Judy / Mike I was, indeed, being facetious, as is perhaps too often my wont. Feminism, like all other -isms posesses refreshing fonts of serene wisdom, from Mary W, through Simone dB, to Bell/Gloria H/W, and Linda K. Each -ism, once practically employed results in undoubted advancement of the human condition. Each -ism, once practically employed results in the shifting of oppression from one sub-class to another. A draught of this sacred water is stored in crystalline vials enshrined in shadow. Those who first drink from the wisdom often secretly piss into the vessel to replenish the store and continue to serve it to their devotees, ignoring the essence of the message, wilfully substituting their own vulgar prejudice for the relative purity of the original message. I am, most emphatically not speaking of Rukeyser in this case. The result of this tainted swig ensures, nominally, that women may pursue equality within a dysfunctional system, yet the system still rests in dysfunction. Women should, of course, be free to pursue this dysfunction, but each of us must realise that genuine personal liberty arises only from a self-actualisation that surmounts and surpasses every -ism. The horrific results of the second-wave are the most imperfect of feminism's best ideals. The cry was, "Equality For (wealthy, educated, white, able-bodied) Women!" Thank every false deity for Bell Hooks. Furthermore, men as a whole were recreated, reincarnated as demons. Dad became a dirty, deadbeat word. Children remain raped of the right to pursue a relationship with an alternate parent. Clearly women are equally as valuable as men. They are also equally as immature, selfish, and destructive as men. Equal rights -- equal responsibility. Rukeyser, in order to communicate her intent, was forced to play the game. By appeasing the ignorant activists of the masses, she struggled to maintain her ideals. She was forced to sacrifice much of what might have been accomplished in order to achieve what could be realised. hoping the third-wave can convince the masses to strive for genuine, respectful appreciation of the thinking individual, d. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Geary" To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Rough winds do shake Muriel Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 06:16:50 -0500 DW: > >In this case, Rukeyser is far too busy playing the game of early 20th C. >> Feminism, which is as misguided as any other wonderfully totalitarian >> approach to systematic thought JE: > Care to clarify? Thank you, Judy. I'm not familiar at all with Muriel Rukeyser's poetry, but I've known of and long had a saintly vision of her as a spit-in-the-face-of-sexist-fascism liberal activist, somewhat along the lines of St. Dorothy Day. So I was surprised to see feminism equated with totalitarianism by David, but I thought I'd wait a while, read more of his posts to see if he was being sardonic or what -- perhaps we just don't know how to read him yet. But I think now that your approach is the better one: clarification, please. Mike Geary Memphis ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html -- See Exclusive Video: 10th Annual Young Hollywood Awards http://www.hollywoodlife.net/younghollywoodawards2008/