Londoniyyah - Part 4 - 3rd Wave Feminism | Mohammed Hijab (2021-10-15) #

0:00:15 or the explanation of the londoner which
0:00:17 is a syllabus that we've constructed
0:00:19 which uh goes through the main
0:00:21 ideologies that are influential in the
0:00:23 world today we're going to be discussing
0:00:25 third wave feminism
0:00:27 this is obviously an extension of second
0:00:29 wave feminism which we discussed in the
0:00:30 previous session
0:00:32 so we're going to start in sha allah
0:00:34 with the reading of the poem in the
0:00:35 arabic as per the tradition and then
0:00:37 come back and explain this
0:01:42 so the problem actually starts with some
0:01:44 of the things that we spoke about in the
0:01:45 previous session which uh which relate
0:01:47 to second wave discourse or so it ends
0:01:50 with that so we're talking about things
0:01:51 like
0:01:52 uh the questions that the backlash
0:01:54 literature asks
0:01:56 second wave uh feminists questions to do
0:01:59 with
0:02:00 uh the army for example why is it that
0:02:03 the you know the those who are talking
0:02:05 about historical injustice are not
0:02:07 saying that women should be drafted into
0:02:09 the army in order to
0:02:11 kind of calibrate or to
0:02:14 equalize or
0:02:15 to set right the historical injustice of
0:02:18 the past
0:02:19 is one example
0:02:20 but the poem also mentioned something
0:02:22 very important on the second wave part
0:02:24 which is the uh as we mentioned one of
0:02:26 the biggest if not i think the biggest
0:02:29 study that was ever
0:02:30 conducted
0:02:31 which is blanche flower and oswald 2001
0:02:36 which was a study of 100 000 women in
0:02:38 britain and america
0:02:41 and basically the study concluded that
0:02:42 women despite all the changes in
0:02:44 legislation in the 1960s
0:02:47 are actually
0:02:48 less happy
0:02:50 this is an extremely important study
0:02:52 because it shows that the welfare of
0:02:53 women has not been affected in the
0:02:55 positive
0:02:56 by the situation or by the changes in
0:03:00 legislation by the new lifestyle that
0:03:04 that second wave
0:03:05 affected people are now leading
0:03:08 in their lives so these are the kind of
0:03:10 things that were mentioned in regards to
0:03:12 second wave feminism it's a very these
0:03:13 are very important points
0:03:15 these are extremely important points
0:03:17 because
0:03:18 once again they relate to the
0:03:20 psychological well-being of women
0:03:23 the same the same study we talked about
0:03:25 blanche flower and oswald 2001
0:03:28 actually concluded that men were happier
0:03:30 as well which means that women are
0:03:32 getting sadder men are getting happier
0:03:34 why because now all the commitments
0:03:37 that women have uh well now there's a
0:03:40 double
0:03:40 you can you can say a double burden it's
0:03:43 a term that is used in feminist
0:03:45 literature sometimes now there's this
0:03:48 double expectation and a man actually
0:03:50 has less of an expectation no longer
0:03:51 does he have the same expert traditional
0:03:53 expectation of you know
0:03:55 you know having a family nuclear family
0:03:57 and resource extraction all these kind
0:03:59 of things so clearly
0:04:01 feminism hasn't worked which is why a
0:04:03 lot of women actually
0:04:05 at least in the west some studies have
0:04:07 been done you can do your own research
0:04:09 on it in germany and britain and other
0:04:11 countries actually don't associate with
0:04:12 feminism anymore when they asked
0:04:15 how many uh or would you do you consider
0:04:17 yourself a feminist sometimes the vast
0:04:19 majority of women
0:04:21 actually in a society don't even
0:04:23 agree
0:04:24 uh to call themselves feminist
0:04:26 but today we're going to be speaking
0:04:27 about third wave feminism which is is
0:04:29 different it is a different flavor of
0:04:31 feminism altogether
0:04:33 um
0:04:34 and it's different because the
0:04:36 kind of epistemological
0:04:38 we could say the philosophical base is
0:04:40 different if you remember
0:04:43 second wave feminism relied very heavily
0:04:45 on simone de beauvoir
0:04:47 and her kind of existential philosophy
0:04:51 third wave feminism
0:04:53 has now injected postmodernism into the
0:04:55 equation
0:04:57 and post-modernism
0:04:59 if you want a very succinct and brief
0:05:02 definition
0:05:04 or
0:05:05 which is very difficult to have because
0:05:07 people really differ on this
0:05:09 but of what post-modernism
0:05:11 slash post-structuralism is
0:05:14 it's a deconstructionist discourse
0:05:17 it attempts to un
0:05:20 really not unlock but deconstruct
0:05:22 any narrative
0:05:24 okay this is what it tries to do
0:05:26 anything which is a meta narrative it
0:05:28 attempts to deconstruct it
0:05:31 the usage of the term in popular
0:05:33 discourse which has been equated with
0:05:34 marxism and stuff that's false that's
0:05:36 incorrect people do that sometimes they
0:05:38 say post modern marxists they're not the
0:05:41 same thing these are complete two
0:05:42 different ideologies
0:05:43 you hear them being added together as if
0:05:45 they're the same thing they're
0:05:46 completely different things
0:05:47 marxism actually has a meta-narrative
0:05:49 post-modernism wouldn't be for marxism
0:05:51 actually it would be against it or at
0:05:54 least it would try and deconstruct it so
0:05:55 post-modernism is a deconstructionist
0:05:58 discourse when we say post-modernism
0:06:00 we're talking about the philosophy
0:06:01 espoused by the likes of nietzsche
0:06:05 by the likes of miku foucault by the
0:06:07 likes of jaquise derrida
0:06:09 okay these are the names these are the
0:06:11 kind of big names of post-modernism
0:06:14 these are the big names of
0:06:14 post-structuralism and when we say
0:06:16 post-modernism and post-structuralism we
0:06:18 use the terms interchangeably so
0:06:20 post-structuralism is post-modernism and
0:06:23 post-modernism is post-structuralism
0:06:25 why am i telling you this is because
0:06:27 this is a very important point
0:06:30 many of the big names in third world
0:06:31 feminism or queer studies discourse
0:06:34 they use post-modernism as a base
0:06:38 okay just like edward said by the way he
0:06:40 wrote the book orientalism
0:06:42 he said i'm going to be using
0:06:44 post-modernism but he also said he's
0:06:46 going to be using gramscian
0:06:48 marxist kind of analysis socialist or
0:06:51 analysis which is problematic because
0:06:53 these two things don't go along with
0:06:55 each other and he's been criticized for
0:06:56 that actually
0:06:58 but once again just to be clear the same
0:07:01 thing happens with third wave discord so
0:07:05 judith butler is a big name probably one
0:07:07 of the biggest that you hear today
0:07:09 and she uses post-modernism quite
0:07:12 explicitly
0:07:13 now why is this important we'll come to
0:07:15 it when it comes when it comes another
0:07:17 important key term for third wave
0:07:19 discourse is what you call
0:07:20 intersectionality
0:07:22 this is one of the most important terms
0:07:26 for third wave feminist discourse this
0:07:29 term intersectionality
0:07:31 now who
0:07:32 was the first to mention this term was a
0:07:34 woman called kimberly crenshaw
0:07:36 in 1987
0:07:38 who basically
0:07:40 made the point
0:07:41 that when we're talking about women
0:07:42 we're not just talking about women
0:07:44 we are talking about black women we are
0:07:46 talking about disabled women we are
0:07:48 talking about homosexual women or
0:07:50 heterosexual so basically they were
0:07:51 talking about different
0:07:54 identity markers okay different identity
0:07:56 markers let's be quite honest
0:07:58 in third wave discourse they keep
0:08:00 mentioning race
0:08:02 and they keep mentioning sexual
0:08:03 orientation okay these are the in
0:08:06 addition to gender race gender sexual
0:08:08 it's just like their trinity it's like
0:08:09 they keep bringing this up they don't
0:08:10 break they don't mention tribe for
0:08:12 example which would be important to
0:08:14 black women or asian women and or i
0:08:17 don't know some women in south america
0:08:19 somewhere where tribes are important
0:08:22 but they don't mention it because
0:08:23 remember this is a western discourse
0:08:25 you know they don't mention religion
0:08:27 almost scarcely seldomly ever mention
0:08:30 religion
0:08:31 um
0:08:32 they rarely ever mention funny enough
0:08:34 disability
0:08:36 very rarely did they mention like you
0:08:38 know it's not it's not mentioned it's
0:08:39 not up there so when they talk about
0:08:40 intersectionality they
0:08:42 they don't do this conscientiously and
0:08:44 if you probably probe them on it they
0:08:46 will probably deny the charge
0:08:48 but they do not
0:08:49 mention
0:08:51 things like disability and you know
0:08:53 tribe or religion as much as they
0:08:55 mention things like sexual orientation
0:08:57 and things which are more regular in the
0:08:58 western discourse
0:09:00 that's a very important point to note
0:09:02 but this idea of intersectionality is
0:09:03 huge
0:09:04 because one you once you start saying
0:09:06 okay you're not just a woman
0:09:08 but you're a black woman or you're a
0:09:10 asian woman and you're you're from this
0:09:12 tribe
0:09:13 and you're from this sub-tribe and this
0:09:16 is your religion and this is your you
0:09:18 have a disability and to what extent now
0:09:20 do you define yourself with these labels
0:09:24 because the idea of intersectionality
0:09:25 and this is the argument i make in the
0:09:27 book obviously that i'm sure
0:09:29 the people at home have already bought
0:09:32 if not they're going already to it's
0:09:33 called fifth wave feminism to buy it on
0:09:35 amazon right now
0:09:37 otherwise they're really uh missing out
0:09:39 but the the the the the argument just to
0:09:41 be quite open and straightforward with
0:09:43 you guys that i'm making this is that if
0:09:45 you do say
0:09:47 there's such a thing as
0:09:47 intersectionality yeah
0:09:49 you do say that a woman is not just a
0:09:51 woman but she's a black woman or she's
0:09:53 you know
0:09:54 uh or or she is or he is even talking
0:09:56 about a man why why are we preferring
0:09:58 women here right
0:09:59 or they are depending on what the
0:10:02 pronoun is you know
0:10:03 whatever it is yeah um
0:10:05 then the argument i make then who's
0:10:07 responsible for
0:10:09 the prioritization if you like the
0:10:10 hierarchization of these identity
0:10:12 markers
0:10:14 because if we say
0:10:16 that
0:10:18 woman-ness whatever that may mean
0:10:20 obviously that's
0:10:21 a subject of great contention today
0:10:23 or femininity which will be projected by
0:10:25 most third waves anyways but whatever it
0:10:28 is you know homosexuality or lack
0:10:30 thereof heterosexuality
0:10:32 bisexual whatever it is these things are
0:10:34 the most important thing okay who gave
0:10:39 them the permission to hierarchize it in
0:10:41 that manner
0:10:42 so for example what if someone says well
0:10:43 the most important thing to me is
0:10:44 actually not gender
0:10:46 is race
0:10:47 and in fact i see gender as a trivial
0:10:49 thing
0:10:50 and i'll put racist number one and
0:10:52 gender is like number 10 after tribe and
0:10:54 disability i put gender there in number
0:10:56 10.
0:10:57 what if someone says actually it's
0:10:58 religion which by the way is definitely
0:11:01 something traditionalist
0:11:03 muslims we know traditions christians
0:11:05 orthodox christians you know do jews
0:11:08 also they do that
0:11:09 for them gender is secondary if not even
0:11:12 tertiary
0:11:14 so
0:11:14 on this analysis
0:11:16 what makes
0:11:18 one identity marker superior to another
0:11:20 how do you argue
0:11:22 that gender is more important than the
0:11:24 other identity markers
0:11:26 who gives them the right unless they
0:11:27 want to fall into a colon in this
0:11:29 discourse to do that
0:11:31 okay so this is the main argument so in
0:11:32 other words
0:11:34 so another question is is it conceivable
0:11:35 that you can have a an identity marker
0:11:38 which will override all other identity
0:11:40 markers the argument i make is it has to
0:11:42 be conceivable and if it is conceivable
0:11:44 then the whole enterprise of feminism
0:11:46 will self-implode because feminism
0:11:47 becomes irrelevant
0:11:49 because if you're talking about you're
0:11:50 not just a woman but you're a black
0:11:51 woman you're a tribe and religion all
0:11:53 these things
0:11:54 and then the woman comes out and says
0:11:56 actually i don't i don't um this whole
0:11:58 thing about gender is tertiary to me
0:12:00 it's not important or i understand it
0:12:01 through this paradigm this religious
0:12:02 paradigm whatever it may be
0:12:04 then what you've done is you've just
0:12:05 allowed your your cause to be
0:12:07 deconstructed itself
0:12:09 feminism actually third wave feminist
0:12:11 discourse and queer discourse
0:12:13 ironically actually deconstructs second
0:12:15 wave discourse and it deconstructs
0:12:17 feminism all together if we're taking
0:12:19 the post-modern aspect of it seriously
0:12:21 and if we're taking the intersectional
0:12:23 aspect of it seriously
0:12:25 so let's uh
0:12:27 go to we're going to slide number two
0:12:31 and slide two is
0:12:35 some of the contradictions
0:12:37 because you know
0:12:39 what happened let me just give you a bit
0:12:40 of a history in the 60s and 70s
0:12:43 um obviously in the 60s it was dominated
0:12:45 by white women you know feminism was
0:12:47 dominated by we talked about better for
0:12:48 them we'll talk about jimmy gray we
0:12:50 talked about
0:12:51 uh simone de bovale these are white
0:12:52 women from western european and
0:12:54 countries and their extensions you know
0:12:57 um so it was dominated by that so these
0:12:59 black women came up and andre audrey
0:13:02 lord is one of the bell hooks these are
0:13:04 two big names okay and they now started
0:13:07 to bring their own flavor into the
0:13:08 discourse audrey lord was herself a
0:13:10 lesbian black woman so she has more than
0:13:12 one thing that she's representing here
0:13:15 but one of the things that she says
0:13:17 look at this
0:13:18 statement one and i want maybe some
0:13:21 interaction here
0:13:22 she says the idea of common oppression
0:13:24 was false was a false and corrupt
0:13:26 platform disguising and mystifying the
0:13:28 true nature of woman's varied and
0:13:30 complex social reality
0:13:34 so she's saying there's no such thing as
0:13:35 common oppression what she's trying to
0:13:37 say is that you can't compare the
0:13:39 oppression that white women faced with
0:13:41 the oppression that black women faced
0:13:44 so you're saying that there's a common
0:13:45 oppression here but there's no common
0:13:47 oppression so this idea of common
0:13:49 oppression she says
0:13:51 was false and a corrupt platform
0:13:52 disguising and mystifying the true
0:13:54 nature of women's varied and complex
0:13:56 social reality
0:13:57 watch what she says in the other in in
0:14:00 her other i think this is actually bell
0:14:01 hooks not uh
0:14:02 lord
0:14:03 bell hook she says this yeah
0:14:06 she should be confused bell hooks not
0:14:07 confused all right by the way in the end
0:14:09 of anything
0:14:10 she says there can be no mass
0:14:12 based feminist movement to end sexist
0:14:15 oppression without a unified front
0:14:18 so you see this what what's the problem
0:14:20 here she says
0:14:22 what's the issue of attention and the
0:14:23 two statements
0:14:41 she's actually making the case for it
0:14:42 and then she's saying the only way we
0:14:44 can make a case of feminism universal
0:14:46 feminism
0:14:48 right so great so beau hooks here is
0:14:50 contradicting herself at least on prima
0:14:53 facie value she's saying that the
0:14:55 oppression has to be okay it can't be
0:14:58 seen as you know kind of happening
0:15:02 like as a unified thing
0:15:04 but then if we want to do activism we
0:15:06 have to come together basically
0:15:08 but why should you come together when
0:15:09 your cause is or when your oppression is
0:15:11 so different from one another
0:15:13 you know can it be like no unified front
0:15:15 because of like things like ethnicity
0:15:19 yeah well she's making it in one breath
0:15:21 but then you see the prescription and
0:15:23 the description are kind of odds with
0:15:25 each other here right
0:15:26 she could say well this is just just uh
0:15:28 convenience and uh
0:15:30 you know better use for all these kind
0:15:32 of things can be said but the point is
0:15:34 when you what what you're just saying in
0:15:36 the first statement is she's casting
0:15:37 aspersion
0:15:39 on the patriarchy itself if you really
0:15:40 think about it
0:15:41 and we've spoken about how third wave
0:15:43 approaches caste dispersion on the
0:15:45 patriarch is the patriarchy is this idea
0:15:46 that men
0:15:48 are oppressing women and they have been
0:15:49 doing so historically but audrey lord is
0:15:52 coming and saying hold on black women
0:15:53 are not being oppressed in the same way
0:15:54 as white women are being oppressed
0:15:56 and we've we've shown actually that
0:15:58 white feminists in the previous lesson
0:16:00 were in fact themselves racist
0:16:03 this really complicates things doesn't
0:16:04 it
0:16:05 because and this is what they see this
0:16:07 is really complicated now it's just so
0:16:08 many interlocking they say this is that
0:16:11 language they use interlocking and
0:16:12 entangled
0:16:14 identity markers this is the language
0:16:15 they use interlocking and entangled
0:16:18 identity markers and it creates
0:16:20 confusion within the movement it makes
0:16:21 activism less
0:16:24 less alluring because why should we why
0:16:26 should i join hands with a white woman
0:16:28 who's probably oppressing that black man
0:16:30 that's on the other side of the you see
0:16:32 why should i do that you see
0:16:34 uh and so it weakens activism it does
0:16:37 weaken when you have a binary it
0:16:39 actually strengthens the us versus them
0:16:41 kind of mentality but when you start
0:16:43 saying well actually we're our identity
0:16:45 is not going to be just
0:16:48 women versus men it's not gonna be women
0:16:49 versus men
0:16:50 we're not gonna make them the we're not
0:16:52 gonna make ourselves a hero and them the
0:16:54 villain or
0:16:55 or the opposite whatever it is yeah
0:16:57 we're not gonna do that
0:16:58 because there's more complex things
0:17:00 going on then confusion starts to emerge
0:17:03 within feminism and that's why i said
0:17:05 that one of the best ways to deconstruct
0:17:08 feminist discourses is use feminist
0:17:10 discourses
0:17:11 in this case third wave of feminist
0:17:12 discourses against secondary feminist
0:17:14 clauses when you hear someone say
0:17:15 patriarchy so you know patriarchy now
0:17:18 has been deconstructed by whom by
0:17:20 feminists themselves and we come to this
0:17:22 judith butland the next slide
0:17:26 actually uh this is something a bit
0:17:28 different
0:17:29 we were talking about collectives and i
0:17:32 was looking at this is what i kind of uh
0:17:34 wrote in my book you see
0:17:35 um
0:17:36 this uh
0:17:38 i was well you know judith butler i was
0:17:40 looking at her i wanted to see what kind
0:17:41 of stuff she's written and whatever
0:17:43 and i realized that she she wrote a book
0:17:45 about palestine and obviously she's uh
0:17:47 and we encourage this and we're for it
0:17:49 she's pro-palestine and she's talking
0:17:51 about you know all these things and how
0:17:53 um
0:17:55 oppression and she's the name of the
0:17:57 name of the book is called
0:17:59 uh it's called
0:18:01 also peace what shall we do without
0:18:03 exile okay so i was reading everything
0:18:06 she's done you know gender troubles
0:18:08 i started reading that as well so why
0:18:09 not
0:18:10 when i read when i wrote when i read it
0:18:12 i thought this is actually where i've
0:18:14 caught her out
0:18:15 because it's completely unrelated she's
0:18:17 got her guard down and everything right
0:18:19 so i'm reading it i'm thinking wait a
0:18:20 minute
0:18:21 she's referring to the palestinians
0:18:24 like the palestinians and the jews or
0:18:26 the israelis or whatever she uses terms
0:18:28 users i'm thinking you would never do
0:18:30 that when it comes to gender
0:18:32 because don't forget judith butler
0:18:36 she she claims that
0:18:38 there's something called gender
0:18:39 performativity
0:18:41 says that sex is socially contrived she
0:18:44 mentions this language sex is not just
0:18:47 gender
0:18:48 we're not talking about gender right
0:18:51 sex
0:18:52 biological sex what we refer to she
0:18:54 refers to that as socially contrived
0:18:57 okay
0:18:58 so i'm thinking okay if if biological
0:19:01 sex is socially contrived surely
0:19:04 racial biological race should be
0:19:06 socially constrained same thing should
0:19:07 apply why are we giving privilege to one
0:19:11 set of biological uh realities if you
0:19:13 want to put that in that language she
0:19:15 would probably would disagree with that
0:19:16 language but let's put it in that
0:19:17 language anyway to
0:19:18 make the case
0:19:20 and
0:19:21 forego the other
0:19:22 so she speaks in collectives when it
0:19:24 comes to palestinians and the israelis
0:19:26 and zionists or whatever is but she
0:19:28 speaks in very kind of uh obsolete or
0:19:32 vague
0:19:34 individualist kind of language almost
0:19:37 when it comes to gender
0:19:39 so gender is all very individual
0:19:41 but when it comes to race it's all very
0:19:43 collective who gets to set this and this
0:19:46 is the argument i'm making so why if
0:19:48 there's gender performativity which she
0:19:50 mentions it's just the language she uses
0:19:52 she calls it gender performativity
0:19:53 because it's performance of some sources
0:19:55 like a social construct
0:19:57 then
0:19:58 there ought to be uh very specific they
0:20:01 ought to be race performativity but if
0:20:02 we say this race performativity
0:20:05 there's no such thing as racism
0:20:08 because if race is a social construct
0:20:11 then racism is a social construct
0:20:13 i i recall actually having conversation
0:20:15 with other students about this
0:20:16 and she
0:20:17 saying that you know rape
0:20:19 this is an elevator actually like in
0:20:21 there
0:20:22 she was saying a rape is a
0:20:24 rape oh sorry sorry not rape she was
0:20:26 saying sex having sex is a social
0:20:28 construct like the penis and this going
0:20:31 into the vagina all of this is a social
0:20:32 construct
0:20:33 so i said so really so rape is a social
0:20:35 construct as well isn't it
0:20:36 because if you they don't it's almost as
0:20:39 if they don't see it coming
0:20:41 it's almost as if they don't see it
0:20:42 coming because
0:20:43 and this might be the if you're being
0:20:45 consistent if they're being consistently
0:20:46 yes it is a social construct rapist
0:20:48 racism is a social construct but for
0:20:51 them to say that
0:20:52 okay if they go that far then really
0:20:55 they have shot themselves in there's not
0:20:56 there's nothing left for them to say
0:20:58 after that there's there's no point of
0:21:00 debate after that we've got everything
0:21:02 we want from them
0:21:03 we've used them
0:21:05 sorry to say
0:21:07 like a cab it is it's taken us to our
0:21:09 destination and now we can leave it
0:21:13 well like a prostitute quite frankly
0:21:15 but
0:21:16 for them obviously the prostitute
0:21:18 is there's nothing there's nothing wrong
0:21:19 with a prostitute for them so this is
0:21:21 not an issue but anyway the intellectual
0:21:24 process put that aside
0:21:27 the use has been done if they go that
0:21:29 far if they go that far but you know i
0:21:31 doubt they will go talking about well
0:21:33 i'm not going to say it talking about
0:21:34 prostitutes talking about
0:21:36 um
0:21:37 talking about people that
0:21:40 talking about people that have uh
0:21:43 have made uh very very
0:21:46 and i've mentioned here in the book as
0:21:48 well
0:21:49 let's just say talking about
0:21:52 well let's use the language i use in the
0:21:53 book right cultural or cultural
0:21:56 capitulators
0:21:57 or
0:21:58 command capitulators
0:22:01 uncle tom i said we'll leave it to the
0:22:03 uh
0:22:04 to the reader to kind of uh
0:22:06 to decide that
0:22:08 so
0:22:09 i used
0:22:12 the case of monitor howie who's i think
0:22:14 she's an egyptian as a
0:22:16 she is an egyptian okay
0:22:18 obviously this makes things uh for me
0:22:20 anyways as an egyptian
0:22:23 a little bit worse
0:22:24 to be honest with you especially because
0:22:26 she
0:22:27 er she um she basically attacks arab men
0:22:30 hate women that's the thesis it's very
0:22:33 easy yeah but arab men hate women they
0:22:36 oppress women
0:22:37 she even tries to attack their sexual
0:22:39 competence
0:22:41 she says she's like a story she says
0:22:42 like you know as a woman as an arab man
0:22:45 and he hears the adhan of the mosque and
0:22:47 he's i have an intercourse of her right
0:22:48 he's having sex with his wife he has the
0:22:50 then he stops having sex and he goes to
0:22:52 the
0:22:52 worst what kind of story is this
0:22:56 and he's trying to say look you know she
0:22:58 they don't even let her go into the car
0:23:00 and you know these kind of things
0:23:01 you know saudi arabia other like you
0:23:04 know this kind of
0:23:15 it's a story of some sort so she picked
0:23:17 up and put it yeah
0:23:18 but let me tell you uh the issue here uh
0:23:22 and this is why i challenged her to
0:23:23 obviously i don't know if you even know
0:23:24 she read this thing but she's actually
0:23:26 written her her article why they hate us
0:23:29 on foreign policy magazine yeah
0:23:31 and this is a you can say she's second
0:23:33 wave but she's a she's a crude second
0:23:35 wave she's not even representative of
0:23:36 mainstream second wave kind of opinion
0:23:38 and they get these women that are
0:23:40 usually from ethnic backgrounds to say
0:23:42 things that they could never say
0:23:43 themselves you'll see this as a
0:23:44 recurring theme by the way like usually
0:23:46 it's it's very like from my experience
0:23:48 debating feminism and stuff i have not
0:23:50 seen
0:23:51 that many white sorry to say
0:23:54 western women be happy to debate me as
0:23:57 much as they're willing to put women
0:23:58 from ethnic backgrounds why because they
0:24:00 don't want that image
0:24:02 of a white woman like taking the rights
0:24:04 of or
0:24:05 attacking a minority group or something
0:24:06 like that but they'll get someone to
0:24:08 speak on their arms like a some ethnic
0:24:10 minority or something like that so it
0:24:12 doesn't seem like you know they can say
0:24:13 what they want about their own about
0:24:14 their own kind of why they hate us she
0:24:16 says so i say
0:24:18 obviously now let's let's think about it
0:24:20 she says arab men are ex that they hate
0:24:23 women okay
0:24:25 uh and she even uses islam as one of the
0:24:27 reasons she is
0:24:29 inspired by religion islam and so on you
0:24:31 can see online what she says she mehdi
0:24:33 hassan she's interviewing him and she's
0:24:35 online she's yeah you might have seen it
0:24:37 yourself you've seen it she's very
0:24:39 arrogant woman but the question is now
0:24:41 using third wave discourse how would we
0:24:43 combat
0:24:44 this mean the third wave would have a
0:24:47 field day with this what would they say
0:24:48 well i mean what do you think judith
0:24:50 butler would say
0:24:52 yeah so what was this men thing who are
0:24:54 you defining as men who who here are the
0:24:56 arabs even oh she may be she would be
0:24:58 foolish enough to contradict herself in
0:25:00 that regard but you see these kind of
0:25:02 things but she would definitely be
0:25:03 against this orientalizing arab men but
0:25:05 my question is why are men why not black
0:25:07 men
0:25:08 she's saying it because she's an arab
0:25:10 but had she said the same thing about
0:25:11 jews all i say you
0:25:14 because if it's about cultural practice
0:25:16 and uh religion orthodox judaism is very
0:25:18 similar to orthodox islam in practice
0:25:22 what are you trying to say
0:25:25 and i was worse it implies there's
0:25:27 something better in the first place than
0:25:28 the other in the comparison it's more
0:25:30 conservative yeah
0:25:32 it's more conservative you can say
0:25:33 smaller so okay with jude
0:25:36 orthodox judaism she wouldn't say that
0:25:38 because she she would be slapped by her
0:25:41 masters actually
0:25:43 the ones who put her
0:25:45 foreign policy as a right-wing paper she
0:25:47 didn't even say she was talking about
0:25:48 afghanistan and these kinds of things
0:25:49 and this was i think in 2012 a long time
0:25:51 ago she wrote this but
0:25:54 afghanistan why are you talking about
0:25:55 america that was uh taking the rights
0:25:57 away from women you know in afghanistan
0:26:00 how many women did
0:26:02 they oppressed there they were talking
0:26:03 about you know uh
0:26:05 iraq she had the guts to talk about iraq
0:26:07 and these countries
0:26:09 but she wouldn't obviously foreign
0:26:10 policy magazine
0:26:12 is a right-wing paper she wouldn't she
0:26:14 wouldn't dare
0:26:15 say that they would not accept her but
0:26:18 it's the same thing she wouldn't be
0:26:19 speaking about
0:26:20 black people in that way black men
0:26:22 because she did it would be racism she'd
0:26:25 be laughed but it's okay to say that if
0:26:28 you bring islam into the equation but
0:26:30 the point is if we now bring we don't
0:26:32 need to fight this that much now
0:26:35 if you're confronted with this kind of
0:26:38 rhetoric by people
0:26:40 you have to use and this is what i'll
0:26:42 put to you now you have to use the exact
0:26:44 language that third way feminists use
0:26:47 because you'll even get support from
0:26:49 them you'll be surprised say look this
0:26:51 is a universalizing of generalizing
0:26:53 there's interlocking things and you know
0:26:55 the same language they use
0:26:57 about the patriarchy without oppression
0:26:58 about bina binaries binary this is a
0:27:01 binary they say it's an unacceptable
0:27:03 binary
0:27:04 you know and that language if you start
0:27:06 using against them she'll someone like
0:27:08 her
0:27:09 will start realizing
0:27:11 how embarrassed or how embarrassing
0:27:13 their argument is
0:27:14 okay so how do you answer someone who
0:27:17 speaks like that you have to
0:27:19 use the language
0:27:22 of their masters
0:27:23 i i personally believe don't obviously
0:27:25 like this goes without saying you don't
0:27:27 want to use islamic language
0:27:29 you know or allah and they're already
0:27:31 attacking islam
0:27:32 use their own collide if you like their
0:27:35 own principles against them
0:27:36 okay
0:27:39 the next thing we're going to talk about
0:27:40 today
0:27:41 i'm just going to go back to slides
0:27:46 is domestic violence and fgm
0:27:50 domestic violence in fgm
0:27:52 now
0:27:52 these become these are hot topics right
0:27:55 the hot topic is the second wave
0:27:57 but why am i bringing it into discussion
0:27:59 about third wave feminism
0:28:01 because the question is is very
0:28:03 important of definitions
0:28:05 and if you're if you're employing a
0:28:07 post-structuralist or post-modernist
0:28:08 framework
0:28:10 definitions like the one that's
0:28:11 mentioned here for domestic violence
0:28:13 becomes really problematic look at the
0:28:14 definition of domestic violence
0:28:16 according to
0:28:18 kumaras
0:28:20 1996 she says
0:28:22 violence that occurs within the private
0:28:23 sphere
0:28:24 generally between individuals who are
0:28:26 related through intimacy blood or law is
0:28:29 nearly always a gender-specific crime
0:28:31 perpetrated by men against women
0:28:34 this is a definition it's not uh
0:28:36 tell me what's wrong with the definition
0:28:37 and what would uh
0:28:39 what can you say if you're going to use
0:28:40 a deconstruction let me say the
0:28:42 definition one more time yeah so it's
0:28:43 violence it's on the slides yep
0:28:47 i sent you the slides yeah
0:28:49 violence that occurs within the private
0:28:50 sphere generally between individuals who
0:28:52 are related through intimacy blood or
0:28:54 law
0:28:56 it is nearly always gender specific
0:28:58 crime nearly always yeah
0:29:02 no no but i've sent it to you i'll send
0:29:03 it to you again okay perpetrated by men
0:29:05 against women okay what perpetrated by
0:29:08 men against this is meant to be a
0:29:09 definition of the term domestic violence
0:29:12 it's the definition what's the problem
0:29:13 here with this definition
0:29:15 already only men can
0:29:17 be guilty of this
0:29:19 well she to be fair to she says
0:29:21 almost yeah
0:29:23 yeah yeah you see so it's almost it's
0:29:25 almost what you call question begging
0:29:27 it's like you know when you have your
0:29:29 in in logic when you have your your
0:29:31 conclusion your premises like you've
0:29:33 already assumed
0:29:35 before you want to go find out about
0:29:37 domestic violence you should have a
0:29:38 neutral right you should have a neutral
0:29:40 thing which doesn't already incriminate
0:29:42 one of the two genders
0:29:44 if you flip this around
0:29:46 and make this about women or talk about
0:29:49 what is domestic violence why is it
0:29:51 always by men against women about
0:29:52 children we talked about this last time
0:29:56 the definition doesn't even input
0:29:57 children why can domestic violence not
0:29:58 be done against children if it is done
0:30:00 against children the majority of
0:30:02 according to the nspcc
0:30:04 of crime is by their mother not by their
0:30:06 father
0:30:07 so this definition would fail
0:30:10 on that grounds
0:30:14 that is only physical it could be like
0:30:16 mental types of domestic violence it's
0:30:19 like depriving someone of yeah
0:30:24 that is another thing but
0:30:25 what would a third wave say about this
0:30:27 to get back to the point what is the
0:30:29 third wave what would a third would say
0:30:32 yeah they exactly they dispute that in
0:30:33 the first place they dispute that in the
0:30:35 first place
0:30:36 now the truth of the matter is they talk
0:30:38 about domestic violence
0:30:41 in the muslim world
0:30:43 so this woman called lisa
0:30:45 yeah
0:30:46 who
0:30:47 one of maybe the command capitulators
0:30:49 she was uh
0:30:51 she was doing some studies on the middle
0:30:53 east
0:30:53 which is obviously a big area okay
0:30:56 and she admits there's no data on the
0:30:58 middle east there's no virtually she has
0:31:00 virtually no data but then she keeps
0:31:02 talking about
0:31:03 jewish prudence
0:31:06 all these verses and brings all of that
0:31:07 into the discourse and talks about
0:31:09 scholars and this so
0:31:11 if you have no data then you have no
0:31:13 case i mean what are we comparing it to
0:31:16 so there is a problem with sociological
0:31:18 data being collected in the middle east
0:31:21 we when you hear why is it that xyz you
0:31:25 always have to ask for the sources
0:31:26 because
0:31:27 it's very difficult to collect data in
0:31:28 the middle east it's very difficult to
0:31:30 collect data in the muslim world
0:31:31 generally about domestic violence
0:31:33 there is not for as far as i know that
0:31:35 many
0:31:37 rigorous sociological investigations
0:31:39 have been done let alone being compared
0:31:41 with the west
0:31:43 so
0:31:44 we always feel like we need to be on the
0:31:45 back foot on these issues but there is
0:31:47 no data that substantiates the claim
0:31:50 that there's any more violence in the
0:31:52 muslim world that there is in the west
0:31:54 there's a hell of a lot of data that
0:31:55 says stranger rape happens
0:31:58 at a very very high rate in the west
0:32:01 and there's a hell of a lot of data that
0:32:02 says it happens mostly when most both
0:32:05 parties are drunk it wouldn't be a far
0:32:07 away inference to think therefore that
0:32:09 where drunkenness is not there the
0:32:10 strange europe would be less and
0:32:12 drunkenness is less in muslim world
0:32:14 because sometimes it's even banned it's
0:32:16 abandoned substance in many countries if
0:32:18 not it's limited in this usage
0:32:20 and the culture of drinking and stuff is
0:32:23 different but the reason why i bring
0:32:24 this up is because
0:32:26 it's extremely important to challenge
0:32:27 definitions
0:32:29 and if we're using post-modernism and
0:32:30 structuralism you really don't have a
0:32:32 definition of domestic violence domestic
0:32:34 violence itself
0:32:36 is something you can't define without
0:32:38 without some kind of power relation
0:32:41 it's undefinable actually because if you
0:32:43 the moment you start defining domestic
0:32:44 violence
0:32:46 you are going to privilege
0:32:47 someone or something even if it means
0:32:50 privileging
0:32:51 okay the person who is defining domestic
0:32:54 violence so on a third perspective you
0:32:56 can really go to town with this
0:32:59 so
0:33:00 this definition here is it
0:33:04 it's not a matter of legitimacy it's all
0:33:05 these
0:33:08 to a second with things then we say to
0:33:10 them do you agree with this definition
0:33:12 one is that occurs within the private
0:33:13 sphere
0:33:14 between individuals
0:33:17 you'd have to it's this case-by-case you
0:33:19 know if you go to
0:33:20 ten feminists five of them might agree
0:33:22 with it five of them might not
0:33:24 agree with uh
0:33:27 men against women well once again no
0:33:31 they will not all agree with that that's
0:33:32 just what's in the literature not
0:33:33 everyone agrees with what's in the
0:33:34 literature
0:33:35 what's in the law is different so they
0:33:37 have abuse they have like you are
0:33:38 talking about mental abuse they have
0:33:40 even they have monetary abuse you can
0:33:42 abuse someone monetarily right you they
0:33:44 they divide it into like five or six
0:33:46 types of abuse
0:33:47 uh psychological abuse physical abuse
0:33:50 and so on okay and there's a high
0:33:52 subjective element into it like go and
0:33:54 read the uk kind of definition of what
0:33:56 abuse is
0:33:57 and see the level of subjectivity that's
0:33:59 involved in discretion of the decision
0:34:01 maker on these
0:34:05 would you issues
0:34:06 for the most part uh it's a secular
0:34:08 discourse it is a secular discussion can
0:34:10 we not say what you said
0:34:12 that if alcohol is the main player
0:34:14 in
0:34:16 men abusing women
0:34:23 and the reason why i use the term
0:34:25 stranger rape is because obviously they
0:34:27 a rape is another one it's just like
0:34:29 domestic violence so how do you define
0:34:30 it uh mckinnon catherine mckinnon
0:34:34 said sex is rape just having sex with a
0:34:36 woman is rape she's having intercourse
0:34:37 with her so she's a product of she's a
0:34:39 product of rape herself according to
0:34:42 yeah
0:34:43 even there's consent
0:34:45 yes she says this rape she
0:34:48 because there's a power relationship she
0:34:50 says the man's always going to be taking
0:34:51 advantage you see
0:34:53 but that's that's an extreme
0:34:54 understanding most second wave feminists
0:34:56 would not take this and that's why i'm
0:34:58 saying there's a spectrum of definitions
0:34:59 there is no there is no uniform
0:35:02 definition of rape in second wave
0:35:03 feministic let alone third wave and the
0:35:05 third wave becomes even more difficult
0:35:08 and if you're having a discussion with
0:35:09 someone okay about rape
0:35:11 especially if they're third wave then
0:35:13 you can say you don't have a right to
0:35:14 define it you can actually make this
0:35:16 point if post-structuralism or
0:35:18 post-modernism
0:35:20 is your foundation you don't have a
0:35:22 right to define anything because the
0:35:24 moment you define it there's a power
0:35:25 relation involved in that
0:35:27 meaning you are defining it you're
0:35:29 giving your own definition privilege and
0:35:31 if you're giving your own definition
0:35:32 privilege there's a power relation there
0:35:34 and if there's a power relation there
0:35:36 then that should be deconstructed like
0:35:38 any other meta narrative
0:35:42 so these are important points but let's
0:35:44 let's go to another point here which is
0:35:46 fgm
0:35:48 okay let me read out what the who says
0:35:52 is f
0:35:53 female genital mutilation okay
0:35:55 there are four types according to the
0:35:58 fds and slide six you can see female
0:36:00 genital mutilation is classified into
0:36:02 four major types type one and by the way
0:36:05 the in the on the website let me just
0:36:07 move clear it says girls and women okay
0:36:09 so this is not a matter of doing it to
0:36:11 children against their will ascent
0:36:12 versus consent no
0:36:14 these definitions are applicable to
0:36:16 women okay the women that
0:36:18 are
0:36:19 kind of pressured to do this by society
0:36:21 or any kind of woman who falls into
0:36:23 these four things she is doing female
0:36:25 genital mutilation
0:36:27 type one this is a partial auto removal
0:36:29 removal of the clitoral glands the
0:36:31 external invisible part of the clitoris
0:36:34 which is a sensitive part of the female
0:36:36 genitals as if we did another and all
0:36:38 the
0:36:39 purpose clitoral hood the fold skin
0:36:42 surrounding the clitoral
0:36:44 uh glands
0:36:46 type two
0:36:49 yeah i was just just showing
0:36:51 type two is the part the partial or
0:36:53 total removal of the clitoral gland
0:36:56 uh glands and the libia
0:36:59 minora so these are the other the lips
0:37:02 if you like over the vagina
0:37:07 the yeah the if you
0:37:10 the inner folds they call it uh or the
0:37:11 vulva
0:37:12 with with or without removal of the
0:37:14 labia majora the outside folds of the
0:37:16 skin
0:37:18 type three also known as infibulation
0:37:21 this is the narrowing of vaginal opening
0:37:23 through the creation of of a covering
0:37:25 seal
0:37:26 the seal is a form
0:37:28 is formed by cutting
0:37:30 and repositioning the libia minora okay
0:37:34 or labia majora
0:37:36 both of them
0:37:38 sometimes through stitching
0:37:40 with or without removal of the clitoris
0:37:42 so even if it's not the clitoris is not
0:37:44 being removed or the clitoral hood this
0:37:46 still this is fgm
0:37:48 now type four this includes all other
0:37:50 harmful procedures to the female inc
0:37:53 for non-medical person eg pricking
0:37:55 piercing
0:37:57 incising scraping
0:37:58 uh uh
0:38:00 cauterizing the
0:38:02 the genital area
0:38:04 but look at this the next slide
0:38:07 the nhs is giving us some advice
0:38:10 the nhs in the uk is giving us some
0:38:12 interesting advice
0:38:14 advice on for women what to do when they
0:38:17 have something called labiaplasty
0:38:20 now labiaplasty is rearrangement of the
0:38:22 libia
0:38:23 stitching the libia what do we talk
0:38:25 about this is type three female genital
0:38:28 mutilation nhs is saying look you want
0:38:30 to do libia plus you want to do fgm
0:38:33 it says having alibia plasti is a big
0:38:35 decision having fgm is a big decision
0:38:38 right
0:38:39 well listen
0:38:40 they're not saying fgm but i'm putting
0:38:41 that in there having a libya plastic is
0:38:43 a big decision that you should think
0:38:45 about carefully
0:38:47 it can be expensive and carries a number
0:38:49 of risks expensive
0:38:51 there's also no guarantee that you'll
0:38:53 get the results you expected
0:38:55 and it will not necessarily make you
0:38:56 feel better about your body
0:39:01 if you're thinking of having a about
0:39:03 having a liberoplasty discuss it with
0:39:05 your gp first you may have a condition
0:39:07 that's causing discomfort which can be
0:39:09 treated or there may be a reason why the
0:39:11 operation is not suitable for you your
0:39:14 gp may advise you to speak to a
0:39:15 counselor or psychologist before
0:39:17 committing to surgery but let's put
0:39:19 libia plastia aside
0:39:21 sgs
0:39:23 sexual
0:39:24 real srs sexual realignment surgery
0:39:28 where a man
0:39:30 is removing
0:39:31 his penis for all intents and purposes
0:39:36 tell me that's not fgm
0:39:38 well mgm right
0:39:40 and i'm not talking about you know the
0:39:42 cinema or i'm talking about male genital
0:39:45 mutilation
0:39:46 how could that not be in that definition
0:39:50 that is 100
0:39:52 it must be
0:39:53 and where a woman does something similar
0:39:55 to her libia and restructures her vagina
0:39:57 and so on
0:39:58 how could that not be fgm if it's done
0:40:01 for srs purposes
0:40:03 so srs is an exception
0:40:06 to fgm
0:40:08 because it's western
0:40:10 because the white man said it's okay
0:40:12 libya plasti is okay because the white
0:40:14 man said it's an exception it wouldn't
0:40:16 even be classified you know when you go
0:40:18 on the who website
0:40:21 say 200 million
0:40:23 uh uh i think african and something
0:40:25 women get cut they use the word cut
0:40:28 so tell me if cut cutting happens when
0:40:30 srs happens
0:40:31 is the doctor not using a landsat or is
0:40:33 he using a butter knife
0:40:35 was he using his mouth
0:40:37 what's he using
0:40:39 tell me tell me what he's using
0:40:41 he's using a lancet
0:40:43 you see what i mean so there's cutting
0:40:45 going on so why don't we count
0:40:47 all the white people in western europe
0:40:49 and its extensions that are cutting
0:40:51 themselves with srs and libya plasti
0:40:55 why why only focus
0:40:57 on these things are happening in eastern
0:40:59 europe eastern africa
0:41:01 which is not obviously muslim specific
0:41:03 anyway this is in ethiopia and eritrea
0:41:06 and countries many of them are not even
0:41:07 muslim majority countries
0:41:17 exactly
0:41:32 ho uh
0:41:35 they do not say this is only if they are
0:41:38 forced to do it to say girls or women
0:41:41 so for them let me tell you what i mean
0:41:43 if some woman in ethiopia is taken when
0:41:46 she's 23 years old to a
0:41:49 fake doctor what they are really that's
0:41:51 what they are fake doctor man maybe even
0:41:53 even worse and he's opening her legs up
0:41:55 and he's taking part of our clitoris of
0:41:57 clitoridectomy they call it
0:41:59 they consider that as fgm
0:42:02 even if she consents
0:42:04 that would go into the stats
0:42:06 are you sure yes i am sure
0:42:10 yes they do the fact that she says
0:42:12 she's pretty they all say she's been
0:42:14 she's been pressured by the community
0:42:18 thank you very much
0:42:19 the consent issue is not
0:42:21 in their stats their stats do not
0:42:23 consider consent as a preventer for
0:42:26 putting b putting on the stats their
0:42:28 stats are skewed because they're not
0:42:29 looking at the things even according to
0:42:31 their own definition properly
0:42:33 exactly yeah but but this they haven't
0:42:35 thought of it in this way that's the
0:42:36 only problem no one it's like as if no
0:42:38 one's speaking about it in that language
0:42:54 you might not feel better about your
0:42:55 body after
0:42:59 exactly
0:43:00 exactly exactly it's just a manipulation
0:43:04 of language and we have knee-jerk
0:43:06 reactions
0:43:07 to these things but if we know
0:43:09 about it then we can resolve some of
0:43:12 these things okay we need to move on to
0:43:14 the next one the reason why i brought
0:43:15 this in in the third wave discourse is
0:43:16 to show once again
0:43:18 actually let's question the definition
0:43:20 who gave the w h
0:43:23 ho the world health organization the
0:43:25 right to give the definition anyway
0:43:29 is it conceivable that someone could do
0:43:30 a clitoridectomy and still be happy and
0:43:32 still be and still be healthy yes it is
0:43:35 conceivable it's not medically
0:43:36 inconceivable is it conceivable that
0:43:38 someone could do a liberoplasty and be
0:43:39 very very much injured yes
0:43:42 so if we're talking about medical
0:43:43 conceivabilities the who hasn't hasn't
0:43:46 abided by that
0:43:47 it has not abided by what's medically
0:43:49 conceivable because if it has then it
0:43:51 should have he should have clearly
0:43:53 mentioned labiaplasty right it should
0:43:55 have clearly mentioned srs they have
0:43:58 said nothing about srs you cannot say
0:44:00 srs
0:44:01 when we know the stats are very very
0:44:03 clear books have been written
0:44:04 irreversible damaged it's kind of been
0:44:06 very clear that most people that do it
0:44:08 most the majority regret it emotionally
0:44:11 some of them commit suicide
0:44:12 huge numbers of them commit suicide you
0:44:14 cannot say okay what's to do with
0:44:16 medical condition thereafter because if
0:44:17 that is the case sarah should be
0:44:19 involved in this should be in this
0:44:20 definition so
0:44:23 who gives them the definition to have
0:44:24 these four that four stage or four-part
0:44:28 definition in the first place why should
0:44:29 the who agree and on libertarian grounds
0:44:32 or on liber
0:44:33 liberalism right if a woman wants to cut
0:44:35 her sorry sorry to say clitoris off
0:44:38 the whole thing
0:44:39 she wants to do the whole thing
0:44:41 what's the problem
0:44:43 she if she consents right on a liberal
0:44:45 paradigm if she wants to do that
0:44:47 then there should be no problem because
0:44:49 it's her body she can do it okay so when
0:44:52 it comes to abortion
0:44:54 it's her body when it comes to her
0:44:55 clitoris it's not her body
0:44:57 with abortion they'll say you know we
0:44:58 have to provide services for them if
0:45:00 they want to do it yeah well
0:45:02 same thing right when it comes to
0:45:04 abortion
0:45:05 the argument we use by second wave
0:45:07 usually is her body her rights right she
0:45:09 can abort the baby at six months some of
0:45:11 them saying a boy has six months right
0:45:13 which is a fully formed baby that can
0:45:14 live on incubator abort it no problem
0:45:16 kill it cut it up whatever
0:45:19 it's her body because the isla here the
0:45:21 causes of reason is her body but if it's
0:45:22 her clitoris is her body as well if she
0:45:24 wants to get rid of her clitoris and cut
0:45:26 it off completely
0:45:27 no one should stop it and by the way
0:45:29 some women have some reason for that
0:45:30 it's not inconceivable to think that a
0:45:32 woman would want to keep her clitoris
0:45:34 because it is the
0:45:36 uh is a
0:45:37 clitoridectomy will reduce her sexual
0:45:39 drive
0:45:40 it's conceivable that a woman would want
0:45:42 to remove some part of her clitoris
0:45:44 to reduce her sexual drive why not
0:45:46 that's not inconceivable to me now
0:45:48 whether that's medically uh
0:45:51 advisable or not that's not i'm not
0:45:52 making that case i don't care about that
0:45:54 i'm just saying on on a libertarian
0:45:56 level if she consensus her body you
0:45:58 should let her do it this should not be
0:46:00 called fgm there should be no
0:46:01 prosecution there should be no stats
0:46:03 there should be no
0:46:13 you know they said it's stigma body
0:46:14 about the baby
0:46:15 because
0:46:16 fgm yes
0:46:17 it is literally a part of her but a baby
0:46:19 is a another human being so it's it's
0:46:22 more severe then isn't it well that's
0:46:23 what i'm saying
0:46:26 yeah exactly yeah yeah you can say
0:46:30 exactly
0:46:31 yes yes yes yes
0:46:33 that's right you can that's a strong
0:46:34 argument because now we're talking about
0:46:36 different uh human being and then the
0:46:38 questions of viability and when does a
0:46:39 human become a human
0:46:41 but the point i'm making here is that
0:46:42 definitions definitions definitions
0:46:44 isn't it
0:46:45 whenever we see
0:46:47 definitions of rape domestic violence of
0:46:50 fgm
0:46:52 you'll be asked questions oh you're a
0:46:53 religion house fgm wait a minute how did
0:46:55 you define fgm is it this way
0:46:57 because if you define it this way these
0:46:59 are your consequences
0:47:01 how do you define domestic violence is
0:47:02 it this way because if it's this way
0:47:04 these are consequences
0:47:06 and what gives you the right to define
0:47:07 it in these ways in the first place our
0:47:09 problem is that we already assume the
0:47:11 definition that that person has given us
0:47:13 is true
0:47:15 so
0:47:15 fgm is defined as who gave you the right
0:47:17 to define it like that we don't you're
0:47:19 sorry
0:47:20 what oh a rape is defined as who gave
0:47:22 you the right to find like that why
0:47:24 should you have a eurocentric experience
0:47:26 and then force it upon all of our
0:47:27 throats to define rape in that way
0:47:30 whatever is to find out why should it be
0:47:32 defined in that way and on a third wave
0:47:34 paradigm it's a power problem
0:47:37 because remember post-modernism it's all
0:47:40 about deconstruct deconstructing
0:47:41 methodologies including power
0:47:43 relations and not giving privilege to
0:47:45 some people or others this does that
0:47:48 now another concept which is very
0:47:50 important because we want to finish this
0:47:52 in 10 minutes okay so we can go to the
0:47:54 discussion point
0:47:55 um so we're going to go to another uh
0:47:58 important key term here which is called
0:47:59 homo nationalism okay so write this down
0:48:01 homo nationalism
0:48:03 uh they define it this is their language
0:48:05 they're defining it in the following way
0:48:07 a facet of modernity and a historical
0:48:09 shift marked by the entrance of some
0:48:10 homosexual bodies as worthy of
0:48:12 protection by nation-states
0:48:14 a constitutive
0:48:15 and fundamental reorientation of the
0:48:18 relationship between the state
0:48:18 capitalism and sexuality this is just
0:48:21 jasper
0:48:22 yeah this is uh the definition of
0:48:24 formation if you want to put home
0:48:25 relations in another
0:48:27 easier way it's basically
0:48:30 where you privilege homosexual people
0:48:32 over other communities
0:48:34 you throw other communities under the
0:48:36 bus
0:48:37 for the rights of homosexual people they
0:48:38 have a term for this
0:48:40 okay they have a term for this and you
0:48:41 need to be aware of that term because
0:48:43 we can actually use this term to our
0:48:45 advantage for strategic purposes
0:48:47 because a lot of the time and you know
0:48:48 i'll give you some examples israel is a
0:48:50 good case study because they actually do
0:48:51 this
0:48:52 they they say for instance um
0:48:55 you know like in israel they'll say that
0:48:59 the palestinians have these rules
0:49:01 against homosexuality and therefore we
0:49:03 should be granted the rights
0:49:04 so it kind of justifies their own kind
0:49:06 of oppression in our perspective at
0:49:08 least or whatever it may be yeah so they
0:49:10 use homosexuality and homosexual bodies
0:49:13 when they say homosexual homosexual
0:49:15 people yeah
0:49:16 in order to justify oppression against
0:49:18 the muslim community for example right
0:49:20 and this is most
0:49:22 this is most pressingly felt and i've
0:49:24 made this argument before but i'll make
0:49:25 it again
0:49:27 in the case of aid foreign aid to
0:49:29 african countries
0:49:31 so i have to double check what country
0:49:32 it was but obama basically cut
0:49:34 foreign aid to one of the countries i'm
0:49:35 not sure if anyone knows what country
0:49:37 it might have been uganda right and he
0:49:39 cut aid because of the homosexual issue
0:49:41 he cut aid now if you think about what's
0:49:43 happening here he is privileging
0:49:45 homosexual bodies
0:49:47 okay so homo nationalist agenda right
0:49:49 he's privileging homosexual bodies over
0:49:51 and above
0:49:52 in this case actually children because
0:49:54 there will be um there will be a loss
0:49:58 when the aid is not there so you can
0:49:59 conceive that because in a sense there's
0:50:02 kind of like um opportunity cost in his
0:50:04 mind and the opportunity cost says
0:50:06 if these guys don't implement her
0:50:08 pro-homosexual rights
0:50:10 then i am willing to see the economy of
0:50:12 this country go down to the extent where
0:50:14 it could affect young children
0:50:17 in a medical manner or can kill them
0:50:22 worse than that they are being
0:50:24 they are they are they are used
0:50:27 as leverage
0:50:29 they're used as political leverage
0:50:31 against
0:50:32 leaders who don't agree with their world
0:50:39 yeah view you want to use that
0:50:40 metaphorically yeah it's not it's not a
0:50:42 war you know in the technical political
0:50:43 terms yes yes
0:50:45 yeah
0:50:46 right right
0:50:47 yeah which is a very strong argument
0:50:49 right so if someone comes and says well
0:50:51 um you know people in africa they don't
0:50:54 accept most of africa you'll be
0:50:55 surprised look at the pew research on
0:50:57 african countries sub-saharan and north
0:50:59 african countries the whole of the
0:51:00 continent of africa
0:51:02 how many people accept homosexuality as
0:51:04 a practice
0:51:05 you'll find that it's negligible quite
0:51:08 frankly so there's so many issues
0:51:09 relating to this right because you've
0:51:11 got a community of people democratically
0:51:13 if you want to put it that way who don't
0:51:14 accept such practice so you have to go
0:51:16 against the popular will but then you
0:51:18 have these other issues now again which
0:51:19 is
0:51:20 now you're going to cut
0:51:22 aid to very if you want to put it
0:51:24 economically disadvantaged countries in
0:51:28 order to teach them a lesson
0:51:29 and kill their kids so because they're
0:51:31 not uh implementing the policies that
0:51:33 you want
0:51:34 this is a very strong argument and if we
0:51:36 put it in that language i think we will
0:51:38 uh show to the people how imperialism is
0:51:41 continuing right it's a form of cultural
0:51:43 imperialism
0:51:44 it was uganda wasn't it uganda he cut he
0:51:47 cut thing i think i mentioned it here i
0:51:49 might have mentioned it in the book
0:51:55 well it's fine
0:51:56 basically they cut thai they cut aids
0:51:59 aid to this country this african country
0:52:02 because
0:52:03 uh because they were not implementing
0:52:04 pro homosexual policies or whole like
0:52:07 policies
0:52:09 anyway as we move on
0:52:10 let's move on to the issue of sexuality
0:52:12 the issue of sexuality itself
0:52:15 now let's once again put ourselves in
0:52:16 the in the shoes of
0:52:18 this kind of post-modernist uh you know
0:52:22 i feel like third wave queer theory type
0:52:24 feminist yeah
0:52:26 have you ever heard the expression
0:52:28 he's come out of the closet
0:52:30 you must have heard this expression
0:52:31 right
0:52:32 and what's it referring to is referring
0:52:34 to people becoming
0:52:35 becoming public about the homosexuality
0:52:37 that's what's referring
0:52:39 have you ever asked yourself a question
0:52:41 why is coming out the closet
0:52:43 preferred to going into into the closet
0:52:46 like who who and let's put this in
0:52:48 formal terms
0:52:50 who sets the criterion that sexual
0:52:53 express expressivism
0:52:55 is preferred to sexual
0:52:57 suppressionism for that put in that
0:52:58 language so someone having a sexual urge
0:53:02 of some sort okay
0:53:04 them suppressing that urge
0:53:06 why is that seen as lesser than someone
0:53:08 expressing the urge
0:53:10 now this might sound like a very
0:53:11 straightforward question but they seem
0:53:13 to have zero answer for zero
0:53:14 justification for it
0:53:16 there's zero justification in fact the
0:53:18 only types of kind of um academically
0:53:22 you could say uh
0:53:24 academic attempts to answer this
0:53:26 question doesn't come from feminism it
0:53:27 comes from sigmund f freud he wrote a
0:53:29 book called civilization and it's
0:53:31 discontents
0:53:33 and in this book remember he's a
0:53:34 psychoanalyst
0:53:36 he's actually one of the fathers
0:53:38 him and carl young and others they are
0:53:40 the fathers of the school called
0:53:41 psychoanalysis
0:53:43 and he basically had this idea that you
0:53:45 have three parts of your of your psyche
0:53:47 if you like the id the ego and the super
0:53:49 ego this idea was also adopted by young
0:53:51 and others and the idea is that you have
0:53:54 the unconscious mind then you have the
0:53:55 conscious mind
0:53:58 the the
0:53:59 the the id is the the bestial
0:54:01 if you like uh impulsive self
0:54:04 the ego is societal civilizational rules
0:54:08 and the super ego tries to balance
0:54:09 between the two things
0:54:11 okay
0:54:12 and this is his idea but what he
0:54:14 basically argues in civilization
0:54:17 discontent is that when you're a child
0:54:20 okay you are being told by your parents
0:54:22 what to do
0:54:24 and then instead of your dad telling you
0:54:26 what to do now is society replaces your
0:54:29 father
0:54:30 so what he says is the solution for this
0:54:32 instead of saying okay well therefore
0:54:34 you have to adapt to the new situations
0:54:36 or whatever he's saying no the best
0:54:38 thing to do now
0:54:39 is to
0:54:41 to release
0:54:42 society or society should now
0:54:46 limit that role
0:54:47 and not tell people what to do so that
0:54:49 people can express themselves in
0:54:50 whatever way they can
0:54:52 and because that will be the expression
0:54:54 of the true self and whatever that's you
0:54:56 know a way of putting maslow in terms
0:54:58 of reaching self-actualization or
0:55:00 whatever it may be
0:55:01 but there's there's this has now become
0:55:03 a philosophical argument if you've
0:55:04 noticed it's no longer psychology
0:55:06 it's not saying that you'll be better
0:55:08 off uh
0:55:10 he's saying that this is
0:55:12 the preferred thing to do
0:55:14 now the question is
0:55:15 a lot of this by the way is we have to
0:55:17 be very very
0:55:18 careful because we think okay well we
0:55:21 have to have muslim counsellors and
0:55:22 stuff it's more pastoral point but we
0:55:25 have uh you know
0:55:27 different ways that people
0:55:28 um kind of in counseling you have the
0:55:30 cbt method you know cognitive behavioral
0:55:33 therapy where they try and rationalize
0:55:34 everything then you have the
0:55:35 psychoanalytic method
0:55:36 and they have something called the
0:55:37 talking cure they have hypnosis and
0:55:39 these things are all connected with
0:55:40 psychoanalysis and the talking cure if
0:55:42 you ever have a counseling session with
0:55:44 a guy or a woman that believes in
0:55:46 psychoanalysis or has it as their school
0:55:48 of thought that they've been taught
0:55:50 that the main thing that they will tell
0:55:51 you is let the person speak they should
0:55:52 let you speak at least 90 of the time
0:55:55 it's like you're solving your own
0:55:56 problems
0:55:57 but to extend is actually helping you
0:56:00 you're just talking okay oh but how did
0:56:02 you feel how this childhood experience
0:56:05 okay but the person needs guidance
0:56:08 that's what we say okay that's not gonna
0:56:09 help them it's gonna it will help to
0:56:11 some extent and talking cure is all good
0:56:13 very good hypnosis might be very good no
0:56:15 problem i'm not i'm not i'm not
0:56:17 disputing the validity or the
0:56:19 efficaciousness of these things to some
0:56:21 extent but what i'm saying is if it's
0:56:22 left like that
0:56:24 for us it's like you've let it all hang
0:56:26 out but you've
0:56:27 not let anything collect
0:56:29 the bread crumbs and make it into a loaf
0:56:31 if you like there's nothing there
0:56:33 so you'll find some most people or not
0:56:35 most people a lot of people are finished
0:56:36 with these kinds of therapies
0:56:38 are very dissatisfied actually
0:56:40 because it's like we are looking for
0:56:41 some kind of guidance here
0:56:44 and uh so we've got to be aware of that
0:56:46 because it's it's all so interconnected
0:56:48 the idea of sexuality being express it
0:56:51 you know that we believe there is we're
0:56:54 not monks and people that believe in
0:56:56 monasticism believe that they should be
0:56:58 expressed sexuality should be expressed
0:56:59 but within time within place within
0:57:01 reason and this is we we have a moral
0:57:03 system which says
0:57:05 that sexual suppressionism or not even
0:57:07 just sexual
0:57:11 the welcoming says those who suppress
0:57:12 their anger
0:57:14 you know these kind of things they
0:57:15 should be suppressed there are some
0:57:16 human emotions that should be suppressed
0:57:18 and you'll find an outlet for them some
0:57:20 other place some other time
0:57:22 this goes
0:57:23 head-to-head with these kinds of notions
0:57:25 we need to be aware of this
0:57:27 you need to be aware of this
0:57:29 and so there is if you don't put it
0:57:31 formally once again there's no reason
0:57:32 why we should prioritize sexual
0:57:34 expressivism over and above sexual
0:57:36 suppressionism we say that there are
0:57:38 times where one should be preferred over
0:57:40 the other and they should be preferred
0:57:41 over one but it doesn't when it comes to
0:57:44 heterosexuality in homosexuality
0:57:47 the idea of coming out of the closet as
0:57:49 being the preferred modus operandi type
0:57:51 thing to do in terms of morality is not
0:57:54 justified on first principles and once
0:57:55 again we ask them to give the evidence
0:57:57 for that
0:57:59 and it goes back to asking the burden of
0:58:02 proof is upon the one that's making the
0:58:03 claim and that is an active claim which
0:58:04 requires a burden of proof
0:58:08 and so
0:58:09 with that we've got one minute left um
0:58:12 i will conclude about just to summarize
0:58:15 what i started off with with the
0:58:16 intersectionalist approach
0:58:19 one of the key things i thought i think
0:58:20 really has worked and on the field
0:58:23 is the idea that if you believe in
0:58:24 sexuality if you get the interlocutor
0:58:26 and most feminists will believe in this
0:58:28 and they will agree with it
0:58:30 all you have to do in terms of
0:58:32 argumentation is get them to agree to in
0:58:33 sectionality get them to agree to the
0:58:36 different identifier markers uh race
0:58:39 religion whatever sexuality and then get
0:58:41 them to agree that
0:58:43 the prioritization the hierarchization
0:58:44 should be left to the subject and if the
0:58:46 subject decides that religion should
0:58:48 override everything then then you do
0:58:49 have an official implosion of feminism
0:58:52 so intersectionality is our way to
0:58:53 destroy
0:58:54 feminism itself and no doubt as we've
0:58:57 seen it's deconstructionist in nature
0:58:58 because of post-modernism so it
0:59:00 deconstructs second wave feminism as
0:59:02 well and with that
0:59:03 we concluded