Back in November, when I sent an email with this subject line to the fabulous Ms. Gloria, I received a prompt reply:

Dear Melody,

I love your spirit! I'm sure we can work something out.

Of course, feminists wouldn't have a queen, every feminist is her own spokeswoman by definition.....like you, I speak about my own experience and hope that's helpful.

Gloria

Melody: How do you feel about the concept of waves in general, and what do you think of so-called "third wave" feminism?

Gloria: Well, it's a... historically it makes no sense; but humanly it makes sense. Because historically we're still in the second wave.

Melody: Totally.

Gloria: Yeah. Because the first wave lasted a hundred years... and we're only 35 years into this one. The first wave was about a legal identity as citizens and human beings for women of all races, and men of color; because, obviously, the suffragist and abolitionist movement was, for the most part, the same movement. So, if it took a hundred years to get a legal identity, it's going to take more than a hundred to get legal equality, and we're still in that hundred. Therefore we're still in the second wave. On the other hand, people should be able to call themselves anything they f***ing well please, you know! So, if they want to call themselves the third wave, it's fine with me! .....

Melody: I keep on reading about how you believe in the inherent goodness of humanity, and I was just wondering how someone like Bush fits into that world view... if he does, at all.

Gloria: Well, yeah. He wasn't born that way. As a baby, he probably had a whole person inside him! But that family is enough to turn anybody into a raving power maniac, and they certainly did it with him.

Melody: When I saw the picture, the famous picture of him, with a bunch of other white guys, gleefully signing away our rights as women... all I could think was, "ok, how is that not just pure evil?"

Gloria: Well, you know, there is certainly evil effect. There are certainly going to be millions of women and a lot of men who simply are not alive because he's in the White House. There are going to be whole species of animals, and living things, and plants that are not alive anymore, and will never come back, because: he killed them. So, that's an evil impact. I don't think it's inevitable. He wasn't born that way.

It takes a lot of work, actually, to break the bond of empathy that I think, probably, is natural. I mean, I think it's probably part of our evolutionary equipment to feel an instantaneous "I'm going to help!" to a member of our own species, and maybe to all living things, I have no idea. But, it takes a lot of work to break it, and our child-rearing methods, and child abuse, and humiliation and shame, and all those common occurrences, break that leap of empathy. There was this, some kind of study, that I've never been able to really find except in references, you know, I've never seen the whole study. But it was of the "Good Samaritans." These were people during World War II who were not themselves Jewish but who saved Jews, at risk to themselves, great risk. People were always studying them 'cause they wanted to replicate them, you know. And the question was: "what did they share?" because, they actually sounded quite alike. Even though they were very disparate, they would say: "I'm not a hero. I don't know why I did this, I just did it. I just didn't think of not doing it." So the question was, "was there something shared about family structure, education, religion, moral teaching...?" But no one could come up with anything... except one thing: which was that they hadn't been abused as children. So, to me that argues that if empathy isn't cut off by abuse and humilation and deeply convincing you that there are only two choices, to be the victor or the victim, that there is this leap of empathy to other people.

Melody: I just read this article in Mother Jones in October about a personal narrative account of what abortion was like prior to Roe v. Wade. And, it was just so helpful to me, I mean, obviously I already was really passionate about the issue of reproductive choice, but, it's another thing entirely to hear from someone who went through it, like, how many people were dying, from illegal abortions...

Gloria: Well, it still is hard though for young women who happen to live in a state where there's parental consent, or for poor women who can't get Medicaid-funded abortions. I mean, women are still dying for lack of safe, legal abortions. But, it was infinitely worse when I was growing up. Contraception was illegal. Say, in Connecticut, it wasn't until the late sixties I think, that you could get information about contraception, you couldn't send it through the mail, you know. So, from the time I could get pregnant I suppose, to Roe v Wade, there were just habits of mine, and I think a lot of my contemporaries: when things were really bad we would always think to ourselves, "well it could be worse, I could be pregnant." Because it was essentially a choice between one of two things: either you endangered your life and your health by going out and getting an illegal abortion, which often meant being sexually abused by the doctor too, 'cause they would bargain. "You can have an abortion if you sleep with me" you know, stuff like that. Or, your life essentially came to an end, your life as you knew it, because you would have to get married, and have to bear a child, which of course, changes your entire life. So, it was, quite literally, the worst thing that could happen to you, short of stepping in front of a car.

Melody: Did you know anything about the JANE underground abortion network?

Gloria: Yeah, I only learned after I came to New York that in Chicago, where it started, women had been courageously referring other women to abortionists who were safe and driving people there and helping individuals. There was always a kind of underground referral system, but it was very difficult to find, and frequently it wasn't safe. But JANE really was important in organizing it, and the clergy. You know, people forget that it was ministers who were doing a lot of the referrals.

Melody: I'm just so amazed that, no matter how many really great religious organizations in the states are pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, our conception of religion is just completely embodied in Bush and the fundamentalist tradition!

Gloria: Yeah, no, it's like thinking that all of Islam is violent. I mean, I do have problems with all religion, no matter how benign, but it is true that there is a huge difference between the right wing, or the center, or progressive part of religion; it's huge.

Melody: I would be interested to know what your ideas are on religion vs. spirituality. Because, it almost seems that most religions, by trying to impose definitions on the vast, and potentially beautiful spiritual realm... are just bound to get tarnished and "human-ified!" Like, I'm just thinking random thoughts about ancient religions and their explanations of gender. So many of the creation myths that I've read involve a goddess coming down to earth and giving birth, but like, she explodes when she starts giving birth and the male sons are coming out of her womb and fighting each other to the death, and she dies...

Gloria: Well, that's probably a literal representation of what happened over a thousand years. That the goddesses, I mean, when in the Bible it says that they should not worship false idols, and they tear down all these statues; those were statues of breasts, you know, that's what was bad about them. So, the myth may be reflecting what actually happened, historically, and in that way the oral history reflects what actually happened. I mean, maybe there was some guy in a cave writing it, you know, doing it all by himself. (hunches over table and squints, pantomimes someone deep in thought, scribbling in the air) But, they may be describing the overturn of previous nature-based, spiritual religions which tended to be unquestionable in the sense that, "OK, there's a waterfall. So when you're near the waterfall you pay respect to the god of the waterfall." ... But monotheism took all the power up here and made it a male presence, and withdrew god or spirit, or whatever you want to call it, from women and nature, for political reasons. So it always seems to me that, for the most part, institutionalized religion is politics in the sky.

Melody: Which is why, to me, it's so scary that, you know, fundamentalist Christians will look at the Bible and be like: "Oh, there's nothing political about this at all! This is the word of God, straight from the man himself!"

Gloria: I just was writing a little column because the New York Times has this syndicate, and they asked me to do gay marriage and I thought I should because otherwise an author might, sort of, demonize it, as if that was the reason we lost the election which isn't true. But anyway, "they say it's the Bible," you know, so I said "if it were the Bible then you would have to declare, legally declare that marriages were only valid if the woman was a virgin and she gets stoned to death if she's not a virgin. Then we would have to overturn all the laws that keep men from taking concubines in addition to an infinite number of wives..."

Melody: And stone disobedient children... I think that's one.

Gloria: Oh yeah? I didn't get to that, I was only doing marriage. And also, the other argu-, the other fact, is that, actually, women are much more religious. I mean, they describe themselves as being more religious and they go to church more often, but they're also much less biased against homosexuality in general, and gay marriage in particular. So, it's not a challenge to the Bible, it's more a challenge to masculinity. I mean, of course, the Bible is full of that too, but, you know, if it were about religion, women would be more against gay marriage than men; but they're not.

Melody: How is it against "moral values" to let a same-sexed couple commit publicly to a loving relationship, and yet somehow it's moral to go bomb another country!?

Gloria: It's just bullshit. It's politics, not morality, because what the right wing is against is any expression of sexuality that can't end in conception. And once you get a grip on that, you see that they're consistent, they're not inconsistent. It makes sense that they're both against contraception and lesbians. Otherwise it would seem sort of bizarre! And they take resolutions against masturbation. It's ridiculous. It has nothing to do with morality. It's all about politics and keeping sexuality directed towards reproduction

Melody: There's so much focus on getting marriage rights for homosexual couples, because of all the civil rights they get, because of the fact that they get health care, but no one thinks to say: "Ok, wait, shouldn't everyone get healthcare and all those other benefits without having to commit to some sort of legal romance? I don't understand!"

Gloria: Yeah, well, we should, you know, we're the only democracy, or, the only industrial, modern democracy without a national system of healthcare, and without some system of childcare. "Women in this country are not the most equal in the world, we're just the most lied to." 'Cause many countries are ahead of us. That's true, but it is probably also true that we want to be able to choose family as well as be born into family. So, we want to be able, and everyone should be able to say, "This person is not a blood relative, but this person is my chosen family." And, that seems OK, I don't have a problem with that. But, I agree that we all should have healthcare, whether we do that or not. And just, I think, you know, I think that little kids, have this kind of innate sense. Little kids are always saying: "it's not fair!" We just have to keep that sense!

Melody: I was talking to one of my new writers about, you know: "Do you remember being younger, and how did you feel about sexism?" She's like "Hmm, I just remember being really mad, and not knowing how to articulate it! And now I know how to articulate it, and I'm really lucky!"

Gloria: Yeah, well then, now she knows that she's not crazy, the system is crazy, which is a really important thing because it literally saves our sanity. But little kids, you know... I mean, people used to write to us at the magazine; they probably still do, I'm just not reading the mail anymore. I never forgot this one little girl. She was maybe nine. She's writing with crayon, you know, and she was saying that the boys got the best part of the playground, and the girls only got this little part in the corner where they played jax. "We girls are angry as turnips!" she says. Isn't that great? I thought: "this kid is gonna be a writer," you know. "We girls are angry as turnips!" I never forgot that. And she still has her basic sense of fairness, because, for one thing, she hasn't encountered, fully, the feminine role yet. She's only nine, you know, when she gets to be eleven or twelve or thirteen then it's all gonna come down on her head.

Melody: I read one of your interviews where you said something like: "that's why being 60's so great, because, suddenly you get that sense of fairness back, and you have your own apartment!"

Gloria: Yeah, because, the feminine role ends with reproduction , basically, or raising children, so, somewhere around fifty, or something, it's kind of over. And that's upsetting, you know, in some ways, but in other ways it's really freeing.

Melody: What news sources would you recommend to radical youth? What do you read?

Gloria: Well, I think the most important thing is not so much the news source as the critical sense with which you read it. So, if you see a report on how they're going to privatize social security, or a large part of social security... they never talk about the differential impact on women, but, if you think about it: more women depend on social security 'cause more women are poor. So, whatever it is we're reading, we have to say to ourselves "Ok, what impact does this have on the female half of the world, and on the invisible folks, whoever they may be, by race or class or whatever it is."

Melody: I took this feminist theory grad course last year with one of my favorite professors of all time. One of the things she said that really annoyed me was, "Oh, you know, Feminist Theory, unlike Marxism, doesn't have 'the big plan.' We don't have the 'big theory' or 'the big revolution' that's going to change everything.'" And I was like, "well, that's annoying, because, we should have a plan. Because if it's just about consciousness-raising to like, the nth level... my consciousness is going to be soaring up in the clouds somewhere, but my body is still going to be existing in the world, and I need to have practical solutions." So, I was wondering if you think there's a plan for feminism, and if so, what is it?

Gloria: Well, I think by taking away the deepest pattern of the leaders and the led and the subject and object and the conquerors and the conquered and the passive and the active and, all that stuff that comes with the false idea of gender, if you take that away as assumption, and training, and brainwashing, it takes it away from everywhere. So, you're no longer ready to accept the rich over the poor or the decision makers over the average citizen... 'cause that's the basis of the hierarchy. Once you pull that away, (mimes pulling an invisible lynch pin out of an invisible hierarchal structure) the whole thing falls down! So I would not posit a utopia, because, I think the very desire to outline a utopia is dictatorial. It's going to become many different things, probably, we don't have any idea exactly what's going to happen. But I think it's clear that doing away with the most basic division of the leaders and the led, the superior, the inferior, you know, transforms everything. There's nothing that is not transformed.

Melody: OK, "feminism as the F-WORD!"

Gloria: Right! Well, the problem is, among other things, I mean, of course, feminism has been demonized as a word, like, affirmitive action and liberal, you know, there's been a campaign against it, to, distort it. But, it's also true that people behave as if anything except total success is failure. And, actually, as many or more women, depending on what poll you look at, self-identify as feminists, as self-identify as Republicans. I don't call that a failure. It's quite remarkable.

Melody: Well, the fact that anyone identifies as a Republican is just a failure...

Gloria: But, it's not so much about Republicans as it is about who's taken over the Republican party, because, actually, seventy-three percent of Republicans are pro-choice. I mean, they're not bad people, it's just that their party got taken away from them.

Melody: I still just don't understand how it happened, at all.

Gloria: Lyndon Johnson was probably not wrong when he said, when the Civil Rights act of 1964 passed, he said "We've just lost the south for the Democrats for decades and decades to come" and he was right. I mean, because the right wing Democrats fled the inclusion of blacks, and they became Republicans. So, a lot of these bad guys used to be Democrats, you know, like, Reagan used to be a Democrat. Jesse Helms used to be a Democrat.

Melody: Well, going along with the "feminism as the F-WORD" line of thought... people who question whether feminism is a dead issue are construed as "howling harpies" sometimes, many times. I would like to hear your advice to younger feminists who might be afraid to speak up in class or question sexism when they encounter it just because they don't want to deal with the stigma.

Gloria: Well, I can say what I find comforting, they may not, but, you know, if you are part of the wrong group, nothing you do is right anyway! So you might as well do what you f***ing well please, you know! I mean, there's no way of behaving in order to get approval. First of all if you do that, you've given the approver all the power; secondly, it's the nature of being part of the wrong group that you won't be approved, you know, you can't be good enough to be a "good girl"... I would say: it just doesn't work. Because, the most comforting thing is: it just doesn't work! So you might as well do what you want to do, and use your talents and use your head, and point out unfairness. And, when you do, when you send out a signal, when you say something in class, you not only get opposition, you get support. Because, you've sent out a signal that means that other people who agree with you will come to you.

And then Gloria gave me a hug!! (before she vanished back off into magical feminist icon land...) The two hours we spent chatting over coffee comprised, quite easily, one of the most amazing highlights of my entire life. Basking in the aura of "Glo" was such an intensely inspirational experience. I am forever grateful for the time, and wisdom she shared with me.