The Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation have released a poll on what Americans think of feminism (New Wave feminism) today. The results are a little bit fascinating, including:
- 6 in 10 women and one-third of men call themselves a feminist or strong feminist
- Roughly 7 in 10 of men and women say the movement is empowering.
- 4 in 10 Americans see the movement as angry, and a similar portion say it unfairly blames men for women’s challenges.
- Younger women are more optimistic about movement across a variety of measures
- More than 4 in 10 say they’ve expressed their views about women’s rights on social media.
Here are the complete results, plus information on how the poll was conducted. As Jac points out (and thanks for the links), Americans said the top priority for improving women’s lives is “reducing domestic violence and sexual assault”. The second priority is “equal pay for equal work” Amen. And amen.
Dating Jesus 
More respondents, by 3 percentage points, thought the choices women make themselves, rather than discrimination, keep women from “achieving full equality with men.” Women respondents being evenly split on the question. And no breakdown given as to respondents position on feminism (strong feminist–feminist–not–antifeminist) for that question (#21).
Considering the fact that choice, or lack of it, is a highly significant factor in gender disparities in American society, I find that a bit odd.
And not much in there on “what’s a feminist.”
I think it’s an interesting overview, and find it sad that we’re still arguing over the word.
I found question #18 interesting. When asked who represents feminism in America today the answers were all bourgeois elites. No front line activists mentioned.
There’s a problem with that, I think.
Those front line activists need better PR. :)
More media attention…definitely.
I thought it was all very interesting.
Interesting to see in the news this morning Madeline Albright saying there’s going to be a “special place in hell” for women who don’t support Clinton’s campaign.
Annnnd
career bourgeois bullshit artistalleged feminist Gloria Steinem telling Bill Maher Friday that young women who support Sanders are just interested in chasing boys. Older women, she says, don’t have to worry about things like that.This after a week or so of pro-Clinton pundits saying Bernie’s late surge in national polls was due to the fact that as an older man he’s allowed to look “uncombed and unkempt” (body shaming?) and angry or just loud. Something apparently denied to female candidates.
I think I may be starting to understand what some respondents to that poll were referring to when citing “the choices women make themselves.”
Huge divide, isn’t it?
You mean huge…or yooge?
It appears younger voters…especially women…aren’t impressed with the identity politics. If Clinton is actually worried about that, which I doubt, she might want to let her celebrity endorsers, (like Amber Tamblyn, Rosie O’Donnell, Amy Poehler, Jemima Kirke, Katy Perry, Retta, Gina Rodriguez, Mary Steenburgen, Tracy Anderson, Shonda Rhimes, Constance Wu, Zoe Kazan, Shannon Woodward, Katie Lowes and Uzo Aduba), do the talking on that score, instead of hauling out the fossils for tired and tacky bonafides. She’ll draw bigger crowds and get better press.
(I could not believe what came out of Steinem’s mouth. That’s sexism…not feminism. And this from a woman that bestowed “honorary woman” status on Sanders back in the day. Sheesh!)
I am just dumbfounded that feminism is now turning — in the words of some of its pillars — on whether you’ll vote for a woman over a man. I mean, Keee-rist.
Speaking of tired and tacky.
Yeah. I just wrote something sort of along those lines, and posted it for later today….le sigh.
He’s desperate to get back into the White House. They both are, I think.
Is it desperation? Or a will to serve? I don’t know any more. I’ve started to pay closer attention to the language around HRC — particularly my own.
Looks desperate to me. The attacks like that demonstrated by Wild Bill aren’t really necessary if you look at the numbers. Including these numbers.
I don’t know what two highly successful professional politicians like the Clintons are so scared of about Sanders. If it’s poll numbers, they should check their tactics. Because it seems after every ad hominem attack on Bernie or trotting out ancient talking-point misrepresentations of his policy proposals, (like universal healthcare), the Clintons lose media numbers. So why continue? Maybe it’s just theater. A little melodrama to warm up interest before the commercial break.
And I have absolutely no doubt the Clintons have a will to serve. The question is, however, serve who? The answer is obvious when it comes to the Clintons, no matter how much they want to obscure it. The answer for Sanders is a little more complex…hard to discern exactly. But I think they’re both in the same pocket. And after the last televised confrontation, it appears they both know it.
And I’m never going to filter my reaction to professional politics in America through processes created by professional PR mongers hawking identity politics.
Nor is any one asking you to. I promise. No filter. I’m just paying attention to myself and wondering if I am in any way influenced by things I wouldn’t like to see in others.
It is very difficult to sift through all of what is going on and figure out what is reality. I end up with asking myself, “What is the best option among our less than ideal choices?”
You only have two choices, really. Democrat or Republican.
When all the melodrama fades away, that’s basically all you’ve got. Democrat and Republican.
David Axelrod
It’s desperation. They’re scared it’s 2008 all over again. If they’re not careful? It will be…and we’ll have a Republican President with a Republican controlled Congress… which doesn’t bode well for fans of things like ObamaCare®, gun control, refugee aid, entitlements……