andyetilienot replied to your post:andyetilienot replied to your post:person: Ron and...
Honestly. Maybe she doesn’t NEED a man but it’s not that bad for her to want a partner, is it? Especially not when it was set up from the beginning that they compliment each other?
Yeah... I mean the point of feminism is that you don’t have to be in an unequal relationship with a man, that you don’t have to become dependent on a man, that your sense of self-worth, your economy, your social status, etc., don’t have to be tied to a man. Not that you can’t want to be in a relationship with a man, not that you can’t CHOOSE to get married, have kids, be a housewife, have a job, or whatever, because the point of feminism is that you have choices and they are valid. The argument that Hermione Granger is no longer a “strong female character” or a “feminist icon” just because she chose to marry her best friend from school and have children, even if JKR has let it absolutely clear that she’s still a badass working at the MoM and rocking it, is incredibly stupid and sexist. Men aren’t required to remain single because they need no woman in order to be a “strong male character” (basically because such a concept doesn’t exist). And the point of feminism is to achieve equality for all genders. So if you think women should fit into your stereotype of “strong, badass feminist” for you to acknowledge they’re strong, badass feminists, if you think women should be required more, you’ve just changed one set of chains for another, and your opinion is bullshit.
