ACS1R@UHUPVM1.BITNET ("k.c. powell") (06/15/88)
I have seen some of the recent network discussion of gender, etc. in sci-
fi and fantasy. I would like to respond to a few things. The first was
the suggestion that Heinlein's proposition that men somehow bear children
bespoke some feminism on his part. I would ask you to read Frankenstein
if you want to see the process of creation in the hands of men. One can
argue that the desire to reproduce is the ultimate autoerotic, misogynist
fantasy. Remove women from the process altogether. I grant that this is
a radical interpretation and one with which I do not agree but it shows
that there truly are several sides to any story.
My second comment is to Henry Spencer who dismisses, in a fashion typical
of those who have nothing to gain by a change and possibly some ego to lose,
the need to address the sexism inherent in language. Henry, there is no
more immediate, profound or basic concern than the structure of communication
especially when it's structure has a built-in repression.
I only ask that men like yourself read a few things in which the generic
she is used and see if indeed it does not require a bit of double identifica-
tion. This is the gripe, and I believe a legitimate one. The use of "he"
to refer to both men and women is confusing to the subconscious. The female
must say oh, okay that means me too but her subconscious knows it is not.
Beyond the issue of double identification, the generic "he" tells little girls
and big that all doctors, lawyers, candlestick makers, astronauts, etc. are
male. We grow up reading that all representatives of humanity are male. It
is a subtle innuendo that perhaps we do not quite qualify as humans. Anyway,
Mr. Spencer, I only ask that you reconsider your cavalier view of language and
its role in our lives, evolution, aspirations, and fundamental relation one to
another. Sincerely,
K.C. Powell