In a recent column for this site, Tuval Dinner asked men to discuss what feminism has done for us.  A few things came to mind when I read his piece and thought about his call.  First, during an acceptance speech for an International Freedom Award by the National Civil Rights Museum, the Dalai Lama noted that he calls himself a feminist: “Isn’t that what you call someone who fights for women’s rights?”

Second, my students and I read the book Still Failing at Fairness (2009) during an educational foundations course that I am teaching.  To wrap up our discussion, I asked them, 16 out of 17 being women, what is feminism and what might a pro-feminist classroom look like or sound like?  Granted, it was the end of our roughly three-hour seminar, so you can imagine how surly and uninterested sophomores and juniors get at that point.  But there was very little passion for the word from the group as a whole and I found myself being feminism’s most vociferous advocate.

Thought three came from a recent conversation I had with an education colleague and the chair of our Women’s Studies department.  Based on our interests in gender studies, my colleague and I sought to forge linkages between Education and Women’s Studies through some cross-listed courses or joint research projects.  The conversation shifted at one point to the department’s purposeful adherence to the title women’s studies and the debate in the larger academic community about the shift to gender studies.

Having entered the study of gender and sexuality through masculinity, and that my previous university adopted the term gender studies, I wondered aloud why the preference for women’s studies.  I was told by the chair, a woman, and my education colleague, a man, that many in the traditional women’s studies community feel that the change to gender studies welcomes attempts by some to reassert masculine privilege via the study of masculinity.  That is, a room of one’s own for men’s rights folks in academia.

I’ve read at some point within the volumes of stuff gathered over the years that some feminists are suspicious of men who would challenge their own entitlements to fight for women’s rights.  What is it about men who seem willing to relinquish their so-called birthright on behalf of gender equity?  Are they just there to meet chicks, so to speak?

As an educated and sometimes reasonable person, I understand what feminism does and consider my practices and myself pro-feminist.  However, the inability for some to relate to feminism and the loyalty to what I see as the out-dated term women’s studies reveals suspicion within camps that largely agree on equity, equality, inclusivity, and legitimacy regardless of one’s gendered identity and sexual orientation, for instance.  Not that the struggle for women’s rights here in the US and abroad is over, yet is it time to consider a more inclusive term than feminism?  Although it may be erroneous, do people, especially pro-feminist men, not feel welcome in the struggles for equity and anti-violence, for instance, because of the continued attacks on feminism?  It is possible that the word is becoming too loaded to be useful in rallying support from disparate groups.  I welcome any and all alternatives to be suggested and look forward to hearing about them.