New Journal

Wednesday, August 31, 2006

This is an entry from my Journal for my "Women in Media class." In it I talk about my experiences in India, so I thought it would be interesting for some to read also, so for those who care...here ya go :)

Dear Journal,

One of my favorite quotes goes: “Feminism is the radical idea that women are people.”
I think this quote is interesting, because not only is it sarcastically hinting at the fact that yes, OBVIOUSLY women are people, but it is also undermining the radical characteristic, which is often associated with feminism. Many people however, do not realize that there have been many different theories, movements and moral philosophies associated with the term “feminism.”

I guess I have never really considered myself a “feminist” even though I am concerned with the issues that most feminists are often concerned with. I think that because I was raised in a very liberal environment (in Europe) and I was always taught to have an open-mind and be accepting of differences, I have always assumed that addressing these issues cannot be that difficult. After all, in my mind there was no doubt that I as a woman could do anything I want and that my political, social and economic rights and opportunities were equal to those of men. And maybe they were, but for a long time I did not fully understand that this is not the case for so many other women in the world.
I first fully comprehended the gravity of this issue when I went to India this summer and saw the inequalities first hand. I met many women that have no means and not enough strength to fight the oppression but I also met the few strong women who can call themselves “feminists” and I have to say, I was truly inspired by them and their strength.

If I had to identify myself with a certain “branch” of feminism, I would probably describe myself as a “liberal feminist.” I do believe that it is important to achieve equality through legal means (which I understand can be very problematic) and by changing the current political system. However, I would focus more on the people themselves. Simply enforcing laws cannot change people, because if the traditions and values of the specific culture do not correspond with the laws, they will not be successful. If one wants to truly change a society one has to start at the bottom and not with the laws. This is one more thing I learnt from my trip to India.

India has a huge population control problem, in fact, it was the second country after China to reach the one billion mark, and for India this is an alarming number, considering that the country is only a third of the size of the United States. According to Wikipedia.com India “is the seventh-largest country by geographical area [and] the second most populous country.” So which factors have caused India’s previous efforts in trying to find a solution to the problem of overpopulation to fail? Like I said, I believe that this has to do with the social and cultural factor. Implementing laws that will lower the birth rate cannot be successful, when social factors, like the importance for a woman to get pregnant within the first year of marriage to prove her fertility, do not change. The problem is that many of the goals and assumptions of their national population control programs do not correspond exactly with local attitudes toward birth control. In my opinion, policies will only prove effective if they are just and aimed at improving the well being of all people. Laws and policies implemented by the government can only prove successful if they are understood and accepted by the people. In other words, when trying to change the habits of a people, it is important to start at the lowest level possible, with the people, not the laws. I believe that changes in attitudes and traditional ways of thinking can only be achieved if they come from within. By saying this I mean that it is important to give people the information and education they need to understand the issue and then let them form their own opinions and give them the chance to come up with possible resolutions.


Change also requires strong and independent people, and if these people happen to be women, most likely they would be labeled negatively, or in other words, they would be labeled “feminists.” There is another quote by Rebecca West that goes: “I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat, or a prostitute.” In my opinion this negative connotation should differentiate between the different branches of feminism. For example, I find that the “radical feminist” just like the religious extremist would be more likely to go too far and use the wrong means to achieve their goal, while the “liberal feminist” would try to work within the system and the laws. Just like with anything else, religion, politics, sexual orientation, family values, I think it is SO IMPORTANT to keep an open mind. I think it is good and important to support and fight for what you believe in, but too many people cannot accept differences, especially when it comes to personal issues like the ones mentioned above, and that’s when things become problematic. I think suicide bombers probably have some good causes, they believe in their god and want only the best for themselves and their families, however, they cannot accept that some people are different, and do not believe in their god. Too many wars and conflicts arise, because people do not understand that being different should not be something negative but should simply be accepted for being different, not better or worse. People are often afraid of change and things that are “different” and as a result they often cling to outdated traditions and value systems, even though the world around them, which is changing so quickly, does not match those value systems anymore.

As far as the Media effects Theory goes, I definitely believe in the Smart Public Theory. I believe that if one stays informed and uses his or her own judgment, one cannot be manipulated (or at least not as easily) and make logical decisions. I don’t think that people in general are stupid and can be manipulated (dumb public theory) but I believe one has to make an effort and stay informed in order to recognize that people are trying to manipulate us (advertising for example). I definitely believe that humans are critical and radical and absolutely capable of critiquing and criticizing. I guess this is what is defined as “media literacy;” the ability to access, analyze, evaluate and use media. Again, one has to understand that media teaches us, but we have to be smart and be aware of how it works and that there can be biases and misunderstandings. After all, media constructs reality and that is exactly how we have to understand it – a constructed reality.