Although we are inclined to think we have come a great distance, American culture is still a patriarchy run by the “Law of the Father”. We, as a country, are a male dominated society; in government, the corporate world, and even within the entertainment industry. The concept of “personal is political” was frequently heard from feminists, particularly second wave feminists, during the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. There are several vital points, discussed during class lectures and while reading Carol Hanisch’s “The Personal Is Political”, that encourage further reflection and deeper acknowledgment of how society, corporations, and our mirrors give voice to our role as a woman, our gender, our beauty, and our pay.
Throughout our lecture discussions, we learned that the concept of “personal is political” means personal outcomes are chiefly a construction of systemic relations and of structures outside each individual’s control that need to be addressed. Carol Hanisch displays an interpretation parallel to our lecture. She expresses how this concept essentially represents coming to a personal awareness of how appalling the condition is for women and holds mutual importance for organizing political "action", for instance, protests. …show more content…
We cannot completely change our situations solely and as Hanisch explains, to do so would put us at risk because when they can’t win, the repercussions are worse than the oppression. Thus, the only way to effectively yield real transformation is to work as one, as a solid individual movement. As long as we continue the feminist movement as a solid progressing entity we can, in turn, be a less male oriented society and become a society of equal opportunity for both genders. We cannot allow our society, corporations, and mirror’s to hold such a powerful voice in our roles as a woman, our gender, our worthiness, and our
Throughout our lecture discussions, we learned that the concept of “personal is political” means personal outcomes are chiefly a construction of systemic relations and of structures outside each individual’s control that need to be addressed. Carol Hanisch displays an interpretation parallel to our lecture. She expresses how this concept essentially represents coming to a personal awareness of how appalling the condition is for women and holds mutual importance for organizing political "action", for instance, protests. …show more content…
We cannot completely change our situations solely and as Hanisch explains, to do so would put us at risk because when they can’t win, the repercussions are worse than the oppression. Thus, the only way to effectively yield real transformation is to work as one, as a solid individual movement. As long as we continue the feminist movement as a solid progressing entity we can, in turn, be a less male oriented society and become a society of equal opportunity for both genders. We cannot allow our society, corporations, and mirror’s to hold such a powerful voice in our roles as a woman, our gender, our worthiness, and our