cw (02/14/83)
A recent article in net.women asked what each reader (men, presumably)
would do with a day as a woman. I answered in an article that I would
spend the day having as much sexual experience as possible. I made
three points in the article.
1. Sexual differences are the only really interesting differences
between men and women; there are no mental differences and the
physical differences of strength or stature are no interesting to
me.
2. Over a year, pregnancy would be an interesting experience, but
not necessarily for me, since I don't want to be a father either.
(One correspondent suggested that I was missing a bet here; I
will admit that it would be a difficult decision either way.)
3. There is no reason to worry about social problems; if I can
not summon the humanity to understand the problems while a
man, I won't be much of a woman either.
Predictably, I got one response that took me task for this article.
I am moved to respond publically because I think the response embodies
an attitude both common and wrong. Let me quote from the letter.
[The entire letter is reproduced here, in order, so that it may be seen
that I have not quoted out of context. Capitalization is the
correspondent's.]
do you really think the only emotion necessary to
understand the political and social roles of women is sympathy?
did it ever occur to you that there is an entire female culture
and set of values and beliefs that is quite different from and in many
ways far superior to the male culture?
To be blunt, it never did occur to me that there is a female culture.
Nor a male culture, for that matter. Also, I have learned not to
rank cultures as to superiority; at least, I try to keep my mind
free from that habit. It seems that the judge always has a bias.
Also, I do believe that sympathy (or empathy, if you will) is all that
is necessary. Now I will admit that I am seldom in the positions
that would give me direct experience of oppression or pressure that
women (and blacks and Indians and ...) often feel in the United States.
Hence, I may be deficient in understanding because of lack of knowledge;
however, if either direct experience or the transmitted experience of others
is not sufficient to teach me the empathy, than I am a poor human--not a
poor man, not a poor white, not a poor 37-year-old, not a poor
computer scientist, not a poor ... It is even possible, difficult
though it may be to believe, that I may have had some trouble in my
life as well.
power isn't everything.
I do not recall mentioning power in my original article. I think
that this possibly betrays an attitude on the part of my correspondent.
being a woman for a day would be wasted on you. you have chosen
the least significant and least interesting difference between
men and women as the focus for your "experiment."
Although my correspondent is welcome to her opinion, again it is
my opinion that the only significant difference between men and
women is their sexuality; most important among these is a woman's
ability to bear children. Social and cultural roles may rise out
of this difference, but sexuality lies at the bottom.
Any other view will surely lead to an attempt to make one sex superior;
it is obvious where that leads. (For what it is worth, I envy
women their sexuality.)
only a man would reduce things to sex.
Four other people have responded to the article--two with women's
names and two with men's. I have met one of the correspondents
who has a woman's name and from external appearance, I would
say that she is indeed a woman; indeed, shy a chromosome test,
I would say it was certain. All of these four correspondents
approved my response. This implies that at least one woman
did so. Hence, the statement above is falsified since at
least one non-man presumably would reduce "things" to sex.
Of course, I didn't reduce all "things" to sex; just 24 hours.
I do not normally respond publically to letters and I have
excised my correspondent's name. However, the attitude that
humans with different skin or size or age or internal organs
are somehow so different from one another that they have
less in common than they have differences disturbs me
deeply. It simply can not be supported as a basis for
society, polity, culture, or humanity.
Charles