home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!think.com!ames!agate!agate!muffy
- From: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy)
- Newsgroups: soc.bi
- Subject: Re: Understanding
- Date: 22 Dec 92 11:10:50
- Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
- Lines: 54
- Message-ID: <MUFFY.92Dec22111050@remarque.berkeley.edu>
- References: <1992Dec20.004841.28248@dsg.cs.tcd.ie>
- <1992Dec20.192301.1250@infodev.cam.ac.uk>
- <1992Dec21.152115.510@dsg.cs.tcd.ie>
- <1992Dec22.141030.16600@thelema.uucp>
- <92357.110706SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
- In-reply-to: Graydon's message of Tue, 22 Dec 1992 11:06:44 EST
-
- In article <92357.110706SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
- >If I may follow up Stella's nifty posting with a little tiny instance of
- >tactical advice; the word 'feminist' tends to make most men defensive.
- >Why this should be so is a long essay, but - talk about fairness and
- >pain - most folks is for fairness and against pain - rather than 'feminism',
- >if you don't want the guy to turtle.
-
- While I'm at it, why don't I stop using "bisexual," as well, since that
- bothers many people (I know someone who just came out to her brother as
- bi: he asked her to stay away from his children)? Instead, I can just
- talk about letting him watch me and another woman fool around, prior to
- both concentrating on him. That's unlikely to scare him off.
-
- I would rather try to change people's negative (and, IMO, incorrect)
- views of feminism than to disassociate myself with what I consider to be
- an important and valuable philosophy.
-
- >There's a certain element of the male experience of feminist philosphy
- >that goes 'this is going to tell me I'm deficent in painful detail - ack!';
- >I, for one, am very resitant to being told I'm any more deficent than
- >the next person over.
-
- This came up in a conversation I had with a woman the other night. It
- seemed to both of us that men take statements about "men" a lot more
- personally than women take statements about "women." That is (grossly
- generalizing here), if you say "all men are scum," a man is likely to
- respond "why are you saying I'm scum." If you say "women can't do
- math," a woman is likely to say "what a ridiculous stereotype." Given
- that this is the case (and it could certainly be argued that it is
- not...*smile*), it seems to me that what might be going on is that men
- have a stronger identification with "being male," because that is
- something to be proud of in our society. More than that, some men base
- their entire self-worth on "being a man." In this case, an attack on
- "men" (being the societal standard for being male) *is* more of a
- personal attack. It would be pretty silly for women to base their
- self-image on "being female," since society's view of women is rather
- negative. Of course, there *are* female supremacists who do this, but
- there are relatively few of them.
-
- To bring this back to bi-relevance: note the parallel between this and
- sexuality issues. How many of us take comments about bisexuals as
- personal attacks, as opposed to regarding the speaker as misled, stupid,
- clueless, etc.?
-
- (Note that all of this is a recent theory; I'd be happy to hear problems
- with it, or other ideas.)
-
- Muffy
- --
-
- Muffy Barkocy | ~Can you tell me how much bleeding/it
- muffy@mica.berkeley.edu | takes to fill a word with meaning and/
- "amorous inclinations"? Aha! I'm | how much how much death it takes/to give
- not "not straight," I'm *inclined*.| a slogan breath?~ - Bruce Cockburn
-