I can't take my chair. Bastards.

It's my last week of gainful employment at BrassRing, and things are winding down. I had my last doctor's appointment on BrassRing's insurance -- a mole check at the dermatologist. The good new: Now cancer. The bad news: There's nothing like catching sight of yourself in the full length mirror as you contort yourself to tie the back of one of those damned hospital robe things to make you seriously despair of the thought of ever having sex again. Sigh.

Check out this blog entry from the Big White Guy update. He's a, well, Big White Guy in Hong Kong, and I love his blog. It makes me former-sorta-homesick, even when he's talking about the new anti-spitting ordinance or the octopus pizza at Pizza Hut.

Also, Rich and Lynn, who I don't know, are talking about women and feminism and sex and art. I was going to post a comment response, but then realized it was a post in and of itself. So here we go.

Among other things, they say:

Lynn Why are there so few (if any) great female philosophers, composers, artists, etc? You can make the argument that it's because throughout most of history women have been repressed and forced into the traditional roles of wife and mother. There is some merit to that argument but I think that to completely dismiss the disparity in achievement based on this one feminist theory is to deny reality.

Have you read Virginia Woolf's "A Room of One's Own"? I highly recommend it. It goes a long way toward explaining why there are so few female artists, writers, philosophers, etc. of the past. And it's not just one argument. The gist of it is this: Women aren't expected to have an inner life, so any art they create is done be stealing time from other activities. It's not just that motherhood makes demands on you -- even if a woman didn't have children, she was expected to serve whoever. Any time they are writing, they have to expect to be interrupted, diverted, told to do something else. It's only recently -- as in, in the last century -- that women have been able to actually stake a claim, and say "This is important, this is what I'm going to do." (You can make the same argument about working-class men -- they simply didn't have time or resources to create. It's a hell of a lot easier to let your creative juices flow when you're not (1) exhausted from the coal mines or (2) starving to death.)

And here's the thing -- I'm hardly a genius, but I do know that writing (and I'm guessing all art and philosophy) is hard. It takes dedication and a certain egotism, a selfishness. And until recently, god forbid a woman should have an ego or be selfish. There was nothing more monstrous than a woman who would sacrifice herself for the good of the family, the community, etc. That made a difference.

Rich It's my opinion that like hunger, greed, ambition or fear, a rampant sex drive can be a strong motivator.... It's a matter of record that most of history's great generals, terrible conquerors, transcendent artists and world-changing politicians have had elevated libidos; it's not quite a prerequisite, but it's close. If you accept that postulate, then it stands to reason that the half of humanity more prone to high sex drive [emphasis added] would appear more frequently in the annals of humanity's great achievements and follies.

I'd contend that sex drives differ more between individuals than they do between the genders. But again, a strong sex drive is expected and praised in men, and is reviled and discouraged in women. Men are studs, women are sluts. So if you do believe that a strong sex drive relates to a strong creative drive, what would it mean to have that source of power questioned and denigrated and burned out of you on a matter of principle? If you were expected to actively suppress those desires, that drive, or better yet, deny it even existed? How would that affect your creative product?

Bottom line: I don't buy that men as a whole are more creative/artistic/touched with genius than women as a whole. I think a lot of it has to do with opportunity, with expectation, with cultural realities. Considering the obstacles women faced -- and still face, to a much lesser extent -- it's miraculous that Jane Austen or Hildegaard von Bingham or Simone de Beauvoir or Lavinia Fontana were able to create what they did.

Now we get to see what women can accomplish creatively when many of the barriers are gone. Think Shulamith Firestone, Julie Taymor, Mary Zimmerman, A. S. Byatt, Doris Lessing, Alice Walker and who knows how many other artists, writers, philosophers (I have to admit I'm not up on current philosophy). Let's revisit this in 50 years, and see how the genders stack up.