A pretty moving and timely open letter from Estelle Tang via the Guardian:
An open letter to all my male friends
For me, part of growing up, maturing, or whatever you want to call it, is becoming more aware of, and sensitive to, these kinds of realities, seeing that things like patriarchy, racism, sexism, etc. exist and permeate our culture and society in negative and harmful ways, realizing that even the most seemingly innocuous things we do or say can and do carry the seeds of patriarchy, racism, sexism, etc. without us ever knowing it because it's hard to see the big picture (i.e., history; the multitude of psychology and cultural mechanisms that are at play; the types of discrimination and violence that still exist, even if only in verbal form; etc.).
Reading something like this, it's easy to say, "Well, that's not me. I'd never do that." But that doesn't mean we don't do or say things that, unconsciously on our part, help to propagate these kinds of attitudes. And even when we are aware of it, it can be hard to admit. I know that I certainly don't like admitting to myself that I've done and said things that were less than enlightened, that I've said racist and sexist shit even though I didn't see it that way at the time.
And even if we don't think and act in this way, do we consistently challenge it when we come into contact with others who do? Sometimes, perhaps. But maybe sometimes we're afraid to confront the person. Maybe we think we're too busy or think it's none of our business. Maybe sometimes we think it's funny. Whatever the case, by not challenging it when we know it for what it is, we give it space to grow. Our non-action helps to preserve an environment that allows this to continue to happen. Reading this, the most important message I get is, "Please help me to create an environment that makes it unacceptable because I can't do it alone."
I think her letter is well worth reading, and her advice well worth following.
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Monday, May 26, 2014
happy memorial day
To remember and reflect upon tragic events and those who have died as a result is a humane and worthwhile thing, in my opinion. Wars are themselves supremely tragic events that take the lives of countless living beings, both soldiers and civilians alike; and it's worth remembering all those who have lost their lives in the global carnage we, as a species, are capable of unleashing upon ourselves.
But when it comes to the subject of war, I think we should always be on guard so that we don't allow ourselves be so blinded by our patriotism and the idealization of war heroes that we fall into the trap of blindly supporting militarism and nationalism, or attacking anyone who happens to have a different point of view. As WWII veteran and political activist Howard Zinn once said:
For me, today isn't just about honouring the dead; it's also about remembering the toll that war takes on its survivors and the heavy burdens that many bear from their time spent in and around war, physical and mental scars that take lifetimes to heal, if at all—victims of political-economic systems in which the ruling class declares the wars that the working class and poor must fight. As Eugene Debs famously said in his 1918 Canton, Ohio, speech:
War is hell, and many of those who are lucky enough to come out on the other side of it are changed forever. And it both saddens and angers me that the one's who fight our wars are caught in the tangled web of geopolitics and the machinations of plutocrats who treat human lives more like commodities in their lust for wealth and power than people while the victims on the other side are denigrated, or else completely forgotten. They deserve to be remembered too.
But when it comes to the subject of war, I think we should always be on guard so that we don't allow ourselves be so blinded by our patriotism and the idealization of war heroes that we fall into the trap of blindly supporting militarism and nationalism, or attacking anyone who happens to have a different point of view. As WWII veteran and political activist Howard Zinn once said:
While some people think that dissent is unpatriotic, I would argue that dissent is the highest form of patriotism. In fact, if patriotism means being true to the principles for which your country is supposed to stand, then certainly the right to dissent is one of those principles. And if we're exercising that right to dissent, it's a patriotic act.
For me, today isn't just about honouring the dead; it's also about remembering the toll that war takes on its survivors and the heavy burdens that many bear from their time spent in and around war, physical and mental scars that take lifetimes to heal, if at all—victims of political-economic systems in which the ruling class declares the wars that the working class and poor must fight. As Eugene Debs famously said in his 1918 Canton, Ohio, speech:
They have always taught and trained you to believe it to be your patriotic duty to go to war and to have yourselves slaughtered at their command. But in all the history of the world you, the people, have never had a voice in declaring war, and strange as it certainly appears, no war by any nation in any age has ever been declared by the people. And here let me emphasize the fact—and it cannot be repeated too often—that the working class who fight all the battles, the working class who make the supreme sacrifices, the working class who freely shed their blood and furnish the corpses, have never yet had a voice in either declaring war or making peace. It is the ruling class that invariably does both. They alone declare war and they alone make peace.
War is hell, and many of those who are lucky enough to come out on the other side of it are changed forever. And it both saddens and angers me that the one's who fight our wars are caught in the tangled web of geopolitics and the machinations of plutocrats who treat human lives more like commodities in their lust for wealth and power than people while the victims on the other side are denigrated, or else completely forgotten. They deserve to be remembered too.
Thursday, May 8, 2014
what does feminism have to do with it?
One of the things I enjoyed the most about yesterday's panel hosted by KBOO was Johanna Brenner's topic of, "What does feminism have to do with it?" Unfortunately, I think a few people misunderstood where she was coming from, and didn't really understand what feminism is, but I thought it was one of the more important and interesting topics of the evening.
Why is it so important? One of the main reasons, in my opinion, is how easily obscured the existence of patriarchy is. It's hidden in plain sight, as is its considerable influence, despite the fact that evidence of it is literally everywhere. Most people don't seem to understand patriarchy, how it works, where it comes from, and why it's worth struggling against. In Western society and culture, for example, patriarchy can be traced back to the earliest parts of recorded history; and even today, it pervades huge swaths of our culture, religion, politics, and economic relations.
The role of women in public life in ancient Greece and Rome, from where Western society can arguably trace its roots, was practically nonexistent. Their primary roles were as child-bearers and homebodies. Women (at least aristocratic women, i.e., non-slaves and prostitutes) in Greece were hardly even seen in public, and then usually only when accompanying a man. Being single wasn't acceptable. Education was primarily something men received. Gender roles were strictly defined. Men dominated all spheres of life. In Romes, things were slightly better and less restrictive for women, but not by much.
(As a side note, one of the more radical and impressive aspects of Plato's Republic was his argument that women should share in the education and tasks of their male counterparts. This includes arguing for female guardians (soldiers) and rulers at a time when women were 'kept at home' and mostly restricted from public life, which really surprised me.)
Another point of entry for patriarchy in Western society was Christianity. While some aspects can be seen as radical and egalitarian in nature, there are aspects that, when Christianity was adopted by the Roman world, reinforced patriarchy and women's submissive role in society. A few examples are: "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord" (Eph 5:22); "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says" (1 Cor 14:34); and "I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet" (1 Tim 2:12).
Fast forward through centuries of male dominated society and you have the birth of America, in which initially only white, male property owners could vote, with women only winning the right vote in 1920, 50 years after blacks and 144 years after the country's founding. And if you think winning the right to vote was the end of gender discrimination, you're sorely mistaken. Women are still battling against rigid gender roles, prejudices, and hierarchies that we've been conditioned over time to subconsciously (and even consciously) adopt and maintain.
These material and ideological pressures, albeit weakened, continue to exert their influence on our society and its structure, informing our perceptions of the world and our conceptions of gender norms. Women are still widely seen as and/or expected to be child-bearers and homebodies, providing the free/uncompensated labour of literally reproducing the labour force and supporting the reproduction of labour power via nurturing husbands and children emotionally and materially (e.g., cooking, cleaning, laundry, etc.). They're still expected to provide a certain kind of emotional labour, even in the workforce. They still make up the majority of 'nurturing' professions like nursing and teaching. They still tend to make less than their male counterparts (roughly $.80 to the dollar according to one study). They're often seen and portrayed as 'bitchy,' 'cold,' etc. if they're assertive and not nurturing/emotionally receptive and giving. The list goes on.
But this doesn't just affect women, it affects all of us. Due to the gender roles imposed upon men and women within our society, neither are free to fully be and express themselves (to say nothing of those who fall outside of this historically accepted gender binary). Men, for example, aren't given as much space as women to be 'caring,' 'nurturing,' etc., it not being 'manly' to show too much affection or emotion. And an argument can be made that the prevalence of male privilege embedded in our predominately patriarchal society and the negative aspects of socially-constructed, male gender norms (what some call 'toxic masculinity') are at least partially responsible for the prevalence of male violence, particularly gun violence.
In addition, a recent study published in the journal Psychological Science found that "both men and women see images of sexy women's bodies as objects, while they see sexy-looking men as people," which I think demonstrates that such a gender bias exists in the perception of both men and women; and the study's conclusion further reinforces my belief that sexism and the objectification of women is a broader symptom of a society that's practiced patriarchy for centuries, as well as corroborating evidence that patriarchal ideology has become so ingrained into our collective psyche that even women are conditioned to objectify women in the same way as men.
Feminism, then, isn't about declaring men to be wholly bad or inferior, nor women to be wholly good or superior. It's about confronting the reality that patriarchy exists and permeates our culture and society and challenging that reality in order to create a more free and egalitarian world. I was once ignorant of what feminism was and why it's such an important movement, but not anymore, and I'm proud to call myself a feminist.
Why is it so important? One of the main reasons, in my opinion, is how easily obscured the existence of patriarchy is. It's hidden in plain sight, as is its considerable influence, despite the fact that evidence of it is literally everywhere. Most people don't seem to understand patriarchy, how it works, where it comes from, and why it's worth struggling against. In Western society and culture, for example, patriarchy can be traced back to the earliest parts of recorded history; and even today, it pervades huge swaths of our culture, religion, politics, and economic relations.
The role of women in public life in ancient Greece and Rome, from where Western society can arguably trace its roots, was practically nonexistent. Their primary roles were as child-bearers and homebodies. Women (at least aristocratic women, i.e., non-slaves and prostitutes) in Greece were hardly even seen in public, and then usually only when accompanying a man. Being single wasn't acceptable. Education was primarily something men received. Gender roles were strictly defined. Men dominated all spheres of life. In Romes, things were slightly better and less restrictive for women, but not by much.
(As a side note, one of the more radical and impressive aspects of Plato's Republic was his argument that women should share in the education and tasks of their male counterparts. This includes arguing for female guardians (soldiers) and rulers at a time when women were 'kept at home' and mostly restricted from public life, which really surprised me.)
Another point of entry for patriarchy in Western society was Christianity. While some aspects can be seen as radical and egalitarian in nature, there are aspects that, when Christianity was adopted by the Roman world, reinforced patriarchy and women's submissive role in society. A few examples are: "Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord" (Eph 5:22); "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says" (1 Cor 14:34); and "I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet" (1 Tim 2:12).
Fast forward through centuries of male dominated society and you have the birth of America, in which initially only white, male property owners could vote, with women only winning the right vote in 1920, 50 years after blacks and 144 years after the country's founding. And if you think winning the right to vote was the end of gender discrimination, you're sorely mistaken. Women are still battling against rigid gender roles, prejudices, and hierarchies that we've been conditioned over time to subconsciously (and even consciously) adopt and maintain.
These material and ideological pressures, albeit weakened, continue to exert their influence on our society and its structure, informing our perceptions of the world and our conceptions of gender norms. Women are still widely seen as and/or expected to be child-bearers and homebodies, providing the free/uncompensated labour of literally reproducing the labour force and supporting the reproduction of labour power via nurturing husbands and children emotionally and materially (e.g., cooking, cleaning, laundry, etc.). They're still expected to provide a certain kind of emotional labour, even in the workforce. They still make up the majority of 'nurturing' professions like nursing and teaching. They still tend to make less than their male counterparts (roughly $.80 to the dollar according to one study). They're often seen and portrayed as 'bitchy,' 'cold,' etc. if they're assertive and not nurturing/emotionally receptive and giving. The list goes on.
But this doesn't just affect women, it affects all of us. Due to the gender roles imposed upon men and women within our society, neither are free to fully be and express themselves (to say nothing of those who fall outside of this historically accepted gender binary). Men, for example, aren't given as much space as women to be 'caring,' 'nurturing,' etc., it not being 'manly' to show too much affection or emotion. And an argument can be made that the prevalence of male privilege embedded in our predominately patriarchal society and the negative aspects of socially-constructed, male gender norms (what some call 'toxic masculinity') are at least partially responsible for the prevalence of male violence, particularly gun violence.
In addition, a recent study published in the journal Psychological Science found that "both men and women see images of sexy women's bodies as objects, while they see sexy-looking men as people," which I think demonstrates that such a gender bias exists in the perception of both men and women; and the study's conclusion further reinforces my belief that sexism and the objectification of women is a broader symptom of a society that's practiced patriarchy for centuries, as well as corroborating evidence that patriarchal ideology has become so ingrained into our collective psyche that even women are conditioned to objectify women in the same way as men.
Feminism, then, isn't about declaring men to be wholly bad or inferior, nor women to be wholly good or superior. It's about confronting the reality that patriarchy exists and permeates our culture and society and challenging that reality in order to create a more free and egalitarian world. I was once ignorant of what feminism was and why it's such an important movement, but not anymore, and I'm proud to call myself a feminist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)