Do I think that all systemic injustice is related to the Rule of the Father (not a literal father, obviously)--that is, to hierarchies of power. Is patriarchy the best word for this? Probably not, which is why I'm phasing out my use of it and phasing in "systemic injustice." Elizabeth Schussler Fiorenza has suggested "kyriarchy," but it's not a word I've been able to take seriously for whatever reason. All systemic injustice is related to the rule of one gender to (an)other(s), one orientation to (an)other(s), one race to (an)other(s), etc.
I've got enough 2nd wave in me to be more interested in how few the non-socially-constructed differences between men and women are than in celebrating differences. Fandom discussions have helped me reassess the value of traditionally feminine things, which I needed to do, but I'm not going to drop my position that those things are only feminine by tradition, both the negative and the positive.
I agree absolutely, although everything you say there sounds like it would fit perfectly comfortably in my understanding of the third wave, perhaps even more so than in my understanding of the second wave. (Obdisclaimer that a) wave terminology erases history between waves and is not to be reified, and b) my understanding of the history is hardly authoritative.)
There is nothing inherently male-dominated in a system sneering at "trailer park" accents or calling for separate drinking fountains or neglecting to build ramps.
No, but there are hierarchies of power at work here. I used to argue that all binary hierarchies of power were implicit projections of the male/female binary, but I no longer argue that, because it privileges sexism over forms of systemic injustice in a way that I now find problematic. I do believe that a society in which one sex did not hold power over the other would not exist in a world with sneering at "trailer park" accents or calling for separate drinking fountains or neglecting to build ramps; they're all interconnected in the Rule of the Father.
Frankly, I would be happiest if sex and gender were taken out of the equation entirely. We could have unisex bathrooms and, hell, why not reproduction by budding?
Come the feminist utopia ("justice utopia" just sounds weird, but I will disclaim that I don't believe you can have a feminist utopia without an anti-racist utopia, etc., because all forms of systemic injustice are linked), I think that will be exactly what happens (possibly not the reproduction by budding, although why not?). In the meantime, constant vigilance is required to detect male privilege where it exists (everywhere!), because attempts to take sex and gender out of the equation more often end up as (are coopted to become) excuses to ignore real gender inequalities. But I do think that we will be able to be post-feminists in the post-patriarchy (but I despair of that being anything more than an eschatological vision!).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-12-02 07:13 pm (UTC)I've got enough 2nd wave in me to be more interested in how few the non-socially-constructed differences between men and women are than in celebrating differences. Fandom discussions have helped me reassess the value of traditionally feminine things, which I needed to do, but I'm not going to drop my position that those things are only feminine by tradition, both the negative and the positive.
I agree absolutely, although everything you say there sounds like it would fit perfectly comfortably in my understanding of the third wave, perhaps even more so than in my understanding of the second wave. (Obdisclaimer that a) wave terminology erases history between waves and is not to be reified, and b) my understanding of the history is hardly authoritative.)
There is nothing inherently male-dominated in a system sneering at "trailer park" accents or calling for separate drinking fountains or neglecting to build ramps.
No, but there are hierarchies of power at work here. I used to argue that all binary hierarchies of power were implicit projections of the male/female binary, but I no longer argue that, because it privileges sexism over forms of systemic injustice in a way that I now find problematic. I do believe that a society in which one sex did not hold power over the other would not exist in a world with sneering at "trailer park" accents or calling for separate drinking fountains or neglecting to build ramps; they're all interconnected in the Rule of the Father.
Frankly, I would be happiest if sex and gender were taken out of the equation entirely. We could have unisex bathrooms and, hell, why not reproduction by budding?
Come the feminist utopia ("justice utopia" just sounds weird, but I will disclaim that I don't believe you can have a feminist utopia without an anti-racist utopia, etc., because all forms of systemic injustice are linked), I think that will be exactly what happens (possibly not the reproduction by budding, although why not?). In the meantime, constant vigilance is required to detect male privilege where it exists (everywhere!), because attempts to take sex and gender out of the equation more often end up as (are coopted to become) excuses to ignore real gender inequalities. But I do think that we will be able to be post-feminists in the post-patriarchy (but I despair of that being anything more than an eschatological vision!).