babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » Imperial feminism

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Imperial feminism
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 04 July 2002 11:02 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Over the last year a number of babblers have argued that feminists should automatically support certain political actors, positions, or systems over others because, in their view, women's liberation is possible only in countries where those politics hold sway.

What do people think of that argument? What happens to it especially in a time of war? How do we answer babblers who accuse us of betraying other women by not demanding that all their oppression be lifted and all their problems solved by tomorrow?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 04 July 2002 11:41 AM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I recall being chewed out by a couple of babblers for suggesting that the scope of desirable change will take a great deal of time to address. History would seem to indicate that the massive social upheaval brought about by rapid change has the opposite of the desired effect.

That said, I think the best we can do for women who are more overtly oppressed in other countries is to support (financially and in other ways) the indigenous women's movements there. Each has to fight their own battle (making even small victories that much sweeter) but shouldn't have to do so in a lonely vacuum.


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
rosebuds
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2399

posted 04 July 2002 06:21 PM      Profile for rosebuds     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There's a great deal to be said for cultural sensitivity, too.

I think it's important to realize that in many cultures the women are as believing about their traditions or ethos as the men are. We certainly can't be marching in and demanding huge changes because "we know what's better" for them. That kind of presumption is called "culturalism" and it's as evil as racism in many ways.

That being said, I'm not suggesting that the oppression of women in any culture is acceptable. But we need to start from the bottom up. Countries where the opression of women is violent, such as in the cases of female genital mutilation or honor-killings, need to be condemned outright. As far as the beliefs that go along with those activities, they'll take a lot longer to change.

I believe that the process of change within a culture is one that must be accomplished FROM within that culture. While gross human rights violations can't be tolerated, it is simply arrogant to suggest that our way is the only way. That's why imperialism failed so miserably in the first place...


From: Meanwhile, on the other side of the world... | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
beachcomber
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 678

posted 07 July 2002 02:33 AM      Profile for beachcomber   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Over the last year a number of babblers have argued that feminists should automatically support certain political actors, positions, or systems over others because, in their view, women's liberation is possible only in countries where those politics hold sway.

Well, I'm a pretty anti-imperialist feminist I suppose. I strongly disagree with any policy that would favor enforcing agreement on certain issues or enforcing conformity WRT supporting certain individuals, be they actors, philanthropists or politicians. For me feminism is a personal philosophy as much as a political movement. It's not homogenous. It's not uniform. It has as many faces as the women who participate.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 07 July 2002 08:39 AM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think with feminism or any push to liberate persons or peoples with demonstrable problems is to be aggressive providing them with access to information.

Then you have to step back and trust that they'll take advantage of the information in a way that best suits them.

If one truly believes that all people are in fact equal, why would one doubt that they'd not be able to make the best of the information provided to them?

The problem with groups on the left that attempt social change, be they feminists, trade unionists or environmentalists is that some of us don't trust too well. We tend to think we know what is best for other people, and yes, that is a kind of Imperialism, although it could be called many other things.

It's the habit of idealogues, and it's not limited to the left by any means.

I missed the topic of can feminists be submissive? over at "Auntie". But that is a fun example. Auntie believed that a submissive woman in the bedroom can't be a "feminist". Rebbeca West, ever the salient one, pointed out that feminism is about giving women choices, and sometimes, people being people, they make choices that one wouldn't make for one's self.

If one can't be tollerant of this kind of thing happening, then perhaps one should re-examine one's core relationship with the ideas of freedom and personal liberty.

Those that demand a certain orthodoxy or dogma concerning lock step acceptance of "certain actors, positions or systems", I submit, have not the trust in people, nor the commitment to freedom and individual liberty we should come to expect from each other out here on the left.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
anna_c
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2845

posted 08 July 2002 12:41 AM      Profile for anna_c     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I think it's important to realize that in many cultures the women are as believing about their traditions or ethos as the men are. We certainly can't be marching in and demanding huge changes because "we know what's better" for them. That kind of presumption is called "culturalism" and it's as evil as racism in many ways.

at the same time, i think it is a mistake to view culture homogeneous, lacking in internal variations, dissenting voices, subcultures and marginal or minor cultures. i agree with the post that encourages us to seek indigenous or local women's movements as the starting point for feminist theorizing or action in other cultural contexts.


From: montreal | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 08 July 2002 01:09 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What if a failure to address women's issues and equality is a primary reason for a region to be mired in poverty and backwardness?

http://www.undp.org/rbas/ahdr/PR4.pdf


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca