Feminist or "Feminazi", I wear the title proudly

It was great to have the opportunity to not only study some of the political aspects of Feminism through the works of great Feminist writers (again, in a class on Political Ideologies), but to be able to interject my own voice and meld my opinions with those of some of the pioneers of the Feminist movement...

Q: Marilyn Frye, in her article on Oppression, argues that women are oppressed in our society, living in a kind of cage constructed of societal rules and norms. Explain what Marilyn Frye means by oppression. Elizabeth Cady Stanton sets forth a Declaration of the Rights of Women that declares the independence of women from societal norms of the mid-1800’s. What societal norms are women still caged by? Does Frye’s concept of oppression apply to people of color, to gays, and to men? If so, how? If not, why not?

A: The various women’s movements in recent history have yielded many successes, such as bringing about women’s right to vote, women’s right to own property, women’s ability to enter the workforce on greater and more varied levels, women’s right to choose, as well as many other relatively new gains in rights and opportunities. Despite these steps toward women’s equality, women still experience a “less-than” gender status in a society which was created by men and which favors men. The only way to truly break through the barriers imposed by society is to acknowledge and do away with the oppression that creates these barriers to begin with.

According to Marilyn Frye in her essay “Oppression”, the word “oppress” is rooted in the word “press.” The point of “pressing” is to “mold things or flatten them or reduce them in bulk, sometimes to reduce them (Frye, “Oppression”, p. 373)”. This definition can also be used, in a less literal sense, to describe oppression of human beings—oppression restrains, immobilizes, reduces, and molds people according to society’s idea of what human beings should act like, look like, do, and be. Oppressed groups, like pressed objects, are “caught between or among forces and barriers which are so related to each other that jointly they restrain, restrict or prevent… motion or mobility (Frye, “Oppression”, p. 373).” As an oppressed group, women are given few options to choose from, and all options “expose one to penalty, censure or deprivation… one can only choose to risk one’s preferred form of annihilation (Frye, “Oppression”, p. 373).”

The cage metaphor that Frye uses to describe the effects and the perception of oppression is very effective in that it points out that oppression is not a one-issue problem, but an entire construct that works together as a whole, using many different avenues, to keep women from breaking out of the roles society has woven for them. Those who cannot see oppression as the multi-faceted issue it is resemble (in thought) those who stand too close to the cage and can only perceive one wire, leaving them to believe that it would be simple enough for a bird to fly around it. Both groups need only to step back a bit and view the bigger picture to realize that the single issue or single wire they were focusing on is only one of many, and that the parts interweave to create a system of barriers which work together so as not to allow escape (Frye, “Oppression”, p. 374).

During Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s time, during the mid- to late-1800’s, the cage of oppression certainly was rife with a greater number of wires than there exist today. A century and a half ago, women did not have the right to vote, the right to property after marriage, the right to choose employment (a great deal more restrictive than the current situation, at least), the right to most higher education, the right to minister, and the list goes on (Stanton, “Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions”, pp. 369, 370). Though the norms of society may have been quite a bit more restrictive in 1848, they certainly did not disappear as specific rights were gradually granted to women. For instance, women are still limited in job opportunities, in that the “service sector of the wives/mommas/assistants/girls is almost exclusively a woman-only sector; its boundaries not only enclose women but to a very great extent keep men out (Frye, “Oppression”, p. 378). The expectation for women to occupy “service” positions, however, is not limited to the workplace—women are expected and pressured to fill roles of service in all avenues of their lives, specifically roles involving the service of men. These avenues include, but are not limited to,

…personal service (the work of maids, butlers, cooks, personal secretaries), sexual service (including provision for his genital sexual needs and bearing his children, but also including “being nice,” being attractive for him,” etc.), and ego service (encouragement, support, praise, attention). (Frye, “Oppression”, p. 376)

Oppression can also take the forms of other societal expectations of women, often expectations which are contradictory and place women in catch-22 situations where no matter which choice they make, the reactions from some sectors of society will be negative. These situations include those of working outside the home or not, choosing to have children or not, being on welfare or not, having sex or not, marrying or not, and being heterosexual or not, among other things (Frye, “Oppression”, p. 374). Whichever choice a woman makes lifestyle-wise, she will be labeled negatively by some, and the labels will likely be based upon the conflicting expectations of women that oppression has ingrained into the fabric of society. The roles of “women, wives and mothers” (and I would also include “daughters” in this grouping) do not always compliment each other, as each comes with its own set of expectations, but each must exist together if these roles are to be taken on—once a wife becomes a mother, for example, she can’t do away with the expectations that come with being a wife in order to more thoroughly fulfill the expectations of being a mother, and if she does, she is looked down upon (Frye, “Oppression”, p. 374).

Women are not the only members of oppressed groups, however. People of color are also specifically mentioned in Fry’s “Oppression” essay as another group that is systematically oppressed within our society. They are another example of a group that is treated a certain way and burdened with certain expectations and roles for reasons based solely on the fact that they are members of a certain group and not because of their individual qualities. Frye states that “the ‘inhabitant’ of the ‘cage’ is not an individual but a group, all those of a certain category (Frye, “Oppression,” p. 376).” Whites, who dominate Western society, have created barriers in an obvious physical sense as well as in less tangible ways, an example of this being the creation of ghettos. People of color often times cannot get through the barriers that separate ghettos from white neighborhoods, barriers in the forms of wealth, jobs, and even the less specific barrier of prejudice and racist treatment, which would surely be faced outside the confines of the ghettos (Frye, “Oppression,” p. 378). There is a less extensive, less-specific reference to lesbians in “Oppression” when Frye discusses the labeling of women who do not engage in sexual activity with men. She refers to it as a negative label for women, which implies that non-heterosexuals are also an oppressed group, since labeling a person as a homosexual is meant to be degrading (Frye, “Oppression,” p. 374).

Men, specifically straight white men, are not included in the list of oppressed groups. It is white men who control society and the system of oppression it nurtures. Men are the oppressors—they have all of the power, and they are responsible for creating the systems that keep themselves in power. They therefore allow themselves to continue to wield power over women, over non-heterosexuals, and over people of color. It is to their advantage, after all. For example, in reference to complaints of “restriction” men sometimes voice regarding their inability to find jobs in the women-dominated service industries, Frye states
“that barrier is erected and maintained by men, for the benefit of men… that barrier is protecting his classification and status as a male, as superior, as having a right to sexual access to a female or females. It protects a kind of citizenship which is superior to that of females of his class and race, his access to a wider range of better paying and higher status work, and his right to prefer unemployment to the degradation of doing lower status or “women’s” work (Frye, “Oppression,” p. 378).”

The cage of oppression still holds strong within our society. The little steps women and all oppressed groups have taken to overcome pieces of oppression that construct the cage certainly help living conditions, but equality cannot yet be claimed to have been achieved until the cage is no more. In order to take it apart, however, the majority of society—or at least the ones wielding the power to create massive social change—must first see oppression for what it is, notice where it comes from, have the desire to dismantle it, and sway the rest of society to adopt the anti-cage way of thinking. Most people, unfortunately, do not see the cage, even including those trapped inside of it. This issue is exactly the reason that feminist writers such as Marilyn Frye and Elizabeth Cady Stanton should have their works read and studied by many—to raise awareness of social conditions that many do not recognize the existence of, but that so very many feel the effects of. Only then will all have a chance to be truly equal.