Narrow Change

Often when a change is being proposed and pushed, it is a narrow change that only serves the needs of a particular power group. Any ideology that is trying to achieve a specific end becomes myopic in its goal. There needs to be a discussion inside the organization of such movements to find out any differences that may exist. The existence of difference, different people, different groups, leads us to the inference that a more holistic approach must be used to include each perspective, and each view must be given its due importance. The same can be said for any feminist discussions and movements. “The absence of these considerations weakens any feminist discussion of the personal and the political.” Inside the feminist movement and other such movements, there are different stakeholders and actors. These stakeholders must be catered to in order for the movement to be holistic and genuinely representative of all women facing oppression in any form. Audre Lorde points at the fact that not many women of color and different gender orientation are given importance in such movements. She gives the example of a conference where women of color were only invited to make sure their representation was recorded. In reality, weak or different people are not given importance among circles that are working against the system for so-called justice. The differences between them are not dealt with justice. Women of color, lesbians, and so on are sidelined. As they are pushed aside, a vital narrative goes missing from the movement, which hinders the complete change that needs to be there. “It means that only the most narrow parameters of change are possible and allowable.” The clash of different perspectives and narratives is crucial for a debate to evolve inside academic circles and a movement. Consequently, the discussion then shapes the outlook and ideology of a movement. Such gaps also sideline issues that are very real. There is a need for unity and helping each other within such movements. Understanding different viewpoints lead to more integration inside such movements. There is a need to build a connection with each other. Only if that connection is made will there be unity. A united feminist movement would pose a more potent threat to patriarchy. Furthermore, the effort does not end at being tolerant of differing views. “Difference must be not merely tolerated but seen as a fund of necessary polarities between which our creativity can spark like a dialectic.”  That leads to interdependency. Interdependency is important to create a new vision that is better than the status quo. The ignorance of differences and seeing them as a cause for separation leads to a lack of unity. “Without community, there is no Liberation.” Even if there is reform or a change in the status quo, it is a hung reform-a narrow change. Furthermore, Lorde further explains how the argument of educating men about the issues that women face is a wash. Educating the perpetrator is like addressing the concerns of the master. The concerns are of women that ought to be addressed. Similarly, the issues of women of color, and of homosexuals are ignored, and they are expected to educate the white women from the feminist women about the issues that they are facing. “Now we hear that it is the task of women of color to educate white women.” In such matters, it is very important for a movement, for academic circles to dive deep among their selves and figure out any differences that exist there. Then there must be an effort to build upon the differences and present a vision that draws strength from all factions and people from all walks of life. The difference can be used to create unity and make the narrow change broader.