"For instance, do we as women see ourselves as nurturers first, and then as unique human beings? If we don't, then we women haven't achieved the growth and change we need to make. "

shouldn't that be "If we do Posted by: Anita Rowalnd on June 26, 2002 04:20 PM

Anita, you're spot on with this correction. Thanks!

"_Real change_ [for women] starts with us [women], not the guys": yes, _exactly_.

So it's unfortunate that the vast majority of feminist theory and practice has been about trying to change the Other (usually men, but not always so) in order to avoid the personal challenge of deep inner change. In that sense, much feminist theory has been about as sensible, and successful, as demanding that men save women the trouble and embarrassment of urinating by doing it for them...

In the last century, women have had to cope with massive changes - effectively, a fundamental shift in the definition of what it is to be woman. Far too many have 'solved' their problems by blaming everything on men, rather than seeing that much if not most of the issues are _and can only be_ women's alone - exactly as Bb says.

What worries me is that the pendulum's back in swing: as I see it, it started that way about five years ago, and it's moving quite quickly now. There's a lot of very understandable male anger at risk of being let loose behind that swing. If we don't want a society which makes the Taliban's attitude to women look positively friendly, we need to stop _right now_ all the self-centred talk about women's 'rights' over others, and focus real hard on women's _responsibilities_, for themselves, and toward others.

To me, this post of Bb's is a welcome sign of sanity in a world that's mostly insane...

plus, I can even spell my own name, if I'm careful!

Tom, I'm not sure you and I are necessarily in agreement or disagreement. I feel that change must be initiated by women for women. However, I don't necessarily think some (many?) men are going to be happy with the change once it comes.

At the end of Spiderman, Peter Parker repeats the advice of his "dad" -- With great power comes great responsibility. You're right, Shelly -- if we want the power/right to determine our own fates, then we have to take responsibility for our choices. Not all women have bought into that; they'd rather trade personal power and responsibility for a protected and supported life. We women have never agreed among ourselves that equality and equanimity with men is what is in our best interest and in the best interest of humanity as a whole. I don't think that there will ever be consensus about gender equality. And if all humans (or at least a majority thereof) could embrace the idea that with rights and power must come responsibility,integrity, and fairness, the issue of gender equality would be moot.

Exactly agreed on that last point, Elaine. Though in some ways I'd phrase it slightly differently: 'rights' and power arise _from_ responsibility, integrity and fairness, and not the other way round.

One of the greatest tragedies of current-era feminism has been the extent to which it has promoted the notion that, solely by the fact of being female, women are inherently _entitled_ to personal power (usually interpreted wrongly as power _over_ others) _and_ "a protected and supported life", and that it is others' (i.e. usually men's) sole responsibility to provide this. To the extent that "We women have never agreed among ourselves that equality and equanimity with men is what is in our best interest and in the best interest of humanity as a whole", it's been men who have borne most of the pain of that uncertainty and disagreement between and (all too often) within individual women.

The biggest shift for women in the last two centuries has been the ending of the 'inevitable' conflation of womanhood and motherhood. This change has come about for medical, social and technological reasons: in itself it has little to do with social mores, though it's necessarily had a huge impact on them. The responsibility for continuing the thread of generations still rests collectively with women, as it always has; yet it is now a choice, individually, as it was not and could not have been before. Yet with that choice come responsibilities - many of them, and most of them systematically shirked and avoided, usually by the age-old women's tactic of blaming everything on men instead... _Blame solves nothing_: personal responsibility does. That's really the issue here.

As for whether "men are going to be happy with the change when it comes", Bb, you'd probably be surprised: what they're mostly unhappy about now is the endless uncertainty, the endless foisting-off onto them of inappropriate and impossible responsibilities. Some men will object, of course - especially those with too great an ego-investment in the codependent 'protector' role - but for most of us it'll be more like breathing a sigh of relief... "at last... at _last_!"

Having been -- in the past -- one of those women who blamed men for my being "stuck" and unable to get anywhere in my life, let me say that we do that out of soul-deep frustration. Often we have husbands who, while perfectly comfortable dealing equally with women in the workplace, still want "mama" at home, making dinner, keeping the hearth fires burning while they focus on achieving what makes them happy in the rest of the world. (Heh. Do I sound bitter; yes, I am about that.) Then, we look out at the rest of the world and see men in power everywhere, making decisions about our lives. What choices do we have then? And who do you expect us to blame? OK. So, if they're like me, they say "enough!" and tear themselves away from patriarchy and re-invent themselves. But at what cost. How much better if men were on our side, don't you think, Tom?

"How much better if men were on our side, don't you think, Tom?" Yes, sure. Yet what _is_ 'our side'? That's not a trivial question: the moment we set up one 'side' _against_ another, we've already set up such that _everyone_ loses...

The bitterness is the hard part: it ain't to get past that without going through a very destructive phase, in the process of which it's our allies that get most hurt - and hence often cease being our allies, for their own safety if nothing else. Having been on _both_ sides of that story, I'm acutely aware of that problem.

I do wish that women would actually start looking in more depth at the real issues here: yes, I fully understand that bit about "mama at home" and the rest, yet there are complexities within complexities about even that issue that render what you've said above to be a dangerous over-simplification - and a dangerously self-centred one at that. (I mean that literally, BTW, not as a put-down. For example, did you actually _ask_ the men involved whether they were focussed "on achieving what makes them happy in the rest of the world" - or did you just assume that it was so? In my experience it's rare for women to ask men what they _actually_ feel _and accept fully that that is what the respective man feels_ - rather than attacking him for feeling something other than what the woman wants to hear. I ain't joking when I said these issues are deep and complex...)

One simple suggestion: dump, permanently, the term 'patriarchy' - it reeks of male-blame and female self-dishonesty, and is all but meaningless in practice. Replace it in your thinking with the term 'paediarchy': 'rule by, for and on behalf of the childish', a term which exactly describes the _co_dependent mess that gender-relations will fall into automatically unless full awareness and responsibility are applied.

Dunno if that makes any sense, but it's there, anyway. :-}

Well, first of all I was writing the above from both very personal experience and from the experiences of women I know well. It might be more situations of my generation, but there were more men out there like that than you would think. (And perhaps they weren't getting what they wanted out of life either, but neither were they willing to give any of it up in pursuit of something more equitable; and that's usually where relationships start breaking down and women like me finally say, sorry buddy, I'm not going to wash your fig leaf or lie under you any more --that's a reference to the Lilith myth btw.) And, sorry, but I'm not letting go of the word "patriarchy," and I invite you over to my site (www.kalilily.net) and BlogSisters to read my rationale for that.

There is a reason why the Lilith myth resonates so with women married to "traditional" males.