In “How to Date Men When You Hate Men,” Blythe Roberson’s hilarious new book about that classic straight woman’s paradox of wanting to smooch her systemic oppressor, there’s a description of a situation familiar to many of us: The author likes a guy, but she can’t tell if he likes her back. After months of mixed messages, she realizes her infatuation has had political consequences. “Instead of focusing on the intersectional-socialist-matriarchal revolution,” Ms. Roberson writes, “I’ve been focusing on whether or not what just happened was a date.”
She is an Everywoman, not a radical separatist. But her observations struck me as uncanny echoes of the Second Wave’s militant political celibates, a small but influential feminist sect that formed during another time when the pervasive perils of patriarchy were laid bare. I’ve always thought that sexual repression equals bad outcomes for women. Still, these radicals made compelling arguments about the destructive, distracting, frankly dangerous power of romance.
It’s hard not to read these women again during our own era of political and sexual upheaval and wonder whether love is standing in the way of a feminist future.
In the late 1960s, several years before “women’s liberation” had truly become a mass movement, some radical feminists came to view sex as anathema to effective political energy. Dana Densmore, a founding member of the separatist group Cell 16, took issue with the idea that sex was a basic human need. In 1968 in a journal appropriately titled “No More Fun and Games,” she wrote that “guerrillas” had important things to do and couldn’t be sidetracked by sex, which was “inconvenient, time-consuming, energy-draining and irrelevant.”
Romantic love was a problem, too. Ti-Grace Atkinson, a radical feminist philosopher, positioned it as the enemy of independence and insecurity. “What is love but need?” she wrote in 1968. “What is love but fear?” Other early feminists weren’t against romance in a perfect world, but they reasoned that until conditions improved, heterosexual love was too tied to marriage and societal expectations of what it meant to be feminine. Shulamith Firestone, in her classic 1970 manifesto “The Dialectic of Sex,” saw romance as “a cultural tool of male power to keep women from knowing their conditions.” Radical lesbians like Jill Johnston viewed loving women instead of men as a necessary political choice.
Of course, if romance is the enemy of revolution, it’s also the enemy of rigid mandates like celibacy. Ultimately, the pro-sex feminists won out. In this moment of feminist resurgence, no one is suggesting we stop having sex.
For me, a woman who came of age with Lil’ Kim and “Sex and the City,” the idea feels like cutting off your nose to spite your face; eroticism is an irresistible source of pleasure. Which is precisely the point: “Why has all joy and excitement been concentrated, driven into one narrow, difficult-to-find alley of human experience?” Firestone wrote. Even she knew what it was like to be consumed with the pursuit of romance. In 2012, in an interview shortly after Firestone died, the feminist activist Rosalyn Baxandall told me that Firestone was “no political celibate” in the late ’60s; instead, she remembered her as “boy-crazy.”
“Boy-crazy” is a revealing choice of words that, if anything, proves the celibates’ point. Anyone who’s fallen in love knows that it can feel like a bout of a debilitating illness. The psychologist Dorothy Tennov coined the term “limerence” in 1979 to describe the obsessive early stages of love, particularly the unrequited kind. She found that among the symptoms of limerents were “intrusive thinking,” and a literal “aching of the ‘heart.’”
Doesn’t it make sense to avoid this destabilizing, often delusional state when you’re trying to start a movement? Especially when the source of that state is a member of the group that’s oppressing you, and especially when that oppression often leads to marriage? Maybe it’s necessary to accept that love is an obstacle to rational thought.
It was an obstacle for the separatists in the long term. Many Second Wave feminists left the movement when other women shunned them for living with men — or even bringing their male children to meetings.
And yet, despite the cautionary tales of dogma run amok, there is something inspiring about how confrontational these women were. Celibacy and separatism as lifestyles were unrealistic options for some, like women who were economically tied to their husbands, or women of color who felt that they were being forced to choose between their gender and race loyalties.
But even if straight women didn’t abandon their male lovers — and most didn’t — the ability to feel anger toward men was edifying for the movement. For many women, writes Judith Levine in her 1992 book “My Enemy, My Love,” “Man-hating was necessary, liberating, and productive — and, anyway, irrepressible.” Sometimes I wish I could conjure that unadulterated anger without worrying whether men find me palatable or sexy. How exhilarating would it be to free up that real estate in my brain?
At one point in her book, Ms. Roberson quotes Roland Barthes, a frequent muse of hers, on infatuation’s pain and ecstasy: “Love had made him into a social catastrophe, to his delight.” Sometimes it’s O.K. to be a social catastrophe, to make decisions according to a seemingly uncontrollable force rather than strict societal rules. Other times, it pays to let logic and strategy prevail. I won’t be swearing off sex anytime soon, but as I battle this latest iteration of private and public misogyny, I’ll be channeling the focused rage of the celibates.
Nona Willis Aronowitz is a writer and editor.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: email@example.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.B:
2016年103期开码资料【顾】【雍】【缓】【缓】【开】【口】【说】【道】： “【沮】【先】【生】【方】【才】【所】【言】【也】【是】【个】【办】【法】。” 【顿】【了】【顿】，【他】【继】【续】【说】【道】： “【然】【则】，【下】【官】【还】【是】【建】【议】【主】【公】，【先】【举】【行】【这】【个】【相】【亲】【大】【会】，【然】【后】【在】【发】【兵】【讨】【伐】【不】【迟】。” 【沮】【授】【面】【色】【微】【微】【一】【变】， 【正】【准】【备】【说】【话】，【哪】【料】【到】【顾】【雍】【继】【续】【开】【口】【道】： “【非】【是】【元】【叹】【不】【明】【白】【沮】【授】【先】【生】【之】【意】，【只】【是】【这】【相】【亲】【大】【会】【如】【若】【要】【进】【行】，【定】【然】【耗】
“【杀】！” “【杀】！” 【其】【中】【一】【条】【通】【道】【中】，【出】【现】【了】【一】【副】【十】【分】【诡】【异】【的】【战】【斗】【画】【面】，【只】【见】【从】【四】【面】【八】【方】【的】【通】【道】【里】【涌】【出】【一】【群】【群】【怪】【人】，【向】S【级】【英】【雄】【猪】【神】【杀】【过】【去】。 【然】【而】，【猪】【神】【始】【终】【保】【持】【着】【一】【个】【呆】【呆】【的】【表】【情】，【那】【肥】【大】【的】【手】【掌】【捏】【住】【前】【方】【的】【怪】【人】【直】【接】【塞】【到】【嘴】【里】，【一】【塞】【一】【吞】【之】【间】，【一】【个】【怪】【人】【便】【不】【见】【了】【踪】【影】。 【猪】【神】【走】【一】【路】【吃】【一】【路】，【他】【的】【肚】
【当】【老】【阴】【货】【等】【人】【带】【着】【疑】【惑】，【急】【冲】【冲】【来】【到】【演】【武】【场】，【瞬】【间】【就】【僵】【立】【当】【场】，【此】【时】【他】【们】【终】【于】【明】【白】【为】【何】【观】【众】【会】【陷】【入】【如】【此】【癫】【狂】【的】【状】【态】。 【此】【时】【光】【幕】【正】【循】【环】【回】【放】【林】【风】****【的】【画】【面】。 “【我】【日】.” 【俞】【桥】【沉】【默】【片】【刻】【后】，【直】【接】【爆】【了】【出】【口】。 【在】【慢】【镜】【头】【下】，【漫】【天】【的】【火】【光】【中】，【林】【风】【呆】【站】【在】【原】【地】，【三】【道】【火】【龙】【卷】【缠】【绕】【碾】【压】【时】，【摄】【影】【机】【捕】
【海】【婷】【面】【色】【不】【改】，【波】【澜】【不】【惊】，【道】：“【我】【们】【学】【校】【也】【有】【很】【多】【老】【教】【授】，【在】【临】【床】【医】【学】【领】【域】【具】【有】【很】【高】【的】【造】【诣】。【另】【外】【还】【有】【很】【多】【师】【兄】【师】【姐】【也】【很】【棒】，【他】【们】【都】【是】【我】【的】【榜】【样】。” “【说】【到】【我】【这】【个】【专】【业】，【五】【年】【时】【间】【是】【很】【漫】【长】【的】。【听】【说】【是】【非】【常】【辛】【苦】【的】。【基】【础】【课】【十】【多】【门】，【专】【业】【课】【五】【十】【多】【门】，【另】【外】【选】【修】【课】【也】【是】【二】【三】【十】【门】。” “【所】【以】【大】【一】【大】【二】【就】【整】【的】【跟】2016年103期开码资料【听】【了】【赵】【尚】【书】【这】【话】，【骆】【大】【都】【督】【坐】【下】【来】【不】【吭】【声】【了】。 【阴】【暗】【的】【地】【牢】，【打】【翻】【的】【食】【物】，【死】【去】【的】【老】【鼠】，【形】【成】【一】【幅】【可】【怖】【的】【画】【面】。 【赵】【尚】【书】【擦】【了】【擦】【额】【头】【冷】【汗】，【吩】【咐】【人】【去】【喊】【林】【腾】，【并】【匆】【匆】【离】【开】【地】【牢】。 【骆】【笙】【正】【等】【在】【牢】【房】【外】，【一】【见】【赵】【尚】【书】【出】【来】【就】【扑】【上】【去】，【哽】【咽】【道】：“【赵】【尚】【书】，【我】【父】【亲】【怎】【么】【样】【了】？【我】【想】【进】【去】【看】【看】，【这】【些】【人】【拦】【着】【不】【许】。”
【杨】【破】【云】【道】：“【前】【辈】【是】【否】【高】【估】【晚】【辈】【了】？【我】【从】【未】【想】【过】【这】【些】。” 【了】【伯】【道】：“【从】【现】【在】【开】【始】，【你】【必】【须】【要】【想】。【这】【世】【上】【再】【无】【第】【二】【人】【能】【有】【你】【这】【般】【的】【奇】【遇】【了】。” 【杨】【破】【云】【似】【懂】【非】【懂】【的】【点】【了】【点】【头】。 【了】【伯】【道】：“【现】【在】【尝】【试】【着】【在】【你】【的】【身】【体】【里】，【开】【辟】【一】【条】【十】【二】【经】【脉】【和】【奇】【经】【八】【脉】【之】【外】【的】【经】【脉】。” “【那】【我】【该】【怎】【么】【做】？” “【我】【不】【知】【道】。【小】
【在】【这】【研】【究】【室】【中】，【站】【着】【数】【台】【作】【助】【手】【的】【机】【械】【人】【偶】，【以】【及】【一】【个】【男】【人】。 【那】【是】【个】【让】【人】【联】【想】【到】【虔】【诚】【圣】【职】【者】【的】【表】【情】【阴】【沉】【的】【中】【年】【男】【性】。 “——【作】【为】【敲】【门】【来】【说】，【这】【是】【不】【是】【过】【于】【粗】【鲁】【了】【点】【呢】”【注】【视】【着】【被】【撕】【裂】【的】【隔】【离】【墙】，【男】【子】【以】【平】【静】【的】【语】【气】【说】【道】。 【对】【于】【这】【包】【含】【着】【讽】【刺】【意】【味】【的】【幽】【默】【台】【词】，【魔】【术】【师】【风】【格】【的】【青】【年】【苦】【笑】【了】【起】【来】：“【也】【是】【呢】，【毕】
“……【改】【天】【吧】。”【对】【此】【提】【议】，【顾】【一】【一】【倒】【是】【没】【有】【直】【接】【拒】【绝】，【但】【也】【没】【有】【一】【口】【应】【承】【下】【来】，【只】【是】【摇】【了】【摇】【头】【使】【出】【了】【拖】【字】【诀】。 【不】【过】，【应】【如】【是】【那】【家】【伙】【想】【来】【是】【很】【乐】【意】【的】。 【就】【是】…… 【就】【是】【她】【有】【点】【烦】【躁】！ 【她】【素】【来】【低】【调】【惯】【了】，【不】【喜】【欢】【那】【种】【太】【过】【招】【人】【眼】，【活】【在】【很】【多】【人】【目】【光】【之】【下】【的】【生】【活】。 【也】【许】【是】【她】【本】【身】【的】【性】【格】【问】【题】，【也】【有】【可】【能】【是】