Womxn// Can We Please Stop Using the Phrase ‘Strong, Independent Woman’ as a Compliment?
By Esther Huntington-Whiteley
7 November 2020
If someone were to call you, or any woman you know, ‘strong and independent’, you would likely consider it a compliment. But what does it actually mean to be a ‘strong, independent woman’ in our current day and age? Is it possible that this rhetoric is actually quite damaging in the face of the patriarchal norms and misogynistic expectations imposed on females in our society?
Strength and independence are two states of existence which most people in the modern world are striving towards, regardless of their gender. Once we start advocating for the idea that only some women can achieve this status, and even then only if they are continually and persistently practicing a certain lifestyle, we create a further barrier between what men are automatically assumed to be and what woman must work to become. Furthermore, if only some women are defined as strong and independent, then where does that leave everyone else - weak and dependent? This perpetuation of gendered vulnerability and internalised rivalry is something we should be trying to work against, not bringing into the fabric of our everyday lives by disguising it as complimentary.
If the definition of an independent person means to live free from outside control, not subject to another’s authority and unreliant on another for livelihood or subsistence, then the automatic assumption that women can only be independent by choice is highly sexist in itself. Perhaps in the past, when the default position was for a woman to be dependent on the other people, usually men, in her life, independence was indeed something which needed to be fought for and gained by individuals. But surely our society is no longer founded on these principles? Emotional, financial and bodily independence are all integral aspects of modern life- they should no longer be regarded as controversial aspects of feminine and identity.
Fictional heroines of the past, such as Jane Austen’s Emma or Isabel Archer of Henry James’ The Portrait of a Lady, were often portrayed as independent by choice in a society that did not expect or even necessarily permit them to be. In regard to the latter, James wrote: ‘this way of her own, of which she was so fond, was not intrinsically offensive - it was very sharply distinguished from the ways of others’- reiterating how his heroine's behaviour was not harmful, just different. Thankfully, we no longer live in a world where choosing to live separately from your family, or not following the conventions set by your predecessors, is viewed as a radical and condemnable decision. Of course, we should always try and learn from the female protagonists of our favourite novels, or look to women of the past as constructive guidance for how we should try and live our lives, but it seems we are only holding ourselves back by reverting to history as a means of differentiation between individuals in our current society.
One could argue that, despite all the numerous developments in gender equality that have come about for women in recent years, we are still in some ways stuck in the prejudiced discourse of the past. We often assume that the norm is for women specifically to be reliant on someone else, when in reality everyone these days is relatively dependent on one another. In our contemporary society, where fewer people are able to buy their own property and online connectivity means we are never far away from the nearest point of communication, independence is not so much something that people inhabit but rather a habit that they practice in their everyday lives. To be independent is not to be separate from the rest of the world, but to be able to separate oneself when necessary, a balance we should all be striving towards, irrespective of who we define ourselves as.
I find it interesting, too, that one rarely hears a man defined as ‘independent’ - at least not in the context of his romantic relationships or reliance on other people. Perhaps this is because we do not tend to perceive men only in relation to the other people in their lives; instead they are seen as autonomous individuals who are capable of making decisions and carrying out certain lifestyles without being labeled as an anomaly of their gender. Men have the freedom of making choices which are detached from their identity, having effectively been given a head start in creating a life of their own. We do not feel the need to label a man as ‘strong and independent’ when he carries out a lifestyle that is traditionally associated with his gender anyway; history has never compromised their position as someone able to exist on their own.
In a similar way, using the commendation of the ‘strong, independent woman’ solely to differentiate someone from her male counterparts or other females only serves to perpetuate the concept of female rivalry and competitiveness as necessary in the face of male approval. The implication of this image is that only some people have access to the classification that we have made into the prototypical female figure. Does this mean that women who live at home, or women who are in relationships, cannot be strong or independent? Of course not. All it means is that we are still being told, and subsequently listening to, the idea that we can only ever exist within the categories that were created with the intention of bringing us down.
When you type ‘strong, independent woman’ into google, the first results you get are the things that this ‘kind’ of woman don’t do, or a man’s idea of what they do. Is this really a conversation we should be having? Why are we still shaming women for the decisions that they make, or trying to pressure them into becoming the people we want them to be? Not only are we teaching young and impressionable girls that the only view of them that matters comes from men, but we are imposing further limitations on the kind of person they are, and what they should or should not do to become that. Perhaps it was inevitable that a supposedly accommodating category of woman was co-opted by others to become something that only serves to perpetuate the discrimination it was traditionally meant to overcome. Either way, women everywhere are once again being put into a position where we cannot win.
The generalisation of women as naturally subordinate and only ever strong by exception is often perpetuated in our popular culture and the things that we consume on a daily basis. Barbara Ellen writes in The Guardian (in the context of films specifically, but also in a way which could be applied more generally): ‘the obsession with strong women is just another way to keep us down.’ She advocates how, ‘the Strong Woman can be as boring and limiting as any other stereotype and must be resisted. In the real world, the near-fetishisation of these types can sometimes make “ordinary” women feel inadequate and weak. In the same way, female characters can’t just be, they must “represent”.’ It feels true that we are subconsciously learning and teaching the stereotype of women as systematically inferior, with the portrayal of ‘strong, independent woman’ as representative of a particular irregularity within our gender.
Australian activist GD Anderson summed it up perfectly when she said, ‘feminism isn't about making women stronger. Women are already strong. It's about changing the way the world perceives that strength.’ If we propose that feminism is intended to establish women as strong, rather than as a collective manifestation of that strength, we are telling women that they can only be strong and independent in the face of conflict that they must first overcome. This generates further disparities between men and women, with the former being automatically labelled as strong and independent, and the latter having to earn the right to this label. Is it not enough that we have already had to fight for some of our basic human rights, and continue to fight for many others? Must we now also begin the battle of changing the narrative around which women are considered strong and independent, compared to those who are not.
Anytime I’ve been called a ‘strong, independent woman’, it has either been as a condescending joke, or a supposed compliment to the fact that I don't let other people treat me badly. Considering this phrase was no doubt initially intended to benefit and empower women, it may be controversial to question the legitimacy of it in the first place. Yet I can’t help but wonder whether we are doing more harm than good by encouraging exceptionality as the defining feature of who we are trying to be. In this way, we are preventing women from being multifaceted human beings who have the ability to be lots of different things at once without compromising their underlying identity. All women are strong, all women are independent- there is no such thing as a ‘strong, independent woman’, there are simply women, and we must all stick together.
Esther is a final year undergraduate student studying English Literature at the University of Exeter. Usually, she lives in London, and due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, this is where she has been based for the past few months. In her free time, she enjoys reading, writing, and learning more about the world. Currently, she is most interested in considering what the future looks like for young people, especially after all the events that have taken place this year. She thinks it is really important that we speak and listen to the voices that most need to be amplified during a time where everything is so uncertain, including but not limited to womxn.