From: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Subject: Re: Ways to respond to criticism of men
Followup-To: alt.feminism
Originator: lunde@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Reply-To: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 03:04:54 GMT

In article <ATAYLOR.92Sep2160216@gauss.nmsu.edu> 
 ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
><In article <1992Sep2.035857.3204@news.acns.nwu.edu> 
 Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde) writes:
><In article <ATAYLOR.92Sep1152443@gauss.nmsu.edu> 
 ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
><><In article <1992Sep1.060249.8502@news.acns.nwu.edu> 
 Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde) writes:
><><One of the question men face in dealing with feminism is how to
><><respond to criticism of men as a group.

><>	Somehow, I was struck by this paragraph...let's
><>	play a little word substitution....
><>        "One of the questions Jews face in dealing with Nazis is how
><>	to respond to criticism of Jews as a group".
><>	Educational, no?

><   Considering the relative power balance; I'm not sure if this is the 
><   correct analogy.  
>
>	*Which* relative power balance? The power balance between
>	Joe Sixpack and Andrea Dworkin? J. Sixpack hasn't nearly
>	as much power as A. Dworkin; I daresay he's never gotten
>	laws passed and/or changed, for example.
>
>	Lunde has produced one of the shibboliths of "feminism"; 
>	that all men are equally powerful.[...]

I didn't say that. (I'd say that men are on the average more powerful
than women, and most are more powerful than women of otherwise equal
social status.)  Your original analogy is with a situation where
both the average sign of the inequality was wrong *and* the situation
was more strongly polarized. Nearly every Nazi in Nazi Germany had power
over nearly every Jew.

Andrea Dworkin does not represent a political group that seems likely
to come to power either through election or seizure of power. It seems
to me that much of her ability to pass laws comes from a tainted alliance
with censors from the right wing -- I'm personally much more concerned
about their rise to power.  I don't know of any legislative bodies
ruled by a majority of self-proclaimed feminists of any sort.

>	I confess to having a preference for individual - based
>	analysis/thought over class-based. Perhaps I studied
>	too many Marxists in school a while back, and saw what
>	class-based thought often leads to.

I don't think much of Marxism (having read The Gulag Archipelago) and
I would agree that a rigid heirachy of oppressors/oppressed obscures
other important factors. (I long ago concluded that as a man there
was *nothing* I could do that would satisfy the most extreme lesbian-
separatist ideologies; though I have sympathy with separatism as a tactic.)

At the same time, feminism derives many of its insights from comparing
the status of men and women as groups; and I'm not ready to abandon that.

Perhaps your criticism might also be justified with respect to the
form of "radical feminism" which tries to show all other forms of
oppression derive from "sexism" (a group broader than Andrea D.); however
I have seen this stance repeatedly flounder in practical politics
because it discourages alliances with other oppressed groups -- 
I think this is one reason this idea is less current today.

><When feminists goon squads start rounding up men
><and putting them in concentration camps, I will conceed you are on target.
>
>	In the event that happens (and note that it's not nearly
>	as droll a joke as in, say, 1976) I doubt Lunde will
>	be posting to Internet at all.....more likely he'll
>	be re-reading the "Thoughts of Chairperson Dworkin" 
>	and engaging in self-criticism...

Well, I will have a ten year head start;).  However, I think it equally
likely I might be re-reading "Thoughts of Reverend Robertson" and
the King James Bible.

>[...]
>	Ok, my mistake. I'll rewrite it:
>
>	"One of the questions small farmers face in dealing 
>	 with Bolsheviks is how to respond to criticisms of
>	 'kulaks' as a group".
>
>	The analogy is much better. Indeed, a comparison
>	the writings of Lenin after the 1905 revolt and 
>	Dworkin or MacKinnon might be a useful exercise....

Well they both are sort of Vangauard of the X; where X is a group that
may not support them and both have questionable allies; but I don't
see them as having the same degree of influence.

>
> (...something deleted...;)
Was that better...?
>
><><I sometimes wonder if we should number our responses to save bandwidth ;)
><>	On an ALT group? 
><We could call it the Frequently Questioned Answers List...
>
>	I have the suspicion that Lunde is leading up to 
>	the old joke about comedians who know every joke
>	in the world......
>
>	"Number 137...."
>	Get it?
>
>	Oh, well, some days one just cannot tell a joke well.
>
Oh! the inverse of the Fine Structure Constant! Haa Ha Ha!

A fine man's joke, (or perhaps a Feynman's joke) ;)

"42..."

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