Response to "There Is No Longer A Need For Feminism In America"

In an Odyssey article from 2016, the author argues that feminism is not needed in America. For my response to it, I am not going to argue for or against feminism and instead am going to try refute several of author's points. Before anybody continues reading this response though, I recommend reading the article first, which I have linked right below below. At any rate, below that are the refutations.

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/no-need-for-feminism-in-america

"I am decidedly not a feminist. To expand on this, I will point to the Bible. I know that some readers will not accept the Bible as a legitimate source but, nevertheless, it is my main reason for not classifying myself as a feminist. In the beginning of Genesis 2 God created Adam. Man. He breathed life into dirt and this created the first human. A human who had physical abilities, intellect and emotions. After this creation, God created Eve — a woman — from Adam. This woman was meant to mother Adam’s children. This woman also possesses intellect, physical abilities and emotions, just like her male counterpart does. But God did not create them to be the same, He gave them both very different natural abilities."

This interpretation of the Bible might or might not be correct, but since there are people who do not believe in God and people who have different interpretations of this part of the Bible, it is not a good argument to use. It alone is not likely to convince a large enough portion of the general public. Furthermore, feminism does not claim that men and women are exactly the same in every way. Feminism is about advocating for men and women to be given equal opportunities and rights by the law and by society. That is not the same as saying that men and women are the same.

"There should be no confusion on how families and marriages are meant to be structured. God lays it all out for us in many different places."

Here, she basically uses the same "because God said so argument" and then goes on to quote a lengthy Bible verse to support her argument. The problem with this one and several other arguments she makes is basically the same as the main problem with the previous one, which is that different people believe different things about God's existence and such, so this is not an argument that is likely to convince a large enough portion of people.

"The current movement of third-wave feminism is one that stems from hatred and it's a group of extremists. Acts like 'SlutWalk' and 'free bleeding' are not acts of freedom, their acts of self-righteousness and they aren't good ways to honor your body. And the "I drink male tears" T-shirts are not a cute look. They make it seem as though you lack empowerment, respect and intelligence, even if the goal is just humor."

The burden of proof is on the author to show that third-wave feminism stems from hatred and extremism. She gives what appear to be meant as examples of such, but she does not provide any information on the percentage of third-wave feminists who do those things, nor does she explain what is hateful or extremist about doing them. Plus, this is a criticism of a specific sect of feminism. So even if she was right that those things are hateful and extreme, she did not give any information confirming those things to be representative of feminists in general.

"Feminists, when I say I’m not a feminist, try to not be so condescending. Don’t shake your fist at me, or try to argue about how I could possibly not be a feminist and how maybe I don't understand what feminism means, because I understand and I hear you loud and clear. I don’t think we should be equal, I think we were made to live for God in very different ways. Please try to understand, that my belief in not being a feminist is my own, and not every Christian feels the same way as me, and understand that you don't need to try to convert me, because our goals in life are different."

It is not entirely clear to me here what the author means by "I don't think we should be equal." Is she saying that women should not have the same legal rights as men, or is she simply saying that she does not believe women and men were created equally? If she means the first of those things, then her belief in not being a feminist is not simply her own. On the other hand, if she only means the second one, then that belief is simply her own, whether we agree with it or not. Also, most feminists probably would not be particularly interested in trying to convert her if her belief is indeed merely her personal belief.

Overall, this Odyssey article is unconvincing as it relies heavily on "because god says so" arguments and it does not go into detail on what percentage of feminists are extremist and hateful or the ways in which the tactics of the people she describes that way are extreme or hateful. I think the article would be much more likely to convince a larger portion of people, kept the "because God says so" arguments to a minimum. The author did note though that The Bible is the main reason she opposes feminism, so it is possible she simply does not have that many arguments against feminism other than that one. Even so, she still would need to come up with other arguments, if her goal is to convince the general that feminism is not needed and/or bad.