The divide-and-conquer of patriarchy and why it's harmful to humanity

There is a significant issue with feminism and how people view it off late. I just read this particular excerpt from The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir - “The woman herself believes that her personal life does not dispense her from the duties she assumed in marrying; she does not want her husband to be deprived of the advantages he would have had in marrying a ‘real woman’; she wants to be elegant, a good housekeeper and a devoted mother as wives traditionally are.”

It is interesting how a lot of the debate around feminism these days is about the division occurring between angry feminists who hate men and consciously or subconsciously look down upon the feminists who want to inherently be dainty, good housewives and serve their families like in the status quo. This gives us two definitions of feminism. The latter group claims it to be simply the freedom of opportunity to be as they please and do as they please without societal restrictions to dictate what they wear/where they work. The former group, though, which originated before and is slowly being labelled as pseudo-feminism (I am not proclaiming if it should be or not yet), designs feminism as the philosophy of rigorous and consistent banishing of patriarchal structures around us. This includes countering and analysing every act/method by way of how it has historically kept women inferior and how men have easily risen away as superiors. And we let them.

Patriarchy has identified this rift and is using it against the whole idea of equality. They have historically favoured and glorified the superwomen and the women who happily submit to their fathers or husbands. SDB says, “The advantage man enjoys and which manifests itself from childhood onwards is that his vocation as a human being in no way contradicts his destiny as a male. […] He is not divided (between his roles as a human being and a bearer of masculinity). However, for a woman to accomplish her femininity (defined by men and most probably capitalists, but that’s a discussion for another day), she is required to be object and prey; that is, she must renounce her claims as a sovereign subject.” The destiny of a female is mostly always in conflict with her personality as an individual with intellect and passion. Conformity to custom is easier for men, while for women, it comes at the cost of losing their individuality. It’s a man’s world, after all; who is she kidding?

Coming back to our problem on how anti-feminists have conveniently divided feminists stems from the idea of freedom of opportunity and how opportunity in itself is biased behind centuries of gender indoctrination. Opportunity is only so ever bounded by what the system wants us to desire ourselves. Years of propaganda have shown women that they SHOULD want to give their family a clean abode, their husband a nourishing lunch and their children 20 hours of their day. A woman ought to prefer looking delicate and perfect (lest the neighbours talk about her hysteria or men want her less). Any less, and she is a careless woman. When she cannot choose herself over what society wants of her, she decides to pick the worst combination of both. She claims she chooses to live as a subordinate by her own will. It is her own will no doubt, but that will has roots in the society’s mutilation of women who choose to be contrarian.

What this needs, and I want to interpret the initial feminist struggle, was, too, a collective systemic shift in how women perceive their choices. A girl is more likely to believe in her freedom of opportunity when she knows nobody can question her sanity by digging out an example of another woman who “managed” everything well or who played with her hobbies whilst polishing the shoes of the good woman idea. It is important for our gender to collectively take ourselves more seriously than the “superwoman” society wants us to be. I may not want to use something as strong as “fight against”, but it is imperative, at this point, for us women to come together as a lot and redefine what femininity means. Don’t let the powerful people with useless things to make, money to monger, temples to follow and a conservative society to impress decide what femininity is for you. It is going to be a little tough for the women who define and know themselves first, but a few centuries were enough for patriarchy; let’s claim our place as human beings here.

In rage but optimism,

Geetika