From: pmm7@ellis.uchicago.edu (peggy boucher murphy (you had to ask?))
Subject: Re: Feminism's Lesbian Leaders (was: Why are there only men on)
Reply-To: pmm7@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 00:22:22 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.010019.12395@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>In article <1993Jan04.053120.7082@microsoft.com> jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan4.000601.10282@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>>In article <MUFFY.93Jan3141424@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>>>And a
>>>male phychologist, like a female friend, is more likely to be involved
>>>in a hetero relationship, and more likely to have ideas and motivation
>>>to patch up an ailing relationship.
>>
>>It seems to me that you are assuming that a same-sex relationship is
>>fundementally different from a mixed-sex relationship. Skills/knowledge
>>learned in same-sex relationships and mixed-sex relationships are 
>>mutually exclusive. Am I receiving your message correctly?
>
>Lets just say that they are not identical experiences. It would seem that
>any sex related problems (roles or having it) would be of a different nature.

obviously you've never heard of butch and femme. ;)
<sarcasm alert for the humor impaired>  
but seriously.  have you had
same sex experiences?  do you know for a fact that 
same sex relationships are *more* *different* than
the differences between men and women and their roles
in relationships?  

frankly, i think you should ask some bisexuals (like
myself and... any volunteers?) if this is so.  

let's say you just did.  guess what -- you're wrong.  
i had a 9 year relationship/marriage with a man (which
resulted in kids and was pretty damn traditional). 
we were very young, however, and it ended.  i am now 
involved in a serious long-term relationship with a 
woman.  and guess what?  the relationship (including
sex stuff) issues are pretty much the same thing, the 
differences having more to with the individuals than
with gender.  

the biggest differences i have experienced between
motos and motss relationships is that the power/sex-role
dynamic which is as much from society as from individuals
is somewhat different.  and most butches aren't as 
chauvenist as most men.  ;)

>>>Thanks, you just make my point. She may have motivation to advise an
>>>end to the relationship, for reasons having nothing to do with the
>>>relationship per se. 
>>
>>You seem to be assuming that a lesbian will automatically try
>>to "convert" any woman she can to her own sexual orientation.
>
>No, you are assuming that I am. It -is- a distinct possibility that is
>just not present in situations involving two heterosexuals. Of course, 
>we have different kinds of problems there.

if that is *not* what you meant, what did you mean?  i
interpreted it that way, too.  

>>Such an unethical creature might and probably does exist. However,
>>in my own sexual identity struggles, it's the HETEROSEXUALS who
>>tell me I'm "confused" and the lesbigays who tell me that only *I*
>>can decide what's right for ME. 
>
>"Sexual identity struggles"? Are you not saying yourself that you [were?]
>confused?

i can't speak for anyone else about this, but...
i wasn't.  but i still had to struggle with my identity, 
mostly in terms of dealing with the rest of society 
(family, etc).  i have struggled with many things where
i was not confused.  

such an assumption!

>>grow up with het parents, are groomed for het relationships, and 
>>are surrounded by the het world. Why do you think that lesbians are
>>so unable to learn from their experiences in the het world?
>
>Do you think that they are able to -define- what is right and proper
>in the het world? I do not.
 
would someone please tell me what the "het world" is?
or where? (if that is more appropriate)  

i think i should state here and now that for a man to 
tell us that sexual orientation is more important than
gender in a struggle which is *specifically* about 
gender based discrimination and prejudice boggles my
mind just a bit.  it's like a straight male telling
a gay man that the fact that they are men makes is 
more important than their sexuality when they discuss 
homophobia in modern culture.  or make it racial.  
<sigh>  it is still changing the subject.  

i think that if lesbians (who are after all *women*, and
have every right to be a part of and lead the *women's*
{not "straight women's"} movement) start saying that 
you can't be a feminist or a true women unless you dump
men entirely, then they are wrong.  these women are
*not* leaders of the women's movement, but of the lesbian
separatist movement.  that is a movement that many 
lesbians have trouble with.  

however, in terms of discrimination against *women*, 
lesbians are more likely to earn less income (even in
couples, since men still make significantly more), 
they do not have a "man to protect them" against harrassment,
even as a "cover", and probably parent alone more often,
by percentage.  as women in the job force, they are 
acquainted first hand with workplace based discrimination
of all sorts as well.  other than sleeping with/being
married to/etc men, where's the problem?  

as an apparent bisexual, patricia ireland is someone
who has the advantage of potentially being able to 
understand and deal with issues for women of *all*
sexualities, as *women*.  this seems to be an 
*advantage*.  would someone please explain the problem?

>>>The point is that some homosexuals find heterosexual relationships
>>>either distastefull, or they literally hate heterosexuals. 

you will find far, far more heterosexuals who feel this
way towards homosexuals in the world than the other way
around.  most lesbigays have families which are out hets, 
ditto for friends, co-workers, bosses, etc.  there
may be a few, but they are the distinct minority.  unlike
'phobic hets, who may be as small a percent of the het
population, but are vast in numbers.   

>I have had the unplesant experience of meeting a few in posting, they do
>exist.
 
on what newsgroup?  and under what circumstances?

>This is the part Robert Shaeffer brought up, if many of the leaders of the
>feminst movement and publishers of feminist magazines are lesbians, then this
>is exactly the situation that may exist. And I do not think that this
>point is invalid, even if Diane cannot stomach the fact that Robert Shaeffer
>posted it. Believe it or not, that does not automatically make it wrong,
>even if they generally disagree.
 
but what anti-het things are these (supposed) lesbians
saying.  btw- i challenge rs's theory that these women
can be assumed lesbians because they are actively angry
with men and heterosexuality.  i know a lot of straight
women who feel this way, too.  or maybe, more.  and they
are often angrier than lesbians or bis because they see
no other options *to* men because they are straight.  i 
know a few who have tried, too.  

>>>Having
>>>had the pleasure of conversing (so to speak) with a few flaming 
>>>anti-heterosexual homosexual's on the net, I am not going to qualify their
>>>existance. I will only state that I have no idea how prevalant this
>>>is.
>>
>>Well, in my realife and net experience, it's 0%.  Maybe I'm not in 
>>the right newsgroups <grin>
>
>It ain't 0%, or you can pull a rini and claim that I am lying. :^)
>I have noticed this on several newsgroups. Oddly, sci.skeptic has been
>a major offender, and has the largest topic killfile of any newsgroup
>that I read.
 
please do not confuse "pissed-of-with-clueless-het
lesbigays" with "anti-heterosexual homosexuals".  people
who get angry at those they see oppressing them (and not 
even recognizing it!) do not necessarily hate those people.

peg

Newsgroups: alt.feminism