[Fwd: Re: current discussions]

[Katha Pollitt <kpollitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mark Jones wrote:
>

> Which statements/positions did I criticise that you don't actually hold? I'm
> happy to be corrected. I would dearly love to hear from Katha that she is
> opposed to the structures of imperialism which create those cultural
> discourses and social realities which are the breeding grounds for
> men-on-women, black-on-black, white-on-black etc violence. Unfortunately I
> am still waiting, and all of Katha's ideas about 'violence' which I've
> unearthed are like are ideas about 'nationalism' she's opposed to it,
> period. This is not enough reason to be a famous feminist, frankly. Katha
> believes that men are violent. period.

I don't like the inquisitory tone of this. Of course I oppose
imperialism, Nato, also civilian bombings and embargo of Yugoslavia. On
a list like this, I would take opposition to imperialism  as read. Do I
think imperialism explains male violence? No. To me that is not a
Marxist position at all -- it's just tubthumping, a way of getting
feminist issues off the table (abolish NATO and wifebeating will end --
sure). Violence against women, in its many forms,rests on the
subordination of women, which is rather older than imperialism -- even
than capitalism.  However, do I think "men are violent, period"? No.  I
have said not all men are violent on this list many times. Most men are
not violent, imperialism or no imperialism. Even on this list!
Katha