Thinking through Book

As a reader who is infinitely interested in gender politics, I found this collection of philosophical essays very valuable. Because of this background, this book was not as mind bending for me as I'm sure it would be for some readers, yet Wittig's slant on gender identity and how it relates to writing was different enough that I was opened to some new ideas.
The first idea that struck me came from the book's eponymous essay that challenges the notion that "what founds society, any society, is heterosexuality" (24), which in and of itself is not a shocking revelation for me, but where Wittig takes this hypothesis is what I found fascinating. She believes that it is the social categories of gender and society's unquestioning acceptance of them that keeps the oppressive institution of heterosexuality in place. Furthermore, she posits that if "lesbian and gay men…continue to speak of ourselves and to conceive of ourselves as women and as men, we are instrumental in maintaining heterosexuality" (30). This idea is exactly what America needs to examine right now: the ability of every human being to recognize all the qualities in themselves that society has dichotomized between the genders. I feel that readers will be challenged when they read this book to look at themselves and wonder if they have these feelings of gender ambivalence on some level and at what cost it is to live with that tension everyday.
Lastly, the essay "Homo Sum" enlightened me by introducing many of the early tenets on which most of modern philosophy is based. I have always enjoyed reading philosophy, but have very little background in studying it. So, I was unaware that both Plato and Aristotle based their main philosophical polarizations on Pythagoras' mathematical opposites, and that this was the origin of aligning "straight," "male," and "white/light" as the dominant and positive forces of society (49-51). Moreover, I didn't realize how prevalent these dichotomies were and how "Every philosopher of our modern age…will tell us that without these precise categories of opposition (of difference), one cannot reason or think or, even better, that outside of them meaning cannot shape itself" (52). Of course, what I appreciate most about Wittig's style is that she always has a call to action based on her thinking, and here she urges all minority/oppressed people to reject these schisms and "do without the privilege of being different as a 'right to be different,' …never abandon[ing] themselves to the 'pride of being different'" (55). I feel that as we approach this pivotal time in American politics, with the upcoming election being so charged with the debate over gender, Wittig's thorough and insightful thinking on this subject should be kept in mind.