True, true: the post before this one is rather grumpy--apologies!
I'd like to build a list of contemporary lesbian poets--readers (well I assume there are none but...) please help!
Friday, July 29, 2011
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
It is irritating to have poems accepted and then have the journal decide to shutdown and one is not notified till wayyyy late.
Too, will I ever get a response regarding my submission to a forthcoming POMO Pastoral anthology?
I wld love to be an editor but know I don't have the needed skills to cut it as one; or one who is not maddeningly disorganized.
Journals which never respond are frustrating--especially when one writes them more than once asking what's up?
That said, I admire editors: it's just some have their shit together and others seem rather bumbling.
Too, will I ever get a response regarding my submission to a forthcoming POMO Pastoral anthology?
I wld love to be an editor but know I don't have the needed skills to cut it as one; or one who is not maddeningly disorganized.
Journals which never respond are frustrating--especially when one writes them more than once asking what's up?
That said, I admire editors: it's just some have their shit together and others seem rather bumbling.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Urgh--I just wrote a terrific post and lost it; urgh.
Wee recap: how write--sing!--woman (eeky singular, I agree) without singing heterosexism. Can one? No, not one; can we; will that we always be a wee one?
Homo-hetero divide as (and in terms of need for critical recognition, more) important as male-female divide.
I, personally, think of heterosexual women as totally like men (and vice-versa) because of the heterosexual common denominator.
The male female divide is a great way to divert attention from the hetero-homo one, and to downplay feminism's frequent complictity in heterosexual hegemony. It is also a great fit with capitalism, and may be more geniunly the naturalization of marketing/Maddison avenue as much as anything else.
For straight I propose strayt! A touch didactic, a touch homosexist?: yes, that cld very well be, and the being not very well.
Straight is not neutral, it is judgmental; it is insidious because it masquerades as neutral; it is used by feminists all the time (should I give a list of examples or wld that look like cruel intention?) and I assume this is habitual/non-critical language use; and that, dear world, strikes me as utterly unfeminist.
I wonder if literary feminism--that articulated by poetry and fiction writers and hybrid aesthetics etc--is likelier to use straight than heterosexual. I'm not positive but I have a hard time imagining M Nussbaum not using heterosexual.
Wee recap: how write--sing!--woman (eeky singular, I agree) without singing heterosexism. Can one? No, not one; can we; will that we always be a wee one?
Homo-hetero divide as (and in terms of need for critical recognition, more) important as male-female divide.
I, personally, think of heterosexual women as totally like men (and vice-versa) because of the heterosexual common denominator.
The male female divide is a great way to divert attention from the hetero-homo one, and to downplay feminism's frequent complictity in heterosexual hegemony. It is also a great fit with capitalism, and may be more geniunly the naturalization of marketing/Maddison avenue as much as anything else.
For straight I propose strayt! A touch didactic, a touch homosexist?: yes, that cld very well be, and the being not very well.
Straight is not neutral, it is judgmental; it is insidious because it masquerades as neutral; it is used by feminists all the time (should I give a list of examples or wld that look like cruel intention?) and I assume this is habitual/non-critical language use; and that, dear world, strikes me as utterly unfeminist.
I wonder if literary feminism--that articulated by poetry and fiction writers and hybrid aesthetics etc--is likelier to use straight than heterosexual. I'm not positive but I have a hard time imagining M Nussbaum not using heterosexual.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)