Feminists Accuse Fora do Eixo: Machismo, Political Use of Sex, Harrassment
Published 26 August 2013, 7:20pm
Sent by Feminist Front for Culture
The criticisms directed at the Fora do Eixo Circuit are for the most part aimed at their modus operandi, which only replicates that of other enterprises within capital that exploit labor.
We – women who took part in the Fora do Eixo houses in Anápolis, Minas Gerais, Northeastern Brazil, São Carlos and São Paulo and other collectives, and men who acknowledge the truth of these facts – feel obliged to point to and radically criticize the patriarchal reproduction of power relations within Fora do Eixo. Therefore, we would like to raise some questions:
1. How sexism appears in work relations and tasks
The projects and activities within the network generally are divided into areas that contain and preserve within them a belief regarding gender affinities. Fueled by a prejudiced logic that assumes that women are more efficient at systematization, women end up being the ones who organize the arrangements, do the accounting and handle technology while men are considered more efficient in argumentation and discourse, are targeted for public activities, political alliances and arrangements with other social actors, expanding their experiences beyond the houses/collectives, which leads to having more political interpretations due to contact with these melieux and the increased resources ensuing from these social experiences. Thus, according to this modus operandi, women tend to be placed in “rooted” (fixed) nodes whose relationships are given inside their living spaces and surroundings, while men are in “transcendent” (mobile) nuclei, have an active dynamic and articulate the actions and projects that will sustain the collective, in a relationship that takes place outside of that community .
2. Sexist arrangements: Girls Club and Boys club
When a member of the collective or house presents personal difficulties or questions about the process and needs clarification, this member is usually sent to look for “his or her supervisor,” who is someone of the same sex .
It is believed that this internal policy strengthens relations among likes. However, this belief strengthens a sexist model, such that separate boys clubs and girls clubs form.
3. “To Procure and Co-opt”: The political use of sex in Fora do Eixo
One of the political practices of Fora do Eixo is called to “procure” or “co-opt” (also used are the terms “delivery “and” mission”), resolved in meetings of the leaders as a means to co-opt partners via seduction and sex.
The leaders discuss the profile of the future members or collaborators, as well as that of the members of Fora do Eixo who have the compatibility to lure and involve them in a romantic and/or sexual relationship in order to co-opt them. Men and women both make use of these ruses.
4. Whoever hooks an ugly woman earns more equity (power to partake in decisions)
Establishing a relationship with an “ugly” woman is within the scope of co-optation of the network. He who maintains a love or sexual relationship with a woman considered ugly, for the purpose of co-opting her, earns greater respect from the others (he earns greater “ballast” or “foothold”). It is common to hear such jargon among those who are closest to the leaders: “whoever gets an ‘ugly’ woman gains more equity.”
5. How a woman’s autonomy is dealt with: “she’s part of his account now”
When a “co-opter” brings a “co-optee” to the network, she now is part of his “account” in addition to being under the responsibility of the manager with whom she will work.
The “co-opting” agent, responsible for controlling the pace of “co-optee”, analyzes the dynamics of her work and keeps an eye on her relationships, friendships and conversations, reporting his observations to the leaders. The “co-opter” is also constantly monitored and controlled so that there is no “contamination resulting from the love relationship,” no interference in the collective’s dynamics.
6. How couples are seen and dealt with in the network: “the creation of interest groups”
Couples are seen as “square” and their love spats are seen as “deviating” since in the larger context of the collective, such conflicts have to do with specific issues of the couple and therefore are irrelevant to the collective process. There is also a veiled curtailment of spontaneous affective relationships.
The relationship between couples is continuously analyzed and when the maintenance of that arrangement is no longer considered strategic for the group, it argues and discusses the dissolution of the couple.
7. Moral harassment , oppression , blame and the pedagogy of fear
When an agent is conflicted about the dynamics and ideologies within the group, he or she may be subjected to what the network calls nightmare-shock, a preventive practice used in conflict mediation, which also shields the group from being “contaminated.”
On another reading, the nightmare shock is a type of bullying in which “conflict-producing” agents are exposed to an embarrassing and humiliating situation in which they are confronted by their managers and other members to a deeply oppressive conduct that leads them to change their opinion, reacting to embarrassment and behaving in accordance with the premises of the group .
This process leads, therefore, to the establishment of a strong sense of guilt for what they believed or for the “conflicts” created by them. Thus is created a policy of coercion, of a strongly moralizing nature by which one learns to respect the “equity” of those on a higher level. The lesson is further instilled by fear of engaging in counter-arguments that will be sternly refuted.
These practices, seen by us as reprehensible, were taken by all, even by us, as natural. Within the dynamics of the network, bolstered by the excitement of participating in a collective project in which we believed, these situations were accepted as a necessary discomfort for the sake of a greater project. Today, however, free from the ties that bound us to the network, we can openly criticize the machismo on which is based the division of labor and the internal relations of the Houses and some collectives. We hope that this manifesto is received not only by Fora do Eixo, but all movements looking to build a truly alternative and counter-hegemonic project, as a contribution for building another culture based on respect for differences and gender equality.
—-
Signed by
Anápolis, Belo Horizonte, Campinas, Recife, São Carlos, São Paulo, 26 de agosto de 2013
Alejandro Vargas • Casa Fora do Eixo Nordeste (CE)
Bruno Kayapy • Espaço Cubo, Festival Calango|Grito Rock e Fora do Eixo
Camila Cortielha • Casa Fora do Eixo São Paulo (SP)
Eliza Mancuso • Fora do Eixo Campinas (SP)
Flávio Charchar • Casa Fora do Eixo Minas (MG)
Gabriel Fedel • Casa Fora do Eixo São Paulo (SP)
Gabriel Zambon • Casa Fora do Eixo Minas (MG)
Hiro Ishikawa • Casa Fora do Eixo São Carlos (SP)
Jessica Miranda • Casa Fora do Eixo Nordeste (CE)
Laís Bellini • Casa Fora do Eixo São Paulo (SP)
Leo Carneiro • Casa Fora do Eixo Anápolis (GO)
Marcos Cestari
Michelle Parron • Casa Fora do Eixo São Paulo (SP) | Casa Fora do Eixo Minas (MG)
Nowhah Luiza Freitas • Casa Fora do Eixo Anápolis (GO)
Rafa Rolim • Casa Fora do Eixo São Paulo (SP)
