From: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Attack of the Separatists
Date: 15 Dec 92 15:57:23
Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
	<iw.724435606@tosser> <1glms1INNg1h@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: rsr@soda.berkeley.edu's message of 15 Dec 1992 22:40:01 GMT

In article <1glms1INNg1h@agate.berkeley.edu> rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport) writes:
>In article <iw.724435606@tosser> iw@tosser.Rational.COM (The_Devine_Dolly) writes:
>->rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport) writes:

>->To call a woman "who works side-by-side with men but simply does't
>->spend any emotional energy on them " a separtist is a gross piece of
>->nonsense. [...]
>Iseult, I was using that example specifically because I had just finished a
>discussion of separatism on a bisexual mailing list I'm on, where a _woman_
>used that to describe varieties of separatism, specifically using that
>version to describe what she practiced for a while ... I didn't pull it out
>of a hat.

"I read it on the net, (and a woman said it) so it *must* be right."
Nah.  I pretty much agree with Iseult - I wouldn't call that a
separatist, either.  From what I've seen/heard of separatists, they
would *not* "work side-by-side with men."  That's the whole point, to
form a society *without* interaction with men.

>Would you have said it's a "gross piece of nonsense" if you knew a woman
>said this? Or do you read this stuff through "a man said this" filters?

Well, without having any right to speak for Iseult, I am pretty sure she
would call it nonsense in either case.  I know I would...*smile*.
Believe it or not, some of us feminists actually believe in the basic
equality of men and women - which includes the possibility of them
making equally stupid statements.

[text slightly rearranged]
>->Iseult - who is pissed that she wasted some more emmotional energy on you.
>->	 But hey, it is my space as well.

>Absolutely.  Nobody said it wasn't.

>->While I did not agree with Vikki about your relationship, in fact
>->I really know far more about your relationship than I care to, I
>->am beginnning to agree with her statement that you guys just don`t
>->get it.

>Fine.  Then stay the hell out of my bedroom, my dungeon, and my
>relationship. You're not invited.

If you agree, as you seem to, that soc.bi is Iseult's "space" too, then
you *did* "invite" her (and the rest of us) a ways into your
relationship by posting about it here.

>->You look at a woman who is has little or no interest in men and you
>->call her a separtist.  You can't clue to the fact that SHE HASN~T EVEN
>->THOUGHT ABOUT MEN ENOUGH TO EVEN THINK OF ACTIVELY SEPARATING FROM THEM.

>No.  I look at a woman who _has_ thought about men, who made a conscious
>decision to stay away from them, and I call her a separatist.  There's a
>difference.

What about the woman who "works side-by-side with men" that you
referenced.  This woman doesn't fit your definition above, and yet you
were using that as an example of a separatist.

>->Another clue - we are not here to spend emotional energy on you.  You,
>->by simple birthright as a man, do not get the rights to womens emotional
>->energy. No person has an automatic right to anothers emotional energy. 

>Of course.  Then why are you spending it on us? Nobody really asked you to,
>y'know ... 

Actually, lots of people *do* ask us to.  There is still very much a
perception of "women as nurturing."  Also, when someone posts, they will
be read.  People will have a response, possibly emotional, to what they
read.  To claim that you "didn't ask them" to have a response to your
post is disingenuous.

>I don't care whether or not Vikki's a separatist or not.  I did want to
>mention that IMHO, the mere fact you're married does not mean you're not a
>separatist.  She doesn't call herself a separatist, fine, she's not a
>separatist.

Look at your definition above.  If a separatist is someone who has
"consciously chosen to stay away from men," then a person who is married
to a man is extremely unlikely to be a separatist (yes, you can make up
an outside case where someone is, but the basic idea is correct).

Muffy
--

Muffy Barkocy                      | ~Can you tell me how much bleeding/it
muffy@mica.berkeley.edu            |  takes to fill a word with meaning and/
"amorous inclinations"? Aha! I'm   |  how much how much death it takes/to give
not "not straight," I'm *inclined*.|  a slogan breath?~ - Bruce Cockburn