Sunday, November 18, 2012

An American Feminist Literary Canon - A Guest Post by Anna

American feminist writing is often not given its due alongside the writing of other social justice movements - writing by Martin Luther King and Rachel Carson, for example. I think it is important to look at feminist writing not only within the context of its time but as part of a movement no less grand and noble than the movements for other types of social justice, such as racial equality and environmentalism. Therefore, I have made this canon of American feminist writing, which I have taken from my larger "feminist literary canon" series. 

Judith Sargent Murray (1751–1820) was an early American advocate for women's rights, an essayist, playwright, poet, and letter writer. In her landmark essay "On the Equality of the Sexes," published in the Massachusetts Magazine in 1790, she claimed that women’s seeming inferiority to men was due to their lack of education, not any inherent defect. Alice Rossi's book The Feminist Papers starts with Murray's essay. The essay can be read in its entirety in English herehttp://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/murray/equality/equality.html

Sarah Margaret Fuller Ossoli, commonly known as Margaret Fuller (1810 – 1850) was an American journalist, critic, and women's rights advocate. Her book Woman in the Nineteenth Century, published in 1845, is considered the first major feminist work in the United States.
Some scholars have suggested Woman in the Nineteenth Century was the first major women's rights work since  Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman in 1792, beginning with a comparison between the two women made by Mary Ann Evans (pen name George Eliot) in her 1855 essay "Margaret Fuller and Mary Wollstonecraft.”  
A shorter version of the Woman in the Nineteenth Century had been published in 1843 in serial form for the Transcendentalist magazine The Dial, which Fuller edited; it was then called "The Great Lawsuit: Man 'versus' Men, Woman 'versus' Women." The book declared that marriage should be a union between two independent and self-sufficient individuals, rather than having the woman dependent on the man. Fuller thought that equality between men and women would enable them to share a divine and transcendental love.
Woman in the Nineteenth Century can be read in its entirety in English herehttp://transcendentalism.tamu.edu/authors/fuller/woman1.html

Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815 –1902) was a leader of the women’s suffrage movement in America, as well as an advocate for divorce reform, birth control, women's parental and custody rights, women’s property rights, and women’s employment and income rights. She was the main writer of the Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions, which was presented at the first American women's rights convention, held in 1848 in Seneca Falls, New York.  
It was based on the form of the Declaration of Independence, and caused much controversy, particularly with its support of women’s suffrage, which even many women’s rights supporters thought was too radical and would damage other causes such as women’s property rights. Furthermore, her controversial publishing of The Woman's Bible in 1898 (a feminist criticism of the Bible, written by herself and a “Revising Committee”) alienated many religious suffragists, although criticism of sexism in the Bible would become more popular in the 1970s, when much of Stanton’s writing was rediscovered. Stanton declared in The Woman's Bible that the Bible "in its teachings degrades Women from Genesis to Revelations." However she and the other contributors found some things to admire in the Bible, particularly some of the women in the Old Testament.  
The Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions can be read in its entirety in English here:  http://www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=4932 
The Woman's Bible can be read in its entirety in English herehttp://www.sacred-texts.com/wmn/wb/index.htm

Kate Chopin, born Katherine O'Flaherty (1850 –1904) was an American author of short stories and novels. She is considered by many to be a forerunner of feminist authors of the 20th century. 
Her short story "The Story of An Hour" (1894) is particularly remarkable in that it shows a woman made happy by her husband’s death due to the oppression of her marriage, a very daring statement for the time. The Awakening (1899) is also a story of a woman made unhappy by her marriage, which features frank (for its time) depictions of female sexual desire, even outside of marriage. Reviews ranged from condemnation to praise, though the public reaction was almost completely opposed. 
She never published another novel, and had difficulties even publishing short stories, but The Awakening is now considered a landmark of feminist literature. Furthermore, Chopin was recognized as one of the leading writers of her time within a decade of her death. The Story of An Hour can be read in its entirety in English herehttp://www.vcu.edu/engweb/webtexts/hour/
The Awakening can be read in its entirety in English herehttp://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/ChoAwak.html

Charlotte Perkins Gilman (July 3, 1860 – August 17, 1935) was a prominent American sociologist, writer, and lecturer for social reform. Her best remembered work today is her semi-autobiographical short story The Yellow Wallpaper (1892) which she wrote after a severe bout of postpartum psychosis. It concerns a woman who is confined to a room for three months for the sake of her health, and who becomes insane as a result; Gilman herself had endured the then-popular “rest cure” as a treatment for her post-partum psychosis, and felt she had come near to losing her own sanity. She sent Dr. S. Weir Mitchell, who had prescribed the rest cure for her, a copy of the story. She claimed he had changed his methods as a result of this, but in fact (possibly unknown to her) he had not.  
Charlotte Perkins Gilman wrote many other feminist works which have not been as popular as The Yellow Wallpaper. Her greatest work is often considered to be Women and Economics (1898), in which she described and opposed women’s financial dependence on men. In order to end this, she was one of the first to support the professionalization of housework, to be done by housekeepers and cooks for money rather than by mothers for nothing. She also suggested cooperative kitchens in city apartment buildings where cooking would be shared rather than being the private chore of each family. However, she still insisted that motherhood was “the common duty and the common glory of womanhood,” and that women would choose “professions compatible with motherhood.”  
Women and Economics received overwhelmingly positive reviews and caused Gilman to be considered the leading intellectual of the women’s movement. It was even compared favorably to The Subjection of Women. However, Gilman did not call herself a feminist, as she was very uncomfortable with the ideas of sexual liberation that had become an important part of feminist thought. The Yellow Wallpaper can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.library.csi.cuny.edu/dept/history/lavender/wallpaper.html
Women and Economics can be read in its entirety in English here: http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/gilman/economics/economics.html

Valerie Saiving Goldstein (1921-1992) was a feminist theologian. She is best known for "The Human Situation: A Feminine View"  (1960), in which she criticized the Christian focus on pride as a sin, noting that many women struggle much more with feelings of self-doubt.
She noted that much of Christian theology was written by men and based on male experience, and might not apply to women, and that women would have to write out their own theology. Her essay had a strong influence on other feminist theologians. Mary Daly for example, cited her in her own book The Church and the Second Sex, while Judith Plaskow, a Jewish feminist theologian, both published a dissertation on Saiving's essay (entitled “Sex, Sin and Grace: Women’s Experience and the Theologies of Reinhold Niebuhr and Paul Tillich”) and reproduced the 1960 article in her own anthology Womanspirit Rising: A Feminist Reader in Religion.  
"The Human Situation: A Feminine View” can be read in its entirety in English here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:NT-adx9hHJwJ:hebe.sjsu.edu/upload/course/course_2055/Saiving_Article.pdf+"human+situation:+a+feminine+view"&h

Betty Friedan (February 4, 1921 - February 4, 2006) was a leading feminist activist. Her best-known book is The Feminine Mystique (1963), which is widely credited with sparking the beginning of the second-wave feminist movement in the United States. In it she criticized the fact that women were encouraged to see housewifery as a career, and declared that women needed a purpose in life separate from their children and husbands. She also praised what we would now consider the first wave of feminism, which won the vote for women, and decried how popular culture had made feminism seem ridiculous and cold-hearted, or alternately insisted that all battles for women had been won.  
The Feminine Mystique was extremely influential in the feminist movement, although it was criticized by later waves of feminism for its focus on upper-class housewives to the exclusion of the problems of other women. Still, the fact that most women were not fulfilled by full-time housework and should not be ashamed of their career dreams was a true and important point.  The Feminine Mystique  is also criticized for its homophobia – Friedan believed that homosexuality was at least in part caused by overbearing mothers – but it should be noted that this was an entirely mainstream idea at the time. 
Friedan is also noted for co-writing"The National Organization for Women's Statement of Purpose" (1966) with feminist and civil rights activist Pauli Murray (1910-1985). Murray and Friedan both helped found the organization and Friedan was its first president. "The National Organization for Women's Statement of Purpose" is notable for its idealism; it declared that the goal of the National Organization for Women was “to take action to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of American society now, exercising all the privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men,” and elaborated that women should have equal rights and responsibilities with men in all fields.

Chapter 1 of  The Feminine Mystique  can be read in its entirety in English here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:GAOxcm1Sjx8J:www.athensacademy.net/teachers/rreid/apushistory/The%2520Feminine%2520Mystique.doc+feminine+mystique+chapter+1&hl=en

Chapter 2 of  The Feminine Mystique  can be read in its entirety in English here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:TB4J7gLWHwIJ:ls.poly.edu/~jbain/socphil/texts/05a.Friedan.pdf+feminine+mystique+chapter+2&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srci

The“National Organization for Women's Statement of Purpose” can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.now.org/history/purpos66.html

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (1960-1970s) The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee emerged from a series of student meetings held by civil rights activist Ella Baker in 1960. The “Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Position Paper: Women in the Movement” (1964), was written and submitted anonymously at the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee meeting in Waveland, Mississippi. It denounced the sexism of the Committee and called for the civil rights movement to “start the slow process of changing values and ideas so that all of us gradually come to understand that this is no more a man's world than it is a white world.” The “Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee Position Paper: Women in the Movement” can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Primary/Manifestos/SNCC_women.html

Casey Hayden (born Sandra Cason) and Mary King (birthdate unknown, both still alive) are left-wing activists. Their most noted feminist writing is “Sex and Caste – A Kind of Memo” (1965) which was based on their experiences as Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee volunteers. It is widely regarded as one of the first documents of the emerging second-wave feminist movement. In it they described and denounced the sexism of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, which was common in left-wing movements at the time, and woke many women up to the fact that while they were ostensibly working for freedom and justice, they themselves were being oppressed.
 
“Sex and Caste – A Kind of Memo” can be read in its entirety in English here: http://uic.edu/orgs/cwluherstory/CWLUArchive/memo.html

Gloria Steinem (born 1934) is an feminist, journalist, and political activist, and is widely known as a spokesperson for feminism.  In 1969 she published the article, "After Black Power, Women's Liberation" which, along with her early support of abortion rights, brought her to national fame as a feminist leader. This article describes early feminist actions (such as demonstrations in favor of coed dorms and against bridal fairs) and how sexism in left wing movements led to second-wave feminism as a separate and distinct movement, and sparked women thinking of themselves as a minority group, just as African-Americans are. The article concludes, however, with the assurance that "women's liberation will be men's liberation too", perhaps an acknowledgement that if feminism could not be made appealing to the men in charge it would not advance.

"After Black Power, Women's Liberation" can be read in its entirety in English here: http://nymag.com/news/politics/46802/

Naomi Weisstein (born 1939) is a psychology professor, and a co-founder of American Women in Psychology,  now Division 35 of the American Psychological Association.  
She is probably best known for her pioneering essay, "Kinder, Küche, Kirche as Scientific Law: Psychology Constructs the Female," which was first published in 1968, and was read by activists throughout the feminist movement, as well as psychologists. The title is taken from the German slogan Kinder, Küche, Kürche (meaning children, kitchen, church), describing what the Nazis believed was the proper domain of a woman. The paper, which has been reprinted over 42 times in six different languages, is a seminal paper in feminist psychology, criticizing psychologists for promoting stereotypes about women, and buttressing its conclusions with unproven theories and inapplicable biological research (shades of evolutionary psychology.) " It further criticizes psychology in general for not taking into account how much social context affects a person's feelings and actions.

 "Kinder, Küche, Kirche as Scientific Law: Psychology Constructs the Female" can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.uic.edu/orgs/cwluherstory/CWLUArchive/psych.html

Frances M. Beal (born 1940) is a political activist. She is perhaps best known for writing  "Double Jeopardy: To Be Black & Female," first published in 1969. This paper criticizes the oppression of all black people by racism, but also criticizes the oppression of black women by sexism, even within the the civil rights movement, which often tried to build black men up by putting women down. 
 Beal declared that this was a "counter-revolutionary position" and that blacks should be fighting for the end of all kinds of oppression, an endeavor which she notes will require everyone's help, women as well as men. She also blames capitalist exploitation for keeping black men in menial jobs and encouraging black women to strive for the life of a full-time housewife. She ends by declaring that revolutionaries against racism and capitalism must treat each other as equals, and that all are needed in the struggle.

 "Double Jeopardy: To Be Black & Female" can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/modern/Double-Jeopardy-Black-and-Female.html

The National Organization for Women (founded 1966) adopted the "National Organization for Women (N.O.W.) Bill of Rights" at its national conference in 1967, and published it in 1968. It is a sweeping document that shows how ambitious the feminist movement had become, and advocates for many things (such as removing all laws limiting access to contraceptive information and devices and laws governing abortion, and establishing national child care facilities) that still have not become law. 
An extended analysis of the "National Organization for Women (N.O.W.) Bill of Rights", also written by me (called "The National Organization for Women’s 1968 Bill of Rights – Where are we NOW?")  can be read in its entirety in English at the Feministing community website here: http://community.feministing.com/2012/08/03/the-national-organization-for-womens-1968-bill-of-rights-where-are-we-now/

The "National Organization for Women (N.O.W.) Bill of Rights" can be read in its entirety in English here: http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/nowrights.html

Carol Hanisch (birthdate unknown) is best known for coming up with the idea to have a feminist protest of the 1968 Miss America pageant (which first brought feminist concerns to the attention of the mainstream media) and for writing The Personal Is Political, which was published in 1969 and coined the phrase. In this paper she argues that women and other oppressed people should stop blaming themselves for their problems and realize that those problems are often caused by oppression and have political solutions. 
You can read The Personal Is Political in its entirety in English here: http://www.carolhanisch.org/CHwritings/PIP.html

Del Martin (1921-2008) is best known as an LGBT rights activist, but she also fought for women’s rights. She was active in the National Organization for Women, and wrote Battered Wives, showing how institutionalized misogyny contributed to domestic violence. In 1970 she wrote If That’s All There Is, an indictment of the sexism in the LGBT rights movement.
Adrienne Rich (1929 –2012) was an American poet, and essayist, called "one of the most widely read and influential poets of the second half of the 20th century", and was credited with bringing "the oppression of women and lesbians to the forefront of poetic discourse.” 
 In her 1980 essay Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian ExistenceRich, herself a lesbian, posits that many women are forced into heterosexuality through women's dependence on men for money and status, violence, denial of knowledge about lesbianism, and so forth. She further declares that sexual repression of women has also stifled women’s creativity and economic advancement through rendering them dependent on men.  
 Whether one agrees with all this or not, this is an important document in the history of feminism, and its concept has been accepted and embraced in many college classes and by human rights activists. As one example of its scope, the International Tribunal on Crimes Against Women, held in Brussels, March 4-8, 1976, named compulsory heterosexuality (in the form of discrimination against and persecution of lesbians) as a "crime against women."The essay can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.terry.uga.edu/~dawndba/4500compulsoryhet.htm
Linda Nochlin (born 1931) Linda Nochlin is an art historian, professor and writer, best known for her 1971 essay Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists? 
 In this essay, which has become very influential in the field of art history, she argues that general social expectations against women seriously pursuing art, restrictions on educating women at art academies, and "the entire romantic, elitist, individual-glorifying, and monograph-producing substructure upon which the profession of art history is based" have worked against women becoming great artists.She also argues that the idea of a lone great artist is somewhat exaggerated, as many have been supported by the help of assistants, patrons, schooling, etc, and have not simply created works of genius alone and unprovoked.
You can read the essay in its entirety in English here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:RZfpIKWTTd0J:f.hypotheses.org/wp-content/blogs.dir/512/files/2012/01/whynogreatwomenartists_4.pdf+"why+have+their+

Anne Koedt (born 1941 in Denmark, moved to America in her youth) is best known as the author of The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm, first published in 1970. In this essay, building on the work of Masters and Virginia Johnson’s Human Sexual Response Koedt advocated new sexual techniques mutually conducive to orgasm and urged women to insist on their own sexual satisfaction. She noted that penis-in-vagina sex (as opposed to oral sex, etc) that does not involve clitoris stimulation often results in women not having orgasms, and encouraged women to consider sex without their pleasure to be as unthinkable as sex without his penis being touched or him having an orgasm, an idea which mainstream society still has not adopted. 
The essay can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.uic.edu/orgs/cwluherstory/CWLUArchive/vaginalmyth.html
Robin Morgan (born 1941) was a child actor and writer. She edited the 1970 anthology Sisterhood is Powerful, which has been widely credited with helping to start the general women's movement in the US, and was cited by the New York Public Library as "One of the 100 most influential Books of the 20th Century.” It was one of the first widely available anthologies of second-wave feminism. Also in 1970, she wrote Goodbye to All That in reaction to the misogyny of the male-dominated left, in particular a magazine called RatThe essay gained notoriety in the press for naming sexist liberal men and institutions. It can be read in its entirety in English here: http://blog.fair-use.org/2007/09/29/goodbye-to-all-that-by-robin-morgan-1970/
Rabbi Rachel Adler (born 1943) is a professor and theologian, ordained as a rabbi in May 2012.In 1971 she published The Jew Who Wasn’t There:Halacha and the Jewish Woman, in which she argued that halacha (Jewish religious law) ignored and oppressed women. This essay was considered by historian Paula Hyman as one of the founding influences of the Jewish feminist movement. It can be read in its entirety in English here: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:_aHy1mQXk-wJ:jwa.org/feminism/_html/_pdf/JWA001c.pdf+jew+who+wasn't+there&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgKmt25OwE0fl_Yilu_Ayd2XrtUpxtH
Carol P. Christ (born 1944) is a teacher and author. Her speech Why Women Need the Goddess was presented as the keynote address to an audience of over 500 at the "Great Goddess Re-emerging" conference at the University of Santa Cruz in the spring of 1978, and was first published later that year. It has since been widely reprinted. In this speech she argues in favor of the concept of there having been an ancient religion of a supreme Goddess. The speech can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.goddessariadne.org/whywomenneedthegoddess.htm
Alice Walker (born 1944) is an author and activist. In 1974 she wrote In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens: The Creativity of Black Women in the South in which she argued that black women’s artistic and literary gifts had been suppressed, and that there was a hidden history of oppressed black women artists. This essay can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.msmagazine.com/spring2002/walker.asp  
Her 1975 nonfiction article In Search of Zora Neale Hurston, published in Ms. magazine, helped revive interest in the work of Zora Neale Hurston (a feminist author best known for Their Eyes Were Watching God), who inspired some of Walker's writing and subject matter. In the article told of her journey to central Florida, where Hurston lived, hoping to find anyone who knew her and thus fill in the missing details of her life. When she arrived, Walker realized that few had heard of Hurston or read her works, nor had they properly honored her after she died. Posing as her niece, Walker made her way to Hurston’s weed-covered grave and purchased a headstone with the engraving: “A Genius of the South, 1901 – 1960. Novelist, Folklorist, Anthropologist”. This article is widely available in English but is not available online.
In 1982 she published The Color Purple, which focuses on the life on black women in the 1930s in the United States, and includes themes of lesbianism and feminism. It is widely considered a feminist classic. 


In this book Walker portrays female friendships as a means for women to summon the courage to tell stories which allow women to resist oppression and dominance. Relationships among women form a refuge, providing reciprocal love in a world filled with male violence. The novel also shows the limitations of gender roles. In 1983 she published In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens: Womanist Prose, a collection composed of thirty-six separate pieces. In this book she coins the word "womanist", which she defines as, "A black feminist or feminist of color. From the black folk expression of mother to female children and also a woman who loves other women, sexually and/or nonsexually. Appreciates and prefers women's culture. Committed to survival and wholeness of entire people, male and female." This has become a popular and influential concept among feminist women of color. The piece In Search of Our Mothers' Gardens, about the hidden creativity of black American women, can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.msmagazine.com/spring2002/walker.asp
Ezrat Nashim (founded 1971) was a Jewish feminist group. The name refers to the women’s section in a traditional synagogue, but also can mean "women's help." In 1972 they took the issue of equality for women to the 1972 convention of Conservative Judaism’s Rabbinical Assembly, presenting a document on 14 March that was titled Jewish Women Call for a Change. The rabbis received the document in their convention packets, but Ezrat Nashim also presented it during a meeting with the rabbis' wives. 
The document demanded that women be accepted as witnesses before Jewish law, be considered as bound to perform all mitzvot (commandments),, be allowed full participation in religious observances, have equal rights in marriage and be allowed to initiate divorce, be counted in the minyan (religious quorum), and be permitted to assume positions of leadership in the synagogue and within the general Jewish community. Historian Paula Hyman, who was a member of Ezrat Nashim, wrote that: "We recognized that the subordinate status of women was linked to their exemption from positive time-bound mitzvot, and we therefore accepted increased obligation as the corollary of equality.” 
Eleven years later, in October 1983, the Jewish Theological Seminary, the main educational institution of the Conservative movement, announced its decision to accept women into the Rabbinical School. Hyman took part in the vote as a member of the JTS faculty. Today, women are ordained as rabbis and cantors, and can read from the Torah in front of the congregation and be counted in the minyan, have full participation in religious observances, and be accepted as witnesses before Jewish law, in all types of Judaism except Orthodox Judaism. 
However, women are still not allowed to initiate divorce in Conservative as well as Orthodox Judaism, and are not considered as bound to perform all mitzvot by the Orthodox. But women have assumed positions of leadership in the synagogue and within the general Jewish community within all types of Judaism. Jewish Women Call for a Change can be read in its entirety in English here: http://books.google.com/books?id=vVETCrICwO8C&pg=PA116&dq=jewish+women+call+for+a+change&hl=en&sa=X&ei=T6ydUOjyMpGQ0QHQzYDgAQ&ved=0CDoQ6wEwA

The Combahee River Collective (founded 1974)was a black feminist lesbian group. Their name commemorated an action at Combahee River planned and led by Harriet Tubman in 1863, which freed more than 750 slaves and is the only military campaign in American history planned and led by a woman. In 1977 they published A Black Feminist Statement, a key document in the history of contemporary black feminism and the development of the concepts of identity as used among political organizers and social theorists. It describes the importance of black feminism, the difficulties in organizing black feminists, the realities of interlocking oppressions, and racism in the mainstream women’s movement. The essay can be read in its entirety  in English here: http://circuitous.org/scraps/combahee.html

Audre Lorde (1934-1992) was a Caribbean-American lesbian writer, poet, librarian, and activist. Lorde criticized feminists of the 1960s for focusing on the particular experiences and values of white middle-class women. 
Her writings are based on the "theory of difference", the idea that the binary opposition between men and women is overly simplistic: although feminists have found it necessary to present the illusion of a solid, unified whole, the category of women itself is full of subdivisions.
Among other works, Lorde wrote The Cancer Journals (1980), in which she describes her experience with cancer and calls on the reader to relinquish silence and speak out. She focuses on the importance of the love received from the women around her throughout her experience, and the comfort from talking about it with other lesbian cancer survivors. She also discusses coming to terms with the outcome of the operation, which left her with one breast. She explains that although it would be fine for women to resort to a prosthesis if they want to, she chooses not to, thinking that it seems like a cover-up in a society where women are solely judged on their looks. She also discusses the possibilities of alternative medicine, arguing that women should look at all the options.  
Her book Zami: A New Spelling of My Name (1982) began a new genre known as biomythography, a term she coined which means the weaving together of myth, history, and biography in epic narrative form, a style of composition meant to represent all the ways in which we perceive the world around us. In Zami, Lorde discusses her upbringing and early life. The book describes the way lesbians lived in NYC, Connecticut, and Mexico. It also discusses Lorde's difficult relationship with her mother, whom she credits for imbuing her with a certain sense of strength; the book ends with a homage to her. Zami is a Caribbean name for women who work together as friends and lovers. 
 In one of Lorde's most famous essays, "The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House"  from Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches (1984)she attacks the underlying racism of feminism, describing it as unrecognized dependence on the patriarchy. She argues that, by denying difference in the category of women, feminists merely passed on old systems of oppression and that, in so doing, they were preventing any real, lasting change. Her argument aligns white feminists with white male slave-masters, describing both as "agents of oppression."

Gloria Anzaldúa (1942-2004) was an American scholar of Chicano cultural theory, queer theory, and feminist theory.



She is most famous for co-editing This Bridge Called My Back: Writings By Radical Women of Color (1981) with Cherrie Moraga. 



This anthology explores the feminist revolution from the perspective of women of color and addresses the cultural, class, and sexual differences that impact them.  It includes Anzaldúa's speech called "Speaking in Tongues: A Letter to Third World Women Writers" (1981), focusing on the shift towards an equal and just gender representation in literature, but away from racial and cultural issues due to the rise of female writers and theorists.



She also stresses in her speech the power of writing to create a world which would compensate for what the real world does not offer us. Anzaldúa has introduced the term "mestizaje" to United States academic audiences, meaning a state of being beyond binary (either-or) understanding. In her theoretical works,  Anzaldúa calls for a "new mestiza," which she describes as an individual aware of her conflicting and meshing identities and uses these "new angles of vision" to challenge binary thinking. This "new mestiza" way of thinking is part of postcolonial feminism. In "La Conciencia de la Mestiza: Towards a New Consciousness" (1987), a text often used in women's studies,  Anzaldúa insists that separatism for Chicanas and Chicanos is not furthering the cause, but instead keeping the same racial division in place.





Andrea Dworkin (1946-2005) was an American author. During the late 1970s and the 1980s, she gained national fame as a spokeswoman for the feminist anti-pornography movement, and for her writing on pornography and sexuality, particularly in Pornography: Men Possessing Women (1981) and Intercourse (1987), which remain her two most widely known books.In Pornography: Men Possessing Women she argues that pornography and erotic literature in patriarchal societies consistently eroticize women's sexual subordination to men, and often overt acts of exploitation or violence.



In Intercourse, she went on to argue that that sort of sexual subordination is central to men's and women's experiences of sexual intercourse in male supremacist society, and reinforced throughout mainstream culture, including not only pornography but also in classic works of male-centric literature. Dworkin argues that the depictions of intercourse in mainstream art and culture consistently emphasize heterosexual intercourse as the only or the most genuine form of "real" sex; that they portray intercourse in violent or invasive terms; that they portray the violence or invasiveness as central to its eroticism; and that they often unite it with male contempt for, revulsion towards, or even murder of, the "carnal" woman.





bell hooks (aka Gloria Jean Watkins, born 1952) is an American author and activist. She took her pen name, which is intentionally uncapitalized, from her grandmother Bell Blair Hooks. She chose this because her grandmother "was known for her snappy and bold tongue, which I greatly admired." She put the name in lowercase letters "to distinguish myself from my grandmother." Her name's unconventional lowercasing signifies what is most important in her works: the "substance of books, not who I am." 
 Her first major work Ain't I a Woman?: Black women and feminism (1981) examines the historical impact of sexism and racism on black women, devaluation of black womanhood, media roles and portrayal, the education system, the idea of a white-supremacist-capitalist-patriarchy, the marginalization of black women, and the disregard for issues of race and class within feminism. 
In 1984 she published Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center,which confirmed her importance as a leader in radical feminist thought. Throughout the book, hooks uses the term white-supremacist-capitalist-patriarchy as a lens through which to both critique various aspects of American culture and to offer potential solutions to the problems she explores.
hooks addresses topics including the goals of feminist movement, the role of men in feminist struggle, the relevance of pacifism, solidarity among women, and the nature of revolution. hooks can be identified in her discussions of these topics as a radical feminist because of her arguments that the system itself is corrupt and that achieving equality in such a system is neither possible nor desirable. She promotes instead a complete transformation of society and all of its institutions as a result of protracted struggle, envisioning a life-affirming, peaceful tomorrow. A second edition of this book, featuring a new preface,  "Seeing the Light: Visionary Feminism,"  was published in 2000. In the preface to the first edition, hooks, talking about black Americans in her hometown, discusses the meaning of her title From Margin to Center: "Living as we did "on the edge" we developed a particular way of seeing reality. We looked from both the outside in and the inside out. We focused our attention on the center as well as the margin. We understood both. This mode of seeing reminded us of the existence of a whole universe, a main body made up of both margin and center."



Hillary Clinton (born 1947) is an American politician. In 1995 her speech at the 1995 UN Conference on Women, called Women’s Rights are Human Rights (1995) showed her “speaking more forcefully on human rights than any American dignitary has on Chinese soil” as the NY Times put it. It is often considered one of the landmark speeches in the global struggle for women’s rights, and condemns all abuses of women wherever they occur. It can be read in its entirety in English here: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/hillaryclintonbeijingspeech.htm 

Eve Ensler (born May 25, 1953) is an American playwright, performer, feminist, activist and artist, best known for her play The Vagina Monologues. This play is made up of various feminist monologues centering around women’s experiences with their vaginas, based on interviews Ensler did with various women. 
However, it has come in for some criticism, mostly due to the monologue "The Little Coochie Snorcher that Could", in which an underage girl (thirteen in earlier performances, sixteen in the revised version) recounts being given alcohol and then having sex with an adult woman; the incident is recalled fondly by the grown girl, who in the original version of the play calls it "a good rape." This monologue is omitted from some versions.  
In 1998, Ensler’s experience performing The Vagina Monologues inspired her to create V-Day, a global activist movement to stop violence against women and girls. V-Day raises funds and awareness through annual benefit productions of The Vagina Monologues, and has raised over $800,000,000 so far.

Susan Faludi (born April 18, 1959) is an American journalist and author. Faludi's 1991 book Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women argues that the 1980s saw a backlash against feminism in America, especially due to the spread of negative stereotypes against career-focused women. Faludi asserts that many who argue "a woman's place is in the home, looking after the kids" are hypocrites, since they have wives who are working mothers or, as women, they are themselves working mothers. This work won her the National Book Critics Circle Award for general nonfiction in 1991.
Naomi Wolf (born 1962) is an American author and former political consultant. She is most famous for the book The Beauty Myth (1991) which argues that as women have gained increased social power and prominence, expected adherence to standards of physical beauty has grown stronger for women. that "beauty" as a normative value is entirely socially constructed, and that the patriarchy determines the content of that construction with the goal of reproducing its own hegemony.

Rebecca Walker (born November 17, 1969) is an American writer. She co-founded the Third Wave Foundation, which aims to encourage young women to get involved in activism and leadership roles. The organization now provides grants to individuals and projects that support young women. Walker is considered one of the founding leaders of third-wave feminism. She wrote an article for Ms. Magazine called Becoming the Third Wave (1991), criticizing the confirmation of Clarence Thomas as a Supreme Court justice after he was accused of sexually harassing his employee Anita Hill. Using this example, Walker addresses the oppression of the female voice and introduces the concept of third-wave feminism, a term her article coined. Walker defines third wave feminism at the end of the article by saying “To be a feminist is to integrate an ideology of equality and female empowerment into the very fiber of life. It is to search for personal clarity in the midst of systemic destruction, to join in sisterhood with women when often we are divided, to understand power structures with the intention of challenging them.”

Riot Grrrl was an American underground feminist punk rock movement that originally started in Washington, D.C.; Olympia, Washington; Portland, Oregon; and the greater Pacific Northwest in the early to mid-1990s. The Riot Grrrl Manifesto (1991) criticizes male-dominated culture and encourages girls to build their own alternative. It can be read in its entirety in English here: http://onewarart.org/riot_grrrl_manifesto.htm

Marilyn French (1929-2009) was an American writer. Her most significant work in later life was the four-volume From Eve to Dawn: A History of Women, published in 2002 and built around the premise that exclusion from the prevailing intellectual histories denied women their past, present and future. Despite carefully chronicling a long history of oppression, the last volume ends on an optimistic note.

Jennifer Baumgardner (born 1970) and Amy Richards (born circa 1971) are American writers and activists. They coauthored Manifesta: Young Women, Feminism, and the Future (2000) after writing for the feminist magazine Ms. 
This book is an analysis of U.S. feminism that claims that "girl culture," from women rock stars and athletes to female entrepreneurs and inventors, supports feminism and has become an integral part of the national psyche. At the same time, they caution young women not to stop and rest on the success of cultural feminism, but to develop political lives and awareness, and include appendixes to teach novices the nuts-and-bolts of community organizing. Jennifer is openly bisexual and has also written about the bisexual experience.


Saturday, November 17, 2012

The Greatest Mystery Of The Last US Elections?











This must be the role of polling played in it.  At some point in the last decade (perhaps earlier),  polls became a political weapon  akin to propaganda.  It's hard to grasp the change I try to write about, because it's a qualitative one and not just quantitative.

Sure, polls have always been used in that sense.  But something vast changed in these elections:  The Republicans believed in their own propaganda.  In the past they may have pretended to believe that propaganda; this time they truly did.

Hence the stunned astonishment of Karl Rove, listening to the Ohio results, and hence the cheerful optimism of the Romneys and the Ryans all the way to the point when it was clear that Obama had won re-election.  They expected to win and they had not planned for the alternative.

There's lots of evidence of this:  Pundits confidently offered numbers based on assumptions about much greater Republican turnout and much reduced turnouts of young voters and African-American voters.  But those assumptions were assumptions, hanging off pure air.  So what made them so easily accepted as facts?

I'm not completely sure, but all this may have something to do with the ideological-bubbles phenomenon.  If you belong to the conservative bubble, then you get your news interpreted by Fox News and by right-wing bloggers, and you get tweets which tell you that unskewedpolls.com is fixing all polls to look the way they should look.

Likewise, if you believe in a vast left-wing-media conspiracy, then all the polls the media reports must be biased, right?

These are just my thoughts and they may be wrong.  But I think the cows have come home on some of the costs of the manufactured political wars and the self-segregation of politically motivated people into separate ideological camps.    That most everything can be now seen through politically-colored spectacles is also part of the problem.

Thursday, November 15, 2012

Things I Hate About Writing


Wordiness.  Ever since I learned my alphabet I've been the concise goddess.  It's a flaw from the reader's side because reading unedited me requires a magnifying glass, so  I work very hard to add air and cute little nothings into the sentences I write.  But o the pain!

Long erudite words.  They can be delicious.  Chili peppers can be delicious, too, but a quarter teaspoon is enough.   The snag, for me, is that long erudite words are easier than finding the needed short and crunchy expression to replace them without losing the meaning.

Bland verbs.  Verbs are the horses on which sentences ride, and bland verbs are like old and tired nags.  But my arsenal of exciting, humorous, onomatopoetic or otherwise strong verbs is pitifully meager.  That's because I write in a language I didn't learn as a pupa goddess.  It's never the same, to learn something from dictionaries and grammars, and decades of real practice still leave me feeling that I'm trying to do microsurgery with mittens on.

Stagnant sentences.  Each sentence should bring the story forwards.  Like mail being carried, quickly and precisely.  But sometimes a sentence is necessary, and still it just stands there or even shakes or tries to turn back.  Fixing it in various ways usually looks like a pileup of bandaids/plasters.  One stagnant sentence sometimes makes me kill the whole story dead.

Editing.   You must have noticed that.  Almost everything here is written and then scanned through once.  Plenty of time later to feel embarrassed about the results.  I know that editing is very important.  But it's not fun.

On the other hand, I adore writing!  I want to marry writing, have wild sex with it, make it have my babies, wrap myself in that zone only writing can offer for hours and hours.  It's a chronic disease, that writing desire.



Fun Watching For Today: Fox News and Women, Nancy Pelosi and Luke Russert


Well, fun on some levels of the term.  First, two videos from Fox News on the ever-fascinating topic of the Woman Problem.   This one debates the question whether girls should ever play in boys' sports teams:



The nine-year-old girl player is pretty wise in her game advice, too.  It can be applied to much of life.

This one reminds us that Fox always has sexists in-residence, the way some colleges have artists in-residence. Gutfeld has a long career of sexist utterances at Fox.





The last video is about Nancy Pelosi's answer to Luke Russert (the son of the late Tim Russert) who asked Pelosi about  the wisdom of her hanging around for so long, given that she is ancient and should retire for the benefit of younger people:



For those of you who might not be able to access the video, here's the question:

Nancy Pelosi was peppered with questions about her decision to stay on as Democratic leader on Wednesday, but one particular inquiry set her off: on her age.
...

"Some of your colleagues privately say that your decision to stay on prohibits the party from having a younger leadership and hurts the party in the long run," Russert said. "What's your response?"

The Democratic female politicians standing behind Pelosi booed the question.  Pelosi's answer, in its core:

When Russert pressed further, Pelosi responded: "So you're suggesting that everybody step aside? ... Let's for a moment honor it as a legitimate question, although it's quite offensive. But you don't realize that, I guess."

...

"I came to Congress when my youngest child, Alexandra, was a senior in high school, practically on her way to college," Pelosi began. "I knew that my male colleagues had come when they were 30. They had a jump on me because they didn't have children.

...

"So I don't have any concern about that, and as I've always said to you, you've got to take off about 14 years from me because i was home raising a family, getting the best experience of all -- diplomacy, interpersonal skills."

Now, whether older leaders should graciously step aside to let younger people have a chance is a different question from asking that of a rare powerful older woman who is giving a speech.

The time and place of that question is probably sexist, unless Russert routinely asks all men of Pelosi's age similar questions about them stepping aside to benefit younger people.

Because these concerns do not apply only to the very top:  They apply equally on other levels of politics. Ted Kennedy's successes  made it impossible for anyone younger in Massachusetts to run for his Senate seat if he, too, was running.   Maybe he should have retired earlier?  John McCain is plugging the pipeline and keeping younger Republicans from power.  Shouldn't he retire?  What about the libertarian god, Ron Paul, who was born in 1935?  Time for him to step aside!

I don't think these men are asked that question when they give speeches, and that's why I think Russert's question was a sexist one.  The fact that Pelosi is among the "firsts" (in the sense of a first woman who ever held some powerful post) adds a slight flavor of impoliteness to that question. 

Pelosi's answer, pointing out that she had started the political game much later than most men (because they probably had someone of Pelosi's sex taking care of their children) reveals a different kind of gender difference here:  Pelosi's age does not reflect the length of her political career as well as the ages of many male politicians do.  Her "real" political age is around 58.

But a young man like Luke Russert doesn't have to be aware of the problems women of Pelosi's age had in entering politics:  The culture wanted women in politics to have children  but the culture also expected women to take care of those children themselves.   That made (and still makes) it tougher for women to become politicians at younger ages.


Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Meanwhile, in Ireland, Savita Halappanavar Dies After Being Denied an Abortion


The Irish Times reports:

Two investigations are under way into the death of a woman who was 17 weeks pregnant, at University Hospital Galway last month.
Savita Halappanavar (31), a dentist, presented with back pain at the hospital on October 21st, was found to be miscarrying, and died of septicaemia a week later.
Her husband, Praveen Halappanavar (34), an engineer at Boston Scientific in Galway, says she asked several times over a three-day period that the pregnancy be terminated. He says that, having been told she was miscarrying, and after one day in severe pain, Ms Halappanavar asked for a medical termination.
This was refused, he says, because the foetal heartbeat was still present and they were told, “this is a Catholic country”.
She spent a further 2½ days “in agony” until the foetal heartbeat stopped.
Intensive care
The dead foetus was removed and Savita was taken to the high dependency unit and then the intensive care unit, where she died of septicaemia on the 28th.
An autopsy carried out by Dr Grace Callagy two days later found she died of septicaemia “documented ante-mortem” and E.coli ESBL.
 
Let's make this clear.  She was miscarrying.  The fetus could not be saved.  According to the Irish law abortion is legal to save the life of the pregnant woman.  She was in agony.  But she had to wait until the fetal heartbeat stopped.

Then her own heartbeat stopped.

Her widower:

Speaking from Belgaum in the Karnataka region of southwest India, Mr Halappanavar said an internal examination was performed when she first presented.
“The doctor told us the cervix was fully dilated, amniotic fluid was leaking and unfortunately the baby wouldn’t survive.” The doctor, he says, said it should be over in a few hours. There followed three days, he says, of the foetal heartbeat being checked several times a day.
“Savita was really in agony. She was very upset, but she accepted she was losing the baby. When the consultant came on the ward rounds on Monday morning Savita asked if they could not save the baby could they induce to end the pregnancy. The consultant said, ‘As long as there is a foetal heartbeat we can’t do anything’.
“Again on Tuesday morning, the ward rounds and the same discussion. The consultant said it was the law, that this is a Catholic country. Savita [a Hindu] said: ‘I am neither Irish nor Catholic’ but they said there was nothing they could do.
“That evening she developed shakes and shivering and she was vomiting. She went to use the toilet and she collapsed. There were big alarms and a doctor took bloods and started her on antibiotics.
“The next morning I said she was so sick and asked again that they just end it, but they said they couldn’t.”

But at least nobody killed a fetus.  Well, god did, I guess.

The Guardian suggests that the Irish law about abortion being legal to save the woman's life is not properly implemented:

Ireland's health service executive, which runs the country's public health care system, has initiated an investigation into the incident, which is also being investigated by the hospital itself.
Reports of the death sparked an outcry on Wednesday night in Ireland, where abortion is illegal unless the life of the woman is in danger.
The Fine Gael/Labour government has struggled to respond to a 2010 ruling by the European court of human rights, which found it had failed to implement laws to enable women to have an abortion when their life is at risk during pregnancy.
Rachel Donnelly, a spokeswoman for pro-choice campaigners in Galway said: "This was an obstetric emergency which should have been dealt with in a routine manner. Yet Irish doctors are restrained from making obvious medical decisions by a fear of potentially severe consequences.
"As the European court ruled, as long as the 1861 Act remains in place, alongside a complete political unwillingness to touch the issue, pregnant women will continue to be unsafe in this country."

It's hard for me to understand a culture or a religion which is willing to waste a young woman's life this way,  assuming that the above descriptions of the case are true*.  Halappanavar was miscarrying.  There was no way for the fetus to be born alive.  Yet she was made to go through days of agony and then an early death.  For what possible reason?  Malpractice?  But what IS malpractice in a system of belief where women are aquaria?

In 2011 Ohio Republicans supported a measure to make abortions illegal after the fetus has a heartbeat:

The House voted 54 to 43 for the ban, along party lines, with most Republicans voting in favor.
If enacted, the law would be a challenge to the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling which upheld a woman's right to an abortion until the fetus is viable outside the womb, usually at 22-24 weeks.
Republican Ohio House Speaker William Batchelder said he knows this bill will face a court challenge.
"We're writing bills for courts," he said.
The bill now goes to the Republican-dominated Ohio Senate.
The Ohio House also passed two other abortion restrictions Tuesday, one that would ban late-term abortions after 20 weeks if a doctor determines that the fetus is viable outside the womb. Another bill excludes abortion coverage from the state insurance exchange created by the federal health care law.
The late-term ban already was passed by the Ohio Senate.
Neither bill was as contentious as the heartbeat legislation, which does not contain exceptions for rape, incest or the life or health of the mother.
Emphasis is mine.

The rumor is that these laws are coming back during the current lame duck season.   Though the Ohio laws are designed to test Roe v. Wade, their contents tell us that Ohio Republicans would not at all mind if other women died the same way Savita Halappanavar did!  Indeed, they wouldn't even bother with having abortion nominally legal for pregnancies which threaten the woman's life.
-----
*That's a euphemism.  I understand those cultures and religions far too well.  May everything their supporters give to others return to them threefold. 


Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Why Do Powerful Men Cheat? The Petraeus Chronicles.


You knew these were coming, the stories about why powerful men cheat, why they are willing to throw away everything for the chance of some extramarital sex and why they go about it in the clumsiest fashion possible.  And yup, we get the evolutionary explanation for men's extramarital cheating.

This is such fun.  It's not that the arguments have no merit but the merit they have is pretty tiny.  On the other hand, the omissions are glaring and tells us loads about the cultural expectations and myths. 

Take what is currently known (or asserted):  David Petraeus, a married man, had an affair with Paula Broadwell, a married woman.  It is argued that Paula Broadwell, a married woman, sent threatening messages to Jill Kelley, another married woman, to warn her off Petraeus.  Jill Kelley, a married woman,  may have exchanged "inappropriate" e-mails with John Allen, a married man.  None of these people are married to each other.

David Petraeus was the head of the CIA and has an impressive military resume.  John Allen is a general and currently the top US commander in Afghanistan.  In short, these are powerful men.

Thus, we get headlines like this:

Why Men Like Petraeus Risk It All to Cheat
And this:

Petraeus affair raises old question: Why do men cheat?

I understand the angle of these stories.  It's Petraeus and Allen who are famous and well-known and they are men.  But the facts of the case suggest that we should also ask why women cheat, given that all alleged participants in this mess had marital partners.  Broadwell, too,  seems to have "risked it all" to cheat:  her marriage, her career as a biographer and the risk of the kind of public attention she is now receiving.  Her position may not look as powerful to us but in terms of her own life the risks she took were huge.

As I mentioned, I get the angle of these stories.  But it takes two to tango, and in heterosexual extramarital affairs both partners can be married.  Thus, the questions those headlines ask about men cheating disguise the fact that we should ask similar questions about women cheating.

That's not quite how those stories go.  USAToday, for example, begins like this:

He's a retired Army general who designed and led the military surge in Iraq and was top commander in Afghanistan. He had been deployed much of his career until he was named CIA director last year. His abrupt resignation amid news of his extramarital affair with a married Army Reserve officer brings a new wrinkle into an old story of why yet another powerful man risks so much for a woman.
Yes, Petraeus joins the list of wayward sons: Arnold Schwarzenegger, John Edwards, Mark Sanford and Eliot Spitzer — just to name a few.
Petraeus is another, says Frank Farley, a psychologist at Temple University who studies such behavior.
Risk takers "tend to believe they control their destiny or fate," Farley says. "The risk-taking personality has a bold quality. It's at the heart of great leadership, and sometimes it overrides what many Americans would call common sense."

A list of powerful men cheating, sure.   And we have no comparable list of powerful women cheating, though that is most likely because there aren't that many powerful women as there are men*.   What all this would look like in a world where the highest positions of power had equal numbers of men and women is anybody's guess.  Still, I suspect that we would get at least a few stories about powerful women throwing it all away for the sake of sex.  Or for the sake of sexual love.

The Scientific American piece  also explains the cheating of powerful men by them being risk-takers, though it does point out that Broadwell seems to share that characteristic, too.   But the short summary we are offered under the headline tells a different story:
The risk of destroying a career is nothing compared with the evolutionary drive to reproduce

This may be nitpicking, but what does "evolutionary drive" mean in this context?  A drive that evolved?  How did our ancestors reproduce if they didn't have that drive?  Never mind.  I think the idea is to plug into the story something that looks like science.

More from the piece:

With risks like that on the line, could an extramarital affair be worth it? As it turns out, men may become blind to risk when an attractive woman enters the picture. One 2008 study found that men who played blackjack after seeing beautiful female faces took more risks than men who played the game after seeing unattractive faces.
This was true if the men were highly motivated in seeking new sexual partners. The blackjack risks seemed calculated to impress potential mates, study researcher Michael Baker, now a professor at Eastern Carolina University, told LiveScience. [The Sex Quiz: Myths, Taboos & Bizarre Facts]
More germane to high-profile affairs, Baker said, the risk of losing one's career or reputation is nothing compared with the evolutionary drive to reproduce. In that sense, while embarking on an affair may seem dumb, it actually shows something called "mating intelligence."
"These individuals have these very high-status, high-power positions, and the whole idea behind why people might be motivated to get these positions is because it gives them better access to resources that could be used to increase their reproductive success and attract more mates," Baker said.

Did the Baker blackjack study include female subjects?  If we are to explain why men cheat, as opposed to why women cheat, say, then data on both sexes is necessary.  Something like showing 20-year-old female undergraduates who major in psychology pictures of cute male butts and then asking them to play blackjack.  Just my uninformed suggestion...

Finally, this quote is worth a few words from me:
"These individuals have these very high-status, high-power positions, and the whole idea behind why people might be motivated to get these positions is because it gives them better access to resources that could be used to increase their reproductive success and attract more mates," Baker said.
The whole idea?  That's a bit exaggerated.  I personally think that people are driven first by the desire to stay alive and to thrive within that state, and only secondarily by considerations such as sex.  To imply that sex is the only reason why someone (a man, really) would want to obtain power and influence seems cartoonish to me. 

But whatever.  I just wish to make the note that "the whole idea" Baker mentions is an idea, and not some clearly proven fact.  Perhaps the alternative idea that "sex is pretty powerful" would do equally well?

Why write this post?  The two articles I discuss are not wrong, as such, and they do contain some interesting theories to think about, including the hypothesis that powerful people get insulated from reality and thus may underestimate the risk of getting caught having an extramarital affair. 

What triggered my writing urges (they are strong!  they are a way to get more mating partners!) may have been that condensed form in both the links to the pieces and in the headline for one:  The movement from why-powerful-men-cheat to why-men-cheat.   That's not what the stories are about, of course, but the same switch is not  uncommon in discussions about this on the net:  Petraeus As Everyman.

Add to that the invisibility of at least one woman cheating in this story, too, and you get one of those easy Chinese fortune cookie answers to presumed gender differences in cheating (found on various comments threads): 

Powerful men cheat because they can (and because of that mating urge),  all men would do the same if they could, and women like Broadwell obviously only cheat because of Petraeus's power and resources.  (In one comments-thread she was called a military groupie.)

But much of that is constructed, in an odd way.  If we begin by looking at the cheating behavior of  heterosexual men on the very top of societal hierarchies, in a culture where there aren't that many women on equally high rungs of those ladders, we are going to find that the partners of those men come from further down in the hierarchy.   This, in itself,  does not prove that women cheat only because of the power and resources of a man.  It's an artifact, caused by starting from the top rungs of the hierarchies. 

Finally, the cultural rules and sometimes even the legal consequences of cheating have been very different for men and women in the past (and still are, in places such as Afghanistan).  Those norms and rules continue have residual effects in our minds.  I think that makes it difficult to regard statements about one's own willingness to cheat or not as only biologically motivated or independent of the culture.



 
----------
*This is the place where I should mention Lisa Nowak.  She, too, recklessly threw away a career path as an astronaut for the sake of an affair.

Monday, November 12, 2012

The Petraeus Puzzle


When I first heard about his resignation all the little wheels in my brain started turning.  The whole thing seemed somehow off.  After some cogitation, I came to most of the conclusions Jane Mayer lists here.  Also, I stole the title of this post from her, all unconsciously!  Weird stuff.

Let's face it:  Newt Gingrich did not resign because of adultery.  Bill Clinton did not resign because of adultery.  That diaper guy in Louisiana did not resign because of adultery.  But then perhaps the military is used to different moral rule-sticks?  I've heard the argument that having a  mistress would make Petraeus someone that can be blackmailed easily, and that's a security risk.  But all that he needed to avoid that problem was to tell his wife, right?  Unless he gave her girlfriend classified information, say.  Hmmm. 

The timing of the resignation made my  bells ring, too.  Not before the elections, not right after them (which could have been interpreted as distrust of Obama) but as soon after them as was otherwise feasible.

Then I wondered what kind of politics this all might have been if it was politics.  Petraeus is not exactly a flaming liberal:
Since his first combat tour in Iraq in 2003, Petraeus had cultivated a cadre of a few dozen loyal staff officers, many of whom had doctoral degrees from top universities and taught at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Usually, he personally selected these men and women to serve on his staff.
In Afghanistan, the retinue grew as people drawn to his fame and eager to launch their own careers took up positions for him in Kabul. “He didn’t seek out these people, but he also didn’t turn them away,” said an officer who spent 40 months working for Petraeus in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Prominent members of conservative, Washington-based defense think tanks were given permanent office space at his headquarters and access to military aircraft to tour the battlefield. They provided advice to field commanders that sometimes conflicted with orders the commanders were getting from their immediate bosses.
Some of Petraeus’s staff officers said he and the American mission in Afghanistan benefited from the broader array of viewpoints, but others complained that the outsiders were a distraction, the price of his growing fame.

The frightening sentences have been bolded by me.  I thought the executive branch of the government, with the president as Commander-in-Chief, ran wars and such. 

Wasn't it a good thing I didn't write any of this over the weekend, given that the real explanation might be something much more mundane:  That FBI got a complaint it had to look into:

Ex-CIA director David Petraeus has told friends he was shocked to find that his biographer and girlfriend, Paula Broadwell, was suspected of sending anonymous, threatening emails to a Petraeus friend she saw as a romantic rival.

A close Petraeus associate said Monday that FBI investigators told Petraeus that Broadwell sent anonymous emails to Jill Kelley, a Petraeus family friend from his time at Central Command in Tampa, warning her to stay away from him. The Petraeus associate spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential conversations with Petraeus. The CIA director resigned last week after confessing to the affair.

Petraeus was not shown the emails, but was told the tone and content seemed threatening to Kelley, prompting her to report them, the close Petraeus associate said. That triggered the investigation that led the FBI to Broadwell and evidence of her affair with Petraeus.

The lawmakers are not happy about the way the FBI ran the investigation.  They were not informed, for instance.

I would have had egg on my face if I had written this post earlier.  Get it?  Heh.

It would have been safer to write about the Cult of Petraeus.  I don't really get cults but that's probably because as a goddess I'm more likely to lead one than follow one. 

The nasty  bits on all this attention are what you might expect:  On The Other Woman.   This is a relatively mild example.

And did you start counting the time to the first evo-psycho article about why Petraeus, A Man With Everything,  did something so stupid for sex? 

I haven't found one yet (though I'm confident that it is in the works), but I did come across this inane television conversation with one S.E. Cupp asking why great men are willing to sacrifice everything for sex, all through the times!  

None of the people point out that Paula Broadwell, the woman Petraeus admitted having had an affair with, seems to have sacrificed pretty much everything for sex, too. 

If we call an affair just sex.  I doubt she can salvage her career as a biographer after this, and I'm not sure what the consequences are for her marriage.  The only difference between her situation and that of Petraeus is that the society ranks his success much higher.  But as more evidence accumulates on women in fairly powerful positions and the follies of love (not just sex, I think), the evidence starts looking more balanced.

This post is a nice word salad, isn't it?