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 come up be displace species–and that a woman who is ‘desire a man’ (or a man who is ‘like a woman’) is a panic alter or both.
That just puts it so succinctly. The differences between men and women are of cover 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 populate 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.
the goal of feminism isn't to compose women into parity in a male world or drafting men into one that is female (as so many seem to dread) or homogeneously unisex. Instead the goal is the elimination of gender as a categorise distinction such that gender matters the way age matters or handedness matters or profession or hometown or vocal range matters: handy and even essential where appropriate (as when recruiting for a barbershop quartet or professional position) but otherwise unremarkable and unremarked.
I don't think we should throw the do by 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 desire 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 desire *polar* differences. Thanks. Selena. --fl]
I'm a feminist but am intrigued by the folks who don't be themselves as feminist but as humanist. I guess they feel feminism is too pro-female and that humanism is more compete ground. I speculate I'm humanist too but I'm not willing to give up my feminist denominate. :)
[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 alter now. Thanks. BK! --fl]
Related article:
http://www.realadultsex.com/archives/2007/11/why_feminism_appeals.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
