University of Virginia Library

Lib Retorts

The recent column by Robert
Gillmore on Women's Liberation
was a finely woven tissue of cynical
condescension, misguided advice
and ignorance of several themes
central to the Women's Liberation
Movement. It need hardly be noted
that references to "whimpering
little bitches," "Hebraic toughs,"
and "Gloria dears" add little to the
lucidity of his analysis.

Gillmore's assertion that the
value of individuality must have
nothing to do with a group is
inappropriate in view of prevailing
social conditions. His naive liberal
reliance on individual initiative is
reminiscent of nineteenth century
capitalists and twentieth century
racists. When the prevailing
ideology and social structure assigns
roles to individuals, regardless of
their unique talents and aspirations.
it is useless to advise an individual
solution to a group problem.

One of women's greatest
handicaps today is that they are
isolated from one another, shut
away alone with children in young
adulthood with little opportunity
to share their common experiences
and feelings. Without organization.
both for consciousness-raising and
social action, the vast majority of
women have no choice but to
accept the dearth of alternative life
styles available to them. The vast
heroic inner-direction advised by
Gillmore is liberal pablum. Sexism
is institutionalized.

Gillmore's comments on
male/female relationships, the
family and sexuality reveal only his
own problems with regard to these
areas of human existence and have
nothing to do with Women's
Liberation. Individual women, of
course, all make their own decisions
with regard to the question of
marriage and children.

However, the goal of most
women in the movement is not to
pay "maids" - no doubt black and
female to free them from the
"horribly ordinary stuff" which
goes along with human survival, nor
to overcome "feminine sexual
reticence." Rather, our orientation
is to modify attitudes, social
structural conditions and parental
roles so that children grow up
sensing the full range of human
potentialities rather than being
caged into stereotyped sexual roles
and so that adults may truly enjoy
children.

With regard to sexuality, women
are not panting after the trustful
experiences Gillmore attributes to
men, but are trying to put an end
to sexual relationships in which
women are more objects for others'
satisfaction and attempting to
relate to other human beings in
ways that express and satisfy their
own sexuality.

In short, Bobby dear, we do not
seek a society comprised of
intellectual elites living off the
labor of those they pay to handle
aspects of existence. Rather, it is a
society in which individuals can
relate to one another as unique and
valuable human beings, regardless
of their sex, toward which we
aspire.

Charlottesville Women's
Liberation

Mr. Gillmore replies: You
good-hearted ladies. I am afraid,
have done little more but to beg my
question. Your several goals
especially that of "relating" - are
much too specific and thus limiting.
The highest value must remain
individuality - and, a society which
nourishes and sustains it. Women's
Lib must be big enough to include
both you and, say, the modern likes
of Harriet Taylor Mill.