Socialism and Feminism - Compounds and Divergence Page 38

Women’s Information-Documentation Training Centre Panel discussions Gender and Left Movement Belgrade, 2012. Panel Discussions: GENDER AND LEFT MOVEMENT Publisher: Women’s Information-Documentation Training Centre (WINDOC) Editors: Lidija Vasiljević Tamara Skrozza Materials: Documentary and Press Clipping Archive of WINDOC Design: Biljana Todorovski Translation: Nebojša Noveski Printing: TIM Agency Belgrade 2012. This publication is made thanks to the support of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation, Germany. Content Nadeţda Čačinovič The Grand Narratives of Feminism Page 7 Gordana Stojaković Yugoslavia Antifascist Front of Women (AFŢ) from 1946 to 1953: A Look Through AFŢ Press Page 13 Dr. AnĎelka Milić Socialism and Feminism - Compounds and Divergence Page 38 Ankica Čakardić Savings measures as a class-gender policy Page 43 Milica Ruţičić Ecstasy of Bureaucracy Page 52 Marijana Radulović Self-organized Choirs in ex-Yugoslavia Page 58 Panel discussions: Gender And The Left Women's Information-Documentation Training Centre (WINDOC), in cooperation with the Youth centre of Belgrade and with the support of the "Rosa Luxemburg" Foundation, launched the first series of the panel discussions on the topic GENDER AND THE LEFT MOVEMENT. The main goal of the project GENDER AND THE LEFT MOVEMENT is emancipation through education and opening space for critical thinking and questioning the work of social movements, with a focus on feminism in the former Yugoslavia. Gender and the left is the topic that is neglected and painted with many prejudices and therefore it presents a challenge, inspiration and hopefully interesting incentive for all activists, students, scholars, researchers, and all those who consider alternative policies as satisfaction and area of interest. Panel Discussions: 12th April 2012 "GENDER AND THE LEFT - Class Perspectives in Feminism", Nadeţda Čačinović 03th May 2012 "Anti fascist movement and women‘s movement after World War II ", Gordana Stojaković 17th May 2012 "Socialism and feminism, feminism in socialism”, AnĎelka Milić and Sonja Drljević 07th June 2012 "Feminism and Radical Left", Ankica Čakardić 21st June 2012 "New left and feminist movement, present trends and challenges", Milica Ruţičić and Marijana Radulović This publication is collection of the articles written by the participants. 5 Poster GENDER AND LEFT, Dom omladine Beograda, Belgrade 2012 Nadeţda Čačinovič THE GRAND NARRATIVES OF FEMINISM et‟s recall: the "grand narrative", the phrase that comes from Lyotard, is the L label for construction that has achieved credibility through procedures that disappear when subjected to critical deconstruction. Deconstruction is required for example that we would not be deceived about embedded meaningfulness of our existence and progress of the world towards a better life based on rhetorical per- formance upgrades simple binary oppositions. Of course, in the background is always the question of power: the issue of the master of discourse. For decades, I did not doubt in any way in excellence and desirability of such critical treatment. After all, when dealing with theory, the self-deception is truly a great enemy. It is true, however, that the attack on the great narratives usu- ally been associated with the so-called postmodern relativism, bringing into question the common notion of the possibility of distinguishing the true and the false, lengthy performative contradiction that has become really unbearable. Grand narrative is the story that explains entirety in one key, literally worldview. Grand narrative is, of course, great because it does not allow itself to be interpreted as an expression of a particular position or a particular interest. All this is quite simplified but enough to raise doubts on the chosen topic and title. Can feminism developed into the great narrative when quite obviously want to represent a certain side? To say a true, that side is a half of humanity... Feminism is, for that matter, as a grand narrative as it is Marxism. Sup- pose that we consider all the previous history as the history of class struggles and as a solution and elimination of these conflicts, emergence of the proletariat with nothing to lose but their chains, then it is more than easy to conclude that feminism can be considered as an insight in the patriarchy of previous history of hu- 7 mankind that are in favor of the whole world can be solved only if afflicted unseat his chains. After this furious introduction, I can slow down and show the relevant context for us. In the mid sixties, the time of my introduction with women's issues, among other things because of the books of Simone de Beauvoir, socialism was the name of the system in which we live and the name of a better future, much different from the present. Of course, the credibility of that view was a little bit problematic from the beginning and bit in some aspects it completely failed. We should not, of course, underestimate the real, true, measurable effect of pro- claimed principles of equality between men and women. However, the gap between the principle and the realization was clearly visible, as it was visible the good effects of equal education, the normal expectations of a more or less equal CVs for women as for men. Femininity was sometimes below the level of consciousness and sometimes above it: we were enrolling in the men's stories, for me, for example, it took a long time to see how Hesse's "The Glass Bead Game" excludes any part of the female intellectuality of mankind, but in the dominant discourse equality was part of the program and the realization of the ideal relationships, according to that, was only a matter of time. The dramatic view of the world was in full force. Shifts are showing gradually. To remind you: year sixty-eight led to a ma- jor renovation of the utopian impulse without doubt. Then, there is so-called sexu- al revolution, which covers everything, from relatively unproblematic contracep- tion, to the discovery of rights to orgasm. For my generation, the changes have occurred in the midst of our growing up. Non-official, feminist women's initia- tives have undoubtedly been encouraged by foreign books or by events outside of Yugoslavia. In those circumstances it is considered as a disqualification, and so- called Yugoslav path of building socialism was peak experiences of the workers' movement. Actually, as it happens in societies of that type, it was considered and not considered at the same time. We are all been able to believe in many impossi- ble things early in the morning, at least on some level. In the specific kind of po- litical debate, and a little less specific scientific and theoretical debate were open questions we are dealing to this day. 8 Theoretically, in the history of ideas we can discern sequences that en- tered into dialogue with the variants of official opinion: existentialism then structuralism then post-structuralism then discussions about postmodernism for a long time and then, of course, censure on 1989th or so. From a feminist point of view and with a lot of simplification, it was always been a huge division on those who (first) equalized female and male or deconstructed functioning of this binary op- position, and on those who (second) were essentialist. On a slightly different logic functioned activism, programs and subjectivization: becoming a subject, the ac- quisition of power. Imposed as women, or cease to be that alien constructions - "women." At first glance it seems that the utopian dimension was doma in the great story of essentialist feminism: when women reach appropriate positions, there would be no war, no violence; the ethical principle will be the ethics of care. But if we consider the ability of imagining of completely different relationships as utopian, alternative thought, it could happen without essentialism. My personal criteria to make differences between acceptable and unac- ceptable utopianism is the price: is it expected to sacrifice for the better future. Of course not, the sacrifice in terms of delay satisfaction, without which there is no culture or civilization, but ra- ther a peaceful acceptance of the sacrifice of many contemporar- ies in the name of supposedly noble aims. Personal sacrifice is something else (although it may have a form of moral blackmail): without it, it would be difficult to reach achievements that were hidden so far under official Work day and Women day. However, as I strongly and secular confident that we have only this dimension, only one life, avoiding the suffering of oth- ers should be the fundamental starting point of a program of Nadežda Čačinović, Panel: Gender and Left, Dome omladine Beograd, 2012 change. Maybe part of that attitude has led to atrophy of the active principles because of which a symbolic gesture is considered as sufficient. Another pathology of feminism is closing in its own world, ignoring all who do not share our views with perhaps some attempts to include women who are not yet conscious, slightly above. 9 But they are turning, pathology, between this and before and after the so- called changes, there will be a large amount of work, patient, less patient, with more or with less performative moments, but productive. Because of feminism, the world is little bit better place. Every now and then, it was talked about some kind of exhaustion, a reac- tion, and apathy. No doubt, many accomplishments became, as stated in the relevant jargon, "mainstream". In a world in which we live, this means that many goals, many accomplishments, become incorporated into the most successful of all grand narratives, one about the inevitability of a market economy. Neoliberal- ism is relatively easy to identify as such ideological reduction, the suppression of all that bothers primary discourse, but the inevitability of the market model, simp- ly put, capitalism, is accepted even where their effects are judgmental, where one seeks to get a little better model.

Load more