Saturday, April 16, 2005
(11:59 PM) | Anonymous:
Pourqoui je ne suis pas un féministe.
Sometime back a philosopher friend and I were having a conversation about abortion. We came to the agreement that we both felt that, ultimately, we were not "pro-choice." However, we also felt no allegiance or points of agreement between us and the anti-abortion/pro-life movement, as the stance most of those folks take regarding economics and other structural issues seem to have made abortion necessary. We both, in whispers, wondered if we could ever express such opinions without being labeled conservatives or reactionaries by our friends and colleagues. Perhaps this was just a bit of paranoia, but nevertheless, such a conversation is impossible to have as Leftists.Without listing off my “Leftist” honor badge citations, I hope you’ll be content to accept that my views regarding most issues would place me in the Left camp. This along with my consistent voting record for pro-choice candidates allows me to avoid making the "cliched argument" against the pro-life movement. It should be obvious that I don't stand with them in any way shape or form, and any suggestion to the contrary is usually just a way to shut down communication used to indicate that I am on the wrong side of the axiomatic fence. Frankly, it is impossible to have a conversation about this issue unless one takes polemical stands that, in my view, have no coherent political or social ontology (a grave charge, I know).
Most feminisms seem to operate on a view of the self that posits a radical individualism, the same political ontology that powers free markets. Though, I don’t think this automatically makes it bad, I do find such a view untenable for a radical politic. Though the mundane argument is that it is a woman's body and therefore her choice, I also find this untenable as all decisions come about through a matrix of personalities acting out in unknowable ways. If the argument is about a woman's right then we have a view of children as property, since all human rights come from the right to property. It ultimately becomes a question of who has the strongest property claim on this child (or fetus, I'm not interested in this debate as both are reduced to property irregardless of the biology involved), the mother or the father. This brings in some strange economies of the body that I, frankly, find frightening.
I remember once there was a theology club meeting concerning feminist theology. Two women and a man presented three feminist theologians, ranging from a middle of the road Methodist to Mary Daly, an advocate of the mass-extermination of men. I sat there listening to a very impassioned feminist speak on Mary Daly's exclusion of men from her courses and how wonderful it was for her to radical shift the power from men to women in the context of the classroom. She was essentially saying that all men are, essentially, the powerful and all women the powerless. I experienced quite a different situation in public schools where I was the powerless one, subjected to the taunts and mean-spiritedness of both women and men (not to say these attacks weren’t merited, I am somewhat annoying and disgusting). In short, I had never seen in reality this essentialist aspect of gender. This isn't to say that there are not some real structural aspects of society working against women. I tend to think that these aspects of society strategically blur the real issues of class, much in the same way race and debates over multiculturalism do. That is, they are ways of pitting the working class (material and immaterial laborers) against each other, to separate us politically but keeping us together for production.
I always avoid having this conversation with men and with women, unless I can find a weepy man, a kindred soul. Women, especially the strong women in my field who believe strongly in feminist ideals, tend to disregard what I say because I have a penis. Despite beliefs to the contrary, this hurts. I was the sole son raised by a strong mother, though technically the middle child, and as such I've never had any problem listening to women express themselves or second guessed being subordinated to a woman. I've never felt comfortable believing in myself, I have body issues, and tend to shy away from confrontation. I advocate and try to live my life in accordance with the ideal of a society where women are equal to men, because such a society is only possible when the two sexes are no longer two sets of slaves distracted from the real war.
I refuse to advocate for my beliefs against abortion until such a time when there is a society where those beliefs are tenable. Ultimately this is not what makes being a feminist impossible (not even to speak of the impossibility of being a un féministe), but rather it is because I am simply a weepy child.
I must apologize if this post is unwanted or offensive in this space. I have hesitated to even post this message, knowing that it will be offensive to people I am rather fond of. It really is my hope that a conversation such as this, where honesty is allowed and are not stifled by axiomatic positions within the Classical Liberal hegemony, can take place. I do not pride myself on my unfailing intellect and rigorous logical skills, I know in the end I am at best a mediocre thinker, and as such recognize the need for critique and discussion.
