So, we've heard both sides of the "story" now (several times in fact) - Anne's
side, Brian's side, many people on this list's commentary on the argument. Is
it over now?
Obviously, Anne said something that was *interpreted* as blatant flaming by
others on the list. Obviously, Anne doesn't feel that what she said was
unjustified. The two sides will never meet - can we let it drop?
I think the lesson learned here (if there is one) is that ALL of us need to be
very careful about what we post to the list - different people interpret things
differently, language does not necessarily have the same meaning for everyone
else. I'm not saying that we need to censor ourselves, but be wary. Responses
to the written word tend to be very different than face to face conversation.
This also means that when reading a message, remember that not everything
offensive "sounding" was meant to offend - polite questioning of what a person
meant will often clear up any misunderstandings rather than an all out flame
war.
This is not to say that I believe that anyone was "wrong" in this situation,
it's just a helpful hint for posting etiquette (then again, I should probably
learn how to spell myself - is it ettiquette? etiquette? etiquete?
ettiquete?)
Nuff said.
Cheeri-o and happy friday.
Tj.
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 7 09:06:18 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 7 09:06:18 1994
Received: from falcon.bgsu.edu (falcon.bgsu.edu [129.1.2.1]) by csf.Colorado.EDU
(8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with ESMTP id JAA21862 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 7 Oct
1994 09:06:13 -0600
Received: (from ltomlin@localhost) by falcon.bgsu.edu (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) id LAA20190;
Fri, 7 Oct 1994 11:08:12 -0400
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 11:08:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Goddess of Disco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: abortion and patriarchy
To: Linnea Marie Haren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, Linnea Marie Haren wrote:
>
> **I do think that abortion done for the purposes of sex selection is a VERY
> patriarchal activity. How many women in India today are having abortions
> because they are carrying a male fetus? Almost none I am sure. But how
> about those carrying female fetuses? I am afraid that abortion is being
> used to "deselect" female fetuses much more than we want to realize. From
> an ecological standpoint this unnatural selection of who is born and who is
> not will have dramatic effects on the balance of nature.
>
I've also heard that technology is being developed that will allow choice
of the child's sex before conception.
A very frightening thought. Does anyone have any more info on this?
Lori T.
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 7 14:08:37 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 7 14:08:36 1994
Received: from iraun1.ira.uka.de (iraun1.ira.uka.de [129.13.10.90]) by
csf.Colorado.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with SMTP id OAA00543 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 7 Oct 1994 14:08:16 -0600
X400-Received: by mta iraun1.ira.uka.de in /PRMD=uni-karlsruhe/ADMD=d400/C=de/;
Relayed; Fri, 7 Oct 1994 21:09:48 +0100
X400-Received: by /PRMD=uni-karlsruhe/ADMD=d400/C=de/; Relayed;
Fri, 7 Oct 1994 21:10:18 +0100
X400-Received: by /PRMD=DAT/ADMD=INFONET/C=US/; Relayed;
Sat, 8 Oct 1994 01:08:15 +0100
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 01:08:15 +0100
X400-Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X400-Recipients: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=DAT/ADMD=INFONET/C=US/;Green2 7-OCT-94 18:45 1015648]
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2)
Alternate-Recipient: Allowed
From: Tzeporah Berman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <"Green2 7-OCT-94 18:45 1015648*"@MHS>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: hello
Sensitivity: Personal
Hello. I have just heard about and subscribed to this list and am intereste
d in
whether anyone has
any suggested references for me. I am currently writing my graduate thesis
on
ecofeminism from
a little island in British Columbia, Canada. Specifically, I am attempting
to
do an ecofeminist
analysis of the struggle to 'protect' Clayoquot Sound (an area of temperate
rainforest on the west
coast of Vancouver Island). I am looking for papers, proceedings etc. whic
h app
ly ecofeminist
analysis to particular issues (specifically forestry).
I have quite a full general bibliography on ecofeminism (which I can post
if
it is useful) and I
have written papers on ecofeminism and feminist theory (published in the
Canadian Women
Studies Journal Spring 1992), and ecofeminist linguistic theory (forthcomin
g in
the Trumpeter).
Right now I am particularly interested in ecofeminism and it's relationship
s to
grassroots activism
and civil disobedience and developing the bridge between theory and practic
e.
My e-mail address is [EMAIL PROTECTED] My full address is
Tzeporah Berman,
R.R. #1 K32 Bowen Island, British columbia
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 7 15:52:34 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 7 15:52:33 1994
Received: from panix.com (panix.com [198.7.0.2]) by csf.Colorado.EDU
(8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with SMTP id PAA02661 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 7 Oct
1994 15:52:32 -0600
Received: by panix.com id AA08932
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Fri, 7
Oct 1994 17:29:02 -0400
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 17:29:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Animals and humans
To: LALONDE ROXANNE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
How nice to be an example, even if I am a bit of a skunk at the picnic.
I think it was Steven Jay Gould (or is it Stephen?) who said to beware of
moral examples drawn from nature, since you can find almost anything you
want there - cooperation and murderous competition, to take two important
examples.
Doug
Doug Henwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Left Business Observer
212-874-4020 (voice)
212-874-3137 (fax)
On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, LALONDE ROXANNE wrote:
> One more thing, (sorry to send your overloaded mailboxes two messages
> today), in the thought-provoking style of Doug Henwood:
>
> If humans continually think of ourselves as animals, how do we stop
> ourselves from behaving like them?
>
> And before I get flooded with responses like emulating the placid
> docility of sheep or whatever, how many animals do you know that
> invent qualities like love, mercy, compassion, generosity, humility,
> etc? The spiritual or moral qualities that we see manifested in
> nature are truly marvelous and the inspiration that humans receive
> from such manifestations can impel us to improve our own behaviour.
> But to use animals as a model for human behaviour is to deny those
> capacities inherent within each human being to aspire to lofty
> thoughts and ambitions, like educating the young, healing the sick,
> providing food of the starving, fostering peace among the
> contentious, etc.
>
> Oops. So much for Doug's model of short and sweet.
>
>
>
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 7 16:00:57 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 7 16:00:56 1994
Received: from knox.knox.edu (knox.knox.edu [192.217.177.1]) by csf.Colorado.EDU
(8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with SMTP id QAA02951 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 7 Oct
1994 16:00:55 -0600
Received: by knox.knox.edu
(1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA05334; Fri, 7 Oct 1994 17:03:53 -0500
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 17:03:51 -0500 (CDT)
From: Sara Ann Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: anne jordan dashiell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anne's comments re:Brian
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, anne jordan dashiell wrote:
> im not gonna let this drop....
>
> what i said was "you are writing too much..." and that he doesnt have to
> repond to everything said. besides that, his tone is often
> intellectually arrogant...and yeah i think there is definitely a place
Please elaborate, I have not noticed this tendency. And second,
what I said was that you sounded extremely hostile in the original
message. Which you did, and also when you called someone who objected to
the idea of kicking the men off the list(no, I know it wasn't you that
said it)defensive. Defensiveness is a normal response to percieved attacks.
Sara Keating
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
