Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 09:47:56 -0600
Subject:  Re: Fem what? -Reply


>>>> <LeoCasey-AT-aol.com>  4/9/96, 09:04pm >>>
>... it sounds an awful lot like (if I may be forgiven an analogy
>which can not be empirically tested) the much maligned lit crit
>papers on the feminine phallus.

>>> Doug Henwood <dhenwood-AT-panix.com>  4/10/96, 08:24am >>>
Surely this is not a reference to Roland Barthes' analysis of the
female penchant for knitting, which he ascribes to the woman's desire
to knit her pubic hair into a phallus?

Lisa:  That has got to be the silliest take-off on that very silly
Freud that I have ever seen.  Freud speculated that the "female
penchant" for spinning, weaving and fiber arts in general was somehow
related to women's unconscious wish to weave pubic hair into a
_covering_ for the shameful lack of a penis.  Then he "joked" that if
this were taken as evidence for his own obsession ["idee fixe"] that
he would have no defence.  Indeed.

I think the clitoris has some advantages over the penis, one of which
is that it _never_ gets caught in zippers.  Of course the "thing"
that women "envy" is privilege and power that is conferred upon males
just because they are male.  But if we're going to talk seriously,
we'll have to distinguish between "penis" and "phallus".  It does
make a difference.  A big difference.

BTW, knitting and weaving are often adopted as "manly" pursuits
whenever they offer higher wages than other things that men are
doing.  Another example of a mechanism of culture change at work,
hmmm?




     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---