Abbottcallmost

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Friday, May 31, 2013

So what do the German green youth want?

Posted on 5:24 AM by Unknown
The German Greens get a bit over 10% of the vote. They are apparently one of the more radically leftist parties around. Last month, their youth wing passed a resolution called "Queer your world". When I begin quoting it, you'll understand how radical it is. But at the same time it can also be seen as fitting in with trends in modern society.

Here is the part where sex distinctions are discussed:
8.9 Overcoming the sexual binary

The categories "man" and "woman" are social constructs, but the idea of two sexes does not accord with reality. We understand a human not as a person who is subject to a lifelong gender identity as a man or a woman. Our goal is to create a society in which everyone can freely decide for themselves which gender identity they would like to adopt. As Green Youth we argue for the diversity of gender identities to be finally recognised. A first step to envisage this is a third option when specifying sex to government agencies and in official documents. There should also be the opportunity to refuse to specify. Our perspective is that specifying gender should completely disappear as a category.

Such ideas are no doubt attractive to those homosexuals who do not have a clear identity as men or women. But they also fit in with the liberal idea that our lives should be individually self-determined and that predetermined qualities, such as our sex or our race, are artificial social constructs that should be made not to matter.

The Green Youth resolution is more radical than the typical liberal attitude: when liberals want to make our sex not matter they do so by advocating unisex parenting and such like rather than wanting the categories of man and woman to be abolished. In some ways, though, the Green Youth position is the ultimate expression of the liberal position: it demands a diversity of freely chosen sex identities to replace the binary of man and woman.

And is the Green Youth position all that much more radical than where liberalism has taken us when it comes to our communal identities? For Westerners, at least, these identities have been declared to be social constructs and abolished in the name of diversity. The Green Youth want to complete the job already begun in a liberal society and abolish our identities as men and women in the same way.

The Green Youth also have ideas on how marriage could be "queered":
3.3 As Green Youth we reject the privileging of marriage between "man" and "wife" and are committed to a family contract that allows all people to express their love equally and to take responsibility for one another. Since intimate relationships exist outside heterosexual and monogamous partnerships, it must be finally legally recognised when non-heterosexual couples or people living in polyamorous relationships or female friends take over the care of children together. Queer people shouldn't be discriminated against any longer in tax law nor in adoption law. In respect to this, we also demand that more than two people should legally qualify to be regarded as parents of a child. Family is when people care for each other and take on responsibility. We therefore demand that any form of family is supported and valued by society and before the law to the same degree. However the protection of marriage should no longer be anchored in the Basic Law. We want to abolish marriage as a state institution. Families deserve state protection, not marriage.

What's to be said of all this? First, note how open-ended the definition of family has become. It is just any arrangement of people who care for each other. And note the radical consequences of accepting such an open-ended definition. You can have any number of people being recognised as the parents of a child; you can have groups of friends becoming parents to a child; you can have polyamorists doing the same. The link to biological paternity and maternity is entirely disregarded, as is the role of motherhood and fatherhood. Literally any form of family will do.

Again, this is a more radical expression of ideas that are already fairly mainstream within a liberal culture. A lot of people now understand marriage to be a "love ceremony" and that tends to suggest the idea that a family can be anything. An Australian newspaper columnist, Andrea Burns, expressed the modern view well when she wrote:
the days of the white bread, nuclear family are over. There are many ways to commune, love and create a home ... It’s inconsequential who makes up that circle of love...

There is a weakening or a loosening of ties in all this. Just consider the definition of family offered by Sam Page as executive director of Family Relationship Services Australia:
The definition I like now is whoever you share your toothpaste with, that’s your family.

I'm not sure that toothpaste sharing quite measures up to fulfilling your masculine nature in the role of a husband and father, or the biological relationship of paternity connecting father and child, or the complementary union of a man and a woman within marriage and family.
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in gender, the family | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • We're breaking the mould
    I had a go at completing a political compass that supposedly tells you where you fit on the political spectrum. As I suspected the compass c...
  • What are the liberal advantages?
    The liberal team has done better than our team over a long period of time. Therefore, we have to carefully consider where they have managed ...
  • A new blog: Upon Hope
    It's always pleasing to be able to announce a new traditionalist blog. The latest is called Upon Hope and is being run by a Melbourne t...
  • A new party in Germany
    The breaking up of political orthodoxy is a good thing for us. So I was interested to read that a new German party, the Alternative for Ge...
  • Lawrence Auster
    Sadly news has arrived of the passing on of Lawrence Auster. Laura Wood has written a fine tribute to him at her site. I can't write as...
  • Stay at home dads still barely register
    There are not many fathers in the U.S. who are choosing to be stay at home dads. If you look at the graph below you'll see that the numb...
  • The Senate race in Australia
    An article in The Age has reignited my interest in the forthcoming Australian elections. It seems that the smaller parties have done prefe...
  • How is history made?
    When I write a post describing a positive political strategy or some political work that is happening on the ground I often get comments tha...
  • Attractive architecture by Lutyens
    Here's a place I wouldn't mind owning. It was built in 1902 at Thakeham, West Sussex, and designed by the famous English architect S...
  • Enjoyable meeting
    We had another get together of the Eltham Traditionalists last week. Once again we had a new face and the conversation was very engaging (s...

Categories

  • Aborigines (2)
  • administrative class (1)
  • Africa (1)
  • Andrew Bolt (2)
  • architecture (8)
  • arts (17)
  • atomised individual (2)
  • authenticity (2)
  • authority (1)
  • autonomy (14)
  • Brandis (4)
  • business (1)
  • caritas (1)
  • choice (1)
  • Christianity (5)
  • classical liberalism (1)
  • common good (1)
  • connectedness (2)
  • cosmic enemy (1)
  • creative spirit (2)
  • Cultural Marxism (1)
  • dehumanisation (1)
  • delayed family formation (17)
  • diversity (3)
  • divorce (1)
  • domestic violence (4)
  • drugs (1)
  • economic man (3)
  • economy (1)
  • education (1)
  • essences (8)
  • ethnic double standard (5)
  • ethnicity (19)
  • European Union (3)
  • existentialism (1)
  • fatherhood (4)
  • femininity (8)
  • feminism (4)
  • feminism and autonomy (2)
  • feminism and equal pay (7)
  • feminism and fertility (1)
  • feminism and military (7)
  • feminism and separatism (1)
  • feminism and work (4)
  • film review (2)
  • France (2)
  • gender (37)
  • happiness (1)
  • Hegel (1)
  • history (1)
  • human nature (1)
  • human status (1)
  • identity (6)
  • immigration (3)
  • immigration and the economy (1)
  • inclusiveness (1)
  • individuality (3)
  • justice (1)
  • left liberalism (13)
  • liberalism and discrimination (3)
  • liberalism and equality (4)
  • liberalism and freedom (9)
  • liberalism and individualism (9)
  • liberalism and nationalism (20)
  • liberalism and neutrality (3)
  • liberalism and non-discrimination (2)
  • liberalism and social solidarity (7)
  • liberalism and tolerance (3)
  • love (3)
  • male income (2)
  • marriage (16)
  • masculinity (6)
  • men's rights (2)
  • misanthropy (1)
  • morality (18)
  • motherhood (11)
  • multiculturalism (4)
  • music (2)
  • nationalism (3)
  • nihilism (2)
  • nominalism (1)
  • ontology (1)
  • paid leave (3)
  • patriarchy theory (3)
  • philosophy (1)
  • poetry (2)
  • polygamy (1)
  • pride (3)
  • privilege (10)
  • progress (1)
  • provider role (1)
  • rationalisation hamster (1)
  • rationalism (1)
  • reason & truth (1)
  • reductionism (2)
  • refugees (3)
  • relationships (16)
  • religion (21)
  • right liberalism (26)
  • rights (1)
  • same sex marriage (3)
  • Scandinavia (12)
  • science and gender (1)
  • scientism (1)
  • sexual liberation (3)
  • sexual morality (4)
  • sexuality (1)
  • social offices (1)
  • songs (1)
  • the family (25)
  • the good (1)
  • the Other (1)
  • the past (1)
  • timing (2)
  • traditionalist community (1)
  • traditionalist conservatism (1)
  • trivial aims (4)
  • undefined family (2)
  • virtues (5)
  • welfare (1)
  • whiteness studies (7)
  • women priests (1)

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (186)
    • ►  September (12)
    • ►  August (24)
    • ►  July (29)
    • ►  June (24)
    • ▼  May (19)
      • So what do the German green youth want?
      • How does a liberal philosophy measure up?
      • Two links
      • German cardinal: we are a dying people
      • This day in Europe
      • So no real men then?
      • Why design a cathedral like this?
      • A little bit will become a lot
      • A tax on men
      • Minister wants to lecture Europe
      • We grew again!
      • Roebuck on women and marriage
      • A classical find
      • Who does Tony Abbott call the most worthy Australi...
      • Losing the waiting game
      • Abbott's scheme
      • How does the liberal concept of freedom lead to st...
      • An example of misunderstanding traditionalism
      • "We’ve assumed we can put it off indefinitely"
    • ►  April (19)
    • ►  March (21)
    • ►  February (16)
    • ►  January (22)
  • ►  2012 (225)
    • ►  December (15)
    • ►  November (14)
    • ►  October (20)
    • ►  September (19)
    • ►  August (18)
    • ►  July (20)
    • ►  June (19)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (27)
    • ►  March (19)
    • ►  February (14)
    • ►  January (21)
  • ►  2011 (89)
    • ►  December (25)
    • ►  November (15)
    • ►  October (17)
    • ►  September (17)
    • ►  August (15)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile