{"id":647,"date":"2010-11-08T09:00:39","date_gmt":"2010-11-08T09:00:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/?p=647"},"modified":"2010-11-08T09:00:39","modified_gmt":"2010-11-08T09:00:39","slug":"an-alphabet-of-femininism-6-f-is-for-female","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/badreputation.org.uk\/2010\/11\/08\/an-alphabet-of-femininism-6-f-is-for-female\/","title":{"rendered":"An Alphabet of Feminism #6: F is for Female"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
‘Well, well,’ I thought, as I cast my eye over the (now somewhat bedraggled) series of scrawled lists of letters for the Alphabet shoved into my pockets, bursting out of purses and sketchbooks and rotating in scarcely less tatty form in my head. For the question was obvious: What am I going to do for F? Because, you see, Z, Y, X, all those, they’re not actually that hard. They don’t have that much riding on them. But F … well, from the various incarnations of the F-word onwards … a headache.<\/p>\n
Because, you see,\u00a0the word
feminism<\/em>
<\/em>just isn’t that interesting.<\/p>\n
Or rather, its interest lies in its power to evoke wide-ranging,
frequently violent reactions while remaining semantically
straightforward.\u00a0Feminism<\/em>
<\/em>gets precisely a centimetre of a three-column page in the
Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Because it means two very
simple and uncontentious things: in rare form, ‘the
qualities of women’, and as it is more commonly understood
today, ‘advocacy of the claims and rights of women’,
first used sometime around 1895. All those extra things, the bad
reputation … those are add-ons, and not linguistically valid
ones, either. So I turned my attention away from\u00a0feminism<\/em>, and thought that perhaps I would go back to
basics. After all, how often do we think about what\u00a0female<\/em>
<\/em>means?<\/p>\n
Hey ho, let’s go.<\/h3>\n