From: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Subject: Re: Dworkin...
Reply-To: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Organization: Columbia University, New York
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 07:11:49 GMT

In article <1992Aug29.175416.6446@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>In article <1992Aug28.052723.8947@news.columbia.edu> mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green) writes:
>>In article <l-cn-sd.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>>Here are some quotes from Andrea Dworkin, a feminist lawyer.
>>>This material is from _Reason_ magazine. There is much more...
>>>
>>>In Dworkin's view, any material involving sexual intercourse
>>>would by definition be degrading to women. "Intercourse remains
>>>a means or the means of psychologically making a woman
>>>inferior, communicating to her cell by cell her inferior status,"
>>>she writes in her book _Intercourse_. "Physically the woman in
>>>intercourse is a space inhabited, a literal territory occupied
>>>literally: occupied even if there has been no resistance; even
>>>if the occupied person said, 'Yes please, yes hurry, yes more.'"
>>>Intercourse, she declares, "is the pure, sterile, formal expression
>>>of mens contempt for women." The fact that a woman might enjoy sex
>>>makes it even more degrading. Dworkin contends that material depicting
>>>women as enjoying sex is worse than the Nazis' treatment of the
>>>Jews:"The Jews didn't do it to themselves and they didn't orgasm....
>>>No one, not even Goebbels, said that the Jews liked it.
>
>>I find these spoutings of hers insensitive, offensive, sexist and bigoted, and 
>>they offend me, as a human being, a Jew, and a man.
>
>I believe Dworkin is Jewish, although not religious. 
>
>>I truly wonder whether she can conceive of a loving relationship with a member
>>of the opposite sex.  I won't tell her what kind of relationships to have or
>>not to have, but I think she is only declaring her own bias by asserting that
>>sexual intercourse is and is only a degredation of females by males.
>
>Dworkin thinks it's important to put intercourse in its historical
>perspective.  If you read the book, _Intercourse_, you'll probably
>find a lot of her statements offend you, but I think you'll be left
>with the feeling of, "yes, many times fucking has been used as a way
>of colonizing and oppressing women."  She believes that, given a
>sexist society, women cannot treat intercourse as a simple sexual act.

So, given an imperfect society, we have to give up our ideals, and say that
life is evil?  More importantly, can you justify your behavior with other
people on the basis of history?  Can you interpret as you will, and attribute
others' actions according to your own biases?  I guess you can.  But I don't
think it will serve any useful purpose towards cleaning up our society.  And
if this is her attitude, then I have no pity for her.  I am ready to treat
her as an equal.  I am even ready to say that women have often been treated
poorly by society.  I am not ready to say that I am guilty of hurting any woman
or women; I am no oppressor!  Prove otherwise!

>>  But it seems to me that
>>Dworkin takes a completely negative approach to sex, without analyzing any
>>cultural patterns other than what she sees in her own backyard!  Then she
>>applies it to the whole world, to all males and females, and to the biology
>>which created her!  What bothers me is that people actually listen to her,
>>because she is feminist!  She is not pro-female only, she is vehemently and
>>blindingly anti-male!  Academia should never accept this trash as valid!
>
>I'm not sure her "completely negative approach" to intercourse comes
>from not analyzing any cultural patterns other than what she sees in
>her own backyard.
>
>Some examples taken from Dworkin's book:
>
>"What both man and woman, driven by obscure primitive urges, wish to
>feel in the sexual act, is the essential force of maleness, which
>expresses itself in a sort of violent and absolute possession of the
>woman."  by Theodore H. Van De Welde, _Ideal Marriage_, 1930.

OK; expand backyard to include her local library on misguided quotations!
What do these quotes prove?  Many people believed this garbage.  She argues
it is true!  I would say she is way out of line, if she is using these quotes
as information...they are more likely non-scientific, unsubstantiated, mis-
information!  I can't believe she is using these anti-female and unenlightened
quotes to try to prove anything other than that people have been misled by
people by her in the past!

>"...I tried to imagine how you would hurt me and cause me to bleed.  I
>wanted to bleed, mulberry blood for you, for my own sake too:  to know
>what it meant to be a woman, to be transformed into a person by
>you..."  by Andre Brink in _An Instant in the Wind_, 1985.  (the
>speaker is a female fictional character speaking to a male lover)

Who the heck is Andre Brink?

Is this fictional account supposed to prove something?
She would do better to use modern sociological evidence!
Her sources are fictional and biased!  You can't use a biased source to prove
anything, not even bias!  So an author was biased!  Is the book popular?  What
does this prove about the society?

>"Since a man's wife is permitted to him, he may act with her in any
>manner whatsoever.  He may have intercourse with her whenever he so
>desires, and kiss any organ of her body he wishes, and he may have
>intercourse with her naturally or unnaturally, provided that he doesn
>not expend semen to no purpose."  by Moses Maimonides in his 12th
>century codification os sexual ethics according to Hebrew law.

This is utter misinterpretation.  The quote means that the man and woman may
have sex in whatever manner they may find pleasurable.  Neither do I think
it means that he can have sex with her when she does *not* want it!  It means
that if he wants to have sex with her, Jewish law does not place a limit
on the number of times they may have sex.

The broader sense of whenever he wants *cannot* apply, since there are many
laws which prevent sex at specific times.  They cannot have sex from the time
of her period until after is ritually ready, they cannot have sex on a fast
day, etc.  In fact, does Dworkin translate her own "Maimonides"?  Surely she
shouldn't interpret an English translation in a revisionist/feminist way,
especially if she agrees that the English language is biased, without carefully
examining the original!  I think this is a good example of her poor scholarship
!  She is clinging to straws, and the academic community deserves better theses
with better arguments.

>"But the husband cannot be guilty of a rape committed by himself upon
>his lawful wife, for by their mutual matrimonial consent and contract
>the wife hath given up herself in this kind unto the husband which she
>cannot retract."  by Matthew Hale, chief justice in England in
>the 17th century.

>So, you still think she's viewing intercourse by the cultural patterns
>in her own backyard?

Yes.
I think she is picking and choosing her quotes with reckless abandon, to
support her own biased outlook.  Let her quote some studies.  If she were
unbiased, she might even consider doing some studies of her own.

>>I am saying all this only in context of the above post...I assume that it
>>truly reflects Dworkin's views :-(
>
>It's awfully easy to find outrageous statements by Dworkin.  She's
>much richer than the outrageous statements, though.  I suggest you
>read some of her books.  I'm sure you won't agree with her, but you'll
>probably not find it a waste of your time.

I don't find anything of hers rich, so far.  It is rather poor, in fact.
I would much prefer to read more Tannen.  She at least seems to care about
truth, reality, science, bias.

She seems to think there is still a chance of making the world a better place
for both sexes through increased awareness and understanding of one another.
I have no problem with educating men about women.  But I think Dworkin needs
a lesson about reality.  The reality is that she is a fanatic.  The world
isn't perfect, but she really needs to clean her glasses!

:-(
:-)

 * * * * *  =================== Internet address is  mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
* * * * * * == Meir I. Green == Amateur Packet Radio N2JPG@W2XO.PA.USA.NOAM
 * * * * *  = mig@columbia.edu= Amateur Packet Radio N2JPG@K2KJC.NY.USA.NOAM
* * * * * * =================== Amateur TCP/IP       N2JPG@uhm.ampr.org
Newsgroups: alt.feminism