Enloe, Week 8 Substantive

"Most militarizing states need women to seek to be patriots, yet need them to do so
without stepping over the bounds of ‘proper’ femininity, since that would then
dispirit a lot of men, who would feel that their own masculine turf is being chal-
lenged. In a patriarchal state, a woman, thus, can aspire to be a ‘patriotic mother’
but not a ‘patriotic citizen’. On the other hand, we have now increasing historical
documentation of women who have challenged this orthodox, gendered idea of
patriotism. These are women, for example, who have sought to be voters in the
name of patriotism." - enloe interview

For some reason, I am always quick to critique the feminist view point. I don't see it as a way of thinking that works universally but rather needs to develop (or not) based upon each country. To me, the development of feminism is very much like the development of democracy. In both, I hold favorable viewpoints and believe that my life was made better by both; however, I feel very strongly that both democracy and feminism will fail unless voluntarely adopted by the nation or state. If forced, I feel both will fail horrible and probably lead to backwards thinking. I am inherently against feminists, though I am very much in favor of feminism. That being said, I feel Enloe's approach is too aggressive. Feminism can't just appear out of every circumstance, but rather the country has to be in a place where it can be accepted. This tends to occur, as far as I have found, when states are in need of labor. Think of the feminist movement in the United States. Women did obtain rights because they finally wore down the government. They have rights because the country needed them during World War II, which allowed women to see what it would be like to have rights, job, etc. Maybe the fact that militarizing states require women to be patriots at all is a step in the right direction.