There are several points and one great example I have to make about the Enloe conclusion article. The point of her argument is that relationship that women have been looking at for years as a product of society are really about unequal distribution of power against women. Not only are these systems designed to keep women down, but they are backed up with public authority. Some of her examples seem to make sense (i.e. rape is more about power than any kind of desire, and doctors have the power they do because the public gives it to them). However, she ends up warping her original statement of "the personal is political" into "the international is personal." By making this statement she uses the example that the government uses women as sexual partners for soldiers to keep their masculinity up. The she goes further to state that governments actively use power to keep women out of roles so they can maintain the illusion of feminine sacrifice.
I know hyperbole is the best way to make a point, but this seems a little over the top to me. Maybe it's a generational thing, I didn't grow up seeing discrimination against women, but I just don't see much evidence that the government, or society for that matter, is making an active effort to keep women down. Sure there are some nut-jobs out there that crusade for inequality, but very few take them seriously anymore. I believe the exact opposite about Enloe's original point, that relationship ARE a product of society and not based on an effort to force one group in subservience. And in an effort to gain sponsorship money, I'm gonna plug a CBS show here and make an effort to prove Enloe wrong by pointing out a few things I saw in Episode 5 of Kid Nation. Episode 5 was about electing new town leaders (the previous ones had been chosen by CBS). I thought this was interesting, because surely these kids had no interest in keeping women in a less powerful role. There's no reason for sexual discrimination in their town. So there were three elections in the town, and in all three boys won (Zach, Guylan, and Anjay).
I feel as though this shows how most elements of democracy are about social construction which Enloe rejects. Perhaps it was just coincidence that three boys won the Kid Nation election, but I see it as part of a societal view. While the kids have no interest in making their relationships about unequal distribution of power, they have grown up in a system where women haven't been as prominent in politics as men. Based on what society shows them, they accept because it's all they've ever known. But I certainly wouldn't chalk this up to the boys on the show (who are outnumbered by the girls 18 to 20) actively trying to keep girls impoverished. Society has told these kids that boys make good leaders, and so that is what they believe and what is reflected in their "society" established for television. While this is a problem in itself, I feel as Enloe's point is more than a little extreme and assumes every man in the world is determined to advance sexual discrimination.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment