open swim

[Valentina Pagliai]

Hi,

here is my opinion (quite im-mediate-d, I would say), on the question of
defining ourselves "feminists". I agree with Jeff Deby's letter, and I feel
very ambivalent regarding this issue. Although I recognize and appreciate
the work of feminist anthropologists (which I deem fundamental), I would
not define myself as a "feminist".

First, the term has just too many meanings for my taste. Is European and
Italian feminism, for example (the one I am more acquainted with) similar
to the US one? What feminism meant in the seventies is the same that it
meant in the 80s, 90s or in 2000? Are we going to consider American white
middle class feminism (after Angela Davis' criticism) as something we can
identify with?

Second, what do we do of so much minimalistic categorizing in feminist
discourse? Including, as Jeff has already recalled, the assumption of a
"binary nature of gender". As a woman I have had my share of unwanted
labels bestowed on me, to have any desire for one more (even if such - in
appearance- agreable one like "feminist").

In my work on male and female gender identity constructions I have to
struggle a lot to find a way out from essentialism, so I suppose this is
why this issue is so hearthfelt to me. I find contituous problems and lmits
and questions, and I have no clear answers.

My suggestion, then, is that we probably need to start a discussion of what
feminism is and has been, its historical significance etc. We could take it
as a category that needs analysis, rather than as a "qualifyer" for our
enterprise. Rather than a feminist conference, I would like to see a
conference ON feminism.

bye,




Valentina Pagliai
Department of Anthropology
University of California, Los Angeles
Los Angeles, CA 90025

(310) 825-6299