“How can I be sexist? I’m an anarchist!”

This is an excerpt from Chris Crass' essay in the 'Going To Places That Scare Me: Personal Reflections On Challenging Male Supremacy' at Znet

"What do you mean I'm sexist?" I was shocked. I wasn't a jock, I didn’t hate women, I wasn't an evil person. "But how can I be a sexist, I'm an anarchist?" I was anxious, nervous, and my defenses were up. I believed in liberation, for fighting against capitalism and the state. There were those who defended and benefited from injustice and then there’s us, right? I was 19 and it was 1993, four year after I got into politics.

Nilou, holding my hand, patiently explained, “I'm not saying you're an evil person, I'm saying that you're sexist and sexism happens in a lot of subtle and blatant ways. You cut me off when I'm talking. You pay more attention to what men say. The other day when I was sitting at the coffee shop with you and Mike, it was like the two of you were having a conversation and I was just there to watch. I tried to jump in and say something, but you both just looked at me and then went back to your conversation. Men in the group make eye contact with each other and act like women aren’t even there. The study group has become a forum for men in the group to go on and on about this book and that book, like they know everything and just need to teach the rest of us. For a long time I thought maybe it was just me, maybe what I had to say wasn't as useful or exciting. Maybe I needed to change my approach, maybe I was just overreacting, maybe it's just in my head and I need to get over it. But then I saw how the same thing was happening to other women in the group, over and over again. I'm not blaming you for all of this, but you're a big part of this group and you're part of this dynamic.” This conversation changed my life and it’s challenge is one I continue to struggle with in this essay.

This is an essay for other white, middle class, raised male who identify themselves as male, left/anarchist organizers struggling to build movements for liberation. I want to focus on my own experience of dealing with issues of sexism and anti-sexism from an emotional and psychological centered perspective. I’m choosing this focus because it is personally challenging, it has proved effective in working with men against sexism and because of consistent feedback from women who I organize with not to ignore these aspects of the work. Rona Fernandez of the Youth Empowerment Center in Oakland writes, “Encourage men/gender privileged folks to examine the role of emotions (or lack thereof) in their experience of privilege. I’m saying this because I think men/gender privileged folks also suffer under the system of patriarchy and one of the most dehumanizing ways they suffer is in their inability/difficulty in expressing feelings.” Clare Bayard of Anti-Racism for Global Justice puts it pointedly in addressing gender privileged activist men, "It took years of study and hard work to develop your political analysis, why do you think emotional understanding should just come to you, it requires work as well."

This essay looks to the leadership of women, women of color in particular, who write about and organize against patriarchy in society and sexism in the movement. The work of Barbara Smith, Gloria Anzaldua, Ella Baker, Patricia Hill Collins, Elizabeth ‘Betita’ Martinez, bell hooks and so many others who provide the political foundations, visions and strategies for the work gender privileged white men need to do. Additionally, there are more and more gender privileged men in the movement working to challenge male supremacy. There are thousands of us who recognize that patriarchy exists, that we have privileges as a result, that sexism undermines movement , that women, transgendered folks and genderqueer people have explained it over and over again and said “you all need to talk with each other, challenge each other and figure out what you’re all going to do.” And yet there are far more white men in the movement who agree sexism exists in society, perhaps in the movement, but deny their personal involvement in it.

Lisa Sousa, who is part of the San Francisco Independent Media Center and AK Press, told me that in recent discussions she’s had in groups about sexism and gender, she’s heard the following responses from men: "we are all oppressed", "we should be talking about class", "you are just using gender as a way to attack such and such". When she raised the issue that women leave the majority male group soon after joining, the responses included: "men leave our group too, women are not leaving more, people leave its a fact in volunteer organizations", "we just need to recruit more women, if women leave, there's more where they came from".

These comments are so familiar and while it is tempting to distance myself from the men who made them, it’s important that I remember when I made those comments. As a person who believes in movement building and collective liberation, it’s important for me to connect with the people I’m organizing with. As a person with privilege organizing others with privilege, that means learning to love myself enough to be able to see myself in people who I would much rather denounce and distance myself from. It also means being honest about my own experiences.

read the rest here: at Znet

Much thanks to Znet.

Well, this is complicated.

Well, this is complicated. First of all, I am a man (boo!! I know, patriachy - I too have done the mandatory arts degree, btw, I topped my feminist class in an assignment...one of three men in the class, irony not bigotry sorry. :) ). Of course, I identify with the anarchist movement, especially through Ran Prieur. But I am sick of hearing a movement of disempowerment... going to university (and considering honours/phd hopefully) and seeing nothing but feminists chasing their tails. I would like, if I can, to compare the concepts of 'patriachy' and 'the system' or 'capitalist elite' if you will...or empire, etc etc, insert current dissident slang. Look, (and in saying this I am not an a bastard...though born out of wedlock so technically yes...or trying to discriminate), these concepts ARE powerful. They can open eyes, they can show us that we are being manipulated. But, I have found that 'the system' is such an inadequate way to comprehend the world when you look at multiple cultures throughout history. The amount of times I've thought of a person 'oh, what a cunt, he drives a car etc, votes right etc)...and been totally wrong. People are not all out to get you and your environment, most of the time they are doing the best the fucking can and 'radicals' probably have to pause to understand this. They are not the 'enemy'; and despite their waste, environmental damage, political apathy....they may feel just as oppressed, hopeful and fucking lost and disillusioned by the political process as many as you do. Think of Jack Kerouac. He felt the same crushing control as Gary Snyder did in Dharma Bums (apologies to those who do not know it)...but he sees them as his friends, family, colleagues. So much of anarchism is divisive; the latest 'sect' is the best of course (much like technology, but let's not enter that debate here yet). My point is of course, that things are a fucking LOT more complicated than 'us' and the 'enemy' (capitalist roaders, patriarchy, empire-mongers). These are philosophical concepts that clarify other concepts, and while there are typifications in our society of the 'worst' of those cultures opposed to us, that does not mean that the silent majority automatically favours it. Personally, I think the reason men pay more attention to men is far more dark than women think. It is not favoritism, it is the fact that men have often far fewer friends than women, and have a harder time bonding. So when a man meets another man who they connect with philosophically, they are pretty chapped. Of course this doesn't explain everything. My point is that 'us' versus 'them' tactics don't fucking work. If anything, they tear us apart. At their worst, they become feminist linguistic theory: men made language so we must make our own (while communicating in the 'dominating' language..and become self-defeating in the same sense as the deconstructionist's argument that language has no meaning....how do you even express that thought aloud with absurdity?) My point is that, feminism has done wonderful things for women, I am completely for equal rights, pay and language but for historical accident etc etc. I am sick of being portrayed as responsible for historic and biased pasts that taint me, simply because I am a man. Attempts by women to then suppress men as 'payback' only make them chauvinistic...to men (this is not counting the numerous times women have tried to convince my partner that by making a choice that is not pro-big business she is 'chained to the stove', she is baby-crazy :P in a nice way, I let her make up her own mind, I'm the bitch ;) hehe). If feminists really considered it, they would not want to 'become men' symbolically by attacking men, they would want equality, as anything less between the genders is oppression. As a man, I think that the feminist movement has much more in common with the men's movement than it would care to admit. We are always sometimes lost, and sometimes, in a gender divided world/nation, we actually sympathize with our own gender more easily than with others. If you disagree feel free to post back or email me, please don't flame me if necessary. If so, go nuts. peace

Post new comment



The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


*

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.