Can Somebody Explain The Arguments That Happened Between Pat Califia and Camille Paglia?

Question

I'm reading Camille's book "Vamps and Tramps" right now (and boy, is it a doozy . . . I can't believe some of her ridiculous and downright wrong beliefs). But I was intrigued by her mention of being criticized by Pat Califia, who I absolutely adore.

I tried Googling for more information, but couldn't find anything about it, probably because it's decades old.

Can anyone enlighten me, maybe with some links?

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

Basically Paglia is a woman who believes if we (women) want to be treated as grown-up adults, capable to think and make decisions, then we need to be accountable for all those decisions and actions, even if they turn out to be bad ones.
She also believes that there ARE differences between men and women and that _sometimes_ some feminists deny that - because it suits their agenda and the victimization role they want to play.

Paglia is extremely smart and clever, but sometimes very opinionated and arrogant in her beliefs and point of view. However, I appreciate her idea that women should not manipulate or degrade men, should not expect men to be "just like women, only with d*cks" or to pick and choose what to be a "feminist" about.
You either is, or you ain't.

Answer 2

I'm going to simplify it to the nth degree:

Example; Paglia believes if a woman is "stupid enough" to flirt, drink to excess, flirt some more, go willingly to a man's room at 3 Am, drink and flirt some more, getting half naked, leading and enticing the man into believing there will be sex, and then suddenly the woman says... "No, forget it! What are you doing?!?" and decides she's been molested or sexually accosted; and that a man has NO RIGHT to be angry or express that anger even in a non-violent way.... Well Paglia believes that's "Bullshit".
She feels women have to be accountable for their OWN actions and take responsibility for acting inappropriately and without regard for the other person involved in the scenario.
This rubs SOME feminists the wrong way.

Califia on the other hand, believes even if a woman drinks, flirts, goes to a man's room at 3 AM, drinks more, flirts more, undresses, lap dances all over the guy and then suddenly says.... "No, forget it! What are you doing?!?" the woman can still play "innocent victim" and rake that man over the coals for being a vicious, horrible sexual predator and a "potential rapist" especially if he expresses any anger towards her change of heart. The woman need not take responsibility for her part in this scene at all.
This rubs SOME feminists the wrong way.

THAT is the difference in their political / feminist stances.
Even feminists can have philosophical differences.

Source(s):

Read several of Paglia's books and articles over the years, have watched a few interviews on PBS ... I don't *always* agree with her, but I do see her point many times and they are valid points.