>At 07:51 AM 9/25/97 -0500, Suzette Haden Elgin wrote, re: Dune:
>>I would have thought that if there was sexism here it
>>was in the form that I am so often accused of myself -- that of portraying
>>the female characters as strong and capable and rational, and portraying
>>all the men as weak and wicked and barely able to find the bathroom alone.
>
>I'm curious, Suzette -- do you have a response to such accusations
>regarding your own works? And if so, what is it?
>
>-- Janice
>
> My first response is always to say -- and mean it -- that I
>apologize for whatever sexism my work contains. I don't think any of us
>manages to be totally free of elitism of one kind or another, hard as we
>try, and I am not under the illusion that I'm an exception. Once I get
>beyond that, there are two things I try to explain.
>
> First, that most of the people who make these comments about my
>work are academics or professionals, usually living privileged lives in
>quite sophisticated social environments; that goes with the territory. I
>suggest to them, as gently as I can, that the men and women with whom they
>themselves are familiar may not be typical of the population at large, and
>that it's possible that my perceptions are pretty accurate. Where I live,
>Barbie still rules.
>
> Second, that I am a native Ozarker, and that like all Ozark women
>my age I was taught from infancy that (1) when men do most things well
>it's an accident, that (2) it's a woman's responsibility to clean up the
>messes men make and protect men from the consequences of those messes as
>far as possible, and that (3) it's a woman's responsibility to see to it
>that men never know about (1) and (2). Now that *is* sexist. Absolutely.
>It's reverse sexism
I don't know about "reverse". I mean, sexism's sexism, man against woman,
or woman against man, man against man or woman against woman. Still, I get
your point and agree.
of the most maternalistic kind -- that is, it is taken
>for granted that men are doing the very best they can, given their
>limitations, that it's not their fault that they're as they are, and that
>whatever change may come about with men is the responsibility of women.
>There are few things more fierce and cruel than the contempt that Ozark
>women feel for a woman who "can't cope," but not much is expected of males.
>(I am stereotyping and over-generalizing, certainly; of course there are
>exceptions. But this is the prototype.) This had awful effects on my
>graduate students when I was a linguistics prof; all a male student had to
>do was stumble through the paces I set, and he would get praise and a
>decent grade -- but from female students I demanded spectacular work. I am
>eternally grateful to my female students, who came to me in a group and
>gave me bloody hell about this until I finally was able to understand what
>they were talking about and realize that they were absolutely right. I told
>them then that I counted on them to keep me straight on this -- to let them
>know whenever I backslid. And they did. The male/female situation that is
>laid out in my Ozark Trilogy (once you delete the flying mules and the
>magic and the Aliens) accurately represents the world view I was brought up
>with. So far as I know, this has not changed. I don't approve of it, but I
>have no power to change the real-world channels.
>
> I apologize for going on at such length. It's hard to do this
>clearly and briefly at the same time.
>
> Suzette
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:06:51 PDT