AN EXTENSION OF HER ‘ELEMENTAL’ PHILOSOPHY
She wrote in the Preface to this 1984 book, “This book is being published in the 1980s---a period of extreme danger for women and for our sister the earth and her other creatures… [This book] is a sister-work to my books ‘Beyond God the Father’ and ‘Gyn/Ecology.’ In some ways, [this book] can be seen as the parthenogenetic daughter of those earlier works… in the sense that [it] continues the Otherworld Journeys of Exorcism and Ecstasy… In case the title of this book should seem misleading to some, I hasten to explain that [this book] is not primarily a work of feminist eroticism… Chiefly, it is a Work of Feminist Erraticism. Lusty women will understand this immediately upon reading the following definitions of ‘erratic’: ‘having no fixed course… no fixed residence.’ … For Lusty women are Wanderlusty, and we are known for fierce resistance to being fixed.” (Pg. ix-xi)
She continues in the Introduction, “The title ‘Pure Lust’ is double-sided. On one side, it names the deadly dis-passion that prevails in patriarchy---the life-hating lechery that rapes and kills the objects of its obsession/aggression… Its refined cultural products, from the sadistic pornography of the Marquis de Sade to the sadomasochistic theology of Karl Barth, are on a continuum: they are essentially the same.” (Pg. 2)
After quoting Paul Tillich, she explains, “I have selected Tillich as an example precisely because of the vast scope and rigor of his thought, which sometimes inspires thinking beyond such limitations… because his work is worth studying and criticizing by those who would embark upon the adventure of dis-covering Elemental philosophy (provided, of course, that we employ his writings only as springboards for our own original analysis).” (Pg. 29)
She contends, “[Gandhi] psychically raped women, many of whom addressed him as ‘Mother.’ At the same time he conned them into behaving toward him in a ‘maternal’ way. He got the best of both deals, receiving not only the respect due to a male ‘mother’ but also the mothering… which he recognized women alone as capable of bestowing.” (Pg. 43)
She asserts, “The sado-ideology that thrives on female degradation extends itself to destruction of nature… Not surprisingly the strategy of spreading Biggest Lies is used to legitimate this torture. J.E. Lovelock, in his work ‘Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth,' exemplifies the bore-ocratic view of nature, personified as ‘Nature.’… This cockoratic assessment of Earth’s need for homo sapiens (read: men) in order to be awake and aware of herself … [and] Lovelock’s expression of lust for Gaia (the Earth Goddess) is obscene in the traditional way.” (Pg. 56-57)
She says of the doctrine of the immaculate conception, “The doctrine certainly can be read as an expression of the impotent priests’ hatred of Female Power. Indeed it represents their attempt at ontological castration of the Arch-Image, and, through her, of the Archimage.” (Pg. 104) Later, she adds, “the immaculately conceived Mary is immaculately deceived---emptied of autonomous intellect and will.” (Pg. 111)
She argues, “The purpose of the Witchcraze was to destroy women’s connections with the elements and with our Elementally Spirited Selves. Its aim, that is, was to destroy our ontological, Elemental powers. Since they themselves were incapable of… soothsaying/divining, the torturers lusted then, as they do now, to blunt and debase these powers.” (Pg. 185)
She acknowledges, “In some areas, these appear to have been movement backward among feminists in the eighties. In the mid-seventies at a women’s concern the performer’s ‘rap’ about alcoholism would have had some power of political analysis. The message would be: ‘Don’t let the man drive you to drink.’ In the early eighties often this was replaced by therapeutic confessional rap sessions, in which the musician proclaimed: ‘I have a drinking problem.’ In these cases, no agent has been Named, and the ultimate in ‘daring’ has been to proclaim oneself sick… an adequate Naming of feminism requires Naming the stoppers as well as the direction of this movement. All else is therapy, psychobabble.. self-hatred… futility.” (Pg. 205-206)
She says of anti-ERA leader Phyllis Schlafly, “As a sort of female Doctor Strangelove, Schlafly illustrates a consistency of pathology, combining machine-like callousness toward women with the same source of indifference to all of Elemental nature and to all of life, except in fetal form.” (Pg. 212)
She asserts, “This afterlife of perpetual union/copulation with the Divine Essence is an absolutely artificial operation. One could see this doctrine of happiness, then, as a confession and legitimation of male impotence. It is by no means a woman-originated doctrine. Women do not experience a need for a supernaturally stimulated eternal erection. As impotent beings, patriarchal males do have this need, which they have erected religiously as the requirement for happiness… Wild women … do not have the need to fantasize an eternal connection with an omnipotent being.” (Pg. 339-340)
She argues, “There are not many Selves [for] one women, but rather, one Self, wholly present in that woman. I am not asserting ... that Self and soul are precisely equivalent terms; in fact, they are not. My point is that one obvious consequence of the idea that a woman has one soul wholly present in all of her ‘parts,’ is that there is an essential integrity at the very core of her self.” (Pg. 345)
She explains, “The Elemental spiritual/physical context/atmosphere in which such friendships can flourish is woven/spun by the vast network of Be-Friending women, many of whom have never even met each other. Yet all are extremely important for the lives and friendships of all the others. This partially invisible network has commonly been called SISTERHOOD. In the estimation of Crones that word… is still in good standing.” (Pg. 386)
She says, “The sense of Otherness, moreover, implies a Lust for bonding with other women, for Be-Friending. A radical feminist is committed to the Race of women to our becoming and freedom. Therefore, she feels Rage at the oppression of her sisters of all races, of all ethnic groups, of all classes, of all nations. She identifies with women AS WOMEN.” (Pg. 397)
Not as interesting as her previous books (and sometimes rather mean-spirited), this book will be of keen interest to those studying Daly.