Bad Feminist by Roxane Gay

Introduction
What exactly does it mean to be a ‘bad feminist?’ Roxane Gay’s Bad Feminist is an amazing and insightful collection of numerous essays that cover a various topics. In essence, the essays offer a new and different perspective of the contemporary topic of gender inequality. In this text, I explore what it really means to be a ‘bad feminist’ in the context of Roxane Gay’s Bad Feminist. In so doing, I first briefly describe the popular notion of feminism and then proceed to provide the academic definition of feminism. This brief description offers the relevant background or basis for an evaluation of the meaning of bad feminism.
Discussion
From the onset, it is important to note that the idea that most people today have of feminism is far from what Gay projects in Bad Feminist. For a while, the mental notion that most people have of feminism is that of a white heterosexual woman seeking to unconventionally find her place in a male-dominated society. The popular image of a feminist is that of a close-minded woman who not only hates men, but also hates sex and is angry at the world around her. In real sense, however, this is the wrong notion of feminism. It should, however, be noted that feminism does not have an assigned definition. What this effectively means is that there are various definitions that have been floated in the past – all in an attempt to assign a definitive meaning to sexism. According to Hooks, in basic terms, “feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression (11). On the other hand, to others, feminism is seen as “the broad goal of challenging and changing gender relations that subordinate women to men… (Ferree and Tripp 57). Combining the two definitions, it is clear that feminism has got to do with the advancement of the rights of women in the realm of equality for all genders. This could essentially mean ensuring that women have equal access to job opportunities, healthcare, etc.
Being a bad feminist does not necessarily mean disavowing the above definition of feminism. Instead, it means being more open-minded and deliberate in the pursuance of gender equality. Being open minded means abandoning the old and tired victim narrative as far as gender inequality is concerned. This narrative has been peddled long enough, just as has been the case with the slavery rhetoric in movies. Indeed, as Gay asks in Beyond the Struggle Narrative Essay, “what more could be said about slavery?” (228). I ask a similar question when it comes to the gender inequality narrative: what more could be said about gender inequality that has not been said already? We need new insights. It is important to note that rationality dictates that even in the advancement of one’s ideas, it is always prudent to take into consideration other perspectives – even those that do not necessarily reconcile with or advance one’s point of view. This is more so the case given that nobody is all knowing. A person could after all be wrong in their assumption. Even when right, refusing to be blind to the perspectives of other persons could have the effect of reinforcing or aiding one’s own argument. Ego could be a slippery path. Bad feminism means renouncing the blind-sided and egoistic perspective of feminism. This is what adopting a new narrative is all about.
Different people have different perspectives of issues. Indeed, as Gay observes in The Illusion of Safety/The safety of Illusion essay, she is not the one to be coerced into supporting popular positions just because there are strong arguments in support of such positions. For instance, with regard to trigger warnings, which have variously been touted as necessary for the prevention of harmful or painful memories, the author asserts that while “those of us who do not believe should have a little say in the matter… we can neither presume nor judge what others might feel the need to be protected for” (153). This effectively restates the relevance of embracing diversity of opinion. When feminism is packaged in ‘women can do what men can do’ and ‘identical treatment for all genders’ formats, it could end up alienating many persons who ought to be part and parcel of the feminist agenda. For instance, it should be noted that there are cultures out there that differ from our own i.e. when it comes to the societal and familial position woman occupy. Further, there are persons whose idea of feminism does not necessarily match that of popular feminism. For instance, there is that one woman who is more comfortable at home taking care of the household and rearing her children while the husband plays the caretaker role. Should this kind of woman be alienated? What of the transgender person? Being a bad feminist means being welcoming. It means embracing those who ought to be part of the feminist movement but their ideas do not strictly fit within the narrow confines of popular feminism. Being a bad feminist means resisting the urge to force our own ideas of what feminism ought to be on other persons. Being a bad feminist means permitting others to chart their own paths and define their own destinies.
If equality for all genders is to be attained, the relevance of roping in all stakeholders into the fold cannot be overstated. After all, it is not a woman’s exclusive world. It is a world for all human beings – and animals, also. We cannot delink from others and hope to win in the long-run. We must be alive to the fact that feminism is not a war of the sexes. Instead, it must be seen as a collaboration of the sexes for the greater good. Therefore, being a bad feminist has got to do with believing that equality for all genders can be attained via collaboration. This is something that Gay appears to be aware of in Bad Feminist. Even those who have been judged in the court of public opinion and found to be guilty of degrading actions towards women are welcome into the fold. We must be alive to the fact that those who have been unfair to women are essentially ‘broken’ and perhaps tired of their behavior. In the essay The Spectacle of Broken Men, Gay describes Jerry Sandusky as a man who appears trapped and broken. In her own words, Gay observes that “if you ever want to know what guilt sounds like, listen to Sandusky try to explain his untoward actions with young boys over the years… his voice is haunting – weakened… by the gravity of his crimes” (157). We must give even the greatest chauvinists a chance. They could be looking for a chance to change after years of their ‘wayward’ ways. If feminism is curved into a ‘them verses us’ kind of confrontation, there will be no clear winners. Indeed, the status quo is likely to be maintained. Further, we are likely to alienate ‘members’ who may offer valuable contribution in the journey to the full realization of equality for all. It is also important to note that apart from gender inequality, there are other social inequalities that exist. These include, but they are not limited to racial inequalities, economic inequalities, health inequity, etc. We must be alive to the fact that these too deserve attention and thus the feminist agenda cannot be advanced in isolation or at the expense of the inequalities and inequities highlighted above. Thus, being a bad feminist also involves being aware of other societal agendas and advancing our own agendas within that very context.
Conclusion
In the final analysis, it is important to note that Bad Feminist enables us to not only identify but also come to terms with the fact that polarized and extreme opinions are often a way of life in various discourses relating to the feminism agenda. We are called upon to look beyond our opinionated ‘spectacles’ – to see around the corner. Thus, even in seeking to advance our own perspectives, we must be capable of embracing the viewpoints of others. In the realm of popular feminism, this would entail being a bad feminist!

References
Ferree, Myra, and Ali Mari Tripp, editors. Global Feminism: Transnational Women's Activism, Organizing, and Human Rights. NYU Press, 2006.
Gay, Roxane. Bad Feminist: Essays. Harper, 2014.
Hooks, Bell. Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics. Pluto Press, 2000.