Talk:Soci 370/Lorde

That there was such little diversity at the conference Lorde was invited to speaks volumes about the illusion of the “sisterhood” among women. There is the assumption that women already constitute a coherent group with identical interests and desires, regardless of class, ethnic or racial location, or contradictions; this implies that the patriarchy is universal.

A contemporary example to show how the “sisterhood” is illusive is the inherent contradiction of white “motherhood” versus non-white “motherhood”. This can be seen in Madonna or Angelina Jolie’s (or a privileged white woman’s) ability to go to a third world country to adopt a child and “save a child’s life”. While there is undoubtedly an altruistic motive for this, it is questionable what this implies. There is the idea that a white woman needs to step in to raise a child because the white mother is the ideal mother. It is overlooked that the white women have the "cultural authority” and “material resources” to do this. It is almost if Angelina Jolie can “shop the world for children” . This leaves us with several questions: can Jolie singlehandedly take care of her 6 children without the help of nannies, sitters, and maids? If not, what does this tell us then about “ideal motherhood”? Can a black, lesbian feminist from an underdeveloped country “shop the world for children” and embody the “ideal motherhood”?

Thus, sisterhood cannot be assumed on the basis of gender; it must be formed in concrete, historic and political practice and analysis. This goes back to the idea of embracing and celebrating all differences.

That's a good point of view. However, on the other hand social movements are not likely to gain traction without some form of uniting force. The individual's identity of gender – in this case female – exists as a rallying point for women, thus creating the "sisterhood". While it is indeed true that intersectionality and stratification create large divides across this sub-group, a comparable situation would be the #BlackLivesMatter movement, if race were not the commonality that brings the protesters together. Without this feature, the cohesiveness and collective consciousness of the oppressed group would arguably be significantly diminished. Therefore, my interpretation of Lorde's writing is that everything must be used to the advantage of the disadvantaged – where similar in gender, it must be used as a tool to unite, and where different in attributes, these differences must be used to diversify and strengthen rather than separate.

You made a good point. I also believe Lorde was trying to explain that everything must be used to the advantage of the disadvantaged. However, I still think she still tried to emphasize the importance of including different perspectives. I could hardly imagine any mainstream feminists could have deep and solid understanding of the gender oppression on Black women or any other minority women. I read about the murder of Pamela George who is an Indigenous sex worker. She is murdered by two White university students and they only been charged of manslaughter rather than one of second murder. The judge emphasized several times to the jury that Pamela George is an Indigenous sex worker. By emphasize the identity of Pamela, the judge lead the jury to a finding of manslaughter. It makes me wonder if Pamela George is a White middle class woman, the case might have a very different result.

I agree with some of your points Jaden. However, the way I understood Lorde was that the one similarity of gender is not enough. While it may be a common aspect, it can't be depended on to simply unite these women who have such diverse backgrounds and issues that stem from their race, sexuality, class, and age. Lorde talks about how just tolerating the differences of women should never be supported because this prevents progress. Instead, she talks about embracing these differences and it is my interpretation that she wants these differences brought to the forefront of the discussion, not just relying on the fact that they're all female.

I also agree that Lorde's point was that having one similar attribute, in this case gender, is insufficient to represent the whole group. Aspects such as sexuality, race, etc are also aspects people need to include when talking about feminism/sisterhood and other groups as well. One need to recognize and put into consideration of other aspects for the group to grow, unite and become stronger. Diversity is good but it also creates inequality within the group as shown in the article.