The “progressives” are confused it would seem. George Bernard Shaw would skewer them on a spit and slowly roast them over a fire. George Bernard Shaw was and is by all accounts an extremely progressive figure in the history of the progressive struggle. He also saw himself as a preeminent feminist; but what that meant in practicality is that women should actual be equal. Shaw was not sympathetic to arguments which reflected an empathy which caused inequality. The logical end of this trial by fire/ survival of the fittest Darwinist approach was eugenic. He saw himself as continuing towards the superman of Nietzsche in his philosophy.
So as one examines the rhetoric surrounding the “Violence against Women Act” one must wonder who is progressive and who is conservative? If one erased the preconceived knowledge of what is Republican and what is Democrat one sees the Republican women in the House putting forth very Shavian arguments about equality in order to forgo “special” protections for say female migrant workers.
We hear the Democratic women in the house talking about the actual need of women in vulnerable situations; thus undercutting an overarching progressive assertion of the need for “equality”. A ready example of Shaw’s lack of appreciation for the vulnerability of women would be his play “Mrs. Warren’s Profession”. In this play Mrs. Warren is the co-owner of an International chain of brothels with the virtuous Shavian head for business. In the real world outside the theatre and Shaw’s play Jack the Ripper was hacking prostitutes up in the streets of Whitechapel. The disconnect is not only striking but telling. Shaw wants us to be detached and rational in regards to sex, as Dan Savage wants us to be detached and rational about sex, and meanwhile the bodies of the vulnerable are used and discarded as rubbish.
I find that the question is confused because men and women are not going to be exactly equal as they are not exactly the same. What needs to be focused upon is not a false notion of equality which ignores fundamental difference but a real equality in the appreciation of the dignity of humans. The House Republican version of the VAWA fails to do this. The Democrats usually own this lack of appreciation as they share a Shavian appreciation of sex as business. I say this as Democrats fail to realize how birth control and abortion commoditize the sexual act, even if not for monetary exchange, thus leaving the vulnerable used and discarded as rubbish.
So the progressives may hold up the standard for Shaw in almost any instance but in this instance he would bury them up to their necks in the sand of his wit and devour them alive in the fire ants of his logical, though misguided, thoughts and words. That’s what George Bernard Shaw would do!
No comments:
Post a Comment