From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: Feminism's Lesbian Leaders (was: Why are there only men on)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 16:25:32 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.223457.5079@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>
>So, that's the way she thinks.  Where's the proof?  Out of the
>feminist leadership, who are the lesbians?  Steinem?  Friedan?  Greer?
>Yard?  Wolf?  Faludi?  MacKinnon?  Dworkin identified herself as
>lesbian in one of her books published in the late 70s.  Paglia is
>either bi or lesbian and a self-proclaimed feminist, but hardly seems
>to be politically correct.

Now, let's see. There's Patricia Ireland, head man over at NOW, who
apparently has walked out on her husband to live with her girlfriend.
Oh, yes, but that's probably just a *fringe organization*, NOW
couldn't possibly be representative of mainstream feminists, could
it? Then there's Catharine MacKinnon, who we Americans foolishly
allowed to shove her version of "sexual harassment" regulations down
our throat. I'm not privy to the details of MacKinnon's private life,
but I do know that in her writings she uses the term "heterosexual"
the same way Rush Limbaugh uses the term "Goddamn Commie pinko faggot
queer"; in other words, to MacKinnon, "heterosexual" is a term of
abuse.  So here is clearly another lesbian. Then there's Robin
Morgan, the editor of "Ms.", the largest-circulation feminist
magazine. Again, I am not privy to the details of her sexual
life. However, she calls "the family" a "disease" ("Demon Lover",
p. 316), says the most horrendous things about men - they all
love death, etc. - and repeatedly praises lesbianism. So one
must infer from her own statements that she's a lesbian, as well.
 
Oh, yes, and Faludi, supposedly *so* hetero (at least by feminist
standards!), who has to write this long, apologetic article for
Ms. about how it *is* possible to be heterosexual, yet not violate
one's feminist principles. Oh, it's not *easy*, to be sure, but with
just the right attitude, a properly submissive partner, and an
eternally-vigilant ideology, it is *just* possible to love a man
without betraying the sisterhood. It reminds me of the debates
among fundamentalist Christians, who seek to reassure each other
that Jesus really didn't mean what he said about the eye of the
needle and the rich man getting into heaven. Just as Christianity
fundamentally hates wealth, and must go through all kinds of
ideological gyrations to rationalize a lifestyle other than
abject poverty, so feminism fundamentally hates men, and must
likewise go through all kinds of gyrations to rationalize a
lifestyle other than lesbianism.

>What bothers me about this "blame it on the lesbians" thread is that
>the undercurrent seems to be that feminism isn't for most women, just
>the fringe of lesbians (in fact, isn't that what starbuck repeatedly
>asserts?).  And since feminism isn't for most women (particularly
>hetero women), these horrible lesbians must be brainwashing nice,
>decent hetero women into hating men and hating their traditional place
>in our culture.  And yet, most of the female feminist leadership
>appears to be hetero, as do most of the female feminists in real life
>and on the net.

Yes, relatively few people *do* succeed in letting ideology triumph
over biology. This is why, for example, Christianity has not yet
succeeded in abolishing "lust." Still, the LEADERSHIP of the
feminist movement, the teachers of "womens studies", etc., are
many times far more likely to be lesbian than are the women to whom
they preach. So the model to which you object is nonetheless
quite accurate: the voice of organzied feminism *is* largely the
value-system of man-hating lesbianism, preaching its form of
misandry as a role model for women who will spend their lifetime
living with men. And as relationships by the millions are broken, families
are destroyed, and childrens' lives are ruined through hellacious
divorce battles, many of these lesbians are sitting back and
chortling over their accomplishments with malicious glee.
-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!


     "Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that
      they are not even superficial."

                   - Friedrich Nietzsche    (The Gay Science: 126)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism