DISCUSSIONS ON FEMINISM
Contributions will be added to the top of this collection as I receive them
From: "Bradley D"
Date: Wed, 4 Aug
On Feminism and Aboriginal Identity
Often it is a survival mechanism or as classed in our text an "Intentional family" that is developed when groups of people feel alienated from the privileges of the elite powers within a state. Furthermore, Feminism and support of this paradigm is often sought within aboriginal communities. There is a much in relation to women in canada and aboriginals within Canada. But a simplistic comparison is what leads to cultural pluralism and this defeats the purpose of Identity. This is not to say that Feminism is not relevent: however the relation of Aboriginals and Feminism, as considered the same, is a farce.
After all Feminism was created by women within elite middle class positions, a status that most aboriginals have not attained even today. The parallels of Feminism and Aboriginal paradigms are significantley different in that women within Canada Today are able to attain an elite status. However aboriginal men or women when straying against the Canadian "norm" are seen as activists or warriors against the state.
Read Jeff Corntassel's article "Activist Posing as an Academic" or the Article "There is no word for Feminism in my language." Both very important articles within the aboriginal community emphasizing our relevance within the western world/academics.
When Marx made the recognition of the Feminist paradigm he merely rediscovered something that has always existed and it will continue to be reinvented within each individual and each community construct. Thus regardless of actions or words Feminism and Indigenous paradigms must evolve with each given circumstance.
It is good to address feminism as a perspective and Aboriginalism as a perspective but it is only relevent to our given interests and needs. If these interests and needs do not meet the Canadian States Status Quo then it will continue to be marginalized. Thus, this has been the case since contact for aboriginals. However, for the non indigenous woman of Canada, who do you think took over the jobs when the men went to war? Where were the aboriginals at this time, residential schools, jails (for practicing their Indigenous beliefs), or segregated onto minute plots of land and labelled with things such as the Indian Act, Constitution, Charter of Freedom and Rights, Land Policy, Banning of the Feasts, Chief and Council sytems, etc.
The feminist movement was there and was not afflicted with such consequences.
hay sxw qa nu scha cha / Thank you my friends
Note: Mr. D has sent both the above cited articles to me in MS Word format. Excellent papers. Because of copyright laws and Camosun regulations, I cannot post them on this web site, but I can and will forward either or both to you if you ask me. Dr. Phil
Laura Tohe, "There is No Word for Feminism in My Language."
JeffJ. Corntassel, "An Activist Posing as an Academic?"
From: "shane f"
Date: Tue, 20 Jul
Just a quick note in response to the feminist blog,
You made this statement
*White males are notorious for hogging the resources on earth.*
After this statement I wonder if you even know the % of white males in the world, or is this an admittance on your part that your view is racist. Maybe before you point your finger at the rest of Canada or the world you should point your finger in the mirror.
Subject: essay on feminism
From: Christy G
Feminist Perspective Explains Today’s Society
By Christy G
And Should Be Included in the Course Pack
For Dr. Phil
Canada’s society is multicultural and has been since 1971, where all Canadians have equal rights. Does this sound like a new model of society? Yes, where any female or minority has the opportunity to head a company or even the country. How come this is not what the country is really like? If we look to functionalism, we can find no clue. The society is in working order over all.
Ok, then we look towards symbolic interactionism for an explanation or a framework to explain why women and minorities are not represented in leadership positions. Well, women and minorities are in their place, that is why. Not necessarily. Women and minorities do go to school and get PhDs. Why then are they not paid equally to white men? Are they simply fulfilling their role in society as subordinates? If so what is that role? Feminism points to the patriarchy. Let us look now to the conflict perspective. Its framework for explaining society is competition over scarce resources. In the textbook, it states that there is more food than ever before on earth, even in Africa, where there should be enough food grown there to support its population. The text states that war and unequal distribution of resources as the root of starvation. If resources in Africa are not scarce, then why are the people there fighting? Feminism is a tool for finding answers to society’s riddles and should be incorporated into your course. In the case of Africa, feminism would put the situation into a framework that states inequality stems from property relations in capitalism or that the global economy needs to change.
An important aspect of a sociological perspective is its path towards the betterment of society. In feminism, as is not the case in the classical perspectives, the path is towards inclusion of all members of society in the decision-making, safety and sharing of resources. Lawfully, this may be guaranteed in Canada, but in society, it is not. Men hold the positions of power in most companies and a glass ceiling halts the advancement of women.
Look at the conservative party of Canada. They got a woman ceo of a multimillion dollar company to run for the leadership of their party within the last year. The business sector is where a great deal of polititions come from, even the current prime minister. Why has she fallen out of the public eye now after her defeat? Feminism would say because she is a woman and we live in a patriarchal society, where people would rather see a man in control. A man in control in public life and dominant in the home are both parts of patriarchy.
The abuse of women and minorities is common in our society. It is not the case that men who commit these crimes are sick. The violence they commit is an expression of dominance. So, society is working but its not; women are in their place, but that place is not working; there is conflict, but some women would rather put up with the abuse than have their husbands removed. Why is this so in a country where women have equal rights as Canadians to men? With the feminist perspective, abuse can be seen as a behaviour that is learned in our culture as a way for men to relate to women and minorities. Consequently, in femist perspective, women and minorities are lumped together as non-white male. White males are notorious for hogging the resources on earth. Feminism sees this as patriarchy.
If you copy text from this site, please acknowledge the author(s)
and link it back to
This site is hosted by the Vancouver Community Network
© Copyright 1967, 1987, 2007 Phil Bartle
Web Design by Lourdes Sada