Notes on the origins of women’s oppression

4 thoughts on “Notes on the origins of women’s oppression”

  1. hi, I hope you will write more, your post is illuminating and I like it very much. will your writing have anything on female sexuality/orgasm? like sexual/life energy. I’ve been thinking about it a lot but have never really put my thoughts down on words. basically women are alive(have orgasmic life energy) while men do not have this, they are essentially walking dead. they pretending to be alive/pretend to be women and have constructed a “reality” based on this lie. its unsustainable an failing rapidly, it was doomed to failure from the start. I’m excited because what I read here seems like it’s similar to what I’ve been thinking.

    Like

    1. Hello and thank you! I’m glad some of it resonated with you, and I of course hope to write more. As far as your question on female sexuality goes, I haven’t thought much about it from that angle. Maybe you could write up something? I think the most important thing is for women to get our thoughts out and in the process of bouncing these ideas off each other, we really come to a greater understanding of things. If that makes any sense?

      For example, you really got me thinking of all those sexist male conceptions of the evolution of female sexuality that permeate anthropology and sociobiology. Because, as you know, when modern science came to replace religion as the chief legitimizing force in society, male supremacists needed new ways to justify their subjugation of women. So, they replaced the story of Adam and Eve with a narrative based around “Man the Hunter” emerging from the animal kingdom red in tooth and nail, with women riding on his evolutionary coat tails.

      So the origins of how humanity came to be and the origins of male supremacy are one and the same. Therefore, the connection between the two is key. Why, in men’s attempts to understand the “birth of mankind”, does he place himself in the role of not only his own creator, but of women’s too? I think patriarchy was/is a kind of ‘Meninism’ that has spread like a virus to every corner of the globe via war. Because when women ask about the origins of patriarchy, of how we came to be, we do so for the same reason that men ask of their own origins: we are presented with a material contradiction. Like a dog chewing her own foot, we feel like we are cursed to cook and clean and raise and literally create these wretched creatures whose seemingly only reason for being is to kill us all. Likewise, at some point in history, being human (made in woman’s image) and being male came to contradict one another.

      So, just as a “class of idlers” have throughout history justified their parasitic and exploitative rule by claiming things like “blue blood” and a “superior race” insists on an equally phantasmagoric “whiteness”, men’s claim to sex superiority is based on a belief that that they are not what they in fact are: the M-A-L-E of our species. Under Patriarchy, women’s social labour is recast as the productive power of men who personify themselves through various metaphysical manifestations of male motherhood (God the Father, Man the Hunter, etc). As this requires coercion through the threat of violence, violence becomes how men conceive of themselves as productive (i.e. as human.) Both women and men still retain faith in this belief that violence is not violence but something else and that through it, men can transcend their biology somehow.

      But as globalization now threatens human life, men’s claims to being the ‘protectors’ and ‘creators’ of humanity are being revealed for what they are: the complete opposite of reality. And in this way, women are becoming conscious of who we are – almost like we are becoming human all over again. It is WE who give birth to the human race. And we did not come to be human by killing, fighting or exploiting anyone.

      Like

      1. YES to getting our thoughts out and bouncing it off each other, it makes sense. (Making ‘sense’.) I think the general understanding of ‘orgasm’ is very limited probably not accurate for women, like how it is defined as a ‘physical body experience you feel for a certain length of time as a result of engaging in sexually stimulating activity for a length of time’. like how sex/masturbation is defined as ‘rising peak, “orgasm”, then sharp drop off’–the general understanding is that it has a beginning and an end, which is wrong I think. I mean our bodies do/can have an experience as defined above, but that’s very male-identified. even our sexuality and orgasms are male-identified and that’s a big problem. I think life existence without patriarchy will literally feel different for women physically. I think the current definition of ‘orgasm’ is the closest approximation of what males came up with/experience that even compares to what this is, ‘this’ as in the feeling of the state of existence physically for women that is natural aka without patriarchy.

        Like

  2. I think “having sex” and “having orgasms” is not really a natural thing we do and it we probably wouldn’t do it without patriarchy. I don’t think language as we know it would exist without patriarchy either.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s