Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [mythsoc]: "Beauty of the female"(What if you're not BEAUTIFUL???)

Expand Messages
  • Lezlie
    I ve been hanging around younger women, their issues and experiences are very different from mine, and thank the Gods that is the case! IMHO (at the risk of
    Message 1 of 5 , Feb 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I've been "hanging around" younger women, their issues and experiences
      are very different from mine, and thank the Gods that is the case!

      IMHO (at the risk of causing a riot): the critiques of feminism I have
      seen here recently are stuck in 1968 and should be *retired*.

      There is too much real work to be done in the world on behalf of women
      and children to be bothered by "feminine" vs. "feminist" rhetoric that
      is at least 40 years old ... just my 2 cents, mind. What Lewis said
      about the politics of his day were vaild (maybe) in his day, but are
      -- well -- quaint is the word that comes to mind in 2006.

      A side: I never considered "Me & Bobby McGee" to be especially
      feminist, I think the Prof. in question was s-t-r-e-c-h-i-n-g,
      personally. Haight/Ashbury ethos, maybe, but feminist...?
      Oh...brother... about as relevant as the endless question of Arwen had
      any girl-Elf children to play with... Lezlie

      --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Mike Foster <mafoster@...> wrote:
      >
      > Ruth Pitter was such a one.
      >
      > 'Ware, though. A member of Far Westfarthing smial was in a grad school
      > class at a nearby university that shall go un[Bradley]named.
      >
      > Prof. played Janis Joplin version of "Me & Bobby McGee" and began
      hyping
      > Joplin's feminist views in her lyric. Uh, our friend reported, the
      song
      > was written by Kris Kristofferson. The prof. disputed this and it
      > didn't help Jim's grade.
      >
      > Foster
      >
      > Bonnie Callahan wrote:
      >
      > >I wish CSL & like-minded believers had known more women like my
      friends & I,
      > >who strive to surpass "Mere
      > >Femininity". Can't be BOTHERED. WE're SO irritated by "Womans**t. I
      think I'll
      > >write a parody of "ShoddyLands" where the person he gets stuck
      inside of next
      > >is a jock. (OOPS, now someone else is gonna do it first, I'd better
      get busy!
      > >Hey, let's have a writing competition & publish all the results in
      Mythic
      > >Circle!)
      > >
      > >Gender ID can become a spiritual poison.
      > >
      > >I never felt a lot of antipathy towards the predominance of males
      playing roles
      > >of questers, heroes, rescuers,
      > >adventurers because I identified w. them as PEOPLE. It didn't seem
      to occur to
      > >me that "Oh I can't rescue
      > >Frodo or carry the Ring bcs. I'm a GIRL." It was some yrs. later
      that I was
      > >exposed to the feminist crit. of
      > >literature. And I still insisted "Enter the role of the Hero as a
      HUMAN BEING
      > >first"! I guess that kept me
      > >a little saner than I might otherwise have felt!
      > >
      > >
      > >Bonnie
      > >
      > >Stolzi wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >>I recently tried to get some help on the quote by cross-posting to
      the CSL
      > >>list, SpareOom. One of their members wrote
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>>A wonderful clue! I've found the letter
      > >>>to Barfield. It
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>was written June 19, 1930. In it, Lewis mentions
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>Coventry
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>Patmore's "Angel in the House," and writes this to
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>Barfield: "What
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>particularly impressed me was his taking--what one
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>expects to find
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>mentioned only in anti-feminists--the lilithian
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>desire to be admired
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>and making it his chief point--the lover as
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>primarily the mechanism
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>by wh. [sic] the woman's beauty apprehends itself."
      > >>>>
      > >>>>'Lewis expands on the idea in the next paragraph
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>("The idea of female
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>beauty is the erotic stimulus for women as well as
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>men.") He then
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>says: "You are very good on this, in Margaret in the
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>novel,"
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>referring, as Hooper helpfully says in a footnote,
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>to Barfield's
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>>novel, English People.
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>ENGLISH PEOPLE, I have learned, was never published and is in an
      archive
      > >>somewhere, I think at the Wade Collection. But this citation of a
      Lewis
      > >>letter may be the first time the idea of the "lilithian desire"
      crossed
      > >>CSL's mind.
      > >>
      > >>Other readers checked the Patmore original and did not find the
      quote there.
      > >>I incline more and more to think that Lewis (a master of pastiche
      in any
      > >>case) composed the quote which Jane reads, himself.
      > >>
      > >>Diamond Proudbrook
      > >>
      > >>The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
      > >>Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
      > >Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Mike Foster
      Stretching, indeed, especially if prof. identified Janis Joplin as the writer. Like saying the Wife of Bath s tale was written by Mrs. Chaucer. Mike ...
      Message 2 of 5 , Feb 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Stretching, indeed, especially if prof. identified Janis Joplin as the
        writer. Like saying the Wife of Bath's tale was written by Mrs. Chaucer.

        Mike

        Lezlie wrote:

        >I've been "hanging around" younger women, their issues and experiences
        >are very different from mine, and thank the Gods that is the case!
        >
        >IMHO (at the risk of causing a riot): the critiques of feminism I have
        >seen here recently are stuck in 1968 and should be *retired*.
        >
        >There is too much real work to be done in the world on behalf of women
        >and children to be bothered by "feminine" vs. "feminist" rhetoric that
        >is at least 40 years old ... just my 2 cents, mind. What Lewis said
        >about the politics of his day were vaild (maybe) in his day, but are
        >-- well -- quaint is the word that comes to mind in 2006.
        >
        >A side: I never considered "Me & Bobby McGee" to be especially
        >feminist, I think the Prof. in question was s-t-r-e-c-h-i-n-g,
        >personally. Haight/Ashbury ethos, maybe, but feminist...?
        >Oh...brother... about as relevant as the endless question of Arwen had
        >any girl-Elf children to play with... Lezlie
        >
        >--- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Mike Foster <mafoster@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >>Ruth Pitter was such a one.
        >>
        >>'Ware, though. A member of Far Westfarthing smial was in a grad school
        >>class at a nearby university that shall go un[Bradley]named.
        >>
        >>Prof. played Janis Joplin version of "Me & Bobby McGee" and began
        >>
        >>
        >hyping
        >
        >
        >>Joplin's feminist views in her lyric. Uh, our friend reported, the
        >>
        >>
        >song
        >
        >
        >>was written by Kris Kristofferson. The prof. disputed this and it
        >>didn't help Jim's grade.
        >>
        >>Foster
        >>
        >>Bonnie Callahan wrote:
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>>I wish CSL & like-minded believers had known more women like my
        >>>
        >>>
        >friends & I,
        >
        >
        >>>who strive to surpass "Mere
        >>>Femininity". Can't be BOTHERED. WE're SO irritated by "Womans**t. I
        >>>
        >>>
        >think I'll
        >
        >
        >>>write a parody of "ShoddyLands" where the person he gets stuck
        >>>
        >>>
        >inside of next
        >
        >
        >>>is a jock. (OOPS, now someone else is gonna do it first, I'd better
        >>>
        >>>
        >get busy!
        >
        >
        >>>Hey, let's have a writing competition & publish all the results in
        >>>
        >>>
        >Mythic
        >
        >
        >>>Circle!)
        >>>
        >>>Gender ID can become a spiritual poison.
        >>>
        >>>I never felt a lot of antipathy towards the predominance of males
        >>>
        >>>
        >playing roles
        >
        >
        >>>of questers, heroes, rescuers,
        >>>adventurers because I identified w. them as PEOPLE. It didn't seem
        >>>
        >>>
        >to occur to
        >
        >
        >>>me that "Oh I can't rescue
        >>>Frodo or carry the Ring bcs. I'm a GIRL." It was some yrs. later
        >>>
        >>>
        >that I was
        >
        >
        >>>exposed to the feminist crit. of
        >>>literature. And I still insisted "Enter the role of the Hero as a
        >>>
        >>>
        >HUMAN BEING
        >
        >
        >>>first"! I guess that kept me
        >>>a little saner than I might otherwise have felt!
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>Bonnie
        >>>
        >>>Stolzi wrote:
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>>I recently tried to get some help on the quote by cross-posting to
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >the CSL
        >
        >
        >>>>list, SpareOom. One of their members wrote
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>>A wonderful clue! I've found the letter
        >>>>>to Barfield. It
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>was written June 19, 1930. In it, Lewis mentions
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>Coventry
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>Patmore's "Angel in the House," and writes this to
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>Barfield: "What
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>particularly impressed me was his taking--what one
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>expects to find
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>mentioned only in anti-feminists--the lilithian
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>desire to be admired
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>and making it his chief point--the lover as
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>primarily the mechanism
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>by wh. [sic] the woman's beauty apprehends itself."
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>'Lewis expands on the idea in the next paragraph
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>("The idea of female
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>beauty is the erotic stimulus for women as well as
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>men.") He then
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>says: "You are very good on this, in Margaret in the
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>novel,"
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>referring, as Hooper helpfully says in a footnote,
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>to Barfield's
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>
        >>>>>>novel, English People.
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>>
        >>>>ENGLISH PEOPLE, I have learned, was never published and is in an
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >archive
        >
        >
        >>>>somewhere, I think at the Wade Collection. But this citation of a
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >Lewis
        >
        >
        >>>>letter may be the first time the idea of the "lilithian desire"
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >crossed
        >
        >
        >>>>CSL's mind.
        >>>>
        >>>>Other readers checked the Patmore original and did not find the
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >quote there.
        >
        >
        >>>>I incline more and more to think that Lewis (a master of pastiche
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >in any
        >
        >
        >>>>case) composed the quote which Jane reads, himself.
        >>>>
        >>>>Diamond Proudbrook
        >>>>
        >>>>The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
        >>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>
        >>>The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
        >>>Yahoo! Groups Links
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Lezlie
        Indeed! And, in academics, correct references are everything! Lezlie ... Chaucer. ... school
        Message 3 of 5 , Feb 8, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Indeed! And, in academics, correct references are everything! Lezlie

          --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Mike Foster <mafoster@...> wrote:
          >
          > Stretching, indeed, especially if prof. identified Janis Joplin as the
          > writer. Like saying the Wife of Bath's tale was written by Mrs.
          Chaucer.
          >
          > Mike
          >
          > Lezlie wrote:
          >
          > >I've been "hanging around" younger women, their issues and experiences
          > >are very different from mine, and thank the Gods that is the case!
          > >
          > >IMHO (at the risk of causing a riot): the critiques of feminism I have
          > >seen here recently are stuck in 1968 and should be *retired*.
          > >
          > >There is too much real work to be done in the world on behalf of women
          > >and children to be bothered by "feminine" vs. "feminist" rhetoric that
          > >is at least 40 years old ... just my 2 cents, mind. What Lewis said
          > >about the politics of his day were vaild (maybe) in his day, but are
          > >-- well -- quaint is the word that comes to mind in 2006.
          > >
          > >A side: I never considered "Me & Bobby McGee" to be especially
          > >feminist, I think the Prof. in question was s-t-r-e-c-h-i-n-g,
          > >personally. Haight/Ashbury ethos, maybe, but feminist...?
          > >Oh...brother... about as relevant as the endless question of Arwen had
          > >any girl-Elf children to play with... Lezlie
          > >
          > >--- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Mike Foster <mafoster@> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > >>Ruth Pitter was such a one.
          > >>
          > >>'Ware, though. A member of Far Westfarthing smial was in a grad
          school
          > >>class at a nearby university that shall go un[Bradley]named.
          > >>
          > >>Prof. played Janis Joplin version of "Me & Bobby McGee" and began
          > >>
          > >>
          > >hyping
          > >
          > >
          > >>Joplin's feminist views in her lyric. Uh, our friend reported, the
          > >>
          > >>
          > >song
          > >
          > >
          > >>was written by Kris Kristofferson. The prof. disputed this and it
          > >>didn't help Jim's grade.
          > >>
          > >>Foster
          > >>
          > >>Bonnie Callahan wrote:
          > >>
          > >>
          > >>
          > >>>I wish CSL & like-minded believers had known more women like my
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >friends & I,
          > >
          > >
          > >>>who strive to surpass "Mere
          > >>>Femininity". Can't be BOTHERED. WE're SO irritated by "Womans**t. I
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >think I'll
          > >
          > >
          > >>>write a parody of "ShoddyLands" where the person he gets stuck
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >inside of next
          > >
          > >
          > >>>is a jock. (OOPS, now someone else is gonna do it first, I'd better
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >get busy!
          > >
          > >
          > >>>Hey, let's have a writing competition & publish all the results in
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >Mythic
          > >
          > >
          > >>>Circle!)
          > >>>
          > >>>Gender ID can become a spiritual poison.
          > >>>
          > >>>I never felt a lot of antipathy towards the predominance of males
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >playing roles
          > >
          > >
          > >>>of questers, heroes, rescuers,
          > >>>adventurers because I identified w. them as PEOPLE. It didn't seem
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >to occur to
          > >
          > >
          > >>>me that "Oh I can't rescue
          > >>>Frodo or carry the Ring bcs. I'm a GIRL." It was some yrs. later
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >that I was
          > >
          > >
          > >>>exposed to the feminist crit. of
          > >>>literature. And I still insisted "Enter the role of the Hero as a
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >HUMAN BEING
          > >
          > >
          > >>>first"! I guess that kept me
          > >>>a little saner than I might otherwise have felt!
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>Bonnie
          > >>>
          > >>>Stolzi wrote:
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>>I recently tried to get some help on the quote by cross-posting to
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >the CSL
          > >
          > >
          > >>>>list, SpareOom. One of their members wrote
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>>A wonderful clue! I've found the letter
          > >>>>>to Barfield. It
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>was written June 19, 1930. In it, Lewis mentions
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>Coventry
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>Patmore's "Angel in the House," and writes this to
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>Barfield: "What
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>particularly impressed me was his taking--what one
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>expects to find
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>mentioned only in anti-feminists--the lilithian
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>desire to be admired
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>and making it his chief point--the lover as
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>primarily the mechanism
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>by wh. [sic] the woman's beauty apprehends itself."
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>'Lewis expands on the idea in the next paragraph
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>("The idea of female
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>beauty is the erotic stimulus for women as well as
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>men.") He then
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>says: "You are very good on this, in Margaret in the
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>novel,"
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>referring, as Hooper helpfully says in a footnote,
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>to Barfield's
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>
          > >>>>>>novel, English People.
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>>>
          > >>>>ENGLISH PEOPLE, I have learned, was never published and is in an
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >archive
          > >
          > >
          > >>>>somewhere, I think at the Wade Collection. But this citation of a
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >Lewis
          > >
          > >
          > >>>>letter may be the first time the idea of the "lilithian desire"
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >crossed
          > >
          > >
          > >>>>CSL's mind.
          > >>>>
          > >>>>Other readers checked the Patmore original and did not find the
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >quote there.
          > >
          > >
          > >>>>I incline more and more to think that Lewis (a master of pastiche
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >in any
          > >
          > >
          > >>>>case) composed the quote which Jane reads, himself.
          > >>>>
          > >>>>Diamond Proudbrook
          > >>>>
          > >>>>The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
          > >>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>>
          > >>>
          > >>>The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
          > >>>Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>>
          > >>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >>
          > >>
          > >>
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
          > >Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.