LETTERS

The idea of writing a letter to reach the staff, current and past, our subscribers, and even advertisers, has been in my mind for several weeks now, but finding the appropriate words of farewell has been difficult. How can I put into words the journey I have taken with this paper since Issue No. 1?

There have been many wonderful parts, as well as the stresses, strains and growing pains. I'll always remember the sense of achievement, relief, pride we felt as we opened each new issue for the first time, the late-night final proofings which still didn't catch errors missed by 2 or 3 others, the agonizing over bad printing jobs, the forever feeling that we needed one more meeting (or maybe only more women to share the work), the effort we all put in to understanding each other and listening carefully, the joy in realizing we'd really become a collective, and there's so much more! I have no doubt that I have participated in a very special activity. The "product" reflects the personal and collective strength we have gained.

Although I leave with confidence in my decision, I am also very aware of how much I will miss all phases and every person connected with What She Wants. You are all pressed into my memory, and I will feel close, in spite of the miles that separate us. My love and best wishes will be with you always. ~Barb Reusch

For months now I have been going up to Coventry Books every month, looking for the new issue of What She Wants. Now that I know at last where I'll be living for at least the next year, I can finally subscribe.

What She Wants is really a high-quality feminist newspaper, and I particularly like all the informative articles on womyn's rights and the feminist movement. The paper reaches a lot of womyn with important news that they might not hear much about elsewhere.

What She Wants is also invaluable for knowing what's going on in the womyn's community. For example, I've noticed that since the announcement of womyn's music at Labyris appeared in the June issue, there have been many more womyn at Labyris on Friday nights, and a lot of them hadn't been there before.

So thank you for all the work you've put into keeping What She Wants going all this time. I can hardly imagine not having it there to keep us in contact with each other.

In Sisterhood Lisa Rainsong

In its April editorial, What She Wants points to the courageous protests of Iranian women on International Women's Day when 100,000 women marched in Teheran chanting, "We Will Fight the Veil! Down with Khomeini!" In response we want to emphasize that Khomeini's reactionary Islamic “republic'' continues to terrorize the women, homosexuals, national minorities, workers and leftists of Iran. The crucial question is, How to defeat Islamic reaction? Fatima Khalil, a Near Eastern Cominunist woman of Muslim background, speaking for the international Spartacist tendency, addressed this question during a speaking tour of the U.S. in a forum on "No to the Veil! For Workers Revolution to Defeat Islamic Reaction!"

As part of her tour, Khalil was invited to give a brief presentation at a talk by American feminist Kate Millet, who was expelled from Iran after defending the rights of women. Only women can liberate themselves, concluded Millet, but Fatima Khalil pointed out that this poses no solution. The protesters in the Women's Day march showed great courage, but the march was unable to reverse the reactionary Islamic legislation. Khalil counterposes "Women's Liberation through Workers' Revolu(continued on page 13)

Page 2/What She Wants/July, 1979

I was very glad to see the June issue of wsw devoted to lesbianism. There is such a large active population of gay women in this city it had the potential to be an exciting, educational and informative issue. The editorial set a promising tone which was unfortunately not carried out by the rest of the articles. Chris and Alexandria did make an invaluable contribution to our collective resources with their work on lesbian legal rights-theirs was the most significant piece in the issue.

I was disappointed that there was no historical overview of the efforts of Cleveland's women's community. We are privileged to live in a city with a long history of women's efforts. We have innumerable educational, cultural, and service oriented cooperatives which have been in existence for years and still manage to survive. WSW, Cleveland Women's Counsel, WomenSpace, Rape Crisis Center, Oven, N.O.W., The Feminist Theatre Collective, The Women's Choir, The Three of Cups, and

(continued on page 14)

I am writing to express my deep disappointment with the "special" Lesbian issue that was presented to us this last month. While I am happy that you chose to do an issue on Lesbianism, I am appalled at the manner in which it was done. The cover did not in any way indicate the contents, which it sometinies does. It might as well have been mailed in a "plain brown envelope". Is Lesbianism not out of the closet yet in Cleveland's Women's Community!

Deb Adler's article Feminism and Lesbianism: A Positive Perspective was very much worth reading, because she reminded me of the uses of positive and negative energy, and why we must, as sisters, let only the positive energy flow between us as much as possible. I must tell you, however, of my very negative feelings about this issue, and endeavor to do it in a positive way. In other words: sisterly criticism.

Why the trio of interlocking male symbols on the third page? I am subjected to enough sexist symbols every day, without seeing them in the midst of a page of writings by women about Lesbianism.

In the interview with the four "couples', one of the women very bluntly consigns the Women's Movement to a place in the past; something she really doesn't bother herself about anymore. She is now free to live the "Great American (Het) Dream". None of the couples interviewed seemed to enjoy sex much anymore. It reminded me of my "Happy Housewife" days of wedded bliss.

Last, but not least, I would like to discuss the little black box on page three that explained WSW's reasons for not printing my friend/sister's article For Lesbians Only: Let's Talk About Sex by Barbara Louise. I am referring to the stater ment that the author would not permit you to edit. I am a witness to the fact that she made many cuts in that article during the months that she labored to convince her sisters at WSW that her article was worthy of being printed. She was cutting and discussing cuts only hours before your deadline. This was done in my presence, at my home. How could you? How could you have printed so blatant a falsehood for all your sisters to read and therefore possibly believe?

I will continue to read each issue of Cleveland's only Women's Newspaper; because it is. I would hope, though, dear sisters, that someday our only newspaper evolves into a Feminist, or better still like Off Our Backs, Washington, D.C., a Radical Feminist newspaper. Or maybe someday a Lesbian/Feminist newspaper.

Censorship, rewriting someone else's words, then erasing the "history" of that needless cutting are all products of patriarchy, and certainly not in the interest of women.

---Sandra Coster Lesbian/Feminist

□Ed. Note: Let us say at the outset that we appreciate your response: we don't receive enough

critical comments from our readers. Ongoing dialogue is essential if the women's community is to thrive and grow.

Our cover photo, portraying women-identified women together and glad to be that way, illustrates the WSW June editorial. The editorial speaks to the need for all women to acknowledge on some level a commonality with and compassion for each other-lesbian, bisexual and heterosexual,

In response to your second point, we too were shocked, after a week of late-night production, to see a male homosexual symbol sit up and glare at us on page 3. It was a mistake, certainly not intended, as should be obvious from our content. We do not feature male homosexuality in the paper. The pressure of producing a monthly newspaper on a volunteer, part-time basis can sometimes result in amateurish mistakes. We've found that the best way

999

to handle such a blunder is to hang on to our sense of humor. (Perhaps if we had more help these errors could be avoided!)

The interview with four lesbians involved in longterm relationships provides a glimpse into the lives of women who were generous enough to be honest with us. Their thoughts, feelings and views may not fall into a "correct" feminist line, but we are glad that women are struggling with the real ambiguities they feel, rather than suppressing them for the sake of allegiance to dogma. Beyond the uncertainties expressed in the interview, the women also spoke of a need to move into and work directly with the community at large, an interaction which must occur if feminism is going to contribute to lasting social change.

Your last criticism does not disclose the whole problem we faced in dealing with Barbara Louise's article on lesbian sexuality from a separatist point of view. Although the writer did attempt to cut down the 4,600-word article on several occasions with the help of our staff, these efforts resulted in only minor changes. She would not allow any further editing and gave us an ultimatum: print all of it or nothing. We doubt many publications, including lesbian separatist ones, would have accepted those dictatorial terms.

If we had printed the article it would have filled two and one-half pages of the paper and would have required eliminating other viewpoints. Even when we explained this dilemma to the writer, she maintained her position: all or nothing.

Perhaps if the article had contained enlightening feminist content, we would have published it. Unfortunately, For Lesbians Only: Let's Talk About Sex considered lesbian sexuality from a dogmatic and oftentimes sexist viewpoint. One of the functions of WSW is to be a vehicle for establishing alternative models of feeling, thinking, and behaving. When a supposed "feminist" objectifies men as "pricks" and "cocks", censures lesbians for sleeping with heterosexual and bisexual women, and rejoices in "wiggling her ass" to attract other women, this person is thinking in sexist, categories no matter what gender she is. We believe these kinds of references confine sexuality to traditional subject/object terms and demean lesbianism. It is time to rethink old separatist stereotypes and mindless cliches because they serve only to reinforce a vicious, hateful sexism. We had little choice but to see the article as a dated example of separatism, and therefore not very useful for creating a new future for women.