NOWHERE in the history of Singapore has talk of feminism so riveted this nation as in the recent saga involving the Association of Women for Action & Research (Aware). The takeover of Singapore's foremost feminist organisation by a group of unknowns - and its controversial consequences - meant that debates over the nature of feminism got prominent airing.

Overnight, a casual observer of the proceedings had to grapple with questions like: Who are feminists? What do feminists do? Can men be feminists?

Fundamentally, feminism is about ridding the oppression of women, but how that can be achieved is contested. Feminism, unfortunately, has been crudely stereotyped, equated with nothing more than bra-burning women. Thus, it is not uncommon to hear even highly educated women preface their statements with: 'I'm not a feminist, but...'

The embattled former Aware president Josie Lau - who resigned after a no-confidence vote at the May 2 extraordinary meeting - said during the heated event that there were many types of feminism. She was right.

The first wave of mainstream Western feminism can be traced back to around the mid-1800s, when its chief focus was getting women the right to vote. Even back then, there were men involved in the feminist cause. British philosopher John Stuart Mill, for instance, championed female suffrage in 1869, likening the lot of women then to slaves. So did the mathematician and philosopher Bertrand Russell at the turn of the century.

There was a lull in feminist activity after female suffrage was attained in the early 20th century in countries like Britain - that was, until feminists like Betty Friedan began examining the social, economic and political structures that imposed barriers before women.

This movement has been called 'second-wave feminism'. In her 1963 book, The Feminine Mystique, Friedan examined the dissatisfaction felt by college-educated suburban housewives, and argued that they were victims of a false belief system that required them to find meaning through their husbands and children.

It was during this era that the well-known phrase 'the personal is political' was coined. This basically means that many of what are commonly viewed as 'personal' problems encountered by women today are actually caused by oppressive structures. The struggles of a professional woman juggling housework, child-rearing and career, for example, are more the result of patriarchal practices that free men from housework than the woman's personal shortcomings.

This issue haunts Singapore too. As some have argued, our baby shortage may be in part due to the inequitable sacrifices that women still have to make when a child arrives in the family.

The third wave of feminism arrived sometime around the 1990s as a reaction to its predecessors' shortcomings - including the failure to incorporate the voices of women who were not white, not middle-class and not heterosexual. The voices of postcolonial feminists also came onstream.

Individual empowerment became the focus and feminism celebrated the right of a woman to be true to herself. This thinking has entered the mainstream to a significant extent, as illustrated recently by the soapmaker Dove's advertising campaign. It featured women with freckles, wrinkles, or who were plump, to debunk stereotypical perceptions of beauty.

Feminism has branched off into so many different directions that it is impossible to detail them in a column. Suffice it to say that it is a cause that all kinds of women - from the deeply religious to the atheist, from middle-class to working-class - have fought for decades, if not centuries.

Many feminists have argued that it is impossible to dissociate the feminist cause from struggles against other types of inequality, because oppressions mutually reinforce each other.

In the developing world, the women behind African Women's Development Fund, for example, state categorically that 'to challenge patriarchy effectively also requires challenging other systems of oppression and exploitation, which frequently mutually support each other'.

In the Singapore context, it would be hard to talk about women's rights without touching on the working conditions of foreign domestic workers here. And since discrimination against such women is linked to their nationality and ethnicity, someone working to better their lot will naturally have to wander into those territories as well.

In recent years, there has been interest in involving men in the feminist cause, the rationale being that men who are aware of the role they play in oppressing women can help to dismantle the structures that perpetuate it.

If more men are taught effective communication techniques, for example, they would be less likely to see aggression as the only way to express anger, which could in turn lower the incidence of domestic violence.

Ultimately, feminism is not a zero-sum game: Equitable relations between the sexes create happier, healthier individuals, couples, families - and societies.

It is against this backdrop that Aware saga was played out, that strenuous arguments were made on both sides of the affair about who were true feminists and what they should do.

Who is to say who is a true feminist? A mother of two who runs for the top office of a country, or someone who advocates for women's rights but mistreats her female subordinates? How about a man who speaks up against the sexual harassment of female colleagues and pays for his maid to attend computer courses?

It's a hard question to answer, but it is good that we are debating the issue.

This article was first published in The Straits Times.