T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
619.1 | there's only one Ted Koppel | CIRCUS::KOLLING | Karen, Sweetie, Holly; in Calif. | Thu Dec 24 1987 14:29 | 13 |
| It certainly has crossed my mind on more than one occasion that
it's really too bad I'm straight. None of my women friends have
the bent brains that even some of the otherwise nicest men have.
Has anyone else had the chilling experience of knowing a man for
years, thinking he's unbiased, and then one day having him say
something incredibly sexist, and he doesn't even realize it is,
even when you talk about it?
I am also constantly amazed at how women stay with men who do real
numbers on them. Throw the bum out, I always want to say. Think
how much happier you'll be without all that aggravation.
|
619.2 | response to 619.1 | NECVAX::VEILLEUX | | Thu Dec 24 1987 15:06 | 5 |
| re:619.1
Sometimes it is easier to say "throw the bum out" that actually
doing it. I agree that we do put up with alot and can not tell you
why because I am doing the same thing!!
|
619.3 | some thoughts | MEWVAX::AUGUSTINE | What do humanitarians eat? | Thu Dec 24 1987 15:42 | 54 |
| re .0:
Justine, Thanks for the present.
The women's movement seems so amorphous that it's hard to say if
there's a split. I assume that it's like any other human thing:
some people are accepting of differences and others aren't. If
the women's movement is split across some lines, I suspect that
the real reason is not one of the "excuses" that you listed.
I have different reactions to piggish men, depending on my mood, my
relationship to them, and the worthwhileness of talking to them.
Sometimes I just chuckle to myself "thank goodness I don't have to live
with him". But when I encounter a piggish man, it doesn't make me feel
like I have to get away from ALL men. on the other hand, I do enjoy
womanspace.
I don't know if it's that tough to be a "straight feminist". That's
who I am right now. and right now, i'm saving my struggling energy
for other parts of my life.
it's not a matter of enduring "sexist 'attitudes' and behavior" just
while "looking" for the right man. i endure it every day just by going
shopping, coming to work, and talking to people at the lunchtable.
perhaps you're asking what other strategies women use to make their
life seem saner.
as for finding a "good guy", can't we expand your question and ask
about finding a "good mate"? a relationship happens gradually. i
don't open myself up for "enduring" crap all at once, and i expect
that you don't either. in other words, there are many types of
behaviors that i would find unacceptable in a mate. sexism directed
at me is only one example.
admittedly, when i first met robert, he wasn't as much of a feminist as
he now seems to be. but he did have tremendous respect for me. (and
that was most important to me). i didn't set out to change him, but
i have noticed that as we've discussed women's issues, his attitude has
slowly migrated towards mine. but then again, i don't expect to
agree with my mate about everything, even on issues that are important
to me.
re .1:
i don't think the gender of one's mate guarantees the treatment
one will receive. one friend had violent women lovers and
gentle men lovers. her experience, however, is probably an exception
to the rule.
Back to justine, you imply that all lesbians are feminists. Is this
the case?
Liz
|
619.4 | Does age make a difference? | BUFFER::LEEDBERG | Toto and moi are On the Road again. | Sat Dec 26 1987 00:12 | 17 |
|
I find it difficult being around "Feminist" who are not woman centered.
There seems to be a growing process that takes place with female
"Feminst" that involves acceptance of Lesbians, then a kind of awe
of the fact that these women don't need men to feel fulfilled.
I think that a number of woman who are not Lesbians but who are
very woman centered in their lives are the ones that face a more
difficult time as a feminist.
Just my thoughts for now.
_peggy
(-)
| And she brought forth a bright light.
|
619.5 | people not sexual identity | YAZOO::B_REINKE | where the sidewalk ends | Sat Dec 26 1987 21:45 | 55 |
| There are times when I find that people of both sexes dene
grate women's issues as being 'lesbian' and use it as a 'put
down'. For example...I am very proud to have gone to the first
college for women founded in the United States..Mount Holyoke.
My Alma Mater has proudly continued to remain a womans college...
(partiallly because even today, a higher percent of women from
women only colleges go on to higher degrees and to advanced
positions in industry etc...) but they are now suffering in
enrollment...because young women think that it must be a lesbian
school...
so why must a women's only college be only for women who are not
attracted to men? and why must being a lesbian be a perjoritive?
it seems to me that this is a bit of a double bind according
to the definitions of the world outside...
I've been a feminist since the fall of 1962 when I first discovered
that I was free to express my self intellectually without any male
put downs...when I entered my fall classes at MHC....it was a totally
liberating experience!
and it pains me that young women today do not have the chances that
my generation had to learn to grow and be independant intellectually.
Do you know that even today...it is still the women from women's
colleges who speak out in class in grad school...on the majority?
My son's women classmates tho, are very feminist and agressive...
they won't let the expression freshman be used...they are all
'frosh'...and when I refered to him dating a 'girl' he said
he would 'report me to womannotes' for my sexist comments...:-)
So if the freshpersons at Wesleyan are any example, maybe we don't
need the Mt Holyokes and equivalents any more...but I would hate
to give them up ...just in case.
But - to return to the oringinal subject - I think that it is
important for straight women not to let 'lesbian' be used as
a weapon against them...but rather to embrace our lesbian sisters
as our friends and as people who share with us common problems
and common goals.
and I would also ask my lesbian friends to understand, as I think
most of those who write here do, that I and other women like me
will always find that men are more important in our life than they
are to our lesbian sisters, and to understand that we can be supportive
of both without betraying one group or the other. There are far
more dimensions to people than their sexual orientation...*for
heavens sake* ! :-)
Bonnie
|
619.6 | Cultural Differences? | PSYCHE::SULLIVAN | U.S. out of North America | Mon Dec 28 1987 10:31 | 28 |
|
Liz, I didn't mean to imply that all lesbians are feminist or that
sexisim is the only behavior that any of us wishes to avoid in a
partner. I was trying to get at some of the differences in our
experiences, however. I think the difference in sexual
orientation is only part of it; I feel that I have a different
cultural experience from my non-lesbian sisters. Some of that
gets expressed in terms of social status, for example, the right
to culturally sanctioned marriage, the right to adopt children,
but I suspect that there are many less tangible differences that
exist because a lesbian feminist's world is likely to be more
woman-centered than a non-lebian feminist's world. (Is that a
valid assumption?)
Bonnie, toward the end of your reply (.5), I felt you really got
at some of the conflict that exists between lesbians and non-lesbians.
(forgive the awkward language, but I'm trying to avoid the words,
"straight" and "gay".) Do non-lesbian feminists ever feel the need
to defend their devotion to the cause? I worry about this. I often
find non-lesbian friends of mine almost apologizing for sleeping
with men. It always makes me sad to see an oppressed group turning
around and harshly judging another group. Do we (lesbians and
non-lesbians) do that to each other? Can we bridge that gap?
In sisterhood,
Justine
|
619.7 | Culture - Education | CSC32::JOHNS | Yes, I *am* pregnant :-) | Mon Dec 28 1987 14:06 | 17 |
| For us, it seems that the main thing that brings us together with
folks or separates us is education. We get along much better with
straight, educated friends then with lesbian (or gay male) non-educated
friends. Unfortunately, this means that since other educated lesbians
are often hard to find (hidden away in their closets) that when
we DO want to get together with people who have suffered the same
types of discrimination then we cannot find them and we end up talking
with our straight friends who often can only barely understand.
Still, we have found that our straight friends limit us less also,
since they themselves have not been taught "not to" (not to get
married, not to have children, not to hold hands, etc). When we
had our wedding ceremony last year, it was our straight friends
who helped us the most, threw us a shower, decorated, kept us sane.
:-) Now if we could only get more gay friends like our straight
friends...
Carol
|
619.8 | Maybe we need a Big Sister Program? | PSYCHE::SULLIVAN | U.S. out of North America | Mon Dec 28 1987 16:05 | 27 |
| Hi, Carol!
I'm glad you and Shellie have Non-Gay-and-Lesbian (non-GL)
friends that are supportive, but I think it's sad that you feel
less connected to other lesbians? Is that a result of the education
issue that you mentioned, or is the lesbian community less visible
there than it is on the Coast(s)? Or do you think it's because the
lesbians you know are not supportive of your decision to have a baby?
I guess I'd like to think that lesbians are especially tolerant and
supportive of individual choice not because we're morally superior but
because we've experienced such a lack of support around our life choices?
Maybe I've just been exceptionally lucky; I have lots of women friends
(both lesbian and non-lesbian) with whom I have lots of different
things in common. When I first came out, my (then) lover and I were
pretty isolated from the community. Most of our friends were
straight, and we felt we had very little in common with other
lesbians. At some point it dawned on me that the only place I ever
met any other lesbians was in bars: not the best environment for
striking up a serious conversation. Getting involved in professional
and political groups has been a big help in meeting people with
similar interests, and I usually find that many (though not all)
of the people with whom I get along well are lesbian and gay.
Justine
Justine
|
619.9 | | MEWVAX::AUGUSTINE | What do humanitarians eat? | Mon Dec 28 1987 19:41 | 11 |
| Justine,
I'm really not _trying_ to be dense. are you asking if n.l. women feel
that they must compromise on feminism more often? as for your question
to bonnie, i haven't yet felt a need to "defend my devotion to the
cause", but i have worried about intruding in space that i don't
"rightfully" belong in. and maybe it comes out sounding the same. when
i get past my own reserve, i don't feel much of a gap, but it sounds
like you might. could you write a bit more about it?
Liz
|
619.10 | Education | CSC32::JOHNS | Yes, I *am* pregnant :-) | Tue Dec 29 1987 13:37 | 19 |
| Justine, it IS the education issue. You had asked about culture,
and we have found that education is more important to us than
sexuality.
The reason that we don't have many lesbians to choose from, is because
this city has a "small-town" atmosphere, and there are not many
groups available. People meet through mutual friends, and that
takes time. Most of the educated lesbians I have met or heard of
around here are in education, nursing, or the military. Unfortunately,
this also means that they tend to be more closeted, hence harder
to meet. We are considered a threat to them, since we are not as
closeted as they are.
Incidentally, I am truly sorry that some non-gay feminists might
feel like they need to defend themselves. I, for one, couldn't
care less who they live with (or would like to live with). It is
far more important that we work together for equality.
Carol
|
619.11 | For one of our sisters | PSYCHE::SULLIVAN | U.S. out of North America | Wed Dec 30 1987 10:59 | 39 |
|
This reply is from a member of our community who wishes to
remain anonymous.
===========================================================
Yes, there does seem to be a split between the lesbian feminists
and the straight feminists. I have a particularly tough time with
this since as a bisexual woman I am in both communities, yet in
neither.
The word lesbian has a pejorative meaning to the straight women.
There seems to be a fear that they may be mistaken for a lesbian.
Many prefer not to associate with known lesbians - they seem to
think that loving another woman is somehow strange.
The lesbians tend to be more woman-centered, and, I believe, more
feminist. They have discovered that you can be happy and fulfilled
without any serious interaction with men. Many don't seem to
understand women that do want to share their lives with men. This
is true to a high enough degree, that although I am on the lesbian
side of bi, I have a hard time with much of the lesbian community.
This often makes me very alone. Who do I talk to when my female
lover leaves me for a man? No one understands or cares to understand
this feeling.
I think this is sad. I have a lot in common with both sides of
the women's issue. I see some need to have separate groups as there
are some issues that effect one group and not the other. I think
both groups should make an effort to be more understanding and
accepting of the other group. We are all fighting for many of the
same issues - we should work together.
She-who-signs-herself-Gina
|
619.12 | one foot on the soap box | WITNES::DOUGHERTY | DOUGHERTY | Wed Dec 30 1987 17:35 | 11 |
| I think the major area of disagreement in the women's movement is
strategy - not class, race, or sexuality. i.e. Do we go with a radical
(demonstrations, march on washington, boycotts, etc.) or
conservative (lobbying, working with "the system", etc) strategy?
This is not, however, to say conflict does not arise
within the movement due to class, race, sexuality, and educational issues.
A feminist is a feminist (period).
- Mary
|
619.13 | | CADSE::GLIDEWELL | Peel me a grape, Tarzan | Tue Jan 05 1988 00:45 | 20 |
| Note 619.11 anonymous
> The word lesbian has a pejorative meaning to the straight women.
> ... Many prefer not to associate with known lesbians - they seem
> to think that loving another woman is somehow strange.
I think the feelings ascribed to the straight woman may be true of
women who have lived in limited circles. I felt that way at 17, but after
knowing ... ummmm ... 40 to 50 women who are lesbians, those feelings have
just gone away -- like my childhood fear of atheists.
Come to think about it, though, I may have met thousands of lesbians without
knowing it. When I describe a friend or acquaintance who is a lesbian to
another person, I never mention that my friend is a lesbian -- the fact
might somehow cause problems for her. Perhaps a lot of people do the same.
Oddly, at gatherings and parties I often find people I especially enjoyed
meeting were lesbian. Am I responding to the 'woman centeredness'
of their world view? Some of my friends have the same response, but we
don't why. Meigs
|
619.14 | Well hmmm | VIDEO::TEBAY | Natural phenomena invented to order | Tue Jan 05 1988 14:01 | 46 |
| I don't see a lesbian/straight fracture in the woman's movement.
However, I do see that lesbians are attacked in conjunction with
the women's movement and that lesbians are somehow made to be
the "bad part of the women's movement".
I try to think in non-labeling terms but I would define myself
as a straight feminist. Maybe straight is the wrong term too
as that implies rightness.
I have often been accused of being a lesbian by men. Part of this
comes because I am a very strong feminist who has worked in
mostly male enviornments for years. It is always used as a putdown
by men-never women, and always as a slur against my character when
they (men) cannot refute the logic of my arguements.
I count some lesbians among my friends but I think of them as
friends-all different individuals.
I profess I find it easier to talk with women period about some
things.
I have been sans man a long time now and am not even looking. I
guess it is not a priority for me. I do miss sometime the lack
of another adult human to communicate with on an intimate basis
as one tends not to overuse friends as you can a S/O when you
are having a bad time.
I must admit my cats could probably tell a lot if they could
talk. (Yep I talk to my cats!)
I don't think one should have to give reasons for their sexual
orientation anymore than they do for their favorite author,artist,
or whatever.
I am concerned though that the lesbians are being represented
as being either the "main content" or the "worst example" of
the feminist movement. That is both unfair to lesbians and to
"straight" women. (The more I write straight the more wrong that
sounds.)
Since homosexuality is to a large degree still tabu in our society
that is a good way to discredit the women's movement.
|
619.15 | small minds | 3D::CHABOT | Wanted: IASFM Aug 1979 & Mar 1980 | Wed Jan 06 1988 10:49 | 10 |
| This is a really ignorant question, but are there *any* non-feminist
lesbians?
By the way, I've seen both men and women call non-men-centered women
"lesbians". Lately I've seen it more as a dismissal than a slur:
'Oh, we can ignore her contribution, since she's a lesbian'. To
some people, labelling someone as a minority lets them out of the
mainstream (therefore they're invalid, or only entertaining at best).
GRRRRR. Just more homophobia.
|
619.16 | yep! | VINO::EVANS | | Wed Jan 06 1988 11:45 | 7 |
| Lisa, I have a very good friend who is a non-feminist lesbian.
If we hadn't been friends since high school, we wouldn't have very
much in common now. And needless to say, we don't talk "politics".
--DE
|
619.17 | Causes for Hope | PNEUMA::SULLIVAN | No State should foster hate | Mon Jan 25 1988 15:13 | 9 |
|
Yesterday at the protest in front of Cardinal Law's residence, I
was really glad to see women (and a few men) straight and gay...
working together to protest the Church's stance on abortion,
privacy, Aids education, and Lesbian and Gay rights. When I see
something like that, I feel hopeful again. If we can just get
more feminist women candidates elected....
Justine
|
619.18 | Still thinking about this issue | PNEUMA::SULLIVAN | Singing for our lives | Thu Apr 14 1988 17:54 | 80 |
|
This issue (of the Lesbian/non-Lesbian split) has come up
for me again recently as I've begun to form more friendships
with women who are feminist but not lesbian. A while ago when
I read Lisa Chabot's (wonderfully written) summary of the Bonnie
Mann W.I.T.C.H. lecture (one that I missed), I was struck by these
words: (Lisa's paraphrase, I think, but maybe a direct quotation
from Bonnie Mann) "A straight woman can be a feminist, but she
lives with an inherent contradiction, which is better or worse
depending upon the man she is involved with." (Note 735.22)
Although I have no firsthand experience of that kind of
contradiction, I find myself agreeing that it must be tough
to reject the patriarchy AND have a primary relationship with
a man. I've been talking with some women about this, and I
came back into this note, and reread the replies here, and
it seems that many (most) of the women who have written in
this note feel that there is no real split in the feminist
movement along the lines of sexual orientation, but some women
(especially women who are bisexual or who consider themselves
to be woman-oriented but not lesbian) have suggested that they
sometimes feel left out, like they're not included in the
"movement."
So these are some of the questions that I've begun to ask:
What do these feelings of exclusion that some women have
mean for all of us? It strikes me that in this file, for
example, a lot of the anger that women have expressed has
offended some of the men who read and write here. But
I have generally felt that many of us have decided that
(at least in this file) protecting men's feelings is not as
important as allowing women the opportunity to share whatever
they're feeling. I feel very good about that decision to put
women first.
But now I find myself wondering about the feelings of those
feminist women among us who love men or a man. What if our
words hurt them? Should they tell us? Do we need to do
anything to make it easier for them to tell us? And then
what do we do? I think that all women need to be free to
express their feelings - even (perhaps especially) angry
feelings. But I wonder/worry sometimes that women who are
involved with men begin to wonder where their experience fits.
I suspect that there is room for all of us, but I'm not
convinced that we always do a good enough job of telling
each other what's painful for us or of remembering that
within our collective experience there are individuals
whose pain and whose joy might be different from our own.
To me being a feminist means that I reject a large part of the
traditional structure. I reject much of what has been labelled
successful, or right, or powerful, or beautiful. Since men
have generally been responsible for defining the standards that
we're all supposed to use (for power, beauty, etc.), when I reject
those definitions and standards, it does mean that I reject
the male model of the world. And that political position often
gets reduced (and oversimplified) to "she hates men."
Now, I am pretty clear in my own mind that it is possible to hate
the male model and still care for some men. But if someone
misunderstands my anger and accuses me of being a "man-hater," I
can easily say, "so what?" It doesn't cost me very much if some
people think I hate men. It might annoy me, but it doesn't cause
any conflict with my sense of who I am. But is the cost (of expressing
anger at the male model) greater for women who do love men and who are
involved with men?
These are all open questions for me. I guess what I'm trying to find
out is: is there a problem, and is there anything we might do
differently to address it? I am proud of the work that radical
feminists and particularly radical, lesbian feminists are
doing in our movement, and I think it's important to recognize
how important these women are. However, to the extent that we
call this a "women's" movement, I need to be sure that we are
accessible to and respectful of all women.
Is anyone else out there thinking about these things?
Justine
|
619.19 | yes! Yes! YES! | VIA::RANDALL | back in the notes life again | Fri Apr 15 1988 10:08 | 65 |
| re: .18
Justine, what a beautiful note.
I think the answer to all your questions is yes -- and yes,
I know some of them were either/or questions or questions with
mutally exclusive answers.
I think the feminist movement is pretty badly split along a line
of sexual orientation, with the extremes of radical lesbianism and
"ignore the dykes and they'll go away" heterosexuality dominating
too much of our thoughts while most of us are in fact somewhere in
the middle feeling left out.
I have at times been told that the reason I'm in the middle
is that I don't have the nerve to make a real choice, that
I can either reject all men and accept women, or I'm not really
a feminist, I'm still a pawn of the man who owns me.
Pardon my French, but that's so much bullshit.
I'm heterosexual, that's all -- and that's not a political
statement, it's a biological reality. I could no doubt manage to
build a stable, emotionally rewarding and psychologically
satisfying relationship with another woman, but I wouldn't be
sexually satisfied in that relationship, no matter how good it was
otherwise, any more or less than a lesbian whose only relationship
was with a man would feel fully satisfied.
One thing that makes the contradiction less is that there are a
lot of men out there right now who very quietly don't buy into the
patriarchy, men busy building their own lives, loving their sons
and daughters, doing honest work, sharing the emotional burdens of
the family with their wives while their wives share the financial
load that was traditionally all the man's. There are still a lot
of chauvinist pigs out there -- but they aren't the whole story.
So I don't think I would define my life as an inherent
contradiction. I don't think it's necessary to define all men as
evil and all sex with men as bad (I've seen radical feminist stuff
that says this in so many words) in order to reject the
patriarchy. And only if you define any contact with men as
contact with the enemy is living with a man an inherent
contradition.
But I wouldn't deny that my life has a difficulty that's not
present in the life of a lesbian feminist. The lesbian is
free to explore the full dimensions of what it means to be
a woman (and some of the notes explaining the insights these
women have gathered have been the most valuable for me), while
I, without that foundation, am trying to change society by
making my own family something different in the midst of the
patriarchy.
Perhaps I would have been better off cutting off men for a time so
I could explore women before going back to men, but I don't think
so. I think I would only feel like I was denying a key part of my
sexuality, closeting myself in reverse.
But I do know that women who are dedicated to and defined by only
women have a great deal to teach me about myself, and I only wish
it were easier to get together to share these beliefs, insights,
understandings, and warmth.
--bonnie
|