Only One Sex? -- Why Not? (An Ode to Engels)

Yoshie Furuhashi furuhashi.1 at osu.edu
Sun Nov 28 09:33:20 PST 1999


Michael Hoover wrote:
>Shulamith Firestone (_The Dialectic of Sex_) argues that women and men
>are not really very different. Firestone states (in stronger terminology
>than Beauvoir) that the biology of women determines their 'sex class'
>which is embedded in family where women and children are at mercy of
>men. Biologically reproductive differences lead to sexual divisions
>of labor.
>
>SF looks to new technologies (that are more extensive than anything
>anticipated by Beauvoir) for liberation from 'curse of Eve.'
>Artificial insemination, test-tube babies, and domestic cybernetics
>will emancipate women (and children) from their biology. She asserts
>that with advances in medical science possibility exists for males to
>carry fetus in implanted wombs and eventually lactate. Gender and sex
>will become redundant in androgynous, unisex future. In arguing for
>androgynous equality and a world of cybernetic communism where all
>humans participate in child-bearing and child-rearing, Firestone
>(criticized for being techno-utopian) wants to destroy political uses
>of difference (which reappeared as virtue a few years after _DofS_
>was published).

Firestone's biological determinism led her to a very pessimistic conclusion. If biological reproductive differences were the cause of gendered divisions of labor, as Firestone believed, you might as well look forward to a test-tube future as the only solution. On the other hand, from Marx & Engels (if they are read against the grain of some parts of their writings), we can conclude that reproduction as such is not an hierarchy-producing activity, unless its meaning & organization are shaped by gender oppression. Reproduction would not even have to be a sexing device of humans (outside of a very narrow area of medicine & science) unless it was made a "problem" for one half of humanity.

That said, as of now, reproduction, social & biological, _is_ a problem for women, because women are denied control over our own bodies, oppressed through gendered divisions of labor, etc. Ending gender oppression & class society calls for Marxism and feminism at the same time, though it is not clear if these two currents of political thoughts can be or should be fully synthesized. Perhaps, they should exist as productive critiques of each other, at least unless & until all Marxists become feminists and all feminists Marxists.

BTW, Engels, an optimistic lover man, wrote in _The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State_ (1884):

***** What we can now conjecture about the way in which sexual relations will be ordered after the impending overthrow of capitalist production is mainly of a negative character, limited for the most part to what will disappear. But what will there be new? That will be answered when a new generation has grown up: a generation of men who never in their lives have known what it is to buy a woman's surrender with money or any other social instrument of power; a generation of women who have never known what it is to give themselves to a man from any other considerations than real love or to refuse to give themselves to their lover from fear of the economic consequences. When these people are in the world, they will care precious little what anybody today thinks they ought to do; they will make their own practice and their corresponding public opinion about the practice of each individual -- and that will be the end of it. *****

_The Origin of the Family..._ was published when Engels was not so "young" any more (biologically -- Engels was 64 years old then!), but look how _youthful_ his optimism announces itself! "Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive / But to be young was very Heaven!" Nowadays, even technically young men, on LBO and elsewhere, sound like crabby old men, turned off by the idea of a future of radically transformed sex and sexuality. As if they were suffering from "accelerated decrepitude," the disease that afflicts Sebastian in Ridley Scott's _Blade Runner_ (1982).

in the spirit of May,

Yoshie



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list