Most women today who label themselves feminists seem to feel that in order to be successful, they have to behave like men. This often means stripping themselves of traditional feminine qualities, like their sexuality, their maternal instincts, or their desire to be homemakers. By insinuating that the qualities traditionally associated with women are inferior, these so called “feminists” are in fact insecure sexists themselves!

While I agree that women should not be LIMITED to these qualities or forced into them, if a woman should find pleasure in staying at home and cooking for her family, then she should not be looked down upon. If her love for her family leads her to want to renounce her career and be a homemaker, then let it be CELEBRATED that today, she can do so by choice — and not because there are no other options.

In my opinion, Sarah Palin embodies this spirit of choice. She is considering running for president, she was a successful governor of her state who was ruthless on corruption, she is an expert in the energy field…but at the same time, she is comfortable fighting for her children, dressing like a woman. She does not limit herself with gender stereotypes, but rather, embraces the most favorable traits of BOTH genders.

And when she talks about women being able to foster both aspects of their lives — family and career — I think she is simply showing a lack of condesension toward housewives (something which many feminists are guilty of).

A woman who believes that there is only ONE path to feminism — androgyny — is being condescending to women who choose to stay at home with their families, and are merely being divisive. Rather, we need more women like Sarah who say that true feminism comes from being able to CHOOSE what you want from your life and not be judged for the path you choose.

Two, you mention that most child care is still done by women. I think at one time in history, this was most certainly a “women’s place” sort of assignment, but I think, for the most part today, women choose and want to be their child’s primary caretaker. It is a tough argument and we may just have to agree to disagree.

I absolutely agree that there is a long way to go, but you are painting a picture so dark, I can’t see any other reason for you writing this besides your anger with christian conservatives. I understand the contradiction between the southern baptists/sarah and being feminist, but there have always been religious women, tits just that now, the conserative religious organizations they are apart of, as a result of feminism, allow them to have so much more power and voice. Women have a strong leadership role in politics and in the country today, and I don’t think that The Atlantic’s article is being fearful of a feminine coup, but are merely stating the truth. Afterall, 30 years ago Soccer Moms were not one of the biggest political blocs in the nation.

Really interesting points you bring up. I think you’re absolutely right that it’s easy to get into a victim mindset when talking about prejudice and that we have to stay aware of how far we’ve actually come. I picked up the Feminine Mystique at the library the other day and was really struck by how different 50 or 60 years ago really was. The same happened after reading the novel, The Best of Everything.

While I have felt slighted in my life because of my gender, it doesn’t do me any good to wallow and become disempowered. It’s all about ‘taking the power back’ and staying positive, aware, and proactive.

Men’s place in the world is changing and as a result, so is that of women. We are all left a bit confused as to our roles in certain ways.

So much of what I learned in my women’s studies courses in college seemed so disempowering precisely because of the message that we are disenfranchised and shit on. I have never particularly felt that way by virtue of my gender, but I also see that as a luxury not all women have.

In the US, I think it’s the complete lack of knowledge of the rights that women did NOT have as recently as 50 or 60 years ago. I am young enough to have benefitted immensely from women’s lib and also so young as to have the luxury of being completely ignorant that as recently as 1920 women in the US couldn’t vote, and as recently as the 1950′s it was unheard of for a married woman to have her own bank account.

I take issue with the victim mentality I encountered in my women’s studies classes and the general sex negativity as it applies to men (since I still like men). I feel like feminism needs a more optimistic message, such as that contained in this article in order to survive.

The way I see it is as feminism progresses, it becomes more expansive. While the first wave perhaps sought legal equality for property and suffrage the next focused more on ending discrimination — something far more difficult to quantify. And once you’re talking discrimination, it makes sense to further expand the discussion to include different races and treatment of women in different countries as well.

Sarah Palin does not expand or broaden any of this discussion. I don’t see her looking for great room to move but instead pointing fingers as to who is right and who is wrong in terms of defining current feminism.

Perhaps the feminism of the 1990s no longer exists, but it has been replaced with something else. It’s difficult to pinpoint exactly what that is, though, as I believe, once again, the discussion has once again grown to encompass more complicated and more multifaceted issues.

We started somewhat of this conversation before.

I agree with you that clearly men and women are not treated equally, particularly if you look at feminism on a more global scale, it is important to recognize that feminism has changed. Meaning, the issues facing women have changed and modified over the last decades, specifically in richer, more democratic or socialist countries.