Main Post: Enloe for 12/7/10

In Enloe's Introduction "Being Curious about our Lack of Feminist Curiosity," Enloe talks about how curiosity is declining because we do not wish to expend mental energy thinking about things. "Being curious takes energy. It may thus be a distorted form of 'energy conversation' that makes certain ideas so alluring (1)." By denying that anything new has happened, we don't have to investigate or challenge anything - the concepts of 'naturalness' and 'tradition' bolster this lack of curiosity by making people accept certain things or ideas as is without letting them or making them think it is unnecessary to question them. She adds to the mix the words 'always' and 'oldest' that discourage us from inquiring into difficult ideas with our limited supply of energy. She adds that some phrases we use in everyday language are lazy and don't get us to think why, how, whom, when, and where (for example, "cheap labor" vs. "labor made cheap"). Since there are so many reasons why we are not curious, we need to explore them when we do become curious because "[s]o many power structure - inside households, within institutions, in societies, in international affairs - are dependent on our continuing lack of curiosity (3)." These words that prevent curiosity prop up, legitimize, 'inevitabilize,' societal, familial, governmental, etc. structures, processes, ways, etc. We need to become aware of our lack of curiosity, understand the causes behind it, and take the veil of mental satisfaction away from other people. Enloe attributes this lack of curiosity to political agendas and people's wish to feel safe and comfortable - stepping outside of your bubble and confronting some sensitive, disconcerting ideas is not fun, so people don't want to do it and thus make excuses like no enough time or resources to investigate all these topics. Enloe says that feminists need to develop a feminist curiosity by first taking all women seriously - in other words, being ready to look closely at every woman's life as worthy of consideration since labeling groups does not allow us to see masculinity and femininity being politicized in society. Labels on groups of men and women obscure questions about the position, thoughts, benefits, and relationships of and between men and women and obscure patriarchy beyond. Enloe then goes on to explain patriarchy as "the structural and ideological system that perpetuates the privileging of masculinity (4)" can be found in every aspect of life because people and groups have developed their perception of the world based on the presumption that masculinity is more deserving of reward and praise and thus marginalizing, trivializing, and scorning femininity and feminine experience. Women do not question patriarchy because patriarchy makes women feel protected and safe because they do not question it. Patriarchy needs women to operate, in particular a certain view and acceptance of femininity - women need to be feminized so that masculine men look better than feminine women. Feminists are curious about women and thus have seen and exposed patriarchy to the world, but patriarchy is modernizing and adapting "new looks" to everything we throw at it so to disguise itself in all its workings. Enloe claims that we must always ask about patriarchy's role in something to see what is really playing out in society. For her own case study, Enloe is looking how her own girlhood was feminized subtly. She ends with the relationship between patriarchy, demilitarization, and women in these zones such as in Turkey, Japan, and Korea where their own cultural patriarchy has mixed with American military patriarchy to continue patriarchy's reign in those postwar societies.


In Chapter 1 "The Surprised Feminist," Enloe discusses how feminism shies away from surprise because people negatively connote being surprised with being inexperienced and incredible - in other words, being surprised makes you look bad because as a credible source, you are supposed to know and understand everything related to your cause. Enloe summarizes this social construct that "[i]t is as if admitting surprise jeopardized one's hard-earned credibility. And credibility, something necessarily bestowed by others, is the bedrock of status (13)." Since feminists' credibility is on shaky ground especially during this time with such anti-feminist leaning and enlightened sexism becoming the accepted norm, admitting that we can be surprised seems to undermine our credibility so our opponents could use it against us (aka "I thought you said you knew what was best. How can you said you know best when you don't even know what is happening?"). However, Enloe asserts that feminists' capacity to be and willingness to admit surprise is something we need to prepare ourselves for the future. She provides a list of events she was not expecting to ever happen, saying that "[t]he ways particular women of distinct citizenship statuses, social classes, ethnic groups, and racialized identities respond to each of these events is certain to determine the respective depth or shallowness of its long-term consequences in the twenty-first century (14-15)." In other words, the circumstances of the women reacting to these surprising events shape how these events' consequences reverberate through society. She says that her surprise that these events and others is what allowed her to step back and see connections and influences that affected these events that she did not see or pay attention to before - "[a]dmitting my surprise is the only way I am going to be able to take fresh stock of my feminist analyses of developments both far afield and close to home (16)." Surprise allows feminists to see what previous theories or concepts can explain or fit the surprising event or if new explanations are needed, which sponsors thinking outside the box. To admit surprise, even in the name of new thinking, is very hard for oneself, never mind in a classroom, conference, or meeting in front of people. Enloe concludes by saying that we need to resist our immediate response to deny surprise or embrace cynicism when we hear news about patriarchy's continuing perpetuation; instead, we need to not only recognize patriarchy at work, but also how, why, where, when, and who. Feminists need to question if patriarchy in each event has been challenged and where its source and implementation is coming from in place of reiterating the same-old patriarchy theory and knowledge. Only by embracing surprise can feminists really immerse themselves into genuine curiosity, broaden their conversations and horizons, and adapt to the coming future.