Tizon's fear and self-loathing and desire to forget and compartmentalize Lola are not exotic.
-
-
...and looked at Lola's feminized labor and emotional labor—things coded in our society as motherly love— and thought, "that is servitude."
-
But is he really wrong there?
-
Because marriage, for most of human history, has been a gross violation of human rights—economic and bodily exploitation; coercion.
-
Because gross harm and exploitation is not *incidental* to domestic labor, labor coded as motherly love.
-
Tizon's love for Lola, and Lola's love for him, were not *incidental* to the violations of her rights, of her enslavement.
-
That bond, and the caregiving, were the basis, the cause, the reason of her exploitation. It was also one of her joys [so she says, to him].
-
That is *fucked.*
-
I really appreciated @jaycaspiankang writing about this—Tizon's article dredged up pieces of my familial history toohttps://medium.com/kang-blog/alex-tizon-rip-again-518c197db57 …
-
My grandmother was sixteen years old when she married my grandfather, who had two small children and had already been widowed twice.
-
She was his neighbor's daughter. He liked the look of her. He needed someone to take care of the house, to take care of the children.
-
My grandmother is dead. In her lifetime, other grandchildren tried to get her to tell her life story, but it was too painful to relive.
-
Based on the bare facts alone, I know something was wrong with the relationship between my grandparents. I will never know everything.
-
There is horrific exploitation embedded in the chains of our familial ties through centuries. No exceptions for any of us.
-
For someone, somewhere down the line, our existence—our familial tie—is the basis and rationale for their grief
-
We are poison to our own mothers.
-
Does Tizon quite get there? Not really, kind of, maybe. But I got there after reading. That's why his article will linger with me.
-
The coda to this is that I am no longer convinced that Tizon didn't realize Lola was his mother. I thought so this morning.
-
I changed my mind because I found out that "Lola" means grandmother, and he doesn't say so in the article.
-
He makes what I think is a purposeful omission. It's possible he knew and wanted readers to get there themselves.
-
My bad, I'm being corrected-- Lola is an honorific and it's hard to translatehttps://twitter.com/sarahjeong/status/864710846219337728 …
-
Final note, I am not erasing her status as a slave by calling her a wife, I am calling marriages (some today, all historically) enslavement.
- 1 réponse de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.