A Few Thoughts Regarding Care Asymmetries in Female Friendship
Care is one of the
fundamental principles of friendship. In female friendships or relationships,
this is becoming more and more acknowledged and confirmed. Women seem to take
their strength to function in the world from a reservoir of care. In this
regard, female friendships and sisterhood serve as nurturing spaces for women
in their journeys of aspiration, struggle, and self-discovery as well as in
their travels of hope that they will make a difference and stand out.
Therefore, throughout
feminist thought and activism, this space has been treasured and honoured.
While recognising the enormous impact that such places have had on women's
lives, including mine, this piece seeks to write about the suffering that
exists inside such friendships. It is an emotional reflection on some painful
memories that occasionally tend to surface in female friendships, but it makes
no promise to offer a comprehensive picture of the politics inside feminist
circles or female relationships.
In doing so, I hope to
draw attention to a few overarching trends that appear to be present in some
female friendships that I have seen. Deciphering "patterns" seems
very unfeminist; this strategy favours a focus on contexts, particularities,
and anything else that probably won't be "patterned."
However, this essay does
not seek to draw broad generalisations or offer recommendations. This article
seeks to pursue a specific goal without diminishing the importance of female
friendships and companionship, which surely serve as enduring support networks
for women against hierarchical structures. It aims to create a forum for
discussing those elements that most accounts of female relationships appear
unaware of or unconcerned with.
These characteristics
belie the feminist commitments and values by perpetuating the same exploitation
systems that patriarchal relations are typically criticised for. As a result,
despite having a restricted purpose, this exercise bears the hope that it may
warn us all as women to be careful not to take part in duplicating the
institutions we have long struggled against.
·
Collective struggle versus the
'collective' that is struggling
Most women are in a race
against the clock. While some of these challenges are a result of the gender
roles people are expected to play, others are a result of having to defend
their deviations from those roles. In other words, it might be difficult to
even have wants or aspirations, let alone to go after them. The challenges that
women confront in society serve as the foundation for sisterhood, both
politically and interpersonal
A problem that is
frequently felt very personally and emotionally becomes politicised when it is
seen as a component of the larger system of gender-based discrimination. But an
intriguing trend among certain female friendships is the assertion of
"exclusivity." Women's narratives, or simply their descriptions of
their lives and decisions, are frequently compared to "speaking liberty"
and seen as a kind of disobedience
But what occurs when
these stories are designed to be exclusive? — they transform into being about
one's brilliant course that they have selected after 'rationally' examining
interactions with the people and conditions in the world. These stories
frequently fall short of being ones of sisterhood or a united front against
oppressive structures. No matter how much they preach about what they
accomplished, the ladies in the area don't seem to take them seriously.
These stories nonetheless
represent an individual's tenacity and drive, as well as her excellence, which
others who are unable to follow in her footsteps would likewise be unable to
achieve. Even unintentionally, it almost denies the experiences and decisions
of the other woman, who is led to assume that she did not give the matter much
thought, that her style of thinking is simplistic or less advanced, and that
she is limited in her investigations. As one presents one's self-image as
independent and, more significantly, as having been created independently, all
these emotions and a lack of self-worth are concurrently caused. They are
narratives of exclusion by nature.
Because we have all been
taught to repeat feminist values without incorporating them into our
interpersonal interactions, none of this would ever be recognised. While
thoroughly criticised in academic circles, the concept of independence is
cherished in interpersonal interactions and upheld through exploitation
relationships, which bears a disconcerting resemblance to the gendered division
of labour in a patriarchal system.
I am independent; I am
helpful; I am involved in politics, and I have always put a lot of effort into
my career. These are all storylines in which everyone and everything else is
downplayed, especially the emotional and caring labour required to achieve that
independence. Even in female friendships, there is a care-asymmetry issue.
While the expectation of care labour is justified on one side by friendship,
the non-reciprocity in caring back for the other will frequently be justified because
they are working hard to "make a place in the world."
The responsibility to be
there for the other is relegated to occasional and piece- mess interventions.
There's vacillation in indulging in a sustained emotional and physical vacuity
for the other, while nearly fully performing on the same vacuity as this
friend. likewise, there's a distinction made between those musketeers whose
labour one would depend on (substantially womanish) and others for whom one
would insure a ready presence.
Such a modality of
conducting womanish gemutlich creates a virtual private and public. Care and
labour of the ‘private’ go unrecognised and unacknowledged while the public
constitutes the realm of possibilities and of claiming equivalency with men as
independent individualities.
While this has been
important talked about in the environment of domestic work, it's striking those
similar asymmetries are also present in a sphere which is celebrated for being
equal in recognising gests, a sphere shielded from exploitation and considered
a safe space by utmost women. A friend points out that at the root of similar
exploitation is the notion that notoriety’s time is less important than others.
The marginalised have
frequently spoken about how this idea that “everybody has the same 24 hours” is
a sham. As sexists would point out, a working-class woman doesn't have the same
time at hand as an upper-class, upper-estate man. An intriguing reversal takes
place in a similar womanish gemutlich wherein time is short and more important
for some women than others — women who have the luxury to leave everything and
singularly concentrate on their career targets are ever fully acquitted of the
duty to be available while another woman is considered available, formerly and
always.
Womanish musketeers whose labour goes into the product of an independent woman are frequently those who don't belong to the same space in which such an image is projected. This has two disturbing aspects. One, the food of that image also is dependent on the continued rejection of these womanish musketeers from this sphere of aspiring. Secondly, while it would feel fully okay to call a friend from five long hauls down; to anticipate her labour indeed as she has to go out of her way to do it, doesn't take important to understand the forces and precedencies that a friend coming door would be having and who thus cannot be disturbed.
This not only reinforces
the virtual public-private peak but also creates a peak within the feminist
movement as some women are made to believe in their natural duty towards
furnishing care and others in their justified exploitation of the same.
Paradoxically, thus,
similar relations frequently continue to calculate on the care and labour of
another as one professes and proclaims her independent life to others. The lack
of realisation, disturbingly, also seems to radiate from analogous
considerations as in a patriarchal heterosexual relationship. notoriety’s time
is more important than the other notoriety’s work is better than the other
notoriety has duties in a relationship, while one can fully be unconscious of
the need to extend the same in need.