Questions that poppped into my mind when reading Saiving's Text

One of the things that struck me Ada Maria Isasi-Diaz’s book was this continuous search for a Utopian like society. In her first chapter she talks about trying to find a place to plant her garden and in the latter chapters, she speaks more literally to this fact of wanting to live in a society that was free from patriarchy and racism. I find nothing wrong with these goals; in fact, I support the end of all discrimination most heartily. While I find all of Diaz’s ambitions for human society to be everything worthy and admirable, I am not sure whether they are actually plausible. I question whether these dreams can become a reality based on what I have read in Valerie Saiving’s text. She made it seem, through her anthropologic study of humankind that many male and female behavior tendencies stem from nature; people are programmed to be a certain way depending on their sex. Although this does not excuse man’s mistreatment of women and other types of similar acts, I do think it helps us to understand where these inclinations come from. If it is true then that nature impels males and females to act a certain way, can there really be a society completely free from patriarchy?

One of the things I found interesting in Saiving’s text was her description of male anxiety. Because men must separate themselves from their mother, they must struggle to find their identity on their own. They are more competitive then because they have to literally define themselves. Girls have an easier time adjusting to life because they merely step into their mother’s role; they follow her example. Man’s constant need to prove himself, in this context then, makes sense. Saiving’s reasons for why there has never been a female Plato or Hitler also seem correct to my mind; women do not have the same anxiety as men because they are able to have children and find fulfillment in that way. They naturally take the passive role. Although Saiving makes all of these points in order to show that men and women have a different concept of sin, I want to look at these things in a larger context. Saiving makes it seem, or at least so it appears to me, that men and women are essentially different and therefore cannot fulfill the same roles. There can always be more understanding and cooperation but I think that men and women were in many ways, created for different purposes. There will always be more male leaders than female ones and this is not because the structure of society is faulty. The fact of the matter is that many women simply choose not to distinguish themselves like men do in the areas of politics, science, and art. They find “happiness” in other things. This is not to say that every female finds contentment in being a mother but I do think it is wrong to look at history and say that women have clearly always been oppressed because there have not been many records of famous female physicians or philosophers. I think women are every bit as intelligent as men but many of us choose not to pursue that type of life. What I am trying to say then is that while I think this concept of patriarchy does exist , I’m not sure whether it is something that can be fully eliminated. Women, to a certain degree, choose their roles in society. We can always advocate for more understanding and cooperation to happen between the sexes, but I don’t think we can radically alter the structure of society.