Sih Pee A oneal es os = . en eee = ES .

PNR Er ees AEA se oe

AFEAS. Since 1969, the women of all of Canada, in the context of a very official and very upright Royal Commission of Enquiry, took the measure of their suborganization and became aware of their problem- atic situation.

Young women twenty year old, those who thought feminism unnecessary, out of date, old politics, and so on, experienced a most acute oppression., Inall the leftist political movements where they were active as people in their own rights, or so they believed; in the interests of all egalitarian, pacifist, national, socialist causes, they came up against a domination: the men in the movement dominated the women. This experience was to give rise to a more radical analysis of women’s situation, an analysis which finally re- sulted in avoiding the pitfalls of equality.

The good old dichotomy method of the Nineteenth Century was back in fashion: this time, there were MODERATE feminists and RADICAL feminists. The very ‘‘darling’’ demands of the BAD feminists of the Nineteenth Century reappeared on the slates of the so-called MODERATES. Andina society which considered itself egalitarian, the demands of the RADICAL feminists turned everything upside down. The situation they were protesting was so intolerable...that they, the radical feminists, were judged intolerant.

But a strange phenomenon happened at the end of the 1970’s. One by one, radical feminist analysis came to reinforce the demands of moderate women. It became more and more difficult to categorize the issues. So much so that at the end of that decade, the dividing line between the MODERATES and the RADICALS had become less and less obvious. Little by little, all of feminism came to beconsidered RADICAL. But inn spite of everything, women’s issues were docu- mented, serious, level-headed, and politicized. It was no longer possible to brush them aside. It was no longer possible to laugh at them, as had happened in the House of Commons, when the prob!em of battered women.caused members to burst out laughing, thus inciting women’s general indignation.

Nothing is more disturbing than reading documents about the conditionofwomen. And if reading these documents makes one ill at ease, one must inevitably ask oneself the reason for this situation that is intol- erable. In ancient Egypt, the Pharaoh executed the bearers of bad news. Today, we choose\to blame those who protest against them. A new dichotomy has become to separate feminists: those who can blame

UPEIX-PRESS |

February 13, 1992

falked to (REA i OMEN and theses whol are scolds (FAULTFINDERS). It isno longer femi- nism that is being judged, but those who document _ and describe feminist demands, those who persist in keeping the issues before the public. Forwomen’s | situation is far from being resolved; on this, everyon isagreed. Let us acknowledge thatthe REASON- _ ABLE WOMEN are those who claim to speak from > masculine objectivity; they have only to give the

impression of understanding it all and explaining it — all. But what to do about those FAULTFINDERS, ~ those women who put forward an interpretation whic disrupts the beautifully masculine syllogisms (which

‘incidentally, any women have taken up)? What to de

about those who insist on bringing itup? You are hurting your own cause, people keep saying to them, that’s enough now. Be quiet.

We can also easily make the statement that it is now FEMINISTS set up in opposition to FEMINISM. Now that women’s analyses have been recognized as legitimate (even the bishops have taken a position or family violence! ), it would be very much appreciatec of the women would finally be quiet. The tragedy at the Polytechnique has provided us with a lovely example of censorship and self-censorship. Messe1 Dubuc, Leclerc and Bourgault were able to speak about it: they were applauded! But women oughtto be quiet about it; what they have to say doesn’t intel est anyone. They are guilty of speaking out. They are even guilty of violence against men with fragile psyches, as Mr. Marcel Adam explained! But Messe Dubuc, Leclerc, and Bourgault hastened to speak of other things.

Be quiet-as !f that doesn’t just make you sick. It | reminds me of that German film on domestic violent Women’s Silence Makes Men Strong.

This article I think says a lot about the controversy occurring now and how people are writing in letters) the editor stating their views about and trying to

distinguish between Radical Feminism and Moderat Feminism. It makes me wonder that in 20 years fro} now how people are going to differentiate between t} feminists/feminism of that time.