ideology and the effects of neoliberalism as governmentality, can be related to what Mcrobbie calls; the post-feminist era (Mcrobbie, 2004). The language of ‘choice’ and the focus on the self-regulating individual created new meanings and
understandings for women. Firstly, there is an emphasis on ‘female individualism’; women are now equally participating members of “the new meritocracy” and failure can only be blamed on the self (Ibid., p. 258). Mcrobbie draws the term ‘female individualism from sociologist Giddens (1991) and Beck (2002). Individualism explained in Giddens and Beck’s work, which Mcrobbie relates directly to the post-feminist generation, focuses on the enlargement of freedom and choice. Women are now able to participate fully on the job market and in education. This is not due to feminist success but due to their own individual effort. Secondly, the enlargement of freedom and choice, causes ‘reflexive modernity’ (Beck, 2002; Giddens;1991). The welfare state during the second modernity made it possible for
people to become independent and capable, resulting in the abandonment of fixed gender roles by not only men, but also young women.
“As the old structures of social class fade away, and lose their grip in the context of late or second modernity, individuals are increasingly called upon to invent their own structures . . . As the overwhelming force of structure fades so also does the capacity for agency increase. (Mcrobbie, 2014, p. 260)”.
People must design their own life. In order to have a complete and satisfied life, surrounded by numerous different paths, choices and risks, it becomes increasingly important for young women to become reflexive in regards to the life choices they make. This is done “internally and individualistically” (Mcrobbie, 2004, p. 260). To illustrate these new understandings and meanings related to women as neoliberal subjects in a post-feminist era, Mcrobbie uses the plot of Bridget Jones’s Diary (Mcrobbie, 2004). In this story, a modern western single women, increasingly becomes aware of her unmarried status. Because of the increase of freedom and move away from traditional roles, Mcrobbie describes a “fear of loneliness, for example, the stigma of remaining single, and the risks and uncertainties of not nding the right partner to be a father to her children as well as a husband” (Mcrobbie, 2004, p. 262). An increase in freedom and choice, also brings about an increase in risks: “the risk that she might let the right man slip from under her nose (hence she must always be on the lookout), the risk that not catching a man at the right time might mean she misses the chance of having children (her biological clock is counting)” (Ibid., p. 262). The awareness of the risks involved with the increase in choice, is accompanied by the realisation of female individualism; when the ideal partner is not found, only the self is to blame (Mcrobbie, 2004). In Bridget’s search for a husband we see an increase of reflexivity and self-monitoring processes; the life plan, keeping a diary, going on a diet. All of these self-monitoring processes are a part of what Giddens (1991) calls; ‘reflexive modernity’. A third development, related to neoliberalism is what Mcrobbie calls; ‘double entanglement’. This is the “co-existence of neo-conservative values in relation to gender, sexuality and family life, with processes of liberalisation in regard to choice and diversity in domestic, sexual and kinship relations” (Mcrobbie, 2004, p. 256). Despite the number of choices and freedoms Bridget has, the uncertainty of her future and the burden of female individualism, causes her to long for tradition. Resulting in the coexistence of both conservative values and (neo) liberal notions of freedom and agency. According to Mcrobbie, these new meanings and understandings caused by neoliberalism, seems to characterise the culture of the modern post-feminist era (Mcrobbie, 2004).
However, neither Beck nor Giddens, seem to have a critical analysis of the processes related to ‘female individualism’ and ‘reflexive modernity’. There seems to be no reflection on how the obligation of reflexivity and emphasis on female individualism, perpetuates, or create new spaces for gendered inequalities. Or how these processes might reinstates gendered roles for women. Like Bridget Jones, the women against feminism, can be looked at as neoliberal subjects in a post-feminist era. In researching their anti feminist discourse I will therefore look at how these meanings and understandings are expressed and what the possible ramifications are.
2.4 Crisis in masculinity
Societal changes related to modern neoliberalism and the growing female individualism has also had its influence on the position of men. “Changing gender roles and rapid economic, social and technological changes in western society created a great number of uprooted and bewildered men to a doomed quest for masculine certainties” (Mishra, 2018, p. par 33). Seeking to re-establish masculine power and privileges has always been an important aspect of anti-feminist discourse. Self help writer and psychologist, Jordan B. Peterson, labelled as the ‘current most influential public intellectual in the western world’ by the New York Times, argues that the West has lost its masculine men because of the vicious equality doctrine that is embraced by western women under the banner of feminism (Mishra, 2018). According to intellectual Pankaj Mishra (2018), there are signs visible that indicate a worldwide crisis of masculinity. Old fashioned ideas of what it means to be a strong male have reached the mainstream in the most developed countries. With masculine virtues on the rise, women, feminist in particular, are attacked. Books about this crisis in masculinity in the west seem to be in popular demand. Theorists like Harvey Mansfield, who wrote the book ‘Manliness’ (2006) or journalist Peter Lloyd, who wrote the book ‘Stand By Your Manhood’ (2014) show concerns about the growing independence of women, arguing that working women are undermining the role of the man. It is also caused by the confusion deeply rooted in
privileged males who are in constant competition with women, homosexual and other ethnic and religious groups (Mishra, 2018; Connell 2005). Elaine Showalter (1990) spoke of a great fear created in men brought about by the claims of feminists in the late nineteenth century: Fear of social decline and degeneration, the desire for strict boundaries between definitions of gender, race, class and nationality.
When did this crisis start? In ‘Age of Anger: A History of the Present’ (2017), Mishra argues that the crisis, which has plagued the modern world for centuries, started with the socio-economic revolution that replaced agricultural and rural societies with industrial
capitalism. This created a new sexual and racial labour division (Mishra, 2018). “More and more deprived of their old skills and autonomy in the ‘iron cage of modernity’, men from the working class try to keep their dignity afloat by embodying this muscular, macho and
dominant masculinity” (Ibid., par. 26). This yearning for masculinity continues to influence politics and culture throughout the world in the 21st century (Mishra, 2018). In discussing this sought after, ideal masculinity the concept of ‘Hegemonic Masculinity’, introduced by sociologist Connell (2005), is directly relatable. Hegemonic masculinity is seen as the most dominant form of masculinity (Ibid.). The crisis in masculinity is relatable to what Connell identifies as the internal contradiction, inherent to hegemonic masculinity. The concept of hegemonic masculinity, gives the illusion of unity amongst men (Connell, 2005). Even though hegemonic masculinity is seen as the superior form of masculinity, only a minority of men embody it. Forms of masculinities are in constant struggle for hegemony, making hegemonic masculinity vulnerable. This vulnerability produces anxiety amongst groups that hold the most power by keeping these superior forms of masculinity in place. “This
precarious position of power for men causes anxieties that is driven by subordinate groups of women and other men” (Ewing & Schacht, 1998, p. 6). Mishra (2018) described this
masculinity as a ‘power dream’. This dream seems to become more tangible for men as it is more intensively pursued. Yet, the more the pursuit intensifies, the deeper the fear of defeat becomes (Ibid.). These anxieties fuel anti-feminism. How the idea of a ‘crisis of masculinity’ and the anxieties surrounding loss of masculine power takes shape in the discourse of ‘WAF’ will be analysed further.
2.5 The online resurgence of anti-feminist politics
Both feminism and anti-feminism have found the internet as a new space to develop.
Anti-feminist movements are now able to more clearly express their ideas and reach a global network of supporters. Anti-Feminist discourse expresses itself online through hate speech, trolling on the internet but now also in the blogosphere as online communities. “The
blogosphere is a term referring to the internetworking among web blogs” (Sheffield, 2010, p. 13). This term gives the idea of a space: “a defined and definite area in which blogging is civic participation. Through writing, reading, and commenting on weblogs, people find and create places online to speak, gather, work and play, in short to live (habitas)” (Ibid.). ‘Women Against feminism’ qualifies as a blogosphere. This is a digital space where women, who consider themselves anti-feminists, can come together and share blogs with each other and the rest of the digital world.
to political scientist and journalist, Angela Nagle (2017), the general platform for public discourse has moved from mainstream newspapers and television, to the online sphere. Nagle discusses the emergence of a new anti-feminist, that makes the anti-feminist forms of pre-internet men’s rights activists seem mild. “A more openly hateful culture was unleashed under the conditions of anonymity” (Nagle, 2017, p. 86). It is argued that online young, predominantly male, internet users can escape the “mind prison of liberalism” and the “reality of societal misandry” (Nagle, 2017, p. 86). The internet has become a place where a new political movement is visible; the alt-right. An alternative political movement, inhabited predominantly by young western white men, who do not identify with the conservatism of the far right. The alt-right opened the realm of discussion online through forums in which topics like; false rape accusations, female-on male violence, and cultural misandry are discussed. These might be unpopular in mainstream media, but seem to garner an impressive amount of online support from, mostly male, internet ‘trolls’ (Nagle, 2017). 1
Angela Nagle talks about an new culture war, in the context of the online world, that has been going on below the radar of mainstream media the last decade (Nagle, 2017). She signifies the election of Trump as a shift in both politics and online, with the alt-right gaining more and more power and political influence through online media platforms. Nagle gives examples of alt-right online media figures such as Steve Bannon who have gained immense political power with the election of Trump. This culture war differs from the culture wars in the 60s and the 90s which were fought amongst young conservatives and liberals during a period of cultural secularisation. This culture war is fought online, mobilizing a vast amount of teenage, mostly white, male, anti-feminists that are fighting for the freedom of expression and speech by taking on the established socialist liberal left, embraced by mainstream media. In this culture war, it is believed that nonconformity, that has long been associated with the socialist left, can now be associated with the right. The right is the new anti-establishment taking on the established left using that which has made its resurgence possible; the internet. ‘Women Against Feminism’ being a part of the online blogosphere, should also be analysed in this context. How has the ‘onliness’ influenced their anti-feminist discourse and can the online developments described by Nagle be related to this community?
1Troll; a person who deliberately starts altercations online with the intent to provoke an
Chapter 3. Meet the women against feminism
In this chapter the online community of ‘Women Against Feminism’ will be introduced. It will look at how the movement emerged, general characteristics of its discourse and how it expresses modern anti-feminism. Using the theory of social representation this chapter will argue that this online community uses a non nuanced perspective of feminism with the focus on past definitions of feminism. It discusses the concerns of loss of prestige and status among women as homemakers. Lastly, it will discuss whether or not ‘Women Against Feminism’ can be seen as a social movement.
3.1 The rejection of feminism by ‘WAF’
‘Women Against Feminism’ as an online community, originated in the United States. In 2012 a campaign was started at Duke University called ‘Who needs feminism’, promoting students to go online and discuss gender related issues such as gender equality and feminism. As a counter campaign, the website ‘www.womenagainstfeminism.com’ was launched a year later (Crusmac, 2017). Women Against Feminism’ is an online platform made up of shared blog content. While it may have originated in the United States, the online community has since welcomed members from western countries all over the world. In 2014 the online community reached the height of its popularity when it transformed from a personal blog to an online movement, receiving and posting materials from it’s followers which expressed anti-feminist sentiments (ibid.). Members could now use this platform to post personal stories, essays, articles, pictures or self made ‘memes’ . The website reached 40.000 fans that year (Ibid.). 2 This popularity was partly made possible by the coverage in mainstream media by magazines and news outlets like; ‘The Guardian’, ‘BBC News’ and ‘Huffington Post’. The first public action the group participated in that grabbed mainstream media’s attention was the collective declaration of anti-feminism by followers posting selfies. In these selfies, the anti-feminists held up signs, stating ‘I don’t need feminism because(…)”, broadcasting their personal
reasons for rejecting feminism. This collective action made the website popular among young women, mostly, who did not identify with feminism.
The rejection of feminism by members of ‘WAF’ can be linked to a particular understanding of feminism (Crusmac, 2017). Political scientist, Oana Crusmac, uses the theory of social representation to understand the definition of feminism used within ‘Women Against Feminism’. Social representation of one group is always in relation to other groups.
2Memes; pictures, often with the intent to be funny or to provoke an emotional response,
“knowing the representation of other groups is necessary for a group to choose its own social representation” (Crusmac, 2017, p. 12). It is therefore important to understand the
representation of feminism used by ‘WAF’, in order to understand the anti-feminist discourse used by this group. Crusmac, argues that the representation of feminism in this movement is based on a stereotypical understanding of ‘feminism’, rather than on a lack of information of the concept, which is often assumed (Crusmac, 2017). This movement embodies a non nuanced perspective towards the history and development of feminism (ibid). When asked what members of ‘WAF’ thought feminism was, most of them responded along the lines of this quote:
“... growing up I thought it meant, empowering women, standing up for women, supporting each other. But the past 6 years it has been more a hate speech you know about: "oh well men have had all this time, so now it is our time, you know..regardless of if we are qualified or not, regardless of if we should even deserve it or not. And it has become: “Ah you know; let me one up you , let me get you back for the years of women not having power.’ It seems ridiculous. They don’t want equality, they want superiority” (Respondent #4, 2018).
This quote illustrates that, to these women, feminism is a man-hating movement. ‘WAF’, believe equality has been reached. The movement, according to many members is not about equality but superiority for women, at the expense of men. Feminism as a movement fighting for equality is therefore considered a thing from the past (Crusmac, 2017). The online
community of ‘WAF’ seems to consist mostly of young, white, western women, between the age of 20-40. It could be concluded that, considering this demographic, the post-feminist attitude these women have, does not seem strange. Most members of this group were born in a world where the battle of equality of rights had long been fought by feminists. Being young, white, middle class western women, many of these women were born with the rights, won by the generation preceding theirs. According to Crusmac; the connection between past and present is fital within representations. That would explain why critique within ‘WAF’ focuses primarily on the pursuit of equal rights, ‘in the eyes of the law’, while some might say that feminism is much more than that. “In many respects, the past is more real than the present. The strength and clarity of social representations derive from the success with which they control today’s reality through yesterday’s reality” (Crusmac, 2017, p. 18). Past definitions of feminism thus heavily influence anti feminist discourse of today.
believe in natural biological differences between men and women that in turn leads to natural societal roles that men and women have to adhere to. Female biological nature, according to ‘WAF’, is as described in the quote; “being at home and taking care of the home, is a natural place for women to be. . . . taking care and nurturing is a natural role to women” (respondent #1, 2018). It is believed by researchers such as Erin Steuter (1992), that the traditional female role, to be a mother and a homemaker was ‘deliberately degraded’ by feminists. Many women were concerned about the status of the homemaker being threatened by feminists (Steuter, 1992). This concern of loss of status and prestige is also detected in the discourse used by ‘WAF’. In the blog: ‘To free women, you must first free men’ (2018), by Janet Bloomfield, she uses a quote:
Figure A3
This expresses concerns about how women as homemakers are perceived by feminists. By trying to draw women out of their home and into the public male sphere, feminism is
diminishing the social prestige and status of the homemaker. Prestige can be seen as a social reward that is important to almost everyone. Because homemakers never received financial rewards for the work they do, prestige is of great importance to them (Steuter, 1992). During the late 1960s and 1970s their prestige was diminished due to feminism. According to Steuter this made women resentful. “And consciously or unconsciously they blamed the people who were, at least in part, responsible - their sisters who had deserted the home for paid careers, making the now empty homestead look shabby” (Mansbridge, 1986, p. 108). When the job market became accessible to women, this became an attractive option for educated women, while traditional female roles became less attractive and less appreciated (Steuter, 1992). In
3Figure A; [To free women, you must first free men quote] by J. Bloomfield. retrieved from
the next statement made by respondent #4, the frustration of loss of prestige of the homemaker due to feminism becomes visible:
“I think if women want to be stay at home moms I think that is great, or if you want to pursue just a career is great. but I think if feminists want to push every women to push to be only a career women is ridiculous because we have to move forward. We have to populate the earth. . . . I really hate that a lot of them look down on people like me who want to dedicate their life to their kids. We are trying to instill good ideas in our kids heads and trying to get them ready for the next generation but it seems like, if you are not completely into a career and focussed on yourself in 2018 as a women, then you are screwing up” (Respondent #4, 2018).
In representation of an organisation, the concept of ‘cognitive polyphasia’ is important (Crusmac, 2017). This concept is used to emphasize the dynamic coexistence of various ways of thinking and knowing within a group (Ibid.). Like language, in which words can have different meanings and interpretations, people within a group can also have different
representations (Ibid, p. 12). This is visible in the ‘WAF’ discourse. There is a variety of views that make up the community. For instance traditional knowledge and modern knowledge can co-exist within one representation. Not only do members differ between forms of knowledge; While one member might show traditional views, others exhibit more modernised views. But members also exhibit internal contradicting views, holding a traditional view in one subject such as family life and societal roles for men and women, while holding modern views in other subjects such as freedom and equality for women. “Different and incompatible cognitive styles and forms of knowledge can co-exist within one social group and can be employed by one and the same individual” (Voelklein & Howarth, 2005, p. 434). These internal contradicting views will be discussed in the next chapter.
3.2 The transference of feminist ideals
Whether or not ‘Women Against Feminism’ can be seen as a social movement can be
discussed. This research proposes however that it is. Anti-feminism in itself can be seen as a counter movement of feminism. Following the line of argumentation used by Steuter, a countermovement is “a conscious, collective, organized attempt to resist or reverse social change” (Steuter, 1992, p. 289). Not only is the group ‘Women Against Feminism’, with it’s nearly 50.000 members online, described in mainstream media as a movement, the group
