The Personal Shouldn't Always Be the Political
I'm working my way back through a list of gender-challenging posts that I've found, bookmarked, and the sort of lost in the shuffle. I found this comment, from Sallo in a post about gender, power, roles in BDSM by DevastatingYet of Devastating Yet Inconseqential, and I thought she made a great point about what sometimes seem suspiciously "coincidental" correlations between bold explorations of kink and highly traditional gender roles.
To use a non-bdsm example, when I hear women take a very conservative, traditional sex-role, one-step-removed-from-barefoot-and-pregnant position on marriage or women’s role in society in general, I do blame the patriarchy. It’s not that I doubt that the woman actually does in some sense want that life, but I assume that it is because she has absorbed these views from her (male-dominated) religion, family, or other source. It’s not impossible that this isn’t something that some women would just want for their own reasons, so I am inaccurately lumping them all into some kind of category of the (however mildly) brainwashed. This is quite unfair to those women who have thought things through at a deep level and still want that life, but the alternative is unclear. Taking it at face value that women want what they are willing to say publically that they want, or want the lives that they are living (through some kind of revealed preference thing, as though their choices have not been constrained all along) - that just seems too close to rationalizing and excusing the system.
I don’t immediately see why moving this into the realm of sex changes the analysis significantly.
Far be it from me to criticize anyone for enjoying home and raising children (barefoot, now that I think about it.) But based on how often people say infuriating shit to my partner like "It must be so nice having him help with the house" I gotta say yeah, a lot of people have kind of absorbed their views about it from their (male-dominated) religion, family, or other source. That *still* doesn't make anyone's turn-on *invalid,* of course since *if it turns you on* then... that's just what does. On the other hand, you'd probably want to consider not taking it personally if other people point out that *public policies* or *conservative traditions* your fantasies are tied to kind of suck.
Update: In comments Christina B suggests an excellent test: " I think a good way to measure 'free' is to ask 'what would happen if one day you change your mind?'" Pretty cool tool, by the way, for all *sorts* of situations.
That's a great photo.
That's a paradox I wonder about a lot--less with kink, which requires some self-awareness of your abnormality, than with women who insist they love traditional gender roles. (Although I note that quite a few female advocates of housewife roles have independent careers themselves--they've "sacrificed" their chance at true happiness to spread the word, you see.) What do you say, as a feminist, to someone who says "my husband says I should have tons of kids and not go to school or work and I think that's wonderful!"?
If you're a radical feminist, you say "you're unenlightened and under patriarchal influence, you don't know what you really should want." Which is partly true but also... hey, who made you so smart, that you know what's best for everyone? I can't presume to know that other people's best interests are different from their stated wishes.
If you're an individualist feminist, you say "mazel tov, live in your way and I'll live in mine!" But is this feminism or complacency? Is a woman's choice to sacrifice her own power always a free and informed choice? Would the women's movement have gotten as far as it has today if we were afraid to criticize anyone else's mode of living?
And if you're sort of a moderate feminist, you just get very, very uncomfortable.
[Actually as I understand small-r radical feminism the question is "do all parties have equal power?" Which ties in nicely with Christina B's test, below: "What happens if I want to change my mind?" Also, "...should want to..." are some of the most passive-aggressive, coercive words in language -- I know some big-R Radical Feminists use that construction but then so do a lot of other people. I'd say if you're moderate and you feel uncomfortable when someone says "gee I think being chained to the stove and ironing all day is just so hot" is to apply the where's-the-power and can-they-change tests. Thanks, Holly. --fl]
Particularly in light of the recent revelation of the ranch in Texas, I think a good way to measure "free" is to ask "what would happen if one day you change your mind?" Would you be physically attacked? Would you be excluded or alienated from your community? Would your family (including your husband) support your decision?
However, that doesn't really answer the question as to how much right we have to question someone else's choices.
[Ooh, that's a pretty brilliant test, Christina. I'm going to bump it to the main post. Thanks. --fl]