You might try reading more carefully. I wasn't saying or even
implying that middle class feminism is self-indulgent, but that a
feminism that loses its focus is. And misunderstanding the facts
serves that loss of focus. For instance, in this country, and I
expect in Australia as well, educated middle class women are not "as
much victims of rape and domestic violence as any other class," and I
don't know of any researcher who claims they are. Middle class women
are also much more likely to pursue their rapists in the courts and
more likely to prevail. Which is not to excuse even a single case of
gender-based violence, regardless of class. It does raise questions
about how to proceed.
Once again, in the US, where the majority of new doctors, lawyers and
professors are women, and MBAs are very close to parity, most of the
earnings differential among middle class women is based on the
inclusion of the older tier, which earns more, because of seniority,
and is mostly male. That's why in the middle class the average income
gap is narrowing--the old farts are dying off.
For the middle class, at least here, the pace of social change in
this area has been unprecedented, partly because of feminism, but
also because the roles of women in middle class families that are
increasingly economically stressed have changed. A good result from a
lousy cause. There's a way to go for middle class women, but the
major changes to come are largely in the rest of society. And it
wouldn't be awful if some of the economic stress were taken off the
backs of the women and men who find themselves choosing between sleep
time and being with their kids.
Given our history I assumed that you were serious in your invocation
of patriarchy.
Anger is a great fuel, but it's not the same as a plan.
Mark
At 07:15 PM 3/29/2006, you wrote:
>Mark, you were the one who brought up feminism in this context and claimed
>it was self indulgent, knowing perfectly well that we have a history of
>disagreement on this. You think the feminism of middle class women is an
>affectation and self indulgence. I have been critical of some feminisms
>myself; but all the same middle class women are as much victims of rape and
>domestic violence as any other class, since this kind of violence bears no
>relation to class at all. I think Pru Goward's clear sighted and balanced
>commentary covers the rest. And yes, even middle class women get paid less
>(and yes, some get paid more). The balance still turns against women. I
>can't find the article, in the Age some time last year, but it showed, to
>most people's shock, that in some cases the differential was 10 per cent -
>for the same jobs.
>
>On 30/3/06 8:13 AM, "Mark Weiss" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > I doubt that your
> > pointing out what you consider a patriarchal
> > (that chronically misused term) reference will be
> > a particularly effective intervention.
>
>I was funning, as they say. Abraham is the archetypal Patriarch, the father
>of the tribes of Israel (and you referred to "tribes" ) so I was using it
>quite precisely.
>
>I'm at a bit of a loss to defend the significance of language.
>
>All best
>
>A
>
>
>Alison Croggon
>
>Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
>Editor, Masthead: http://masthead.net.au
>Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com
|