Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 22:19:04 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Pat Robertson and feminism
              27 Aug 1992 17:32:06 GMT from <jrussell@UNLINFO.UNL.EDU>

JR:

"Radical feminism," properly used, refers to a fully feminist world-
view in which, rather than seek to obtain a bigger part of the
pie by playing by existing rules (as liberal feminists do), one
declares the pie to be poison and seeks to build a new kitchen.
By radical, we mean "at the root," in that radical feminism seeks
to rebuild society in terms that are anchored in the (superior)
values that belong to women (such as community, compassion,
nurturance, tenderness, and women's love for each other) rather
than those that belong to men (such as competition, individuality,
aggression, dominance, cruelty, and selfishness--which stink.)
  This worldview seeks to overturn every aspect of life which is
rooted in or dependent on patriarchy.  These aspects include
patriarchal, competition-centered economic theories; male-
dominated notions of relationships; the divisiveness that is
a natural aspect of societies dominated by men; notions of
ownership; protectionism; and lots of others I can't think of
right now.
   That's *radical* feminism.  That's what Pat is talking about.
His problem is that he reads radical feminists and assumes that
all feminists agree with them.  They don't.  Liberal feminists
and radical feminists disagree on many things, sometimes violently.
While liberal feminists may run for office, radical feminists see
the patriarchal system of government as being an object of derision
to be overthrown, not a system within which to contend for the same
power men have.  While liberal feminists may defend the Constitition,
radical feminists see it as a document written by elitist white
males for their own protection.  Liberal feminists see abortion as
an issue of choice, and radicals see it as an issue of power.  For
radical feminists, most heterosexual sex, all marriage, and pregnancy
are forms of oppression that advantage men and entrap women.  Abortion,
for radicals, is a way of demonstrating to men that their efforts to
perpetuate their system can be overcome.  There are radical feminists
who call for a moratorium on heterosexual sex, and there are radical
feminists who believe that the only way to wrest the power away from
men is to eliminate their progeny and disempower them to the point
that they die out.
   Oh, yeah.  I almost forgot.  The witchcraft thing.  This is where
things get a little weird.  Some radical feminists (generally
misconstruing witchcraft in the first place) advocate a "feminist
spirituality" that prefers witchcraft and some forms of paganism
(last I heard Native religions were very big) because they place
the center of spiritual power in women (which, of course, is
where it belongs.  Uh-huh.)  Any belief system that grounds its
creation myth in a female figure stands a good chance of getting
picked up (at least for a while) by some faction of radical
feminism.  The Goddess, Mother Earth, Kali--whoever; if the object
of worship is female, it's okay with radical feminists.

Hope that helps some.

BTW, I'm not one anymore.

(Just in case you might have missed it.)

--Missy P 2 B
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU