Two weeks ago, I was told that I would look like a “hardcore feminist” if I cut my hair short. To be clear, this was said in a derogatory tone—a comment intended to discourage me from my decision. When I responded with “What if I am?” to challenge the idea, a mildly heated argument began.
My point in this discussion was simple and clear: to explain that women are constantly accused of being “aggressive” when they advocate against gender-based violence and femicide—issues that are not just women’s problems but societal ones requiring collective awareness and action. Advocacy is not just about acknowledging an issue’s existence; it requires proper engagement and change, which demand assertiveness.
Unfortunately, in today’s society, gender equality is not the status quo, and advocating for women’s rights is frequently misinterpreted as claiming their superiority over the opposite gender. When expressing this simple belief in a passionate manner, I was labeled “aggressive.” For someone who rarely receives such accusatory comments, I was taken aback.
The image of the “aggressive feminist” is a familiar stereotype. For so long, women’s advocacy has been mischaracterized as aggression, and many women find themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to justify their behaviors and filter their opinions to come across in the “right” way. In modern terms, “We who were not forced to be docile … can recognize in our turn that female aggression and rudeness can easily become Karenism” (Cornell).
When tracing the root of this misconception, I found it impossible to single out a single factor. Instead, it arises from misinterpreted data, outdated customs, ingrained societal norms, and stigmas—all of which persist unquestioned, often because they serve the convenience of society or the individual.
Women have been taught to acquire “ladylike” traits—kindness, caregiving, politeness, and submissiveness—all of which align with innate maternal instincts. Meanwhile, it is considered “normal” for a boy to be tough, protective, and dominant. Because of these assigned gender characteristics, women’s assertiveness is seen as hostile and unfeminine—going against the grain, against normality.
This stereotypical perception is not confined to a specific environment. In romantic relationships, for example, men’s aggressiveness and violence are often attributed to the natural outcome of their jealousy—most times unfounded—whereas women’s equivalent response is dismissed as “crazy girlfriend” behavior.
Another example is in the workplace. Rooted in the “Sapphire” caricature, Black women are often characterized as loud, irascible, and too straightforward. This harmful stereotype has led to workplace discrimination. Although anger is a natural response to workplace stress, when it comes from a Black woman, coworkers are more likely to tie her anger to her race and gender rather than an inciting situation. This misattribution and constant scrutiny cause women to avoid expressing anger “because it supposedly dis-confirms stereotypical prescriptions for women to be kind and caring [or] because anger confirms the stereotype that women are overly emotional” (Breen and Barreto).
Eventually, this dilemma of emotional expression results in a significant anger gap, as supported by an annual poll showing that while both genders exhibited similar levels of anger in 2010, by 2019, women were angrier than men by a margin of six percentage points. Women’s frustration transforms into anger and sadness that can no longer be restrained. In crude terms, as stated in the movie Born in Flames, which depicts a group of women’s rebellion, “All oppressed people have a right to violence.”
Of course, the extent of violence is debatable, but it is undeniable that unresolved anger and frustration can result in various forms of rebellion—both negative and positive—such as the #MeToo movement. It can also lead to mental struggles for the individual, as seen during the pandemic lockdown, when women reduced their working hours due to taking on greater maternal responsibilities than fathers. Once again, stereotypical gender norms fueled the frustration and anger of women.
When discussing gender stereotypes, examining their historical origins is helpful. Tracing their roots provides a reason—perhaps an excuse—to understand why they remain a part of society today. However, even when the origins of a stereotype are found and challenged by cancel culture, diversity and inclusion missions, or other equal rights movements, many old customs continue to keep gender stereotypes alive. These traditions are so subtly ingrained in society that they have become an inevitable part of the culture, making them almost impossible to abandon.
It is well known that some fathers deny their daughters the right to education, marry them off as children, or even bury them alive as infants because, to them, women are considered useless—even without a chance to live. Many traditions consciously or unconsciously reinforce this mentality.
I am Turkish, and my culture is full of old customs and traditions. To this day, I love to talk about my culture and explain my traditions. However, many of these traditions are deeply rooted in a highly patriarchal system—one in which women have historically been regarded as the property of men. For me and many others who reject this notion, it is a struggle to recognize the patriarchal presence in our inherited traditions.
One example is the custom of “asking for the girl’s hand in marriage.” This event involves the groom’s family visiting the bride’s family to obtain the bride’s father’s consent. In the past, the traditional engagement ceremony implied that the bride and groom had never seen each other, and the bride’s father would simply marry off his daughter. Although this is no longer a common practice, some phrases from the tradition remain in use. The groom’s father still says, “By the order of Allah and the word of the Prophet, we ask for your daughter for our son.” In the “modern” version, the bride’s father responds, “The young ones have come to an agreement among themselves, and all that’s left for us is to wish them well,”relaying mutual consent. While this answer has been adapted to modern circumstances and is simply a custom, it is debatable whether the continuation of this tradition reinforces the idea of a woman being “transferred” from one family to another—like an object exchanged between fathers. However, abandoning such traditions is not as easy as it seems, as “there is always a tradeoff between individual freedom and collective belonging, and between the past and the future”(Cornell).
We live in a society where women are treated as property, deprived of autonomy over their bodies, lives, and choices. When such perceptions are deeply embedded in cultural and societal norms, fighting for self-governance is no longer seen as a basic right—it becomes an act of rebellion, defiance, and even violence.
So yes, I get angry when someone judges my beliefs about fundamental gender equality or uses “feminist” as an insult, because I am not just expressing an opinion—I am defending my basic human rights.
Bibliography
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-63874001
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/dec/10/angry-women-gender-rage-gap
https://hbr.org/2022/01/the-angry-black-woman-stereotype-at-work