Adaptive patriarchy and women's political subjectivity
| Autor | Orsetta Giolo |
| Cargo | University of Ferrara, Italy |
| Páginas | 183-199 |
Periódico do Núcleo de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre Gênero e Direito
Centro de Ciências Jurídicas - Universidade Federal da Paraíba
Nº 02 - Ano 2015
ISSN | 2179-7137 | http://periodicos.ufpb.br/ojs2/index.php/ged/index
183
DOI: 10.18351/2179-7137/ged.2015n2p183-200
CONCLUSIONS: ADAPTIVE PATRIARCHY AND
WOMEN’S POLITICAL SUBJECTIVITY
Orsetta Giolo
1
Abstract: Does patriarchy still exist? In
2011 the “Inter-university working
group on women’s political subjectivity”
began its trajectory of study and analysis
beginning from this question and the
ensuing reflection on whether or not
complex contemporary societies retain a
patriarchal structure. Patriarchy seems to
have become softer, more seductive and
persuasive only in terms of rhetoric: in
reality, it has maintained all its most grim
and violent features. Rather than
disappearing, patriarchy appears to have
honed its skills and strategies of
adaptation in relation to continuously
and rapidly evolving contemporary
contexts. “Adaptive” patriarchy thus
functions as a system capable of
continuously and swiftly repositioning
mechanisms and rhetorics of domination
and control over women. From this
perspective, the rhetoric of choice
appears to be an expression of the
adaptive character of patriarchy: a model
of femininity that is actually not so
different than the stereotypes of the past
has successfully established itself as
something new, silencing anyone who
does not intend to adopt this model.
Keywords: “Adaptive” patriarchy,
feminism, equality, women’s
subjectivity
1. Foreword
1
University of Ferrara, Italy. E-mail: orsetta.giolo@unife.it
Does patriarchy still exist? In
2011 the “Inter-university working
group on women’s political subjectivity”
began its trajectory of study and analysis
beginning from this question and the
ensuing reflection on whether or not
complex contemporary societies retain a
patriarchal structure. As scholars have
noted, in the Italian context there has
been a lengthy discussion concerning the
“end of patriarchy,” starting from the
well-known position taken by the
Libreria delle Donne (Sottosopra, 1996).
In other contexts, in contrast, the issue
has never been framed in these terms;
instead, discussions have revolved
around the transformations of traditional
patriarchy over time: “post-patriarchy”
and “neo-patriarchy” are two of the
terms adopted to account for the survival
of this structure while also capturing its
shifts (Casalini, 2011). It is beyond the
scope of this essay to investigate why the
survival of the patriarchal regime has
been cast into doubt in Italy; however, it
is useful to underline the fact that
Periódico do Núcleo de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre Gênero e Direito
Centro de Ciências Jurídicas - Universidade Federal da Paraíba
Nº 02 - Ano 2015
ISSN | 2179-7137 | http://periodicos.ufpb.br/ojs2/index.php/ged/index
184
DOI: 10.18351/2179-7137/ged.2015n2p183-200
statements such as these have in some
ways strengthened the belief that the
lion’ already been accomplished and the
most important battles already won:
Patriarchy is over, it is no longer
given credit by women and thus i s
finished. It lasted as long as it was
able to have meaning in the female
mind. Now that it has lost this
meaning, we realize that it cannot
last without it. For women’s part,
it was not a matter of agreement.
Too many decisions were made
without and against them, laws,
dogmas, o wnership systems,
customs, hierarchies, rituals,
school programs [...] \ Rather, it
was a matter of making the best of
the situation. Now, however, we
no longer do that (Sottosopra,
1996).
2
This kind of standpoint has
likely helped to spread the belief that
women’s freedom has been attained and
sanctioned once and for all and that the
problems that continue to burden women
involve limited, specific situations
centered on work, familial organization
or political representation. In recent
decades new ‘rhetorics’ of women's
rights have taken hold in relation to some
2
È accaduto non per caso, in
“Sottosopra”, 1996. This famous issue of the
journal Sottosopra was signed by a number of
intellectuals, including: Francesca Graziani,
Sandra De Perini, Luana Zanella, Denise Briante,
Cristiana Fischer, Anna Di Salvo, Daniela Riboli,
of these individual issues, at times
perceived as mutually independent:
gender equality, work/family
reconciliation, part-time employment,
nursery schools, assisted reproduction
and so-called “pink quotas” of female
representation have in some ways
become new ‘keywords’ accompanying
the classic themes of 1970s feminism,
such as divorce and abortion. It is no
coincidence that, from the stage of the
Rome “If not now, when?” protest,
Susanna Camusso, secretary of the CGIL
trade union, identified divorce and
abortion as “two great achievements”
made by women and, without any
problematization, associated them with
the new demands being made in the
streets on February 13, 2011.
It appears to be particularly
difficult to advance critical readings of
classic or new topics of feminist
reflection in that the very act of
questioning what are considered in some
ways the cornerstones of past and present
feminist struggles seems to necessarily
Luisa Muraro, Clara Jourdan, Rosetta Stella,
Rinalda Carati, Lia Cigarini, Maria Marangelli,
Oriella Savoldi, Mari Zanardi, Letizia Bianchi,
Lilli Rampello, Traudel Sattler, Annarosa
Buttarelli, Marisa Guarneri and Loredana
Aldegheri.
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO