From: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Sexism: Defined
Date: 7 Sep 92 22:39:43 GMT
Reply-To: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Followup-To: alt.feminism
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Originator: lunde@casbah.acns.nwu.edu

Rich:

I'm not going to try to answer point by point, as I think I've stated
my views clearly, and restating them will not necessarally bring us to
agreement.  I do want to respond to a few things:

In article <dzqnzsr.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>That women can be sexist at all is denied by prominent feminists like
>Dworkin, who confuse social context for sexism.

I never claimed to agree with Andrea Dworkin -- she may be "prominent"
but she doesn't represent either my views or any school of thought I
tend to subscribe to.  I don't want to defend her and I'm not especially
surprised if I happen to be saying something different than her.

I'm trying to be self-consistent in presenting my views of feminism
and there is no particular authority responsible for my opinions.

[...]
>(Albert Lunde wrote:)
>>- Being discriminated against in a subculture (i.e. the music fest) does 
>>not have the same impact on the rest of my life and choices as being
>>discriminated against in the mainstream would.
>
>But would not the leglislation you propose cover both? Why make the
>distinction here, when the proposed laws make no such distinction?

I'm not proposing legistation, I'm talking about my views about
the nature and importance of sexism.  Some of the distinctions I am making
are ethical or political but would be difficult to put into law.

[...]
>>The nearest parallel example I can think of for actual men-only events 
>>would be Robert Bly or the radical faries.  I wouldn't call either of these
>>events being men-only, "sexist"; though I have other disagrements with Bly.
>>(These are almost equally marginal to the cluture at large.)
>
>Since I do not know what these things are, their significance escapes me.

These are two flavors of the "men's movement" which have held men-only
events of a somewhat counter-cultural flavor. Bly is credited with
leading the "mythopoetic" men's movement, the radical faries were
a gay men's group which worked to subvert conventional masculitity.

(They are interesting to compare since Bly is very "butch" ;) and the 
radical faries aren't; but both have done men-only rituals of a somewhat
shaministic character.)

>>Striking out in another direction, I would agree that those ideologies
>>that suggest that women or men are *essentially* superior, are sexist.
                                                             ^^^ ^^^^^^
>>For example, there was Sally Miller Gearheart's essay suggesting that 
>>world peace could be obtained by reducing men to 10% of the population
>(by non-violent means!?). (See "Reweaving the Web of Life" -- a low point
                      ^^                                       ^ ^^^ ^^^^
>for me in a generally good anthology.)

I'm glad women are "caring", else I guess she would have suggested
euthenasia, or perhaps a machine gun. It's a good thing she ain't sexist. :^)
                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you not reading what I am saying or is that what the smiley face is
about? I tried to make it clear I didn't agree with her and I thought 
her idea was sexist. I thought at least I could offer some limiting cases
we both would agree on....

-- 
 Albert Lunde         | Interfaith  |     *Y*Y*      "A branch on the
 Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu |  Bisexual   |      *Y*        tree of life"
 alunde@nuacvm.bitnet |  Feminist   |.......|.........................