One of the most interesting things I did this past week was to attend a session where Germaine Greer was interviewed. Of course, she loves to be controversial and she has always been controversial. Some people worship the ground she walks on and some people have nothing but scorn for her. Either way, she packed a full (large) auditorium. When it came time for the audience to ask questions one woman wanted her opinion on the relationship between Feminism and Veganism and whether Feminists should be seriously considering Veganism.
Germaine has never been at a loss for words and she told an interesting story of watching a python in Queensland. An animal (unfortunately I don't have in my notes what type of animal it was) had been swallowed whole by the python and was clearly evident in the python's body. Along came another one of these animals and when reaching the python, made no effort to get away from danger.
This led Germaine to ask, did the animal get the sense that there was no danger because the python was already fed, or was the prey drawn to the predator? She had my attention. That is a fascinating question. Ultimately, she suggested that we should be "eco-feminists" - feminists also interested about the land. "I am an animal with other animals," she said.
The conversation was wide-ranging. She talked of her disdain for marriage and she did not support gay marriage. Marriage was a "breeding contract" she said and if there was not a vagina and a penis involved, there was no marriage. A breeding contract does not sanction anal intercourse, she said. It was her view that marriage should be a contract like any other contract, with sub-clauses. People needed to sit down and sort things out. Who was going to do what? No good finding out that the husband was angry that the wife didn't Hoover more than once a fortnight when at the divorce lawyer's office, she said."The best people start to behave badly in marriage," she stated. She was all for making it easier for people to live together. A co-habitation contract could work, she suggested.
She was asked why she rejected up to a dozen offers to critique 50 Shades of Grey. She said that she wasn't in the least interested in spanking or sado-masochism or relationships where people were "hooked on pain". She'd seen the damage and dread caused to people she knew and she had no interest.
But, wasn't she talking about abuse rather than relationships in which there was consent, asked the young man interviewing her? I didn't make note of a direct answer. Rather, my notes then relate to her thoughts on rape and that "the notion of consent can't effect the mechanical pursuit of what he wants to do". How can she consent in advance if his desires push him into territory of which she (or he) is unaware in advance? This led to discussion about prosecution of rape, that the burden of proof is massive and hence there are very few prosecutions. Germaine would like to see the charge of rape dropped and instead there should be a single law of serial assault.
I rarely take things personally. I'm aware I'm different to so many people and what they want but I felt sensitive sitting there in that auditorium. Wanting what I wanted seemed to be going against 'the movement'; the vibe in the room.
Then, Germaine Greer said something particularly interesting to me. She was talking about a 'Slut Walk'. She said that people had forever made a connection between loose morals and dirt. "Being dirty" was one of the biggest insults someone could give a woman. There were all those "slimy, slithery words" like "slut" and "slattern" thrown at us if we didn't do what we were expected to do; if our morals were loose. We've been "blackmailed", she said, with "dirtiness". "Stop bloody cleaning clean houses," she demanded of us. Stop accepting this blackmail!
It was a lot to take in and I'm not at all sure that some things weren't contradictory. She wanted to make it easier for people to live together but wasn't happy about people living together whose relationship involved domination and submission, even if that was a consensual relationship...
The whole darn thing destabilized me a bit. It was not okay to be in a power exchange relationship, it seemed, but perfectly okay to want to be slutty. I left a little confused.
Germaine has never been at a loss for words and she told an interesting story of watching a python in Queensland. An animal (unfortunately I don't have in my notes what type of animal it was) had been swallowed whole by the python and was clearly evident in the python's body. Along came another one of these animals and when reaching the python, made no effort to get away from danger.
This led Germaine to ask, did the animal get the sense that there was no danger because the python was already fed, or was the prey drawn to the predator? She had my attention. That is a fascinating question. Ultimately, she suggested that we should be "eco-feminists" - feminists also interested about the land. "I am an animal with other animals," she said.
The conversation was wide-ranging. She talked of her disdain for marriage and she did not support gay marriage. Marriage was a "breeding contract" she said and if there was not a vagina and a penis involved, there was no marriage. A breeding contract does not sanction anal intercourse, she said. It was her view that marriage should be a contract like any other contract, with sub-clauses. People needed to sit down and sort things out. Who was going to do what? No good finding out that the husband was angry that the wife didn't Hoover more than once a fortnight when at the divorce lawyer's office, she said."The best people start to behave badly in marriage," she stated. She was all for making it easier for people to live together. A co-habitation contract could work, she suggested.
She was asked why she rejected up to a dozen offers to critique 50 Shades of Grey. She said that she wasn't in the least interested in spanking or sado-masochism or relationships where people were "hooked on pain". She'd seen the damage and dread caused to people she knew and she had no interest.
But, wasn't she talking about abuse rather than relationships in which there was consent, asked the young man interviewing her? I didn't make note of a direct answer. Rather, my notes then relate to her thoughts on rape and that "the notion of consent can't effect the mechanical pursuit of what he wants to do". How can she consent in advance if his desires push him into territory of which she (or he) is unaware in advance? This led to discussion about prosecution of rape, that the burden of proof is massive and hence there are very few prosecutions. Germaine would like to see the charge of rape dropped and instead there should be a single law of serial assault.
I rarely take things personally. I'm aware I'm different to so many people and what they want but I felt sensitive sitting there in that auditorium. Wanting what I wanted seemed to be going against 'the movement'; the vibe in the room.
Then, Germaine Greer said something particularly interesting to me. She was talking about a 'Slut Walk'. She said that people had forever made a connection between loose morals and dirt. "Being dirty" was one of the biggest insults someone could give a woman. There were all those "slimy, slithery words" like "slut" and "slattern" thrown at us if we didn't do what we were expected to do; if our morals were loose. We've been "blackmailed", she said, with "dirtiness". "Stop bloody cleaning clean houses," she demanded of us. Stop accepting this blackmail!
It was a lot to take in and I'm not at all sure that some things weren't contradictory. She wanted to make it easier for people to live together but wasn't happy about people living together whose relationship involved domination and submission, even if that was a consensual relationship...
The whole darn thing destabilized me a bit. It was not okay to be in a power exchange relationship, it seemed, but perfectly okay to want to be slutty. I left a little confused.
It is good that you don't need her approval.
ReplyDeletequeen: I definitely don't need her approval but I got the sense that a lot of woman did.
ReplyDeleteI've always thought she was confusing.. if not actually a bit confused herself.
ReplyDeleteNancy: She made the statement that she is accused of changing her mind and that that isn't true. But, I think at various stages of her life she's felt very differently about being a woman and what that means for her. I suspect that there is a private Germaine and a public Germaine and that they are poles apart.
ReplyDelete