Feminism: What’s in a Name?

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


Slate’s XX Factor has a fascinating discussion about Sandra Day O’Connor’s passing on calling herself a feminist even though she totally is one. Need proof?

Do you call yourself a feminist?

I never did. I care very much about women and their progress. I didn’t go march in the streets, but when I was in the Arizona Legislature, one of the things that I did was to examine every single statute in the state of Arizona to pick out the ones that discriminated against women and get them changed.

So, ‘feminists’ march in the streets (which is bad) but don’t fight for a seat in government from which to focus on women’s equality? I ain’t mad at Sandra. The woman haters have worked very hard to make the word “feminism” synonymous with man- and baby-hating. With—gasp!—lesbianism and everything ‘unladylike’. With all that scary protesting and refusing to play nice. Ah well, I much prefer women (and men) who pass on the name but fight the power anyway. Sandra O is just in the closet but active as hell on the feminist down low. Works for me.

As a side note, SDO’C rocks as an interviewee. What a breath of fresh air to hear someone say, essentially, ‘Screw you. I’m pushing a majorly important new website and you want to talk about inanities. Shut the frack up (sorry—HUGE Battlestar Galactica fan), and let’s talk about what I agreed to talk about.’ Here’s a taste of that great old-chick no-nonsense:

Although you were nominated to the court by President Reagan, you became known as a centrist who disappointed conservatives and provided relief to liberals.

Look, that’s your spiel, not mine. I tried to decide each case based on the law and the Constitution.

Old feminists rock. Whatever they call themselves. BTW: if you’re not a feminist, what are you: anti-feminist?

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest