For the longest time, I operated under the assumption that the most admirable of scholarly states on any issue was that of the "moderate." I, like many, succumbed to the idea that every ideology had its "radicals," and that these radicals were to be denounced, and that the moderates had a responsibility to come out and fight the words of the loudest in their movement. I, like many, believed that I was a moderate on many issues. However, it is anecdotally that I can easily prove the impracticality of this widespread idea.
Imagine you have a friend—no, an acquaintance—with whom you must acquaint yourself for academic or work-related reasons, and thus you have little reason to associate with them on a level at which you'd discuss politics. But imagine that one day this acquaintance invited you to get drinks with them. While you're at some decrepit, dark bar in the wrong part of town, this acquaintance boldly proclaims, "I hate black people…moderately." Would you respect their racism anymore than if they had simply said, "I hate black people"? I would hope not. Say, instead, they said, "I moderately believe that homosexuals should be stoned," or, "I moderately believe that women are inhuman." Do you still truly think that their beliefs are permissible? Moreover, say that this acquaintance was being sarcastic the whole time, in which case they've ridden themselves of your disdain. However, on an honest note, they say, "I moderately believe that all people, regardless of religion, race, gender, national origin, or economic class should be viewed as equals in the eyes of the law." Once again, does their "moderation" actually matter at all?
Many anti-feminists and "men's rights activists" love—and I mean absolutely get wet in the pants—to say that their problem is not with feminists on the whole, but with the few "radicals."
I identify as a feminist. If I had to choose between calling myself "moderate" and "radical," I'd seamlessly choose the latter. To deem someone's perspective on a given issue as good or bad solely on the basis of whether or not they're a "moderate" or a "radical" is simply stupid. These empty terms have no effect on the validity of their ideas. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that those who are "radical" are doing it right.
Martin Luther King Jr. was radical. Gandhi was radical. Harvey Milk was radical. Anyone at the forefront of a historical movement has and always will be radical. That's what not conforming to the status quo means—ignoring arbitrary (and often detrimental) social standards and customs, and creating new, radical ideas and practices that combat those standards and customs.
Thus I find myself wanting more than anything to be radical. As a feminist, that means that I can cut or dye my hair, wear suits, wear Oxfords, kiss girls, pay for my boyfriend half the time, and not be monogamous—all of which I already wanted to do anyway, but was just too scared to.
There are big tangible inequalities facing the genders in America—an obsolete wage gap, unbelievably high rates of sexual violence against women, the like—and there are also big cultural inequalities that too many ignore. It takes being radical to combat those cultural inequalities.
In a tribe in Ethiopia, women scar their bellies as a form of a tattoo. It's considered sexy. In a tribe in Thailand, women use brass rings to compress their chest so as to accentuate the length of their neck. It's considered sexy. In some parts of Japan, women have their teeth cosmetically unstraightened. Crowded teeth are considered sexy. In other words, humans are weird. We have standards and ideas and ideals that are random, and we perpetuate them as if they're our sense of morality. As a result, in western civilization, when a woman doesn't shave or when a man starts to cry, we condemn them as not lady-like or weak (respectively). Moreover, if a person dares indulge in androgyny, we consider them strange or creepy. Thus we base a large portion of our comedy in transphobia.
A lot of societal customs are arbitrary, but they don't hurt anybody. By the same token, a lot of such customs hurt everybody. As a radical, I thus denounce these haphazard ideals. As a radical, I seek to empower people who don't fit into the square boxes that proliferate traditional ideas of gender and sexual expression. As a radical, I seek to fit into my own damn square box.
I implore all of you to do the same. Have your own box. Cross-dress, wear purple lipstick, shave one leg and not the other, experiment, and disregard the weird and random principles that your culture has derived for you. In the simplest of terms, be radical.
Share This Article
