Comments on: Depression in Action, or Why I’m Still A Radical Feminist Despite It All

By: Friday Blogaround « The Gender Blender Blog

Friday Blogaround « The Gender Blender Blog — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:31:09 +0000

[...] Depression in Action, or Why I’m Still a Radical Feminist Despite it All [...]

By: ShinyObjects

ShinyObjects — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:03:23 +0000

Yes, thank you! I missed out on formal women’s studies classes, mostly because I never got around to taking any in college, so I’ve been playing catch-up here and there. A lot of these ideas are tough to grapple with on my own, and it means a lot to hear from real people off the page.

By: magpie_seven

magpie_seven — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:42:25 +0000

This is extremely good. I do think though that there is a danger inherent in saying that a married relationship can only be a “mixed blessing”- I find it a sticking point when talking to people, like they are afraid I will somehow devalue them for their choosing monogamy. I think monogamy works for some people and that’s okay.

But this was a really good piece.

By: Zara

Zara — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 10:15:13 +0000

Thank you for this post. I feel better and that I am not alone.

By: Spark

Spark — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:18:18 +0000

Hmm, I thought radical feminism was defined by its goal to destroy gender. I see the tension you’re describing–if we can’t see beyond patriarchy, how do we know how to defeat it? But in practice, it doesn’t feel that way. For example, since you brought up marriage, I don’t know what romantic partnership looks like post-revolution, or even if romantic partnership exists post-revolution, but I sure know what oppressive romantic partnership looks like now. Maybe I don’t see the whole picture, but enough is visible that I still have plenty of work to do (and I imagine the farther you get, the more you see to chip away at).

By: bellacoker

bellacoker — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:37:54 +0000

I had always thought that radical feminism was the response to choice feminism. So when people said, “But can’t women choose to be in porn, prostitute themselves, whatever the case might be?” The radical feminist response was, “Sure, but her choices were limited by the patriarchal system she lived in. She was making a choice between prostitution and (insert other crap choice) not prostitution and running for elected office, having a trust fund, or (insert other lovely choice here).”

So, we all have agency to make our choices, but the options that are open to us are determined by a lot of things that are outside out control.

By: Pilgrim Soul

Pilgrim Soul — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:28:30 +0000

JD! I always miss you when you’re gone.

Obviously this piece is a bit mid-conversation, but let me put it this way: I am trying to explain why I still draw on MacKinnon in particular, and why I don’t self describe as “beyond radical feminism” or whatever.

Your note on taxonomy is well taken. It turns out, I learned, that on the internet, radical feminism can be taken to mean something like “feminists who hate men and trans people and also believe that race is irrelevant.” I suppose what I am trying to explain is that that’s not all there is to radical feminism either, in my reading of it.

I think that all I am saying is that just because radical feminists rail on about the patriarchy, and emphasize the various ways in which it shapes our lives including sexually, doesn’t mean that it necessarily fails to recognize individual agency.

And again, my reading happens to be heavily influenced by MacKinnon. No need to break out your Indianapolis rants just yet, ladies, I’ll get to that.

By: jdregent

jdregent — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:09:29 +0000

I also am not sure how helpful it is to talk about “Radical feminism” as if it is a closed canon, agreed upon by all members. Maybe would be more fruitful to talk about actual texts and policies than these “schools” which no one agrees on or knows if they belong to.

By: jdregent

jdregent — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:59:52 +0000

I have a lot of thoughts about this but I’ll just say one for now:

I think that part if the disconnect is that radical feminism, as I have understood it (and I may very well be wrong) does not contain a theory of liberation (is this the same thing as saying a theory of agency? I’m not sure). In fact it suggests that in our current state of patriarchy we are unable to even imagine what non-patriarchy would look like; we are stumbling blind, reaching and hoping for a better world we can’t see. At the same time, policy interventions are suggested and enacted in the name of radical feminism, and I think sometimes there is a tension between this idea that patriarchy is always and forever, and the sense that we are also seeking progress and a way out of patriarchy. I’m not sure if it is some American desire for hope! change! and a linear development of increased freedom, or if there is actually a conflict between the depressive state and the possibility of progress.

I also think that these are not just abstract ideals but also conflicts that are rooted in real historical and actual differences in policy preferences, around porn, use of the criminal justice system, and many other issues, that may be more important (?) or germane to tackle than the abstract commitments.

I also think that some conflicts are actually about tone and syntax more than substance. I’m not sure what that does to the differences between classical radical feminism and its critics; I’m not sure if it is any easier to overcome (or should be overcome) or not.

Ok that was three thoughts.

By: amanda/notmandy

amanda/notmandy — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:28:12 +0000

Oh the many times I have had this discussion. I guess I too am one of those people who can recognize the just how fucked up and inescapable the system is while continuing to participate in it. I like what you said about thinking outside of the box. We all negotiate our level of engagement (with varying levels of privilege), but the fact is we are all still reacting against the roles pushed on us as women. I’d rather the world be a place where that wasn’t the starting point, where there wasn’t that fucking box as a reference point to our thinking.

I don’t think it’s totally a function of age (part of me always had that gut feeling that something was up with the world), but the older I get, the more likely I am to examine my choices/actions and really question why I do some of the things I do. Becoming more aware doesn’t make me feel helpless, instead it has given me insight into the thoughts behind what seemed like gut reactions at the time.