the end of essentialism

in reading foucault there is some discussion of torture. torture and bodies and power - it all goes together quite nicely. but here's the thing which is bothering me. not so much about foucault - but about torture in general.

if we look to the u.s. in iraq or torture camps in chile during the 1980s (during the time in chile when that stuff was happening) we see a shift in who is doing the torturing.

in the 1500, 1600, 1700, 1800s etc. it was men who were doing the torturing. mainly because it was men who were doing everything. unfortunetly - it seems that in the 20th and 21st centuries torture has become yet another equal opportunity employer.

no i know what you might be thinking - torture is torture is torture - it's bad - what does it matter who is doing it - women have the same capacity for evil as men - look at Karla Hamolka.

but there is something about the idea of women systamatically torturing other human beings that fills me with a deep and profound sadness. i don't want to accept that women are capable of this. that if given the opportunity women would be as prepared as men to debase themselves and others in this fashion. not okay. i want to believe that there is something about women which is fundamentally different (not better - different) than men. that women could not do this. and i am discovering that there is not.

which in some ways destroys the promise of feminism. the promise of a different way of seeing/experiencing/understanding the world. undermining an ethics of care (as opposed to justice). all the arguements about actions being dependent on the situation etc. out of character etc. they apply equally to women as to men.

maybe this destroys the essentialist arguement once and for all. maybe this is proof postitive that there are no differences. that underneath it all we really are the same. but if this is what it means to be the same - maybe i'd rather be different.