Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utcsstat.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsstat!laura
From: laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: feminising literature FLAME
Message-ID: <1690@utcsstat.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Jan-84 04:29:22 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsstat.1690
Posted: Mon Jan 23 04:29:22 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 23-Jan-84 05:19:41 EST
Organization: U. of Toronto, Canada
Lines: 63

I have a new solution. Let's try this one on for size. Let us remove every,
single, solitary feminine word in the English language, with the exception
of "female" which will be useful when it is absolutely necessary to know the
sex of the organism involved. (That way we won't get any more spayed tom cats,
but that is for net.pets...). No more of this "he/she" nonsense -- drop "she" 
as an antiquidated form.

Fine? Not fine? Why not? There is something vital/fantastic/different
whatever about being a woman, perhaps? (Damned if I know what it is,
actually. This is distinct from the wonderful things about being a *person*
which I know about.) If you recognise the existence of this "something", then
perhaps you can only appreciate "feminised" literature. On the other hand
the original may have no relevance to you -- if that "something" is so
important to you that you cannot appreciate the original then you may be
more "female" than human.

If that is the case, then you have my deepest sympathy. I hope that you
can learn to work around this severe limitation, because there are a lot
of wonderful people out there whom you will never be able to understand
or appreciate, simply because they are not female.

But, compassion be damned -- I WILL NOT HAVE YOU TWIST MY WORDS. I may
actually get something published one day. I am still working at it. If
I catch anybody "feminising" my words, I shall likely try to do as much
violence to you as possible. It is too damn bad that I will end up eaten
by the worms some day -- you will not get to putrify my words as well,
since if anything is likely to survive me it will be them. 

I have come to the conclusion that very few people know what it is to
write something. To be driven to write. They assume that the books that
authors put out are for their amusement. No doubt the English departments
which gleefully take a hatchet to works and play the game of Sigmund Freud
are in part to blame, but they do not have the only blame.

Perhaps it is that few people have ever tried to write. Or wanted to and
found that they couldn't get it down on paper before the daemon had
passed and the strength of what they were saying faded to mere false
recollection. Or sat for an hour trying to remember *one* *perfect*
*word*. Or shredded yesterday's brilliance, discovering today that
it was mere sophistry. Or taped together the day before yesterday's
brilliance, discovering that yesterday one had suffered from ennui...

Did you think that books came polished like machine parts out of
factories? That an author just had to work from 9-5 like other folks?
Then you have never known one. Every word might as well be written
in blood. 

I am a lousy writer -- yet I know this. One day I may finally get
enough together to finally get something published. It is unlikely
to be "Literature", but let us assume it is. Let us assume that
somebody decides that they like one line so well that they should
use it as an aphorism. This in itself is bad enough -- shall one
line be used to describe a whole person -- but let us assume that
it is a very significant and powerful line. 

AND YOU WOULD CHANGE WHOLE WORDS. For this, I might kill you. There
are very few things that I could see myself killing for, and this is
one of them. And if you still cannot see why, then
you should not read books at all for you are in no condition to
appreciate them.

Laura Creighton
utzoo!utcsstat!laura