Sexuality taken by FORCE!!!

The SCUM Manifesto article by Valerie Solanas, describes a league of women called Scum. One of the duties of SCUM women is to organize and unite to leave the workforce in order to cripple the economy. SCUM’s goal is to mess up the government and economy by looting, killing, and destroying work productivity as well as men. The enemy is described as men, the economy, and money. Solanas describes the women’s force as so powerful that “the police force, National Guard, Army, Navy, and Marines combined couldn’ t squelch a rebellion of over half the population, particularly when it’s made up of people they are utterly helpless without”(172). In the article, Solanas encourages women to leave men and their jobs so that there the economy and nation will suffer from the mass withdrawal of women. I enjoyed the part where she explained that men really want women to control them which characterize them as MAMA’s Boys! I also liked the rhythm in the article as well. She suggests that there are women who are “Daddy’s Girls” who are submissive to men and do not acknowledge men for who they really are. SCUM will strip men of their money, which is the power that they have over some women. My impression of SCUM is that they are very violent and non-tolerant. As I was reading the article, I wanted to know how it relates to sexuality. I came to the conclusion that after SCUM take over, all men will become submissive which will give women power over their sexuality. I also have the question of whether Solanas is a Marxist Feminist theorist? I also wanted to know if she was suggesting that all women will become lesbians after men lose their power? Will their sexual orientation change because women rule the society?


The very title of the article "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence" explains the author, Adrienne Rich’s thesis which seeks to prove that historically women have been socialized into the concept in being attracted to men. Rich uses Kathleen Gough ‘s essay “The Origin of the Family”, as her framework to theorize how men control and enforce heterosexuality on women. Rich uses the terms, lesbian existence and lesbian continuum, instead of lesbianism to remove the society’s taboo of lesbians. She explains that lesbians make a political statement that denies men and their power over women’s sexuality. I agree with Rich’s comment which states that historical records about the lesbian existence in letters and memorabilia has been destroyed (306). Rich mentions that the bond between women as friendship, comradeship, and erotic. I do not agree with her statement because there has neverbeen an erotic bond with my experiences with women. I believe she generalizes an infant suckling at her mother’s breast as sexual or erotic (306). This article can also explain why some women have a lesbian experience in life. I also disagree with her contention which states that women marry men for financial stability on the account that many women have their own successful jobs and careers. Overall, I would have liked Rich to explain why women in general are attracted to men without men's force of heterosexuality?