From: onr@netcom.com (D. Owen Rowley)
Subject: Re: Dworkin (was Re: Liberty)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:00:42 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.043029.10104@macc.wisc.edu> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:

>>From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
>>>[T]here clearly is a much smaller tendency to hold over-zealous
>>>woman-haters accountable (their numbers are massive) than to
>>>hold over-zealous man-haters (their numbers are much
>>>smaller) accountable.

>David Christopher Rogers <drogers@riacs.edu> writes:
>>This argument has been made a number of times, and is
>>likely true, but I'm left to wonder what is the conclusion I
>>am to draw from this?  It's the kind of argument often used
>>to excuse the lesser of two evils.  Is there something more
>>subtle I'm missing here?

For one thing , I don't buy that *their numbers are massive* .
Give me some examples of overzealous woman hating writers who publish
similar material to Dworkins, but with women as the subject?

Do you really think that a male writer could postulate that acts of 
rape are really deeply emotional bonds energeticly exercised without
being publicly vilified?

I suppose that there are indeed massive numbers of clueless men who
can't think beyond the end of their dicks, but that is a sign of ignorance
and insensitivity, not women-hating.

as Jess sez again:
>...those who are finding ...fault are ignoring
>some relevant issues of proportion.  As I've been at some
>pains to point out, I'm in no position to criticize
>Dworkin's writing directly, as I've not read it.  But as
>Arne points out, the systemic oppression of women in our
>society is one thing and man-hating is another, I maintain
>quite a smaller, thing.  This excuses neither, 

It seems to me that we are at the crux of a major paradigm shift regarding
the interaction of the sexes. We carry a lot of baggage in certain portions of 
our grey matter that seems unsuitable for our journey into the future.

I suspect that social/cultural programming can go a long way to modifying
how the genders interact, but I doubt that the basic *battle of the sexes*
will change significantly while reproduction of the species is still
accomplished through natural means. Obviously when ( or if) the means of
reproducing the species  is accomplished ex-utero, we would also have 
necesarily developed the means to change lots of things about ourselves
and the gender gap would be a non-issue. 

>but if men
>are going to try to render Dworkin such a demon, then to be
>at all credible, they are going to have to move heaven and
>earth in an effort to rectify women's inequities, in the
>process impeaching largely themselves, which they are
>singularly loath to do.

Dworkin ,isn't a demon who threatens the power establishment, Dworkin
does nothing to uplift the position of women. She focuses sharply on the 
injustice of the situation, she exposes the vast extent and deep
entrenchment of the imbalance of power, but she offers nothing that
deals positively with the issue. She can agitate some, she can irritate
others, she can beat her breast and wail till the cows come home, but
her polemic style can only fail the cause of empowering women.
I think that the *Ellen James Society* depicted in "The world according to
Garp" pretty well satirizes the utimately destructive nature of such
self defeating tactics.

Power is an individual thing, and each person either finds it within
themselves or accepts it from outside themselves. Most of us are
relatively powerless, even those who weild authority.
Your power in this world stems from your resolve to *have* it. 
People like Andrea Dworkin spend too much energy wanting power and 
leave no time to *have* it. People who have power understand well that
they can only exercise their own power, and don't waste time being
envious of someone elses power. ( If they don't understand this , they don't
hold onto it very long)

Men don't need to *impeach* themselves to assist the empowerment of women.
We need to work towards a society that operates on the principle of
fairness, and recognises the right of the individual to own themself.
We live in a society that still maintains the vestigal systems by
which women have been kept the property of men. Men need to be fair
in their dealings with women and equitably share opportunity to 
make their way in the world without taking  undue advantage of differences in
strength or previous privilege. I do not believe that Andrea Dworkin leads
on us on a path towards anything resembling that goal.

LUX ./. owen

-- 
D. Owen Rowley onr@netcom.com ( also owen@autodesk.com )
[ EU-PHORIA: A STATE OF WELL BEING ]
Euphoria is my natural state, I do what I enjoy and an abundance 
of all good fortune comes to me for it.
Newsgroups: soc.motss