Strömungen im Feminismus

In dem Spearhead-Artikel „Why We Need A Men’s Movement“ ist eine interessante Zuordnung von verschiedenen Strömungen, Interessen und Personen im Feminismus enthalten:

– There’s a sharp division between Lesbian and straight women. The abolitionist/anti-pornography/pro-sex-regulation feminists are almost always straight. The liberals are more reliably lesbian or lesbian-identified.

– Anti-marriage and “men are evil” feminists are usually “political” lesbians, or those with specific axes to grind, or single-issue interests, or ideologically socialist.

– Actual bona-fide lesbians live in a separate world and don’t see any need for men at all, personally or socially. Their writing often doesn’t even concern itself with the key issues that bother heterosexual women. These women inhabit different worlds. Lesbian politics often support obviously anti-male policies because men are irrelevant to them, and they don’t care how men are affected. The truth is that they have little to say to straight women, because straight women are interested in the health of male society. Straight women like men, and interact with men on an intimate level. What both agree on is that women always need more power, regardless of the amount of power they already have.

– Sexual-libertarian feminists want less social/legal control over sexuality, resulting in a free-wheeling, Sex Is Always Good “hook-up” culture, filled with consequence-free sex and the elimination of the concept of “slut”. Eventhe very concept of monogamy comes in for ridicule. In effect, these women are more prototypically “male” in their “variety-is-life” outlook than men ever were.

_ Sexual-Moralist feminists take a different approach, seeing this freewheeling sexual liberation as serving male interests. Women, they think, have different interests. Sex for its own sake is not a goal for these women. These feminists don’t see sexually open women as Liberated – they see them as Deluded Sluts, no matter how they sugar-coat the label for feminist solidarity. The fact is that their outlook on sex and relationships bears no relationship to the feminists who advocate for sexual liberation. They have nothing to say to each other. Their views on social policy are in direct opposition.

Ein Teil davon lässt sich sicherlich mit meiner Einordnung in dem Artikel „Gruppierungen in der Geschlechterdiskussion nach Gehirnausrichtung“ in Einklang bringen. Interessant finde ich noch die Betrachtung, dass einer überzeugten Lesbe Männerinteressen relativ egal sein können, möchte aber noch an Brüder, Väter und ggfs. Söhne erinnern.

Interessant finde ich auch nach wie vor, dass viele Unterschiede in der Tat „mit Zucker überzogen werden“, also die Diskussion dort eher die Gemeinsamkeiten betont als die Differenzen ausdiskutiert (vgl. auch „Feminismus und weiblicher Diskussionsstil„)