Inquiries into feminist thought
Kajal Bandyopadhyay spots a breath of fresh air in an old book
As a critical friend of feminists, I find it enjoyable publicising a non-anti-feminist book on which I could somehow lay my hands. This is Fire with Fire by Naomi Wolf, already quite a celebrity for her earlier book, vThe Beauty Myth. Wolf's first book was granted a sort of foremost position in what is called Third Wave Feminism. And it's not at all that the second book is anyway against feminism or its principal causes. Here we get started rather with Wolf's valorizing account of the famous Hill-Thomas hearings (Anita Hill's testimony in the US Senate hearings prior to Clarence Thomas' appointment to the Supreme Court) that took place in September-October 1991, ushering in "a spontaneous women's uprising that brought American women an incredible number of victories". And, this, Wolf feels, could just be the big beginning for men-women equality. But that did not happen. Why? As Wolf finds it, an obstacle stood on the path of women's equality in the shape of many American women's rejection of "feminism." That's how the struggle did not pick up further. In Fire with Fire, Naomi Wolf proves to have anyhow developed a sharp opposition to the typical negative mindset true of some people. We find a remarkably revealing instance of this in her long description of the situation in a rape crisis center where she had worked. As one reviewer of her book comments on that, "The walls were drab, the chairs uncomfortable, the lighting stark. A lack of money? No, simply a pervading attitude of victimization, as if it would be "inappropriate" to have a cheerful, comfortable shelter." Wolf is clearly against the philosophy orienting the atmosphere there; the same reviewer observes: Who more deserves a little comfort than a woman who has been raped? Surely if anyone would appreciate a vase of flowers and a cup of gourmet coffee, it would be these women. Even the staff were lifeless; they held tedious meetings in which everyone tried not to say anything vaguely negative, lest they upset the "sisterhood." Wolf would have preferred a little honesty, efficiency, and forward drive instead of all this false agreement and wheel-spinning. Eventually the rape crisis center smothered in its own self-pity and had to close. And it's then that in Section III of Fire with Fire we find some very thought-provoking ideas coming from Naomi Wolf. These are revolutionary so far as their conventionally anti-feministic import is concerned. Rejecting the typically feministic or "victim feminism" notion that power, money and aggression are necessarily "male" traits that women should not cultivate at all, Wolf acknowledges women's "dark side" also! She admits that given the same scope as men, women would behave in much the same way. Wolf even favours the development of a "vision of femininity in which it is appropriate and sexy for women to use power." (p. xvii). And, this is where I, as a critical friend of feminists, feel highly vindicated. For I have written a good number of essays indicating how power can be female also, or that there's nothing gender-specific in all these. I would, however, more like to check if Wolf's is an acceptable position above either for males or females. Should anyone interact in a powerful manner, of domination? Will that result in anything short of an endless cycle of domination and counter-domination? It's interesting that, basing herself on popular magazines, national polls and TV shows, Wolf also shows that women no longer see men as "natural" wielders of power (a concept of second wave feminism). What then emerge, fortunately, are senses or images of female power, prestige and wealth. Ideas of natural gap between genders in all these are untrue. To go back to our initial position of many American women's rejection of "feminism", the second section of Fire with Fire explains the gap between feminism and so many American women. That is, by saying that though the majority of American women support the goals of feminism, a majority will not call themselves "feminists." For, feminism has now come to represent a rigid agenda, and many women feel that taking on the feminist label somehow requires them to hold a long list of "correct" opinions. These opinions on highly divisive issues such as abortion, affirmative action, homosexuality and pornography make it difficult for many to go by the feminist name! There's a little more of this story. Wolf recounts how feminism, never monolithic, has now turned out to be so. Almost all the numerous strands of feminism of the early days of the second wave except what Wolf calls "victim feminism" have allegedly died out. And this one strand is a creation of academics confined to women's studies departments, and does not represent average (American) women. So, Wolf is for a return to the days of heterogeneity when women didn't have to agree in order to be called "feminist." It is a damage done to women's movement, she feels, when it's a quibble about who is "really" a feminist, and there's no appreciation or acknowledgement of pro-women efforts that don't strictly go by exact political ideas. There can be a vibrant, vital women's movement only when there's space for some division and conflict. Naomi Wolf recollects the conservative 1980s when American women had to huddle together to repel certain forces; what she now advocates is the luxury of diversifying without becoming fragmented. She writes, "We should never [glorify consensus] at the expense of challenging and testing our reality through dissent and debate.... If criticism of a movement amounts to disloyalty, that movement has set up the conditions of its own fossilization." (pp. 109-110). What Wolf proposes in the third section of her book is new and worth exploringreplacing "victim feminism" with "power feminism." As I feel, it is so when power feminism means women's equality with men (not inferiority or superiority), and encourages women to assume the power and responsibility they not only deserve as men's equals, but also already have. I appreciate it when Wolf shows how emphasis of victimization leads women to only nagging and stagnation when they should positively use the power that they already and very much have. She writes, "Instead of complaining, let's solve the problems! Instead of feeling guilty for earning a decent income, let's use the money to help other women." Wolf's is almost an acceptance that women anyhow have much power, maybe after what she calls the "genderquake." And that is very much a welcome change! Most of the women do not admit their power, may be of a different kind. Wolf's call for bringing about the due change in women's self-consciousness is what I find most valuable about Fire with Fire. Wolf writes both about recent changes in women's condition and the changes that is yet to happen in self-realization. Let me quote: ...When I argue that women have enormous unclaimed power, I am not pretending that women are not harmed and held back in every way, or that "everything's all right now" so we can relax and stop fighting. I am saying rather, that if we understand the events of the recent past and act on that understanding, and if we undergo a sea change in our own self-image, matters will become increasingly "all right."... My hope is that if we interpret the genderquake rightly, we won't stop fighting. We will fight more intelligently and elegantly... When I say that the genderquake has potentially changed forever what it means to be female, I mean this: It is no longer necessary for women to ask anyone's permission for social equality. (pp. 51-52). Fire with Fire is a breath of fresh air in feminist literature, which is all too often heavy and negative. Though Wolf has not come up with senses and ideas that logically follow from her initial idea of "fire" being already and always there in women, yet her goal is perhaps to create a new feminist movement that (American) women can again join, to replace exclusionary feminisms. She is for a heterogeneous movement, characterized not by unity of strict beliefs or an idealistic concept of "sisterhood." We wait for women coming up as agents of all-out changes in the whole society. Women cannot have totally self-determined lives; nor are there all sunny mornings for any one anywhere.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments