THE ACADEMYnWimin’s Worknby Theodore PappasnThe women’s movement is in considerablendisarray. While mostnself-described feminists are concernednmainly with job prospects, equal pay,nand abortion rights, the radical wing ofnthe movement is busy advocatirig everythingnfrom witchcraft to lesbianism.nThis was never more apparent than atnNOW’s recent convention. While mostndelegates were content with denouncingnthe Supreme Court’s decision innWebster v. Reproductive Health Services,nthe radicals of the organizationnwere busy pushing for the creation of annew political party that would betternrepresent such things as “lesbiannrights.”nStill, within official feminism therenremains substantial agreement on onenissue — the need for linguistic reform.nFor insight into this aspect of thenwomen’s movement take a glancenthrough a few issues of Lesbian Ethics,na radical lesbian journal published innAlbuquerque, New Mexico. This journal—nthe direct offspring of thenwomen’s movement’s push for linguisticnreform — is one of the principalnproponents of “lesbian discourse,” anlinguistic world in which “man” has nonpresence — no presence as a word, nonpresence as a syllable. Until recentlynthe one thing women in the women’snmovement could agree on was the factnthat they belonged to a “women’snmovement.” But those days of consensusnhave passed. For now there is anmovement for wimin, wymin, wymyn,nand wim.nBoth radical lesbians and mainlinenfeminists base their call for linguisticnreform on the Wittgensteinian ideanthat “a language is a form of life.”nBecause traditional society has beennmale-dominated, feminists believe traditionalnlanguage patterns must similarlynbe dominated. To be more specific,nfeminists see traditional language asninherently misogynist: it is a reflectionnof male supremacy and female inferioritynbecause it preserves and perpetuatesnunfair social stereotypes while denyingnwomen the right of visibility.nWhere mainline feminists and radicalnlesbians differ is the degree to whichnlinguistic reform should be taken. Thenformer have been generally content innmerely fighting the generic use of suchnwords as “he” and “man”; they havenbeen content to bask in the glow ofntheir successful efforts to replace firemen,npolicemen, congressmen, andnchairmen with firefighters, police officers,ncongressional representatives, andnchairs.nRadical lesbians, however, call fornmore. In fact, radical lesbians even seenthe linguistic behavior of radical femi­nRevolution: The Legacy of 1789 in France,nEngland and America – June 1989 – Revolutionsnaround the world: Geoffrey Wagner on Grenada andnthe Caribbean, l^o Raditsa on South Africa, DonnFeder on Israel’s religious revolution, and MichaelnWarder on glasnost and the USSR. Plus GeorgenWatson on the English and French Revolutions, annupdate from Paul Hollander on political pilgrims,nand Jack Neusner reviews Profscam.nThe Burden of Liberalism – July 1989 – 1988nIngersoU Prize winner, sociologist Edward Shils, onnthe varieties of liberalism; historian George Watsonnon postwar Buchenwald; for the Soviets it was alsona death camp. Timothy Ashby reviews Hernando denSoto’s plea for unfettered capitalism in SouthnAmerica, The Other Path.nnists as too tame. Whereas radicalnfeminists have long spoke oiwomanistsnwho believe in womanity, who partakenof womanism, who cultivate theirnwomanliness, and who even writenwomanifestoes for the womanist movement—nradical lesbians never would.nOn the contrary, as the Proudhons andnBakunins of the women’s movement,nradical lesbians see mere elaborationsnof the word “woman” as still notnenough. For the word “woman” is stillntainted: it is tainted by the proximity ofnthe ever-present devil, “man.”nThus, from the radical lesbian perspective,na true and wholesome femalencould only be a womyn, a womin, anwomon, or a worn. And if among truenand wholesome friends, they couldnonly be wimin, wymyn, wymin, ornwim, this last word being the pluralnform oiwom. Of course, radical feministsnwould not object to a femalenbeing a womynist who believes innwominity, partakes oiwomonism, cultivatesnher womynliness, and who writesnwomonifestoes for the wimministnmovement. But most of them wouldnjust prefer to be dykes, whereupon theynThe 60’s Thing -August 1989 – Vice Admiral JamesnStockdale on why we cannot put Vietnam behind us;nThomas Fleming gives a short history of rock andnroll; Chris Kopff on the vision of Clint Eastwood;nKatherine Dalton on the late 60’s in New York. PlusnGeorge Garrett reviews the Sam Goldwyn biography.nArt Eckstein gives high markes to Collier &nHorowitz’s “Destructive Generation,” and JanetnScott Barlow plumbs the depths of Real Guyhood inn”GQ” and “Esquire.”nIlliberal Arts – September 1989 -Thomas Flemingnon the closing of the conservative mind; JohnnHoward on the impact of federal aid to higherneducation; Jacob Neusner on why universities arendifferent from other centers of learning; and StephennClark on the spiritual meaning of philosophy. PlusnRussell Kirk discusses the ethics of English, andnSamuel Francis reviews Gregory Fossedal’s ThenDemocratic Imperative.nBACK ISSUE ORDER FORMnr Each issue $2.50 (postage & handling included)nTitle Date Qty.nRevolution June 1989nThe Burden of Liberalism July 1989nThe60’sThing August 1989nIlliberal Arts September 1989nTotal EnclosednName .nAddress .nCity.nState .nZip.nMail with check to: Chronicles • 934 N. Main Street • Rockford, IL 61103nLnnnCostnnnCB489 JnOCTOBER 1989/57n