Sacred B.S.

Lisa Rogers EQDOMAIN.EQWQ.LROGERS at EMAIL.STATE.UT.US
Fri Jul 21 12:58:37 MDT 1995


>>> Robert V. Scheetz <ay581 at yfn.ysu.edu>  7/20/95, 09:01pm >>>
[snip]
Moreover, Boomer female's dilemma cannot be overstated, was/is very
real, excruciating, I think ...as are the socio-economic exigencies,
 unemployment, the Burgher's malthusian nightmare, referred.

Rogers, may I put you a pointed question?
 Given the period under review as classically patriarchal (let's say
pre-60's),  how explain that the central cultural institutional
artifact regulating the relationship between genders,
marriage/divorce law (along with the sustaining "middle-class
morality"), overwhelmingly favored the female in its assumptions and
definitions re transgressor, guilt, and its awards and sanctions,
child custody and support, house, alimony?


     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

I don't yet recognize your "boomer female's dilemma."  Would it be
visible to me in the form of, say, rates of marriage, rates of
childlessness, or something like that?  Or could any change in
women's child-bearing behavior from say 1940 to 1990 be related to
changes in the economy during that time? or some other factor?  And
I'm still not clear on how a women's movement was created by who for
the purposes of reducing the birth rate, for who's benefit??

Oh, and how does a marriage/law system that allegedly "overwhelmingly
favored the female" have the concrete and documentable effect of
lowering the standard of living of women while raising the standard
of living of men, after divorce?  Some favor.

If it was so damn great up on that pedastal, why would I want to get
off it?  Because I am duped by ideology?  And you're not?  Do you
realize how you are coming across here?  It doesn't look pretty, or
well-informed.

What is wrong with struggle against patriarchy?  Classic patriarchy
is still part of the reactionary status quo.  It was/is people
_against_ feminism that I expect to say "those rules we make for you
are only for your own good, girls, so don't fight it."  Or "look at
those crazy women, working against their own best interests, why
would they do that?"  Because we want to define our own best
interests, just like other workers want to, and we don't trust our
masters to do it for us.  Or wasn't that part of the whole point of
social revolution to begin with?

Lisa



     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------



More information about the Marxism mailing list