What attracts many of us to feminism
Via Lynn of Noli Irritare Leones here's a quote by Mythago of a comment she made on Hugo Schwyzer's blog
What attracts many of us to feminism is a rejection of the shaky theory that men and women are binary opposites, with virtually no overlap in their biology, behavior or abilities–practically might as well be separate species–and that a woman who is ‘like a man’ (or a man who is ‘like a woman’) is a freak, pervert or both.
That just puts it so succinctly. The differences between men and women are, of course, real, but real the way twenty and thirty year olds are different, different the way basketball players and ice skaters are different, different the way left handed and right handed people are different: different, sure, and depending on particular circumstances even significantly different, but no more polar opposites than are musicians and poets, Pennsylvanians and Virginians, or pharmacists and chemists.
As Shulamith Firestone puts it in the last chapter of The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution
"...but no more polar opposites than are musicians and poets, Pennsylvanians and Virginians, or pharmacists and chemists..."
Reminds me of those SAT questions...
sun is to moon as man is to...
I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bath water, though. Polarity is important, and I wouldn't want to live in a world without it. Dichotomy in the world is a beautiful thing, when it can be acknowledged and appreciated without judgment.
[Eh, again I'm not sure polarity is the right word. Yes, some of us are outies and others are innies, and depending on how we like to mix sexually those make a big difference... but I'm just saying that however I might care for those specific differences they still don't add up to anything like *polar* differences. Thanks, Selena. --fl]
I'm a feminist, but am intrigued by the folks who don't define themselves as feminist, but as humanist. I guess they feel feminism is too pro-female, and that humanism is more equal ground. I suppose I'm humanist too, but I'm not willing to give up my feminist label. :)
[Yeah, the terminology thing is fraught with peril. After reading Firestone's Dialectic of Sex I'm comfortable calling myself a *radical* feminist, because that really is about eliminating sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression. But I'm not comfortable calling myself a plain-old feminist because not everyone agrees men should call themselves that. Technically I'm still a humanist because eliminating gender as a fundamental social organizer isn't my only objective. But in my opinion feminism is where the real cutting edge of humanism is happening right now. Thanks, BK! --fl]