A LITTLE CONSCIOUSNESS-RAISING TRIP

Since the resurgence of feminism in the early nineteen seventies, suggestions have emerged sporadically that women might in fact be the superior sex. Feminists such as Elizabeth Gould Davis have pointed to studies in anthropology and mythology to suggest that matriarchy was an early societal form which preceded and surpassed patriarchy in quality; Shulamith Firestone has drawn on Freudian theory to suggest the superiority of women; and as we begin to discover the great feminist writings of the nineteenth century we find women such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton writing about women's superiority with unhesitating conviction.

Most of us, however, even the most “radical”, tend to dismiss notions of female superiority with a chuckle, feeling either that the idea is fun but essentially ridiculous, or that such thoughts are somehow unfair to men, merely an attempt to "one-up" them at their own game.

The idea has persisted, however, and it becomes increasingly difficult to discount material as merely wishful thinking or unsubstantiated hypothesis. Nowadays even such scholarly fields as genetics are bringing forth exciting new information that suggests that women may be superior to men in almost every respect.

men. The issue is, first, what are the implications if men believe (unconsciously or consciously) in women's superiority; second, what are the implications if we as women begin to think of ourselves in that light? For example, if we consider the possibility that men believe much more clearly in our superiority than we do, we can see a crucial new

One scholar who is presenting challenging material on this subject is Joel Kovel, a psychohistorian who has previously studied the links between racism and sexuality. While it is true that writing by males on this subject needs the most critical analysis, because it is often simply an attempt to patronize or coopt us (after all, we've been told for years on "Mother's Day" and "Valentine's Day" that women are superior)--it is also true that men can understand and describe the inner workings of the male mind in relation to women in a way that women

cannot.

LNS/cpf

In a recent article entitled "The Castration Complex Reconsidered", Kovel suggests that there is much evidence that the entire system of patriarchy stems from men's unconscious belief that women are superior. What Kovel calls "all kinds of craziness'' follows from the initial male phobia that his first love object, his mother, will swallow him up with her overwhelming power. From this initial fear comes the glorification of the penis and of male accom. plishments and the denigration of women's genitals and women's capabilities in order to keep women under control--in short, the basic cornerstones of patriarchal society. All other sexual relationships, for males, carry the traces of this early phobia. Kovel links the craziness that creates female oppression to the same craziness that justifies and maintains the oppression of blacks and the rape of the environment. He summarizes, today's malecontrolled world as "a world which certifies delusion as truth from many angles".

J

The key issue for purposes of this discussion is not whether we can prove that women are superior to

BUT

do the

BUT

and do

go

BUT

more

must prepare to deal with a desperation that will stop at nothing. As Kovel suggests, male society, instead of relinquishing its paranoia to the rationality of the feminist analysis, clings yet more desperately to its ideological house of cards, striking out at the most gentle of analysts (such as Susan Brownmiller) and at the most peaceful of alternatives (such as day care centers).

What happens to women when we begin to ask seriously, are we superior? First, we begin to see that our previous pooh-poohing of the idea is rooted in our continuing unconscious oppression. Even while we mouth radical feminist beliefs, we continue to define ourselves, unconsciously, as inferior. Further, we can see how cleverly we have been taught female personality characteristics to main. tain our oppression. It is women who worry about being generous, unselfish, fair, in relation to men. Is there not some contradiction in that? Why are the powerless, instead of the powerful, expected to be generous?

What follows almost immediately upon those thoughts is the realization that, if we are not the superior sex in all respects, we are certainly outstanding in one respect--we are the most foolish. It appears that in the face of all the evidence, women have for centuries purchased the myth of our inferiority. As Kovel writes, "What a villain is the inner voice that tells a woman to hate what she is and envy what she is not.'

dimension in the counterattack currently being waged against the women's movement, Rapes, woman-battering and the subtle media glorification of violence against women become symptoms, not of a last spasm of protest, but rather of an all-out campaign to stop what may be viewed by men (primarily unconsciously) as a wave that will literally sweep them away. If this is true, women

The irony is that somewhere in our psyches we have always known that the concept of male superiority was absurd. Women have always chuckled over the idea of "penis envy" and have known it was conceivable only in a male mind. Sylvia Plath describes a college woman's first view of her boyfriend's genitals, "The only thing I could think of was turkey neck and turkey gizzards." The fourth thought on this consciousness trip is that there are many common bonds between the oppression of women and that of other groups, particularly blacks. Much more study needs to be given to the sexual and unconscious overtones of the гаре of women, of blacks, and of the environment.

At some point one wonders, if we are superior, should we now wrest power from men and put them "'in their place," as they perhaps did to us, long ago? Of course not. The concept itself is the product of the very patriarchal value system that we seek to leave behind. We must continue to move on toward the goal that women have envisioned throughout all these centuries of exile from power a gentle, caring, cooperating society.

The last thought is the most precious: what a sense of delight comes with the lifting, even momentarily, of the load of self-doubt that most of us carry about! Probably doubts will return, again draining precious energy. Still, the vision that we may indeed be Amazons is one that can sustain many lifetimes of struggle. .. Marge Grevatt

WHAT SHE WANTS ENDORSES CLEVELAND PUBLIC RADIO

Want She Wants, Cleveland Women Working, Cuyahoga Women's Political Caucus, and Women Speak Out for Peace and Justice endorse current efforts to bring the full schedule of National Public Radio to Cleveland. WSW believes that NPR will present greater coverage of women's issues than is now available on other radio news programs.

Radio stations in the U.S. exist for the most part in only two varieties -those whose purpose is public service and those whose purpose is commercial. Cleveland is one of the few major cities of the U.S. without a single full-service publie radio station. Cleveland Public Radio was formed as a broadly based community-run organization whose sole object is to bring full-service public radio to the Greater Cleveland area.

National Public Radio (NPR) is the federally owned network, the counterpart to PBS for television, that provides nationally distributed programming of high quality to affiliated stations. Some of this programming is available in the Cleveland area on WKSU, the Kent State station, and on WBOE, the Cleveland Board of Education

station.

Unfortunately WKSU is too distant for reliable reception in Cleveland, and WBOE is principally used for classroom broadcasting to the Cleveland school system.

Since early last year, WBOE has brought into Cleveland limited amounts of the excellent programming that is available to every public radio station from NPR. This programming, however, has only been aired in Cleveland during non-classroom hours. During school hours, WBOE's full 50,000 watts have been utilized for instructional broadcasting with programming distinctly different from normal public radio programming.

Recently, members of the Board of Education have questioned the need for the Board to operate WBOE. Keith D. Smith, Radio Projects Manager of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, has indicated that a full-service public radio station would need an operating budget of nearly $500,000 per year to serve adequately the public radio needs "of the Greater Cleveland area. The School Board's

financial problems, however, have prevented WBOE's budget from expanding to anything near this level.

As Cleveland's only public radio outlet, WBOE must offer two mutually exclusive forms of programming in the course of a single day. Since radio is primarily a daytime medium reaching motorists, people at work, homemakers, the elderly, the young and the blind, WBOE is inhibited by the daytime classroom format from gaining significant momentum in developing this daytime audience.

The April/May 1977 Arbitron ratings showed WBOE had less than a 0.4 percent market share. As the broadcast voice of an urban school system, WBOE provides no initial attraction to those who have little interest in classroom programming, and it faces serious credibility problems (whether or not justified) in dealing with public affairs programming for the community.

These programming difficulties bear a direct relationship to the problems of raising significant (continued on page 7) September 1978/What She Wants/page 3