Week 12 Reading Response

This week, we read Audre Lorde's comment that was made during "The Personal and the Political" Panel in 1979. The comment is titled "The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle The Master's House."

In her acknowledgment of being the only black lesbian on the panel, Lorde makes valid comments on feminist theory in 1979 and its ignorance of the differences in race, sexuality, class, and age between women that participated in the panel. She laments the lack of voices being heard from poor women, women of color, and lesbians. The article does not provide an account of the audience reaction so I don't know how the audience responded to Lorde's comments but I think that her observation was completely spot-on. The second-wave feminism's rallying call was "The Personal is Political," and Lorde acknowledged the lack of support for "differences" between the women participating on the panel. She states, "advocating the mere tolerance of difference between women is the grossest reformism. It is a total denial of the creative function of difference in our lives." Lorde then explains that the differences between feminists is what gives them strength. She insists that individual differences give each of them power.

I thought that this reading was really powerful and I could not help but compare it to my life and my involvement with different aspects of feminism. During high school, I was involved in the "Riot Grrrl" movement, a punk feminist movement directed at empowering young women. Within the small community, we attempted to address the diversity within our small group. Bands wrote songs about the lack of racial diversity in the punk scene, in general, as well as addressing the differences between class, sexuality, abilities, and size of those belonging in the community. I felt incredibly empowered during my involvement with this group, but I wonder if I would have felt that sense of belonging if I were not white. I had two Chicana friends that wrote a zine about their experiences within the mostly-white scene and their feelings of being "outsiders."

Another experience that I recall during this reading happened during my first semester of community college. I was attending a large college in Orange County and it was one of the first weeks into the semester. During a conversation in my Women's Studies class (consisting of mostly white women and a token dude), there was some contention over the material that covered the lesbian experience. One particularly vocal and immature woman actually questioned the validity of learning about the experiences of these women. Calmly, my professor replied, "We cover the experiences of lesbian women because they are women and we are in a Women's Studies class. We want to gain knowledge about the lives of all women." To this day, I recount that story because it seems so incredible that there would be any question regarding the lesbian or queer experience in a Women's Studies course!

Back to Lourde's comments...
She makes a compelling argument acknowledging the weaknesses of assimilation techniques for gaining acceptance within the larger society. Lourde encourages women that are "different," whether they be poor, black, older, or lesbian, to turn these "disadvantages" into strengths. Warning that the feminist movement of the late '70s was racist, Lourde insisted on a "define and empower" strategy rather than the "divide and conquer" one of the patriarchy.

Lourde compared women having to educate men on the patriarchal oppression to having women of color having to education white feminists on their ignorance. It is time that the "personal" in the slogan encompasses the personal experience of all women. And only then, will the personal become political and an impetus for lasting change.