Mary Daly, 1928-2010

Monday, January 4th, 2010 · 84 Comments »
Mary Daly.  Photo by Gail Bryan.

Mary Daly. Photo by Gail Bryan © 1998.

I just got an email that Mary Daly died yesterday. It didn’t make the Google news; I only know because of the listserv message from the secret feminist cabal that rules the world. It kind of surprises me that there isn’t more coverage; Daly was one of the intellectual giants of 20th century feminism. Oh, wait, maybe I’m not surprised after all.

The National Catholic Reporter has an obituary: Mary Daly, radical feminist theologian, dead at 81. Her colleague, Mary E. Hunt, sent out a short tribute, which is posted here. I’m told there will probably be a memorial service in late May or early June.

Mary Daly was a colossus. She was an absolutely towering influence on modern feminist thought. If you’re a feminist alive today, Mary Daly influenced you. Even if you’ve never heard of her, even if you’ve never read her books — she influenced you.

Something I’ve had bookmarked forever is an interview she gave with Enlightenment magazine back in 1999: No Man’s Land: An interview with Mary Daly. If you’re not familiar with her work — or even if you are — it’s an enjoyable introduction to her philosophy, her wit, and her attitude. Like this:

WIE: My question is: How do you think that Gautama the Buddha could have come to such an extreme position about half of the human race? What would you say to a Western Buddhist woman wrestling with the apparent incongruity of such an enlightened being holding such a woman-negative view?

MD: As I wrote in Gyn/Ecology: all patriarchal religions are patriarchal—right? They take different forms. What would I think? There’s nothing to think about. It has taken another form—seductive, probably, because christianity is so overtly warlike and abusive. And furthermore, I don’t know what “enlightened” means. It’s not a word that’s in my vocabulary. This is like a christian woman being upset over something that Paul said, instead of seeing that of course he’s an asshole. He’s one more very macho asshole described as a saint and as enlightened, and once you get over that, you get over it. You see it for what it is and you don’t worry about why he would say such a thing. Of course he would say such a thing. That’s what he is. It’s really extremely simple. Stop wrestling with it; it’s not interesting. Get out of it. That would be my approach to it. Misogynists! Hateful! All of them! I studied them. And finally I just didn’t try to reason with it anymore. Boston College was most enlightening to me. The experience of being fired for writing The Church and the Second Sex introduced me to the idea that it’s not going to change. That’s the way it is—leave it.

Rest in peace.

Filed under: Various and Sundry · Tags:

84 Responses to “Mary Daly, 1928-2010”

  1. Gayle says:

    From your National Catholic Reporter Link:

    Daly once wrote: “There are and will be those who think I have gone overboard. Let them rest assured that this assessment is correct, probably beyond their wildest imagination, and that I will continue to do so.”

    How awesome is that? Now I have to run out and find me a copy of Gyn/Ecology. I can’t believe I’ve never read her before.

  2. Branjor says:

    Mary Daly truly was and is one of the great ones. Gyn/Ecology was a life changing book for me. The world is an emptier place without her.

    Thank you, Mary Daly, thank you.

  3. Nadai says:

    Oh damn. I loved the Wickedary best, I think. She had such a gift with language, turning it inside out to show what the words contained. She was one of the first to show me how to take reality apart and really look at it.

    Thank you, Mary Daly. You made my life richer.

  4. Unree says:

    As of now (10 pm on Monday January 4th), not one word from the NY Times about Daly’s death. And it’s not as if this paper doesn’t know how to write an obituary. When Thomas Hoving, who ran the Metropolitan Museum for about ten years in the sixties and seventies, died last month, they put their 2400-word obit on their front page ASAP. It went on and on and on.

  5. cellocat says:

    Wow, now I have to go and read everything she wrote. Times like this I realize how much I’ve missed by not being alive to experience the radicalism of earlier decades. But there are books. And this website. And other places. Of course, I have no idea how to reconcile that philosophy with the fact that I have a male partner, male friends, etc. But reading the interview linked above feels like entering a room with more oxygyn.

  6. Michele Braa-Heidner says:

    Thank you Violet for posting this. I was amazed when I heard the news this morning, first about Mary Daly dieing and then about the fact that she died yesterday morning and I hadn’t heard about it until the next day. Mary Daly was a giant in feminism and a huge influence on me. Her books caused a shift in my reality so profound that I began looking at everything differently. She helped me to delve deep into myself and at the same time deep into the layers of the patriarchal facade. Mary Daly is the only Womyn (spelling intentional) that I have ever known that was a whole Womyn who lived her life independent of “man.” She told it like it was without giving a damn about the status quo or about being politically correct. Mary Daly, used her divine energy to spin a tale of a future where women are dancing free of patriarchy. No one, absolutely no one, informed my feminism more than Mary Daly.

    Excerpt from SIN BIG – By Mary Daly, The New Yorker, February 26, 1996.

    “EVER since childhood, I have been honing my skills for living the life of a Radical Feminist Pirate and cultivating the Courage to Sin. The word “sin” is derived from the Indo-European root “es-,” meaning “to be.” When I discovered this etymology, I intuitively understood that for a woman trapped in patriarchy, which is the religion of the entire planet, “to be” in the fullest sense is “to sin.” Women who are Pirates in a phallocratic society are involved in a complex operation. First, it is necessary to Plunder–that is, righteously rip off–gems of knowledge that the patriarchs have stolen from us. Second, we must Smuggle back to other women our Plundered treasures. In order to invent strategies that will be big and bold enough for the next millennium, it is crucial that women share our experiences: the chances we have taken and the choices that have kept us alive. They are my Pirate’s battle cry and wake-up call for women who want to hear.”

    Thank you Mary Daly, you will be truly missed.

  7. Violet Socks says:

    Of course, I have no idea how to reconcile that philosophy with the fact that I have a male partner, male friends, etc.

    That’s interesting, cellocat. Why do you find it hard? You’re much younger than I am. It seems easy to me because I grew up with radical feminist awareness. For me it’s always been clear that feminism is about rejecting the particular social order we’ve all been indoctrinated with, men and women. But that’s never (for me) meant that I needed to reject men as friends, lovers, confidantes, etc. I really like men and always have. I just expect them to share my vision for liberation and equality.

  8. Sophie says:

    It’s 3:08 AM, EST and still no word from the mSM on Mary Daly’s passing. I treasure my Wickedary and always thought Hell was where you had to play Scrabble against Mary Daly.

    Thank you, Violet for noting her passing.

    Thank you Mary Daly for your life.

  9. Nessum says:

    “He’s one more very macho asshole described as a saint and as enlightened, and once you get over that, you get over it.”

    “Stop wrestling with it; it’s not interesting. Get out of it.”

    Great advice! Just love it! :)

  10. TheOtherDelphyne says:

    “I urge you to Sin,” Daly once wrote, “but not against these itty-bitty religions, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism – or their secular derivatives, Marxism, Maoism, Freudianism and Jungianism – which are all derivatives of the big religion of patriarchy. Sin against the infrastructure itself!”

    Another quote from her that I love. Gyn/Ecology was one of the most transformative books for me. Her way with words is a beauty to behold.

    Rest in peace, Mary.

  11. votermom says:

    I have never heard of her but I am very grateful. Must go read her books now.
    (Funny how there’s so many brilliant women I have never heard of … not in history books or in school)

  12. Elle R says:

    In my estimation, Mary Daly was the single greatest feminist writer around. “Beyond God the Father” changed my life. She really “got it” in a way no one else has. Thanks, Violet for letting us know about the passing of this truly remarkable woman.

    I can’t believe the NYT hasn’t mentioned her death! Did I just write that? Of course I can believe it. As Daly would have noted, who could possibly be surprised!

    But, actually, I am shocked. I still have these unrealistic expectations.

    I was terribly shocked and disappointed in 2000 when Daly came to Vanderbilt, invited by women’s studies, I believe. I was in the divinity school and thought her talk would be well attended by div school professors and students, given her stature as an ecofeminist theologian. But few showed up. And almost no men. So sad. So revealing.

  13. votermom says:

    OT. Violet, have you seen this?

    I saw this on LJ. An afghan woman needs help avoiding a forced marriage. She posted anonymously. It’s heartbreaking.

    http://awwproject.wordpress.com/2010/01/03/i-am-for-sale-who-will-buy-me/

    I have two months to find a solution. If I fail, I have to accept this marriage, and I will accept it because of my mom, but I can’t live in such a situation. How can I live with such a man, or accept such failure? I think if this happens, I won’t stay in this world; I will leave the world for those who can live in it, who can find a solution.

    Maybe spreading the word will help?
    :(

  14. Ann Valentine says:

    WIE: What do you feel are the limits of that way of thinking?

    MD: I wrote about human beings in The Church and the Second Sex, which was published in 1968. I wanted to liberate “human beings,” and I found out that the whole thing was fallacious because there’s a false inclusion, as if there were greater similarity between women and men than there is difference. Let me try to put it in a way that may convey some of the landscape. If we lived in a gynocentric society, first of all, it wouldn’t be matriarchal; it wouldn’t be like patriarchy transposed with big mama on top instead of big papa. It would be totally different, and I believe that it was before patriarchy came—this evil. And men would be different, too. They would not have been socialized into this—assuming that they have been socialized into it and they’re not all mutants—they would be different because the female way of seeing things would be, I don’t want to say “dominant” because that’s a patriarchal word, but it would be all-pervasive. And you do meet some men like that—I never fully trust it—but you do. Some are less tinged by the patriarchal mode.

    So having that in your mind, and living to some extent already in that future, an archaic future that is rooted in a deep past, I have a sense of identity that isn’t easily described in this kind of discourse. These kinds of questions are always too crisp. They seem very logical, but they’re not. In my opinion, they’re not. I would never ask what identity is primary. In the past somehow I made a switch from being “a human being who happens to be female.” But I never really believed “happens to be” because at the core of my being I’m female. I know who I am, and therefore I could not be other than a radical feminist once that idea was available to me.

    You’re taking what I consider to be a very primitive set of ideas and asking me to speak about what I might have thought about those ideas twenty or thirty years ago. You see, “human being” doesn’t really say much of anything to me. I don’t know if I’m getting it through to you or not, but I’m not a member of a class called “human being.” There is a tremendous uniqueness, but that uniqueness surfaces only when you have a predominantly female mode of being that is at the same time daringly, forcefully breaking out of the patriarchal mode of thinking. So, no, I don’t feel at all like a human being. I hate the “human species”—look at it! I hate what it is doing to this earth: the invasion of everything. The last two frontiers are the genetic wilderness and the space wilderness; they’ve colonized everything else. It’s a totally invasive mentality—rapist. That is alien, and insofar as I’ve internalized any of that, I’m sorry. I’m contaminated by it. We all are. But I try not to be, and with every step I at least try to be biophilic, which is what would be required to break out of the human species.”

    Wonderful. Men have a word called Heaven, which describes the paradise we used to live in, before Patriarchy plunged us into ignorance and out of Eden and into caves and the desert. They are necrophiliacs. They believe in the dead and an afterlife and they can’t wait to die. I can see it. Beautiful lush growths. A filiment hangs over the earth, making it temperate. We have domesticated all of the animals by selectively trapping and taming then releasing the alphas. Animals instinctively do not attack humans. We live forever and our wounds heal rapidly. Men and women are the same size and we all play, because there is no work to do. Because of the filament, the sky is nearly green, and everything is a rainbow, with incadescent rushing waterfalls and prism’s on dew drops. The scent of many hundreds of flowers fill the air.

    How many Feminists will it take to replace Mary Daly?

  15. Ruth Rocchio says:

    I have been searching for Mary Daly’s public obituaries as well. And isn’t it just like her to be so far beyond patriarchy that their “honoring” of her passing from this world would be ignored? Let all of us who loved her, who were guided by her words, who sailed upon her pirate’s ship to plunder continue to celebrate her by making our own tributes. I have a feeling she didn’t care about such acknowledgments. In the end, she would want us all to rise up, to spread our wings, to see the truth and to be free. Love you, Mary Daly! You are in my heart!

  16. murphy says:

    “How many Feminists will it take to replace Mary Daly?”

    how about all of us?

    (beautiful quote by the way, quietly inspiring)

  17. Ciardha says:

    The media ignored Andrea Dworkin’s passing too. First warning I had of Ms. magazine turning away from real world feminism was the negative article they published when Betty Friedan died (consisting of whining about how overbearing and difficult a person she was- Funny how in 1972 when Shirley Chisholm ran for president Betty Friedan was her most enthusiastic backer, in contrast Gloria Steinem wrote in Ms that she “liked Shirley but she loved McGovern” so deju vu for 2008, huh? Never mind that McGovern’s record on women’s issues wasn’t good and Chisholm’s was fantastic…) Then Ms. magazine totally ignored Dworkin’s death, no obit at all- but considering the tripe published about Friedan perhaps that was for the best. Watch them ignore Daly too.The msn did have brief notices on Betty Friedan but from what I recall it only focused on her 1960′s work.

    Daly’s Gyn/Ecology had an impact on me back in college. She was radical where I was a liberal feminist back then, but unlike the 3rd wavers I had a respect for Daly- I understood where she was coming from, just like I did Dworkin. Sonja Johnson too- wonder what happened to her? Her books resonated with me even more than Daly’s or Dworkins when I was a 20 something liberal feminist sympathic to radical feminism. She sold radical feminism in a gentler way from what I remember. Now I think I’m pretty much a radical feminist, with strong socialist overtones. Feminist comes first before anything else.

  18. Janis says:

    Nice to see that there was another woman out there who agrees with me that the word “spiritual” adds no value. To that, I’d add the words “confident,” “believe,” and “optimist/pessimist.” They mean nothing to me that can’t be stated more honestly with simpler words. They encode nothing of value.

    I’m also glad to see that there was someone else who just said, “Fuck it, female fertility and earth fertility are the same thing,” without being tut-tutted at for being “essentialist.” Sorry, but in the minds of the species, they ARE the same thing. This is why men are the way they are toward women: Fertility Is Not To Be Trusted. In tier way of looking at things, uncontrolled fertility is dangerous and must be made to obey their rules. In an effort to do this, they put their hands around its throat and choke the life out of it. Then, they die. Suicide.

    I’m less conflicted about reconciling the existence of men in my life with how I feel about them, which through reading that interview I’ve discovered is exactly the same as Mary Daly. It’s a negotiation. We’re in a world with them, and we can’t get out. So we start rationalizing. It’s a natural response. But I refuse to do the thing wher eI crow loudly about how I just LOOOOOVE men! I LIKE them! I have SO MANY MALE FRIENDS!!!!!!!!!!

    Because I know how they interpret it. “Hey, she’s fine with it in the end!” and they then drop their end. I don’t like them. I’ll never like them. I never trust them; I’ve encountered one male online who seems to have a clue, and he keeps to himself very often — and we still disagree on a lot of thing. I’m 43. ONE MALE. That’s it.

    But I’m not going to name him, and I’m not going to go on about “and there’s probably LOTS MORE!” There aren’t. I used to agree with the women who would say that that “lets men off the hook,” but I don’t anymore. I’m happy to let them dangle off of it permanently. I think the other assertion lets WOMEN off the hook — they are desperate to imagine that no matter how horrific the world really is, and no matter how undeniable the evidence is that men really are a series species-wide problem, they’ll still find a nice man to marry. Chances are, you won’t. Not until you repeat “I like men! I require them to share my philosophy!” enough times to convince yourself to cut enough slack for the guy you’re with that he will pass muster.

    But that sort of thing just breeds slack-cutting. The fact is that women have sexual drives, and they want to fuck and have babies. And men are overwhelmingly not really much to write home about. For feminists, this is a problem: they can only allow themselves to fuck men who are egalitarian wonder-boys. The response is that they can’t fuck a guy until they talk themselves into believing that he’s Albert Schweitzer. Inevitably, they will end up latching onto Mr. Ordinary Chump and talking him up — cutting him slack so that they can exercise their sex drives with a clear conscience. Feminists don’t just want to fuck men. They ahve to fuck them with a clear conscience.

    That breeds enormous slack-cutting. And because all that slack-cutting erodes them inside, they turn around and savage women for tiny deviations from perfection in order to reassure themselves that they aren’t caving in constantly. It’s poisonous, the whole thing.

    So I just don’t buy into that “men are just peachy!” thing. the minute men hear that, every single one of them drops their end. Any man out there who has a clue, I’m afraid you’re going ot have to want to hold onto that clue without my applause. I don’t have to kiss your ass to get you to say that the sun rises in the east, so why should I clap and put a gold star on your forehead if you say that women are people?

  19. la-t-da says:

    O/T

    Discussion at Wired Left: “Senate-House Health Care Bills Comparison”

    http://wiredleft.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/senate-house-health-care-bills-comparison/

    Thank you! Hope you can join in the discussion.

  20. Violet Socks says:

    Janis, I think there’s a possibility you’re not considering: that women like me, who say they like men, are not making excuses but are simply registering their actual experience with individual men.

    It’s my opinion, borne of long observation, that there is a significant difference (at least potentially) between men as individual humans and men as a group. I would say that’s true of all human beings, actually. An individual human being is just an animal with a big brain, but he or she may grow up to be, for example, a racist white person who learns behavior patterns from other racist white people and lives his or her life as a racist white person.

    So it is with men. A male human is just an animal with a big brain. But men-as-a-group create a new dynamic in most human societies — I suspect it’s connected to sexual competition and testosterone. And along with that dynamic comes a self-perpetuating suite of reinforcing behaviors, etc., etc., which we all know and loathe. Many men are wholly absorbed in that pattern, and their original potentials are swamped by the stereotypic suite of asshole male behaviors.

    But not all men.

    Look, I grew up with a brother who is more like me than any other human on this planet, male or female. That’s simply the truth. And I’ve known many men — deeply loved and trusted friends — who were not the stereotypical asshole men. Really. It happens.

  21. DancingOpossum says:

    I read “Gyn/Ecology” in college and it was really a head-changer for me. I was an ardent fan of hers then, but I don’t know how well it would hold up now, lo these many years later, so I haven’t gone back to her. Maybe I will to comemmorate her passing.

  22. DancingOpossum says:

    And Janis, really, an outlet for your bitterness might be a good idea. Have you tried kickboxing?

  23. gxm17 says:

    re DancingOpossum @ 22

    Or yoga?

    (Janis, that’s self-deprecation and has little to do with your comment. You make some very good points.)

  24. gxm17 says:

    I was not familiar with Mary Daly, but I just ordered Gyn/Ecology and look forward to reading it.

    It’s all too typical that the MSM has not mentioned Daly’s passing. Just one of the many ways the patriarchy disappears us and relegates us into insignificance.

  25. JP Gal says:

    Daly was one of the most influential philosophers of the 20th century — male or female, straight or lesbian, theologian or other. It is impossible to describe how deeply “Beyond God the Father,” “The Church and the Second Sex,” and “Gyn/Ecology” changed all of our thinking about organized religion and the place of women in the world. Daly invented the language for describing patriarchy and naming its reality, and we still use her words today. Mostly without attribution, I’m sad to say!

    As I commented elsewhere this morning upon learning of her death, we all stand on Daly’s courageous shoulders, whether we know it or not. I have contacted her hometown paper, the Boston Globe, and been assured that her obituary will appear there tomorrow. Who knows what it will say. The comments here and on other blogs where women are having similar conversations about her life and work are the best tribute I can imagine to our greatest Revolting Old Hag!

    (Don’t cringe — look it up!)

  26. Janis says:

    My bad. I must have confused this blog with one that actually admired Daly’s ideas.

  27. m Andrea says:

    Thank you so much for this. Heard about it yesterday and wondered why certain folks were not discussing it.

  28. Michele Braa-Heidner says:

    @ Janis. Thank you so much for having the courage to tell your truth regardless of whether or not it’s politically correct. Telling your truth as a woman is a very appropriate way to mourn Mary Daly’s passing.

    I know from experience as a heterosexual female and from the experiences of other women who are the same (out of respect for women & men who are not heterosexual, I will not speak for them due to my own ignorance about their experiences) that it’s almost impossible to have a “platonic” heterosexual male friend for any length of time. I have done a great deal of thinking about why this is the case and I have come up with what I believe to be one of the reasons: Heterosexual men only value women if they are getting something out of them, such as sex or ego stroking.

    Let me elaborate further. If you take the sexual part out of the relationship, men then have to want to be around women just on their merits alone and this tends to eliminate them as friends. In patriarchy every man and woman for that matter have been socialized to be sexist, to believe women do not have as much value as men. Consequently, the only way men value women is if they are getting something out of the relationship. Usually it’s sex or sometimes if it’s not sex, then flirting or the promise of potential sex does the trick because it strokes the man’s ego. If neither exist, the man will usually lose interest and not spend his energy on nurturing the relationship.

    This is not the case for men having male friends. They already have an inherent respect for men due to their socialization therefore men are worthy friends on merit alone. Furthermore, I’ve heard numerous women exclaim that they don’t like women and they are seldom refuted or questioned on this belief, because most people on a deep level due to patriarchal conditioning, feel this way. On the other hand, you hardly ever hear men or women saying “I don’t like men.” (Except for those courageous few, like Mary Daly and our very own Janis and I’m sure others that I don’t know about:)). If a man said “I don’t like men”, he would be labeled a homosexual, if a woman said this, she is refuted relentlessly or called a “man hater” or a “ball buster”. The “man hater” is then made to feel very uncomfortable until she either shuts up and keeps her opinion to herself or she back pedals in order to fit back into the status quo. I know because I have done this myself and it’s not pleasant.

    I also think it’s valid and sometimes necessary for women to hate men. To really go all the way into hating men. It’s necessary in order to separate ourselves all the way from our dependence on men. The dependence began when patriarchy began. In a world that revers men and hates women, we had to align ourselves with men in order to survive, to gain an identity, to feel ok about ourselves. Therefore, by hating men, separating our psyches completely from them, women have the opportunity to finally see all the ways we are dependent. Unfortunately this is extremely difficult to do and painful because when you separate yourself from your dependence or your drug, you go through withdrawal. You then wake up and realize that you don’t know who you are without men. You feel empty and without purpose, you have entered the unknown and this is a scary place. The good news is, you can then venture out and find out who you really are as a woman. Find your strength and power that is not dependent on men.

    With dependence breeds denial and if we don’t detox off of men, it can be too easy to gloss over what is really going on and to deny the oppression and inequality of women because this denial makes our own lives easier. This I believe is one of the biggest reasons why patriarchy has kept it’s power for so many years. I know about this denial first hand because prior to reading Mary Daly’s books, I was in denial about most of it. However, because Daly was writing from a place of complete separation and independence from men, she was able to dive in deep and cover the subject more thoroughly, unabashedly without constraint or pretense then other writers I had explored.

    Mary Daly wrote in Gyn/Ecology:

    “The courage to be logical — the courage to name — would require that we admit to ourselves that males and males only are the originators, planners, controllers, and legitimators of patriarchy. Patriarchy is the homeland of males; it is Father Land; and men are its agents. … The fact is that we live in a profoundly anti-female society, a misogynistic “civilization” in which men collectively victimize women, attacking us as personifications of their own paranoid fears, as The Enemy. Within this society it is men who rape, who sap women’s energy, who deny women economic and political power.”

  29. la-t-da says:

    @ 19. Sorry. Taggles preempted me with another good planning piece. Mine will be up tomorrow. Thanks for listening. LOL

  30. bygones says:

    Unfortunately, Janis is in the habit of running all over the blogosphere spouting her hatred of men on a constant basis. Nothing to offer beyond that one hateful meme that all men are rapists and should be banished forthwith as they have nothing to offer and she does this quite often in the most graphic of terms.

    It is difficult to imagine how she manages to keep up her consistent rage against men on a daily basis, but trust me, she does. It would be laughable if it weren’t so insistent on condemning all men as hopeless, useless, and dangerous in general.

    As for Mary Daly, she was one of a kind. God rest her soul.

  31. m Andrea says:

    Janis that was amazing! And really sorry but this is confusing:

    It’s my opinion, borne of long observation, that there is a significant difference (at least potentially) between men as individual humans and men as a group.

    A group is an entity which has members who have something in common. If there’s nothing in common then no group exists.

    A few non-sexist men does not magically erase sexism. Counting the number of men says absolutely nothing about counting the amount of harm. Liking men is absolutely not relevant to either the subjegation or liberation of women. That sideways mental slide which takes place whenever the amount of harm is mentioned, is a trick of denial.

    Mary said walk away, I think she meant it.

  32. AniEm says:

    Thank you for reporting this. I’m very sad at the news and valued her transformative writings. Among many ironies is that Daly was fired by Boston College for being….brilliant?

    She was the first to convey the good news that being born female is, in itself, a courageous act of subversion. We can all take heart from her writings and I’ll do whatever I can to promote them.

  33. Michele Braa-Heidner says:

    @ bygones. Mary Daly was very much like Janus in that she had absolutely nothing to do with men. Didn’t waste any of her time on men. I think I can safely say that Daly didn’t like men. Honestly, Janis’s post is completely relevant here. This is the one blog that I have found to be open to all expressions of truth, including and perhaps especially the hatred of men. Regardless of whether or not Janis has rage or that she has posted her rage over the blogosphere, her rage is still valid. It really upsets me when people try to silence women when they express their anger by calling it “bitterness”. Women have a right to their anger and more importantly because of it’s relevance to this particular subject, Mary Daly would welcome it!!

    Goddess Bless Mary Daly!

  34. votermom says:

    men are overwhelmingly not really much to write home about.

    I should like to cross stitch this and frame it.

  35. murphy says:

    I like Janis’ statement about wanting to go to bed (literally) with a clean conscience. I think many of us are willing to go to bed without that clean conscience, knowing full well that “love” has pretty much zero to do with what’s going on there. I’ve always been shocked at how shocked people are when I’ve said (which I’ve been doing for almost 30 years) that sex and love are almost mutually exclusive for me.

    women aren’t really allowed to think/feel that. even though secretly millions of us do.

    anyway — janis’ comment was brilliant.

  36. gxm17 says:

    Just to be clear, my comment @ 23 was self-deprecating snark and the only thing it had to do with Janis’ comment was that the one I was responding to (DancingOpossum @ 22) had mentioned it. (For those who weren’t on the previous post, it’s spillover from there.)

    Janis makes some good points quite effectively. Her world view and mine are not the same but there are intersections and, for me, her comments often hit home. Loving (or hating) men is a central feminist issue and deserves serious (and continued) attention because of the conflict it creates externally and internally. I don’t believe that a woman has to hate men in order to be free or to be a fully realized woman. But I do think that we need to address the fact that loving men is one of our biggest impediments on the road to gender equality.

  37. gxm17 says:

    votermom @ 33. I was glad I didn’t have a mouth full of coffee when I read that line. TFF!

  38. Michele Braa-Heidner says:

    I guess I need to be more clear on what I meant when I suggested women need to hate men to gain a separate identity from men and that in itself being the end all. What I meant was, that it might be necessary to divorce men in order to see our dependence on them and then going forward this could help us understand where we end as women and where they begin as men and vice versa allowing us to have better relationships with ourselves and men because of this knowledge. :)

    Cheers!

  39. Gayle says:

    . . .you hardly ever hear men or women saying “I don’t like men.” (Except for those courageous few, like Mary Daly and our very own Janis and I’m sure others that I don’t know about:))

    Very true. And I also agree that the term “man hater” is used to silence women ALL THE TIME.

    I was on a thread about trafficking yesterday at Huff and Puff and men on that thread were accusing the author of the featured article of man hating. (She had the audacity to blame Johns for sex slavery, who the hell else is to blame?)

    Anyway, this got me thinking: men joke about being sexist– calling a man a sexist or a “women hater” is hardly an insult. It certainly doesn’t silence them. Yet to be a “man hater” is pretty much the worst thing one can be.

    There’s your proof of Patriarchy right there.

    I’m a married woman but I’ll go ahead and say it: Rage on Janis! I for one don’t want you silenced.

  40. Petro says:

    She called Guatama a “macho asshole?” And I thought I was an iconoclast. Awesome.

  41. Cyn says:

    I can’t believe how much I don’t know.

    And, with strong, outgoing speakers like this, I can’t believe how much we’ve not accomplished.

  42. cellocat says:

    Well, I’m not that much of a young thing, Violet; I’m 41. But I grew up in a place that honored the contributions of radical challengers of racism, while feminism, by the time I was 10 and old enough to have heard the term, was already a joke to most people. As well, my household was oriented around the males in it, and I grew up valuing them more than my mom, my sister, or myself. Early training is hard to divest.

    I’d hazard a guess that you find it easier to be a feminist with close relationships with men because you’ve been more forthright, have compromised less, and have had cleaner relationships as a result.

    For myself, I don’t have a clear answer, but here are some thoughts that contribute to my difficulty in achieving resolution (a lifelong task, perhaps).

    How many men are really comfortable with a vision of the future in which males are 10% of the population? How many men really do share the vision of a true feminist? How many men are willing to challenge other men’s sexist and mysogynist statements, jokes, actions? How many men are really willing to look at the pervasiveness of patriarchy, and how it benefits them individually? How many men are willing to look at themselves sufficiently clearly to admit their investment in the patriarchy, to challenge themselves every day (or most days) to do better, to change their views, behaviors, etc? How many men are willing to be that uncomfortable? I’d say, very very few.

    The thing is, for much of my life although I’ve been an expert complainer, I’ve been far too scared to be an actual boat-rocker. When I was little I could be fierce, but that got knocked out of me pretty hard. And the tyranny of today’s spiritualism’s focus on harmony has further glossed over the need for women to stand up strong, and to speak forthrightly without needing to constantly assure their hearers that they do like men (not that I think that’s what you’re doing!).

    However, since the 2008 primary season, and since the birth of my daughter I have vowed to rock the boat more deliberately. I have become a more difficult person to be around, I would suppose; my husband and good friend with whom I spend a majority of my time have had to hear a lot more on the subject of how women and girls are seen, treated, and spoken of. I am trying to do this, not entirely as an effort to educate the men, but to see, speak, and repeat the truth as a way of living out my values.

    Reading that interview of Mary Daly’s helps me remember the fierce joy of my very early childhood, and vow to cultivate it for myself and for my daughter. Be-ing is hard work, but it’s necessary to be alive.

  43. purplefinn says:

    From Boston Globe, finally:

    Mary Daly, pioneering feminist who tussled with BC, dies at 81
    January 5, 2010 05:23 PM

    http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/01/mary_daly_pione.html

  44. Donald W. Paulus says:

    cellocat, That was very well said. You are so right about be-ing being hard work and so necessary”to be alive.” So what? if you are more difficult to be around. Keep rocking that boat, your daughter is worth every wave.

  45. Violet Socks says:

    My bad. I must have confused this blog with one that actually admired Daly’s ideas.

    Damn, that is one nasty comment. I’ve been in bed sick all day, sorry I’m just now getting back to the blog. But jesus.

    You know what? Fuck you. Really. Just fuck you and get the fuck off my blog.

    Of course I admire Mary Daly’s ideas. I was just responding to your assertion that when I said I liked men, I was simply overlooking their failings in an attempt to justify my desire to sleep with them. That’s not true. Many women do that, of course, and patriarchy pretty much demands that we do that. One of the great things about Mary Daly is her urging us to stop doing that. To stop feeling like we have to do that. I don’t expect any woman to defend men or make excuses or sing their praises or anything else. I had no problem with your original comment. I was just sharing my experience, which is different.

    What happens if you’re one of the lucky women, like me, who has actually known men who didn’t fit the mold? Then you start wondering about how behavior develops and what might be the pathway between individual human male baby and adult asshole. And, you know, you might actually study anthropology and gender issues and human evolution and try to sort it out.

    But obviously my mistake was in actually trying to share ideas here.

  46. Violet Socks says:

    And really sorry but this is confusing:

    It’s my opinion, borne of long observation, that there is a significant difference (at least potentially) between men as individual humans and men as a group.

    A group is an entity which has members who have something in common. If there’s nothing in common then no group exists.

    The logical gap between what I said and what you think I said is enormous. If you’re interested in understanding group dynamics and emergent properties, then study them. Don’t imagine they don’t exist because you’ve never heard of them.

    A few non-sexist men does not magically erase sexism.

    And…who said that it did?

    Counting the number of men says absolutely nothing about counting the amount of harm.

    And…who said that it did?

    Liking men is absolutely not relevant to either the subjegation or liberation of women.

    And who said that it was?

    That sideways mental slide which takes place whenever the amount of harm is mentioned, is a trick of denial.

    Again, my mistake for actually attempting to share information with the likes of you and Janis. Fuck off.

  47. Violet Socks says:

    By the way, I’m in a lot of pain right now and the last thing I need is to be blogssaulted by you goddamn ideologues. Please oh please let Heart open her blog again so you guys can have somewhere to go.

  48. Sameol says:

    I’m obviously not in Janis’ head or anything, but I thought maybe her comment was in response to the fact that she wrote this long heartfelt detailed comment and it got dismissed out of hand and ridiculed as “bitterness” complete with suggestion on how she could work it out. And okay, it wasn’t quite as bad as usual suggestion of what bitter women need, but still, if I were her that’s what would have angered me, not what you said.

  49. Violet Socks says:

    Well it’s MY BLOG, and when she says that oops, guess this isn’t really a blog that admires Mary Daly and obviously I’m just frantically saying “I like men!” like some kind of brain-dead nightmare dreamed by Valerie Solanas, it fucking pisses me off.

    I have spent my fucking LIFE trying to sort this shit out. I make a huge effort to create a space for serious honest discussion on this blog. And to have these people (and the ones in my mod queue, the usual suspects) start in with how I’m a sellout who’s just sucking up to men… Jesus fucking CHRIST.

    and I’m in PAIN.

  50. Violet Socks says:

    For the record, comments @22 and @30 are inappropriate responses to Janis’s original comment. Inappropriate in the sense that rage against men is fine and shouldn’t be dismissed as bitterness. I don’t know what other comments around the web Bygones is referring to. And I’m not interested.

  51. Sameol says:

    I’m sorry you’re in pain. I hope you feel better. I know it’s your blog, I’m just saying that sometimes it’s hard to know who’s talking to whom in a comment thread, and sometimes people can get so mad they temporarily forget about the blog owner and start going off on each other.

  52. NullityPersonified says:

    @Violet

    My comment will probably land in your spam pile, since Akismet doesn’t like me. Whether or not you choose to post my comment, I hope that you will read it.

    As a long-time lurker, I would like to mention how much I appreciate women like Janis, who have the courage to hold men accountable for their actions, without making excuses for them. She was probably not referring to you directly when she commented about your blog being unfriendly to the ideas of Mary Daly. Two other commenters, on this blog, aimed personal attacks at her rather than responding to her position on men.

    I see the problem of men’s role in women’s equality a bit differently from the two of you. As Mary Daly understood, men are responsible for the beliefs upon which the architecture of Patriarchy rests. Their belief system has caused enormous harm to our species, Homo sapiens, on more than one level. (But, this is a topic for another day.)

    Like Mary Daly, there is no place for men in my life. I am not interested in them and feel no obligation to them at all. So I have no desire to make excuses for any of them. However, like you, I distinguish between men as a whole and men as individuals. From what I have witnessed throughout my life, I regard the majority of men as complicit in and practitioners of misogyny and sexism. A small number of men are an exception to this rule.

    When women see a male exception (or a few) they tend to generalize. This generalization influences their impression of other men, whom they may mistakenly view as similar to the non-standard males they know. Their logic is flawed because they are using the atypical males as the standard and assuming that if those males can be atypical, so can others. Sometimes, even egregiously sexist behavior does not dissuade women from their belief that a particular man is an exception.

    Women tend to be lenient towards males, in part, because most women are mothers. Mothers are taught to love their offspring unconditionally. From the day of their birth, girls are socialized to take care of others and to nurture and obey male relatives. They are also conditioned to believe that they have no value unless they are acquired by a man (a husband).

    Women give birth to men and are only valued in relation to men. In such a scenario, most are trapped between a desire to be who they are, in and for themselves, and to be who Patriarchal society says they are, namely an appendage of a man. Under these conditions, most women claim that their male relations are exempt from the misogynistic and sexist practices we see all around us. If every feminist’s husband father, brother, or friend is not a sexist, then how did Patriarchy survive for thousands of years?

    It is difficult to admit that half the human race (males) attacked and damaged the other half (females). And, it is equally difficult to attribute culpability to atypical males who, through no fault of their own, were born male in a world where males have existed for thousands of years as a whirlwind of destruction. (As an aside, a strong case could be made that men were not always this way – one more topic for another day).

    Until women unite to speak the truth about how damaging Patriarchy has been, and continues to be to the Human Race, our species will continue down a path of self-destruction. What awaits us at the end of that road is extinction. For their culture of domination and destruction, men deserve to be detested. Perhaps, if women’s hatred of them was strong and unwavering, more men would be motivated to change what it means to be human.

  53. purplefinn says:

    I hope you’re feeling better, Violet.

  54. janicen says:

    cellocat @ 42, Very well said. Me too.

    Violet, I’m sending warm and healing thoughts to you and hope that you recover soon.

  55. votermom says:

    Violet, I do hope you feel better soon. Hope it’s not a serious illness. ((gentle hugs & virtual chicken soup))

    @cellocat

    The thing is, for much of my life although I’ve been an expert complainer, I’ve been far too scared to be an actual boat-rocker. When I was little I could be fierce, but that got knocked out of me pretty hard.

    You just described me. Same age even.
    I can be braver for my daughters than I can be for myself. ((hugs))

  56. Ann Valentine says:

    I’ve read this blog long enough to know where Violet is coming from, from an intellectual standpoint, and I’ve also been reading other posters long enough to probably guage the same. I know Violet, for instance, is not an essentialist, though she has tolerated some extreme essentialist views posted as comments before.

    Twisty got sick too. Why are all the Feminists getting sick?

  57. Gayle says:

    I’m very sorry to hear you’re in pain, Violet. I hope you feel better soon.

  58. ekittyglendower says:

    I’ve never met a man who was not sexist.

  59. gxm17 says:

    Get well soon, Violet!

  60. Level Best says:

    Mary Daly amazed and a-mazed me, and I am grateful this blog is honoring her passage so respectfully. I was fortunate to have read her when I was young and to live on to continue to seek out her words. Dr. Socks, I hope you are well soon, I truly hate that you are in pain. Your blog has been a wonderful gathering place for people across the spectra who wish for justice.

  61. Ciardha says:

    My blunt response to the manhater tag- “I don’t hate men, I hate assholes. If I hate you, then guess what you are.”

  62. Jackie says:

    Ciardha, Thank you so much for sharing that. I’m stealing it!

  63. Kiuku says:

    I hate men. And I’ll freely admit it. And I’m an essentialist;can be accused of being an essentialist just like Mary Daly. Evil is either in the dynamic or it is inherent or it is both. I think it is both. I think there is something wrong with men, inherently. I think the reason for evil and the harm that men do lies in the dynamic between the sexes. Men cannot handle being males, as in not having a vagina, and I don’t think Psychology adequately explains that. I think there is something fundamentally and biologically wrong with men and that men understand this too.

    Males are an anomaly, an evolutionary quark. I’m not convinced that there were male mammals in their advent. I’m pretty sure that all the dinasaurs were women. I believe there is strong proof of this;that early hominids may have all been women. One proof is the clitoris. I believe the clitoris proves that at one point in time giving birth was extremely pleasurable, and not sex as proved by the fact that there is a clitoris and there is no vaginal orgasm. The fact that men’s penises are made out of the same material of a clitoris is extraneous and a result of human dna. They get pleasure from sex as a quark. The clitoris has nothing to do at all with a penis. Men are either some kind of Necrophiliac alien robot, or created by an evil Demiurge, or a true Evolutionary quark adaptation to survive whatever killed off reptiles en masse.

    I’m not saying there is no sexual impulse that evolved between men and women. I believe the only way to find out what causes Patriarchy aka evil, destruction, crude and dumbness and darkages, is to engage in total separatism, so i’m a separatist too. I don’t think the sexual libido in women is strong enough to make impossible complete separatism, but then again I’m pretty asexual.

  64. Kiuku says:

    I mean, if there were always men, and we evolved together, the clitoris would be positioned for sex and the penis, and it just is not. Men don’t even have a complete genome. Call it a Y chromosome if you want. It’s incomplete. And they make placenta..and just about destroy everything.

    Btw, I have male friends too. Actually quite a bit of them. Most don’t know how much of a Radical Feminist I am. I believe it is necessary to be decent to individuals, but I still hate men.

  65. Kiuku says:

    correction:

    “I’m not saying there is no sexual impulse that evolved between men and women.” (due to it being occassionally physically pleasurable, but mostly for men)

  66. Kiuku says:

    Because I mean think about it. Men will put the penis in anything, a mouth, an anus, anything, until conditioned by porn men don’t have a sexual impulse toward a vagina. I believe if we can figure out what killed off the reptiles, you might have an anti-male agent, as males might have evolved to counter some kind of male destruction, and therefore the number of male hominids would have been less than the number of women because only they would die off, but the mammalian population ultimately survived the pandemic.

  67. lambert strether says:

    #63 evolutionary quark

    “Quirk,” I think.

  68. madamab says:

    Violet, I’m so sorry you’re in pain.

    I want to say thank you so very, very much for exposing me to Mary Daly’s ideas (and heck, her very existence). One area in which I am very sorely lacking is knowledge of the giants of feminism past. Thanks to you and others, I am learning!

    What really struck me about the interview with “Enlightenment” was how the interviewer really did not make any attempt to speak to Daly in her language; kept trying to force her into a world she had left behind long ago. Imagine asking a radical lesbian feminist to engage with the ideas of a man who defends and excuses the patriarchy? It would be like asking a black person to engage with the ideas of a white person who defends slavery.

    R.I.P., Mary Daly. You done great!

  69. DarkAdaptedEye says:

    Just delurking here to say that I love this blog and I hope Violet is feeling better soon.

    And Janis, I agree with your original post, and if that makes me a “bitter” hateful shrew, hey, ask me if I care.

    Thank you Janis, for echoing what some of us feel but are too suppressed/shamed/oppressed to vocalize.

    Thank you Violet, for this blog, I check here frequently hoping for a new post. I appreciate how well you keep it up to date even when you are in pain.

    Wishing you a peaceful new year….

  70. Adrienne in CA says:

    If every feminist’s husband father, brother, or friend is not a sexist, then how did Patriarchy survive for thousands of years?

    You know, the Patriarchy quotient isn’t exactly the same everywhere on Earth.

    True, large parts of the world are still held hostage by patriarchal religious nonsense such as was long ago cast off in much of the Western Hemisphere (except for it’s recent resurgent death throes), and would be everywhere else eventually if we’d stop inciting “Democracy” wars.

    I don’t hold baby boys born into those cultures any more at fault for their participation than I do the baby girls. Enlightenment takes so long, it seems miraculous that it ever does come.

    (And no, it’s not my motherly “unconditional love” talking. That part had me laughing out loud. I sure got none of that from my mom, nor has my daughter gotten any from me. Ha!)

    But there are glimmers of light in the darkness. Europe, Scandinavia and, surprisingly, some countries in Latin America, are passing laws — with support from men, btw, which we need to get stuff into law — that actually increase women’s equality.

    We were on that trajectory in the U.S., too, until the massive Dumbing Down (a.k.a Conservative) movement launched in the 70′s by a few mega-rich families to keep Americans stupid and enslaved. This too shall pass.

    I don’t know enough to say what went wrong to allow Patriarchy to begin, but thousands of years of recorded history are just a fraction of the time humans have been around. Cultures rise and fall and the Patriarchy mega-culture will be no different.

    Meanwhile, yeah, it sucks.

    *****A

  71. RedDragon62 says:

    I am sorry you are feeling ill Violet and I hope you feel better.

    I’m sorry you feel the way you do Janis. As a “MAN,” I could never fully understand what a woman feels nor could I understand what they have had to endure, but I do feel we have much to learn from one another.

    I enjoy reading your blog Violet and I will continue to do so.

    Please feel better.

  72. cellocat says:

    Donald, janicen, votermon, thanks.

    I realized I wasn’t clear about something and wanted to add to what I said above about complaining but not rocking the boat. That is, when I encounter examples of sexist behavior personally, I have tended to fall into the (intended) trap of feeling shame and slinking off silently rather than to respond appropriately to the direct or indirect attack by the member of patriarchy. So, when a manager once reached over, buttoned the top button of my shirt, and said, “We sell food, not flesh,” to me, I neither confronted him in the moment or even later, partly because there was an embarassed refrain in my head, “Oh, he’s right, I have big breasts, and I shouldn’t ever let any evidence of them be visible,” or something to that effect. I complained to friends, later, but never challenged the perpetrator, nor linked his action directly to patriarchal aggression.

    Shame undercuts my ability to rock the boat. And of course, shame is a major weapon of the patriarchy. That’s why Daly’s example of freedom from that outlook or set of rules is so inspiring to me.

    Violet, I really hope your night has not been awful, and that you’ll be able to see a dentist today.

  73. Linden says:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/education/07daly.html?hpw

  74. Ann Valentine says:

    Yes it’s definitely a “quirk”. Interesting how the more research I do into whether or not there was sexual dimorphism it becomes more apparent that, in fact, this may be the case. Especially in dinosaurs and this highlights the fact that there are fatal errors when men try to do Anthropology and Archaeology. You get exhibits of dinosaurs in the so-called mating position and naming a T-Rex Stan when in fact, they were not sexually dimorphic.

    “As the number of specimens increased, scientists began to analyze the variation between individuals and discovered what appeared to be two distinct body types, or morphs, similar to some other theropod species. As one of these morphs was more solidly built, it was termed the ‘robust’ morph while the other was termed ‘gracile.’ Several morphological differences associated with the two morphs were used to analyze sexual dimorphism in Tyrannosaurus rex, with the ‘robust’ morph usually suggested to be female. For example, the pelvis of several ‘robust’ specimens seemed to be wider, perhaps to allow the passage of eggs.[43] It was also thought that the ‘robust’ morphology correlated with a reduced chevron on the first tail vertebra, also ostensibly to allow eggs to pass out of the reproductive tract, as had been erroneously reported for crocodiles.[44]

    In recent years, evidence for sexual dimorphism has been weakened. A 2005 study reported that previous claims of sexual dimorphism in crocodile chevron anatomy were in error, casting doubt on the existence of similar dimorphism between Tyrannosaurus rex genders.[45] A full-sized chevron was discovered on the first tail vertebra of “Sue,” an extremely robust individual, indicating that this feature could not be used to differentiate the two morphs anyway. As Tyrannosaurus rex specimens have been found from Saskatchewan to New Mexico, differences between individuals may be indicative of geographic variation rather than sexual dimorphism. The differences could also be age-related, with ‘robust’ individuals being older animals.[1]

    Only a single Tyrannosaurus rex specimen has been conclusively shown to belong to a specific gender. Examination of “B-rex” demonstrated the preservation of soft tissue within several bones. Some of this tissue has been identified as a medullary tissue, a specialized tissue grown only in modern birds as a source of calcium for the production of eggshell during ovulation. As only female birds lay eggs, medullary tissue is only found naturally in females, although males are capable of producing it when injected with female reproductive hormones like estrogen. This strongly suggests that “B-rex” was female, and that she died during ovulation.[40] Recent research has shown that medullary tissue is never found in crocodiles, which are thought to be the closest living relatives of dinosaurs, aside from birds. The shared presence of medullary tissue in birds and theropod dinosaurs is further evidence of the close evolutionary relationship between the two.”- Wiki

    And neither perhaps was our human ancestor.

  75. Ann Valentine says:

    Mary Daly would be proud.

  76. Kiuku says:

    Thank Linden. Well it’s about time. I tried to discuss Mary Daly’s death with a man, and, not surprisingly, it was a constant “But what about the men” conversation…and of course never heard of her, and the only “Feminists” he knows of are two men.

    What surprises me the most about dialogue with men, is that it doesn’t matter how many men you talk to on the subject, the conversation is essentially the same. So, I mean, there is a good reason to believe in a borg-like conspiracy here.

  77. Kiuku says:

    And then I realized something: the vast extent of men’s willingness to ignore, forget, erase, and write out women. If men can write out women, even from Feminism, then..I mean really, you have to question nearly every single thing men have taken credit for, and wonder about every single other thing they got rid of, ignored, wrote out in order to preserve their dominance/Necrophilia and/or hide their inferiority, perceived or real.

  78. Gayle says:

    Please oh please let Heart open her blog again so you guys can have somewhere to go.

    Well you got your wish. Heart has reopened her blog specifically to commemorate Daly’s passing.

    Women’s Space

    I don’t consider myself an ideologue, but I’m glad she did so. BTW, as someone who used to read her blog regularly, Heart contended with some very nasty and unfair comments on a daily basis.

  79. Violet Socks says:

    Yes, she did. And I’m very pleased to see she’s reopened her blog. I hope she keeps it up.

  80. Nessum says:

    Thanks Linden at #73! A good read for those of us who didn’t know about Mary Daly.

    And I loved the description of how she at the age of 14 had found herself communicating with a clover blossom and,

    “It said, with utmost simplicity, ‘I am.’”

  81. No Blood for Hubris says:

    Buddhism is not a patriarchal religion, and Buddha was a human being, not a god.

    Buddha and Buddhism, however, recognize that women are an inherently oppressed social group.

  82. julia says:

    Not one word from DemocracyNow. It’s almost March – I guess I could stop waiting. Will someone please explain to Amy Goodman what a feminist is?

  83. kalibhakta says:

    Thank you for this memorial to Mary. She rocked my world, as she did others’ worlds, and she helped open a new world for a lot of people. She seemed like a force of nature, and was a personal Shero for me, so her passing has been hard. It’s been a-mazing, though, to read the dozens of heartfelt and insightful tributes on the net…I think “colussus” really says it.

  84. Sonia says:

    I know this is an old thread but @opossum:

    *an outlet for your victim-blaming snark is probably a good idea.

    how bout a woman-shaped pinata?*

    bitterness at men is well earned.

    thanks Violet for honoring Mary.