“To the extent that femininity is a psychology of the oppressed, or an indication of Societal Stockholm Syndrome, we are forced to ask whether women should support our culture’s glorification of “feminine qualities.”
It is one thing to be feminine in order to survive when you know why you are doing what you are doing; it’s another thing to celebrate femininity as proof of one’s womanhood.
However, we do recommend that women understand femininity’s function and the role that it plays in our survival in a patriarchy. Contempt is publicly expressed for battered women who stay with their partners and each day use every ounce of ingenuity they possess to keep their abusers from becoming (emotionally and physically) violent. Perhaps we would see the similarities between battered women and women in general if we understood the function that femininity plays in subordinates. Could it be that all women in a patriarchy are battered women and that our femininity is both our strategy for surviving and the proof of our oppression (if proof other than men’s violence against us were needed)?”
–Dee Graham, Loving to Survive, page 196-197
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
9 comments
July 30, 2016 at 6:56 am
Steve Ruis
This is an absolutely brilliant comparison. Really makes one think. Probably would need to have one’s eyes opened first, but might be an eye opener, too. Thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 30, 2016 at 8:12 am
The Arbourist
@Steve Ruis
Eye opening (somedays better than others) is what we do here at DWR, glad you enjoyed the piece. :)
LikeLike
July 30, 2016 at 8:44 am
Bernie Orbust
To understand this issue, one must first realize there are two kinds of human societies: hierarchical and egalitarian. Humans were all once egalitarian (about 100,000 – 200,000 YA,) but northern races reverted to patriarchal hierarchism (inherited from Hominini, also extant among Chimpanzees.)
With PH, sexual selection is oriented towards leadership abilities among males (alphas.) Alphas, on the other hand, are sexually attracted to females who display signs of submissiveness, which go to infantalization. (E.g., body hair removal mimics prepubescence.)
One can see the differences between E and PH races (PH races having atrophied many E physical features.) With African E, since men and women are equal, femininity is not defined by submissiveness but is more subtle (at least to PH races.) Like how that Milos jerk implied Ghostbusters star Leslie Jones looked like a man. Not true. If anything, African E have a more sophisticated concept of femininity.
I believe the solutions to our problems will come from Africa. It is the true cradle of civilization (egalitarianism is the epitome of civilization: a perfect-trust environment free from backbiting and war; northern barbarians certainly aren’t civilized for capturing technology and using it to conquer, colonize and commit crimes against humanity.) It is the birthplace of democracy. Africans developed equality of men and women long ago as well as life-long monogamous relationships.
We patriarchal hierarchists, given our history, prehistory and sorry state of what we consider civilization, obviously have much to learn from African egalitarians. But we don’t have much time to do it in. (The SS Humanity is chugging along in frigid waters, an Invisible Hand at the wheel, M & M Enterprises is tearing up the ship and selling it off for parts.)
-Bernie Orbust
LikeLike
July 30, 2016 at 9:50 am
tildeb
Ooo, I’ve never thought of it that way. mulling…
LikeLike
July 30, 2016 at 5:06 pm
Sha'Tara
Quote: “Perhaps we would see the similarities between battered women and women in general if we understood the function that femininity plays in subordinates.”
I got lost on that = what does the author mean “that feminity plays in subordinates.” In subordinate roles?
“Feminism” in my opinion has yet to grasp the great “WHY?” question. Why misogyny, or oppression of the female as a basically world-wide phenomenon when men find women attractive, desirable, lovely, works of art, supportive, helpful? When men cannot stop themselves from being sexually attracted to women? The whole male to female social interaction is positively CRAZY. I like stuff to make sense and when something doesn’t make sense and it comes from the forgotten past and continues “in your face” without a shred of validity, despite everything screaming at everyone that “this shouldn’t be” I want to know WHY. Men “love” women, and want to be loved in return. Men COME from women and without women there would be no men. Women are mothers, sisters and lovers. Men could not live without women. Even if they could “be” and exist in an all male world, they would die without female companionship.
So, after so much said, and so little accomplished, if actually anything at all really gained for women as a group, how do we answer the WHY question so we can deal with the problem and resolve it? What drives a misogynist patriarchy? What makes a man abuse a woman? Hate a woman? What is THAT? Such a thing does not come from nature, so where does it come from?
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 1, 2016 at 11:15 am
The Arbourist
@Sha’Tara
The author could mean that the set of behaviours described as feminine are maligned, devalued and yet, at the same time celebrated.
As long as women stay out of the realms of power and do not want to change society, men are happy as clams to let women be all of qualities you’ve listed.
When women want their turn on the levers of power, then just watch the misogyny bloom.
One of the roots of female subordination is the gestation and care of children – specifically male heirs, as historically that is how power is transferred across generations.
It is the type of companionship that is often problematic, not the absence or presence, so to speak.
The power imbalance is not a rational feature of society. It is a protected feature of a class of people who benefit from it everyday. This system of unjustly favouring one class of people has become so ingrained in our societies and socialization that it seems *normal*.
I would argue that it is important to focus on the ‘how’ of patriarchal society – identify the causes of systemic discrimination and then raise hell until they are changed.
A systemic belief that one class of people is better than the other because of biology.
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 1, 2016 at 11:24 am
The Arbourist
Further reading –
A Brief History of Misogyny – Web
‘Understanding Patriarchy’ Bell Hooks – Four page .pdf
Against Our Will – Susan Brownmillar Review
The Second Sex – Simon de beauvoir – Wikipedia
LikeLike
August 1, 2016 at 6:31 pm
Sha'Tara
Thank you for taking the time to give such an in-depth explanation. Didn’t answer all the questions (to my satisfaction) but it clarifies a few square miles of territory…!
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 1, 2016 at 8:25 pm
The Arbourist
@Sha’Tara
Happy to help. If there are finer points, please feel free to share. I have a nice library of feminist resources, and am always happy to share.
LikeLiked by 1 person