<- back

the crumbs that we are given

       .--.           .---.        .-.
	.---|--|   .-.     | A |  .---. |~|    .--.
	.--|===|Ch|---|_|--.__| S |--|:::| |~|-==-|==|---.
	|%%|NT2|oc|===| |~~|%%| C |--|   |_|~|CATS|  |___|-.
	|  |   |ah|===| |==|  | I |  |:::|=| |    |GB|---|=|
	|  |   |ol|   |_|__|  | I |__|   | | |    |  |___| |
	|~~|===|--|===|~|~~|%%|~~~|--|:::|=|~|----|==|---|=|
	^--^---'--^---^-^--^--^---'--^---^-^-^-==-^--^---^-'

21th of March, 2024 | 21.03.2024 | read on medium



A black and white photograph of a hand sprinkling some sugar (or salt) into a pan with eggs inside of it.
"Share The Meat" recipes.

Ms. A and Ms. B are sitting on a bench, waiting for a bus.

A: “Frankly, I do not understand people who equate feminism with women empowerment.”

B: “Elaborate?”

A: “Some might think that feminism as an idea can be boiled down to the notion that we should strive to empower women, to create stronger characters of them both in fiction, in our minds, and in reality. I don’t deny the importance of giving women more power, similar to that of men; the liberation of the ‘other sex’ has been based on giving women their rights, their opportunities, their voices. It is a great idea when put in a larger feminist movement, but when taken out of context it results in what we see in modern movies. The superheroines, the female characters in books and other fiction all lack depth. We’ve got that idea that feminism is making women strong and powerful and that all they can be. It flattens their character – it is simply reversing the poles of sexism. Sexism is not just belittling women’s abilities, their personalities, their bodies. Sexism is characterised by a generalisation of women. Whether they are portrayed as demure and weak, or as powerful and ‘girlboss’-like is all the same. It is sexism.”

B: “Why, I see where you stem from, dear, but I still believe that this empowerment of our sex and gender is better rather than how it was when movies and fiction portrayed us as damsels in distress. I’d take this ‘flattened’ yet strong character any day compared to how it was.”

A: “But that is the problem. For so long we have been stripped of any respect, except that when we were loved, which even then we were simply objects of love, not subjects, that when we were given another option we had taken it without any second thought. We were starved for generations for equality and rights, fighting fiercely for it and when we were thrown crumbs of bread and finally managed to at least not feel the rumbling in our stomachs, a lot of us felt satisfied with that ‘reward.’ It is expected that we will live this way – taking any opportunities for the crumbs of what once was the feminist dream and not lashing out anymore. But that is no way of living. Yes, perhaps some might agree that when women are portrayed as the polar opposites of what we were it is still progress. But these changes are signs that we can do better, that we should demand better and bigger progress. We are still a caricature of men; we are not an equal to him; we are still portrayed as the other; we are still only a planet that orbits around a larger star. No matter if we are littered with diamonds and gold; or perhaps with weapons and armor; we are still given our rights. We are bestowed by the privileged; we do not become equal to them. To be equal to men means that neither of us would be able to take away or grant anyone a new right or privilege. We’d be independent of each other.

“So I disagree with you, my friend. It is not a step forward; it is not a step backwards. It doesn’t mean we should be glad and at peace that ‘at least we didn’t regress.’ That thinking will only result in us being in a constant rut.”

B: “Then, do you believe that we should be portrayed as weak? As demure and feminine? Do you think we should strive for balance in our representation?”

A: “It's not exactly about balance, but yes, I do think those strong women characters should show weakness every now and again. Because men characters have depth – they have their downfalls, they cry, they shout and get angry. And yet with a lot of women characters, you either see a boss, a powerful woman, or a weak, and submissive one. There's no in-between, it seems.

“But I've already said that it's not the point. The point is to create a world where both men, women, and everybody else are equal. The problem lies in how we perceive women. We see them as polar opposites to men; the female is the opposite of a male, they say; and if we are the opposite of men, then it also means that we possess the opposite qualities of men. While they are brave, and bold, and daring, it means that women are the opposite of that – fearful and cautious. While men are powerful and can rule the world, women should stay at home for they are weak. While the male has a penis, the female has a vagina. But we, of course, know that degrading people to biological sex, to animals, is untrue for us. And we also know that not every man has a penis, just like not every woman has a vagina.

“I say we stop thinking internally how a woman and a man are opposites of each other.”

B: “So you say that we are just different diversions of the human mind, body, and soul?”

A: “Exactly! We stand together, not against each other. Woman is simply a different mode of existence of the human body. It's not an antithesis to man. And the human body can take up many forms, many of each lie beyond the binary of 'Man/Woman'.”

B: “You've said that women can only be free once we eliminate the fact that it is men which grant us the rights. So, to achieve total equality (though I don't believe that such paradise will ever be possible on planet for as long as there are humans) we need to remove the possibility of taking or giving somebody rights. How would we be able to do that? A sort of classless society where no one person controls everyone else?”

A: “Perhaps. A world without classes would mean that no one dominates over another. No ruler, no governor, no oppression. But for that world to continue to exist, we'd need to eliminate somebody usurping the power. Which would mean that we'd have to get rid of the accumulation of wealth; what you need – you take, what you can – you give. So that means–”

B: “That Karl Marx had done it again. He had invented the peak of human economical and societal system.”

A: “That's my girl!”


B&W photograph titled "Share The Meat" recipes was used as the header image. I have been unable to find information on the copyright of the image found on LOC.gov. If you own this image, please email me at [email protected].


ways to contact me

if you want to message me, feel free to do so through letterbird.co