FEMINISM VS. FEMININITY: AN ALLUREMENT/ENCOURAGEMENT TO WOMAN’S IDENTITY

 

 

 

FEMINISM VS. FEMININITY: AN ALLUREMENT/ENCOURAGEMENT TO WOMAN’S IDENTITY

These article is to support the women identity in a world and to reject the idea of what some writer says- Feminism v. Femininity: the Threat to Woman’s Identity

 

The topic- FEMINISM V. FEMININITY: AN ALLUREMENT TO WOMAN’S IDENTITY was curled out from an article (Feminism v. Femininity: the Threat to Woman’s Identity) which I saw recently on a site.

I DO NOT support these views written by her. Her article is below. I was wondering if you people have any arguments against (or for) it?

 

Here is the link to the site for proper reading:

http://www.cormacburke.or.ke/node/2441

 

Feminism v. Femininity: the Threat to Woman’s Identity

(New Oxford Review, October, 2013)

Lest the title given to my presentation cause confusion, may I begin by emphasizing that I am a feminist. Radical feminism is what I see as a threat to woman’s identity. Ask any radical feminist what should be the most logical question to put to them (a question incidentally they don’t like) – what he or she understands by “feminine,” and they have no answer. They don’t want women to be feminine, just as they don’t want men to be masculine. Down with the difference!

My life as a feminist started at about the age of five, when I first began to admire my mother. And my feminism increased as I came to appreciate my sisters. Probably then I could not define the elements of that appreciation, except for realizing there was something different about women and girls; and somehow I admired that something. Vive la différence!

Then I entered into my teens, and girls entered into my life in a new way, a way that changed and to some extent disturbed my incipient feminism. Part of my reaction was concisely expressed not long ago in a mentoring session with a fourteen year old boy. He was from a good family background with the distinctive note that his five siblings were all boys. As we were ending our chat, I sensed there was still something on his mind; so I asked him, what is it? He looked at me, and solemnly enunciated – “Girls!”. Slightly amused, I asked him, what about girls? He looked at me again and answered quite slowly, “They puzzle me…” I gave him a few possible clues to the puzzle but didn’t really try or want to solve it. I had had the same experience myself and thought it a good start to a healthy sexual outlook.

When I was a teenager I lived in a residential area on the outskirts of Sligo, my home town in Ireland. There were three or four families close by, all friends and all large – six, seven or eight children. As a result, my teenage social life was spent in the company of fifteen or twenty boys and girls all in the 15-18 age range. I admired the girls I knew, and now and then imagined I might eventually marry this one or that. I admired them but respected them. They made themselves respected. ‘Bad’ thoughts were directed elsewhere. One would feel ashamed to allow a bad thought toward a girl who inspires respect.

“Modesty” (which was then not an unbecoming term), modesty, especially on the part of girls, made purity easier – though never easy. Yet it drew out a noble impulse which helped so much. In another recent mentoring session with a boy of 16 I described, a little more at length, that atmosphere of my teenage social life. When I had finished, he observed, “I wish I had grown up in your times”. In my times, that was a fairly normal atmosphere. It is not normal today.

The Different Powers that a Woman has over a Man

Today, in general, women are desired – but not admired. Why? Because so many have forgotten – perhaps never learned, never been taught – the difference between wanting to be attractive and letting oneself be – making oneself – provocative. They emphasize the animal fact of being female, and ignore the human quality of being attractive. They have the power the female has over the male – consisting simply in a physical desire that looks for satisfaction. They do not have the power that the truly feminine woman has over a man, inspiring him, as only such a woman can inspire a man: to overcome his sensuality, learning to admire her and therefore to respect her.

If men have changed, it is because women have changed. Women themselves seem no longer to prize two fundamental features of femininity which are precisely those most capable of inspiring admiration and reverence in men: virginity and motherhood. The consequences are disastrous for both men and women.

“Neither virgin nor mother!” – this seems to be the motto or battle-cry of radical feminism – or should we simply say its pathetic cynicism. Such ‘feminism’ not only destroys woman’s understanding of true femininity, but ruptures the relation between the sexes in the most profound way. Let us try to consider this in greater depth.

Virginity

It helps to understand virginity by first enunciating that primary anthropological truth: more important than what one has, is what one is. To give what one has is something; to give what one is, is something much more. But to be humanly fulfilling, it must be a giving of what one is, to something or someone that merits such a gift. No one matures into a person from within themselves. Growth and maturity come from a loyal response, a giving of self, to family, to friends, to country: giving to them aspects or parts of oneself: time, sympathy, presence…

One can give aspects of self to many people in diverse ways. But true fulfillment only comes from the gift of the whole of oneself. It could be directly to God; normally it is to a spouse in marriage. Marriage, as the normal fulfilling commitment, involves a mutual self-gift. But it is a gift of the whole of one’s self. Properly speaking, one should come to marriage with the whole of one’s self to give; with an intact and integral self to give.

Virginity is not mainly a physical condition. It is simply the integrity that the marital self-gift logically calls for; what the person who understands marriage looks for in the woman (or, it should be equally so, in the man) he or she wants to marry. Marriage, if it is to have any unique human sense and dignity, is the union of a man and a woman in exclusive, open-to-life and permanent mutual self-giving. It is not a giving in part; that is not yet a gift. It is not a temporary gift, that is just a loan. If one has already given oneself sexually then any subsequent sexual self-gift is impaired. Part has already been given away, one has less of self to give. The gift is then so much the poorer; and the one prompted to accept it feels it is a used-up self the other is offering.

Girls today give themselves so easily. As a result they cheapen themselves in the eyes of boys and men. Modesty in behavior, modesty in dress, modesty in not letting a guy get fresh with her, used to be the style of most girls. They were the girls whom the vast majority of men admired and sought – also precisely because there was the sense they were not easily won. “This girl values herself. She makes herself respected. I admire that. She has ideals. I want to measure up to the self-worth that she attributes to herself”. That is a first condition if a woman is to inspire a man.

Tragically, though, modesty is out of fashion today. Then let us talk a bit more about it.

Modesty

Modesty is connected with the sense of self. It relates to personal intimacy. Animals have no modesty for they have no personality to reveal or to protect. Modesty does not relate just to forms of dressing. A genuine and attractive modesty marks the person who feels repugnance at speaking too much about his or her achievements, or those of their family members. It is only gradually that one shares one’s intimate things with others – in the measure precisely of friendship… A readiness to share the whole of one’s intimacy with anyone and everyone shows a superficial self-esteem [2]. It implies regarding one’s intimacy as public property, containing nothing in it that merits to be reserved for some persons and not to be revealed or exhibited indiscriminately to all.

Going back to my university days, it wasn’t uncommon among men students, to hear the remark about some girl: “You know, So-and-So is a really nice girl”. It didn’t sound ‘sexy” in the modern sense (although it was in fact full of genuine sexual appreciation). The girl in question might not even be very pretty or have a good figure. But there was something very attractive about her.

The ‘finishing schools’ of a hundred years ago often managed to give young ladies a veneer of ‘niceness’. The truly feminine woman gives the impression of being nice in her deeper self.

The body is part of one’s self – the most visible part, but certainly not the whole of one’s self. Excessive emphasis deliberately drawn to bodily attraction often reveals an impoverished inner self, a shallow personality. If a girl knows how to develop her interior feminine self, she will be attractive to men, to the most worthwhile of men, however limited her physical assets might be.

Dress should be revealing… It should reveal the person, in his or her sense of values, of interior worth … Dress that over-reveals the body hinders the discovery of the person, of one’s real self – if there is any real self left worth showing. Or is that over-revealing dress an offer of one’s self to anyone ready to pay its worth? Maybe one should excuse oneself in saying it, but it nevertheless needs to be said, and said clearly: so many women today are lowering their proclaimed self-worth to that of the prostitute.

Romance, a romantic view of the opposite sex, is not cool today… It is dated. No one lives it. Oh, but they do! – at least in their dreams They, especially girls, but boys too, dream of it. But it’s not a cool dream, so they keep it to themselves. Besides, they’ve been told too often that romance only ends in disillusionment. But it does not have to end that way, if only women and men could be an inspiration to each other.

The knight of the old tales of chivalry put his maiden on a pedestal and worshipped her. How is that there seem to be too few maidens today, too few to inspire boys and men to be chivalrous…?

Radical feminists (who propose to women that they should all be CEOs) despise that ancient idea of woman on a pedestal. They rejected the pedestal, and chose to step down from it. But in stepping down, they fell. And what a fall was there! And how many they have brought down with them.

One may be tempted to say, this is too idealistic; and we always fail in our ideals. Yes; but if there are no ideals, then we will fail – we will fall – all the deeper.

 

Motherhood

What a man feels for a maiden, a truly feminine girl, and what he feels for a mother, a truly feminine mother, are two quite different things. He worships the maiden; he admires and venerates the mother, all the more so if that truly feminine mother is his own mother. The maiden is full of romantic promise – though in his heart he should realize that she will never fully live up to all those idealized expectations. But the mother is an achiever. She has done it! Her credentials are there – he is one of them. She is the real heroine.

But who today really considers motherhood admirable? I think most men do – even if they so often seem content to be poor fathers. The tragedy is that many women, and I would go so far as to suggest that it is a sizeable majority, do not.

The radical feminism that has so expropriated a noble cause has turned women away from motherhood, has convinced them that it is no more than a woman’s burden, an unjust burden of nature. For them, it is not only a woman’s right to put professional achievement first in her priorities of fulfillment; it is even her duty. She owes it to herself. In fact she owes it to the rest of women, to the whole of society… So – marriage…? Perhaps – after having had time to enjoy oneself. And children? Well, maybe one or two – because they so limit one’s freedom. Besides, the woman is still expected to be their main care-taker. A woman is always under such a handicap.

By its very structure the body of woman shows that it is made to open, to be visited, to be made fruitful, and that only in this way can it achieve its natural fulfillment as a human feminine body: to receive and give love and life. Does this mean, then, that, as is often said, biology is destiny? It is certainly a pointer to personal identity, which includes sexual identity. If we reject nature, we have no clue left to our human identity. We are drifters, unidentified and unidentifiedly lost, ready to be swept away in the debris of a disintegrating humanity.

How is it that young girls are not taught to wonder at their unique life-giving potential, and so want proudly to keep themselves, so as one day to fulfill that potential? Probably, almost certainly, they will not relearn that wonder until we return to the situation where the normal wife and mother once more proudly rejoices in her role as the privileged bearer and nurturer of life?

Fear of pregnancy? Understandable. No one chooses pain for its own sake. But we do choose a painful operation to save our own lives. A soldier can give his life to save his country. Soldiers used to be regarded as heroes. Now we don’t believe too much in military heroism. Even just causes are greeted with skepticism. There seems to be nothing worth giving oneself to. The ultimate surrender of values is when suppressing new life is regarded as a proper right, and giving new life as an unfair burden.

It seems well here to quote two prominent twentieth-century figures in the study of sex, who can hardly be accused of retrograde religious bias. The first, the British physician and psychologist, Havelock Ellis (1859-1939), stressed that “the mother is the child’s supreme parent”; adding, “In the great ages of humanity [this] has indeed been accepted as a central and sacred fact”. He goes on: “In England, by a curiously perverted form of sexual attraction, women were so fascinated by the glamour that surrounded men that they desired to suppress or forget all the facts of organic constitution which made them unlike men, counting their glory as their shame, and sought the same education as men, the same occupations as men” [3]

The anthropologist, Margaret Mead, (1901-1978), has been criticized for cultural determinism in her observation of primitive societies. But the following words of hers could well be taken to reflect the modern societal determinism to which girls are more and more subject. “The simple logic of “breasts that do not give suck” can only be escaped by the most elaborate forms of cultural learning. Girls can be placed in learning contexts where every one of them will wish to be a boy and resent being a girl; girls can be placed in learning contexts in which being a woman and bearing a child is a synonym of having one’s body invaded, distorted, and destroyed. Girls can certainly learn not to want children, but such learning seems always to be socially imposed… Societies may be differently successful in teaching each sex its reproductive rôle, and when both sexes set their hearts against reproduction, then such societies die out – even without benefit of contraceptives” [4].

 

Conclusion

So, to sum up and conclude… On the one hand, disdain for virginity, disregard for modesty, provocative fashion. On the other, rejection of the ideal of being a home-builder, loss of appreciation and reverence for the mystery of motherhood…

Who is to blame for this unhappy state of womankind, which is pervasive in the West and is being unrelentingly imposed from the West on emerging countries? Who is to blame for this denaturalized situation which inevitably results in robbing women of their deepest human dignity, isolating them from men and from each other, leaving them more and more immersed in aggrievances, frustration, self-pity and loneliness?

Who is to blame? Some men, no doubt, who seek money or power in pushing this degraded agenda. But it is a group of women who originated the agenda that are the first to be blamed – the radical feminists of the 1960s and later. Highly intelligent women, for the most part, who were also highly frustrated. Their writings, their words, their interviews confirm this impression: frustration in their own upbringing; in their marriage, if they married; in their love affairs; in their professional ambitions. They pushed for women’s “freedom” from sexual restraint, from family ties, from motherhood, from the respect of men… And, with few exceptions, the rest of women followed them.

Hence, I don’t hesitate to say that the main blame for all of his lies with the generality of women themselves. And I don’t hesitate to say it because unless they themselves realize it and react, their situation, and the situation of all of us, will degenerate more and more, until we are overtaken by total dehumanization.

A hundred years ago, in the turbulence of early feminist claims, G.K. Chesterton made a quip about how ten thousand women rose as one man, crying out, ‘we will not be dictated to’; and promptly became stenographers!…

Today his quip could be given a much more serious turn. Millions of women all over the Western world need to rise up and cry out, each in her own voice, “we will not be dictated to, or exploited, or turned into merchandise: or into men… We reclaim our right to be women.”

NOTES

[1] An address sponsored by The Witherspoon Institute, given in Washington, D.C., March 2013.

[2] Self-esteem is the subjectivized measure of self-worth that is so dominant today. Yet many young women today seem unable to distinguish between what could ground genuine self-esteem and what simply makes for radical self-cheapening.

[3] Studies in the Psychology of Sex (1927), volume vi (Gutenberg).

[4] Male and Female, 231, 238.

English Feminism

EnglishSpanishItalianFrenchPortugueseRevised Douay-Rheims Bible (‘you’ version)Confessions of St. Augustine (Pusey’s Translation of 1838; in a ‘you’ version)Encyclopedia of Catholic Doctrine (Extracts)EnglishSpanishItalianFrenchPortugueseGermanEnglishLatinSpanishFrenchBooksCompose tipswhat’s newCurriculum Vitae

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MY PERSONAL ARGUMENT AGAINST THE ARTICLE

 

The writer/author is angry that most youth (girls) have reduce the attitude they have toward virginity, again most women don’t value motherhood and modesty. So the writer/author have to find a way to blame feminist/radical feminist. Before the coming of feminism as a movement, they have been a decadence in morality. For her to put the blame on a particular movement is totally wrong.

For a Broadview and understanding of the topic let look at some definitions of some terms she mentioned while in the beginning.

 

DEFINITION OF FEMINISM

  1. According to Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

Feminism is a range of social movements, political movements, and ideologies that aim to define, establish, and achieve the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes.

  1. According to Merriam Webster dictionary

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism

  1.  the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
  2. organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests

 

DEFINITION OF FEMINIST

According to Cambridge dictionary

A person who believes in feminism, and tries to achieve change that helps women to get equal opportunities and treatment.

 

RADICAL FEMINISM

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism

Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical reordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts.

Radical feminists view society as fundamentally a patriarchy in which men dominate and oppress women. Radical feminists seek to abolish the patriarchy in order to “liberate everyone from an unjust society by challenging existing social norms and institutions.” This includes opposing the sexual objectification of women, raising public awareness about such issues as rape and violence against women, and challenging the concept of gender roles.

 

 

 

WHAT MAKES IT ‘RADICAL’?

Radical feminists tend to be more militant in their approach (radical as “getting to the root”) than other feminists. A radical feminist aims to dismantle patriarchy rather than making adjustments to the system through legal changes. Radical feminists also resist reducing oppression to an economic or class issue, as socialist or Marxist feminism sometimes did or does.

The reason this group gets the radical label is that they view the oppression of women as the most fundamental form of man’s domination, one that cuts across boundaries of race, culture, and economic class.

 

Radical feminism opposes patriarchy, not men. To equate radical feminism to man-hating is to assume that patriarchy and men are inseparable, philosophically and politically. (Although, Robin Morgan has defended “man-hating” as the right of the oppressed class to hate the class that is oppressing them.)

 

The major emphasis of radical feminism include:

 

  • ELIMINATION OF PATRIARCHY

It aims is to challenge and overthrow patriarchy by opposing standard gender roles and oppression of women and calls for a radical reordering of society.

 

They raise the demand for the destruction of patriarchy. They believe they should be a shift from struggle for role and legal reforms to the destruction of patriarchy. The chief institution of patriarchy is the family and the family promotes patriarchy in the society.

 

It is a perspective within feminism that focuses on the patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships based on the idea that male supremacy oppresses women.

 

  • BIOLOGICAL REVOLUTION

 

This group of feminists claims that the root of women’s oppression is biological. They believe that the physical subordination of women by men is the primary form of oppression and others are secondary.

Therefore, radical feminism believes that woman’s liberation requires a biological revolution. Radical feminism questions why women must adopt certain roles based on their biology, just as it questions why men adopt certain other roles based on gender.

They attempt to draw lines between biologically determined behavior and culturally determined behavior in order to free both men and women as much as possible from such gender roles.

Moreover, they believe that the whole system must be abolished even, its biological aspects. Radical feminism principles contains many interesting claims such as pregnancy and child birth in which they consider them as the most painful and unpleasant experiences that can person pass through.

 

They believe that the technology should be used to eliminate all kinds of pain particularly from the fundamental inequality of the bearing and rising of the children. This must be the basic achievement because they believe that the heart of women’s oppression is their childbearing and childrearing roles.

Radical feminists believe that the male psychology or biology is the source of women’s oppression and pain. This is why they call for separation and the independence from men.

 

KEY ISSUES AND TACTICS

Central issues engaged by radical feminists include:

  • Reproductive rights for women, including the freedom to make choices to give birth, have an abortion, use birth control, or get sterilized
  • Evaluating and then breaking down traditional gender roles in private relationships as well as in public policies
  • Understanding pornography as an industry and practice leading to harm to women.
  • Understanding rape as an expression of patriarchal power, not a seeking of sex
  • Understanding prostitution under patriarchy as the oppression of women, sexually and economically
  • A critique of motherhood, marriage, the nuclear family, and sexuality, questioning how much of our culture is based on patriarchal assumptions
  • A critique of other institutions, including government and religion, as centered historically in patriarchal power

KEY RADICAL FEMINISTS 

The following are some key radical feminist:

  • Ti-Grace Atkinson
  • Susan Brownmiller
  • Phyllis Chester
  • Corrine Grad Coleman
  • Mary Daly
  • Andrea Dworkin
  • Shulamith Firestone
  • Germaine Greer
  • Carol Hanisch
  • Jill Johnston
  • Catherine MacKinnon
  • Kate Millett
  • Robin Morgan
  • Ellen Willis
  • Monique Wittig.

 

RADICAL FEMINIST GROUP OF FEMINISM

These group include:

  • Red stockings
  • New York Radical Women (NYRW
  • The Chicago Women’s Liberation Union (CWLU),
  • Ann Arbor Feminist House
  • The Feminists, WITCH
  • Seattle Radical Women
  • Cell 16

 

TOOLS USED BY RADICAL FEMINIST GROUP OF FEMINISM

Tools used by radical women’s groups includes:

  • Consciousness-raising groups,
  • Actively providing services,
  • Organizing public protests,
  • Putting on art and culture events.
  • Women’s studies programs at universities are often supported by radical feminists as well as more liberal and socialist feminists.

 

 

Speaking as someone who knows a thing or two about feminism, feminist and femininity I guess seriously this article is the most pathetic – laughably pathetic – article I have ever read in my life.

She even refutes and confuses his own article in the statement “ Lest the title given to my presentation cause confusion, may I begin by emphasizing that I am a feminist

However, here are my personal 8 arguments against her article:

 

 

FIRST ARGUMENT

(NOT ANSWERING A QUESTION ABOUT “FEMININE” IS NOT ENOUGH REASON FOR THE THREAT TO WOMAN’S IDENTITY)

Starting with the first paragraph-

“”””” Lest the title given to my presentation cause confusion, may I begin by emphasizing that I am a feminist. Radical feminism is what I see as a threat to woman’s identity. Ask any radical feminist what should be the most logical question to put to them (a question incidentally they don’t like) – what he or she understands by “feminine,” and they have no answer. They don’t want women to be feminine, just as they don’t want men to be masculine. Down with the difference! “””””

 

This backup is a fallacy and totally incorrect. From what am seeing now, am able to bring out some funny points said by the writer/author about why Feminism v. Femininity: the Threat to Woman’s Identity

 

POINT 1

Ask any radical feminist what should be the most logical question to put to them (a question incidentally they don’t like) – what he or she understands by “feminine,” and they have no answer.

 

POINT 2

They don’t want women to be feminine, just as they don’t want men to be masculine. Down with the difference! “””””

 

These points I guess are totally absurd to me. Starting with

 

POINT 1

Ask any radical feminist what should be the most logical question to put to them (a question incidentally they don’t like) – what he or she understands by “feminine,” and they have no answer.

 

These first point above is totally wrong as per the article because no reference was made or links or interview that shows that such radical feminist where ask such question (“what he or she understands by “feminine,”). To make the articles so absurd she said “they have no answer”

 

The author/writer claims that any radical feminist that is being ask such question, have no answer. But she does not offer the least amount of evidence to or reason to back up this statement. Any radical feminist can decide not to answer such question based on some personal decision or some cogent reasons been known to her. Like what the writer/author said – what should be the most logical question to put to them (a question incidentally they don’t like).

 

So if they are logically ask such question, her reply of not answering is logically based. So I see no reason why the “no answer” term should make her raised her point about saying “feminisms vs. femininity: a threat to women’s’ identity.”

 

 

POINT 2

They don’t want women to be feminine, just as they don’t want men to be masculine. Down with the difference! “””””

 

These point is quite funny how does the idea of radical feminist  not wanting women to be feminine and not wanting men to be masculine is a threat to woman’s identity.

 

Here she didn’t give us a clear definition of what feminine and masculine are. But she just wrote “” Down with the difference! “”. Is not about saying something but about bringing out what that something means for the viewers or readers to understand.

 

For proper understanding of what feminine (femininity) and masculine (masculinity) are, please the writer/author should read up here about the meaning of the term:

 

MASCULINITY AND FEMININITY/MULIEBRITY

Definition of Masculinity

According to Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculinity

Masculinity (also called manhood or manliness) is a set of attributes, behaviours, and roles associated with boys and men. Although masculinity is socially constructed, some research indicates that some behaviours considered masculine are biologically influenced. To what extent masculinity is biologically or socially influenced is subject to debate. It is distinct from the definition of the biological male sex, as both males and females can exhibit masculine traits.

Definition of femininity

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femininity

Femininity (also called womanliness or girlishness) is a set of attributes, behaviours, and roles generally associated with women and girls. Although femininity is socially constructed, some research indicates that some behaviours considered feminine are biologically influenced. To what extent femininity is biologically or socially influenced is subject to debate. It is distinct from the definition of the biological female sex, as both males and females can exhibit feminine traits.

 

According to merriam-webster dictionary

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/femininity

The quality or nature of the female sex : the quality, state, or degree of being feminine or womanly.

 

 

The following are prove to support my FIRST ARGUMENT POINT 2 using FEMINIST Adichie Chimamanda Ngozi books –

  1. WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST
  2. DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS

 

 

PROVE 1 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimamanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“”””” We do a great disservice to boys in how we raise them. We stifle the humanity of boys.

We define masculinity in a very narrow way. Masculinity is a hard, small cage, and we put boys inside this cage. We teach boys to be afraid of fear, of weakness, of vulnerability. We teach them to mask their true selves, because they have to be, in Nigerian-speak—a hard man. “””””

 

 

PROVE 2 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“”“””” Men and women are different. We have different hormones and different sexual organs and different biological abilities—women can have babies, men cannot. Men have more testosterone and are, in general, physically stronger than women. A man and a woman are doing the same job, with the same qualifications, and the man is paid more because he is a man. So in a literal way, men rule the world. This made sense a thousand years ago. Because human beings lived then in a world in which physical strength was the most important attribute for survival; the physically stronger person was more likely to lead. And men in general are physically stronger. (There are of course many exceptions.) Today, we live in a vastly different world. The person more qualified to lead is not the physically stronger person. It is the more intelligent, the more knowledgeable, the more creative, more innovative. And there are no hormones for those attributes. A man is as likely as a woman to be intelligent, innovative, creative. We have evolved. But our ideas of gender have not evolved very much.         “””””””

 

PROVE 3 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

 “”””” Boys and girls are undeniably different biologically, but socialization exaggerates the differences. And then starts a self-fulfilling process. Take cooking, for example. Today, women in general are more likely to do housework than men—cooking and cleaning. But why is that? Is it because women are born with a cooking gene or because over years they have been socialized to see cooking as their role? I was going to say that perhaps women are born with a cooking gene until I remembered that the majority of famous cooks in the world—who are given the fancy title of “chef”—are men. ”””””

 “”””

 

PROVE 4 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the Eleventh Suggestion

“”””” We often use biology to explain the privileges that men have, the most common reason being men’s physical superiority. It is of course true that men are in general physically stronger than women. But if we truly depended on biology as the root of social norms, then children would be identified as their mother’s rather than their father’s because when a child is born, the parent we are biologically – and incontrovertibly – certain of is the mother. We assume the father is who the mother says the father is. How many lineages all over the world are not biological, I wonder? ””””

 

PROVE 5 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“”””” In secondary school, a boy and a girl go out, both of them teenagers with meager pocket money. Yet the boy is expected to pay the bills, always, to prove his masculinity. (And we wonder why boys are more likely to steal money from their parents.) What if both boys and girls were raised not to link masculinity and money? What if their attitude was not “the boy has to pay,” but rather, “whoever has more should pay.” Of course, because of their historical advantage, it is mostly men who will have more today. But if we start raising children differently, then in fifty years, in a hundred years, boys will no longer have the pressure of proving their masculinity by material means. But by far the worst thing we do to males—by making them feel they have to be hard —is that we leave them with very fragile egos. The harder a man feels compelled to be, the weaker his ego is. “”””

 

 

 

 

 

 

SECOND ARGUMENT

(CLAIMING TO BE A FEMINIST IS A FALSE IDEA AND THEREBY REFUTING AGAINST RADICAL FEMINIST. YOU HAVE TO SPECIFY WHAT TYPE OF FEMINIST ARE YOU)

 

Another annoying claim the writer was trying to present was to back up her idea and background about feminism as stated below-

  1. “”””” may I begin by emphasizing that I am a feminist”””””

 

  1. “”””” My life as a feminist started at about the age of five, when I first began to admire my mother. And my feminism increased as I came to appreciate my sisters. Probably then I could not define the elements of that appreciation, except for realizing there was something different about women and girls; and somehow I admired that something. Vive la différence!

 

Then I entered into my teens, and girls entered into my life in a new way, a way that changed and to some extent disturbed my incipient feminism. Part of my reaction was concisely expressed not long ago in a mentoring session with a fourteen year old boy. He was from a good family background with the distinctive note that his five siblings were all boys. As we were ending our chat, I sensed there was still something on his mind; so I asked him, what is it? He looked at me, and solemnly enunciated – “Girls!”. Slightly amused, I asked him, what about girls? He looked at me again and answered quite slowly, “They puzzle me…” I gave him a few possible clues to the puzzle but didn’t really try or want to solve it. I had had the same experience myself and thought it a good start to a healthy sexual outlook.

 

When I was a teenager I lived in a residential area on the outskirts of Sligo, my home town in Ireland. There were three or four families close by, all friends and all large – six, seven or eight children. As a result, my teenage social life was spent in the company of fifteen or twenty boys and girls all in the 15-18 age range. I admired the girls I knew, and now and then imagined I might eventually marry this one or that. I admired them but respected them. They made themselves respected. ‘Bad’ thoughts were directed elsewhere. One would feel ashamed to allow a bad thought toward a girl who inspires respect.  “””””

 

 

DETAILED EXPLANATION ON SECOND ARGUMENT

Firstly she claimed “” My life as a feminist started at about the age of five””. Her claimed is false, it doesn’t show she is a feminist. Again you can’t be calling yourself a feminist while you reject the idea of radical feminist. Is either you are a feminist or not.

The writer claiming feminist could have specify what type of feminism she belong to. This is to make a difference of what she is saying.

Using the word “feminist” attached to your whole being as a child, teenage and also adulthood and your  personality in the society as you described below-

“”””” My life as a feminist started at about the age of five, when I first began to admire my mother. And my feminism increased as I came to appreciate my sisters. Probably then I could not define the elements of that appreciation, except for realizing there was something different about women and girls; and somehow I admired that something. Vive la différence!

 

Then I entered into my teens, and girls entered into my life in a new way, a way that changed and to some extent disturbed my incipient feminism. Part of my reaction was concisely expressed not long ago in a mentoring session with a fourteen year old boy. He was from a good family background with the distinctive note that his five siblings were all boys. As we were ending our chat, I sensed there was still something on his mind; so I asked him, what is it? He looked at me, and solemnly enunciated – “Girls!”. Slightly amused, I asked him, what about girls? He looked at me again and answered quite slowly, “They puzzle me…” I gave him a few possible clues to the puzzle but didn’t really try or want to solve it. I had had the same experience myself and thought it a good start to a healthy sexual outlook.

 

When I was a teenager I lived in a residential area on the outskirts of Sligo, my home town in Ireland. There were three or four families close by, all friends and all large – six, seven or eight children. As a result, my teenage social life was spent in the company of fifteen or twenty boys and girls all in the 15-18 age range. I admired the girls I knew, and now and then imagined I might eventually marry this one or that. I admired them but respected them. They made themselves respected. ‘Bad’ thoughts were directed elsewhere. One would feel ashamed to allow a bad thought toward a girl who inspires respect.  “””””

PROVE 1 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the Fourth Suggestion

“””” Beware the danger of what I call Feminism Lite. It is the idea of conditional female equality. Please reject this entirely. It is a hollow, appeasing and bankrupt idea. Being a feminist is like being pregnant. You either are or you are not. You either believe in the full equality of men and women or you do not.””””

 

 

PROVE 2 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the tenth Suggestion

“””” Don’t think that raising her feminist means forcing her to reject femininity. Feminism and femininity are not mutually exclusive. It is misogynistic to suggest that they are. “”””

 

 

 

 

 

 

PROVE 3 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the Fourteen Suggestion

“””” And there are many women in the world who do not like other women. Female misogyny exists, and to evade acknowledging it is to create unnecessary opportunities for anti-feminists to try to discredit feminism. I mean the sort of anti-feminists who will gleefully raise examples of women saying ‘I am not a feminist’ as though a person born with a vagina making this statement somehow automatically discredits feminism. That a woman claims not to be feminist does not diminish the necessity of feminism. If anything, it makes us see the extent of the problem, the successful reach of patriarchy. It shows us, too, that not all women are feminists and not all men are misogynists. “””””

 

 

PROVE 4 (FROM HER BOOK)

 According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“””””” Some people ask: “Why the word feminist? Why not just say you are a believer in human rights, or something like that?” Because that would be dishonest. Feminism is, of course, part of human rights in general—but to choose to use the vague expression human rights is to deny the specific and particular problem of gender. It would be a way of pretending that it was not women who have, for centuries, been excluded. It would be a way of denying that the problem of gender targets women. That the problem was not about being human, but specifically about being a female human. For centuries, the world divided human beings into two groups and then proceeded to exclude and oppress one group. It is only fair that the solution to the problem acknowledge that. Some men feel threatened by the idea of feminism. This comes, I think, from the insecurity triggered by how boys are brought up, how their sense of self-worth is diminished if they are not “naturally” in charge as men.   “”””””

 

 

 

PROVE 5 (FROM SITE/INTERNET-TALK)

I will backed it up with a powerful statement made by FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE where she mentioned “”””FEMINISM“”””

For further reading here is the link to convince you:

https://pen.org/press-clip/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-on-the-world-of-african-literature/

FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE   speech:

“” At the TED conference in 2013, Ms Adichie gave a now-famous talk titled, “We Should All Be Feminists.” (The singer Beyoncé quoted it in her song “Flawless.”) “My version of feminism means acknowledging that women have and continue to have gotten the bad end of things, politically and socially, all over the world,” she says. “Feminism means not only acknowledging that, but wanting to make it better.””

 

 

 

 

THIRD ARGUMENT

(VIRGINITY, MODESTY (APPERANCE) AND MOTHERHOOD ARE NOT THE MAJOR EMPHASIS OF FEMINIST BUT INSTEAD EQUALITY OF BOTH SEXES)

 

Here the writer is trying to say that virginity, modesty and motherhood ideas and rejections from radical feminist is a threat to women identity.

 

Here is her write-up about it:

 

————-“Neither virgin nor mother!” – this seems to be the motto or battle-cry of radical feminism – or should we simply say its pathetic cynicism. Such ‘feminism’ not only destroys woman’s understanding of true femininity, but ruptures the relation between the sexes in the most profound way. Let us try to consider this in greater depth.

Virginity

It helps to understand virginity by first enunciating that primary anthropological truth: more important than what one has, is what one is. To give what one has is something; to give what one is, is something much more. But to be humanly fulfilling, it must be a giving of what one is, to something or someone that merits such a gift. No one matures into a person from within themselves. Growth and maturity come from a loyal response, a giving of self, to family, to friends, to country: giving to them aspects or parts of oneself: time, sympathy, presence…

One can give aspects of self to many people in diverse ways. But true fulfillment only comes from the gift of the whole of oneself. It could be directly to God; normally it is to a spouse in marriage. Marriage, as the normal fulfilling commitment, involves a mutual self-gift. But it is a gift of the whole of one’s self. Properly speaking, one should come to marriage with the whole of one’s self to give; with an intact and integral self to give.

Virginity is not mainly a physical condition. It is simply the integrity that the marital self-gift logically calls for; what the person who understands marriage looks for in the woman (or, it should be equally so, in the man) he or she wants to marry. Marriage, if it is to have any unique human sense and dignity, is the union of a man and a woman in exclusive, open-to-life and permanent mutual self-giving. It is not a giving in part; that is not yet a gift. It is not a temporary gift, that is just a loan. If one has already given oneself sexually then any subsequent sexual self-gift is impaired. Part has already been given away, one has less of self to give. The gift is then so much the poorer; and the one prompted to accept it feels it is a used-up self the other is offering.

Girls today give themselves so easily. As a result they cheapen themselves in the eyes of boys and men. Modesty in behavior, modesty in dress, modesty in not letting a guy get fresh with her, used to be the style of most girls. They were the girls whom the vast majority of men admired and sought – also precisely because there was the sense they were not easily won. “This girl values herself. She makes herself respected. I admire that. She has ideals. I want to measure up to the self-worth that she attributes to herself”. That is a first condition if a woman is to inspire a man.

Tragically, though, modesty is out of fashion today. Then let us talk a bit more about it.

 

Modesty

Modesty is connected with the sense of self. It relates to personal intimacy. Animals have no modesty for they have no personality to reveal or to protect. Modesty does not relate just to forms of dressing. A genuine and attractive modesty marks the person who feels repugnance at speaking too much about his or her achievements, or those of their family members. It is only gradually that one shares one’s intimate things with others – in the measure precisely of friendship… A readiness to share the whole of one’s intimacy with anyone and everyone shows a superficial self-esteem [2]. It implies regarding one’s intimacy as public property, containing nothing in it that merits to be reserved for some persons and not to be revealed or exhibited indiscriminately to all.

Going back to my university days, it wasn’t uncommon among men students, to hear the remark about some girl: “You know, So-and-So is a really nice girl”. It didn’t sound ‘sexy” in the modern sense (although it was in fact full of genuine sexual appreciation). The girl in question might not even be very pretty or have a good figure. But there was something very attractive about her.

The ‘finishing schools’ of a hundred years ago often managed to give young ladies a veneer of ‘niceness’. The truly feminine woman gives the impression of being nice in her deeper self.

The body is part of one’s self – the most visible part, but certainly not the whole of one’s self. Excessive emphasis deliberately drawn to bodily attraction often reveals an impoverished inner self, a shallow personality. If a girl knows how to develop her interior feminine self, she will be attractive to men, to the most worthwhile of men, however limited her physical assets might be.

Dress should be revealing… It should reveal the person, in his or her sense of values, of interior worth … Dress that over-reveals the body hinders the discovery of the person, of one’s real self – if there is any real self left worth showing. Or is that over-revealing dress an offer of one’s self to anyone ready to pay its worth? Maybe one should excuse oneself in saying it, but it nevertheless needs to be said, and said clearly: so many women today are lowering their proclaimed self-worth to that of the prostitute.

Romance, a romantic view of the opposite sex, is not cool today… It is dated. No one lives it. Oh, but they do! – at least in their dreams They, especially girls, but boys too, dream of it. But it’s not a cool dream, so they keep it to themselves. Besides, they’ve been told too often that romance only ends in disillusionment. But it does not have to end that way, if only women and men could be an inspiration to each other.

The knight of the old tales of chivalry put his maiden on a pedestal and worshipped her. How is that there seem to be too few maidens today, too few to inspire boys and men to be chivalrous…?

Radical feminists (who propose to women that they should all be CEOs) despise that ancient idea of woman on a pedestal. They rejected the pedestal, and chose to step down from it. But in stepping down, they fell. And what a fall was there! And how many they have brought down with them.

One may be tempted to say, this is too idealistic; and we always fail in our ideals. Yes; but if there are no ideals, then we will fail – we will fall – all the deeper.

Motherhood

What a man feels for a maiden, a truly feminine girl, and what he feels for a mother, a truly feminine mother, are two quite different things. He worships the maiden; he admires and venerates the mother, all the more so if that truly feminine mother is his own mother. The maiden is full of romantic promise – though in his heart he should realize that she will never fully live up to all those idealized expectations. But the mother is an achiever. She has done it! Her credentials are there – he is one of them. She is the real heroine.

But who today really considers motherhood admirable? I think most men do – even if they so often seem content to be poor fathers. The tragedy is that many women, and I would go so far as to suggest that it is a sizeable majority, do not.

The radical feminism that has so expropriated a noble cause has turned women away from motherhood, has convinced them that it is no more than a woman’s burden, an unjust burden of nature. For them, it is not only a woman’s right to put professional achievement first in her priorities of fulfillment; it is even her duty. She owes it to herself. In fact she owes it to the rest of women, to the whole of society… So – marriage…? Perhaps – after having had time to enjoy oneself. And children? Well, maybe one or two – because they so limit one’s freedom. Besides, the woman is still expected to be their main care-taker. A woman is always under such a handicap.

By its very structure the body of woman shows that it is made to open, to be visited, to be made fruitful, and that only in this way can it achieve its natural fulfillment as a human feminine body: to receive and give love and life. Does this mean, then, that, as is often said, biology is destiny? It is certainly a pointer to personal identity, which includes sexual identity. If we reject nature, we have no clue left to our human identity. We are drifters, unidentified and unidentifiedly lost, ready to be swept away in the debris of a disintegrating humanity.

How is it that young girls are not taught to wonder at their unique life-giving potential, and so want proudly to keep themselves, so as one day to fulfill that potential? Probably, almost certainly, they will not relearn that wonder until we return to the situation where the normal wife and mother once more proudly rejoices in her role as the privileged bearer and nurturer of life?

Fear of pregnancy? Understandable. No one chooses pain for its own sake. But we do choose a painful operation to save our own lives. A soldier can give his life to save his country. Soldiers used to be regarded as heroes. Now we don’t believe too much in military heroism. Even just causes are greeted with skepticism. There seems to be nothing worth giving oneself to. The ultimate surrender of values is when suppressing new life is regarded as a proper right, and giving new life as an unfair burden.

It seems well here to quote two prominent twentieth-century figures in the study of sex, who can hardly be accused of retrograde religious bias. The first, the British physician and psychologist, Havelock Ellis (1859-1939), stressed that “the mother is the child’s supreme parent”; adding, “In the great ages of humanity [this] has indeed been accepted as a central and sacred fact”. He goes on: “In England, by a curiously perverted form of sexual attraction, women were so fascinated by the glamour that surrounded men that they desired to suppress or forget all the facts of organic constitution which made them unlike men, counting their glory as their shame, and sought the same education as men, the same occupations as men” [3]     ———————

 

 

 

 

 

 

For further understanding of the third argument let the writer know that   Virginity, modesty (outer-inner appearance) and motherhood are a choice and decision made by the radical feminist.

Virginity, modesty (outer-inner appearance) and motherhood is never the aim of feminist, the purpose of feminism 

According to Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

 Is a range of social movements, political movements, and ideologies that aim to define, establish, and achieve the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes.

 

This backup is a fallacy and totally incorrect. From what am seeing now, am able to bring out some funny 3 points said by the writer/author about why Feminism v. Femininity: the Threat to Woman’s Identity

 

POINT 1

————— “Neither virgin nor mother!” – this seems to be the motto or battle-cry of radical feminism – or should we simply say its pathetic cynicism. Such ‘feminism’ not only destroys woman’s understanding of true femininity, but ruptures the relation between the sexes in the most profound way. Let us try to consider this in greater depth.

Virginity

It helps to understand virginity by first enunciating that primary anthropological truth: more important than what one has, is what one is. To give what one has is something; to give what one is, is something much more. But to be humanly fulfilling, it must be a giving of what one is, to something or someone that merits such a gift. No one matures into a person from within themselves. Growth and maturity come from a loyal response, a giving of self, to family, to friends, to country: giving to them aspects or parts of oneself: time, sympathy, presence…

One can give aspects of self to many people in diverse ways. But true fulfillment only comes from the gift of the whole of oneself. It could be directly to God; normally it is to a spouse in marriage. Marriage, as the normal fulfilling commitment, involves a mutual self-gift. But it is a gift of the whole of one’s self. Properly speaking, one should come to marriage with the whole of one’s self to give; with an intact and integral self to give.

Virginity is not mainly a physical condition. It is simply the integrity that the marital self-gift logically calls for; what the person who understands marriage looks for in the woman (or, it should be equally so, in the man) he or she wants to marry. Marriage, if it is to have any unique human sense and dignity, is the union of a man and a woman in exclusive, open-to-life and permanent mutual self-giving. It is not a giving in part; that is not yet a gift. It is not a temporary gift, that is just a loan. If one has already given oneself sexually then any subsequent sexual self-gift is impaired. Part has already been given away, one has less of self to give. The gift is then so much the poorer; and the one prompted to accept it feels it is a used-up self the other is offering.

Girls today give themselves so easily. As a result they cheapen themselves in the eyes of boys and men. Modesty in behavior, modesty in dress, modesty in not letting a guy get fresh with her, used to be the style of most girls. They were the girls whom the vast majority of men admired and sought – also precisely because there was the sense they were not easily won. “This girl values herself. She makes herself respected. I admire that. She has ideals. I want to measure up to the self-worth that she attributes to herself”. That is a first condition if a woman is to inspire a man.

Tragically, though, modesty is out of fashion today. Then let us talk a bit more about it. —————

 

A PERSONAL REFUTATION AGAINST POINT 1

Here In my view, feminism is not necessarily about just letting women do whatever they want instead it’s a complicated movement with a lot of goals and a lot of layers.

I personally kick against this statement made by the author/writer, where she said-

————-“Neither virgin nor mother!” – this seems to be the motto or battle-cry of radical feminism – or should we simply say its pathetic cynicism. Such ‘feminism’ not only destroys woman’s understanding of true femininity, but ruptures the relation between the sexes in the most profound way. ————–

 

Every woman have the choice to keep her virginity or not.  Feminist are not only after choice of a particular thing but after equality of both sexes. Why are we talking about choice, the last time I checked choice was not part of the agitation made by the feminist.

 

For proper understanding, am going to use a popular feminist statement on her two major books on feminism to prove a point about virginity. This is the one other reason I like her, she explained the idea of virginity for us to understand.

For more information on it, here are some of the statement made by her in her two books to prove my point that virginity was never a threat to women identity as been said by the writer of these article Feminism v. Femininity: the Threat to Woman’s Identity.

 

 

 

 

PROVE 1 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the Twelfth Suggestion

“”””Do not ever make ‘virginity’ a focus. Every conversation about virginity becomes a conversation about shame. Teach her to reject the linking of shame and female biology. “”””

 

PROVE 2 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“””””   We police girls. We praise girls for virginity but we don’t praise boys for virginity (and it makes me wonder how exactly this is supposed to work out, since the loss of virginity is a process that usually involves two people of opposite genders). “”””” 

 

 

 

POINT 2

Modesty

——— Modesty is connected with the sense of self. It relates to personal intimacy. Animals have no modesty for they have no personality to reveal or to protect. Modesty does not relate just to forms of dressing. A genuine and attractive modesty marks the person who feels repugnance at speaking too much about his or her achievements, or those of their family members. It is only gradually that one shares one’s intimate things with others – in the measure precisely of friendship… A readiness to share the whole of one’s intimacy with anyone and everyone shows a superficial self-esteem [2]. It implies regarding one’s intimacy as public property, containing nothing in it that merits to be reserved for some persons and not to be revealed or exhibited indiscriminately to all.

Going back to my university days, it wasn’t uncommon among men students, to hear the remark about some girl: “You know, So-and-So is a really nice girl”. It didn’t sound ‘sexy” in the modern sense (although it was in fact full of genuine sexual appreciation). The girl in question might not even be very pretty or have a good figure. But there was something very attractive about her.

The ‘finishing schools’ of a hundred years ago often managed to give young ladies a veneer of ‘niceness’. The truly feminine woman gives the impression of being nice in her deeper self.

The body is part of one’s self – the most visible part, but certainly not the whole of one’s self. Excessive emphasis deliberately drawn to bodily attraction often reveals an impoverished inner self, a shallow personality. If a girl knows how to develop her interior feminine self, she will be attractive to men, to the most worthwhile of men, however limited her physical assets might be.

Dress should be revealing… It should reveal the person, in his or her sense of values, of interior worth … Dress that over-reveals the body hinders the discovery of the person, of one’s real self – if there is any real self left worth showing. Or is that over-revealing dress an offer of one’s self to anyone ready to pay its worth? Maybe one should excuse oneself in saying it, but it nevertheless needs to be said, and said clearly: so many women today are lowering their proclaimed self-worth to that of the prostitute.

Romance, a romantic view of the opposite sex, is not cool today… It is dated. No one lives it. Oh, but they do! – at least in their dreams They, especially girls, but boys too, dream of it. But it’s not a cool dream, so they keep it to themselves. Besides, they’ve been told too often that romance only ends in disillusionment. But it does not have to end that way, if only women and men could be an inspiration to each other.

The knight of the old tales of chivalry put his maiden on a pedestal and worshipped her. How is that there seem to be too few maidens today, too few to inspire boys and men to be chivalrous…?

Radical feminists (who propose to women that they should all be CEOs) despise that ancient idea of woman on a pedestal. They rejected the pedestal, and chose to step down from it. But in stepping down, they fell. And what a fall was there! And how many they have brought down with them.

One may be tempted to say, this is too idealistic; and we always fail in our ideals. Yes; but if there are no ideals, then we will fail – we will fall – all the deeper.  ————–

 

A PERSONAL REFUTATION AGAINST POINT 2

For a better understanding of these THIRD ARGUMENT POINT 2, I will give a clear definition of modesty (in connection to appearance, sexuality and shame) from various source and with links for further reading.

 

DEFINITION OF MODESTY

  1. ACCORDING TO WIKIPEDIA

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modesty

Modesty, sometimes known as demureness, is a mode of dress and deportment which intends to avoid the encouraging of sexual attraction in others. The word “modesty” comes from the Latin word modestus which means “keeping within measure”. Standards of modesty are culturally and context dependent and vary widely. In this use, it may be considered inappropriate or immodest to reveal certain parts of the body. In some societies, modesty may involve women covering their bodies completely and not talking to men who are not immediate family members.

 

 

  1. ACCORDING TO MERRIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/modesty

 

1: the quality of not being too proud or confident about yourself or your abilities

2: propriety in dress, speech, or conduct

 

 

  1. ACCORDING TO CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/modesty

 (QUIET SUCCESS)

The quality of not talking about or not trying to make people notice your abilities and achievements: She does a lot of work for charities, but her modesty forbids her from talking about it.

 (CLOTHES/BEHAVIOUR)

The quality, in women, of dressing or behaving in a way that is intended to avoid attracting sexual interest

 (CORRECTNESS)

Correct or socially acceptable behavior and clothes, representing traditional cultural values: Modesty is expected in the dorms as well as in the classrooms.

 

 

  1. ACCORDING TO OXFORD DICTIONARY

https://www.lexico.com/definition/modesty

  1. The quality or state of being unassuming in the estimation of one’s abilities.

‘With typical modesty he insisted on sharing the credit with others’

  1. The quality of being relatively moderate, limited, or small in amount, rate, or level.

‘The modesty of his political aspirations’

  1. Behaviour, manner, or appearance intended to avoid impropriety or indecency.

‘Modesty forbade her to undress in front of so many people’

 

 

 

DEFINITION OF APPEARANCE

 

  1. According to. Cambridge dictionary

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/english/appearance

  1. An occasion when someone appears in public
  2. An occasion when someone goes to court to be officially involved in a trial:
  3. a public performance by an entertainer:
  4. To be present somewhere for a short time

 

  1. According to merriam-webster dictionary

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/appearance

  1. External show: SEMBLANCE
  2. Outward aspect: LOOK

 

 

 

DEFINITION OF SEXUALITY

  1. According to Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sexuality

Human sexuality is the way people experience and express themselves sexually. This involves biological, erotic, physical, emotional, social, or spiritual feelings and behaviours.

 

  1. According to Cambridge dictionary

https://www.google.com/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/english/sexuality

  1. Someone’s ability to experience or express sexual feelings:
  2. Attitudes and activities relating to sex

 

  1. According to merriam-webster dictionary

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexuality

  1. The quality or state of being sexual:
  2. The condition of having sex
  3. Sexual activity
  4. Expression of sexual receptivity or interest especially when excessive

 

 

DEFINITION OF SHAME

  1. According to Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shame

Shame is an unpleasant self-conscious emotion typically associated with a negative evaluation of the self, withdrawal motivations, and feelings of distress, exposure, mistrust, powerlessness, and worthlessness.

 

  1. According to merriam-webster dictionary

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shame

  1. A painful emotion caused by consciousness of guilt, shortcoming, or impropriety.
  2. The susceptibility to such emotion.
  3. Condition of humiliating disgrace or disrepute: IGNOMINY.
  4. Something that brings censure or reproach.
  5. Something to be regretted: PITY.

 

 

 

The above definitions is to enlighten my readers and viewers about what I have to say about modesty linking it with shame, sexuality and appearance (inward and outward).

Here the writer is trying to say being modest as a female is more feminine. Which the radical feminist reject so their preach to women not be modest but should wear what they like.

Moreover it has not be recorded that any radical feminist was going against the idea of been modest as in respect to femininity. Here the author/writer is narrowing modesty to femininity. Modesty goes to both gender. I guess the writer is been biased here.

Radical feminist did not reject any idea of modesty, what they were concern was biological revolution and the elimination of patriarchy. I keep wondering how a feminist writer on this article will try to misinform people about radical feminist.

For my own opinion, I feel the writer/author have problem personally with radical feminist. May be because they choose what to wear, they choose what to do with their body and they choose to talk about their achievement and abilities any time anywhere.

Here the author feel most radical feminist are not modest in their character(anger, aggressiveness), abilities and achievement, instead the writer feel they reject the idea of modesty in femininity and they  go preaching and telling people that modesty is feminine and it ruins them and put them as prisoner of oneself.

 

The writer first claim as a feminist was totally incorrect. I guess properly she is practicing what they call female misogynist. While will a feminist say such thing as I state below;

———Romance, a romantic view of the opposite sex, is not cool today… It is dated. No one lives it. Oh, but they do! – at least in their dreams They, especially girls, but boys too, dream of it. But it’s not a cool dream, so they keep it to themselves. Besides, they’ve been told too often that romance only ends in disillusionment. But it does not have to end that way, if only women and men could be an inspiration to each other. ———–

 

Looking at what she said above what is the correlation of romance and modesty. How does modesty and romance come in these context? Making things difficult again she says radical feminist have enlighten girls that most “romance only ends in disillusionment”

 

Honestly I think the writer got these all wrong, I will keep saying that she just claim to be feminist for no reason and thereby fighting and disagreeing against radical feminist.

Why will she same such thing that “Besides, they’ve been told too often that romance only ends in disillusionment.””

This is what a renowned FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi have to say about romance and love. That is the prove against such statement:

———Romance, a romantic view of the opposite sex, is not cool today… It is dated. No one lives it. Oh, but they do! – at least in their dreams They, especially girls, but boys too, dream of it. But it’s not a cool dream, so they keep it to themselves. Besides, they’ve been told too often that romance only ends in disillusionment. But it does not have to end that way, if only women and men could be an inspiration to each other. ———–

 

 

 

 

PROVE 1 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the thirteen Suggestion

“””” Make sure you are aware of the romance in her life. And the only way you can do that is to start very early to give her the language with which to talk to you not only about sex but also about love. I don’t mean you should be her ‘friend’; I mean you should be her mother to whom she can talk about everything. “”””

 

 

PROVE 2(FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the thirteen Suggestion

“””” Teach her that to love is not only to give but also to take. This is important because we give girls subtle cues about their lives – we teach girls that a large component of their ability to love is their ability to sacrifice their selves. We do not teach this to boys. Teach her that to love she must give of herself emotionally but she must also expect to be given to. “”””

 

PROVE 3(FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the thirteen Suggestion

 “””” I think love is the most important thing in life. Whatever kind, however you define it, but I think of it generally as being greatly valued by another human being and greatly valuing another human being. But why do we raise only one half of the world to value this? “”””

 

PROVE 4 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the thirteen Suggestion

“”””” Romance will happen, so be on board. I’m writing this assuming she is heterosexual – she might not be, obviously. But I am assuming that because it is what I feel best equipped to talk about. “””””

 

PROVE 4 (FROM SITE/INTERNET)

 

I will backed it up with a powerful statement made by FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE where she mentioned “” the most important thing in the world: love  “”

For further reading here is the link to convince you.

https://time.com/3921492/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-graduation-commencement-wellesley/

SHE SAYS

 “” And, finally I would like to end with a final note on the most important thing in the world: love.Now girls are often raised to see love only as giving. Women are praised for their love when that love is an act of giving. But to love is to give AND to take. Please love by giving and by taking. Give and be given. If you are only giving and not taking, you’ll know. You’ll know from that small and true voice inside you that we females are so often socialized to silence. Don’t silence that voice. Dare to take. “””

 Congratulations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Going further in to her writing about modesty which the writer says is a threat to women identity, this is what I saw that got me shocked:

“””” Radical feminists (who propose to women that they should all be CEOs) despise that ancient idea of woman on a pedestal. They rejected the pedestal, and chose to step down from it. But in stepping down, they fell. And what a fall was there! And how many they have brought down with them. “”””

 

Here the writer is trying to obey the definition she gave about modesty in the beginning:

“”””” A genuine and attractive modesty marks the person who feels repugnance at speaking too much about his or her achievements, or those of their family members. “”””

 

Here again, the writer feel that most radical feminist who propose to women about been CEO’s of an organization are kicking against modesty.

From her writing about Modesty- (A genuine and attractive modesty marks the person who feels repugnance at speaking too much about his or her achievements, or those of their family members.) which implies a woman should not talk more about achievement, she should not achieve much, or should not own much property because of the idea of modesty.

Here she is trying to say a woman should be modest in her achievement, anger, appearance, intelligent, career/job pursuit and her establishment as a female.

Again the writer feel women should have modesty so not to get angry or aggressive so they can be likable by their counterpart in church, organizations and place of work.

Achievement, anger, appearance, intelligent, career/job pursuit and establishment as a female in terms of modesty is never a threat to women identity but instead an empowerment or encouragement to women identity.

Moreover am going to give a detailed proves that modesty was not a threat to women identity as been said by the writer in her article.   

 

 

PROVE 1 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

 

“”””””” Not long ago, I wrote an article about being young and female in Lagos. And an acquaintance told me that it was an angry article, and I should not have made it so angry. But I was unapologetic. Of course it was angry. Gender as it functions today is a grave injustice. I am angry. We should all be angry. Anger has a long history of bringing about positive change. In addition to anger, I am also hopeful, because I believe deeply in the ability of human beings to remake themselves for the better.

 

But back to anger. I heard the caution in the acquaintance’s tone, and I knew that the comment was as much about the article as it was about my character. Anger, the tone said, is particularly not good for a woman. If you are a woman, you are not supposed to express anger, because it is threatening. I have a friend, an American woman, who took over a managerial position from a man. Her predecessor had been considered a “tough go-getter”; he was blunt and hard-charging and was particularly strict about the signing of time sheets. She took on her new job, and imagined herself equally tough, but perhaps a little kinder than him—he didn’t always realize that people had families, she said, and she did. Only weeks into her new job, she disciplined an employee about a forgery on a time sheet, the same thing her predecessor would have done. The employee then complained to top management about her style. She was aggressive and difficult to work with, the employee said. Other employees agreed.

 

One said they had expected she would bring a “woman’s touch” to her job but that she hadn’t. It didn’t occur to any of them that she was doing the same thing for which a man had been praised. I have another friend, also an American woman, who has a high-paying job in advertising. She is one of two women in her team. Once, at a meeting, she said she had felt slighted by her boss, who had ignored her comments and then praised something similar when it came from a man. She wanted to speak up, to challenge her boss. But she didn’t. Instead, after the meeting, she went to the bathroom and cried, then called me to vent about it. She didn’t want to speak up because she didn’t want to seem aggressive. She let her resentments simmer. What struck me—with her and with many other female American friends I have—is how invested they are in being “liked.” How they have been raised to believe that their being likable is very important and that this “likable” trait is a specific thing. And that specific thing does not include showing anger or being aggressive or disagreeing too loudly. “”””””

 

 

 

PROVE 1 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“””The sad truth of the matter is that when it comes to appearance, we start off with men as the standard, as the norm. Many of us think that the less feminine a woman appears, the more likely she is to be taken seriously. A man going to a business meeting doesn’t wonder about being taken seriously based on what he is wearing—but a woman does. ”””

 

PROVE 2 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“””” We teach girls shame. Close your legs. Cover yourself. We make them feel as though by being born female, they are already guilty of something. And so girls grow up to be women who cannot say they have desire. Who silence themselves. Who cannot say what they truly think. Who have turned pretence into an art form. “””””

 

PROVE 3 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the tenth Suggestion

“”””” Sadly, women have learned to be ashamed and apologetic about pursuits that are seen as traditionally female, such as fashion and make-up. But our society does not expect men to feel ashamed of pursuits considered generally male – sports cars, certain professional sports. In the same way, men’s grooming is never suspect in the way women’s grooming is – a well-dressed man does not worry that, because he is dressed well, certain assumptions might be made about his intelligence, his ability, or his seriousness. A woman, on the other hand, is always aware of how a bright lipstick or a carefully put-together outfit might very well make others assume her to be frivolous. “””””

 

 

PROVE 4 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“”””” I have chosen to no longer be apologetic for my femininity. And I want to be respected in all my femaleness. Because I deserve to be. I like politics and history and am happiest when having a good argument about ideas. I am girly. I am happily girly.

 

 I like high heels and trying on lipsticks. It’s nice to be complimented by both men and women (although I have to be honest and say that I prefer the compliments of stylish women), but I often wear clothes that men don’t like or don’t “understand.” I wear them because I like them and because I feel good in them. The “male gaze,” as a shaper of my life’s choices, is largely incidental. “””””

 

PROVE 5 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“”””  We teach girls that they cannot be sexual beings in the way boys are. If we have sons, we don’t mind knowing about their girlfriends. But our daughters’ boyfriends? God forbid. (But we of course expect them to bring home the perfect man for marriage when the time is right. “””””

 

PROVE 6 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the twelfth Suggestion

“”””” In every culture in the world, female sexuality is about shame. Even cultures that expect women to be sexy – like many in the West – still do not expect them to be sexual. The shame we attach to female sexuality is about control. Many cultures and religions control women’s bodies in one way or another. If the justification for controlling women’s bodies were about women themselves, then it would be understandable. If, for example, the reason was ‘women should not wear short skirts because they can get cancer if they do’.

 

Instead the reason is not about women, but about men. Women must be ‘covered up’ to protect men. I find this deeply dehumanizing because it reduces women to mere props used to manage the appetites of men. “””””

 

 

 

PROVE 7 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the Suggestion

“”””””“Teach her, too, to question the idea of women as a special species. I once heard an American politician, in his bid to show his support for women, speak of how women should be ‘revered’ and  ‘championed’ – a sentiment that is all too common. Tell Chizalum that women actually don’t need to be championed and revered; they just need to be treated as equal human beings. There is a patronizing undertone to the idea of women needing to be ‘championed and revered’ because they are women. It makes me think of chivalry, and the premise of chivalry is female weakness.     “”””””

 

 

PROVE 8 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the tenth Suggestion

‘’”” Be deliberate about how you engage with her and her appearance. Encourage her participation in sports. Teach her to be physically active. Take walks with her. Swim. Run. Play tennis. Football. Table tennis. All kinds of sports. Any kind of sports. I think this is important not only because of the obvious health benefits but because it can help with all the body-image insecurities that the world thrusts on girls. Let Chizalum know that there is great value in being active. Studies show that girls generally stop playing sports as puberty arrives. Not surprising. Breasts and self-consciousness can get in the way of sports – I stopped playing football when my breasts first appeared because all I wanted to do was hide the existence of my breasts, and running and tackling didn’t help. Please try not to let that get in her way. ‘’”””

 

PROVE 9 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the twelfth Suggestion

“””And speaking of shame – never, ever link sexuality and shame. Or nakedness and shame. Do not ever make ‘virginity’ a focus. Every conversation about virginity becomes a conversation about shame. Teach her to reject the linking of shame and female biology. Why were we raised to speak in low tones about periods? To be filled with shame if our menstrual blood happened to stain our skirt? Periods are nothing to be ashamed of. Periods are normal and natural, and the human species would not be here if periods did not exist. I remember a man who said a period was like shit. Well, sacred shit, I told him, because you wouldn’t be here if periods didn’t happen.”””

 

PROVE 10 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the tenth Suggestion

“”””” If she likes make-up, let her wear it. If she likes fashion, let her dress up. But if she doesn’t like either, let her be. Don’t think that raising her feminist means forcing her to reject femininity. Feminism and femininity are not mutually exclusive. It is misogynistic to suggest that they are. “”””

 

PROVE 11 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the tenth Suggestion

“””””” Never ever link Chizalum’s appearance with morality. Never tell her that a short skirt is ‘immoral’. Make dressing a question of taste and attractiveness instead of a question of morality. If you both clash over what she wants to wear, never say things like ‘You look like a prostitute’, as I know your mother once told you. Instead say: ‘That dress doesn’t flatter you like this other one.’ Or doesn’t fit as well. Or doesn’t look as attractive. Or is simply ugly. But never ‘immoral’. Because clothes have absolutely nothing to do with morality. “”””””

 

PROVE 12 (FROM INTERNET/SITE-SPEECH)

I will backed it up with a powerful statement made by FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE where she mentioned/talk on “””” culture and appearance “””

For further reading here is the link to convince you.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/karenhua/2016/10/21/the-cultural-importance-of-chimamanda-ngozi-adichies-boots-beauty-campaign/amp/

 

FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE says-

  1.  “””Our culture teaches us that to be taken seriously, women should not care too much about their appearance. So I stopped wearing makeup and became a false version of myself,”  “But then I woke up because makeup doesn’t actually mean anything. It’s about how I feel when I get it right—what makes me walk ever so taller. It’s about the face I choose to show the world and what I choose to say.”””

 

  1. In her Feminists TED Talk, she recalls preparing to teach a graduate class and thinking, “I was worried that if I looked too feminine, I would not be taken seriously. I really wanted to wear my shiny lip gloss and my girly skirt, but I decided not to. I wore a very serious, very manly, and very ugly suit… I have chosen to no longer be apologetic for my femininity. And I want to be respected in all my femaleness because I deserve to be.”

 

  1. Adichie told FORBES, “”“I love makeup and its possibilities for temporary transformation, but I also love my face after I wash it all off. (Makeup is) about what I like—what makes me feel slightly better on a dull day—what makes me comfortable.”””

 

 

PROVE 13 (FROM HER BOOK)

I will backed it up with a powerful statement made by FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE where she mentioned/talk on “””” culture and appearance “””

For further reading here is the link to convince you.

https://time.com/3921492/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-graduation-commencement-wellesley/

FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE says-

“”””” I’m truly, truly happy to be here today, so happy, in fact, that when I found out your class colour was yellow, I decided I would wear yellow eye shadow. But on second thoughts, I realized that as much as I admire Wellesley, even yellow eye-shadow was a bit too much of a gesture. So I dug out this yellow—yellowish—head wrap instead.

“It’s Heart breaking for us.” Syrian Students’ Struggle to Study in the U.S.

Speaking of eye shadow, I wasn’t very interested in makeup until I was in my twenties, which is when I began to wear makeup. Because of a man. A loud, unpleasant man. He was one of the guests at a friend’s dinner party. I was also a guest. I was about 23, but people often told me I looked 12. The conversation at dinner was about traditional Igbo culture, about the custom that allows only men to break the kola nut, and the kola nut is a deeply symbolic part of Igbo cosmology.

I argued that it would be better if that honour were based on achievement rather than gender, and he looked at me and said, dismissively, “You don’t know what you are talking about, you’re a small girl.”

I wanted him to disagree with the substance of my argument, but by looking at me, young and female, it was easy for him to dismiss what I said. So I decided to try to look older.

So I thought lipstick might help. And eyeliner.And I am grateful to that man because I have since come to love makeup, and its wonderful possibilities for temporary transformation.

So, I have not told you this anecdote as a way to illustrate my discovery of gender injustice. If anything,

 

 

PROVE 14 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” WE SHOULD ALL BE FEMINIST “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

“””” When women say “I did it for peace in my marriage,” it is usually because they have given up a job, a career goal, a dream. We teach females that in relationships, compromise is what a woman is more likely to do. We raise girls to see each other as competitors—not for jobs or accomplishments, which in my opinion can be a good thing—but for the attention of men. “”””

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

POINT 3

Motherhood

What a man feels for a maiden, a truly feminine girl, and what he feels for a mother, a truly feminine mother, are two quite different things. He worships the maiden; he admires and venerates the mother, all the more so if that truly feminine mother is his own mother. The maiden is full of romantic promise – though in his heart he should realize that she will never fully live up to all those idealized expectations. But the mother is an achiever. She has done it! Her credentials are there – he is one of them. She is the real heroine.

But who today really considers motherhood admirable? I think most men do – even if they so often seem content to be poor fathers. The tragedy is that many women, and I would go so far as to suggest that it is a sizeable majority, do not.

The radical feminism that has so expropriated a noble cause has turned women away from motherhood, has convinced them that it is no more than a woman’s burden, an unjust burden of nature. For them, it is not only a woman’s right to put professional achievement first in her priorities of fulfillment; it is even her duty. She owes it to herself. In fact she owes it to the rest of women, to the whole of society… So – marriage…? Perhaps – after having had time to enjoy oneself. And children? Well, maybe one or two – because they so limit one’s freedom. Besides, the woman is still expected to be their main care-taker. A woman is always under such a handicap.

By its very structure the body of woman shows that it is made to open, to be visited, to be made fruitful, and that only in this way can it achieve its natural fulfillment as a human feminine body: to receive and give love and life. Does this mean, then, that, as is often said, biology is destiny? It is certainly a pointer to personal identity, which includes sexual identity. If we reject nature, we have no clue left to our human identity. We are drifters, unidentified and unidentifiedly lost, ready to be swept away in the debris of a disintegrating humanity.

How is it that young girls are not taught to wonder at their unique life-giving potential, and so want proudly to keep themselves, so as one day to fulfill that potential? Probably, almost certainly, they will not relearn that wonder until we return to the situation where the normal wife and mother once more proudly rejoices in her role as the privileged bearer and nurturer of life?

Fear of pregnancy? Understandable. No one chooses pain for its own sake. But we do choose a painful operation to save our own lives. A soldier can give his life to save his country. Soldiers used to be regarded as heroes. Now we don’t believe too much in military heroism. Even just causes are greeted with skepticism. There seems to be nothing worth giving oneself to. The ultimate surrender of values is when suppressing new life is regarded as a proper right, and giving new life as an unfair burden.

It seems well here to quote two prominent twentieth-century figures in the study of sex, who can hardly be accused of retrograde religious bias. The first, the British physician and psychologist, Havelock Ellis (1859-1939), stressed that “the mother is the child’s supreme parent”; adding, “In the great ages of humanity [this] has indeed been accepted as a central and sacred fact”. He goes on: “In England, by a curiously perverted form of sexual attraction, women were so fascinated by the glamour that surrounded men that they desired to suppress or forget all the facts of organic constitution which made them unlike men, counting their glory as their shame, and sought the same education as men, the same occupations as men” [3]  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A PERSONAL REFUTATION AGAINST POINT 3

Feminism obviously has a lot to do with examining gender roles, and women are under constant judgement for their decisions. Whether they are right or wrong about their ideas someone always has something negative to say about it, including misinformed feminists sometimes (like the writer of these article that said Feminism v. Femininity: the Threat to Woman’s Identity)

 Most of my female friends (and many of my male friends) would self-identify as feminists. There is no contradiction there.

Questioning the idea of one about motherhood can be in two forms

  1. Individual choice
  2. societal influence

 

  1. INDIVIDUAL CHOICE

Feminism generally pushes for equal opportunities. It does not demand that a woman has to a mother. I personally think it is individual choice to be a mother.  

 

Another absurd statement she made was about:

———-Fear of pregnancy? Understandable. No one chooses pain for its own sake. But we do choose a painful operation to save our own lives. A soldier can give his life to save his country. Soldiers used to be regarded as heroes. Now we don’t believe too much in military heroism. Even just causes are greeted with skepticism. There seems to be nothing worth giving oneself to. The ultimate surrender of values is when suppressing new life is regarded as a proper right, and giving new life as an unfair burden. ——–

 

Bringing life to the world is a choice to any women, if she decide to be a mother or not is her individual choice. With that being said, you can be a feminist and still practise the idea of motherhood because it’s a movement. Radical feminist was stating their opinion about motherhood in relation to childbearing and childcare.

As long as you’re aware of your privilege and your marginalization and you advocate for oppression on many levels to end, you can be a damn good feminist regardless of what path you’ve chosen in life as a mother or not. If you are self-identify as a feminist, you almost certainly believe that women shouldn’t be forced but instead given choice to decide whether to be a mother.

Motherhood in relation to childcare, childbearing and pregnancy is not a threat to women identity.

 

 

  1. SOCIETAL INFLUENCE

You also probably believe that society influences women to the idea of motherhood like  stay at home in various ways—e.g., signaling that childcare is for women, offering better maternal leave than paternal leave, etc. This is all about societal influence.

A woman can believe all this and still say: Given the actual real situation of my life, they choose to follow it or not. The “why” and “how” of her life situation is still based on individual choices. But it doesn’t really matter when it comes to what makes sense for her. This is about individual choice which is more powerful than societal influences.

There is nothing like feminism attached to sit about that decision. It’s just about individual choice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

PROVE 1 (FROM HER BOOK)

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the first Suggestion

“”””” Be a full person. Motherhood is a glorious gift, but do not define yourself solely by motherhood. Be a full person. Your child will benefit from that.

 

It doesn’t surprise me that your sister-in-law says you should be a ‘traditional’ mother and stay home, that Chudi can afford not to have a double-income family. People will selectively use ‘tradition’ to justify anything. Tell her that a double-income family is actually the true Igbo tradition because not only did mothers farm and trade before British colonialism, trading was exclusively done by women in some parts of Igboland. She would know this if reading books were not such an alien enterprise to her. Everybody will have an opinion about what you should do, but what matters is what you want for yourself, and not what others want you to want. Please reject the idea that motherhood and work are mutually exclusive.

 

Our mothers worked full-time while we were growing up, and we turned out well – at least you did; the jury is still out on me. In these coming weeks of early motherhood, be kind to yourself. Ask for help. Expect to be helped. There is no such thing as a Superwoman. Parenting is about practice – and love. (I do wish, though, that ‘parent’ had not been turned into a verb, which I think is the root of the global middle-class phenomenon of ‘parenting’ as one endless, anxious journey of guilt.) Give yourself room to fail. A new mother does not necessarily know how to calm a crying baby. Don’t assume that you should know everything.

 

Read books, look things up on the Internet, ask older parents, or just use trial and error. But above all, let your focus be on remaining a full person. Take time for yourself. Nurture your own needs. I have no interest in the debate about women ‘doing it all’ because it is a debate that assumes that care-giving and domestic work are singularly female domains, an idea that I strongly reject. Domestic work and care-giving should be gender-neutral, and we should be asking not whether a woman can ‘do it all’ but how best to support parents in their dual duties at work and at home.   “””””

 

PROVE 2 (FROM SITE/ INTERVIEWS)

I will backed it up with a powerful statement made by FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE where she mentioned/talk on “””” motherhood and feminism “””

For further reading here is the link to convince you.

https://time.com/4443256/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-motherhood-feminism/?amp=true

FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE says-

“I still look at [my daughter] in absolute wonder and I think ‘You’re really here and you’re really mine,’”

“She really is the most beautiful human being in the world.”

“Feminism is not a cloak that I put on on certain days and take off on certain days,” she responded. “I did not get the memo that says men and women are not equal. Being a mother, sister, daughter is not mutually exclusive.”

 

 

 

 

PROVE 3 (FROM SITE/ INTERVIEWS)

I will backed it up with a powerful statement made by FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE where she mentioned/talk on “””” motherhood and pregnancy “””

 

Here she was asked about her pregnancy status and as a mother

For further reading here is the link to convince you.

https://brittlepaper.com/2016/07/performing-pregnancy-chimamanda-adichie-explains-silence-pregnancy/

 

As Adichie explains to David Pilling who runs the famous Lunch with FT series, she is not into making pregnancy into a public spectacle.

 

FEMINIST/WRITER/ CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE says-

 ““I just feel like we live in an age when women are supposed to perform pregnancy. I went into hiding, I wanted it to be as personal as possible.””

 

Here is the full quote from Pilling’s account of his conversation with Adichie:

“””” Our drinks appear. Drostdy-Hof turns out to be a mouth-puckering South African chardonnay. The color of her Chapman matches her shoes. “This is just very sugary, very sweet. I would probably have a glass of wine, but I’m breastfeeding, I’m happy to announce.”

It takes me a moment to process. Adichie, 38, is famously protective of her private life. I had no idea she had a baby. Is this my world scoop? I ask. “This is the first time I’m saying it publicly. I have a lovely little girl so I feel like I haven’t slept … but it’s also just really lovely and strange.” Her voice has a wonderfully rich timbre. When she says “lovely” — soft and round as a peach — it feels like a gift.

“I have some friends who probably don’t know I was pregnant or that I had a baby. I just feel like we live in an age when women are supposed to perform pregnancy. We don’t expect fathers to perform fatherhood. I went into hiding. I wanted it to be as personal as possible.

“In this country of mine that I love,” she goes on, sliding to a halt on the word “love”, “people think that you’re incomplete unless you’re married.” Her husband, also a bit of a secret, is a Nigerian doctor who works in the US, where Adichie spends time when she’s not in Lagos. Can I ask the baby’s name? “No, I won’t say,” she says with a disarming smile. “”””

 

 

 

 

 

CONCLUSION

To sum things up, radical feminist are not to be blame for

  • disdain for virginity,
  • disregard for modesty,
  • provocative fashion,
  • rejection of the ideal of being a home-builder,
  • loss of appreciation and reverence for the mystery of motherhood,
  • unhappy state of womankind,
  • denaturalized situation which inevitably results in robbing women of their deepest human dignity,
  • isolation of women from men and from each other,
  • Leaving women in immersed in aggrievances, frustration, self-pity and loneliness?

 

Which is stated in her article as seen below-

“””” So, to sum up and conclude… On the one hand, disdain for virginity, disregard for modesty, provocative fashion. On the other, rejection of the ideal of being a home-builder, loss of appreciation and reverence for the mystery of motherhood…

Who is to blame for this unhappy state of womankind, which is pervasive in the West and is being unrelentingly imposed from the West on emerging countries? Who is to blame for this denaturalized situation which inevitably results in robbing women of their deepest human dignity, isolating them from men and from each other, leaving them more and more immersed in aggrievances, frustration, self-pity and loneliness?

 

The writer should get these to her head-

According to a popular literature book “”” DEAR IJEAWELE OR A FEMINIST MANIFESTO IN FIFTEEN SUGGESTIONS   “””

 FEMINIST Adichie Chimanmanda Ngozi she says in her book:

From the sixth Suggestion

“”””” Teach her that if you criticize X in women but do not criticize X in men, then you do not have a problem with X, you have a problem with women. For X please insert words like anger, ambition, loudness, stubbornness, coldness, ruthlessness. Teach her to ask questions like: what are the things that women cannot do because they are women? Do these things have cultural prestige? If so, why are only men allowed to do the things that have cultural prestige? “””””

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.