From: levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine)
Subject: Re: Why are there only men on
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 22:04:59 GMT

farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:

>In article <1992Dec9.153536.20644@nmsu.edu> dsteinbe@nmsu.edu (David Steinberg) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec7.031938.583@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>>>Starbuck, do you have any idea what sexual orientation is?  How
>>>can there be a sexual competition for women between lesbians and
>>>(hetero/bi) men when lesbians want lesbian women?  How do you suggest
>>>that lesbian women talk hetero women into wanting sex with another
>>>woman?  That has about as much chance as a hetero man talking a
>>>lesbian woman into wanting sex with men.
>>
>>I dunno about this.  I recall reading an article in Ms Magazine about
>>a year ago called Orchids in the Artic.  Its point was that women who
>>are in relationships with men should seriously consider getting out of
>>them, or at least take steps that would put barriers between the two.

>But was this a call to sexual/romantic relationships between women or
>was it a call to women not to assume they have to be in
>sexual/romantic relationships with men?  There's a huge difference
>between telling women to "try lesbianism" and telling women that many
>sexual/romantic relationships with men can be harmful.

(More, in this vein.)

>>I also recall the repsonses in this issue to Naiome Wolf's (sp?)
>>article on Radical Heterosexuality.  Maybe the attempts of these women
>>are in vain, but it does seem to be trying to convince heterosexual
>>women to become lesbians.  (Actually, I tend to agree with most of the
>>points in these articles, but that's another story...)

>Well, to whom does it seem to be trying to convince hetero women to
>become lesbians?  It seems that we have a self-selecting screen where,
>if it is suggested that many women should opt out of romantic/sexual
>relationships with men, the default is automatically assumed that it's
>being said that women should opt for romantic/sexual relationships
>with women.  Personally, I know several hetero women who, at this
>point in their lives, don't want romantic/sexual relationships with
>men because they take too much time and effort the women would sooner
>put into other activities.  

I would like to add my 2 cents worth....

If only once in his life, Starbuck is right here. There are women,
writing in Ms., whose idea of feminism is lesbian separatism, who 
would like to encourage other women to live that way, who do
say things that are anti-men. And there were many more such women
when I was last involved with organized feminism, 20 years ago.

I would not, however, call these women feminists. I do not
think their philosophies have any connection with mine. Moreover,
I do not think they represent the mainstream of organized feminism
today. 

Starbuck, humans being what they are, if you were to take any
good, worthy cause, movement or activity that *you* are into,
I am sure you would find abusive assholes who misuse its name.
For example, if you are a Christian, you would get very
uncomfortable if I mentioned the Inquistion, as some sort
of example of Christianity. And the existence of the Inquisition
does not prove that Christianity is bad, or wrong. Merely that
Christians, like feminists, are human...

Lenore Levine
levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu

P.S. The feminists I know today, personally or from the net, seem
to be about as anti-male as a cat is anti-tuna fish.

Just because we are not willing to perform the metaphorical equivalent
of binding our feet, in order to get a man, does not mean we do
not want one...
Newsgroups: alt.feminism