CHAPTER 5

Woman as Victim:
Suck

We move from the straight literary pornography o f our

forebears, represented by Story of O and The Image, into
another realm, that o f the sex newspaper, born o f the
hip culture (or, as we like to think, counter-culture),
post sex revolution (Freudian, Reichian, Mailerian,
Brucean, Ginsbergian), post pot, post acid, post pill:
post Them and into the world o f Us. We move into the
realm o f here and now, our own turned-on, liberated
time and space, into the social world for which we are
responsible. Since we seek in that world freedom as
women, defined in radical terms, achieved through a
concretely lived lifestyle, newspapers like Suck, Oz, and
Screw are important. Playboy is Them —no doubt Kis­
singer and Sinatra sleep with it tucked under the pillow.
But the counter-culture sex papers are created by
people who inhabit our world (freaks, drug users, radi­
cals, longhairs, whatever the appropriate term might
be), people who share our values, our concerns — people
who talk o f liberation. The counter-culture sex papers
would be a part o f our community and so we are
obliged, if we are a community, to approach them criti­
cally and seriously, to ask what they bring to us and
what they take from us.
75
76 Woman Hating

“Us” —who are we? Jerry Rubin says that we are the
Children of Amerika. Eldridge Cleaver calls us the
Children of BLOOD. It is our parents, Amerika,
BLOOD, who through their moral bankruptcy and
genocidal ways have forced us from the womb onto the
streets of the nation. It is our parents, Amerika,
BLOOD, whom we refuse to be, whose work we refuse
to do. We are the survivors of Flower Power, now adult,
with our own children. We are the tribes of Woodstock
Nation, now in Diaspora, roaming the whole earth. We
are the New Left, wounded, in disarray. We are not
yet extinct, and we are not nearly finished. Our past
is only prologue.
Generally we are between 24 and 35 years old; have
used acid, mescaline, psilocibin, etc., with some fre­
quency; use grass and hashish often with no mystifica­
tion; have probably used cocaine, amphetamines, or
barbiturates at some time; have frequent sexual rela­
tions, many of which are absolutely casual; reject the
nuclear family and seek forms of community antago­
nistic to it. We are the people who listened to Leary,
Ginsberg, Bruce. Politically we are radicals. Some of
us seek to develop radical forms of community, to live
good, simple, natural lives. Some of us engage in ex­
plicitly political actions —opposing illegitimate wars,
resisting the uses of illegitimate authority —we wonder
how to kill pigs without becoming pigs, we are im­
mersed in the process of revolution, we learn the skills
of revolution, we resist all forms of current authority
and we simultaneously seek to develop alternatives to
those forms. There are diminishing numbers of peace
freaks among us (totally committed to nonviolent revo-
 Woman as Victim: Suck 77

lution) and quite a few roaring anarchists. We are, at

least in our Amerikan manifestation, white, children
o f privilege, children o f liberals and reformists. We
were brought up in pretty, clean homes, had lots o f
privacy, friends, companionship from family and peers.
We are unbelievably well educated —we went to fine
suburban schools (mostly public) where we experienced
physical and intellectual regimentation which we found
unbearable; we went to the best colleges and univer­
sities (mostly private) where we studied anthropology,
Freud, Marx, Norman O. Brown, and Marcuse too,
with the finest minds who, it turned out, were chicken
shit when it came to applying egalitarian principles in
the classroom or outside o f it. T he universities where
we studied all o f these disembodied ideas continued
doing defense work for the Amerikan government. We
have had our share o f disaster and despair: the acid
tragedies, the Weatherman tragedies, the needle trage­
dies. Many o f us have known jail, and we have all seen
friends die. We are older than we ever thought we
would be.
What it comes down to is this: through the use o f
drugs, through sexual living out, through radical po­
litical action, we broke through the bourgeois mental
sets which were our inheritance but retained the hu­
manism crucial to the liberalism o f our parents. O ur
goals are simple enough to understand: we want to
humanize the planet, to break down the national struc­
tures which separate us as people, the corporate struc­
tures which separate us into distinct classes, the racist
structures which separate us according to skin color;
to conserve air, water, life in its many forms; to create
78 Woman Hating

communities which are more than habitable—commu­

nities in which people are free, in which people have
what they need, in which groups of people do not ac­
cumulate power, or money, or goods, through the ex­
ploitation of other people. So when we look at a sex
newspaper, made by people like us, we demand that
it take some positive step in the direction we want to
go: we demand that it incorporate our radical attitudes,
the knowledge that acid and other parts of our lifestyle
have given us. And, most importantly, we refuse to
permit it to reinforce the dual-role sexist patterns and
consciousness of this culture, the very patterns and con­
sciousness which oppress us as women, which enslave
us as human beings.
Suck is a typical counter-culture sex paper. Any
analysis of it reveals that the sexism is all-pervasive,
expressed primarily as sadomasochism, absolutely the
same as, and not counter to, the parent cultural values.
Suck claims to be an ally. It is crucial to demonstrate that
it is not.
The first issue of Suck appeared in Amsterdam,
Holland, in 1969. It continues to be printed in Amster­
dam because Dutch police do not confiscate pornog­
raphy or imprison pornographers. It was started by
two Amerikan expatriates. Suck is entirely about sex,
that is, its pages contain pornographic fiction, technical
sexual advice (how to suck cock or cunt, for instance),
letters from readers which reveal personal sexual his­
tories (mostly celebrational), and photographs o f cunt,
cock, fucking, sucking, and group orgying. The news­
paper appears irregularly —when there is enough
 Woman as Victim: Suck 79

money and material for publication. Suck is confiscated

in England and France with some vigor.
Suck has made positive contributions. Sucking is
approached in a new way. Sucking cock, sucking cunt,
how to, how good. Sperm tastes good, so does cunt. In
particular, the emphasis on sucking cunt serves to
demystify cunt in a spectacular way —cunt is not dirty,
not terrifying, not smelly and foul; it is a source o f
pleasure, a beautiful part o f female physiology, to be
seen, touched, tasted.
T he taboo against sucking goes very deep. Most of
the actual laws against cocksucking and cuntsucking
relate to prohibitions against any sexual activity that
does not lead to, or is not performed for the purpose
o f effecting, impregnation. Sucking as an act leading
to orgasm places the nature o f sexual contact clearly —
sex is the coming together o f people for pleasure. T he
value is in the coming together. Marriage does not
sanctify that coming together, procreation is not its
goal. Suck treats sucking as an act o f the same magni­
tude as fucking. That attitude, pictures o f women
sucking cock, men sucking cunt, and all the vice versas,
discussions o f the techniques o f sucking, all break down
barriers to the realization o f a full sexuality.
Cunnilingus and fellatio (sucking by any other name
. . . ) are still crimes. The antifellatio laws, in conjunc­
tion with sodomy laws, are sometimes used against male
homosexuals (lesbians are not taken seriously enough
to be prosecuted). Given the selective enforcement o f
the laws, the shame that attaches to the forbidden acts,
and the fact that acts o f oral lovemaking represented
 Woman Hating

in words or in pictures are generally deemed obscene,

sucking must be seen in and of itself as an act of political
significance (which is certainly wonderful news for de­
pressed revolutionaries). In this instance Suck takes a
relevant, respectable stand.
(Important digression. As late as October 1961,
Lenny Bruce was arrested because in one of his routines
he used the verb “to come" and talked about cock-
sucking. He was arrested for the crime of obscenity.
Bruce described the bust:

I was arrested for obscenity in San Francisco for using

a ten letter word which is sort of chic. I’m not going to
repeat the word tonite. It starts with a “c.” They said
it was vernacular for a favorite homosexual practice —
which is weird, cause I don't relate that word to homo­
sexuals. It relates to any contemporary woman I know
or would know or would love or would marry.1

Bruce was busted in San Francisco (obscenity), Phila­

delphia (possession), Los Angeles (possession), Holly­
wood (obscenity), Chicago (obscenity), and not per­
mitted to enter England or Australia. As late as 1964
Bruce was busted for obscenity in New York City, in
1965 he was declared a legally bankrupt pauper, and
on August 3, 1966, he died in Los Angeles.)
Suck also makes a contribution in printing pictures
of cunt, though here the praise must be severely quali­
fied. Photos o f cunt are rare. All the rest we have seen —
siliconed tits, leering smiles, Playboy's version of pubic
hair. But having seen a remarkable movie by Anne
Severson and Shelby Kennedy2 in which a fixed camera
catalogues the cunts of many different women, all ages,
 Woman as Victim: Suck 81

races, with all sorts o f sexual experience, one gets a

comprehension o f the superficiality o f the Suck cunt
photos. Imagine a catalogue o f still photos o f people’s
faces —the colors, textures, indentations, the unique
character o f each. It is the same with cunts, and it would
be fine if Suck would show us that. It does not.
Germaine Greer once wrote for Suck — she was an
editor—and her articles, the token women’s articles,
were sometimes strong; her voice was always authentic.
Her attempt was to bring women into closer touch with
unaltered female sexuality and place that sexuality
clearly, unapologetically, within the realm o f humanity:
women, not as objects, but as human beings, truly a
revolutionary concept.
But Greer has another side which allies itself with
the worst o f male chauvinism and it is that side which, I
believe, made her articles acceptable to Suck's editors
and Suck acceptable to her. In an interview in the Am er­
ikan Screw, reprinted in Suck under the tide “Germaine:
‘I am a W hore, ’ ” she stated:

Ideally, you’ve got to the stage where you really could

ball everyone —the fat, the blind, the foolish, the im­
potent, the dishonest.
We have to rescue people who are already dead.
We have to make love to people who are dead, and
that’s not easy.3

Here is the ever popular notion that women, extend­

ing our role as sex object, can humanize an atrophied
world. T he notion is based on a false premise. Just as
the pill was supposed to liberate women by liberating
us sexually, i.e., we could fuck as freely as men, fucking
82 Woman Hating

is supposed to liberate women and men too. But the pill

served to reinforce our essential bondage —it made us
more accessible, more open to exploitation. It did not
change our basic condition because it did nothing to
challenge the sexist structure of society, not to mention
conventional sexual relationships and couplings. Neither
does promiscuity per se. Greer’s alliance with the sexual
revolution is, sadly but implicitly, an alliance with male
chauvinism because it does not speak to the basic con­
dition of women which remains the same if we fuck one
man a week, or twenty.
There is similar misunderstanding in this statement:

Well, listen, this is one o f the things a woman has

to understand, and I get a bit impatient sometimes with
women who can’t see it. A woman, after all, in this
country is a commodity. She’s a status symbol, and the
prettier she is the more expensive, the more difficult
to attain. Anyone can have a fat old lady. But young
girls with clear eyes are not for the 40-year-old man
who’s been working as a packer or a storeman all his
life. So that when he sees her he snarls, mostly I think,
because she’s not available to him. She’s another taunt,
and yet another index o f how the American dream is
not his to have. He never had a girl like that and he
never will.
Now, I think that the most sensible way for us to
see the crime of rape is an act o f aggression against
this property symbol. . . (but I’m not sure about
this at all —I mean, I think it’s also aggression against
the mother who fucks up so many people’s lives). And
I must think that as a woman, who has not done a
revolution, have not put myself on the barricade on
this question, I owe it to my poor brothers not to get
uptight. Because I am that, I am a woman they could
 Woman as Victim: Suck 83

never hope to ball, and in the back o f my mind I reject

them too.4

Here again, the alliance is with male chauvinism, and it

is incomprehensible. Mothers fuck up people’s lives in
direct proportion to how fucked up their own lives are
— that fuck up is the role they must play, the creative
possibilities they must abort. Greer surely knows that
and must speak to it. Women who walk, as opposed to
those who take taxis or drive (another relevant class
distinction), are constantly harassed, often threatened
with violence, often violated. That is the situation which
is the daily life o f women.
It is true, and very much to the point, that women
are objects, commodities, some deemed more expensive
than others —but it is only by asserting one’s humanness
every time, in all situations, that one becomes someone
as opposed to something. That, after all, is the core o f
our struggle.
Rape, o f course, does have its apologists. Norman
Mailer posits it, along with murder, as the content o f
heroism. It is, he tells us in The Presidential Papers,
morally superior to masturbation. Eldridge Cleaver
tells us that it is an act o f political rebellion — he “prac­
ticed” on Black women so that he could rape white
women better. Greer joins the mystifying chorus when
she posits rape as an act o f aggression against property
(a political anticapitalist action no less) and suggests
that it might also be an act o f psychological rebellion
against the ominous, and omnipresent, mother. * Rape

* G reer changed her ideas on rape. Cf. Germ aine G reer, “Seduction Is a
Four-Letter W ord, ” Playboy, vol. 20, no. 1 (January 1973).
84 Woman Hating

is, in fact, simple straightforward heterosexual behavior

in a male-dominated society. It offends us when it does,
which is rarely, only because it is male-female relation
without sham —without the mystifying romance of the
couple, without the civility of a money exchange. It
happens in the home as well as on the streets. It is not
a function of capitalism —it is a function of sexism.
What Greer contributes to Suck, and to its women
readers who might look to her for cogent analysis and
deep imagination, is mostly confusion. That confusion
stems from an identification with men which too often
blunts her perception of the real, empirical problems
women face in a sexist society. That confusion manifests
itself most destructively in the patently untrue notion
that a woman who fucks freely is free.
The main body of Suck is pornographic fiction. It is
in the fiction that we find a repetition of events, situa­
tions, images, and attitudes which most effectively re­
inforce conventional sexist values. “Congo Crystal
Hotel,” a story by Mel Clay, is typical of Suck fiction.
Two men watch a pornographic movie. They have a
sadistic sexual encounter. One of the men, Beno, goes
off to meet Carol, a woman he has known previously.
He forces her to fuck and suck two Blacks, who violate
her in every way. Carol’s husband intrudes. Beno forces
Carol to suck her husband’s cock and as her husband
comes, Beno shoots him. An example of the purple
prose:

In a sudden spasm the man clutches her head and

arches his back and as the beginning sensations of
orgasm overtake him Beno pulls the trigger, the ex­
plosion drowning out the sound of Carol gulping on
his come and his brains splashing against the ceiling.5
 Woman as Victim: Suck 85

Carol is announced: “he could smell her even before he

saw her. ” 6 T he rape which Beno forces on her is, o f
course, the vehicle o f her recognition that she loves
him, because only he could do that to her. T he story
contains incredible violence. Beno whips his male lover,
Carol is beaten and raped, the husband is killed. T he
cocks o f the Blacks are, o f course, gigantic tools o f pleas­
ure and pain. T here is little to distinguish “Congo
Crystal Hotel” from straight pornography, except for
the awful quality o f the writing. T he vision o f woman is
precisely the same: insatiable cunt, to be violated and
abused; the sadomasochistic content is the same; even
the exaggerated genitalia o f the Blacks participate in
the worst o f the pornographic tradition.
“Sex Angels, ” a story by Ron Reid, chronicles the ad­
ventures o f Helen and Tony, that is, a gangbang ar­
ranged by Helen with a bunch o f tough bikers. Helen
is “high class cunt who was soon to be stuffed with their
working class cocks.” 7 T he class analysis is central to the
story: “the social gulf accentuated the mounting thrill
already high with the knowledge that the young hus­
band was to observe his wife’s gangbanging by the
pack.” 8 The culmination o f the event, after Helen has
been thoroughly used, is described like this:

now hot wet fuck tube — hot slit, go on let see you fuck
your wife now. we’ve all been through her. 9

Helen, whose resemblance to that other well-known sex

object, Helen o f Troy, will not be overlooked by the
acute observer, is a “hot wet fuck tube —hot slit.” In­
deed, one must ask, in the world o f Suck fiction, who o f
us is not?
 Woman Hating

The overwhelming fact which emerges about Suck

fiction is that it contains and expresses the traditional
male fantasies about women. Helen and Carol differ
little from O and Claire. Their needs can be articulated
in precisely the same way: cock, lots of it, all o f the time,
rape, violation, cruelty. If only our needs were so sim­
ple. If only our needs had anything to do with it at all.
Men have always known, in that existential-accord-
ing-to-Mailer way, that women not only need IT but
want IT, rape-brand-whip orchestrated. It was always
obvious to them —a woman's “virtue” is merely facade,
her reluctance is merely tactic. What matters is that she
wants to be fucked —she is defined by her need to be
fucked. We find in Suck these sacrosanct male fantasies
applied with true counter-culture egalitarianism: to
all beings “feminine,” whether women or gay men.
Projection has come home to roost and cock is crowing
like never before —but, like the cult of cunt before it,
the cult of cock is colored with the washes of unresolved
guilt and pure sadism. The onus and hatred of male
homosexuality is heavy in Suck — ugly, heavy, and ever
present.
Suck has in some ways aligned itself with the cause
of gay liberation. Suck 4 printed the “Gay Guide to
Europe,” a list of gay clubs, bars, pissoirs, etc., to al­
leviate the chronic need for information felt by the
traveling gay man. Suck 6 has a story entitled “A Week
in the Fondle Park,” in which a man extols the quantity
of cock sucked in one idyllic week in Amsterdam’s
central park, which had been turned over to long­
haired dopers and freaks in the summer of 1971. But
in Suck, as in the parent culture which maligns any
 Woman as Victim: Suck 87

deviation from the ole hetero norm, the hatred attached

to the queer is very apparent.
“T he Suction Game” is the story o f two men, one
dark-skinned, one light-skinned, one overt, one latent —
a typical colonial situation, ripe for exploitation. T he
acknowledged (overt) queer has the typical misogynist
point o f view:

Carlos explained that the male body was nature’s

perfection and how clean men were compared to
women.10

T o the norm ally) self-enhancing John Wayne male, the

above is self-evident and always has been. In the con­
text o f the homosexual encounter it has added signifi­
cance. It reinforces the maleness o f both partners. It
makes the homosexual act an affirmation o f manhood.
The insecurities which a homosexual identity conjures
up in our culture, however, are hardly resolved through
the putting down o f women. “Cocksucker” is a term o f
insult and abuse —it means queer. Yet it is obviously
absurd for a man to believe that what is pleasurable to
him when done by a woman is disgusting when done by
a man. T he distinction here is not so very subtle: the
political meaning o f the two acts, heterosexual fellatio
and homosexual fellatio, is different. T he former makes
the man clearly the master —the woman kneels at the
foot o f the sheikh. T he latter makes the man queer—
ours is not to reason why, or is it?
Carlos (overt, dark-skinned), having unzipped the
hero’s pants, has started kissing his glorious equip­
ment:
 Woman Hating

Here I was standing in this tiny YM CA room, naked as

the day I was born, with a pretty boy queer, kneeling
in front o f me playing with my cock. The whole thing
was sickening, but the worst part was that I was en­
joying it.. . . Suddenly I didn’t give a fuck if he was
queer. I just relaxed and surrendered to his sucking
mouth.11

The resultant orgasm is fantastic, mind-blowing, as

aren’t they all in Suck. Yet the imminent slander is too
much to bear. Being sucked by a queer is one thing.
Reciprocity is something else. Could it be reciprocity
that makes one queer?

He was a fucking queer but I wasn’t. If he had hot

rock that was his problem not mine. He’ll just have to
find some other queer to suck his cock.12

Hot Rock Carlos is undaunted. After much patient

persistance, our supermale hero succumbs, with res­
ervations: “The idea was repulsive to me, but I wanted
to make him happy.” 13 The moral of the tale is simple.
Says our hero:

Funny I do not consider myself queer, just damn lucky

to be able to attract so many good looking young boys
so they could have their rock inside me.14

Only now does the definitive definition of queer seem

to emerge. Cocksucking isn’t the definitive experience
after all. One must conclude that anal intercourse,
the closest corollary to female penetration, really de­
fines the queer. One must conclude that being fucked
in the ass separates the queers from the men and places
 Woman as Victim: Suck 89

them squarely among the women. O ne must conclude

that being penetrated is queer, not to mention debasing,
disgusting, and humiliating, which one had already
guessed.
Homosexual men are not only penetrated like
women —they also lust after pain and degradation. T h e
author o f “T he Suction Game” has given us another
example o f homosexual pornography, this one engag­
ingly entided “T ough Young Dicks for Hot Kicks.”
Five young toughs are cruising; they pick up a long­
haired boy, shove him in the back seat o f the car and or­
der him to blow them all; the boy considers refusing,
since he’d love to be beaten then and there, but in­
stead submits since greater abuse can always be had
through submission than through resistance; the young
toughs brutally rape the long-haired boy, then piss and
shit all over him. He is, o f course, ecstatic:

Gee did I smell o f come and teenage sweat and urine

and I had two more toss-offs myself thinking about
their tough young faces and dicks enjoying me for
hot kicks.15

T h e stereotype o f the homosexual which emerges

from the general run o f Suck fiction is not very different
from the stereotype o f woman. T he homosexual is
queer, asshole, cocksucker, faggot; the woman is hole,
hot wet fuck tube, hot slit, or just plain ass. He thrives
on pain and so does she. Gangbanging is their mutual
joy. Huge, throbbing, monster, atom-smashing cock is
god and master to them both. T he parts they play in the
sadomasochistic script are the same: so are costumes,
attitudes, and other conventional cultural baggage. It
90 Woman Haling

is not hard to see that the struggle for gay male libera­
tion and women’s liberation is a common struggle:
both mean freedom from the stigma of being female.
The fantasies (indicative of structural mental sets) which
oppress male homosexuals and women are very much
alike. Women and male homosexuals are united in
their queerness, a union which is real and verifiable —
affirmed by Suck, which contributes to the cultural
oppression of both.
The pages of Suck have, sadly, nothing to do with
sexual liberation —there is no “counter” to the cul­
ture to be found anywhere in them. They are, instead,
a catalogue of exactly those sexist fantasies which
express our most morbid psychic sets. They chart the
landscape of repression, a landscape that is surprisingly
familiar. As women, we find that we are where we have
always been: the necessary victim, there we are, the
victim again; the eternal object, there we are, the ob­
ject again. Through the projection of archetypal sado­
masochistic images, which are the staple of the sexist
mentality, we become more a prisoner, robbed and
cheated of any real experience or authentic communi­
cation, thrown back into the intricate confusion of being
women in search of a usable identity.
206 Woman Haling

4 Ibid., p. 93.
5Ibid., p. 187.
6Ibid., p. 32.
7Ibid., p. 106.
8 R obert S. de R opp, Sex Energy: The Sexual Force in Man and
Animals (New York: Dell Publishing C om pany, 1969), p. 134.

Chapter 4. Woman at Victim: The Image

‘Je a n de Berg, The Image (New York: Grove Press, 1966), p.
137-
2Ibid., p. 19.
3Ibid., p. 47.
4Ibid.
5 Ibid., p. 10.
6 Ibid., p. 11.
7 Ibid., p. 9.
8 Ibid., p. 42.
9Eliphas Levi, The History o f Magic (London: R ider an d C om ­
pany, 1969), p. 263.
10 Ibid., p. 265.
" J e a n d e Berg, op. cit., p. 11.
11Ibid., p. 135.
13 The Essential Lenny Bruce, ed. Jo h n C ohen (New York: Ballan-
tine Books, 1967), pp. 296-97.

Chapter 5. Woman at Victim: Suck

1The Essential Lenny Bruce, ed. John Cohen (New York: Ballan-
tine Books, 1967), p. 245.
2Anne Severson and Shelby Kennedy, I Change I Am the Same
(n.d.).
3Suck 6 .
4 Ibid.
5Suck 4 .
6 Ibid.
7Ibid.
8Ibid.
" 7Ibid.
19Suck 2 .
 11 Ibid.
11Ibid.
13Ibid.
14Ibid.
15Suck 3 .

Chapter 6. Gynoclde: Chinese Footbinding

I Howard S. Levy, Chinese Footbinding: The History o f a Curious

Erotic Custom (New York: W. Rawls, 1966), p. 39. Mr. Levy’s book is
the primary source for all the factual, historical information in this
chapter.
2Ibid., p. 112.
3Ibid., pp. 25-26.
4Ibid., p. 26.
5 Ibid., pp. 26-28.
6 Ibid., p. 141.
7Ibid.
8 Ibid., p. 182.
" 9Ibid., p. 89.
10 Ibid., p. 144.
II Ibid., pp. 144 - 4 5 -

Chapter 7. Gynoclde: The Witches

1Jules Michelet, Satanism and Witchcraft (London: Tandem,

1969 ). P- 66.
2H. R. Hays, The Dangerous Sex: The Myth o f Feminine E vil (Lon­
don: Methuen and Co., 1966), p. 111.
3Pennethorne Hughes, Witchcraft (Harmondsworth: Penguin
Books, 1971), p. 63.
4Ibid., p. 65.
5Ibid., pp. 66-67.
6 Hays, op. cit., p. 147.
7 Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger, Malleus Maleficarum,
trans. by M. Summers (London: Arrow Books, 1971), pp. 29-30.
8Ibid., Table of Contents.
9 Ibid.
10Ibid., Preface.
11 Hughes, op. cit., pp. 183-84.