Feminism |
|
|
|
|
|
I came across Starhawk's book "Dreaming the Dark" at just the right time. In the previous year I'd resolved a major issue in my life -- reconciling being male and being a woman. My solution was in acknowledging the masculine side of my character, as an aspect of the God and one that enables me to die and be reborn anew. This was a major event in my life, and only achieved after at least one suicide attempt. Shortly thereafter I went to that year's (1998) NOWSA (National Organisation of Women Studenta of Australia) conference. This is a feminist conference and I gave a plenary on gender there. I also went to a workshop about the burning times, wove a web (from wool) with others who attended and made at least one new friend there. Now it seemed to me that being feminist seemed a natural stance to anyone like myself who was a) pagan and b) transgendered. Being pagan influences me because I know that everyone has aspects of the Goddess and the God in them, regardless of their sex. And in being transsexual, I have seen the culture differences in men's and women's behaviours and restrictions.
This doesn't mean that men get all the breaks and women none. Rather, it is a set of social expectations as based on gender, one that exaggerates differences between sexes, and creates stereotypes from which people are judged. As a transsexual I know that these stereotypes are only that -- models that ill define anyone. And as a pagan, if we all have qualities of both the Goddess and the God (even if say we don't call on one in particular), then it follows that regardless of how we define those qualities, that the stereotypes must be false. And if the stereotypes are false, or at the very least horrible distortions promoted for cultural gain, then that needs correcting. Going to NOWSA was an education for me. Feminism isn't one single voice, but a myriad of visions. A recent university pamphlet suggested these categories of feminism as a rough guide: Liberal; DIY; Radical ("separatist"); Socialist; Marxist; PostModern; and Marginalised (referring to women of colour, who are not represented by a anglo middle class majority). I was glad to add my voice to others. Separation and ExclusionI was also saddened by some elements. The conference is for women and hence should be a woman's space, but some people there didn't see transgendered people like myself as falling in that category. To them (and I believe most were separatist) I was a deluded man, a pawn of the patriarchy. As a result the organising committee of the the current conference (1999) banned transgendered women from attending.I was naturally hurt and upset over this. I could feel that it was wrong but was unable to articulate properly the reasons why. Then I read Starhawk's book. It became obvious to me that the patriarchy was in fact an exercise of power-over (as opposed to power-within, see The Power Within) and that thrives on isolating the individual and favouring some people over others, on an arbitrary and violent basis. The quote below (taken from the Sex and Politics chapter) is relevant I think: We must also demand that our politics serve our sexuality. Too often, we have asked sexuality to serve politics instead. Ironically the same movements that criticized sexual repression and bourgeous morality have themselves too often tried to mold their sexual feeling to serve the current political theory. This tradition includes nineteenth century revolutionary ascetism, the New Left's demand that women practice free love (meaning sex without involvement), the fear of lesbianism in the early woman's movement, and the mandatory separatist line taken by some in the later women's movement. Too many generations have asked: What do my politics tell me I should feel? The better question is: What do I, at my root, at my core, desire?And that I think is the key to the issue. If some see their oppression as based on innate differences between sexes (and the unversity pamphlet mentioned above says that separatists believe "that women's characteristics and values are of greater importance and validity than men's"), then someone like myself will be seen as a threat. If I am a woman and male, then that set of beliefs collapses. Hence they reject someone like me as a woman. Naturally though, I differ in this opinion. I see myself as a woman, and being male just makes me an uncommon one. Perhaps the ideology that Starhawk puts forth in her book defines yet another style of feminism: Pagan Feminism. I certainly hope so, but if there is as yet no recognition of the term, maybe I can gain such by applying it to myself. After all, every movement has started with one person, and I can start with myself. I don't know what the outcome will be, but that's not the point. The point is to get involved, and I certainly am. References:
|
|
|
|
|
![[Ethics]](../common/corner.gif)
And it is very evident that the current dominant cultural system in the West, is a patriarchal one. What do I mean by patriarchal? I mean a self perpetuating ideology that uses gender as the basis of advantage and disadvantage: favouring men and disempowering women.