On A Womyn’s Ecdysis blog, in a post titled “Burning Questions,” Sudy said:
“Why do I feel more hardened than softened by feminism? If the point was to work for equality, then I assume that means that I would learn to better perceive others as equal and work through my own prejudices and obstacles…It’d make sense that that would soften me. Instead, the roadblocks with the people who are supposedly “feminists” have angered me to the point of being a rigid rock wall rather than a rich ground of soil for grrls to learn from and grow. What happened there?”
One possible explanation may lie with your expectations. I hit a similar roadblock and walked away from feminist blogs, sites, and organizations to explore feminism inside my own mind, observing how its concepts play out in the world. That was 5 years ago and now I’m back with a different mindset and approach.
My original expectation in becoming actively involved in feminism was that there would be a higher level of camaraderie and a greater level of “enlightenment” among feminists. When those expectations didn’t materialize, the disenchantment settled in. All of the infighting got to me but for whatever reason I wouldn’t quit reading the back-n-forths. But what let me down the most is I expected all feminists to already be on the same level, to be interested in organizing and affecting real social change, and, hell, to just be able to have an open dialogue where all women were included.
But that wasn’t realistic to wish for at that time, nor is it now. Who knows how long it will take to get that point? Maybe a few generations, maybe a couple hundred years? The desire for unity is exciting when you first really grasp these concepts, and you want so much to be able to share with others and have them understand where you’re coming from and to be able to help one another delve deeper. Instead it turns into brawls with feminists dividing along class and race lines, each unable to fully comprehend where the other is coming from. And it sucks all that much more because we’re supposed to be sisters, right?
You wrote a piece about people needing to stop and listen that struck a chord in me. When I think of stopping and listening, it’s in the broad sense and applies to everyone. Feminists especially though. I’ve been wondering lately if perhaps we just haven’t “evolved” feminism (as a philosophy) far enough along to be ready, collectively, to create a real, meaningful movement. We don’t have the necessary power behind it because feminist philosophy isn’t yet widely accepted and hasn’t reached enough people yet, and of those it has reached some are still struggling to make sense of it. Coming to terms with and exploring these concepts, such as kyriarchy as you proposed (credited to Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza), takes a great deal of effort and thought. It takes breaking away from other value systems we’ve been taught to worship and soul-searching in the abstruse layers of our identity molded by a lifetime of social conditioning. That’s no easy feat, with some having farther to go in their journey than others.
Why won’t people hurry up and get a clue? We can inform people of their social and moral obligation to continuously seek a better understanding of the world we’re in, but it will fall on deaf ears of 90% the people, 90% of the time. Of the 10% who truly want to expand their thinking and communicate effectively with others on these topics, there are different stages in awareness. Some of what I know and accept now wouldn’t have made sense 5 years ago. I lacked the life experience to connect some of those dots. Ya know? We’re all at different places in terms of our own individual understandings, with what seems like the majority of humans on this planet not trying very hard.
What better time for feminists, as a collective, to stop, read up on feminist theory and the historical insight and ponderances of our foremothers, and concentrate on really listening more than talking. Maybe this will help establish a bit more common ground.
But then we have to factor in the other dimensions that lie outside of our control. Plenty of people refer to themselves as feminists when really they’re furthering the interests of the “mainstream liberal feminist movement,” standing in opposition to the feminist/humanitarian ideals held by others. This pseudo-movement, made up of women in the middle-to-upper echelon of our present social hierarchy who aim for a (larger) slice of the American pie, does little in the way of helping people unlike themselves. Many don’t seem to grasp how the “pie” is integrally joined to the greater oppressive system so many are complaining about. Some do know and don’t care, but most I would venture to say are misguided and naive. It’s frustrating to deal with, for sure, and it will harden your way of thinking about feminism. Because that is NOT feminism, at least not in the way I understand it. It’s a women’s movement of sorts, but not an all-inclusive one.
What can we do about the women embracing mainstream values? Attempt to win them over to a different way of looking at the world? Sure, it’s worth a try. Waste our time and effort feuding with them over matters they aren’t yet capable and/or willing to be honest with themselves on? This is where lots of folks experience burnout and frustration, it seems. The problem appears to be a clash in values and ideals, with one group wanting to overhaul the system that the other group is climbing within.
Bear with me while I attempt to explain this. Let’s say there’s a community of squirrels that have always lived within this huge Red Oak in the middle of a forest. The set way of life they’ve grown accustomed to is to compete against one another in order to gain access to the top branches where the best nuts are. The nuts can also be wielded as weapons to knock down those attempting to climb the tree. Of those inhabiting the lower half of the tree, there are two factions: those that aspire to compete and climb further up the tree and those that wish to cut the tree down and (re)create a less competitive, more equitable way of living.
While these two factions of squirrels may be assigned to live within a short range of one another and share some common concerns, such as being discontent with the quality of the nuts on this level of the tree, they are fundamentally opposed in terms of their objectives. The faction wanting to climb may catch some of the thrown nuts and in turn share it with those below, but they can offer no more help than that to those wanting to cut down the tree. They will not aid in cutting down the tree because in it lies their livelihood, ambitions, and greed. The faction wanting to cut down the tree see this and thereby have little interest in boosting the other faction. What then transpires is those wishing to climb use the others as step ladders to get closer to where they want to be.
Crappy analogy, I know, but it’s what came to mind. Speaking as one of the squirrels near the bottom, I advocate jumping (with the realization that it’s easier said than done). By jumping, they’re refusing to be used as stepping stones in the journey of another who has no real intention of offering meaningful reciprocal aid.
In the case of the woman author and her comic book and the publishing company, one way to “jump” would be to actively choose NOT to be in competition with her kind. If this person/business wants to step on the backs of others (evidenced in the inappropriate illustrations and an unwillingness to publish books by women of color – regardless of reasons), then why not buck that system altogether by making/keeping the literature free? Fuck their book deals. Those reading the books likely aren’t the ones seeking real social change, hence why the publishing company considers the writings of women of color less marketable. They are. The mainstream isn’t wanting to take part in the actual “cutting down of the tree,” despite all of their feel-good claims to the contrary. So fuck ‘em. Keep the words free and (potentially) undercut their market by remaining available for all those who seek answers and a better understanding. This faction is, admittedly, a small minority, but it’s all anyone has when going up against the majority.
It’s easy enough for anyone to get bogged down by it all and turn to the “tree-climbers” in search of allies, but they have their own agenda and it doesn’t include others unlike them. This just leads to more anguish as our expectations and feminist vision clash with the disenchanting, disturbing reality that 90% of folks (in this country and likely many others) will toe the line and accept the status quo despite the harm it does. Their reasons appear to be rather straightforward: Greed, ignorance, or a lack of imagination, or any combination thereof.
To sum it up: I’ve come to the realization that most people are assholes, if not through their actions then through their ignorance. This can be applied to all types of people, even many who call themselves “feminists.” If you expect too much of most people, it seems you’ll be let down in a big way. That sounds so negative, glass-half-full, doesn’t it? lol People always tell me that, but in actuality I feel more at peace knowing this. Oh sure, it pisses me off all the damned time, but I have got to get it through my thick skull that there are some things I can’t change, not even with an army of supporters. And those things I’m referring to involve the forcing of other individuals to see, experience, and relate to life as I do.
BUT, the silver lining is that there are SOME who truly want to expand their thinking and call an injustice just what it is. Within this comparably smaller faction I do believe listening, learning, and honest personal assessment can occur. Maybe in smaller circles because, as you said in your “What movement?” piece, and I think you hit it on the head, WE do not really have a movement. Mainstream Feminism does and that’s not what I’m about.
While I can also see where “mainstream feminism” overlaps at times and in places with “true” Radical Feminism, the value systems embraced by each group stand in stark contrast, namely with one “side” fighting for slots within our present framework and the other aiming to tear it down. That fundamental difference, in my mind, is where most of the drama lies. We think because we’re sisters that their should be a greater sense of solidarity, and there isn’t.
(I wrote this last night and posted it today without having read Sudy’s latest post on Surveying the Damage. There seem to be a lot of similarities in the (re)defining of what feminism means to us.)
Newsvine
