Re: virus: Something Remains Missing

Michelle Lee Gendvil (
Fri, 18 Jul 1997 13:54:27 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 18 Jul 1997, Tim Rhodes wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jul 1997, Michelle Lee Gendvil wrote:
> > So I label this meme "bullshit" and go on my happy way. I get along
> > fine with men because I do not put a relationship on a level at which
> > I use my "femaleness" for empowerment. The problem I have is with those
> > males who are unable to see me as essentially "human".
> That is because the men *do* put their relationships in a level that uses
> "maleness" for empowerment. If you're not comfortable using all of your
> tools, your feminine power, then aren't you dis-empowering yourself?
> Aren't you still bein' held down by da MAN!?! My sister-child, ain't it
> about time?! Ain't it about time you done freed yous'self from da MAN!!!
> > Because of this reason many women subscribe to the notion that they are
> > objects without question.
> > In other words, women and minorities have one thing on their side, the
> > negative connotations attached to oppression of a minority group.
> Wow, our memes are doing better than we could have ever expected! You
> actually *beleive* being a victom is empowering! Well good for you, lil'
> darlin'! Keep up the good work, you're almost there...
> > I will finish up by saying I don't know exactly how to define
> > the strengths and weaknesses of this meme for society at large. I know
> > what the strengths and weaknesses are for myself. I don't want to be a
> > clone and therefore I don't see anything special in total "equality".
> Why would you settle for "equality"?
> > I figure as long as the minority rights activists keep up their end of
> > it, I personally do not need to fear oppression beyond simple
> > manipulation.
> There is no greater oppression than a slave that needs no chain.
> OUch! Okay I see your point. This is a wonderful example of what I was
saying, I am in a position once again to battle my male counterparts
about my gender. I believe it was you who asked if there were any females
in on this conversation. Why might you ask that? You say because women
are the audience in a man's world, right? So I felt the responsibility to
make myself as a woman known and defend myself as your "audience". My
point is that since I have revealed myself as a female who is interested
in a topic discussed by (coincidentally) mostly or all men, the gender
issue is now moot.

One thing I don't understand is how does it make me a "slave" if I do not
use my "femaleness" for empowerment? I feel empowered enough in my self,
and yes, my gender is obviously a part of myself. I probably
misrepresented the term "femaleness" because I do look and act like a
woman and hence derive power from looks. Perhaps I should have said I do
not use my sexuality as a female for power over males, and maybe even that
is not always true. The context in which I used the term "femaleness" is
actually a personal one and I don't have the time to expain it, or the
desire to. So you can assume that I am a slave that don't need no
chain if you want. I cannot "prove" anything to you in my defense
beyond what I have said, nor do I care to.