The Weight of Small Steps (Part 1:The "Whats" of Microfeminism)

I first came across the term microfeminism while scrolling through Instagram reels. Microfeminism is all about the subtle, everyday choices we make that push back against ingrained gender biases and create more equitable spaces [1]. These acts may appear small—inviting women to speak first in meetings, or confidently taking space in public—but they carry the weight of intention and resistance. Change doesn’t always have to be loud or sweeping; often, it begins with these quiet but deliberate gestures.

Made in Canva

Though the word microfeminism has gained traction only recently (especially online), the concept—and even the term itself—has roots that go back much further. In a 1998 article from the book 'Wired-Up', academic Sue Turnbull explored how her students responded to everyday feminist practices [2]. Rather than aligning with broad, unified political frameworks, they were drawn to more grounded, personal actions that addressed gender dynamics in daily life. Turnbull noted that this “emphasis on the local, the immediate and the tactical” reflected a shift in how feminism was being lived—not through sweeping ideological commitments, but through small, practical negotiations for space, voice, and respect in everyday interactions. This perspective reframed feminism as something embedded in the rhythms of ordinary experience.

Building on Turnbull’s framing of everyday feminist practices, we set out to understand how people in our own community engage with microfeminism in their daily lives. We circulated a questionnaire asking individuals to reflect on how they challenge gender biases in routine settings. We received 27 responses, with roughly 8 coming from men. Respondents ranged in age from 20 to 55.

The questions were straightforward. We asked: “Can you describe 1 to 3 everyday actions you do that you consider acts of microfeminism?” and “What motivates you to do these acts?”

One of the most common themes that emerged from the responses was the idea of taking up space in environments traditionally dominated by men. Several women described small but intentional acts that asserted their presence—like Marjan, who wrote about "using so-called ‘male’ public spaces", or Malavika, who noted her act of "not shrinking in public transport and taking more space". Another respondent shared that she asserts her space in sports matches dominated by men and tells the person to close his legs if he is manspreading.

Parvathy added, “I adamantly choose to ride when I am going with my partner, although I don’t enjoy riding.” Kadambari wrote, “I make sure at campus to keep everyday doings like stopping at a teashop, lingering around even if [it] is just female friends. For [us] to loiter as women, ha!”

Another key form of microfeminist resistance, expressed by both women and men, was the act of challenging casual sexism refusing to let sexist comments, jokes, or language pass without response. The idea of visibility also came up in conversations—not just as a physical claim, but as an assertion of voice. As Sradha explained, “I don’t let men interrupt me or speak over me when a woman or myself is speaking”. These actions, while often subtle, serve as daily confrontations against the normalization of patriarchal thinking.

Aswathy shared, “I’m the only girl in my team at office so I try to correct the language or jokes that the men in the team say casually about stereotypical roles for women”. Malavika also emphasized the importance of correcting casual sexist remarks as they arise in conversation and Marjan said she often questions patriarchal language directly. Karthika mentioned that she challenges stereotypes and works on changing others’ perceptions. Merin Joseph put it more bluntly: “Speaking up when you notice unconscious misogyny, and not tolerating any patriarchal and misogynistic crap.” 

Niloyendu offered a detailed account of his approach, emphasizing the importance of being attentive and vocal in everyday interactions. He shared that he tries to “humbly point out an unintended disrespect in social conversations,” and makes it a point to “bring up the issues of both gender, class or caste privilege, in any conversation where [he finds] it necessary, but missing. I take the effort to state my views against [casual sexism], even though, sometimes, it can become a very long and tiring conversation”. Swetha added that she tries to correct people’s misconceptions about feminism. 

As for myself, I try to point out unsolicited advice, and try to not be an easy person in gender-related conversations. Sradha had a similar opinion " I try to stop men when they start giving unsolicited advice just because they assume they know better." These seemingly minor interruptions to the flow of normalized sexism represent a quiet but firm resistance—often carried out without applause or acknowledgment.

Many respondents reflected on the power of language we use—how small shifts in how we speak, think, and engage in conversation can create lasting change. A recurring microfeminist act was correcting one’s own language or assumptions, especially when it came to gendered norms and stereotypes, like 55 year old Meena who shared that she tries changing behavior and talking patterns.

Several people described efforts to avoid gender bias in their everyday speech. Sritha noted, “Assuming the gender of a person in high authority (professors, doctors, politicians) to be a woman”. Kannan similarly shared, “I ensure there is no automatic assumption that a person in power is a ‘he’. I make sure to say ‘she’ or ‘he or she’ in such instances”. Parvathy added, "I try to avoid using he/she pronouns while talking about something in general”.

Others focused on consciously correcting language that reinforces patriarchal structures. Anurag, Devan, and Karthika talked about "Correcting language", reflecting the everyday challenge of breaking conventions in the language we use. Merin Komban added, “[I try to] not use too many please and thank you[s] in work mail". 

Some reflected on more personal, internal shifts. Nimmi shared, “[I] try to understand the power hierarchies in conversations, especially with my mother and sister”. Kadambari spoke about normalizing taboo topics: "One of the things I started doing since UG was to mention and talk aloud about menstruation/periods/pads/cramps no matter who I am speaking to. This has given me multiple responses but I feel like I have set the conversation at an honest plane and it is liberating. It leads to many more conversations”. Merin Komban also talked about how she specifically mentions menstrual cramps when she takes sick leaves during periods. 

Some responses addressed unspoken social dynamics, such as gossip and tone policing. As one respondent shared, " [I] try not to bitch about women with other men, and to rethink the part gender and patriarchy plays in the actions of women”. "I always recheck my harsh judgements if it involves a woman, to see if it stems from, or is fueled by, societal patriarchy" Kadambari added. Together, these responses reflect how even internal reflections, tone adjustments, and deliberate word choices can be everyday forms of resistance.

Challenging gender stereotypes—whether through daily choices or deliberate interventions—was another powerful thread that emerged across responses, from both men and women. Several respondents shared how they push back against traditional expectations around domestic roles and personal expression. Susruthan noted his efforts in "challenging stereotypes [around] cooking and doing other household chores, [and] being soft-spoken”. Swetha highlighted the importance of encouraging change across generations, saying she works on “challenging stereotypes about women of certain age or backgrounds and encouraging elder women to think beyond their boundaries”.

Acts of resistance also came in the form of doing what’s traditionally labeled as 'men’s work'. Merin Joseph emphasized that she tries “normalizing not following socially allocated gender tasks”. Another woman said she was "always trying to fix things around home and work by myself, challenging the idea that men are naturally better at tasks like changing a light bulb or tightening a loose screw".

Clothing, too, was used as a subtle but effective tool to question gender norms. Meena, Amritendu Roy, and Khanh Phuong Tran, all spoke about making different choices in dress and challenging stereotypes.  Parvathy added a personal twist: "I try to make my husband wear pink occasionally". These everyday gestures, though quiet, play a role in disrupting the rigid expectations society places on gender—and they reflect a shared intent to broaden the possibilities for how one can move through the world.

Support and relearning within intimate relationships emerged as powerful forms of everyday resistance by men. Devan described sharing responsibilities with his partner as a way to challenge traditional gender roles. Sangeeth reflected more broadly on the process of unlearning internalized patriarchy, saying he tries "to perceive/understand a women and her actions in the way she wants to be perceived/understood, not the way others have decided". He acknowledged the difficulty of this relearning, especially with a mindset shaped by a patriarchal upbringing, and noted the support he receives from his wife and female friends. Anurag echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the importance of unlearning harmful patterns from past relationships.

Many respondents reflected on deeply personal choices that, though seemingly individual, function as political statements. Sometimes, these acts are vocal and immediate like Sradha who noted that “I react to men catcalling on the streets”. For others, these efforts centered on self-expression and reclaiming autonomy. 

Nimmi offered an especially moving reflection: "I dress like the way I want to. [This change] didn’t happen overnight. Many of my girl friends helped me to overcome several patriarchal conditioning. I didn’t have the confidence to wear lipstick, or sleeveless dress before. Now I am confident enough to carry any look". She also talked about being okay with herself by "slowly learning not to take guilt trips for everything. Rewiring my brain’s thought process by telling repeatedly that ‘Choosing myself is not selfishness.’ Trying to be kind to myself”.

Others spoke of acts of presence and solidarity in their daily environments. Christy summed it up as simply as: "Just trying to exist the way I afford to exist each day”. Merin Komban mentioned a small but powerful decision: “If I can, I don’t plan work presentations around the time of PMS (Premenstrual syndrome) and say that it is near my periods time”. Athira described her own approach: “Complimenting my flat mates when they try on new clothes for their work, listening to and asking about their work (though they work in different sectors from mine), drinking together and venting”. Malavika added, "[I try to] give people the space to be angry about sexism and misogyny and not pushing it aside as the way of the world”.

These microfeminist actions—based on self-assertion, empathy, and mutual care—illustrate how even the smallest gestures can shift cultural expectations and offer space for more honest, equal interactions. Though seemingly everyday in nature, these acts are far from accidental—they are shaped by thought, intention, and a desire for something better. This led us to ask: what truly motivates individuals to persist in these acts of microfeminism?

Part 2: The Weight of Small Steps ( Part 2: The "Whys" of Microfeminism)

Written by Janaky S. and edited by Parvathy Ramachandran based on the responses by different people @ThinkHer

References:

1.https://www.npr.org/2024/12/04/g-s1-36686/microfeminism-ashley-chaney-sexism

2.Turnbull, S. (2005). Dear Anne Summers: ‘Microfeminism' and Media Representations of Women. In Wired Up (pp. 152-168). Routledge.