Mary Daly is a genius, though certainly commits the typical sins of our TERF mothers. I’ll address some of those sins first and then get into the good stuff.
As Mary Daly puts it, “It is rapism that has spawned racism. It is gynocide that gives rise to genocide.” For Daly, because sexism is the first and most universal “-ism”, it takes absolute priority. All other revolutionary movements (black liberation, pacifism, Marxism, etc. are superficial because they don’t address sex and therefore stand for only half of humanity at best.
In her attempts to acknowledge black feminism, she highlights the work of Pauli Murray and Angela Davis, but she can’t seem to acknowledge the role of white women in perpetuating racism:
“In the South, Negro women are sexually exploited by white men. Black men have often raped white women in revenge for their own degradation. Yet it was not women who brought slaves to America. Women have been pawns in the racial struggle…”
Daly wants to have her cake and eat it too. She’s not wrong that black liberation that ignores gender or worse, argues for black male supremacy, isn’t enough for black women. But she fails to acknowledge the insufficiency of the radical feminist movement to fully address problems like race. She presumes that once sexism is fixed, everything else will be fixed too because the root of “the Other” is, and only is, sexism.
How much better could Daly have been with a better understanding of intersectionality?
Daly envisions a future that is non-binary and pansexual:
“The categories of heterosexuality and homosexuality are patriarchal classifications. …doctrinaire insistence upon exclusive homosexuality…is not radical enough, for…it lends support to the notion that is *does* matter what the sex of your partner may be.”
“By becoming whole persons” women (and consequently men challenge “the artificial polarization of human characteristics into sex-role identification… The becoming of androgynous human persons implies a radical change in the fabric of human consciousness and in styles of human behavior.”
However, it should be clear in 2021, nearly 50 years after the book was written, that the growing visibility and acceptance (both self-acceptance and societal acceptance) of trans people is changing the fabric of human consciousness with relation to gender and sex in a radical way that a trans-exclusionary movement never could. The pioneering of non-binary identities (est at 1.2 million in the US this year) and increasing prevalence of pansexuality/bisexuality speak to this point. It is the utter rejection of sexual roles assigned at birth that both Mary Daly and trans activists are pushing for.
Intersectionality is the missing piece of the puzzle in Mary Daly’s diagnosis of what is wrong with society. By integrating Daly’s best insights with the insights of more recent feminists, especially in regards to intersectionality and trans liberation, a higher form of radical feminism can start to emerge. So what are those insights that are worth keeping?
It’s hard to do Daly justice in the space of a review. Her categorization as a “feminist philosopher” and therefore exclusion from Philosophy proper is a real shame. Her analysis is not just political (or even mostly political); it is theological, metaphysical, ontological. Daly is not interested in questions of voting rights or abortion (except as a practical example of her deeper point); she is interested in the ontological implications of sisterhood, alienation, nonbeing and Be-ing. She engages with thinkers as diverse as Aristotle, Aquinas, Augustine, Bachofen, Bacon, Berger, Berrigan, Bonhoeffer, Camus, de Beauvoir, Descartes, Eliade, Jung, Kant, Leibnitz, Marcuse, Metz, Mill, Moltmann, Nietzsche, Pannenberg, Roszak, Spinoza, Szasz, Teilhard de Chardin, Tillich, Weber, and Whitehead, to name just a few (seriously). Her style is continental and poetic but her analysis is rigorous. Her insights transcend the dichotomy between detached “armchair” theory and practical prescription.
Her insights are far more individualist than one might expect to find in feminist philosophy. It is precisely this aspect of her worldview that feels the most important today, in a society obsessed with propping up a false dichotomy between freedom/autonomy/individualism and community/sisterhood/love.
“I suggest that if one wishes to speak adequately of “convergence” then this has to have as a basic element in its meaning a coming together and harmonizing of *traits within individual human psyches* that have been split apart and objectified by sex role socialization. This fundamental convergence, or unity, or individuation will mean increasing human potential for participation in society as unique, diverse individuals. It will mean “divergence.””
She highlights the importance of community in achieving our full potential *as individuals.*
“The bonding phenomenon among women, expressed by the word “sisterhood,” is… essential to the battle against false consciousness…To oppose the essential lovelessness of the sexually hierarchical society is the radically loving act. Seen for what it is, the struggle for justice opens the way to a situation in which more genuinely loving relationships are possible.”
“…the women’s revolution is a communal phenomenon…a collective refusal to be “the Other.””
She criticizes the “pseudo-feminine” passive ethic of self-sacrifice, humility, meekness, and obedience that serve the interests of the oppressor at the expense of the oppressed, especially women, who should instead prioritize values like pride and self-esteem, and creativity. This is perhaps a loaded comparison, but it’s hard not to think of Ayn Rand here (and wonder whether she would have changed her views on feminism if she had encountered Mary Daly).
Daly acknowledges the transitional nature of her place and time and leaves her philosophy open to further development and evolution. The Possible is still obscured by the oppressive structures of the Now, but we can start to live on the boundary. In this sense, Daly has a sort of courageous humility in her approach. She is not prescriptive. She diagnoses the present, and through this diagnoses, she opens up ways to an unknown future for which there is no existing model.
“[The feminist movement] is the catalyst that enables women and men to break out of the prison of self-destructive dichotomies perpetuated by the institutional fathers… *this* movement *is* movement. Realization of this is already the beginning of a qualitative leap in be-ing. For the philosophers of senescence “the final cause” is in technical reason; it is the Father’s plan, an endless flow of Xerox copies of the past. But the final cause that *is movement* is in our imaginative-cerebral-emotional-active-creative being.”
It is the transcendent nature of Daly’s philosophy that renders her aforementioned sins less relevant, (and makes this an unapologetically 5-star review), because her real insights into human nature and human possibility are so integrable into a worldview that *is* properly trans-inclusive and intersectional.
“Participation in Be-ing is the final cause, and because this is “the end,” we can look forward to endless divergence.”
God, therefore, is not the Father. God is not a being. God is the Verb. God is Be-ing.