word work

My problem of the week is with the assumption that words, words, words are just lying flat, lifeless and exposed. The innocence of words, the truth/transparency of words, the convenience of words. It's hard for me to stomach the suggestion that feminism should be reshaped into "Gender Studies" or "Equality Studies." The task at hand is indeed gender equality, but we're not going to achieve this by throwing specificity out the window. There is intention, political thrust, and an imaginative potential behind and within the title of feminism. What does it mean to specify femininity? Even more thought-provoking is to consider what it means to receive resistance from doing so. Feminism is swimming against the current, nobody will argue that. But how come so few of us have paused to acknowledge the fact that the current exists to begin with? The antagonism towards feminists is perplexing at first: no one, at least in sane academia, signed up for Anti-Male or Anti-Masculinity Studies, so what is all the fuss about? Feminism doesn't deny males or masculinity, rather it seeks to deny inherent maleness through specification (ever notice how the "default" gender is always male? This is what is meant by inherent maleness). The mistake is in assuming that there can be some sort of accommodating "neutrality" within the field of feminism (hence, "equalist" rather than "feminist"). Is standing still an option when you're neck-deep in the river current? It is not even a possibility, let alone an option. Visualize it, I dare you.