Pablo de Lora: "Hegemonic feminism is a tsunami: going against it sinks you under the wave"

'Sex is political (and legal)' is the last book Pablo de Lora (1968), professor of Philosophy of Law at the Autonomous University of Madrid. The essay offers the reader a very illustrative journey on the consequences that hegemonic feminism has on public policies. The conclusions are surprising. Even for those who criticized the HazteOir bus.

In the case that accusations against Plácido Domingo are proven, why does public opinion have a hard time differentiating a slug from a criminal? Because a certain mental and conceptual framework that, under diverse denominations - call systemic exploitation, patriarchy ...-, try to encompass under an umbrella of domination all actions and behaviors, also including what would once be pure rudeness, lack of education, lack of delicacy. Now these baboserías become part of that structure that contributes to the persistence of domination over women. They cannot be slugs, they have to be part of a structural gear that allows us to say that we live under that kind of system of domination. So the heteropatriacado would be a kind of freemasonry to progress ... You come to say that, according to feminism more radical, then any relationship is forced. Andrea Dworkin came to affirm that intercourse is the expression of men's contempt for women. Today mainstream feminism spreads the idea that the system, the structure, makes there Placid Sundays , which display their masculinity. Because they have been educated like this or because we have "normalized" their "toxic" behaviors. And there are also structures of domination that continue to have women as subjects, all of them, or presumably all of them, vulnerable, worthy of protection, and those incidents themselves cannot resolve. Fucault and Derrida have made a good cisco, according to you ... Yes, and Deleuze and many other people who could be there on that payroll. There are also neomarxist strands clearly. All the ideas that have to do with the alienated woman, the structure of domination, the woman as a class, exploited, who becomes the substitute for the proletariat as Lidia Falcón argued, are an important source as well. And then without a doubt, the feminism of this fourth wave, the Catherine MacKinnon, and some others. Cultural feminism, feminism of difference ... All of those are probably the most important cocktail ingredients. But the idea to sum it up in one sentence is: "Down with moral individualism." That is, women are a class, men are a different class, and everything that has to do with individual responsibility, the individual imputation of actions, is obscured or ruined. Simone de Beauvior said that what worried her was the difference between man and woman, but I knew there are women and men who are different. That is not wielded by mainstream feminism when the appointment. The second sex has had a huge influence. It is a book that is so omniabarcante that one can further exploit one type of streak or another. And I think that in that sentence is the best Simone de Beauvior, which is a Simone de Beauvior that is resistant to precisely that, to that sort of essentialization of femininity, or masculinity. Of course, man - Dominant, macho - would also be a social construct. Sure, it should also be that "man is not born, but becomes." The idea that has borne fruit is to keep us all as social constructs, not responsible, and not to tear apart the elements that compose or identify us because then you will have to judge in each case, you will even have to attribute, obviously, the superior position or dominating a woman in some cases. One way of claiming that vein of liberal feminism, of that Simone de Beauvior that I privilege, is to say that women are also bad, and a lot, and they can be, but those structures are what dictate doctrine and sentence. For example in the case of the bride and groom of Zaragoza who left a nightclub and stuck. They did not even denounce (a third did) but she fell three months and six months in jail ... Yes, that is perhaps the clearest instance that shows that things have been done wrong. The Supreme is, in that case that mentions, interpreting in the worst possible way the norm of the Criminal Code, that absurd idea according to which every instance of aggression against women is "due to the fact of being a woman". This is not always the case, it is obvious. Is the new legislation that is going to be produced regarding sexual abuse realistic? Is it just yes? No, it isn't at all. I believe that not even those who propose it believe it. Anyone who has a minimum adult life in love matters knows that sexual encounters and their development are adventures, as long as they are not, they are something else. I don't know, gynecological examinations, or violations for violence or intimidation. The consents can be perfectly tacit or acquiescent. What have been the consequences of the La Manada trial? Many. One, of course, affects the course of group sex. I asked a criminal: what would have been the conditions under which we can say that there was no violation on that portal? And he could not tell me. Because the idea is: if there are five and she is one, there is always rape. That is, the consent of a woman does not count anything in that context, because it will be considered that she is always in a situation of vulnerability. The other consequence is to rethink the penalty imposed. Even if it is sufficiently proven that there was sexual assault, 15 years in jail is not a proportional penalty in relation to other crimes. The abortion caused in a woman without her consent is eight years. And finally there is the painful reaction of the media and prominent politicians when the first sentence was known. What do you think has changed in Spain so that in 2006 Manuela Carmena signed a manifesto - A feminism that also exists - against the victimization of women and now refuses ... I think we live a tsunami of this hegemonic feminism, which has a Clear political consequence, and in the market of political ideas, going against that tsunami plunges you under the wave. That was clearly seen in the debate of the municipal elections, when Carmena, in a kind of lapse, said, rightly, that crime rates in Madrid are not high, but he immediately remembers that he cannot fail to mention women dead. That was a fascinating moment of the debate, because you see Carmena herself being tremendously honest and saying something that is true: in general crime in Spain is very low, but she has to overestimate the murder of women. You argue that the admission of Trans movement in feminism means her death. That is what the TERF (transexcludent feminism) think. The wake-up call of those known as TERF is very consistent, and very necessary. Because of course, the feminist struggle, if it has a budget, is that there is something we call women - who are also vulnerable - regardless of what they think, or what they want. Feminism only makes sense as a political theory, as a social claim, because there is a sex-gender division that does not depend on the will of individuals, but is based on certain gross facts. When you go to a statistic, the statistic that tells you gender gap, salary gap, lower enrollment in STEM careers, whatever ... is anchored in the civil registry data. Not in what people can feel. No one has been asked: do you feel female? Is it non-binary or gender fluid? Because if you start to ask, then the free computer engineering career for women falls apart as public policy ... In fact, if I would prosper what I would say to any of the friends who are about to enter the university is that Women are declared if they want to study engineering. That is, if gender identity is self-constructed, this ends the basic budget of feminism and all public policies promoted in its name. That is to say: If women also have a penis, goodbye to feminism. And another bleeding issue is the advantageous position in the sport, but sex is relevant in that if you hit your boyfriend you fall three months and him, double ... Sure. But that discrimination called positive, or inverse, has a condition that is: he is a man despite what he says. That is, if you go to court, it is not worth saying: "I am not a macho." But even less should it be worth: "No, if I am a woman, it is that you treat me as a man because you have gone to my ID, but you have not asked me." It seems exaggerated but you read all those laws and proposals of Podemos and the PSOE ... If gender identity is something that one simply proclaims, then that ends all possibility of anti-discriminatory policy. Although, strangely enough, the trans movement exacerbates the good idea that sex, identity, should not be relevant at all. In the epilogue it goes on to say that Simone de Beauvior would be conservative. Humanist, realistic ... Feminism is a claim that arises from a more global theory of justice, which we can say, humanist, or of struggle for the disadvantaged. But, and it is basically what Simone de Beauvior also now and at the time would claim, it turns out that those vulnerable are not always women, they were, at the time, the proletarians beyond the condition or sexual identity. And hence the title I put to the epilogue, The End of Feminism , because what is telos ? But it is also the end (al) of feminism if we are going to end those sexual identities that do not depend on the will, because that makes all the norms we talked about before and that, therefore, we are going to take the idea seriously that we have to fight for the disadvantaged, regardless of their sexual condition. With prostitution, it is also liberal. Of course, if we define prostitution as the exchange of sex for money, money is one of the admissible reasons to have relationships - so that the sexual relationship is morally correct - if there is consent. Money does not add anything or take anything away, just as the salary does not make the provision of a service a form of slavery or forced labor. It will seem frivolous, unworthy, but as it seems inappropriate to me at best, I do know, casual sex. If there is no consent, everything is wrong. The question now is: Do all prostitutes who agree to have sex in exchange for money do it without consent? Do they do it in a forced way? I would say no. And punish the customer as in some countries? Why? Let's be consistent: if it is assumed that prostitutes are forced, then that the punishment be for rape. It is better to regulate and protect women who practice prostitution. Or men, who do not even talk about gay prostitution. The associations of prostitutes are outraged by robot prostitutes. Sure, it is fascinating when they point to this competition as unfair, noting that theirs is not "mechanical" sex, that Their service is not only to satisfy the sexual drive, but they give affection, in the face of what hegemonic feminism usually spreads. That reveals very well what is the self-concept that many of these women have of their trade. And I know of course that immediately the Taliban on duty will say they are all alienated. It is also paradoxical that those who buy sex dolls in the shape of a child are penis. He speaks of a man who was arrested because he recognized using the doll and also buying clothes. Yes, the thought does not commit a crime, even when accompanied by mechanisms. On the other hand it can be counterproductive if, in addition, by allowing them, we prevent them from resorting to those of flesh and blood. That is, there is an added instrumental reason there. Do you think the feminist tsunami will remit? I think so, that it will be pendulous. In other words, we will return to a certain balance in which we will have been able to limit the roughness, understanding such counterintuitive consequences, flagrant injustices, such things. Placido Domingo is anecdotal. Another thing is that there was a dependency relationship, that she was his employee, and then he abused her position. All that I think is very objectionable, if it has occurred. But more relevant all those episodes of discrimination seem to me in the imposition of a penalty, the recent case of that man who has been arrested for violating the restraining order when it is she who goes to his house. Or as the self-constructed identity, the imposition of those pronouns by choice that already makes it annoyingly complicated to communicate.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

• Spain
• Placido Domingo
• Saragossa
• We can
• PSOE
• Manuela Carmena
• Madrid
• Opinion
• Columnists
• La Manada Trial
• Feminism
• Feminist strike

Nothing in writing Sister, they won't believe you anymore

'Riverales' and liberal comments

nothing in writing Rivera's voter dilemma