Julie, Mary:
(Julie, I got two copies of your message. All you need to do is
post to ECOFEM, and all subscribers are copied.)
Yes, Camille Paglia is extreme. (See "Vamps and Tramps".) She's
bisexual and, in her own words, addicted to her own hormones. She
admits getting excited at the sight of a beautiful woman, similar
to a male response. (I think nearly all of us Italians hava a
hormone problem!) She favors pornography, legal prostitution, etc.
She evens condones child pornography, which in my view goes way
over the line. But she's extremely intelligent, and on the first
Firing Line debate, towards the end, she pinned Bill Buckley's ears
back, which was great. (He can be such a jerk.) She and
Betty Friedan were getting along quite well - Paglia said the
feminist movement has deviated from "The Feminine Mystique."
Whether that means Friedan has changed her views or was
misunderstood by the women's movement, I don't know. Paglia also
did a pretty good job, in my opinion, of defending the Feminist
movement, which the opposition team attempted to totally trash.
Paglia makes some very good points, and I relate to her libertarian
streak. (But, as we agreed earlier, I'm a sexist.)
I'm still puzzled about the meaning of ECOFEM. If the "FEM" part
refers to women's rights, as opposed to feminine characteristics,
what's the point? Do you mean simply that providing equal rights
to women will help the environmental movement? Well, gee, that's
easy - the answer is obviously YES. So what's there to discuss,
other than to get more women into environmental management? Go for
it! Call Alyce Parmer (904/488-0450) of our Human Resources Bureau
if you're interested in the Florida Dept. of Environmental
Protection. The agency is run by a woman, and many of the Bureaus
are run by women. There are great opportunities here.
If that's all there is to ECOFEM, then let's just talk about
environmental issues. I had thought the tack was on the
differences of how women approach environmental problems, which I
think is an important issue because there's something to it. Is
that something just a cultural phenomenon resulting from the way we
raise our kids? You're right, we all possess both masculine and
feminine characteristics, and society certainly pressures men to be
the former and women to be the latter. Are you saying we should
downplay the differences to break down the barriers to women's
rights? Okay, that makes sense. I definitely do NOT espouse the
"barefoot and pregnant" philosophy. And surely downplaying the
differences will help women on the job and men at home taking care
of the kids, which is important flexibility to have so we can all
try to live life to the fullest. Am I on the right track?
If so, then why call it ECOFEM? How about ECO-UNISEX? I'm not
trying to be a smart guy, really. I just need some guidance on
what issues to discuss.
aVr
P.S. I'm on my own time now - at a terminal at home.
