Ein Slogan, den man häufiger hört, beispielsweise auch im Zusammenhang mit den neuen Starwars Filmen aber auch bei anderen Gelegenheiten, ist „The Future is female“
Es soll irgendwie ja wohl ausdrücken, dass Frauen in der Zukunft eine größere Rolle spielen werden oder sogar die bestimmende Rolle, es hat also etwas von „das Patriarchat ist vorbei und die glorreiche Zukunft der Frauen beginnt“. Was ja aus humanistischer Sicht eine fürchterliche Aussage ist, die irgendwie beinhaltet, dass Frauen etwas besseres sind. Es erscheint mir als das Gegenteil von Gleichberechtigung und einer Gesellschaft, in der Frauen und Männer gleichberechtigt nebeneinander stehen.
Eine der ersten, die anscheinend eine Form dieses Slogans benutzte war wohl (?) Sally Miller Gearhart. Aus deren Wikipediaseite:
In her early career, Gearhart took part in a series of seminars at San Francisco State University, where feminist scholars were critically discussing issues of rape, slavery, and the possibility of nuclear annihilation. Gearhart outlines a three-step proposal for female-led social change from her essay, „The Future–-If There Is One–-is Female„:
- I) Every culture must begin to affirm a female future.
- II) Species responsibility must be returned to women in every culture.
- III) The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.
Da wäre immerhin der Aussagegehalt ganz klar, die Zukunft ist weiblich, weil man die Männer stark reduzieren will und sie nichts mehr zu sagen haben werden.
Gearhart does not base this radical proposal on the idea that men are innately violent or oppressive, but rather on the „real danger is in the phenomenon of male-bonding, that commitment of groups of men to each other whether in an army, a gang, a service club, a lodge, a monastic order, a corporation, or a competitive sport.“ Gearhart identifies the self-perpetuating, male-exclusive reinforcement of power within these groups as corrosive to female-led social change. Thus, if „men were reduced in number, the threat would not be so great and the placement of species responsibility with the female would be assured.“ Gearhart, a dedicated pacifist, recognized that this kind of change could not be achieved through mass violence. On the critical question of how women could achieve this, Gearhart argues that it is by women’s own capacity for reproduction that the ratio of men to women can be changed though the technologies of cloning or ovular merging, both of which would only produce female births. She argues that as women take advantage of these reproductive technologies, the sex ratio would change over generations.[14]
Immerhin also ein friedlicher Ansatz, eine Art friedliches Ausschleichen der Männer, damit diese keine Männerbündnisse schließen können, bewirkt durch ein Frauenbündnis.
Daphune Patal in her book Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism summarizes Gearhart’s essay as, „The future must be in female hands, women alone must control the reproduction of species; and only 10% of the population should be allowed to be male“.[15]
Mary Daly supported Gearhart’s proposals, stating: „I think it’s not a bad idea at all. If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males.“[16]
Wer Mary Daly auf seiner Seite hat, der sollte überlegen, ob er eine humanistische Position vertritt, aber das ist eine andere Sache.
Würde man das als den Ursprung der Formel benennen, dann wäre es etwas, auf das Feministen nicht stolz sein könnten. Einen tatsächlichen Bezug darauf findet man allerdings selten, die Formel wird eher ohne weiteren Inhalt einfach als Zeichen für eine bessere Welt und ein „Ende der Unterdrückung“ gesehen, aber wie man bei Stars Wars sieht durchaus auch in dem Zusammenhang, dass Frauen in weiblichen oder weiblicheren Teams arbeiten und die Posten entsprechend besetzen.
Ich habe mal noch etwas gegoogelt:
Hier:
While the slogan has a long history, for our panel the future is female because it means that we must look to the female archetype, and into the myriad of women’s experiences to define alternative forms of leadership. The female energy is to be found in a world that is emotionally intelligent, that is collaborative, a global society in which individuals are “linked and not ranked”. “The Future is Female” means that hierarchy in industry, in technology, in art, in sport etc. is not the only valid form of social organization.
Our world is facing complex challenges and these issues need comprehensive solutions. It is time, better late than never, to integrate the female ingredient in the definition of these solutions. Wallonia-Brussels wants to bring her fair share and create a forum for the voices of women, with very different backgrounds, to be heard. The goal is of course not to raise the female against the male archetype. To the contrary, we believe that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts”.
Together, we will try to outline the upcoming forms of leadership, the future of work and inclusion for our global society. Let’s convene and get valuable insights from the 6 “ecosystems” we managed to have on stage: Venture Investment, Government Agency, Startup, Incubator, Sport Industry and Civil Society Association.
Das klingt etwas nach einem Differenzfeminismus, in dem Frauen irgendwie eine „Female Energy“ haben. Die weiblichen Stimmen sollen gehört, aber nicht gegen die Männer gestellt werden, sondern ein neues großes Ganzes ergeben.
Oder hier:
The Reality
- THE NUMBERS ARE NOT GOOD. No matter how many times you hear about female advancement on the news or read about it, the numbers are NOT changing. There are a few companies that are making inroads when it comes to gender pay parity and equality at their workplaces (Salesforce being one of them, and they glow in the spotlight). The top workplaces for women and working mothers to be employed are also widely documented. And that’s it. That’s the summation of the progress we have made.
- MEN CONTINUE TO PUSH BACK ON WOMEN’S DEMANDS. Women are called unreasonable, dumber (because our brains are smaller), inferior, not committed, distracting, and not as qualified. All this backlash over women asking for something that is pretty rudimentary. Women don’t want to be punished for being mothers. We do want equal treatment that addresses women’s issues. Not the issues of men—that’s a different set of issues. As a result, not much is happening. We are spinning in circles.
- WOMEN FAIL TO COLLABORATE WITH EACH OTHER. This means that we are not well organized to ask for what we need. Infighting amongst women—accentuated by She Tyrants and Queen Bees—is alive and well. Just because you know one woman who has figured it out doesn’t move the needle. Young women think older women (like me) are feminists, and while they often don’t know what that term means they are adamantly against it. After all, it’s we who have these issues, not them. Give it time, I say. It’s easy to overlook the issues when you haven’t yet experienced the glass ceiling, or discrimination against mothers, or the horrible guilt you feel when you have to juggle both your sick child and your job.
- ORGANIZATIONS ARE FOCUSED ON OPERATIONS AND PROFITS. A company will make changes when it is mandated (i.e. forced). Despite the hundreds of thousands of dollars forked out to pay damages and fines for sexual harassment charges (including one case where the company was ordered to pay a 1.6 million dollar settlement because the company knew but didn’t do anything about it), many companies believe a two-hour online harassment training will do the trick. Wait, you think that a $3000 program will do a good enough job over two hours delivered every two years for you to limit your exposure to these massive settlements? Think again. Organizations also don’t seem to understand how to find and hire women. That’s why I wrote an article about it.
- ON THE POLITICAL FRONT, WE STILL HAVE MEN WHO ARE DECIDING WHAT WOMEN SHOULD DO. What our health programs and care programs should look like, what we should be covered for, and what we can do with our bodies. How a man can say that a woman’s visit to her OB/GYN is “extra care” and not the standard care, or that birth control can’t be covered, is so caveman that it leaves me speechless every single time. Women need to be in charge of deciding what care we need. We keep rehashing the exact same issues again and again. There is so much time wasted that I’d like to fire them all for failing.
The Future is Female
The future is female because we are at a point in history where the question women have is simple: “Can you see who I am?”
Why do we have to beg for things that we shouldn’t have to ask for, like equality in every area of our lives and the right to make our own decisions?
The future is female because men built the systems and the systems are failing women. Women are now ready to step up because our trust has been eroded.
While we’ve been pro men all along because we love our men, we have now run out of patience. No more waiting.
The future is female because men make the majority of decisions in a system that works for them, and that has no allocated room for women. Why do we feel bad for being a woman?
See us for who we are. Women are not men. I repeat, women are not men. We do not need the same things as men. We want something equivalent that works for us. It has to be created now.
The future is female because women are so fed up that we’re exploding. If we see one more image of a roomful of men deciding on healthcare for women, we will explode.
If we see one more comment on locker room banter… If we hear one more excuse for why something can’t be done because it would be an unfair advantage for women, like time off to give birth and care for a newborn… If we hear one more time that because we took a year off our entire education is worthless… ENOUGH!
The future is female because most male decision makers have failed to understand that there is a difference between men and women.
They don’t understand that just because we want equality, we don’t want to be treated like men. We want to be treated like women. And just saying that is setting off men crying unfair. At the same time, men are upset that women are asking for what men have! Wait, which one is it going to be?
Because of snail-like pace that systems are moving in, women have no choice but to step up. And when women organize it is an earth-shattering event. If you still don’t hear us, we’ll do it again and again until we have it figured out.
The answer—and I have been standing on my soapbox shouting it out loudly—is very simple. Let men be men and let women be women. Give each what each needs, as long as it is the equivalent. THAT’S BALANCE. That’s what we should aim for.
If you like to listen to the podcast interview in Pablo’s segment of the Small Business War Stories – check it out in the link below. Here we talked about community, supporting one another, the realities of starting a business, and much more.
Auch hier wieder eher ein Differenzfeminismus, Frauen wollen Frauen sein und Männer Männer, jeder hat das zu bekommen, was er braucht und es muss Gleichheit bestehen. Im oberen Teil wird deutlich, dass sich die Männer zu viel nehmen
Gefällt mir:
Gefällt mir Wird geladen …
Alles Evolution 