Professor Chizuko Ueno from the Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology, University of Tokyo, gave a lecture on May 27, 2005, for the anniversary of the establishment of the Gender and Sexuality Studies Program at ICU. The lecture was entitled "What can be achieved by gender and sexuality research?"
The two-hour lecture covered a range of interesting issues and, as requested by Professor Kazuko Tanaka, it was geared toward beginners and specialists alike. Professor Ueno began with a basic introduction to feminist theory, outlining the establishment of gender studies in Japan, and clarifying the concept of gender. She then discussed the various hidden traps of neo-liberalism as well as the place and the role of gender studies within a neo-liberal environment.
Six years ago, when I was an undergraduate student at ICU, there were few classes on gender and feminism that were accessible to students from the Department of Education. This left me with no other choice but self-study; I started by reading some introductory books, and collecting works by famous scholars listed in the bibliographies.
Chizuko Ueno's writings were one of the first I read; they seemed somewhat accessible to me since I:d already come across some of them in my sociology classes. Yet, although the content of her lecture was not completely new to me, I still experienced profound moments of revelation while listening to Professor Ueno. This was perhaps largely the effect of her constant repetition of: "Theory can come later, understanding first is what's important." A complete report on the lecture is available on a separate webpage; my article will therefore focus on one particular issue discussed by Professor Ueno -- the idea of self-determination.
During the question-and-answer session, someone asked about the difference between Professor Ueno's idea of self-determination and that of neo-liberalism. According to Professor Ueno, there is a hidden trap behind the neo-liberal notion of self-determination. Following the principle of the survival of the fittest, neo-liberals view everything as the result of self determination and self responsibility. As long as there is competition between people, the gap between those who can and cannot remain in the race will inevitably continue to widen. Moreover, the competition itself is fundamentally structured to disadvantage particular people (in this case, women). Thus, the neo-liberal idea of self-determination poses an ingenious trap and is in conflict with the ideas of feminism.
However, this trap was set throughout society even before the advent of neo-liberalism and there is no possible way out. So what is there left for us to do? Is resistance a good strategy?
Professor Ueno's answer was that we should just give it all up - collective job recruitment, age limits - give up all the marks of a male-dominated society. Equality of the sexes cannot be achieved if women simply try to do what men do.
Quoting Christine Delphy, Professor Ueno explained the logical contradiction behind the idea that we should all become like men: "If we were to position men within the gender framework, they would be, before anything else, in the position to rule. However, in order to become a ruler, one also requires people to be ruled over. Just as it is impossible to envision a society in which everyone is "super rich", it is impossible to envision a society in which everyone rules."
In spite of this, there are those who blame feminism for the rising current of neo-liberal self-determination in recent times. By accusing others of speaking about self-determination and aspiring towards it, they are in actual fact supporting their own neo-liberal ideas; or, on the contrary, they think they are original in rejecting the right of self-determination, unaware that this criticism was already made before them by feminists such as Delphy.
Professor Ueno followed up this comment by taking an example from a book she co-wrote with Shoji Nakanishi, Putting the Individual in Charge , "Putting the Individual in Charge", published by Iwanami Shinsho. She quoted the words of one person who needs 24 hour nursing care:" I need the help of others to survive. So, please help me. But why does that mean that I must do as you say? I will still make my own decisions."
It is strange to support the idea of homosexual marriage while rejecting the concept of marriage itself. It is strange to complain about the lack of support for single people while at the same time refusing to marry and rejecting the idea of state intervention. It is strange to require full care for one's own ageing parents, while at the same time claiming that the state and politics should be regarded with suspicion.
In recent years I have become increasingly frustrated for not being able to argue against or respond effectively to many things that I feel are 'strange' or wrong. Thus, Professor Ueno's words were in truth a revelation and inspiration.
Feeling that something is wrong, but being unable to say: "That's enough! I can't manage by myself so what's wrong with asking for help?" reflects an ungrounded belief in self-reliance. In other words, despite my professed antipathy, deep down I am a slave to the idea of self-determination and personal responsibility.
I could not help laughing at the following words of Professor Ueno: "You all talk about self-reliance but what will happen when you have children? What will happen when you get old?" Exactly!
That's why I did not feel my usual anxiety when my mother said to me after the lecture: "I'm getting older every day so I'm going to rely on you!" For a moment I almost screamed "No!" but then I was able to reply "Well, that's ok. If that happens, I'll just run and cry for help too."
Someone who has been harassing me about the "strange" issues said to me recently: "Oh, you must have read Putting the Individual in Charge; but you don't need 24 hour nursing care, so who cares?" I wish they had said something more loud and protective like a man rather than voice such concern for detail like a woman. Prof Ueno suggested ways of fighting back against such persistent forms of backlash.
However, the most troublesome of all is the contradiction inside me. The neo-liberal idea of self-determination which I have thought to be so stupid must be deeply rooted inside me. If I don't watch out, it could rear its ugly head again so easily.
Gender and sexuality research does not provide any clear-cut answers. However, it pulls the wool from my eyes and urges me to think more deeply about things.
Professor Ueno's lecture helped me to understand that knowing does not presuppose understanding. She made me feel that this awareness will help me learn and strengthened my resolve to continue with gender studies.
ICU graduate student : Naomi Suzuki