BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Feminist perspective?

 
 
wembley can change in 28 days
14:02 / 13.09.01
Well, in at work again at the YWCA (I do web stuff), and one of the fabulous women here and I had a conversation about the lack, thus far, of any feminist commentary in the media. I don't mean this as a what-is-feminist debate starter, and perhaps it is early to be expecting anything but tunnel-vision coverage, but has anyone found anything? She's going to be doing a lot of writing today and I'd love to help her out with a few links, or perhaps anyone here who could offer some words. Thanks.
 
 
Cherry Bomb
14:24 / 13.09.01
I had actually thought of this myself. Something to look into, certainly.

I feel that pacifism is very, if not feminist, certainly egalitarian, partnership-oriented point of view. As all of the talk of "punishment" with weapons and basically showing who's mightier has gone on, I have definitely been struck by the "dominator" mentality of such talk.

I recommend y'all read the fabulous "Sacred Pleasure" and "The Chalice & The Blade"byRiane Eisler. "Chalice & The Blade" is especially striking in its discussion of the absence of war and battles and the presence of scenes of love, children, dancing in the murals of ancient, partnership-oriented cultures. As dominator societies came in, the images of man and women intertwined became replaced more and more by images of battle and war.

I believe that war is directly related to this "might makes right" dominator mentality. I also believe that the dominator mentality is responsible for a great deal of abuse, racism, sexism and homophobia in the world.

This is because in the dominator model of relations, might truly makes right. Whether that is physical, monetarily, militarily, etc.

This is not to say that a partnership model is perfect by any means. However, I do believe that we do not need war. There is no reason to have war - period. And I certainly think a partnership way of being is more prohibitive of war, abuse, etc., because it relies more on working together rather than one side dominating the other.

[ 13-09-2001: Message edited by: Cherry Bomb ]
 
 
Ganesh
16:55 / 13.09.01
My partner claimed today that, a couple of decades ago, it wasn't uncommon for Islamic militant hijackers to be female. Nowadays, when we hear of a hijacking, they're almost always male.

Has militant Islam become more fundamentalist in terms of sex roles?
 
 
grant
18:05 / 13.09.01
Yes.
I can't remember where I was reading this, but part of the thing has to do with Palestinian sence of *urgency*.

I think tradtitionally, Palestine and Lebanon were also far more secular. The rise of fundamentalist Islam really took place with Khomeni's rise to power in the early 80s (part of the same global wave as Reagan & Thatcher - and Jerry Falwell & Pat Robertson). That Iranian movement crossed a few borders.
And once the religion got involved, it started being about Islam and not about whatever country.
 
  
Add Your Reply