Inside the DANGERS of the “Anti-Feminist” Movement That Has Found a New Home On The Internet
I recently came across a post from the anti-feminist podcast, Freed From Feminism, that posed a question, “Should women vote?” Upon expanding the post, I discovered that the author and her followers were actively advocating for women to not vote. I thought to myself, This is 2020. It’s the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage. Surely, these people must be joking. Who would be so backwards that they question a fundamental human right in our democracy? After doing some research, I discovered that the “anti-feminist” movement is no longer a silent minority. Social media has enabled supporters of this movement to spread their regressive and oppressive ideologies worldwide. As an individual baffled by these women’s advocacy of women’s oppression, I set out to answer the burning question: Why do supporters believe that women shouldn’t vote? The crux of the anti-feminist argument against female suffrage is that voting gives women power, and that power challenges male dominance. Supporters of anti-feminism assume a twisted social hierarchy where women are subordinate to men, without opinions or aspirations of their own. I will dismantle the fallacies of this argument and explain why such backwards thinking is harmful towards today’s society.
The History of Anti-Feminism in America
The roots of the anti-feminist movement date back to the 1850s, when anti-feminist groups challenged women’s suffrage and higher education. The movement was deeply rooted in fear, as advocates feared that giving women rights would threaten the “traditional” way of life. Early anti-feminist groups had close ties to evangelical Christianity, as Samuel Dike, the founder of the Divorce Reform League, frequently spoke at evangelical conventions.
Anti-feminism didn’t truly make its entrance into the public sphere until the late 1970s, when Congress proposed the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). This amendment would guarantee equal rights to individuals, regardless of sex. Phyllis Schlafly was one of the most vocal opponents of ERA. Like her predecessors, she argued that ERA would dismantle “traditional gender roles” and remove privileges designed to “protect” women, such as women being exempt from the draft. Despite being a working woman herself, she argued that the passage of the ERA will force women to enter the workforce, and working women would damage traditional family values. Her advocacy led to the failure of the ERA to be passed by Congress.
The Argument Against Women’s Suffrage, and Where It Falls Apart
One of the individuals I spoke with argued that each household should only have one vote in order to maintain “unity,” and that vote should be by the man alone. This argument assumes that women are inherently dependent upon men: men are strong protectors of the household, while women are weak and submissive caregivers. This argument also assumes that dissent is reviled, and dissent always creates a lack of unity.
The individual also cited G.K. Chesterton, an English writer and theologian, who argued that women’s voting rights represent “coercion” by the government. Implicit in his claim is the idea that a choice is coercive.
History has shown that women are not weak individuals that need “protecting” but strong innovators that have revolutionized scientific research, politics, and the arts. Ada Lovelace wrote the first algorithm that was designed to be implemented on a computer. She published her work during a time when women didn’t get an education beyond middle school, and the idea of an intelligent machine that could “think” was a fantasy. Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson were Black female mathematicians who were vital to the Space Race in the 1960s. During a time when Black women were virtually unheard of in science and technology, they made the calculations that launched the first man in space. In 2018, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez became the youngest person to ever be elected to Congress. Despite coming from a working-class background and facing harassment from male politicians, she advocates for fighting climate change, helping the poor, and universal healthcare. Beyoncé is the highest-earning Black musician in history and the most nominated woman for the Grammys, and she uses her voice to speak up against racial injustice. These women demonstrate that women are not without ideas. Women have used their power to improve humanity, even when they didn’t have any power by the law. To silence the female vote is to silence the female voice.
The individuals I spoke with have a narrow definition of femininity: they believe that women should only be submissive caregivers. However, if femininity means caring for others, then women should be engaged in humanitarian causes, like caring for the poor, racial equality, and fighting sex trafficking. Voting is the perfect way to express your support for these causes: by voting for politicians who will fight for causes you believe in, you are taking a stand for your beliefs. It is not unfeminine to use your voice to speak up against injustice. It is unfeminine to callously sit back and turn a blind eye to it.
Like the anti-feminists of days past, the individuals I spoke with are afraid of dissent. To them, giving women the right to vote means that women can express dissenting opinions from their spouse, and dissent dissolves the unity of a marriage. However, dissent shouldn’t be feared: it should be welcomed. Without dissent, we wouldn’t have progress. Imagine if Galileo never spoke up when people believed the planets rotate around Earth. Imagine if Darwin never spoke up when people believed in creationism. Our country was founded upon the principle of (respectful) dissent: imagine if our founding fathers and mothers never spoke up against the tyranny of the British monarchy. Respectful disagreement doesn’t destroy harmony: by seeing the flaws in the present and suggesting a solution for the future, we can work together to achieve a better world for all.
G.K. Chesterton suggests that women’s voting rights are coercive, but there is nothing coercive about a choice. If a woman doesn’t want to vote, she is more than welcome to throw her ballot away. However, taking away women’s voting rights is coercive: it is reminiscent of the autocratic regimes of dictators and monarchies. Voting is the cornerstone of our democracy: without it, there would be no way for common people to express their thoughts to the government.
Last Words
2020 is a critical election year. We have experienced great suffering at the hands of this year: the coronavirus pandemic, racial injustice in policing, and massive wildfires have saddened America. Your vote can help determine how our country faces these issues. Your vote stands for your beliefs in how the government should handle the economy, coronavirus response, racial justice, climate change, LGBT rights, foreign policy, and so much more. Regardless of your political affiliation or leaning, voting is your way fighting for the change you want to see in the world.
Instead of embracing the fight that Susan B. Anthony made 100 years ago for women’s equality, the anti-feminists have villainized it. They are ungrateful for the progress that women’s rights advocates have made in the past, practically spitting on their graves.
The anti-feminists can’t stop us. Their words are hot air.
Women, vote. Men, vote. Non-binary and gender non-conforming people, vote. Everyone, vote. https://www.vote.org/
Note: Your county elections supervisor has a list of ballot drop-off locations in case you aren’t able to mail in your ballot on time.