2005-05-18

Issue

Okay, the m*se is revisiting her feminist roots. Now, why is it that so many women do this after a breakup? I've seen it happen a number of times, so it is, if not a full-blown movement, at the very least a phenomenon worthy of comment. I'm genuinely curious, although I may be treading in a sensitive area, since I am, after all, a male coyote. Not exactly a member of the ruling patriarchy, perhaps, but hormonally and genetically part of the problem, from a feminist perspective.

Agatha, you suggested yesterday that the posting was a reaction against phallocentric society. I'm wondering if it is not more of a generalised reaction, or a projection onto some theoretical 'other', to avoid looking more closely at her own impulse to lose herself in a relationship. I mean, she could, theoretically, have carried out the relationship while holding true to her feminist precepts throughout. The snippet she published yesterday, along with her musings since her emotional rift with M, make me wonder if she's not playing a version of the old game of blaming something big and exterior, for an issue that may well be interior.

Some people, when they have 'issues' prefer to see these less as anything to do with themselves (i.e. "I have poorly-defined emotional boundaries and tend to drown my self in pursuit of the relationship I crave") and more to do with the world at large (i.e. "It's obviously a feminist issue, because The Patriarchy made me do it")

I'm not saying it's all one or the other. Our interior monologues are always informed by the ethos in which we swim. I'm curious as to what proportions of interior versus exterior this group thinks prompted yesterday's posting in this particular case.

6 comments:

4th Dwarf said...

Wow, Coyote, that's about enough to make me go back to talking like a pirate. Arr.

I have a number of things to discuss.

Like this Evilver guy. He's more obsessed with 5M than we are. Posting vaguely inappropriate comments within minutes of her posting. Focussed on her sexuality when isn't he supposed to be some kind of born again Christian?

Chair, the Intl H-T has let you down. Belinda and Peter are splitsville and she's given him some real good PF language.

Plus, after getting my chompers looked at this morning, I stopped by the Java Joint. Think I saw 5M and M. Didn't freak me out though. I've known all along that 5M is a real person.

Agatha said...

Born Again Evolver likes to present himself as someone interested in the 5M's upper chakras. 4th Dwarf, it's great that you can see through this perverted guise.
Coyote, your posting reminded me of what a guy in one of my feminist literature classes said many years ago after listening quietly for most of the semester to what he felt was a lot of whining: "Patriarchy, partriarchy. I'm so oppressed. Boo hoo hoo hooo!" Of course, your posting was much more sophisticated than that. I think the 5M needs to move towards a more postmodern brand of feminism.

4th Dwarf said...

Agatha, I wasn't quite sure what you meant about chakras, but then I found this diagram

coyote said...

So, Agatha, are you suggesting us coyotes is male chauvies? (What did I start here?)

Anyway, Evild'er may be interested in our m*se's upper chakras, but I've noticed that alleged spirituality can be made malleable in pursuit of a goal... A shrink of my acquaintance once said he was most interested in opening up his eighth chakra -- a rite that apparently involved a foamy hot tub, lotsa beers, and, at some point, yodelling loudly at the stars until the metaphorical top of his head blew off. (If there's a moon among those stars, I'm onside with the yodelling part, at least.) But as you and 4th Dwarf point out, it looks far more likely on the face of it that the lower chakras are what Ev'r would like to, ah, open up. His.

I digress. My point is that I hadn't intended to write off all feminist literature as whining. Did I? Rather, I'm trying to understand why I've seen this thing with the pre-modern brand of feminism cropping up after breakups. It may be that a chromosomal difficulty prevents me from understanding. A way of saying I'm never gonna get it, sympathetic as I may be. Or it may be that -- I'll quote an undisclosed source here -- 'all men are pigs' -- especially right after a busted romance.

All along, I've been watching our m*se through an individual, rather than a societal, lens. My theme-thing lately is that she needs to look within rather than without, if she's going to become happy with herself. Feminism is one approach. Is it the right one? Or are there others that would serve better? Damned if I know... maybe Yoda would.

4th Dwarf said...

Just came across an article that would be of interest to Conch Shell.

It speculates on the theory that people with personality disorders form pathological attractions to people with complementary or opposite personality disorders.

"These people often literally see the other person as 'their other half.' But that half is one they have cut off in themselves, so they're essentially attracted to the thing they've rejected or have a negative attitude toward."

Mixing oil and water by BRIDGET MURRAY

Agatha said...

Coyote, I hear what you're saying about post-breakup feminism. Post-breakup feminism (or pre-modern feminism) tends to be a pretty crude, Men are From Mars brand. Maybe the 5M needs to "look within", but I think she currently lacks the tools to do this in any kind of meaningful/critical/reflective way. I think Dr. Phil could do some good work with her. In fact, I suggest we compose a question for Dr. Phil on her behalf: Dr. Phil's Email.