Join the March! "Equal Enough" Isn't Equal at All

5 years ago

Women need to be recognized as full citizens -- and, yes, I am talking about women in the U.S. "Equal enough" isn't equal at all. If you agree, you're not alone. Tomorrow, Saturday, April 28th, thousands of women and men will participate in 53 marches and rallies for women's rights in 45 states and the District of Columbia.

These events are part of UNITEWOMEN.ORG, a movement against the "war on women."

Image via UniteWomen.

In truth, I don't care what the sustained legislative assault on women's rights by the Republican party is called. Nor do I care for the Unitewomen moniker, because while I'm happy for anything that offsets a cultural preference to portray women as enemies, I believe that men and women who understand the importance and benefits of equality must work together. However, I agree wholeheartedly with Unitedwomen's goals and intent.


Because women's and girls' fundamental rights, to privacy, to life, to bodily integrity, to chose when to plan their reproduction are being violated.

Because women can't afford to nor should be forced to live their lives according to rules that assume they are dependent on men.

Because women and girls should not be punished, denigrated and publicly humiliated for speaking civilly and intelligently in their own interest or making their own choices.

Because boys and girls should be taught what equality, not entitlement, means.


Without fail, when I talk to people about gender inequality in the United States, someone inevitably says some variation of this: "Compared to other women, women here are equal enough."

First of all, women are not in competition with other women for safety from violence and freedom. Second, this type of comparison, with its echo of threat, is an unacceptable and irrelevant framework for considering citizenship and protection under the law. Women are citizens and should have the full rights and privileges of citizens.

We should. But we don't.


If you are uncertain about what I am saying and think I am exaggerating the harm, consider the effect of one distillation of events: the degree to which the conservative "political" agenda requires that all women, regardless of color, faith, economic status or sexual preference, seek men's review and approval before acting. (Those factors, race, economic status, sexual preference magnify the effect.)

What else are things such as "informed consent," "permission slips" if not that? How else should we regard wage policies that are determined because "money may be more important to men," this business with "man-up finances," the fact that women's health care is being determined by all-male religious leaders and congressional panels, or the general refusal to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act because of homophobia (and racism)?

It goes on and on and on. Every time, the baseline requirement for women to exercise their rights and live freely is the intervention and approval of men. This is not just unfair to girls and women, but imposes unreasonable responsibilities and pressures on boys and men.

Even the phrasing of hot button issues -- "Mommy Wars" and "Slutgate" -- are coded conversations that define women, their health, their choices and their incomes primarily in terms of their relationships to men.

Those frameworks are unacceptable. These attempts to legislate the subordination of women are not just distasteful and embarrassing but designed ultimately to humiliate women and keep them in their place.


I do not hate men. I hate inequality and oppression. This is about men and women being mutually central as humans and, together, fighting systematized biases against girls' and women's full engagement with the world.

All over the world women seek equality. Men and women who understand this fight against everything from subtle, cultural sexism to extreme and violent gendered oppression. Here, in the U.S., many people really do think women are "equal enough." I am told we should "consider ourselves lucky."

But I am not going to compare oppression. Nor am I in any way dismissing the dehumanizing and life-crushing hatred that women face in too many places on the planet. But, because others are violently deprived of rights and life does not mean that we should be content with circumscribed rights and lives.

Women should not have to be thankful for hard-won rights, be penalized for seeking to live better lives or have to settle for "enough" when it comes to equality. In theory, we are citizens with full rights.

Republicans would have you believe that the word "war" is not a valid way to describe the assault on women's rights represented by the hundreds of bills (916 since January 2012 alone) and laws they've pursued or enacted during the past two years.

This attitude is unsurprising. What is surprising to me however, is the degree to which these assaults reveal the Republican abandonment, when it comes to women, of three core beliefs of their own party, namely:

Our country was founded on the fundamental principle that individuals have rights and freedoms

Government intervention into the lives of private citizens should be limited

Traditional values and freedoms of the American Republic should be reaffirmed

Either they are betraying their belief in, for example, individual rights and limited government or they are demonstrating that they don't believe women are genuinely included in the definition of individual citizens with full rights and privileges. Time and again, women and their rights are made marginal and secondary to almost everything else and debated away as a matter of expedience.

You should march because this is unacceptable.

It is evident that conservatives do not believe women can be trusted to think for themselves and make their own decisions -- whether this is about when to become parents, their money, their faith, or anything else. Instead, in almost every sphere of life, their agenda is designed to keep women dependent on the good graces of men and competing for the resources that men have traditionally provided and keep them vulnerable in the process.

That belief seems largely derived from Complementarianism, a worldview of gender roles as different but complementary, in which there are requirements made of men (as heads of households and public life) and restrictions placed on women, who are essentially limited to childrearing. It is one thing for people to chose this model privately, but it should not be enshrined in law, imposed on everyone and enforced judicially and legislatively to undermine equality and freedom. Yet, like a slow moving train wreck, that's what is happening.

As I've said, it isn't about individual men and their relative goodness. It's about systematized bias, gender hierarchies and how power, responsibilities and rights are distributed. And, also for the record, before anti-feminist trolls come out of the commenting woodwork, I believe women should fight in combat in military wars. And, yes, I know, these systems are supported by both men and women. That's how Complementarianism works. It's a primary vector for ambivalent and paternalistic sexism's cultural sanction and enforcement by women.

The writer Erin Solaro put it this way in a commentary on women and war and freedom:

At the core of citizenship is the idea that the citizen's body is hers and hers alone, regardless of sexual history, marital status or childbearing... The full citizenship of women is not just about the right to hold credit cards, buy real estate in our own names, have access to abortion and birth control and lead openly lesbian lives in which marriages and adoptions are legally recognized. These things are important in themselves -- terribly so, to the point of sometimes being matters of life and death -- but what they represent is vastly more important. They are part of a woman's citizenship and freedom, the right of a woman to fully inhabit her own life and participate fully in the life of the polity (in this case the American Republic) as a public and private equal.

You should march because women have yet to be recognized as full citizens, with agency in both the private and public spheres.

Soraya Chemaly writes about feminism, gender issues, politics and culture. She has written for The Feminist Wire, BitchFlicks and Fem2.0 among others and has a regular column at The Huffington Post. Follow her on Twitter at @schemaly.

This is an article written by one of the incredible members of the SheKnows Community. The SheKnows editorial team has not edited, vetted or endorsed the content of this post. Want to join our amazing community and share your own story? Sign up here.

More from living

by Kimberly Peta Dewhirst
| 7 days ago
by Lynne Curry
| 10 days ago
by Lynne Curry
| 11 days ago
by Kimberly Peta Dewhirst
| 14 days ago
by Hannah Hickok
| 17 days ago
by Kate Crocco
| 19 days ago