Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 01:21:04 -0500
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <Furuhashi.1-AT-osu.edu>
Subject: Re:  M-TH: Re: Sex.lib & male supremacy


Malgosia in reply to Chas:
>Dear C.B.,
>
>"A rebours" means in reverse, in negative.
>
>Here's what I mean.  You say:
>
>> Maybe I'm overstating it. How about just don't hate women in general.
>> Is that clear exactly what I am proposing they shouldn't hate ?
>
>> Then take it another step, respect what you used to hate, male
>> chauvinist ? Then you will be a man , not a pig (just kidding).
>
>(I hear you when you say "just kidding", so take what I say with a grain
>of salt.)
>
>So let's say someone hates women in general.  Crudely speaking, this means
>they stereotype women as having certain hateful qualities.  _Crudely_
>speaking.
>
>The steps you're proposing is that first they should stop hating these
>qualities, and then they should start respecting what they used to hate.
>In other words, the stereotyping does not go away, only the attitude changes
>from "hate" to "respect".
>
>Now let's imagine that I do not like the stereotype which the hater has
>imposed
>on me.  As long as I am being hated for it, it is at least legitimate that
>I rebel against it.  But now, instead, I begin to be "respected" for the same
>(supposed) qualities.  _Now_ if I object to the imputation of these qualities
>I can be told "What is your problem?  I _respect_ you for these qualities.
>Surely you can have no objection to _that_."
>
>Again, this is ridiculously crude, but maybe it will help you see (part of)
>my point.
>
>Do you really think that "women as a group" have some definable qualities?

Maybe Mal's reply to Chas also serves as one explanation of why I am
meta-ethical and don't think much of moral arguments.

That said, Malgosia, do you think that misogynists hate "specific
qualities" of women as a group? Or are you saying that's the way C.B.
thinks misogyny works?

IMO, misogyny is hatred of the female sex, period, not a hatred of
particular qualities--whatever they are--that women are thought to possess.
Misogynists hate women *because we are women*, circular + tautological it
may seem.

>> I know that technology now projects the possibility of a >> test-tube pregnancy norm, but I am not ready to throw out, what is it, the >> 2 billion year old  method of sexual reproduction for a synthetic method >> developed in the last ten years by humans. So I am conservative about >> keeping sexual reproduction for a while. So we need to get rid of the male >> chauvinism that represses sex.
>
>Surely this cannot be your motivation.  Humans have reproduced successfully
>for centuries in spite of male chauvinism, and here we are to testify to it.
>I see no reason we couldn't continue this success without any effort to
>eradicate male chauvinism.

Somehow Chas above reminds me of Mark Jones. Makes me wonder why some men
are repelled by the idea of a 'synthetic method' superseding 'sexual
reproduction.'

Yoshie




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