There’s no bliss in participating in groups for the sake of firming up collective identities. For one, there is always a cost or some form of sacrifice required by the superego on the basis of its becoming accustomed to group enforced norms. Secondly, many a “community” in itself is not all that endearing as it engages in backbiting, threats and all sorts of unpleasant behavior in order to keep its order.
Communities are often enclaves for regressive and stupid outlooks. Communities are often enclaves for regressive and stupid outlooks.
A an organisation M was in is being attacked from the inside by a sub-group who propound identity politics as the only way forward. They attack others who disagree with them and then they claim that others are victimizing them because of their own particular identities. I was thus attacked by one of these who wanted to set up a women’s enclave. I made a flippant, but good natured comment in support of M, and I got put down by one of those (who was demanding women should be treated differently, because she said they had separate problems). She hid behind patriarchal rhetoric by implying that I was a “wife, talking about her husband”. Her deeper, patriarchal insinuation was that I was simply being an female airhead and was therefore not funny.
So, I did what any intelligent person would do under such circumstances, and decided to use their identity ammunition against them. “You are against women per se,” I insisted. I was severely reprimanded for saying that in a private email by a male of the group who had taken on the role of pater. He had a lot of scolding to do.
I replied, (keeping in the vein of identity politics and its poor form of logic): “How can you say that to ME, a woman?” After that, I got this very private and particularly unhumorous email from pater:
This is not a joking matter!
Communities are often enclaves for regressive and stupid outlooks. Communities are often enclaves for regressive and stupid outlooks.
A an organisation M was in is being attacked from the inside by a sub-group who propound identity politics as the only way forward. They attack others who disagree with them and then they claim that others are victimizing them because of their own particular identities. I was thus attacked by one of these who wanted to set up a women’s enclave. I made a flippant, but good natured comment in support of M, and I got put down by one of those (who was demanding women should be treated differently, because she said they had separate problems). She hid behind patriarchal rhetoric by implying that I was a “wife, talking about her husband”. Her deeper, patriarchal insinuation was that I was simply being an female airhead and was therefore not funny.
So, I did what any intelligent person would do under such circumstances, and decided to use their identity ammunition against them. “You are against women per se,” I insisted. I was severely reprimanded for saying that in a private email by a male of the group who had taken on the role of pater. He had a lot of scolding to do.
I replied, (keeping in the vein of identity politics and its poor form of logic): “How can you say that to ME, a woman?” After that, I got this very private and particularly unhumorous email from pater:
Nice attitude. Good to know that concern for others is high on your list of priorities. Who the fuck do you think you are, the Queen of Sheeba? Being a woman doesn’t give you the right to say whatever the fuck you feel like regardless of the consequences for anyone else. What exactly is it about you that makes you think that it does? If you talk shit which you do I call it out. What is it about being a woman that makes you think you’re above being held to account for the consequences of your actions? [emphasis added]From this I learned that contemporary identity politics is nothing if not inconsistent, also that jokes have "consequences" (meaning that I would be charged with having adopted the immoral stance of not caring about others).
This is not a joking matter!
No comments:
Post a Comment