Liberal
Individualism Subverts Social Responsibilty
To
the Editors:
I immensely value the letters of Molly Findley, Jason Clark and
Paul Wilczynski over the last two weeks in the Review. All three
seriously engage the problem of sexual violence and this alone,
quite simply, I appreciate. I am writing to respond to a theme in
the articles of Findley and Wilczynski in which both writers seem
to openly refute the concept of implication: the idea that a person
who is not directly to blame for a pattern of violence can and should
be responsible for working to stop it.
I write under the presumption that we all live within a social structure
in which a matrix of power relations affects and orders all of our
lives in fundamental ways. If you do not share in this assumption,
I am not addressing you.
Both sexism and racism, the two forms of oppression vaguely addressed
in Findley and Wilczynskis letters, are social systems of
power relations. They affect the larger social structure, the ways
in which institutions are structured and most importantly the ways
in which people relate to one another. In that, they cannot be explained
simply through individual people and/or interactions. Yet consistently
people attempt to do so: I never raped anyone, what does this
have to do with me? Im not participating directly
in the lynchings, therefore I cant be blamed for it.
I must not have realized that because there are others with
my skin color who have committed violent acts against people that
I too have the capability of such things, despite my pacifist upbringing
(Findleys letter, two weeks ago), and I believe that
the significance of sexual violence is in violent actions for which
individuals must take responsibility (Wilczynskis letter,
last week). The subtext of these statements reduces systems and
patterns of power relations to individual acts of violence and/or
discrimination. It leads us to put the responsibility for racism
and sexism on the others, the crazies, the
violent ones and blinds us from seeing the ways in which
racism and sexism affect us all.
Our society operates within an ideology and politic of liberal individualism.
This ideology deludes us into believing that a person is not responsible
for something unless they are directly to blame for it as an individual.
Yet, collective responsibility and individual blame are not the
same thing. Jason Clark defended this argument in his outstanding
letter, which Paul Wilczynski did not to respond to. In short, he
argued that there is a sexist system of violence that endows men
with social power and privilege. In that, men have the consequent
responsibility to use their social power and its attendant
privileges to work to end that very system.
In my previous letters, I was not claiming that any one man is to
blame for the existence of sexual violence, nor that he created
the social structure that promotes and allows its proliferation.
Nonetheless, sexist power relations have created a material reality
in which the vast majority of sexual violence is committed by men
(businessmen, rapists, communists, athletes, presidents and hippies
alike). The various ways in which men operate within and help to
reproduce sexist power relations are too myriad to cover in a letter.
In short, there is a culture and a politics to sexism and sexual
violence that men are socialized into, participate in and often
unconsciously reproduce. It doesnt mean you or I are directly
to blame for any act of rape, it means that as men we are
all responsible for allowing the existence of rape as a phenomenon.
I did not directly participate in either of the gang rapes that
occurred in Oberlin last semester, nor did most of you reading this
letter, but we live in the context of a community that
allowed those rapes to occur. In that, I am arguing (a) that we
are all a part of that social structure, (b) as men we get many
material, social and political benefits from that structure and
(c) in turn we have the responsibility to change it.
Paul Wilczynskis analogy of arson to rape is instructive of
a common sexist ideological weapon: reducing sexual violence to
the physical act of using the penis violently. This line of reasoning
denies any collective responsibility for what is a social (not individual)
problem. In a literal sense, Mr. Wilczynski, you are correct, you
have both a penis and matches. The reality, though,
is that you not only have the penis you have now identified to us
all, but a society that culturally and politically makes it quite
easy for you to use your said penis as a weapon without much consequence.
Further, beyond the power our penises have as potentially violent
weapons, our penises are usually associated with immense social
power and privilege (although very much dependent on other intersecting
social categories such as race and sexuality): a penis usually means
I dont have to worry much about walking home at night. a penis
usually means I dont have to think about the possibility of
being violently assaulted when Im in the process of getting
together with a friend of mine. When dressing up to go out or even
to work, I dont think much about my safety. I can do drugs/alcohol
around strangers. I can leave a bar and not have to worry every
time about being assaulted. I can say no and I know that people
will respect it. When I say I was violently assaulted Im not
seen as hysterical and people believe me. I dont think your
little box of matches endows you with the same social power. In
that, Mr. Wilczynski, while youve acknowledged the existence
of sexual violence in the penises of crazy rapists, youve
used the logic of individualism to remain silent about sexual violence
in the context of a widespread sexist system of power relations.
So I ask everyone reading, if you are walking down the street and
come across a person being beaten up or raped, is this logic
of individualism and blame the paradigm you plan
to use? Silence is a political act. Claiming this has nothing
to do with me is perhaps the most politically destructive
thing a person can say in the larger process of ending systems of
violent power relations that affect us all. As men, we have the
responsibility to work within our communities to interrogate and
challenge the culture and politic of sexism that we all participate
in and help to reproduce. Simply talking to one another about our
role as men in sexism and sexual violence is a great first step.
Benjamin Joffe-Walt
College senior
|