Is The 4B Movement an Inclusive and Effective Movement?
“Examine what a life looks like without centering men so deeply.” This sentiment is at the core of the 4B movement, a movement emerging from South Korea, brought to the West by American Women after Trump’s Election. The radicality of this movement questions how far women’s rights have been violated but, also, what implications this movement has for other feminist movements. Is eradicating relationships with men the way forward for women?
The 4B Movement emerged in 2015 in South Korea, responding to the strikingly high gender inequality and violence against women, with the highest wage gap in OECD nations for instance. It derives from the four words bihon, bichulsan, biyeonae and bisekseu translating to no marriage, no childbirth, no dating and no sex with men.
Following Donald Trump’s re-election, the movement was embodied by American Women online, fed up with fellow citizens’ decision to elect a candidate liable for sexual abuse. Throughout his prior presidency and recent campaign, the president-elect has consistently disregarded women’s agency, stating that he would protect women “whether they like it or not”. His actions have pushed women to take radical moves; the 4B movement is a testament to this. Some women now wish to sever all relations with men, which should be a wake-up call. The movement’s mere existence shines light on the increasingly committed violences against women, now threatening consolidation further into the law.
However, the radicality of the movement questions its efficiency, posing a risk to other feminist movements. In Korea, 4B faced backlash by contributing to pre-existing stereotypes of feminism as extreme and “against men”, as stated by Lee Jeong-eun, a Korean woman: “You’re treated like the devil”. This has resulted in feminism being seen as an extremist opinion. In America, the movement might face the same fallout. Hence, the 4B movement risks contributing to gender polarization, fuelling pre-existing misogynists that feminism is against them.
As Incel discourse has become popularised, it is crucial to shine light on feminist movements. The men in these podcasts blame women for their romantic and sexual isolation, generating a violent, new wave of misogyny that is being communicated to young boys. I argue that the 4B movement feeds into these discourses, by creating an ‘us vs them’ dichotomy, and recentering men in a women’s movement. Ultimately, this could perpetuate the women unsafety in America. Moreover, a war between two genders is not a setting in which the fight for women’s rights and gender equality can truly take place.
Expelling men as a feminist choice suggests they were at the center beforehand, with women existing FOR men. Feminism cannot be reduced to this. It is about fighting traditional concepts of femininity. A women’s conception of her own femininity must go beyond her association with men. In labelling the rejection of romantic or sexual male association as THE ‘feminist’ action, 4B outcasts the LGBTQ+ community from its forces. We must also be aware of the differing social and geographical contexts which shaped the movement, which will not be applicable to the American context. These methods and associations, therefore, exclude American men and women alike.
To be efficient and long-lasting, feminist movements cannot exclude entire groups from their actions. As resolving gender inequality demands profound social modifications to our system, exacerbating gender divisions is simply not productive. The Patriarchy has solidified men’s access to power, making their presence necessary in this reformation. The 4B movement focuses on a binary divide that is ultimately unproductive and too simplistic. It overlooks the vast number of women that have voted for Trump in the last election. This movement should be an invite to reflect on how each individual might fuel patriarchy, even unconsciously. Meanwhile, we must retain and reaffirm intersectionality as a crucial part of feminism.
The 4B movement is the signal proving the necessity and urgency to fight for women’s rights in America. It calls on us to reflect on the increasing severity of violence against women. However, whether 4B can be considered the ultimate solution is questionable. It risks widening gender divisions. To be optimally effective, feminism must include all men. But most importantly, it must include all women, for exclusion cannot be a way to efficiently combat patriarchy and achieve the primary goal of feminism: the promotion of all women’s rights.