The "Third World Argument"

Our society – by which I mean first world Western society – is probably the most libertarian and equal in the world from a feminist perspective. That’s right; this social order which I criticise, moan and bitch about every Tuesday and Friday is a haven of equality and human rights in comparison to most other options. And when people recognise this seeming hypocrisy, feminism is criticised for having everything out of perspective.

The “third world argument” as I like to call it is when people attempt to invalidate the fight for gender equality in this society by claiming that feminism should only seek to aid women who “actually” suffer oppression, like those who are unwillingly forced into the restrictions of Sharia law, or who cannot receive an education. To analogise:

That is like saying we should not have soup kitchens in Sydney for people living below the poverty line because “the starving children in Africa have it worse.”

That is like denying a paraplegic disability access because it’s not as if they’re suffering as much as a quadriplegic.

And my favourite: saying you should not be suffering because someone in the world has it worse than you is like saying you should not be joyous because someone out there is surely happier than you.

To concede, in so many countries around the world, fighting for higher paid maternity leave would seem like a luxury in comparison to the daily struggle of requiring a potentially abusive male guardian just to “freely” walk around. However saying feminism is useless because we need to be focusing on women who face “real” oppression is so harmful on multiple levels.

Firstly, when 1 in 3 women experience sexual violence or rape in this society, delegitimising one of the only movements that aims to emancipate them of their shame and guilt is what we like to call a dick move. Yes, rape is more of an issue in countries like India that it is in Australia, but that in no way creates a hierarchy between individual women whose lives have been severely impacted by sexual violence. And anyway, the numbers of the “lesser” demographic are not at all insignificant. Probably the area that gets most bashed under this (fragile and incorrect) argument is feminist activism on a corporate level. How can women be whinging about a 24% smaller pay check when millions of women still can’t vote? Aside from the previous statements outlining the futility of this message, it remains that there is an inequality, and it must be addressed. A lack of female representation, unequal pay, insufficient maternity leave for working mothers and other corporate issues all impact the way society works. It belittles women, and adversely affects the way women view themselves as human beings. And that other people suffer more has little to do with the fact that right here and now, there is a system of discrimination that gets into our minds and affects us as people. I doubt anyone disagrees that we should aim to fix this.

On a more general note, how can we expect other societies to improve when we ourselves do not strive for equality? – which we definitely have not achieved. Because someone is a worse person that you does not mean that your attempts to become a better person are “useless”. And if your becoming a better person can influence said worse person, then it’s all the more beneficial. Now substitute “person” with “society”. See?

Moreover, feminism for and by a predominantly Western audience does not aim to impose its goals in place of women’s rights movements for disadvantaged countries. And in fact, by looking at the nature of these latter movements, we see that “feminism” as we define it in a western sense probably should not encompass all of third world women’s rights issues. There is a great need for cultural sensitivity when aiding issues such as Sharia law, or religious “oppressions” of women. We in the West so often misunderstand or ignore the nuances of what we perceive to be oppressive because, well, basically racism and Islamophobia. Emancipation for women in the Middle East, Africa, South East Asia, etc. generally does not look like “feminism” as the Westernised image appears in your mind. The most effective and empowering movements for women’s rights in third world countries have been grass root activist groups from those women themselves e.g. the Egyptian Feminist Union. Of course Western governments influenced by Western feminism is integral to putting international pressure on countries with poor human rights records. But we need to acknowledge that the idea of Western feminist saviours swooping in to help our powerless and oppressed third world sisters is condescending and problematic.

Egyptian Feminist Union

This is not to say that women’s rights activism in third world countries is not feminism, or that it is less legitimate in any way. Rather, it is important to notice the difference between feminism in privileged and disadvantaged countries. Because then we can see that one does not overshadow the other, and we should not be trying to shut down one demographic of feminism simply because another exists, even in more drastic situations.

It’s quite logical really.

Comment below!

Hannah