(big snip)
It's interesting how this text starts out representing the 'ecofeminist'
ideology from the oh-so-very-proper-scientific-paper third-person
grammar (you can almost see the quotes around the sloganeering expressions
and patented vitriolic rhetoric). Add to this a vaguely interesting
(though incomplete and thoroughly myopic) presentation of a perceived
cultural pattern, and you almost miss how the pedantic becomes preachy,
smoothly shifting gears into a quasi first-person-assertive:
>Revolt against the
>predominance of this divine chain of being has followed, and the
>guerillas have not been exclusively female. Some men have come to
>feel cramped and pigeonholed in the role of overseer on the domination
>plantation and degraded and ashamed of what is expected of them there.
> They have therefore joined the rebellion against the JCIZ gender
>hierarchy, agreeing with Martin Luther King that you can't hold folks
>down in a ditch unless you climb down in there with them. As women
>and men come to the practical conclusion that only equality of rights,
>responsibilities and opportunities works, however, they also tend to
>come to the spiritual conclusion that this is true because the sexes
>equally approach divinity. This, however, would require deity to be
>comprised of masculinity and femininity in equal measure, which of
>course directly contradicts the JCIZ.
.....et cetera, et cetera, ad-fucking-nauseum. What makes me ill is
the number of people I can see falling for this tired old trick. I
wonder what motivates this "Salamantis" (one-word name; how "earthy").
If he were male, and gay........hmmmmmm.
Dan