To the editors:
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
Ms. Wik is correct that there are “reasons for those tiny demons we wage war with in our minds,” but locating the causes of self-doubt, low self-esteem, and self-destructive behavior in an insufficient knowledge of oneself is only progressive if effectively linked to analyses of how we are socialized by racism, sexism and class oppression to believe ourselves unworthy of love and respect. To tell working class and minority women “know thyself” is hardly deep and effective oppositional thought. It fails to address how a society founded upon competition and not cooperation, and which perpetuates itself by commodifying human persons and values, is necessarily going to erode such values as caring, respect, friendship and community. These are ideas that emphasize and assert our mutual interdependence, i.e., that we exist as selves only in a “field of selves” (Wayne Booth). It is precisely such ideas that capitalist civilization structurally and institutionally militates against. Mr. Futrelle’s review only shows how Ms. Steinem seems to abandon the idea that (in the words of bell hooks) “we collectively shape the terms of our survival.” His review also validly argues the dangers of Ms. Steinem’s position causing people to become bogged down in self-psychoanalysis. Such a preoccupation with the individual self and its inadequacies could lead people to neglect the communal struggle necessary for liberation. The “roots of our self-doubt” cannot be effectively analyzed in isolation from the social matrix in which “self” is created and has meaning.
Ms. Wik goes on to write, “The fact that he cannot relate to Steinem’s expansive emotional repertoire does not surprise me either.” The quote she offers from the review to support her insight reflects neither an inability to relate nor one-dimensionality. It makes a criticism of style, i.e., her “expansive emotional repertoire” was not organized well enough to avoid some confusion in the presentation. Mr. Futrelle is not attacking Ms. Steinem for attempting to address a variety of themes, but for not orchestrating them as well as a writer should (especially given this writer’s talents).
