I hear ya, but I'm not quite sure I am COMPLETELY feelin ya, Ms. Rich

In reading lesbian feminist work, I often feel excluded because there is so much emphasis on the denial of their sexuality and the need to embrace it, that I feel almost as if my heterosexuality is being suppressed. In fact, the initial paragraph which posed the question of whether or not the search for love for both sexes originally leaned toward women, made me feel as if this reading was not made for me to relate to. However, Adrienne Rich’s article challenges the clinical term of lesbianism and in search of a more all encompassing term, she chooses the word lesbian continuum/lesbian existence. These terms reject the notion that lesbianism is simply the desire by two women to have sex with one another. Her term incorporates general rejection of systems within the larger patriarchal system which reinforce the oppression of the patriarchal system. For example, she cites women who did not get married and relied on female companionship to live fulfilling lives.
This concept is something I can relate to however it still leaves me wondering about my heterosexual female constituents that still desire to live forcefully within certain confines of patriarchal systems. I understand that marriage, in the western historical context, was put into place for men to pass down property and for women to be labeled as property. Yet, there have been women that have been empowered in recent history within the institution of marriage. I believe she was trying to say that the more inclusive term of lesbian continuum could invite more women to be a part of a movement against male patriarchy. However, I feel this is the type of “male bashing” that many potential male allies are concerned about. I feel that feminism should not be entirely about rejecting all patriarchal systems or accepting ideas that all systems, that are historically patriarchal, cannot be manipulated or evolved into systems of cooperation between the sexes.