Just recently, I have started to delve in to modern feminist literature [Judith Butler, Anne Fausto-Sterling, Foucault, etc.]. All of this reading is brand new to me---never before have I read such articulate academic accounts of feminism and suggestions for how to advance feminism given certain problems and limitations that the ideology faces today. I'm not going to get into the details of these arguments, but if you're at all interested in learning more I strongly encourage you to pick up and read Fausto-Sterling's Sexing the Body. Even if you don't agree with everything argued, the history and science alone are fascinating and informative [plus, it's especially important to consider views that counter your own so that you can be a well-rounded person].
I definitely fall into the category of not agreeing with everything proclaimed in these modern works, yet I find the books to be very stimulating and encouraging of fruitful reflection. One of the most intriguing suggestions I've encountered so far was the argument is that masculinity is defined for the most part without reference to the physical nature of maleness whereas femininity is historically defined [at least in part, if not totally] by the woman's physicality, especially the capability of being a mother [see: Gender Trouble]. Before reading Butler, I'd never thought about the construct of maleness and femaleness in a comparative fashion...I mean, it's always made sense to me that part of being a woman is motherhood, but I'd never before considered what the comparison was with men or even whether there was a common, cultural comparison to men or not.
