hrm. Problems boys have.

[curgoth]

I've been over-caffeinated and bored. Therefore, my brain has been racing and trying to work on not-work.

Specifically, I find I've been ruminating on feminist issues a fair - privilege, the role of women's sexuality in society, how the patriarchy affects that, etc. I feel a bit weird talking about it, though. I mean, I'm a guy. I am implicitly party to the patriarchy. I benefit, daily from my male privilege, and don't necessarily cast that off when I might. I haven't read most of the basic books of feminist theory. So, really, I'm probably talking out of my ass and expecting everyone to think my opinions are important because I'm a white male, and I'm used to people thinking what I say is important. I dunno. I feel sometimes like I'm not qualified to have opinions about this stuff, and should just shut up.

While pondering this, I was struck by the fact that despite my good intentions and attempts to have dependable sexual politics, I find I am easily swayed when a pretty girl asks me to do something. There's something in the neighbourhood of "sad" or "ironic" in there.

I have no answers. I'm not going to stop trying to understand gender/sexual politics, but sometimes I wonder if I ever really can.

Comments

[zingerella.livejournal.com]

It seems to me that there are places where I can do something about that, but I can't come up with any good examples off-hand.

Here's one (and I'm not saying you don't already know this, but it's a really common example):

Affirmative action and programmes intended to redress gender or racial inequities in the workplace. In order to have women or members of other underrepresented groups in certain professions, members of the better represented groups may wish to support such programmes, and accept that doing so means more competition for the same jobs, accepting that some programmes may seem to "favour" members of less represented groups, and that, eventually, they may not be able to do things the way they've always done them.

For example, people who take parental leave may not have this adversely affect their suitability for promotion (as it does now, on the grounds that other people were slogging away in the salt mines proving themselves while new parents were living lives of idleness and luxury, rocking the cradle and eating bonbons, so clearly those who stayed around are more worthy of promotion.)

In the post-feminist, post-gender-essentialist, post-racist society, the playing field may well be level, and people will be evaluated for jobs on the basis of their suitability for those jobs alone. Right now, how things are done tends to favour men, and people who have no dependents, and no responsibilities outside their workplaces. It tends to favour those who have backgrounds that permit them access to higher education, and that give them the cultural tools to "pass" in the dominant culture. Redressing this inequity means accepting that people who may not have "done their time," may seem to receive help that members of the dominant groups don't have access to (because, as members of the dominant groups, they've always had access to help).

but the hard ones are the advantages that have to be abandoned to build a fairer society.

This? Is spot on.