Abolish the Family | Sophie Lewis speaks to Ben Smoke

Do family abolitionists want to get rid of your Gran? Do they hate love? Are they all killjoys looking to rip the roots of working class resistance apart? Find out all this and more in this episode of the Verso podcast with author Sophie Lewis in conversation with Ben Smoke.
Sophie Lewis is the author of Abolish the Family: A Manifesto for Care and Liberation www.versobooks...
Ben Smoke is the commissioning editor of Huck Magazine.

[@annahurtado3136]

"Family as the privatization of care." I can attest to the organized scarcity of support as a stay at home parent.

[@frocco7125]

I hope you and your child have it good. 2 people raising a kid alone is tough.

[@kelechii7209]

The trouble with Sophie Lewis (and a lot of the utopian abolitionist left at the moment) is unlike the women's liberationists in the 60s and 70s that grappled with Marxist feminists, on the one hand, insisting that capitalism was the foundation for women's oppression and radical feminists, on the other hand, debating the complexity of the interaction between biology and culture, in her utopian abstract ideal world she forgets that humans are still mammals. The maternal instinct is partly cultural and exaggerated, yes, but to completely ignore the role of biology is very naive especially when this maternal instinct is observed in our closest animal relatives. Biology is the bedrock that oppressive cultural exaggerations are built on. The fear of biological essentialism has led to all sorts of woo woo theories and human exceptionalist ideas that are frankly stupid if they're put under even the mildest empirical scrutiny. The fear of biological essentialism on the left is rooted, in my view, in the naturalistic fallacy that says that if something is natural it is necessarily good, inevitable, or desirable. You can think that the maternal instinct is partly natural, and still make an intelligent argument that neither thinks it is inevitable nor thinks it justifies the inequality between the sexes. This is Shulamith Firestone's central point by the way and why she is so keen on using technology to overcome what she sees as a natural disadvantage for women via abortion/contraception (and actually this argument underpins all of disability rights activism if you think about it). Perhaps, Sophie needs to put down Marx/Engels/Kollontai/Federici and read more Simone de Beauvoir, who in her chapter in the Second Sex entitled 'The Point of View of Historical Materialism' criticises Engels' theory of the origins of the family/women's oppression in his popular treatise on 'The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State'. As Beauvoir later said later in her life regarding communist revolutions and the relationship between class struggle and women's oppression, 'The sex struggle embodies the class struggle, but the class struggle does not embody the sex struggle. Feminists are, therefore, genuine leftists. In fact, they are to the left of what we now traditionally call the political left.'

[@tear728]

Such typical behavior of these insane morons. They overfit or underfit everything they see because they can only see the world through some bullshit socialist hypothesis masquerading as theory.

[@kelechii7209]

@@newlin83 Where did I say that because the maternal instinct is partly natural it means that humans have perfect familial relationships? Something being true on average doesn't mean there isn't enough variation so that many women don't have that experience or that the system we have now is perfect. I accommodate that variation in my thinking but in Sophie's abstract world, the maternal instinct is completely cultural and constructed and therefore she thinks we can completely unconstruct it with no unintended consequences. She completely ignores the role of biology in the system we have right now. Even in your comment you're doing the exact thing by discussing how culture socialises everyone to valuing and formalising relationships with blood related people whilst completely ignoring that biology may play at least some role in the biological parent/child bond. I do agree that we need to de-emphasise only familial bonds (to an extent and in specific contexts), but in order to do that I think we need to also formalise our friendships/non familial relationships much more than it currently is. This is the reason why the gay 'rainbow' family idea hasn't worked as much- most people do not have formal enough relationships with their friends. The feminist movement has always criticized the nuclear family as a site of women's oppression. The issue is Sophie Lewis completely ignores human nature in her argument. The fact that something isn't perfect also doesn't mean it needs to be completely dismantled. If you think it needs to be completely dismantled then you're ignoring human nature.

[@coreysavage8584]

The trouble is too much book reading and not enough life living... Mental masturbation is a paltry replacement to consciously attuning oneself to NOW where easeful surrender to Life's flowing river of energy manifests. Thoughts, beliefs, and ideological positioning are fine descriptors in a moment, where in the next they become as hardened rocks and brambles which tear at the flesh of any holding to them. The river ushers us to forward progression, oceanic wisdom, absorptive dissolution into the abyss of Now. A Yogi is as content with reading a book as they are tossing it aside. The essential realization is One to be known within. Always has been, always will Be.... Peace 🙏

[@jasminehouston-burns1691]

Simone argued against the idea that women should be allowed to be stay at home mothers "because most women would choose it" if we let them, and the founder of Planned Parenthood was a eugenicist who wanted to exterminate the black population. Sucking a baby out of your womb for the sake of your convenience is not a good or liberating thing. Women could just be abstinent, sexually responsible but no, you want to have one nighters and kill the baby. You want to have relationships that aren't leading to marriage and then get rid of the baby. And you want to follow a racist eugenicist. There really isn't a great disparity for women in the workplace and feminists need to stop cosplaying the civil rights movement. You are fighting a shadow on the wall.

[@2steaksandwiches665]

@@kelechii7209this…slow clap. I don’t know if it’s true for Sophie, but I find many of these women don’t have children and don’t want children. I believe they lack the ability to understand women that want a family, and have that maternal instinct as some sort of base animalistic thing. Guess what. We’re animals. When you think about sex, it’s ridiculous. But most of us love it because…instinct. Same with wanting to win a sports game you’re playing. Human nature exists. Too many of these radicals think they can overcome human nature.

[@neonjesus]

nobody disparaging her in the comments has read the book have they

[@Eudaimonist]

The pure evil of collectivism.

[@razvanzabalovici]

Define collectivism

[@thewaffle003]

Family is a tradition that provides stability and understanding as we plunge into the future. The vision Sophie has for that future may be better than what we have now, but if we were going to get there, we'd get there by using what we have now to do so: in other words, the family. Family is our current vehicle for progress and rejection of it on the way to our destination (wherever that may be) is sure to get us stuck in the middle of nowhere.

[@frocco7125]

My family screamed at me and spied on me so much I almost killed myself. Tradition is a childish sicknes. No thank you.

[@thewaffle003]

@@newlin83 That all sounds reasonably logical, but 1) you'd better not assert whatever your new framework is as a flat-replacement for family--nobody wants that right now, and maybe ever. 2) Good luck selling your plan to the public as "Abolishing the Family."

[@agoo7581]

This reeks of non-dysfunctional/non-abusive family privilege.

[@thewaffle003]

@@agoo7581 Wah. Convince conservatives to "abolish the family" and then come talk to me. Use what you have to build the next thing, don't kill what you have and then build the next thing. A more rhetorically savvy name might be "building the social family" or something. You need to win to implement ideas. "Abolish the family" is not a winning slogan.

[@the_northface]

@@agoo7581 this reeks of someone who used their fingers to type this and it isn't inclusive of people who dont have them. this also reeks of someone who has the privilege of the internet to watch the video and make a comment. this also reeks of someone who has the privilege of being able to afford a smartphone/pc. we can both keep going if you'd like...

[@Rosecrucian]

The death knells of the weak and frightened, Stockholmed by one’s trauma.

[@jeremymr]

I'm lucky to come from a good and supportive family, so I know how great it can be. No, families aren't perfect and that's because human beings aren't perfect. Instead of trying to destroy families, which in my opinion are one of the most wonderful things that makes life living and offers a little stability in this cold dark world, focus on helping people who don't have families. A lot of people are lonely and lacking community support. We need more of family, not less. And if someone doesn't have a dad then they can call me dad. Yes, this is a KZbin comment and I jest, but this is the attitude we can cultivate.

[@danielj8858]

me commenting on an interview about how family abolition is actually not about destruction: "Instead of trying to destroy families,..."

[@javierrodriguez3098]

Saying the quiet part out loud they’ll say. That we should all become caring and loving ✊🏼

[@annahurtado3136]

You must have watched before commenting because this was essentially it. It's truly revolutionary to increase our capacity for care.

[@Marimba100]

I wonder how that is accomplished in a culture that trivializes it. Some talk about empathy training, but that seems more about window dressing.

[@frocco7125]

@@annahurtado3136 I agree.

[@RoberttAvro]

As a male I certainly don't feel that I can count on some type of a "loving society" to take care of me and work in my interests over a lifetime. My experience with humans is that self centeredness is their most common trait and that really nobody cares for you as much as your family or one or two close friends. No amount of training or education is going to change that, because it's basic human nature. So the idea of a "no oppressive families" society seems absurdly utopian in the extreme and generally a bad idea for the bulk of the people.

[@valq10]

@@RoberttAvro You are asserting that it's basic human nature, but that's not evidence. It's merely your assertion.

[@frocco7125]

I did always feel off and disconnected with the family I was born into. Even besides all the arguments we had. I will look into this philosophy.

[@riyadougla539]

Same here. Family isn't blood.

[@they1373]

The philsophy amounts to NOTHING - everyone has always felt disconnected with something or someone, even 1000 years ago when we were all farmers. That is called being HUMAN

[@nojaism]

change the inheritance laws and the whole concept of family falls apart

[@2steaksandwiches665]

Not really. When I had some mental health issues, my family rallied behind me. I’m not convinced the father government really cares what happens to me. Or any pseudo intellectual.

[@veronicalagor4771]

@@2steaksandwiches665Would it surprise you to learn that for some of us, our families were the primary source of life/mental health struggles?

[@2steaksandwiches665]

@@veronicalagor4771 same thing with my family. Through help and self love I have been on the right path for a few years and almost off all medication to do so. I also learned to forgive.

[@lemonlimelukey]

shes lightyears ahead of the sheeple.

[@dfwherbie8814]

Lol I rather be with the sheep then

[@frocco7125]

I agree.

[@esthermiedema8388]

@@Rexen1999 wow, that was deep.

[@ninakamenic3679]

She IS the sheeple.

[@they1373]

More like behind