it’s a false choice.
memoir or philosophy. if i start, i start from i. to pronounce on my life as i saw it or life as i see it: it’s a false choice.
i’m reading de beauvoir.again.
did she see the overlap?
in memoirs of a dutiful daughter, a surprise ending reveals a daughter who is not simone, but her best friend, Zaza. the question raised is of the subject proper and asking this question properly, proprietarily, (what is not) simone’s story ends in hysteria. the loving daughter cannot find her feet as her mother continues to sweep them out from under her, moving her to berlin (of all places) each time she seems to be on solid ground. simone writes herself, writes Zaza, as prey to propriety.
yet in the second sex, in true historical form, simone writes woman into a propriety that suffocates as it hopes to suffice, to explain, to show contingencies when at all possible. a venerable act..? it is the same act she performs in the dutiful daughter. a tracing, an anthropology even, of how one woman, how all women, fall prey to propitiation.
true, i’ve not reached the conclusion yet. and to be painfully honest, i skipped over bits of the history. buying the contingency argument, i’m not convinced that knowing in which ways men broke women’s hymens before sex is all that critical to how i will see myself when i wake up tomorrow. but isn’t that something closer to denial than i’d like to admit? (clearly) i’m not anti-historical, after all…
what’s the problem here?
i’m bother by a question i can’t answer. not without considerable compromise. the claim made by beauvoir and others is that women are women in childbearing. it is the body that differentiates, and it is the body designed for the purpose of procreation that matters.
sowould i accept sexual difference if i’d accept my own salvation? (1 Timothy 2:13-15)
isn’t this feminist argument essentially an echo of what is already given as proper?
i.e.: ‘women will be saved through childbearing’
saved. apparently in greek (sozo) this can mean:
1)to save, keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction
1a1) to save a suffering one (from perishing), i.e. one
suffering from disease, to make well, heal, restore to health
1b1) to preserve one who is in danger of destruction,
to save or rescue
but my sources are suspect. i got them from a biblical translation site, and when i googled the word ‘sozo’ on my own, only other biblical sites came up. something’s fishy. something’s rigged.
but didn’t i know that to start? can it make sense to read the bible in search of something other than propriety?
isn’t this something of what nancy is up to? this mitsein, this community. isn’t he tracing old texts, old terrain on this front?
i can’t answer these questions today. you could say i’m barren on the subject…