Female Domination in Nurturance
free themselves from the symbolic father. As the consequence, the subject will not recognize other identifications possessed by other women.
Furthermore, it is also important to highlight that the daughters dependency to other women is affected by the strong desire for maternal
attachment. It is argued by Jane Flax that a girls needs for a sense of fusion with a caring, reliable person remain strong since she does not get the secure attachment
to mother.
84
Flaxs statement clarifies an argument that symbiotic relationship with the mother stimulates a sense of fusion with other woman and forms an
imaginary unity in their relationship. Fusion and mutual identification with the other woman, however, do not certify the security of self-identification. Cori
reminds us that female friend does not owe us the selfless love that we wanted from our mothers because they also have needs and limitations.
85
From this argument, it should be understood that not all of the other women can secure our
needs for nurturance because they do not have full responsibility to respond our needs. It is the responsibility of us to be wise and aware of our own ability, to
classify the virtue and the evil. Coris argument above has the same view to Campbells opinion about the
importance of subjects differences. Cori asserts that separation from maternal attachment will evoke a problem to fusion or oneness because the subject cannot
be the concern to others needs.
86
She reveals the resistance of the subject toward the differences when separation to oneness or unity with mother occurs. Cori also
notes that the daughter will find difficulty to leave relationships with other women
84
Flax, p. 9
85
Cori, p. 107
86
Cori, p. 107
because she has projected the needs of nurturance into them and is not ready yet to walk away from the mother.
87
Hence, the daughter is seen as the figure that needs support for nurturance and autonomy.
The need for the nurturance and dependency toward other women can bring negative effect for the daughter if there are no differences between them.
Each woman must be aware of their own self, their ability to control their life. It is argued by Campbell that if differences are not raised, a woman cannot be herself,
and she only reflects the self of the powerful subject.
88
Here, Campbell points out that reciprocal relationship needs two subjects, not one. It is to note that there
must be equality between the women where each of them can be the speaking subject instead of being submissive to the interests of the certain group of people.
The evocation of differences between women subverts the previous concept of sisterhood which emphasizes that sisterhood must love one another
unconditionally, avoid conflict and minimize the disagreement.
89
In sisterhood, the symbolic identification takes place in horizontal identification that allows the
inter-subjective dialogue between women. Symbolic identification in horizontal ties between women is explained by Campbell as follows:
In this way, symbolic identification permits the subject to acknowledge the differences between herself and other subjects. It
does not construct a relation between subjects as an imaginary desire for unity that entails a méconnaissance of others, but as the
representation of the difference of an other, that enables a relation to the other. Symbolic identification forms political relations that do not
require that an other is loved as self, but rather that subjects engage with each other as speaking subjects.
90
87
Cori, p. 107
88
Campbell, p. 102
89
Hooks, p. 66
90
Campbell, p. 104
From the explanation, Campbell verifies the role of symbolic identification as a mean that facilitates the formation of speaking subject. It is to clarify that female
relationship does not reproduce imaginary unity and submission to another subject, as it is found in primary and secondary identification with mother and
symbolic father. Symbolic identification helps the subject to speak with and listen to other
people without being adhered to each other‟s conviction. It is important to highlight Campbell‟s conclusion of symbolic identification in sisterhood. She
underlines that inter-subjective dialogue makes the subjects become equal as the speaking subject and allows the discursive exchange that initiates feminism to
negotiation and change rather than being trapped in imaginary relations.
91
Furthermore, inter-subjective dialogue should not only focus on a kind dialogue but also on constructive critiques. Critiques are sometimes problematic
during the inter-subjective dialogue. For the first time, if the other insists upon her difference, the egoistic self-greets her with hostility arising from an anxiety of
difference.
92
The interaction with the other women who come and bring the different ideology starts to disrupt the daughter‟s self-esteem. Some actions such
as sheer disruption and critiques insult self-conviction and it makes the daughter aware of her ability and deficiency. The insisting critique which stimulates anger
is worthy enough to awaken the self-awareness.
91
Campbell, p. 104
92
Campbell, p. 100
Bell Hooks states that women need to have the experience of working through hostility to arrive at understanding and solidarity.
93
She believes that women have been constructed under the sexist environment which restrains their
chance and ability to resist the social construction of womanhood. She also claims that avoiding confrontation makes women away from revolutionary change and
transformation both individually and collectively.
94
From Hooks view, it can be noted that hostility and the evocation of differences lead to positive improvement.
According to Hooks, solidarity is a form of support for the weakness structure of womens identity.
95
She reveals woman as the victim of social construction who is helpless and powerless, and also needs support from someone who understands
and experiences the same burden, which is the sister. Overall, women must avoid the fear of differences and develop the sense
of solidarity. Different experiences actually reflect that people have different needs, and by understanding others needs the subject may place herself in the
appropriate position, whether to follow the others virtue or to resist its badness. Robin Morgan also argues that woman should develop self- defense, physical
strength, and the ability to work collectively, to teach and share an idea for each other.
96
Thus, sisterhood allows the women to build bond relation within the differences, to provide nurturance as well as autonomy for the woman.
The explanation above represents the power of sisterhood to help the daughter keep her subjectivity from the social construction of womanhood. By
93
Hooks, p. 66
94
Hooks, p. 66
95
Hooks, p. 64
96
Robin Morgan. Sisterhood is Powerful. ed.. NY: Vintage Books, 1970, p. 492