>At 17:54 31-07-00 , Ricardo wrote:
>. My own view is that this problem is (partly) due to the
> >fact that the gay men who control the fashion are not interested in
> >real women but prefer them to look asexual or androgynous.
>
>I agree entirely. In fact, I've been spouting this view, for years. I'd
>be interesteed to know whether anyone has any good arguments against it.
>
>Homophobia isn't necessarily one of 'em, Louis (strikes me in fact as a
>knee-jerk response), and it would be a problematic diagnosis in my case
>since I'm bisexual.
>
>cheers,
>Joanna
Anti-Semites used to say that the Jews control prostitution, white
slavery, etc. and therefore are a menace to white women, who must be
protected by chivalrous white men (see Sander Gilman, Klaus
Theweleit, etc.). Joanna's & Ricardo's argument belongs to this
genre of conspiracy theory. Nowadays, anti-Semitism isn't
respectable, but homophobia is still respectable. It's still common
to blame gay men (or alternatively what is sometimes called "latent
homosexuality") as the cause of women's oppression (see Eve Sedgwick).
As for gay men & feminism, while not all gay men are feminists, if
anything, gay male leftists learned from & supported second-wave
feminism much earlier than straight male leftists got around to
checking it out (see John D'Emilio's _Making Trouble: Essays on Gay
History, Politics, and the University _ for instance). That's
because the oppression of homosexuals has much to do with the
oppression of women, and gay male leftists realized that before
straight male leftists did. Gay men have been derided as "sissies,"
that is, being "like women" who are objects of straight male
contempt; feminists have been often called "dykes," for they have
refused to conform to straight gender norms. Not enough women --
including lesbians & bisexuals -- have appreciated this fact, though
on average straight women seem less homophobic than straight men.
Yoshie
