From: mlperkin@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (mildred l perkins)
Subject: Re: Heinlein (again)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:12:47 GMT

In <1993Jan27.041501.10024@lucid.com> lola@lucid.com (Lola McCrary) writes:

>>   you're teaching sexism in sf.  I read his work a lot until I got to be
>>   old enough to be bothered by his continual reluctance to treat any woman
>>   character as more than a possible mother to children of important men.

>What Heinlein were you reading?  Examples that don't meet that criteria:

Don't forget I haven't read any Heinlein in about ten years.  I won't be
able to quote anything, 'kay?  :)   

>Dr. Mrs. Stone in The Rolling Stones

>Grandma Stone in The Rolling Stones

True, Mrs. Stone is a doctor, and she even gets to *do* some doctoring
in the book.  Grandma has a brilliant mind and is brave.  These two also
illustrate something my brother pointed out to me yesterday when I was
telling him about the discussion on Heinlein.  He said, (and I
paraphrase) "Sure, Heinlein created a bunch of tough, smart, capable
women - but as soon as something bad happened they had to be saved...as
soon as all the bad stuff was over they reverted to helpless
housewives."

>Friday in Friday.

Yeesh!  Don't get me started on this one.  This book looked SO
promising, but I don't CARE if the woman is a wonder of technology - I
can not abide the male rape fantasy at the front of the book.  And,
correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't SHE also find "true happiness" in
housewifery on the frontier?

>Heinlein let a woman be an intelligent and capable as she wanted as long as she
>had  breakfast ready on time.  Describes most working mothers today.  And
                                ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^

So true.  Isn't it too bad it doesn't describe more "working fathers",
also?  :)

>please note that in many of his books men cook and do chores as well.

That's right.  That's the one thing I always like best about ole
Lazarous(sp).

>Just taking the women listed above, Heinlein as least writes about strong
>women, emotionally, intellectually and physically.  Maybe *you* don't agree
>with the decisions many of the women in his books make about having babies, but
>that doesn't take away from the fact that *his* women were more equal to men
>than most women who were written about in the 50's, probably the social era he
>never graduated from.

One thing I'm ashamed I haven't mentioned before is the fact that
Heinlein WAS one of the few sf writers of his era who even PUT women
characters in his works, much less bothered to make them more than
background scenery.  Again, having these characters turn out to be happy
only as homemakers (I know, I shouldn't say "only" - running a home is
tough work) no matter how kickass they are in other areas is extremely
frustrating for me.  It's like being hungry and going into the store.
You only have fifty cents, so you can afford a peanut butter sandwich -
which is sitting right next to a big, beautiful Hoagie for a dollar.
You buy the peanut butter and are glad to have it, but wouldn't it be
nice if you could have it all.  

>I'm female, liberal, and independent, and I've never understood the fuss.

's cool.  So am I.  Isn't it wonderful that we can disagree on this? :)


>Lola
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.misc