Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1996 04:37:09 -0600 (CST)
From: Chegitz Guevara <mluziett-AT-shrike.depaul.edu>
Subject: M-I: Re: "Human Needs"


On Thu, 21 Nov 1996 detcom-AT-sprynet.com wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Nov 1996, Chegitz Guevara <mluziett-AT-shrike.depaul.edu> wrote:
> 
> >You are just SO chivalrous, saving the world's women from the sexual
> >desires of men (saving them for who, one may ask). Has it ever occurred to
> >you that maybe women like, enjoy, and demand sex? In my experience, women
> >want sex more than men do. I have the bruises to prove it.
> 
> Jay:
> On a conference call last night with some other political activists,
> (after we discussed local affairs) I related some of this discussion and
> read excerpts from the posts, when I related this particular paragraph
> my comrades (disgusted) wouldn't let me go on.  I was advised not to
> even bother wasting my time responding, and if I did, to "tell you that
> there is a group of angry women in Detroit that wants to kick your ass
> and that you should quit playing out your perverted fantasies on the
> internet (citing bruises to 'prove' it) in the name of marxism." 
> 
> I thought this also to be a correct proletarian attitude though we
> did have a discussion about making threats on the internet.  

You miss the point. I was mocking you. Your whole attitude that you have
shown in your writing is that women need to be protected from sex. I
disagree. Most of the women I know, disagree. Even lesbians *need* sex,
just with women, and not with men. In any event, sex stimulates certain
physiological changes within a person's body that enable them to relax and
rejuvenate themselves. Without sex, people turn into big balls of nerves. 

I'm not too terribly worried about a group of women in Detroit, unless
they own cars, and want to make a road trip to Chicago to kick ass for the
revolution. In that case, you should be warned, I have a baseball bat and
a really nice set of knives (not that I'd actually ever use either on a
human being). Of course, I must point out the obvious difference between
us: I want people to enjoy their bodies, you are threatening (not
seriously) bodily harm. For any FBI types, I do not take this threat
seriously and I am not concerned about my safety. Jeez Jay, just hand them
an assault charge on a silver platter, why don't you?

What part was the perverted fantasy, the part about women wanting sex more
than men do, or the part about my having bruises? A modecum of brain power
would yield the point that I have bruises because I DON'T want it as much
as a particular woman, and she hurts me when I deny her. This is not my
idea of a fantasy, however perverted it may be. 

> Marc:
> >The Proletarian Attitude(tm). What proletarians are you talking about?
> >Most of the ones I know are *VERY* interested in sex.
> 
> Yeah?  What is your point?  It seems the point you want to make is
> that making sexual activity your primary concern is more correct and
> proletarian than putting the proletarian revolution first.  That 
> self-centered concern about your pleasure is more important than 
> putting the whole world first.  Frankly your point is not correct,
> if I'm interpreting you right.  

Excuse me comrade, at what point did I ever say that sex was more
important than making the revolution? What I said was, that it plays a
very important part of the lives of the comrades I know. There is a world
of difference. Politics should come first, but it shouldn't block out what
little human parts we have left to us. Sex, a good beer or wine, playing
with a cat, smelling a rose, these are all things that are absolutley
necessary to us, if we are to remain sane enough to be able to build a
truely human world. 

> Is your observation that the proletarians you know are *very* interested
> in sex an incorrect one?  Most probably not.  In a society where the
> division of labour becomes more accentuated, where the vast majority of
> people are deliberately deprived of creativity, where work has no other
> value than its explicit monetary one, sexuality becomes a means of
> escaping from society through self-centered sexual consumption, rather
> than the full expression of interpersonal relationships.

Life isn't that horrible. Well, maybe it is. However, before I was a
communist, I worked in a factory in a shitty job, which I hated. However,
there was something about the job that gave me a satisfaction that I
didn't understand, and that was being able to point to things that I
worked on, and say, "I made that." For many proletarians, this still
exists. I think it is a major factor in the reason that capitalism still
exists. 

Second, sex isn't all that sacred. When you get down to it, it is little
more than rubbing body parts, not necessarily genitalia, and not
necessarily with genitalia. As one person told me, it's cheap
entertainment. A pack of condoms is less expensive than a Blackbuster
movie. A full human relationship can include sex, but it doesn't have to,
and in some instances, is necessarily precluded.

I don't accept the ruling class' designation as sex only for committed
opposite sex relationships. I think sex is for any number of consenting
adults to engage in how they wish. In a truely humane society, certain
relations would disappear, such as consenting sexual relations for money,
but I wouldn't be in favor of punishing the prostitute as happened in some
so-called socialist regimes. 

> This can be only an illusionary escape in which the fugitive merely
> rediscovers all society's detestable features.  The relationship between
> oppressed and oppressor, market value, selfishness, consumption for
> consumption's sake--are all there in another form.  But illusion though
> it may be, nevertheless it's an important vehicle by the means of which
> the ruling class can impose it's own ethics and its vulgar materialism
> on the people in the guise of the true meaning of life.

An illusory temporary escape is better than no escape. Everyone needs a
vacation from this world. "All work and no play makes Jack grim, and
nobody wants to be grim," said a former Communist Party leader, who got
into some trouble for partying to much. He was a former Cotton Club
dancer, you may knoww who I'm talking about, I don't remember his name.

> Marc:
> >I'm a big wheeler now?
> 
> Jay:
> Actually I wasn't referring to you, but if the shoe fits and you want to
> be included, go right ahead.  You know what a big wheel is don't you? 
> It's a sort of tricycle that small children zip around on, it has a big
> wheel in front and makes a big roaring noise. 

Yes, mine was stolen, in 1972, when I was five years old by a girl who
made me take my clothes off to get it back. Then she threw them in a tree,
but I got my Big Wheel back. Course, I had to ride it home naked. This is
a true story. 

> Jay:
> >> Sex and Beer is not any big concern among the proletarian revolutionary
> >> youth that I am familiar with.
> >
> Marc:
> >That's because you people are repressed. I want to be free.
> 
> Jay:
> Somehow I don't think your penis is going to play much of a role in the
> emancipation of humanity. 

No, probably not. But imagine the bragging rights if it did. Seriously
though (which is your problem, you don't know when to lighten up), I meant
you don't know when to take a load off. Even Lenin took vacations. We
aren't beating off (ugh) the Guomindong here, we can afford to relax
occasionally, in order to rejuvenate ourselves to continue the struggle. 
Or we could burn ourslves out, and be totally useless in the coming (ugh
again) struggles. 

> >
> Jay:
> >> Hang in there Anthony.  You got contributions to make.
> >
> Marc:
> >Get laid Tony. You too Jay.
> 
> Jay:  Look, if it's flames people want, I can dish them out with great
> relish and with the finest proletarian creativity.  I thought things
> were to be different on this list.  As it's turning out, the Marxism
> General list is doing better than this one.  We have had no problem with
> too-copious posts from anybody, all the nuts are on this hi-tone
> "prefered" list, and jerks like "the chegitz" are over here.

While I am a jerk, you have no sense of humor. Nor do you appear to
understand the concept of necessary recreation. Recreation and play,
including sex, alcohol and music, is *NOT* the decadent past time of a
decaying hedonistic class.  It is an absolutley vital need for human
beings to express and fullfill themselves this way, in order to repair
themselves physically and emotionally. Fantasizing about what a wonderful
world it will be after the revoluion only gets me so far. I suspect that
it isn't much of a vacation for most people either.

> On the general list there has been good discussion of the situation in
> Africa and in Zaire.  The only mention of plutonium has been when a
> member of the international list, bored with your proper discussions,
> tried without success to incite Comrade Rolf.  Stupid remarks about Mao
> and Stalin have all been on this list.  M-G is beginning to look more
> and more like the original vision of M-I.  If things get too shitty
> here, I invite serious folk to try M-G and make a contribution there. 
>
> -Jay Miles / Detroit

I suspect that one of the stupid remarks about Mao was my metioning his
1st wife pummeling him with a flashlight for visiting a female comrade
during the Long March. It's recorded in the biography of Agnes Smedly, who
was with Mao's detatchment, and was herself attacked by Mrs. Mao, for
being an "imperialist" when she tried to stop her from beating Mao. 

Jay, take a vacation. And I apologize for being insulting last time.

Marc, "the Chegitz," Luzietti
personal homepage: http://shrike.depaul.edu/~mluziett
political homepage: http://shrike.depaul.edu/~mluziett/chegitz.html

"What is robbing a bank, compared with founding a bank?" -- Brecht



     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---