the k.i.s.s. principle

Feminism is like EasyMac.

It’s plain and simple, and just really damn good. It needs no embellishments, and this is coming from a firm supporter of Sriracha. They’re entirely unnecessary and are merely a way of exaggerating. The embellished becomes overpowered by riffraff–the actual, beautiful and simple meaning gets lost among it.

Feminism is defined as equal rights for men and women on social, political, and economic grounds.

Rather than emphasizing a point, painting it with the tacked-on personas of “radical” and “die-hard” hypes it up completely. It is a loaded gun the average person is too afraid to touch for fear that it will explode.

Simply being a feminist is all we really need to center our focus upon. Its meaning is not given any more power with added adjectives. It cuts zero corners and is a strike straight through the target of inequality.

There! That’s all it is: equality for humankind.

The problem with peppering such a word with titles as “radical”, “die-hard”, “hardcore”, “kinda-sorta”, and the like is that it creates an other. This is a little counterproductive, as alone, it stands for equality–it does not affirm reification.

The loading of the word “feminist” causes this divide in people who claim to be feminists and those who don’t. It’s one thing to be a “something”, but it’s another to be a “hardcore something”.

Being a [insert loading adjective here] feminist, as aforementioned, causes the creation of an “other”, and also tiers. Essentially, it causes those who consider themselves to be “hardcore” feminists to seem as a step above those who simply call themselves “feminists”, when in reality, there is really no discrepancy between the two.

It all comes down to a matter of choice: people perform gender in their own ways. To avoid judgment, the goal is to make not only the foreign familiar, but also the familiar foreign. We may not agree with the way someone does feminism, but at the end of the day, they’re doing feminism in their own way. They’re being an individual, and are embracing that very freedom to be an individual.

Often times, ideologies are most powerful when they are at their core, devoid of embellishments and personas that create them into a reified competition in which the relationship between the like and the unlike is uneven. When the idea of feminism becomes an exclusive realm, that is not equality. Its meaning is devalued, as well as its effectiveness.

Equality is simple. It respects humankind and puts the ego on the back burner–the ego that causes the segregation of individuals from each other. It is a mutual, all-inclusive realm. Creating tiers of feminism creates exclusion, and exclusion contradicts the very fiber of its meaning.

All in all, messing around with feminism is like messing around with EasyMac: you don’t f*ck with EasyMac. Keep it simple, Stupid.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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