a political housewife?
how does a housewife define herself? the most banal answer (which also gets me nowhere) would be by the title, and i'm leery of societally-defined labels.
so... does a housewife have some personal politics to define herself by, speaking purely from the experience or role of housewifery? its so easy to identify political women and say that this is a political woman, that is not. so who is a political housewife? can we equally clearly say this is a political housewife, that is not?
is a political, feminist housewife someone who finishes with the housework, packs off the maid in the morning and curls up with a feminist theory book or blogs a feminist blog? is it someone who listens to the news the whole day and has an informed opinion on current affairs though living a perfectly conventional life? how come there are so many millions of housewives, but we don't know their opinion (as a group, with their own politics) on something other than advertisements that claim some tea is best?! that is so weird when you consider that if there's a petrol strike, a war, effects of global warming or something, a housewife would be as clued in as anyone else (without even watching the news) just by toddling down to the vegetable market.
speaking of which, i know its helping the environment when i ignore the numerous dispensers of plastic bags at the market and try to cut down on plastics. but what does it all account to? a shopping-list of politically motivated deeds that somehow fail to add up to an enlightening whole. i am reminded of noam chomsky's statement that no act is political in itself, but is only political when placed in context. it's easy to scoff at these small political acts as being armchair politics or as being insignificant because they're not organised as part of a movement. but that's the key to housewifery i think: that it's a lot about individualism and working in solitude.
the nature of the work is very "internal" and behind the scenes: when you're at your busiest you're most invisible to the world! also, ironically, the result of what you do isn't as manifest as what you don't. (considering what a visual culture we follow, it's not surprising that much of housework is also sadly underrated.)
however, this invisibility doesn't mean its not discussed: everyone, from my useless cousin who hasn't bothered making his mother a coffee one day of his life, has an opinion (more an instruction) on what makes a good housewife and what she should do! i think it's part of the challenge of being a political housewife to first even try and personalise such an impersonalised role. because every single you do has been rigidly defined for centuries, and the person herself has been often institutionalised.
i'm looking at seetha in a new light sometimes because her story seems to be a similar one of trying to live up to an impossible set of ideals, having almost nothing to do with deciding who and what she will be. straining every sinew to match up and then finally furiously exploding because nothing you do is good enough... and experiencing an epiphany.
i've also heard the same word associated with seetha as with housewifery : endurance. often that's used to indicate a kind of victimhood. it's used in a context that focusses on oppressive suffering, and is even assigned to women as being a "feminine" quality in order to legitimise suffering. but put it in the context of shakthi (or prakrithi) and it isn't.
housework can be loads of backbreaking work, and its easy to get obsessive, humourless or lose a sense of perspective when your task seems sisyphean. but it can also be deeply satisfying, honest and ethically clean.
endurance is quality based on strength. my mother has brought us up to believe that strength has a greater obligation of endurance and patience. so i associate endurance with strength being used, built up or tested responsibly. and that, is freeing to know about.
Labels: brownskinspeak, feminist issues, marriage diaries



