“And for every feminist blog-reader-turned-activist, there are probably dozens of us who…well, just read feminist blogs and feel a little bit better about ourselves. But here’s the thing: even when we don’t become activists or revolutionaries, we do something. When we allow ourselves to understand other women as valuable allies, rather than competitors for men or jobs, we do something. When we resist the notion that rape prevention is the responsibility of women, we do something. When we support survivors of abuse and incest in online forums, we do something. When we refuse to let homophobic or ableist or racist “jokes” pass without comment, we do something. And when we get taken to task by other blog commenters for our own unexamined privilege, we do something. All of these things are on some level individual actions, and indeed, it is true that they take less sacrifice than other forms of resistance to oppression. But the mere fact of their individual basis does not mean that they have no broader effect. I don’t write this with the intent of absolving myself—or the rest of us—from (what I think is a real) responsibility for political action beyond our corner of the internet. As Valenti herself wrote in her WaPo op-ed this weekend, the material realities for far too many women, both within the U.S. and around the world, are too bleak to simply congratulate ourselves for consciousness-raising. Moreover, I would argue that to the extent that feminism becomes about branding, selling Cosmos and vibrators as independence, the “something” that it does is increasingly ineffective. I would suggest, however, that this is a deeply inaccurate characterization of most of the popular feminist movement (including, for the most part, Valenti) and blogosphere—and it’s telling that Power’s book is short on quotes and long on generalization in this regard. But despite my own belief that we feminists ought to be engaged in collective political action against capitalist, imperialist exploitation and rampant SATC-style consumerism, I simply cannot ignore the fact that individuals not only make up the world; they alter it. Power writes in her book, “So conditioned are we to think that our behaviors are individual (a degree is an ‘investment,’ starting a family is a ‘personal choice’), that we miss the collective and historical dimensions of our current situation.” (34) Her point is that individuals aren’t isolated, autonomous things, but beings whose desires and actions are shaped by the political world around us. I believe that she’s right about this. But what I want to ask is this: why wouldn’t it go both ways? Why wouldn’t changes in our attitudes and shared discourses do something to shape the political world? Why shouldn’t we believe it’s the case that an individual revolution—in which we dare to affirm our own value, examine and combat our own privilege, rail against the injustice of our abuse, valorize our denigrated sexuality, race, ability or class identity—does something? Why this either/or choice between coalition-building and political revolt, on the one hand, and a personal revolt—one that says, I will no longer stand for being treated this way—on the other? We can do both. We ought to do both. And my hope is that we can recognize, and act on, the ways in which each sort of feminist enterprise might strengthen the other.”
- Feminist Revolutions (and Why Ladyblogs Matter) by philosophyerin.
