Monday, May 7, 2007

Feminism and love?

Anyhow, this is the first post. A great majority of the posts will have to do with feminism, and politics, others will not.

The intent, I think, is to create a space in which feminism and conciousness raising, as well as theory discussions can be put to good use. I hope to, from this blog, create a bridge between feminism and feminism activism, which -- at this point, are not on the same page.

So, without further delay, here is your first post:

I apologize in advance for the cheesiness of this note. So cheesy, you could make nachos out of it, and still have leftovers for something else.

So, feminism and love: it's been the topic in my head the last week or so, because of what we're reading in class and all. I want to get your opinion on whether we can love and still be feminists.I used to think it was impossible, because love, for what it's worth, upholds patriarchy. It leads to "family," and "wife" and "husband," all of which are problematic in its own sphere, because of society's definition.In fact, since my transformation/mutation/metamorphis into a feminist, I've rejected relationships and love, seeing it as weak and patriarchal.But, in reading "To Be Real," I realized that, indeed, love and feminism can exist.

While society's view of love, it seems, is based on inequality, feminists can indeed take such institution (love) and transform it into something powerful.Love, for the feminist, isn't about being weak or feeling "out-of-control" love, but it's a decision. It's a decision based on us having a choice -- in that we love someone for choosing us, and we choose someone for loving us. That decision to love is not because we are forced to, as is often the case with the general public, but because we choose to, and we feel like it.

For the feminist, love is about shared values and ideals, beliefs and dreams, knowing damned well that we are completely fine alone; but that we're better together.For the feminist, love isn't about someone completing us, making two halves into a whole -- but rather, two wholes joining.In fact, for the feminist, love isn't about someone making us better people, as the cliche goes (idealistically, you should already be good enough when entering a relationship), but rather -- joining forces to make something, someone, some agency, some group, some institution better.

Maybe I am all wrong. Maybe we feminists should just settle for casual sex, because anything else that can lead to a family might be patriarchal, but then again, maybe I am onto something here.After all, we feminists don't need a trophy partner or a suppoter, what we need are allies. As my favorite poem goes, and I think it applies here, "I don't want to build my life around you, but I want to include you in the building of my life." That, for me, is how love ought to be for feminists.

Marc

No comments: