You are quite right that we think differently.  For one thing, I do not even
use words like "political correctness" because it is meaningless and even
what people think it means does not have anything to do with the way I
think.  Mary Wollstonecraft was Mary Shelley's mother; she wrote A
VINDICATION OF THE RIGHTS OF WOMAN.  De Beauvoir's 800 pages of
existential philosophy pretty much have to be read to be evaluated in any
way.  To consider Woolf's feminism, you need to read A ROOM OF
ONE'S OWN, not only the novels.  There is nothing about loving men and
children or liking to dress or look gorgeous that is in conflict with
feminism.  And you really cannot have an idea of what I think if you think
calling it dumb names like political correctness has anything to do with it.
De Beauvoir's boyfriend apparently thought better of her than you do.  I
never understand why you make pronouncements without bothering to
check out what anyone else really means.  But this is a pointless
conversation.
Nancy



Date sent:              Fri, 29 Nov 2002 22:00:57 EST
Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
From:                   Kate Troy <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:                Re: Off-List - Women
To:                     [log in to unmask]

In a message dated 11/30/02 1:18:45 AM !!!First Boot!!!,
[log in to unmask] writes:

> I am at a loss for any response except to suggest that you read
> Wolstonecraft, de Beauvoir, Woolf, Cynthia Enloe on women and war, and
> maybe a few hundred other texts on the notions of "woman" and
> "feminine."  The Oxford series on feminism is a good place to start for
> an overview.  This cannot even be discussed in language like "looks like
> a woman."  It starts in a totally different discourse, and it has
> nothing to do with what kind of man you personally like.
>

I believe that we think differently about life. I have never heard of Cynthis
Enloe. Mary Shelley said something like:  Women shouldn't concentrate
on playing up their physical beauty or seeking romantic love; yet she
writes probably one of the first science fiction love stories, her most
famous work, in which a monster falls in love with this young, beautiful
young woman.  I've read Fran kenstein, by the way, and a couple of her
essays' and many books concerning the Romantic era of poetry in which
she and her husband were given significant coverage.  One of the more
interesting books I've read was titled "The Liberal."  It detailed the history
of a literary magazine put out by Byron, Shelley and Hunt while they lived
in Italy.  I think she was a bit of a hypocrite.  She very much cared about
physical beauty and romantic love. Satre's girlfriend always struck me as
being more eager to show the world that she was very proud of being a
wild woman than anything else.  But, I haven't read much of her works; so
I may be missing something. I very much like Virginia Woolfe, and the
main reason being is that she writes so "real" about people, men and
women.  To the Lighthouse is one of my favorite novels; and I don't read
many novels, but I read that one time and again. I guess our difference in
opinion comes down to your adherence to political correctness.  I don't
believe in it. It's bullshit.  Most women I know or see on the street couldn't
even lift a heavy rifle. And most men could. But, that means doesn't mean
that women can't be senators. What I believe in is that a woman can be
extremely intellectual, to be strong and independent, to live her life as she
sees fit, but yet still care about looking drop dead gorgeous at a party, and
loving with all her heart her husband and/or kids, or to seek a loving man
or whatever.