Question 5 Audre Lorde argued Flashcards
Question 5 Audre Lorde argued, “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house”. What does this mean? Why is this important when considering using existing theories to conceptualize gender equality/equity?
Audre Lorde’s argument, “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house,” means that using the same systems and frameworks of power that created oppression will not lead to liberation from that oppression. Applying this to gender equality/equity means that relying solely on existing patriarchal structures or theories (the “master’s tools”) to achieve women’s liberation (dismantling the “master’s house” of patriarchy) will be ineffective. Even reading classical liberal thinkers like Locke, who did not consider women or people of color as fully human or possessing the same rights as white men, provides inadequate tools for achieving true gender equality, like trying to fit a “square peg [into a] round hole”. Lorde’s quote suggests the need for new perspectives and approaches rooted in the experiences of the oppressed, pushing for a more fundamental transformation (revolution) rather than just reform within existing liberal frameworks. While John Stuart Mill might be seen as more amenable, Lorde’s quote still emphasizes the limitations of relying on even reformed versions of dominant theories.
Question 6: Case Study
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: The article explores the persistent and increasing issue of harassment, abuse, and threats directed at female politicians in Canada, especially online. It highlights that despite public support for gender equality in politics, the reality for many women in office is one of fear and constant vigilance. The piece features personal accounts from several politicians who describe how their safety has been compromised due to misogynistic and threatening messages. Female politicians face rampant harassment, especially on social media, with messages often containing threats of violence, misogyny, and hate speech. This toxic environment discourages women from entering politics or causes them to leave early, contributing to the underrepresentation of women in political spaces. Although political parties and government institutions are aware of the issue, there is a lack of consistent, meaningful action to protect women in politics or hold abusers accountable. Women of color, LGBTQ+ politicians, and others at intersecting identities face even more severe forms of abuse. The article advocates for stronger safety measures, support systems, and cultural shifts to make Canadian politics safer and more inclusive for women.
Liberal Feminism
A liberal feminist would likely focus on the inequality present in the political sphere, where female politicians face safety concerns that their male counterparts may not experience to the same extent. They would advocate for equal opportunity and argue that these safety issues create barriers to women’s full participation in political life, hindering their ability to contribute equally to society. They might push for stronger laws and enforcement to protect politicians from harassment and threats, ensuring a level playing field and removing barriers to women’s political engagement. They might also focus on increasing representation of women in politics as a step towards normalizing their presence and challenging patriarchal norms.
Radical Feminism
A radical feminist would analyze the safety concerns for female politicians as a manifestation of patriarchy and men’s control. They would see the threats and harassment as tools used to keep women out of positions of power and maintain male dominance in the political realm. They might emphasize the systemic nature of this violence and the need to challenge the underlying patriarchal structures that normalize such behavior and view women as ‘other’ to men in the public sphere. They might advocate for creating supportive “women’s spaces” within politics and challenging the male-dominated norms of political culture.
Socialist Feminism:
A socialist feminist would consider the intersection of gender and class in understanding the safety concerns of female politicians. They might examine how women from different socioeconomic backgrounds experience these threats differently and how the capitalist system might contribute to or exacerbate gendered violence and inequality in politics. They would likely analyze who holds power and benefits from the exclusion or marginalization of women in politics, looking at both patriarchal and capitalist structures. They might advocate for broader social and economic changes that empower women and challenge both patriarchy and capitalism to create a safer and more equitable political landscape. They might also consider how the “double day” of labor for women (work in the public and private spheres) might make them more vulnerable to such threats and limit their ability to respond effectively.
