Gender Issues Interview

Note: for this essay, I was asked to interview someone I knew about their views on feminism and gender issues.

The purpose of this paper is to gain an outside perspective regarding gender communication with a focus on feminism by interviewing someone I know about topics related to gender communication and feminism. I have several friends who I know have an interest in feminism and gender, and going into this project I wanted to choose someone who I knew I disagreed with on at least one aspect of feminism. The respondent I settled on is an acquaintance of mine who is currently working in academia, and who I know leads an intellectually rich life. They are a well-read and articulate person, and although we disagree on a number of things, we are able to engage in fruitful discussions. I respect their opinion even when I think they’re completely wrong. With their permission, I recorded the interview in order that I might come back to it as needed, and so that I could accurately represent their views and correctly quote them.

Are men and women treated differently in U.S. society? Should they be treated differently? The respondent took care to differentiate differently from badly. They explained that being different isn’t synonymous with bad. They do believe that men and women are treated differently, and that they should be treated differently, but not because of their gender: how someone is treated ideally “would depend on the circumstances and the individual – not their gender.” They emphasized, throughout the interview, that they feel focus should be on equality of opportunity, rather than equality of outcome. They were clear to separate the aspiration of equal opportunity from the social reality we face, in which gender, race, and class are, regrettably, still thought to be acceptable forms of discrimination in selection processes (job hiring, college applications, etc.).

Does sexism still exist in modern American culture? Do you see instances of sexism in your everyday life? If so, give examples. My respondent certainly sees sexism in their daily life. The pointed out the sexism they see both on television and in academia. “Sexism is a natural extension of the academic environment, because the academic environment is based on the stated supposition that all students are equal, but is executed on the evidential reality that all students are not.” They pointed out the fact that there are measurable differences which exist between individuals (and individual circumstances), and that it seems verboten to discuss these differences in liberal circles (as liberals are often the most interested in pushing for equality for all, regardless of race, income, gender, or sexual orientation). If we’re to address the problems facing the disenfranchised, we must be able to freely talk about the differences which exist between people, and how that impacts their opportunities in life.

What do you think of when you hear the term “feminism?” What images come to mind? Has your view of feminism changed over time? Do you consider yourself a feminist? My respondent considers themself a feminist, but does not identify with the feminist movement: “I don’t often like associating with any ideology, even ones whose most basic tenets I share.” While they support what they believe to be the goals of feminism, they don’t believe that much progress towards those goals have been made in the last thirty to forty years. They see a lack of activism in modern life, and feel that feminists have been running to stay in the same place since Roe v. Wade. They do believe that there exist feminist organizations which have and continue to do great work for the cause of feminism (they cited NOW--the National Organization for Women), but think that there exists a subset of feminists who tend to undermine and subvert the goals of the movement.

What do you see as the biggest issue and/or problem with regards to discussing feminism or feminist topics with the general public? My respondent feels that there is a misconception regarding who is or isn’t a feminist; they claim that “everybody is a little bit feminist though the degree changes”. They believe that the feminist movement often lacks a moderate voice; that vocal feminists can often be polarizing when they discuss feminist and women’s issues with other people. The problem, in their opinion, is how feminists can be seen to condescend to their audience. In their words, “We really need to drop the concept of feminists explaining feminist topics to the general public … [it serves] to talk down to those allies that could most grown and adapt to changing social realities if they were simply included in the discourse.” This condescension can lead to the exclusion of potential, if imperfect, allies.

I came away from the interview with a lot to think about. There were certainly things which my respondent said that I had an initially negative reaction to. When the respondent affirmed they believed that men and women should be treated differently, I was a bit shocked. Upon reflection, though, I began to see the point they were making. In the context of an ideal merit based system, one in which individuals have equal access to opportunity, you would have to treat men and women differently, just as you would have to treat men and other men differently, or women and other women differently. The idea is that people are treated as individuals, with different specific needs, which can’t be boiled down into simplistic categories such as “man” or “woman.”

I see the greatest difference in our views in how we each approach feminism. They approach it primarily from a woman’s rights angle, which is a historically accurate view of feminism. My own feminism embraces a more intersectional approach, in that I don’t view women’s issues as necessarily separate from other human rights issues, such as LGBTQ rights or racism. I can understand the preference for not wanting to mix traditional feminism (which is specifically interested in women’s rights) with these other social justice issues, and I know my respondent does not believe these other social justice issues to be lesser in their importance. Where I believe my feminism differs from my respondent’s feminism is my inability to view women’s rights as separable from other civil rights issues; in the Venn diagram of social issues, more often than not, women’s rights overlap with class, race, ability, and sexual orientation. There are a thousand (or more) types of feminism which exist, and I’m interested in learning about and promoting all of them. I don’t feel that I can fully appreciate the full spectrum of feminism without including an understanding of these other issues. I don’t think my respondent and I are all that opposed in our ideas about what’s important to women, just in how we choose to define our feminism.

While in conversation with my respondent post-interview, I was able to pinpoint more clearly why, despite our different approaches and ideas regarding what feminism is and what it should be, I’m able to have disagreements with this person without getting upset or angry (an experience I’m familiar with when discussing feminist topics with other people I know). It relates back to the idea of talking down to the person you’re in conversation with: I have never once, over the course of our communications, felt as though my respondent were condescending to me, or treating me as anything other than an intellectual equal. I think most people are familiar with talking to someone who shares their opinion as though it were the last and final word on the topic, when it isn’t so clear that they’ve actually put much effort into forming their opinion, and they don’t seem to think that anyone can disagree with their opinion. While my respondent is firm in their opinions, they are always willing and able to articulate their arguments, making it clear that they’ve put effort into forming their opinion and they think highly enough of you that they pre-emptively lay out the basic argument in order for you to find the flaws which may or may not exist in their opinion. They don’t treat their opinions as self-evident, and respect the other party regardless of how deeply the disagreement runs.

Looking back over my interview, I feel confident that I chose the (near) perfect respondent for this assignment. Not only because of their ability to communicate in an articulate and respectful manner, but because of their views regarding feminism. I certainly enjoy a challenge to my own ideologies, especially from someone whom I consider an ally. I hope to continue the discussion about feminism with my respondent beyond this class and this assignment, because communication isn’t about being right or wrong, it’s about learning from other people.