File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1998/marxism-thaxis.9804, message 88

Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 17:21:10 -0500
Subject: Re: M-TH: Self-Emancipation of Women or Hetero-chauvinism?

     I have communicated with other real women besides
    you and other real marxist women beside you. The
     agenda I have written down is from listening to them.
      You may know more than them, but I am not
     convinced of it.
        There is nothing anti-woman about saying women
      and men have some human nature still imbedded in
      their human culture.
         To attribute to me crypto- male supremacy in
       espousing feminism , because I don't agree with
       your theory of sexuality, is off. Why should I drop
       everything I have heard or observed of other
       women because I meet someone with a different
      point of view ?  I have presented these ideas to
      other women and other marxist women. They have
       not considered it as reactionary as you seem to.
           The substance of your arguments has not
   persuaded me. I have responded in detail as to
   why they have not
       It is not fruitful to heap insults on me. Heap logic on
      I apologize for pissing you off so much, but I
   am not yielding to groundless, and by now
, insulting accusations. I know
damn well  that I am not a male chauvinist and that
  there is nothing inherent in the postion that I have
   espoused in this debate that is explicitly or implicitly
   male chauvinist. In fact , it reveals men as
 more fundamentally dependent
  upon women, more in need of
 women than the average man
admits, as in the spirit of the quote from Marx.
     Obviously, our communication is ruined. But I
     am not going to tell you you have persuaded me
     when you have not.
      I am getting tired of arguing on this.
      Aren't we starting to
    get repetitious ? Frankly, some of the level of
     the disagreement seems to me as just the
     energy that pumps up in an argument.
     At any rate, unless you say otherwise, I
    propose we wind this down. Or you can continue,
     but I am going to wind down my replies.

                       with apologies for offenses,


>>> Yoshie Furuhashi <> 04/01 3:11 PM >>>
Malgosia in reply to Charles:
>>     Your views are very different on procreation and sexuality
>>      from those of most of the women I know or communicate
>>      with, and there are hundreds of them
>>      I don't accept your PATRONIZING attitude
>>       that you know more than they do .
>I thought it was a given that the people on this list have views that
>are very different from the views of most of the people around us.  Are most
>of the women you know Marxists?  In addition, adopting the attitude that
>one knows more than "they" do seems to me part and parcel of Marxist
>at least what I see of it.  Why is all this suddenly a bone to pick?

Obviously, that's because what Charles wants to do is not to assist the
self-emancipation of women but to define the agenda of women's emancipation
according to his views of 'nature,' 'reproduction,' 'sexuality,' etc. A
real woman--especially a real marxist woman--who contradicts his visions is
very inconvenient.


     --- from list ---

     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005