However, according to Anne Koedt, from there came confusion between personal solution and political solution. She denounces that; there is a crucial difference between a lesbian personal engagement and a lesbian political engagement. That is the origin of the famous Slogan: “The personal is political!” There, Anne Koedt joins Kate Millett, an author with some different ideas, who wrote “Sexual Politics” in 1969. Like her, she denounces the women subordination to men. The society is sexist. Freud’s thinking was adopted as a real referential schema into the American society throughout the 20th century. Women's power, efficiency and reliability were decreased to constantly restore the men's image and so to keep the same unchanged collective consciousness: “It will take a great deal of sophisticated political muscle and collective energy for women to eliminate sexism” (lines 20-22). Homosexual/heterosexual sexism must be eliminated from society, as White/Black segregation had been before. It is the same schema for a similar struggle. They are linked. The issue is to be free from male supremacy, this social structure positioning men into a dominating class and women into a subordinating class. But would it be so easy by simply becoming lesbians? Of course not! (Lines 19-20).
At first, being gay is a
…show more content…
This is utopia. And ultimately it will maybe lead to a female sexism. How can radical lesbians envisage women to be completely independent from men? Man is certainly a necessary partner for a sane and clever reciprocation on a perfect equal level. We have to be complementary in all our differences, to bring each other. It might be the right and fair fight. This would surely be the most productive for society. The fact is we are a mixed society. It cannot be otherwise. So acting for equality seems to be really better, normal and acceptable than asking for a subordination of