“FEMINISM IN MODERN SOCIETY

scientific adviser

Siberian Federal University

She shouted: "Equality!

Give me all my rights!

He quietly: “Yes, take it. To your health.

I give everything, because you are right.

Drive? Yes please.

Whitewash, wash, saw, plan.

I give everything, then don’t complain

Don't you dare whine and shout.

With passion, woman, redoubled

I took care of everything myself.

I washed, built a house - built.

She taxied, dug and rowed...

And he, having felt the “disenfranchisement”,

Having fallen in love with the sofa,

Thank you for equality

All women of the world and all countries...

Feminism has already become an integral part of our lives. Just imagine a world where women do not have the right to higher education, cannot vote and hold leadership positions, should not wear trousers, short skirts or makeup, and, naturally, there can be no talk of any continued dating - this is the lot "fallen" women. Is it difficult to imagine? But our world was like this just recently. By the way, in civilized Switzerland, women were allowed to vote in elections only in the 80s of the twentieth century. So we cannot say that feminism has lost its relevance. Moreover, he has not yet reached many places, and women there are still treated as a kind of livestock. And as for the fact that it’s hard to do everything yourself - well, before, women weren’t carried in their arms at all, and they weren’t even allowed to open their mouths. It has always been, at all times, not easy to be a woman. But whether feminism has benefited us is not yet known. Women have achieved a lot, but what do we see? That now women everywhere are busy with their careers and self-affirmation. They pushed the institution of mother and wife into the background. So it is not surprising that feminism on the male side is now picking up speed. Somehow it turned out that women shouted, but they had not yet acquired true freedom from male chauvinism.

At the same time, in modern society a huge number of myths have developed about the activities of feminists, their views and ideas. Did you know that feminists have never held public bra burnings? In reality it was like this. In 1968, American students protested against the Miss America beauty pageant: they staged a mock coronation of a sheep and defiantly threw ladies' magazines, high-heeled shoes, curlers and corsets into trash cans. For greater effect, they intended to burn their underwear at the same time, but in the end they did not do this for reasons of fire safety. But the editor of the New York Post really liked the headline “Bra Burners” - it really does sound romantic and scary. Thus, thanks to the media, the belief about the pyromaniac tendencies of feminists was born. But what about bras? Bras are a trifle, a special case, “flowers”. There are also “berries”.

“Feminism is when women want to rule the world,” my friend once said. And thereby formulated the main stereotype about feminism. In fact, feminism was and still largely remains a struggle not for the superiority of women over men, but only against their defeat in legal and actual rights.

Early feminism emerged shortly after the French Revolution. Olympia de Gouges, one of the most striking characters of the era, wrote in her “Declaration of the Rights of Woman and Citizen”: “If woman has the right to mount the scaffold, then she must have the right to mount the tribune.” She was indeed executed in November 1793, and she was far from the only one. But the French Revolution never allowed women onto the podium. In the same November, clubs and associations of women were closed, they were soon banned from appearing at public meetings, and a little later, Napoleon, who came to power, enshrined in the constitution that only men could have civil rights.

The beautiful slogans proclaimed in the American Declaration of Independence of 1776 that “all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” applied only to men. Abigail Smith Adams, the wife of President John Adams and considered America's first feminist, said, "We will not submit to laws we had no part in making or to an authority that does not represent our interests."

So the first steps towards equality and brotherhood, which are written with affection in history and law textbooks, applied specifically to “brothers,” because “sisters” were somehow not really considered people. It was against this background that suffragism developed, that is, simply put, the movement for equal voting rights. And if you don’t think women should be banned from voting, then congratulations: you are de facto a suffragist (or suffragist). Entire generations of men and women fought for this equality, which today seems self-evident, and fought hard: they disrupted government meetings, held hunger strikes in prisons, and even staged terrorist attacks against government agencies.

There is another misconception... “Okay, 19th century, suffragettes, the right to vote and study. Okay, third world countries. But now what do women lack in enlightened Europe? What other rights do they want? They're crazy about fat!" Actually - no, not with fat. The problems that feminists raise and try to solve cannot be called far-fetched. In particular, violence. On average, up to 70% of murdered women worldwide are killed by their sexual partners. In some EU countries, every fourth woman has been a victim of domestic violence. And this is only what is reflected in the statistics, but beaten and raped women do not always report this “to the right place.” Moreover, they themselves do not always adequately assess what is happening to them. For example, many still do not understand that a husband raping his wife is also rape.

In 1736, the English judge Sir Matthew Hale made a decision that for two and a half centuries determined the legal fate of the concept of “marital rape”: “A husband cannot be guilty of violence committed by him against his lawful wife, for by their consent and the marriage contract the wife is given to her husband and cannot deny him anything.”

It was not until 1991 that the UK Court of Appeal ruled that this principle was no longer appropriate and upheld the conviction of a man convicted of raping his wife. This decision was supported by the House of Lords, and then confirmed by the European Commission of Human Rights.

Another problem that leaves unplowed ground for the work of feminists even after the adoption of all the necessary laws is that sometimes declared rights remain rights only on paper. Stereotypes of public consciousness that set different attitudes towards women and men sit in the blood like cholesterol, and this affects the level of implementation of the rights that are so wonderfully prescribed. Moreover, in order to realize rights, you need to at least know about them, and often have remarkable courage to go “across.”

But some feminists perceive this activity as a kind of game: you can shout “for your rights” to your heart’s content until you smell kerosene, and at the very least you can call for help from a big and strong defender and hide behind the backs of men. In the movie Ghost Dog, a man kills a policewoman with the words: “You wanted equality? You got it." And rightly so. Coming out of the shadows, the women realized that in the sun you can not only warm up, but also get burned.

Many people think that feminists are man-haters. In fact, if a woman has a beloved and loving husband, why does she need this muck with the letter “f”? However, statistics prove that the idea that feminism is for people with failed personal lives and that it is incompatible with happy romantic heterosexual relationships is a myth that has nothing to do with reality.

This is evidenced by the results obtained by specialists from Rutgers University in New Jersey, USA, who conducted a face-to-face survey of 242 students and an online survey of 289 older people. Men in relationships with feminist women reported more stable relationships and greater sexual satisfaction to researchers. At the same time, stereotypical ideas about feminists were tested - and refuted: in terms of success with the opposite sex, love and the quality of relationships with partners, feminists left non-feminist women behind.

And man-hating is attributed to feminism thanks to the “efforts” of only one of its many directions - radical feminism. Suffice it to remember how in the 70s in Holland, activists on the streets pinched men’s... soft spots in order to “revenge all oppressed women.”

“Metaphors and hyperbole aside, what is called ‘radical feminism’ is fascism. Chauvinism, censorship, quasi-scientific anthropology, the search for the enemy, mystical unity with nature, fake pseudo-pagan religiosity, mandatory standards of thought and even appearance are praised,” writes American anarchist Bob Black.

Another misconception is that feminism will soon sweep away other values. “Traditional values are in danger, and feminists are to blame! They are systematically destroying our world!” - impressionable adherents of traditions fear. But don't worry: the idea that feminism is a single whole is wrong. In fact, there is probably not so much disagreement about any “-ism,” and there are more than 300 different definitions of feminism in the literature.

However, mass thinking prefers to simplify everything; no one wants to understand the difference between socialist feminism and liberal feminism, not to mention such strange beasts as psychoanalytic feminism or, God forgive me, postmodern feminism. It's difficult. It is much easier to come up with some collective image of a feminist monster (or angel) and vigorously criticize (or praise) it. For example, feminism is accused of “positive discrimination” - giving women an economic and legal “head start”, for example, electoral quotas, advantages in admission to educational institutions and work, and tax breaks. Sometimes it even reaches the point of absurdity, as in Sweden, where the Left Party proposed imposing a “domestic violence tax” on all... men! That is, a man lives for himself, he won’t hurt a fly, and maybe he himself will when his wife falls under the heavy Scandinavian hand, but he is obliged to pay for the fight against domestic violence, because he is a man. Why this is not discrimination, the fight against which feminism puts on its banner, is a mystery. But there is another example: when in Spain socialists proposed lowering taxes for women and increasing taxes for men, it was feminists who spoke out against it.

But still, since people with different views call themselves the same word “feminists,” it means they have a certain point of intersection. This point is the idea of the inadmissibility of discrimination against women and forcing women to live a lifestyle determined by their gender. The only difference is in the ways to achieve this goal and the ideas about what exactly the world of gender equality should look like.

It so happened that in my conscious life I had already managed to zealously support the views of feminists, but everything, as they say, comes with age, and, most likely, this kind of statement was just “youthful maximalism.” The reasons may be different, especially their combination, but this is not the task of my essay. Having matured a little, I understood the real calling of a woman, her true essence as the keeper of the hearth and the basis of happiness in the home. I am deeply convinced that the fundamental intransigence of the ardent supporters of these ideas arises from their inability to understand the importance of the role of a woman as a woman and to intelligently distinguish between the spheres of activity of women and men. But still, the main purpose of the beautiful half of humanity lies not only in raising children. In addition, you are destined by the Almighty to be a wonderful decoration of our planet, to bring beauty and love, harmony, tenderness, and high feelings to the human world. You need to start not by proving your equality with a man, but by realizing yourself as a full-fledged person, and not an appendage to your husband. Women must realize, first of all, for themselves that their souls did not incarnate on Earth in order to serve men and children. And in order to realize yourself as a unique and talented person. Well, when men notice this personality in you, it won’t even occur to them to sign you up as a servant.

Do not forget about female dignity even in the most difficult everyday situations and remember that it is then that men most of all need your moral support, and having received it from you, they will ultimately be able to cope with any misfortune to the joy of themselves, and to you, my loved ones.

Love a woman for the sin she carried out of paradise,

And not because she cooks and does laundry better than anyone else.

Love a woman for the sadness she hides from you.

Because next to her the burden of problems decreases faster.

Love a woman for her mind, which is both great and modest.

For children's fun, the noise in your home at dawn in the morning.

Love a woman for the night she gives you,

And for the desire to help when you are dead tired.

Love a dream and an intriguing secret in a woman

Do not humiliate beauty with a reproach thrown casually.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru

Introduction

Conclusion

List of used literature

Appendix (Questionnaire “Effectiveness of Women's Leadership”)

Introduction

The women's movement for equal rights at the beginning of the 20th century was an international phenomenon, but the scale, nature and forms of movements, as well as feminist rhetoric, were determined by specific socio-political conditions, cultural and historical traditions of a particular society.

Feminist ideas remain relevant today. Even though women have already achieved a lot, there is still no true equality in society. Politics and economics are still dominated by men, and progressive, business women are viewed with doubt. On paper, the laws proclaim equality, but in reality, the old, patriarchal foundations in the family prevail; the man still considers himself the master in the house and in society.

While writing the work, I used the works of Russian and foreign scientists: N. Novikova, A. Temkina, S. de Bouvar, S. Evans and others, as well as articles in periodicals.

Feminism in Russian historiography has long been considered part of the labor and socialist movement. This issue was not considered independently and therefore was not widely developed, hence the paucity of domestic literature. The main sources were the books “The Second Sex” by Simone de Beauvoir, “Born to Free” by Sarah Evans and the collection “Feminism: Prose, Memoirs, Letters, Essays”. Simone de Beauvoir turns in her narration to myths and legends about the “mystery of sex”, about the “mystery of the female soul”, created, in her words, by men. Sarah Evans's book reveals the life history of American women, starting from the 16th century. She writes about how the American woman has tried for a long time to change the boundaries assigned to her. Hence the explosion of social activity, which led to the creation of a number of informal associations.

The book centers on the diverse lives of American women - Native Americans, pioneers, slaves, immigrants, factory workers, mothers and housewives. The women's movement, according to Sarah Evans, is a hidden source of democratization of society. The collection includes works of different genres - essays, memoirs, letters and excerpts from works of art by famous public figures and writers - J. Sand, A. Adams, G. Ibsen, S. Anthony and others. The works included in the collection reflect the history of 150 years women's struggle for their rights - from the time of the American Revolution to the forties of the 20th century. Among the problems discussed in the collection are marriage as a tool of suppression and exploitation, a woman’s desire to manage her own freedom, and a woman’s economic dependence.

The object of the work is feminism.

The subject of the work is women in modern society.

The purpose of this work is to study feminism in modern society.

identify the essence of modern feminism;

research on women in business.

Chapter 1. The essence of modern feminism

1.1 Feminism in the second half of the 20th century

The awakening, or “feminine renaissance,” began in the 60s. Its epicenter was the United States, where precisely during these years there was an intensification of democratic processes aimed at eliminating various forms of discrimination, and above all racism. The women's movement took on new, often radical forms, which is reflected in its name - “women's liberation movement”.

The new wave of the struggle for emancipation was due to structural changes in society and, above all, a significant increase in the share of female labor in social production. Thus, by 1960 in the United States, women made up more than one-third of the country's labor force, while 54% of working women were married and 33% had children, which indicates economic factors that encouraged women to join social production practices.

The feminist movement of the 60s and early 70s acquired a somewhat extravagant coloring, manifesting itself in unusual slogans and forms of expression of protest that were provocative, even shocking to the traditionally minded public. In an effort to awaken women's self-awareness and liberate public opinion from the inertia of patriarchally oriented moral attitudes, feminists used, for example, the techniques of “square theater.” The leaflets of the American organization that emerged in 1968 under the scandalous name “Witch” said: “Everything that is repressive, exclusively male, envious, puritanical and authoritarian should become the target of your criticism. Your weapon is your limitless beautiful imagination. Your strength comes from yourself as women, and it is greatly enhanced by working together with your sisters. It is your duty to free your brothers (whether they want it or not) and yourself from gender role stereotypes. Shaternikova M. Where does feminism grow from? // Bulletin of Moscow State University. - 2014. - No. 16. - P.25.

Not only the forms of feminist protest were shocking, but also their content. Those foundations of society that, according to feminists, contributed to the consolidation of the unequal status of women: marriage, motherhood, etc. were criticized. The logic of the reasoning boiled down to approximately the following: “In marriage, according to the law, a man and a woman are one person, that is, the very existence or legal existence of a woman ceases with the beginning of her marriage. For “one” always implies male dominance.”

The extremism of the feminist movement has had positive and negative consequences. On the one hand, it contributed to the awakening of women's self-awareness, and on the other, it gave rise to discredit, allowing opponents to accuse feminists of having an inferiority complex, an unhealthy addiction to power, a tendency to sexual promiscuity, etc.

Feminism, like any other political movement, could not avoid radicalism, “leftism” as a kind of growing pains. It took time for maturity of assessments, moderation and balanced actions, and, finally, theoretical validity to arrive. This was greatly facilitated by the creation of a network of so-called women's studies, designed to simultaneously educate and provide a scientific foundation for the movement for women's liberation. Women's studies have become an integral part of the curricula of many universities, and many specialized research centers have emerged.

In the 70s, centers for “women’s” or “feminist” studies with special programs, including specialists in biology, physiology, anthropology, ethnography, philosophy, history, and philology, appeared everywhere in Western universities. They moved into a debate that divided feminists into supporters of an “egalitarian” approach and preachers of “female subjectivity.” With the spread of women's studies, this dispute not only was not resolved, but separated opponents in different directions. Bryson V. Political theory of feminism. / Per. from English - M., 2011. P.145.

Researchers who based their analysis on a comparison of “male” and “female” roles in different situations and different periods proposed their way out of this impasse. They proposed introducing a new concept of “gender” (from the English gender - genus). In Russian, this concept can only be explained by a semantic phrase: “social relations of gender,” or the socially fixed division of roles into male and female. They strive to transfer the analysis of gender relations from the biological level to the social level in order to finally abandon the postulate about the “natural purpose of sex”; show that the concept of “gender” belongs to the same meaning-forming concepts as “class” or “race”.

In the 70-80s, the international community adopted documents that call for the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women. In them, a woman is recognized as the same full-fledged subject of history as a man, and her personality is valued higher than her “natural purpose”; they emphasize that the birth of children, procreation is a woman’s right, not a duty.

The “women's revolution” that began in the 60s went under the slogan: “If a woman has the right to half of heaven, then she has the right to half of the power on earth!” - in the 80-90s, it forced those in power to make room and finally let women into all structures of social governance. These structures began to turn from single-sex male structures into “mixed” structures. The suffragettes, the grandmothers of late 20th century American women, would have rejoiced at the increase in the number of women members of political parties. In 1969 Women occupied only 3.5% of state positions by 1986. this figure rose to 13%. Their representation in local government was 4% in 1975. and 10% in 1981 The share of women in the US Parliament is 11.2%, in the UK - 7.8%. . And these numbers continue to grow, albeit very slowly. Thus, the “women's revolution” changed the idea of the role of women in modern society. By the mid-90s, men held 375 seats in the US House of Representatives; women held only 60. In the Senate, there were 87 men and 13 women. There are 4 women in senior ministerial positions in the Bush Administration. Women-owned companies employ one in four Americans. But at the same time, only 12.4% of women are members of the boards of directors of the largest American companies. Bryson V. Political theory of feminism. / Per. from English - M., 2011. P.147.

In 1961, US President John Kennedy created the world's first special structure - the President's Commission on the Status of Women. This organization was headed by Eleanor Roosevelt, widow of President Franklin Roosevelt and author of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights The Commission monitored the observance of women's rights in the workplace.In 1963, the US Congress required all employers to pay women the same as men for the same work.

In 1964, discrimination based on race and gender was prohibited by law in the United States. The influential Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was created, which aimed to investigate cases of such discrimination. Right there. P.148.

Feminism spread around the world so quickly only because it could use pre-existing traditions of social activity everywhere. Feminism has adopted the fundamental norms of the era of humanism and the Enlightenment, according to which man is a being who influences the environment and himself, changing and creating. However, in a patriarchal society, a man has assumed an active role and the right to embody these characteristics of the human race. The goal of feminism is, therefore, to free women from the restrictions imposed by men, giving them equal opportunities to participate in the creative process, in history.

Feminism grew out of other movements aimed at reforming society. In the United States, one of the ancestors of feminism was the movement for the liberation of the black population, and another was the student movement. In Britain and Western European countries, modern feminism has its roots in the radical student movement of the 60s.

Since the early 60s, a radical branch of American feminism—the “liberation movement”—began to take shape. This movement gradually grew out of the “new left” movement, at the same time being a reaction and protest to the student revolution. Women students enthusiastically took part in university protests, sit-ins, protest marches against segregation in the South, and anti-war rallies and debates against the Vietnam War. But gradually they begin to feel dissatisfied with their role in the youth movement. The disappointment was associated with the process of realizing one’s complete detachment from leadership and decision-making in the new leftist informal groups and organizations. The New Left movement was the first mass movement of middle-class young people in the history of the United States against the institutions and values of Western democracy. The criticism and ideological nihilism of the new radicals concerned the entire system of values and institutions of the “rotten industrial civilization.” Zherebkina I. “Read my wish...” Postmodernism. Psychoanalysis. Feminism. M., 2014. P.76.

At the same time, it turned out that, having questioned the political ideals of “one hundred percent Americanism”, challenging the bourgeois “American Dream”, the “new left”, like the “old”, questioned the values and practices of patriarchy. The demands of egalitarian democracy and “participatory democracy” do not apply to the system of gender relations. Comrades in the movement who dared to step away from the prepared role of clerical and kitchen assistants and put the issue of equal rights for women on the agenda of youth meetings were met with rude ridicule, bullying and complete rejection. The leader of the influential radical organization the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee became famous throughout the country for his “jocular” reaction to the question of the status of women. “The only position for women in our political organization,” he publicly declared, “is prostrate.”

Women leaving student groups in protest are forming their own communities and organizations. Their new concept is the slogan “The personal is political.” The “liberation wing” declaration provided a basis for collective strategies and actions distinct from the practices of liberal feminism. The main form of their activity was the creation of informal small discussion groups “conscious-raising”. Awareness of women's personal deprivation and personal experience as a political problem and as a social model of inequality for women as a group inevitably led, according to the organizers, to the formation of a collective identity and new solidarity activity. “Personal experience and personal experiences give reason to speak of the general problem of oppression of all women,” said the Manifesto of the Red Stockings, an influential radical group from New York. -- “Male dominance is the oldest form of domination and exploitation of women. The growth of self-awareness is not psychotherapy, it is the development of the solidary class consciousness of women. Our goal is liberation from all types of suppression of the female personality. Zherebkina I. “Read my wish...” Postmodernism. Psychoanalysis. Feminism. M., 2014. P.78.

Any woman or women's group could begin activities at the local community, city or state level.

In numerous “consciousness growth” and “increasing personal self-esteem” groups, their participants rethought the well-known “similarities versus differences” debate in a new way. In the radical movement, female difference, opposed to the understanding of equality as sameness, ceases to be a term of abuse. On the initiative of women's groups, alternative women's “countercultural” social institutions and practices are being formed. Since the late 60s, feminist publications, bookstores, cafes, kindergartens, women's clinics and centers for women's health and family planning, crisis centers for women subjected to sexual and domestic violence have appeared. In its scope, the “liberation” women's movement by the mid-70s began to surpass the scale of anti-war and youth protests. Evans S. Born for Freedom. / Translated from English. - M., 2013. P.107.

The feminist challenge is becoming a leading theme in the media. The women's rights movement did not cause such resonance. The reformism of women's liberal organizations of the 60s, in general, fit into the framework of the US democratic system, while the radicalism of liberation groups threatened to destroy centuries-old sociocultural values, institutions and policies.

The problematization of sexual relations as political relations of power and subordination exacerbated the split within feminism in the 1980s. The identification of the lesbian wing in the radical movement and the ideological justification of female homosexuality as the leading strategy for women's liberation caused sharp antagonism from liberal organizations. According to one of the famous theorists of this movement, Charlotte Bunch, “reformists define the problem as a private issue; Meanwhile, for us, this is a form of political rebellion against the social construction of female sexual inferiority and secondaryness, as well as the fight against male power and oppression.”

By creating their own organizations and distancing themselves from the male homosexual movement, the lesbian community of the 1970s insisted on the fundamental importance of combating compulsory heterosexuality. Since the prevailing sexual practices excluded the possibility of realizing and satisfying women's own sexual desires, it was this project, in their opinion, that provided the basis for the establishment of equality as a sociocultural norm. As feminist discussions cool, proclamation of homosexuality ceases to be an act of political protest. Since the mid-80s, in the context of respecting the civil rights of sexual minorities, this topic has become part of the programmatic requirements of liberal organizations. Evans S. Born for Freedom. / Translated from English. - M., 2013. P.108.

Since the mid-70s, following the lesbian movement, the movement of black feminism began to take shape within the framework of the US women's movement. Famous journalists, future popular writers Alice Walker, Nobel laureate Toni Morrison, Angela Davis were the first to raise the problem of double identity and double oppression of black American women in their works. Involved in the civil rights movement of African-Americans in the 60s, they followed the same path in their ideological evolution as their white comrades in youth organizations. The discovery of the marginality of women's situation not only in the traditionally patriarchal American society, but also in the new liberal and radical concepts of African-American liberation inevitably brought them into the ranks of feminists, inevitably causing accusations of betrayal of the interests of racial solidarity from adherents of the new programmatic slogan of the struggle “black power.” .

For black feminists themselves, the path to achieving female solidarity of protest also could not be simple and smooth. A serious barrier to this path and the main object of criticism was that the experiences of black women were not included in the models of women's liberation created by white feminism. In this sense, the concepts and practices of both branches of the movement of previous decades completely ignored the social, racial and ethnic differences among women. The liberal and radical paradigms of feminism, built exclusively on the experiences of white, educated middle-class women, reproduced, according to feminists of color, a power hierarchy among women themselves. The mechanism they created to ensure formal individual equality, which did not take into account the double exploitation of women from racial, ethnic minorities and lower social classes, turned out to be unworkable and sometimes worsened the status of these women. One of the most famous theorists of black feminism, bell hooks, wrote in her book “Feminist Theory: From the Edge to the Center” about the need not to limit the scope of feminism to the desire to achieve the same social status as men. Beauvoir S. de. Second floor. / Per. from fr. - M.: Gardarika, 2014. P.54.

Adding missing elements of analysis inevitably creates a split in the feminist environment, but at the same time it expands the boundaries of feminism to understand the totality of multiple systems of domination, the interdependence of forms of oppression based on gender, race and class. Identifying oppression exclusively with male dominance indicated, in Hooks's view, the weakness of liberal and radical political analysis and made it difficult to formulate viable strategies, the ability of men and women to be subordinated - their common point of contact. This idea becomes key in the formation of multicultural feminism in the 1980s and 1990s.

“Difference feminism,” or the plurality of feminisms, defined a new stage in the ideology and practices of the US women's movement in the 1980s and 1990s. The collective action of the 1960s and 1970s is being replaced by the institutionalization of the women's movement in decision-making on a wide range of gender policies. The academic status of new university programs in women's and gender studies affirmed the recognition of the epistemological possibilities of feminist concepts. In the last decade of the 20th century, the integration of many feminist values into the structure of the national identity and life philosophy of Americans became obvious. Legal recognition and respect for differences of all kinds shaped the formulation of the principles of multicultural pluralism in the 1990s and the evolution of the American model of democracy. Beauvoir S. de. Second floor. / Per. from fr. - M.: Gardarika, 2014. P.60.

1.2 Main directions of modern feminism

It seems like “feminism” is an American phenomenon, or rather, now it is no longer American, but global, worldwide, but it was born in America - at least that’s what they say. Maybe that's how it is. I touched on this topic a little in my story about New York. Now I would like to go into more detail.

The feminism in question is a phenomenon of the 80-90s of the last century, when women became men. And so it began... Various courts of rights, cases of accusations of “sexual harassment” - this is when a woman thinks that a man looked at a woman as an object of desire. Previously, we knew about all this only by hearsay - now a lot has reached us.

The woman became a man, accusing the man of having to do this - maybe she’s right in some ways - I’m not challenging her right, I’m not reproaching her - I’m just thinking. She walked over heads, through corpses, through skyscrapers, human souls - she walked quickly, confidently - but where did she go?

Of course, a lot has been said about the role of women. Plato in his “Republic” - one of his strongest works - of course, when considering the ideal state, he considered all its component parts: society, the unit of society - the family, the components of the family - man and woman. Thus, he considered an ideal woman in an ideal state.

He just carefully examined the process of why women cannot do the same things that men do, why they cannot, and what is the difference between them and husbands, if any. A wonderful comparison from there: can a bald and hairy man be a shoemaker? Are they different? It is necessary to understand, according to Plato, how they differ in order to thoughtfully explain whether they can do the same thing or not. Popkova L. Theory and practice of modern feminism: the women's movement in the USA. St. Petersburg, 2014. P.24.

A man is a breadwinner and a guardian, but why can’t a woman be a breadwinner and a guardian? What delimitation criteria should we talk about? According to Plato, the ideal man had to be fluent in the art of gymnastics - he was given a number of exercises, which had to be performed naked for more effective results. At the very beginning, this caused ridicule among society, but then they evaporated as the results spoke for themselves. This led to reflections on the fact that then women should also engage in naked activities, and this may not be reasonable enough: after all, even at a fairly advanced age, men engage in nude activities, even when they are deprived of the attractiveness of youth. How will older women survive this if they are equal in this too?

However, after thinking in detail, Plato came to the conclusion that a woman can do the same things as a man, but since she is physically weaker than him, her workload should be less. At the same time, a woman also has a certain other role, so this compensates the woman for some difference with the opposite sex. However, she can be both a warrior and a guard on an equal basis with a man, if she so desires. Plato has very fascinating opinions, and besides Plato, many later touched on this issue.

Apparently, once again the woman decided to prove that she can do what a man does, but not in the Platonic way, but from the point of view that she can do it no worse, not on an equal footing, but even better - that she is stronger, more significant. When talking about equality and equality, feminists put themselves first. There's something wrong with this. It’s another matter when a man, elevating you as a woman, puts you in first place. This is similar to when others see merit in you and celebrate them, but it’s another thing when you yourself talk about them incessantly.

Once again, the woman was seduced, of course, seduced spiritually, which caused her tragedy - seduced by the theory of consumption, fashion and the catwalk, with slogans like “You deserve it - take it! You can!" As a result of this, at first glance, seemingly feminine, the Woman became similar to the man, similar in all criteria, and such a woman even outwardly assimilated with the male archetype. Popkova L. Theory and practice of modern feminism: the women's movement in the USA. St. Petersburg, 2014. P.27.

In America, the following happened: in megacities such as New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, where the bulk of the population lives, there are generally fewer men and a larger proportion of non-men. Men who are more or less capable and attractive in terms of future marriage and fatherhood have turned away from feminists.

It feels like there is now a wave of mixed marriages - a man in America, having reached marriageable age, does not look at women shaking their rights, calling all individuals of the opposite sex “goats”. Marriages began everywhere with European women - French, Italian, Spanish, Scandinavian, and moreover - with Oriental women - from Asia plus the beauties of Panama, Ecuador, Guatemala, because women there are still classically feminine. I know one worthy couple - an Asian woman, very famous for her age, occupies a fairly high position and can at work “settle”, “build” entire workshops overseas that work for their corporation, but... the husband is a HUSBAND for her! Apparently, this tradition comes from the East - a woman does everything to make her husband better - because this is what she is in her husband. For her, he is a king and God. And they have very good family relationships. The man, in turn, carries her in his arms, he does not look at her as his free app, as something secondary in their union. This is probably the “Yin-Yang” unity characteristic of Asia, when people do not use each other, but complement each other. Temkina A. A. Feminism: West and Russia // Transfiguration. - 2015. - No. 3. - P.41.

At the same time, there are a huge number of young American women in offices - lonely, embittered. Yes, even if one of them is dating someone, the following often happens: a pretty girl, and he is... nondescript, spineless, no-one - a dud. Where is the best place for her to find it? And seeing his inconsistency, she reviles him behind his back, oppresses him even more and still remains with him, so as not to be lonely.

What woman admits to her mistakes? And the collective feminist mind never admits that it is doing something wrong (although everything may be true, this is how it should be - after all, I, a sinner myself, am simply reasoning from my sinful point of view).

And feminism has moved forward even more wildly - this is very clearly visible on the street, when eyes run away, deprived of love, who have deprived themselves of it - nervous, aggressive, ready to rush at anyone - men literally shy away from them - you can’t approach them, they there are a lot of them and they are rushing to God knows where. Where? Right there.

And this has reached our country too. Maybe New York feminists are still a long way off, but somewhere nearby - the so-called “self-made women”, each with their own business.

The most important part of feminism is its gradual evolution. The content of this evolution is a shift towards multicultural feminism, plurality of feminisms or feminisms of difference. Until this time, the idea of female identity, which was the main focus of liberal and radical feminism, made it difficult to conceptualize the diversity of women's experiences. The experiences of white, well-educated, middle-class women were normalized, ignoring the historical and sociocultural conditions of other, more marginalized women's groups. Multicultural feminism argued that recognizing women's differences and conflicts is part of a healthy political process. Shenard A. Where is the feminist movement going? / Per. from English // Today. - 2014. - No. 23. - P.4.

With the acquisition of experience in political activity, women became more confident in themselves and in their abilities. It seems that the modern women's liberation movement followed a similar path. At its initial stage, there was a struggle to achieve the same specific goals - such as the right to abortion, the right to divorce, the legal prosecution of rapists and men who beat their wives.

The key word was “the right to choose”: women sought to control their own lives and, above all, their own bodies.

Another important area of activity of the women's movement at the present stage is the labor market. Here, women are fighting for the right to get a job, equal opportunities for career advancement, and equal pay for equal work. A demand is being put forward to repeal legislative acts that are supposedly designed to “protect”, but in fact discriminate against them.

Feminism considers not the experience of gender, but the experience of gender; “masculinity” and “femininity” are not biological-anatomical, but cultural-psychological characteristics, since manifestations of gender and biological sexuality exist only as a product of “humanized interactions.” To attribute generic ideas inherent in a given culture to the very “nature of man”, his sexual characteristics, according to feminism, means to uncritically accept a number of hidden patriarchal premises - a certain type of division of labor, the hierarchical principle of subordination of the young to the elders, an abstract-technological understanding of science, philosophy, progress etc. These attitudes have, according to feminism, a cultural-historical nature and cannot be reduced either to economic or legal reasons. Taking these premises into account, relations between the sexes are understood in feminism as one of the types of manifestation of power relations, since under the guise of “objectivity” a situation is reproduced when one part of the human race, having its own interests, simultaneously represents the interests of another part of it. this corresponds to a specific understanding of “objectivity” that develops through scientific ideas that bear the stamp of a “masculinist orientation.” In cultures of this type, according to feminist theorists, a woman is represented only as an “Other.”

Representatives of feminism believe that the schemes of rational control prescribed by society for men and women are essentially different, while the type of female spirituality remains, in principle, unclaimed. The basic schematisms of culture are mastered only in their masculinist manifestation. Therefore, the goal of feminism is to remove women's spirituality from the “sphere of silence.” The fundamental insufficiency of traditional theoretical analysis and the need for political action are recognized.

Thus, feminism causes significant and irreversible changes in a woman’s life, in everything that has to do with her social status, her place in society. Feminism greatly changes the picture of the world in the political and economic aspects, bringing into the arena previously hidden forces that are now gaining weight faster and faster. Currently, feminism remains a vital and visible social movement that has achieved its greatest successes in the field of culture. Despite the loud predictions of the post-feminist era, the ongoing social inequality of women and its eradication remains the focus of feminism in all its forms.

Chapter 2. Research on women in business

2.1 Opportunities for women to occupy leading positions in enterprise management

A woman in business is not an exception, but a pattern of development of entrepreneurship in modern Russia is true, confirmed by data from questionnaire studies and general statistics; patterns of growth in the share of women’s participation in entrepreneurship. In particular, in industry, agriculture, wholesale trade, activities to ensure the functioning of the market, and the financial sector, the share of women entrepreneurs ranges from 13% (in industry) to 20% (finance). And the most actively explored by women are retail trade, public catering, science, culture, and healthcare, where the share of entrepreneurs ranges from 39% (in retail trade) to 56% (in science). These findings are consistent with data from other surveys, which confirms their validity.

In recent years, the share of women in business has been increasing rapidly. Gender stereotypes in modern Russia when considering the possibility of women taking leading positions in enterprise management are quite strong, however, market conditions have led to their softening. This is reflected in the fact that the number of women occupying leading positions in companies has been growing steadily over the past 5 years. Komarov E.I. Woman leader. M., 2013. P.46.

Truly “female” sectors of entrepreneurship have emerged (retail trade, services, etc.), in which the share of female managers is significantly ahead of men. Research results confirm the priority of service and trade sectors in women's entrepreneurship. According to the study, 45% of women head enterprises with up to 10 employees and 55% - with 10 to 30 employees. According to the author of the survey, this is due to the fact that women's entrepreneurship is mainly developed in those industries whose technology does not require a large number of workers.

A woman has the opportunity to act as a subject of entrepreneurial relations on an equal basis with men - this is not true, men have advantages both in employment and in some other relationships in business - this is confirmed by survey data and analysis of observation results.

Six hundred surveyed women aged 20 to 55 years (3.2% of them are entrepreneurs) believe that women, unlike men, have much fewer opportunities for professional growth, career advancement, and holding a high position. According to respondents, this is hampered by time-consuming family responsibilities (55%), difficulties in combining work and family (38%), as well as the prejudiced attitude of men (19.2%). Komarov E.I. Woman leader. M., 2013. P.48.

The results of a study by the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences showed the following: when asked why women cannot successfully run a business, respondents gave the following reasons: 22% simply believe that women are not able to do business at all; 22% sympathize with women, but it is more difficult for them to get support from officials, get a loan from a bank, etc.; 12% drew attention to the fact that for some reason it is more difficult for women to obtain an appropriate education; and 21% note the resistance of relatives, friends, and family to their doing business.

For successful business, the issue of gender is not the main one - this is true, since the specific characteristics of the individual’s capabilities, be it a woman or a man, come to the fore - this is confirmed by statistical data and analysis of observation results.

Experience shows that women can lead successfully, and there are already quite a few women in leadership positions. According to Goskomstat, already in 1994. Among the co-owners of commercial limited liability partnerships (and there are more than 900 thousand of them), women accounted for 39%, cooperatives - 23%, entrepreneurs using hired labor - 17-19%, in individual labor activities more than 1/3 were women. In 1996, out of 200 business enterprises, according to estimates by L.V. Babaeva and A.E. Chirikova, in 25% of companies women held leadership positions. Komarov E.I. Woman leader. M., 2013. P.52.

Another conclusion from psychologists seemed interesting: successful business models are carried out by those entrepreneurs who, regardless of their own gender, have a psychological script of behavior - managers. This means that both men and women have almost equal psychological capabilities to manage an enterprise. Gender characteristics practically do not act as limitations for successful leadership.

A businesswoman has a number of significant psychophysiological advantages over a male entrepreneur, which allows her to more effectively build strategies and tactics for doing business in certain sectors of commerce - this is true, since in a number of business sectors women naturally occupy leading positions compared to men - this is confirmed by statistics, surveys and analysis of observation results.

As many male employers note, in certain leadership positions and in many areas of entrepreneurship, the “female managing hand” has a number of great advantages - for example, when negotiating with male companions, when developing entrepreneurship in an area where demand is formed by women themselves, etc. Novikova N. Liberal feminism in Russia and the West: experience of comparative analysis. Yaroslavl, 2010. P.37.

A number of researchers on this issue argue that there is a special, “female style” of management and business, characterized by soft relations with subordinates, greater attention to the particulars and features of the company’s strategic behavior in the market. This management system often turns out to be more effective than the male style of doing business - tough, direct and clearly regulated. According to J. Rosener, this management style allows you to go through the stages of a crisis in business with fewer losses.

Today, social prejudices and discriminatory aspects that limit women’s opportunities in commerce compared to men remain in society - this is true, confirmed by the analysis of observation results and questionnaire studies.

In many studies, surveys of male respondents showed that they have a fundamentally negative attitude towards the role of women in business, and are skeptical about the possibility of a woman doing anything serious. Moreover, this opinion is often not confirmed by more or less clear argumentation - for example, 22% of respondents in a study by the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences “simply” believe that women are not capable of doing business at all. Novikova N. Liberal feminism in Russia and the West: experience of comparative analysis. Yaroslavl, 2010. P.38.

Analytical observation results also confirm this state of affairs. For example, it is believed that women in business pay less attention to the main thing and more to the little things; less content and more form; place less emphasis on the future and more on current problems. They pay less attention to the production of money than to their preservation. Men, accordingly, are the opposite.

A typical anti-scientific stereotype is the opinion that women managers are often forced to fall under the influence of their male subordinates in matters of the future of the company and its strategy.

A sociological survey conducted in Russia showed that when asked to women “Are you ready to engage in entrepreneurial activity?” they answered as follows:

“Yes, ready” 22%,

“I don’t want” 44%,

“Already engaged” 0.4%, .

“I never thought about it” 34.6%.

The majority of women expressed the opinion: “This is not a woman’s business.” Komarov E.I. Woman leader. M., 2013. P.115.

The process of alienating women from power, from real participation in politics, especially in big politics, is underway and even gaining momentum. In the conditions of democratization of society, has a woman begun to play a more active role in the public life of Russia? When conducting a sociological survey, only 11 percent of respondents gave an affirmative answer, 62 percent gave a negative answer, half of whom are convinced that the real participation of women in public life has decreased.

Among 0.1% of women entrepreneurs, an optimistic attitude prevails, elation and even delight in their activities. For most women, feelings of anxiety, tension, and uncertainty about the future dominate.

What typical behavioral mistakes do women entrepreneurs and managers make? A woman begins this activity by spending a lot of energy on quickly overcoming or at least disguising her natural features. Feeling like she is on stage, a woman often thinks: “I am a woman and must constantly prove my right to lead no worse than men.” She lives in constant fear of not living up to her position, of being too sentimental, kind, condescending, or of showing “feminine” weakness.

Do feminine charms help women in business and career? Men are confident that they are helping, especially if the woman has achieved more than them. However, in “big business” this rarely affects: “In business there are no men and women - there are business partners,” the British say.

Is there secret or overt discrimination against women? In a socio-psychological sense - yes. The main male personality traits are the motive of self-affirmation and achievement, rivalry with other men in the competition for status and position in society. Every man throughout his life, as it were, proves to himself and those around him that he is at least in some way better than others, seeks public recognition. In this struggle for status, a man competes with other men, but does not take women into account. Indeed, the desire for high social status is not typical of women; they are more focused on family well-being. A woman who asserts herself in her personal career often experiences irony and humiliation from men, especially if she succeeds better than them. A businesswoman, even one who has made it to a high level of her business career, is usually not invited to selected, male companies, where the most important information is disseminated to a narrow circle. Komarov E.I. Woman leader. M., 2013. P.117.

The question arises: what are the limits of gender equality, can it be complete? The essence of the idea of equality of men and women, their equal opportunities, is that in terms of their intellectual and physical potential, a woman is in no way inferior to a man. For her, there are no fundamentally closed, inaccessible areas of mental and physical labor. No law should prohibit a woman from engaging in this or that business or mastering this or that profession. Her sacred right is complete freedom of personal choice of types and forms of activity for her self-realization. This formulation of the question, of course, does not mean that the physiological characteristics of women cannot limit (sometimes temporarily) their professional responsibilities. Hence the conclusion follows that gender equality, while not absolute, can be quite complete and comprehensive.

With all the pluralism of views on the problem of discrimination against women, we must not forget the fact of historical significance: it was the October Revolution in Russia of 1917 that gave impetus to solving the key issue of equality between women and men in all spheres of life, including civil and legal rights, in labor and education , in family.

But discrimination against the “weaker sex” continued under the Soviet regime. The party-quota system of female “appointment” practically sanctified her, if not by the force of law, then by the omnipotence of administrative orders. Service in the armed forces and other security forces (with the exception of a number of technical or auxiliary specialties) was closed to women. They were legally denied access to “heavy” and “harmful” industries, which completely excluded the freedom of personal choice.

As for post-Soviet Russia, despite all the talk and incantations about its democratization, the problem of social discrimination against women has acquired a special, exceptional urgency in connection with the collapse of the socialist social system, the change of the entire socio-economic structure and the virtual elimination of social guarantees for the family, children, women.

Thus, for analysis, the problematic situation lies in the deep contradiction that has developed between the formal course towards democratization of Russian society, towards the implementation of the constitutional principle of “equal rights and opportunities” of the sexes, on the one hand, and the actual discrimination of women in the sphere of labor and employment , infringement of their social rights in economic life, on the other. Word and deed, the “de jure” situation and the “de facto” situation, alas, as often happens in Russian reality, are in flagrant contradiction to each other.

Guided by certain documents and agreements and based on an analysis of Russian reality, on January 8, 1996, the Russian government adopted a resolution “On the concept of improving the status of women in the Russian Federation.” According to the concept, women's rights are an integral part of general human rights. Their full and equal participation in political, economic, social and cultural life at the federal, regional and international levels should become the main goal of state policy in the field of improving the status of women in the Russian Federation.

The main method of collecting information for this work is to analyze the results of surveys conducted by various research organizations on this topic. This work also uses the method of sociological observation and analysis, carried out on the basis of our own research and surveys of a narrow group of respondents.

Questioning as the main method of analysis in this work is a survey of women involved in entrepreneurship. The selected surveys contain questions on the most characteristic aspects of the chosen topic: obstacles in business, discrimination, difficulties with obtaining licenses and certificates, and much more.

The tools used in this study can be divided into three parts:

1) comparison and comparison of the results of various studies on this topic;

2) analysis of observation results;

3) study and analysis of publications.

It should be noted that the specificity of this work is that it is not based on a specific study - be it a survey, observation or interviewing.

2.2 Findings from the study of women in business

The conducted research proved the correctness of four out of five hypotheses put forward - women in modern business are a pattern; a woman in business is influenced by negative stereotypes; in certain areas of business, a woman’s natural psychophysiological qualities allow her to have an advantage over men; For successful business, the issue of gender is not decisive.

So, let's summarize. The fact that women in business today are increasingly strengthening their position is proven. Women as a social category have become equal to men - this is confirmed by the current legislation, which does not make any differences between the sexes in the field of business and entrepreneurial activity. Moreover, the highest legislative act of the country - the Constitution - directly states that no one can be subjected to any kind of discrimination based on gender. Women in modern Russia lead a significant percentage of all business structures. There is also a trend towards an increase in the number of women in business - every year the percentage of men and women entering business is tilting in favor of the latter. Based on this, we can conclude that the role of women in society as a whole is increasing every year. The rights of the fair half of humanity, which previously had only a declarative nature, have now become a real basis for the realization of any opportunities both in business and in other areas of public relations.

However, during the study, the second hypothesis was also confirmed - that a woman in business depends on stereotypes and prejudices existing in the public consciousness, which have a sharply negative impact on a woman’s exercise of her rights to engage in entrepreneurship. It is impossible to overcome this tendency by legislative means, since the law cannot regulate the sphere of consciousness. However, the very fact of the presence of women in business and their increasing role in entrepreneurship should in themselves soon change these negative social stereotypes. Already, many men in the business sector have recognized a number of their undeniable superiorities in women - moreover, in many areas of business activity the stronger sex has “lost” its positions. equality woman business feminism

The same thesis is confirmed by the third proven hypothesis - that women in business have a number of objective advantages over men, and that certain sectors of entrepreneurship seem to be specially created for women. These include the service sector (hairdressing salons and beauty salons, for example), the retail trade sector, and in general any commercial enterprises that require attention to every detail, with a small or medium-sized staff. Research has shown that the share of women is higher in small businesses, then in medium-sized businesses. In the field of large, especially international business, men continue to occupy leading positions - but in the field of managing this business they are often simply forced to have female staff, since their presence under certain circumstances is interpreted by business tactics (for example, when negotiating with male partners) .

And the last hypothesis - that for running a successful business the issue of gender is not decisive - accumulates the previous ones and sums up this study. Indeed, despite all the obstacles that a modern businesswoman has to face, despite public opinion, the question of success in commercial activity, first of all, depends not on gender (age, nationality, linguistic or religious affiliation), but on the quality of available professional skills, experience, objective financial and strategic capabilities. Indeed, if a woman has the necessary knowledge, dedication, perseverance and perseverance, as well as financial and strategic capabilities, then no man, no social prejudices can prevent her from reaching the top of the business elite and occupying a worthy niche in the field of entrepreneurship.

Feminism through the eyes of a man

It all started back in the 18th century, when women first raised their heads high and actively and declared their rights. Much water has passed under the bridge since then - having achieved equality in many spheres of public life, we began to wear men's suits and men's short haircuts, occupy men's positions and play men's games.

But men's attitude to the feminine feminism, and this is what we are talking about now, even in the so progressive 21st century it still remains very ambiguous.

Feminism - examples from life

Remember the footage from the film “Moscow Doesn’t Believe in Tears” - well, the main character could not allow the woman he loved to occupy a higher position and receive a salary greater than he receives. And even because of the notorious male pride, I almost lost the greatest love of my life, True, I came to my senses in time.

Although... After all, the author of the film does not show us how the relationship of the main characters develops after a quarrel - was Gosha still able to come to terms with the superiority of the woman he loved?! Perhaps it doesn't show because For such a family, the situation can be the most unpredictable, unless a strong woman learns to leave her directorial ambitions at the doorstep.

Feminism in modern life

There are a great many such examples in modern life - how many successful women who make stunning careers, spend fabulous sums on their own appearance, remain lonely, and come to their empty luxurious apartments every evening.

Most men are afraid of strong independent women - because of their over-success feminist women trample on such a fragile and vulnerable male ego.

After all, even in everyday life, such women will demand the division of household duties in half. How else? Both work - both must take care of everyday life. Such a prospect is not at all included in men’s ambitious plans; moreover, it frightens them, if not repels them!

Feminism - advantages for men

However, women's feminism from a man's point of view can also have obvious advantages. You can and even need to go on a date with a feminist girl without, without banal, you can do without compliments, without opening doors for her, without shaking hands when getting out of transport, without taking off a girl’s outerwear, without pulling up a chair in a restaurant...

Look how convenient it is! The main bonus awaits the man at the end of the date with a feminist - she will pay for herself, drive herself home herself, or even give him a lift home in her own car!

Such a girl for sure will not demand stupid romantic confessions under the moon, evidence of strong male love for her, and then, throughout her life, endless vows in this very love.

Feminist girl much easier will agree to sex after the first date, and the point here is not a lack of self-respect, but the fact that men do this. This means that a woman should not lag behind them!

Men, don't be afraid! Feminists are women too moreover, they are very beautiful and successful, and just like other women, these militant people want your love and tenderness! So feminism feminism, and everyone without exception wants love, affection, tenderness, care and attention! Love your friend and be happy!

Any woman or women's group could begin activities at the local community, city or state level.

Last update: 12/22/2018

Feminism is the radical view that women are men

Although it was not Susan Pinker's idea to write it, reading her wonderful book, The Sexual Paradox: Trouble Boys, Gifted Girls, and the Real Difference Between the Sexes, cannot help but further strengthen my opinion that modern feminism in the 21st century is both illogical and inappropriate. and harmful.

First, modern feminism is illogical because, as Pinker points out, it is based on the vanilla assumption that, despite lifelong gender socialization and pernicious patriarchy, men and women are fundamentally the same.

The overwhelming body of evidence today demonstrates conclusively that the vanilla assumption is false; men and women are inevitably, radically and incomparably different. Any political movement based solely on this - that men and women are and should be the same - is doomed to failure.

Moreover, modern feminism is inappropriate because its entire raison d'être is the unchallenged axiom that women are, and historically have always been, worse off than men.

The fact that men and women are radically different and have different needs makes it difficult to directly compare their well-being in order to assess which sex is better off; for example, the fact that , cannot in itself be a reason that women are worse off than men, just as the fact that men have fewer pairs of shoes than women does not indicate that that men are in a worse position than women.

Meanwhile, in just two biologically significant dimensions of well-being—longevity and reproductive success—women are and have always been slightly better off than men. In every human society, women live longer than men, and many women achieve at least some reproductive success; many more men end their lives as absolute reproductive failures, leaving no genetic descendants.

It is also not true that women are the “weaker sex”. Pinker documents the fact that boys, compared to girls, are much more fragile, both physically and psychologically, and therefore require more medical and mental health care. Men succumb to more diseases in far greater numbers throughout their lives than women.

The greater susceptibility of boys and men to disease explains why more boys die in childhood and fail to reach puberty, and why the average life expectancy of men is shorter than that of women. This, by the way, is the reason why slightly more boys are born than girls - 105 boys per 100 girls - so that approximately 100 boys per 100 girls are achieved.

Another misconception that modern feminism relies on is that men have more power than women. Among mammals, females always have more power than males, and humans are no exception.

Women don't control these resources because they don't need to. What do women control? Men. As I mention in , any objectively attractive young woman enjoys as much power over men as the male ruler of the world has over women.

To top it all off, modern feminism is evil because it ends up making women (and men) unhappy. In a forthcoming paper in the American Economic Journal entitled "Economic Policy," Betsy Stevenson and Justin Wolfers of the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania show that American women have become consistently less and less happy over the past 35 years, while compared to men, they earn more and more money.

Women were much happier than men, despite the fact that they earned much less than men. Over the past 35 years, the happiness gap between the sexes (favoring women) has narrowed as the gender pay gap (favoring men) has narrowed.

Nowadays, women earn as much, and sometimes even more, than men. As a result, women today are just as unhappy as men, and sometimes even more unhappy. As I explain in a previous post, money does not make women happy.

The feminist demand that women behave like men and earn as much money as men cannot be the sole reason for women's rising levels of dissatisfaction with life; Higher divorce rates and fatherlessness may also contribute to this.

Be that as it may, it cannot be denied that modern feminism is responsible for persistently contributing to women's misery, since it is based on false assumptions about the human nature of men and women.

Men's happiness has not declined over the past 35 years because there was no masculinism; no one insisted on the radical view that men are women, although, as Christina Hoff Sommers lays out, this may be happening in our current war against boys. For those looking for an effective antidote to modern feminism, I highly recommend the 1999 book What Our Mothers Didn't Tell Us: Why Happiness Escapes Modern Women by Danielle Crittenden.

From “no one can” to “everyone/half must”: the folly of feminism

Long ago, before the mid-20th century, there were many legal and social restrictions on what women could do. For example, there were many positions that women were not allowed to hold by law. Women also could not vote. To their credit, feminists worked very hard in the early 20th century to remove these legal and social barriers for women.

It was, as Martha Stewart would say, for the best. Then in the second half of the 20th century, feminists went too far, and at the beginning of the 21st century they only made it worse. Susan Pinker's 2008 book, The Sexual Paradox: Problem Boys, Gifted Girls, and the Real Difference Between the Sexes, powerfully lays out where feminists have gotten it wrong.

Feminists unquestioningly believe that if there are no legal and social barriers to women's achievements, then women will overwhelmingly want to achieve the same positions as men. Pinker calls this the "vanilla assumption."

In her book, Pinker methodically demolishes the feminist myth embodied in the vanilla assumption and shows that biologically, men and women are inherently different, and that women are evolutionarily designed to have different goals in life than men.

Pinker lays out statistics, personal conversations, and stories from his clinical practice treating troubled boys to essentially agree with what Kingsley R. Brown previously argued in Biology at Work: Rethinking Sexual Equality.

As I suggested in the previous series of posts, women have better things to do than make money: it's called life. "The Sexual Paradox" Pinker hides names and faces behind statistics, court cases, and theoretical arguments provided by Brown.

Through the "vanilla assumption" feminists moved from "no one can" (a society where no woman was allowed to seek a position, which the first feminists abolished with their hard work), to "everyone/half must" (a society where all women are obliged to have the same career preferences and aspirations as men and, as a result, half of all jobs should be filled by women).

Pinker cites the work of my LSE colleague Catherine Hakim to refute the all/half prescription that follows from the vanilla assumption.

Hakim's work demonstrates that only about 20% of women in Western industrial societies are as career-focused as men. Another 20% of women do not want to pursue a career at all and would prefer to focus on their family. The remaining 60% want a little bit of both – part-time work combined with family.

In other words, the vanilla assumption only applies to 20% of women; Only one woman in five will be as doggedly dedicated to her career as most men.

Pinker weaves in many interesting stories about women who, despite their intelligence, talent and performance, nevertheless decide to give up their successful careers in order to spend more time with their families (and the “glass ceiling” they usually impose on themselves voluntarily) and about men who, despite their ADHD, Asperger's syndrome, dyslexia, nevertheless achieve heights in their careers. In the meantime, she gives us many sensible observations, such as:

“Insisting on a 50/50 gender split in all areas could put pressure on talented women to take jobs they don’t want, or on talented men to work in areas where they are unsuited.”

“Women can now have what men have, but after trying it, many decide they don’t want it.”

"The devaluation of women's preferences is an unintended aspect of the requirement that the sexes be absolutely identical."

In other words, as I argue in a recent post, modern feminism is significantly harming women. Susan Pinker's "The Sexual Paradox" goes a long way toward exposing the vagaries of the feminist injunction that "all/half owe."

P.S. Since this was the first question I asked Susan Pinker, even before I met her last year in London during her international book tour for The Sexual Paradox, it would be quite disingenuous of me to pretend that that the question does not play a special role, although it does. Answer: yes, she is his sister.

Feminism through the eyes of a man. Feminism in modern society What kind of equality can we talk about if women and men are biologically different?