Skip to main content

This is much more of what people call a “rant” than a piece of news. It’s in reaction to what gets defined as news in a political community, and has been written over my sojourn here, so is not coming out of any particular article or comment. Warning: antibiotics and steroids may be somewhat involved, if the piece’s connection to the concrete seems to be just a little strained.

I receive Daily Kos recs in the mail every day. I’ve noticed that the list usually contains news about politics in the narrowest sense: the politics of the mainstream, the politics of left, right and center, the politics occasionally of resistance. There are other articles occasionally, but the emphasis is usually on what I would call the "politics of men," though I've seen a lot of women turn into pols over the years.

I also read quite a few blogs, though my energy for comments is currently down. This often leads me to older ones which concern topics I'm interested in. Occasionally, I encounter comments which question if the topic is even appropriate on a political blog.

The deep down insight of the feminist second wave, the most important insight to understanding what radical feminism is, as opposed to the vaguely liberal feminism of wealthy men’s wives, (and yes, I put it like that deliberately, since women with money in their own right are somewhat different in their political personae) is that the personal is political. That we cannot understand the oppression of women unless we understand the system which keeps it in place, which is not in the public sphere.

When I write an essay about not doing dishes, it is informed by a lifetime being told that women should keep our houses clean. Many men, I think, and some women miss that saying I don't clean my kitchen voluntarily is as much a political manifesto as a personal decision.

Once, in grad school, a colleague presented a fascinating paper on a feminist collective which did pap smears and birth control. My (male) friend whispered to me during an enthusiastic Q&A period, “Do you feel as bored and puzzled by the subject matter when men present on things like mainstream political figures?”

The answer of course was no, because I don’t get bored and puzzled by rhetoric in any form anyway, and besides, women listen to men’s interests by nature and careful training. But I was completely surprised that he would be uninterested in a topic which, to me, was the height of political analysis, and had been done very well.

Nonetheless, I suspect that the assumption domestic arrangements are not political still lies out there in our little diary community. The travails of a writer's cat, the cosplay of bdsm -- not the stuff of electing Democrats.

The phrase “The Personal is Political” was coined before 1968, a few years after then-Stokely Carmichael supposedly said during a SNCC meeting, “The only position for women in the movement is prone!”(1) That was arguably the year of the beginning of women’s liberation, as opposed to Betty Friedan’s 1964 National Organization for Women, which had been acting precisely like any other lobbyist group which worked within the system, and had their own internal problems, like lesbians who thought their sexual orientation should be validated and respected. (Ask Ti-Grace Atkinson for details.) (2)

Radical feminism (which for the purpose of this diary I will call “feminism,” but is only one of many kinds) noticed that, since women had been relegated to the domestic spaces, that was where oppression often manifested. It was at home that women were most at risk for male violence; in private spaces where sexual assault most likely would occur; in the invisible interstices where women’s names, credit records, ability to sign contracts and buy homes or cars on their own all ended. The public sphere, which contained the laws which supposedly protected all citizens, failed miserably at protecting at least half of them.

The story of the ‘70s struggle to reverse these trends is a long one, and, it appears, also long-forgotten. It started far earlier. My mother had to bear five children before she could have her tubes tied, although she had wanted only two. Even then, she required my father’s signature to stop continual pregnancy; if he had not given it, she would have had to fight with him about sex or continued to proliferate.

My friend Jeannie had an excellent income, but her husband’s was poor, and her mortgage reflected that. Men with similar incomes, whose wives did not work at all, got much better deals.

Women I knew fled dangerous homes, and their abusive husband got custody; newly-come out lesbians were afraid to tell their husbands because there was a very real possibility they would not ever be able to see their children again unsupervised.

Millions of stories. The point concerning them is that, while law eventually got involved, it wasn’t as central to the issue as the culture was. As long as there were public and private spaces, and as long as oppression remained nine-tenths below the surface, what needed to change was invisibility. Domesticity, the arts, children and pregnancy, even travel – everything had an unspoken side where the chains were hidden, but also where they were locked.

Because of the vast nature of the movement, and the very different goals of many sorts of feminists, change happened. The women’s movement began as many threads of different issues, but having a movement meant that it was formed into macrame. Like macrame, the end result was geometrically, not merely arithmetically, stronger.

Laws are a sign the culture is weakening in some place and needs shoring up. Until the mid 20th century, abortion was hardly an issue in the country because medical solutions were so scarce. Laws trying to stop abortion, birth control, economic fairness are all anti-progressive and dangerous, but they are at heart the sign of a technological site of struggle. If we win control of the technology, we can be free. (3)

I am a rhetorician. I learned in both my practice and my study that you cannot fight an opponent until you understand what they’re trying to say. I have come to the conclusion that, in this intensely technological time, you cannot understand an opponent by listening to their soundbites -- and certainly can't fight them by a constant state of outrage about them.

The real struggle is one of raw power: who controls people and resources?

So the important questions include how exactly they got there, and why people give themselves away to their class and economic enemy? Or go after the words instead of the power?

These are political issues in the most important sense. But they are not legislative issues. If we merely focus on the legislation coming out of the back room, to fail or succeed, we will win some, lose some, but never achieve the kind of power any liberation movement has wielded at its strongest and best.

Perhaps the “strongest and best” looked like the “most divisive” or "most out there" to those who don’t understand rhetoric and power. Just as the radical feminists and the socialist feminists and the liberal feminists and the womanists all looked suspiciously at each other for focusing on the less essential; just as SNCC and CORE and the NAACP and the Black Panthers and the Black Muslims all thought the other groups didn’t really have the clearest thinking or the best path to power; just as the Abolitionist movement a century before wobbled between seeing John Brown as a hero, a crazy zealot, or a righteous but misguided leader, so the movement of progressives today requires more diversity to survive, and a far broader definition of “political”.

They need to remember that the times of greatest change come in the times of greatest argument among members of the same movement. They need to remember the lessons of the feminists that the personal is political. They need to remember Civil Rights lessons that allies are not the same as you, don’t have the same experiences, and may actually prefer that you not write their agenda for them – but that it’s nothing personal.

We need to remember the lessons of the 80s – the time of anti-apartheid and anti-nuclear activism – that there’s plenty of room for affinity groups, and you don’t have to make everyone be arrested to support each other.

We need to remember the most recent lessons of Occupy – that technology isn’t everything, that there are other ways to make sure everyone can hear and participate, even if it's simply shouting to those further back.

But what I want to remind people of the most is that there is a class war – that Marx developed the term, identifying a real-life phenomenon that, no matter what Republicans or Republocrats say, describes how the rich get richer on the backs of… whomever they can, except in some cases their own wealthy allies. The ruling class controls the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, and if we lose sight of that, we forget the organizers’ first rule: “No Permanent Enemies, No Permanent Friends.”

Thinking that most of politics takes place between people in the places of power is to forget our organizing heritage; to forget our private spaces; to forget how we win, when we do. So keep those stories of your cat or your bdsm outing coming; that's what leads to an exploration of animal/human relationships and the nature and limits of sexuality and racial difference..

And that's of course without even considering that I've never been to an in-person political discussion which did not, over time, develop ties of intimacy, because we are, and need to remain, human.

So keep those personal stories coming. That's where progress lies.

(1) While the comment itself has never been questioned, there is some evidence Carmichael meant it in a teasing way. Casey Hayden, who with another women had written a critique of SNCC'S problems with women activists, wrote later,

At a break in one of SNCC's marathon, multi-day, staff meetings, our paper on the position of women came up, and Stokely in his hipster rap comedic way joked that 'the proper position of women in SNCC is prone'. I laughed, he laughed, we all laughed. Stokeley was a friend of mine. We crossed paths in many settings, as he was close to the Young People's Socialist League, and through them, to SDS... and I knew he was on my side about women's issues, because we'd talked about them.
(2) A nice little summary of the Second Wave of feminism and its beginnings, written in 1971, is available from Jo Freeman, then a political science student, who had already written more than one radical feminist paper under the name "Joreen."

(3) That's why I deliberately pass on information about how amateurs can perform abortions on each other. While this ability is certainly higher risk than medically-approved, easily accessible abortion, the inability to find such things is growing, at least in certain states. The economics of obtaining an abortion are unfairly born by the working class and poor. A solid underground willing to violate laws if it becomes necessary requires education. Currently, that's free on the internet.

Originally posted to kestrel sparhawk on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 02:22 PM PST.

Also republished by Feminism, Pro-Feminism, Womanism: Feminist Issues, Ideas, & Activism and Community Spotlight.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Stokely. (7+ / 0-)

    I've heard this quote attributed to Stokely many times, and for all I know, it's true.

    But I heard another story about Stokely not so long ago that might help round out who he was in the 60s.

    It was the day that the Mississippi Freedom Summer volunteers, training people up in Ohio, learned about the disappearance of three of their early "missionaries."  Staughton Lynd describes how the group didn't organize into a meeting wih motions and debate.  Instead, they gathered in a close circle and sang "Kum Bay Ya."  Then they began to spontaneously volunteer to do something about their missing comrades.  Stokely was one of two to volunteer to go to Mississippi and go through the backwoods to talk to people and investigate what had happened to the three.  The other was a white man at much less risk than Stokely.

    SNCC was an extraordinary group in American history.  Its members still  had much to learn about the nature and extent of all of the oppressive behaviors and attitudes in society at that time, but it was nevertheless a remarkable step forward.  I can only look upon people like John Lewis, Stokely, Staughton Lynd and their comrades with great admiration.

    One thing I hope we've learned in the decades since is that a single-minded focus on one particular form of oppression makes for a great tool for the Right to exploit.

    Was  Stokely a sexist?  Most likely.  Were most people on the Left at that time homophobes?  Probably.  Were their goals to stop war, end racism and further working class solidarity wrong?  Hell no.

    And those movements that have subverted themselves to militarism and the status quo in order to advance their narrow interests have been more of an obstacle to true progress than the failures of Stokely, etc. in their time and place.

    •  I actually admire him very much (6+ / 0-)

      Besides the fact that I've seen other arguments that the comment was in a playful context, his work ever since has impressed me. Years ago, I saw him (as Kwame Ture) late in his life speak to privileged private college students where I taught, and his liveliness and brains helped them actually see connections between corporate selling and thinking that they had come up with those ideas on their own.

      Besides, my experience of the men's New Left movement at the beginning of New Wave feminism is that there were a lot more horrible people around than just one. I think in fact it's a mark of his real gift with rhetoric that his quotation is the one that's remembered.

      A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot. The beggars change places, but the lash goes on. --WB Yeats

      by kestrel sparhawk on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 05:08:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Forgot to mention (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RiveroftheWest, Ezekiel in Exile

        I wondered if perhaps you hadn't seen the first footnote (below the bug) where I talk about Casey Hayden's version of it. I spent some time trying to track the quote backward, since I'd heard the claim that it was a smart ass comment in context, despite the very-well documented reality that he actually said it.

        A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot. The beggars change places, but the lash goes on. --WB Yeats

        by kestrel sparhawk on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 09:43:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  The past and history should never be under- (9+ / 0-)

    estimated in the power they can create for the future.
    How did we get here?
    On whose backs did we arrive?
    On whose terms?
    How can we learn the lessons of the past?

    Thanks for the diary! Keep it personal, shouldn't all of life be personal?
    Peace and Blessings!

    For those abused, war torn and blood-soaked regions of the world: due to our apathy, our need for cheap shit, and our wars on terror and drugs, we apologize for the inconvenience.

    by Penny GC on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 03:02:59 PM PST

  •  The first feminist I read cover to cover (8+ / 0-)

    was Shulamith Firestone.  She would have appreciated this essay.

    "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." ~Frederick Douglass

    by ActivistGuy on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 03:25:04 PM PST

  •  Yeah, "who controls" - it is all about power (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RiveroftheWest, kaliope

    isn't it: in relationships, in groups, in politics. The ruling class controls the system, as you so accurately point out.

    But no one controls the Laws of Physics. They can play their power games but they can't alter the consequences of their power system which has real, physical effects upon the ground which we inhabit. Ma Nature will win in the end - but it won't be very nice. Or pretty.

    muddy water can best be cleared by leaving it alone

    by veritas curat on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 06:39:59 PM PST

    •  the trouble with Nature winning (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RiveroftheWest, annan

      Is that we're supposed to be on her side. Instead, we're the enemy.

      I like to believe that there are relatively immutable laws equivalent to the laws of physics for political control, too. I believe in dialectic. I just don't believe that even change for the better will last long.

      A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot. The beggars change places, but the lash goes on. --WB Yeats

      by kestrel sparhawk on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 10:43:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  T&R'd, bookmarked for community edu. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RiveroftheWest, annan

    So much to think about in this diary.

    Poverty is not an accident. Like slavery and apartheid, it is man-made and can be removed by the actions of human beings. —Nelson Mandela

    by kaliope on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 08:19:33 PM PST

    •  Thank you (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RiveroftheWest, kaliope, annan

      It took me six months to write because I was thinking about it a lot myself. So I'm glad it's meaningful to you as well.

      ps, I love the Mandela quotation.

      A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot. The beggars change places, but the lash goes on. --WB Yeats

      by kestrel sparhawk on Wed Feb 05, 2014 at 10:40:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jon Sitzman, RiveroftheWest

        This is an essay for the archives. i appreciate it all the more having read your recent diary about poor people's food.

        We are about the same age and I am vividly aware that many of my single female friends are facing a very uncertain future. It's my hope that we will find answers together. Putting our struggles into a wider context really adds to the conversation.

        "Let us not look back to the past with anger, nor towards the future with fear, but look around with awareness." James Thurber

        by annan on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 08:53:55 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I especially agree with... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RiveroftheWest, annan

          "Putting our struggles into a wider context really adds to the conversation."

          So nicely put. And it's hard to find people who want the context.  Day to day, I find so many posts which ignore the history which enfolds us all. How hard is it to remember even six months ago? (My last post someone objected to because Obama hadn't said specifically that in the site I cited -- but it's only been six months since a lot of people here were quoting him saying that cutting food stamps was unacceptable. It's not exactly 40 year old historical context! So I shouldn't expect people to remember history... but I do.)

          A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot. The beggars change places, but the lash goes on. --WB Yeats

          by kestrel sparhawk on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 10:39:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I have a "shorter" for this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


    I'm glad you reached the conclusion you reached. I was afraid I'd have to ask if my diaries about my bereavement had been a problem. I'm happy they haven't been.

    •  Haven't been... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Of course, I haven't been able to read everyone's diaries about everything; but if I had, nothing anyone put in there would be a problem by subject matter, as I'm sure you've figured.

      I tried to see diaries about your bereavement but am not good at searching older posts on this site. Was your loss a pet? If so, my deepest sympathy. My older cat is leaving us, and the pain is deep and will deepen when she finally is gone. If a person -- well, equal sympathy, though, since many people at least understand a little better how it hurts when the loss is a human, I hope and assume you are already receiving support.

      A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot. The beggars change places, but the lash goes on. --WB Yeats

      by kestrel sparhawk on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 02:41:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nicely done... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    except for the French, mon dieu!

    •  Excuse my french... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      at the time I wrote the headline, nostalgie de la boue was a phrase that kept running through my head. I'm not absolutely certain the revised version is grammatical (or that original phrase, for that matter). But I love the image -- it reminds me of another quotation which I believe is also French, though I only know it in translation: "Ah, for the good old days, when we were so young and unhappy." That's how I feel about my youngest feminist days.

      A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot. The beggars change places, but the lash goes on. --WB Yeats

      by kestrel sparhawk on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 12:54:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What a great diary! I'm going to read it over (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    a  couple of times before I venture a comment. There is a great deal to think about here.

    Kestrel, you are a woman after my own heart. Will be back  to join the discussion.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Fri Feb 07, 2014 at 02:16:49 PM PST

    •  Thank you! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I just saw your comment now. Look forward to your comments.

      Like your siggy -- started me thinking. Napoleon was partly right; but of course guns keep the poor from murdering the rich as well. Religion just means government needs fewer guns.

      A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot. The beggars change places, but the lash goes on. --WB Yeats

      by kestrel sparhawk on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 12:51:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site