Definitions...
Apr. 10th, 2005 08:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trixtahI'm a member of the ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
anarchafeminist community, which I joined because I'm into the anarchist political philosophy and I'm a feminist.
But I just tripped over their definition of the term, which they got in turn from the Wikipedia article:
And you know, I don't agree with it. The first form of oppression was when someone used their strength (physical or otherwise) on someone else to gain something that the other person wasn't willing to share. Whether it was a man over a woman, an older person over a younger or whatever.
If they're talking about systematic oppression, I don't know about that one either. I think the economic kind of oppression (you cannot gain access to resources unless you're X or Y) probably came first. But no-one can possibly know.
I hate it when people extend definitions past what a word apparently means. I got bit by that as well with "lesbian-feminist" in the 80s. Ok, I'm a dyke and I'm a feminist. What I didn't know is that lesbian-feminists are supposed to think that all women are naturally superior to all men (roots in cultural feminism), and that the only way to be a real feminist is to be a dyke. I even met a couple of "political dykes" (who would possibly be bi, but they felt that lesbians were "more oppressed", therefore they chose to be lesbian), and quite frankly, I'd be glad if the pair of them returned to straight-dom. (There must be a word for that kind of über-earnestness. A word for that sense of absolute moral superiority which is guaranteed to get instantly up my nose.)
Anyways, getting back to the technical description of anarcha-feminism, what a bugger. Maybe we should invent a new language of academe (since that is where these mutated definitions seem to originate), where they don't use English words, and define their own terms how they see fit. Bring back Latin as the language of academics, I say! :-)
anarchafeminist community, which I joined because I'm into the anarchist political philosophy and I'm a feminist.But I just tripped over their definition of the term, which they got in turn from the Wikipedia article:
Feminist anarchism, or anarcha-feminism (a term allegedly created during the 1960's second-wave feminism), views patriarchy as the first manifestation of hierarchy in human history; thus, the first form of oppression occurred in the dominance of male over female.
And you know, I don't agree with it. The first form of oppression was when someone used their strength (physical or otherwise) on someone else to gain something that the other person wasn't willing to share. Whether it was a man over a woman, an older person over a younger or whatever.
If they're talking about systematic oppression, I don't know about that one either. I think the economic kind of oppression (you cannot gain access to resources unless you're X or Y) probably came first. But no-one can possibly know.
I hate it when people extend definitions past what a word apparently means. I got bit by that as well with "lesbian-feminist" in the 80s. Ok, I'm a dyke and I'm a feminist. What I didn't know is that lesbian-feminists are supposed to think that all women are naturally superior to all men (roots in cultural feminism), and that the only way to be a real feminist is to be a dyke. I even met a couple of "political dykes" (who would possibly be bi, but they felt that lesbians were "more oppressed", therefore they chose to be lesbian), and quite frankly, I'd be glad if the pair of them returned to straight-dom. (There must be a word for that kind of über-earnestness. A word for that sense of absolute moral superiority which is guaranteed to get instantly up my nose.)
Anyways, getting back to the technical description of anarcha-feminism, what a bugger. Maybe we should invent a new language of academe (since that is where these mutated definitions seem to originate), where they don't use English words, and define their own terms how they see fit. Bring back Latin as the language of academics, I say! :-)