Events like a graduation never seem complete without a few
did-he-really-just-say-thats and are-we-actually-having-this-discussions. Mine
was witness to a denouncement of feminists, with a bit of a back-tracking
defense that although all feminists are crazy, he supports women’s activists.
Perhaps that individual should be more attentive to the company he keeps. I err
in blind condemnation, however. Once upon a time, I too thought feminists were
crazy, even while supporting women’s rights. That’s why my gender studies
courses have been so important to me. They have given me the language to
articulate those thoughts, feelings, and observations that have long given me
discomfort, even if I couldn't quite put a finger on why. Now I have
positionality, intersectionality, and hegemonic masculinity (it would be nice
if Microsoft Word did too- those red squigglys are so unbecoming to my
manifesto).
It’s shameful that that may be my most persuasive self-check
is self-identification. I agree with getting angry, I agree with protest,
outcry, endurance, and firm-resolve. The comment from that individual did come
from at least a sliver (albeit teeny tiny) of reality. Sometimes being a
warrior becomes being a crusader. And I think as soon as a mission is given
such divine status, it loses focus. Gods, in any case, can justify all. The
rare outlier that does fall into man-hating is likely guilty of complicity with
privilege. Is that individual white, middle-class, heterosexual, able-bodied,
sound of mind, thin but not too thin, youthful (ad infinitum)? For me to even have such thoughts, at least so
clearly formulated in my mind, I owe Kimberle Crenshaw for giving me “intersectionality”
and the scholars who built upon her work.
Another particular addition to my vernacular has been especially
timely: victim-blaming. News recently has been jointly filled with sexualized
violence and its explaining away via excusing the perpetrator. Like the
Steubenville case, blame is being routinely shifted to the victim. During the
semester, we had the opportunity to read “'Nothing really happened': the invalidation of women's experiences of sexual violence,” in Next Critical Social Policy by Liz Kelly and Jill Radford. The use of repetition as a persuasive rhetoric
tool as well as articulate analysis on domestic and sexualized violence in this
chapter really helped elucidate the absurdity of victim-blaming for me. It
dovetailed well with our reading of the Continuum of Sexual Violence, which,
additionally, maintains connections with Connell’s conceptions of hegemonic
masculinity, as both examine the pervasiveness and infiltration of various
aspects of privilege in US society and some of the writings by Ann Jones. Concurrently, I’ve lately avoided complete
cynicism by rejoicing in the fact that conversation is happening. The fact that
it seems to be being debated now seems to suggest that the reliance on “tradition,”
or “the way it’s always been” is being challenged. I relish that. And then I
hear an esteemed female physician on NPR discussing community- and
patient-based health care declare that women are “universally” communicative, chatty,
and desirous of discussing such topics as menopause and I waver between excusing
her for having been raised in the US’s system of stark and hierarchical gender
dichotomies and denouncing her as a betrayer of women.
I feel as though I should end with an acknowledgement of the
more international-minded of our class’s readings. In particular, I enjoyed What Kind of Liberation? Women and the
Occupation of Iraq by Nadje al-Ali and Nicola Pratt. Themes of
positionality and intersectionality were replayed. The need to feminize
security studies was also underlined. As the rhetorical title indicates, claims
of women’s liberation for the Iraq War have not been well met in its aftermath.
The book did an excellent job of elucidating the specific challenges that some
women in Iraq face, the role of the international system and the United States,
and the shared global system of patriarchy, consequences in tow. Ultimately, our internationally-focused readings
helped to dissolve “us” vs. “them” heuristics by uncovering shared experiences.
No comments:
Post a Comment