De zaak voor genderafschaffing
Een marxistisch perspectief
Vertaling (klad) · Origineel: Earl Robson · The Pseudonymous Left, 23 juli 2023
Dit is een kladversie ter vertaling. Het originele Engelstalige artikel volgt hieronder.
I. Introduction
Gender is one of the most divisive subjects of our time. Those who are otherwise apolitical have become single-issue activists about the gender question. For this reason, I find it necessary to make my position clear.
As Marxists, we must begin with the material: sex. A common misconception is that sex is binary. This is unscientific and undialectical. Sex is bimodal. There are opposites, male and female, with unities between the two. Sex also does not determine one’s behavior. The behavioral aspect—how one acts, speaks, dresses, etc.—is what’s known as gender.
Gender is not an internal phenomenon. Those who believe in self-identification theory are correct when they say that gender is a social construct, but by that very definition, gender is a social phenomenon. Gender exists between individuals, not within them.
II. Historical Development of Gender
As all social phenomena do, gender arose out of material conditions. The bourgeois and liberal feminists completely ignore this fact, and that is why their analysis inevitably leads them astray.
Gender roles and relations first arose due to the social division of reproductive labor. Alexandra Kollontai details this in "The Social Basis of the Woman Question":
"The followers of historical materialism reject the existence of a special woman question separate from the general social question of our day. Specific economic factors were behind the subordination of women; natural qualities have been a secondary factor in this process."
Given that the material basis of gender is economic, it follows that as the mode of economic production changes, so too will gender. There is nothing inherent to man or woman as genders; to think otherwise is pure idealism.
Already, it is clear that gender essentialists are incorrect. However, those who subscribe to self-identification theory are also incorrect. Gender cannot possibly be an entirely individualistic experience.
III. Gender as a Tool of Reproduction in Class Society
Gender has always been a powerful weapon of the ruling class. The monogamous family is based entirely on the dominance of women by men. According to Engels in "The Origins of the Family": "It is based on the supremacy of the man, the express purpose being to produce children of undisputed paternity."
The emancipation of women cannot come as a result of reactionary hatred of men; it can only be achieved by creating a new social order with a new mode of production.
IV. The Case for Gender Abolition
If gender arises out of material conditions and is in no way a natural trait of humanity, does it have any utility? Gender roles are roles one performs. Would it not be simpler to be rid of this structure and exist simply as humans?
The oppression and exploitation of women are inarguably dependent on the existence of gender. True emancipation of the female sex results from both the abolition of the present mode of production and gender roles.
V. Conclusion
Gender abolition seems to be the inevitable result of the communist mode of production. In a society where all are truly equal, gender will have even less utility than it does now. Communism is the real movement that abolishes the present state of things, and it will also be the movement to abolish gender.