Lesbian-April 23

What do you have to say about the class and/or feminist theory?

I think that the economic theory in relation to women should be updated.  I do believe it is important to study Marxist theory, however, I do not believe the feminist theory derived from Marxism is relevant today.

The readings set forward the significance of lesbians in politics.  Audre Lorde defines herself as a Black lesbian feminist.  She contends that the three factors of her identification silence her.  The problem she addresses in "I am you Sister: Black Women Organizing across Sexualities" is that black women fail to organize due to differences in their sexualities, and thus, can never value and benefit from each others' strengths.  According to Lorde, homophobia and heterosexism are rooted in the black community that women become immobilized and silent when they are accused of being lesbian.  This silencing effect allows men to use homophobia as a powerful weapon in order to make women submissive.  Why does homophobia jeopardize the ability for different members of the black community to unite and mobilize?  I believe this is deeply related to Gayle Rubin's discussion of the shame of abnormal sex practices.  Rubin organizes a sexual hierarchy in which married, procreative heterosexual couples are at the top because they are normalized by society, continue the human race, and do not threaten the many systems under the control of men.  Homosexual individuals compose the lower rungs of hierarchy, and intersections of race, class, and gender even further lower a person's status.  In Lorde's case, black lesbians are marginalized along those same lines.  They are viewed a threats to the continuation of the black race, the black family, and just plain abnormal.  This marginalization has no grounds, as Lorde testifies that she has raised children in a stable home, thinks about sex just as much as any heterosexual woman, and is equally as significant in politics as anyone else.  Lorde urges black women to eliminate their biases so they can fight together against the common issues they face.  Being a black lesbian cannot erase them from political relevance, as throughout US history, they have fought against injustices.  Lorde concludes her thoughts by demanding that the black community, and the world, recognize their political significance, and stop just "tolerating" them.  A similar tone of lesbian political mobilization is echoed in Bunch's essay titled "Lesbians in Revolt."  The climate of Lorde's essay is much more realistic and, I think, effective.  Lorde is asking for people to unite across barriers of sexuality and race, so that the political system can be more accommodating for all members of society.  On the other hand, Bunch situates lesbians at the center of political mobilization.  I agree with Bunch in that lesbians play a critical role in rejecting and undermine male dominance.  However, I found her argument to be so malicious towards heterosexual women, that it weakens the ability for feminists to gain political voice.  She relies too heavily on assumptions about the man-woman relationship, putting all heterosexual women in a category of privileged and blind to oppression.  Heterosexual women have stakes in the feminist movement as well, and she is just weakening feminist power by dismissing heterosexual women.  In this light, Lorde's writing is much more powerful because she demands us to use each others strengths to end oppression.  Moreover, Lorde offers historical contextualization to show how homosexual groups have mobilized separately and in unity with more broadly defined groups.  There is little contextualization for Bunch's argument, aside from a series of assumptions and stereotypes.