The problem with the current swedish feminist-antifeminist debate is a lack of semiotics. At some point you just gotta start analysing all those fancy words you're using.
And that's also my problem with it, that people who call themselves anifeminists or humanists or whathefuckever seem to think this debate is about running around and proclaiming to be "for equality" and selfcongratulatory explain that "I
believe in equality for BOTH men and women!" and, well, yes, great, but what does that
mean? In my experience, having once jumped from being a determined antifeminist to a third-wave-feminist, you need some Feminist Theory to back up all that pretty, pretty talk about equality. For instance, you need to determine what gender is, if you're gonna talk about it, what is innate and what is culturally constructed. You need to look at your own behavior in a critical way, and, well, we all know some people have a real problem with that, claiming it makes them feel "blamed" for something other people have done.
I do think some things are already set in motion and are thankfully not gonna be stopped by us arguing about -isms. For instance, I think the generations after us will never understand our willingness to put labels on sexuality. To actually think we could make up three or four categories for fucking, and then expect that to, you know, work. To care so much about
where does this fit in? that we forgot about the fact that nothing in nature is that fussy. And I suppose, in that view, why would anyone care about theories and academia if what everyone say they want is absolut equality between the sexes anyway? Isn't that what we're hoping the fourth wave feminism is gonna be about anyway; redefining feminism, emphasizing other things than the feminists before? I mean, this is not really unheard of. Things progress. My grandparents had to teach their daughters that they could go to university and have a career in whatever job they wanted even if they had children, my parents had to make sure me and my sister knew that our sexuality was completely and totally our own and that nobody had the right to decide with who or how we chose to have sex, and I, in turn, will one day have to teach my daughters if I ever have any that they should never surrender any of the rights they now have just because a lot of very outspoken people will try to claim that the "outdated feminism that forced women to become like men" is the reason for most if not all of the modern world's difficulties. Funny how it goes, huh?
So should I just be glad
there is a debate at all? Does it really matter what camp you're from if everyone has the same goal and change is a good thing anyway? It's just that, I don't really think the Swedish antifeminists and feminists do want the same thing, even if they both mention "equal rights." When a history-less, antifeminist who has never read Kristeva or even Susan Faludi starts being called an authority on "true" gender equality, I'm afraid all stuff - stuff that I care about - that seems too nit-picking will just be discarded as "feminist nonsense." While I do love it that people state that they don't classify people based on their gender, I still think that you need to do more than just say it out loud.
Well. So. That wasn't very coherent at all. I was gonna work Buffy in there somewhere too, but I've forgotten how now.
You know what you need after this much rambling? You need some wine, some self-loathing, and some drunk self-loathing Dylan Moran.
Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om
feminism,
antifeminism,
drunk!,
wine!,
self-loathing!