From: Jason R. Pascucci <jasonp@PRIMERD.Prime.COM>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Camille Paglia is GOD! was Re: camille paglia
Date: 13 Nov 1992 03:31:03 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Well, okay, maybe not. But, she is definitely a voice of reason
and what I can only hope is a beacon of light to the future generations
of the Feminist Movement.

Camille Paglia wrote a couple of books. The first, which I haven't
read, was named _Sexual Persona_, which I have heard is kind of
dry, and not at all of the Calibre of her second book,
_Sex, Art, and American Culture_. Even in the second
one, she has an essay which switches back into the more dry
style, which, honestly, she isn't very good at. Where her writing
shines is in her down-to-earth use of speech, her attitude...
mostly the fact that she seems to be a real person. Also,
too, she doesn't take herself all that seriously, which makes, in my
mind, her arguments only that much more strong. Her examples
aren't perfect, for example I wouldn't give Madonna quite as much
credit as she does in her arguments, but the points she was trying
to make come through.

Another reason that I like her is because I myself was never impressed
with the Academic Environment, and she has put into words why
on more than one occasion in her book. She has reason to be pissed
at the Academics, her career, she even admits, was (is?) pretty
bad, as much due to her personality (she seems to thrive on
conflict and likes to be the center of attention) as to the inherit
problems in the 'System'.

Let me tell y'all something about myself. I identified myself with
the feminist movement because they, basically, stood for what
I believed in. However, there was so much extra baggage, in the form
of the 'traditional' radical and militant philosophy that I put
up with because I was under the impression that it was fairly
wide spread, and my reactions to it were, basically, because
of my White-bread Male Dominated background.


However, this is a woman, a Real Person, who believes that Date Rape
is getting too publicized. While I disagree that it takes away
>from Real Rape, I do class some of the notions of Date Rape
in hte 'Insane' category. (If you, Female, go get drunk,
and wake up the next morning with a guy you don't like, crying
Rape is foul, unless you said 'No', and meant it, the night
before. No 'I felt compelled to do it, or else he wouldn't
like me so it is coercion, so it is Rape.', that just doesn't
wash in my mind. Period.) She also pointed out another thing,
that the Feminists did *not*( invent the notion of outrage against
Rape. In fact, it was the Honorable Men (Fathers, Brothers, Friends)
who would deal with the situation, and make sure it never happened
again. Camille's comments about how women seem to want to break
free of these relationships, "No more double standard", to take
risks, and yet don't want to take the consequences. Sorry, Sister,
it doesn't work like that.

"Blaming the victim makes perfect sense if that victim has behaved
stupidly. I doubt that Susan Jacoby would leave her purse on
the street or sleep with her doors wide open at night. Theft,
rape, murder are facts of life in large societies, except in police
states." She goes on to say that while you are bitching out the
person who left their purse on the street, you do go after
the person who stole it to bring to justice.

"Society is not the enemy, as feminism ignorantly claims. Society
is woman's protection against rape." This I agree with, but her
comments about the 'wild, infectious delirium of gang rape', while
applying to her case, don't ring true. I think those words were
intended for more female ears...I, personally, loathe rape
in any of it's forms, and it's on of the only things left I feel
strongly enough to kill for. There are other ways to obtain
a 'wild, infectious delirium', none of which involve a breach of
consent.

Another thing I honestly can say I like was her interview with Sonya
Friedman, which she reprinted. Camille didn't really come out on
top of that one. They both thrust and parried very well, and
they both presented their cases well also. Even though
Camille wasn't obviously the winner of the 'debate', she
published it anyway.

Now, I feel I can disagree with the Feminist Movement's more
sociatally insane philosophies and commentary, and not be branded
a Male Chauvinist Pig Slime. Heck, I'm considering being
non-PC on alternate Wednesdays.

I could go on, she has so many quoteworthy phrases and
sentiments, but, basically, read the book...
A healthy attitude about sex, a healthy attitude about danger
and living in a modern society, a healthy attitude about men
and women, and the DIFFERENCES between them. All things
very nice, and necessary, to prosper in life. It's definitely
a two thumbs up.

With Love,

Jason R. Pascucci
jasonp@primerd.prime.com
Disclaimer: These don't represent the view of my employer. Don't sue.



-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.