Hi. I'm Sara, at the U of Houston,Downtown. I have two reactions to this
morning's ecofem digest. First, DT said that in the debate over vegetarianism
at conferences that people were attempting to "ban meateaters" from conferences.
Now, I'm pretty ambivalent about declaring a conference totally vegetarian,
b/c while I believe there are strong political (feminist/environmentalist)
arguments to be made against meat and the meat industry, I also came to this
position over several years of reading and thinking; meateaters deserve their
own space to inspect (or not) their diets. Still, just b/c a conference offers
no meat in it's planned meals does not mean that conference "bans" meateaters,
unless said meateaters are so addicted to flesh that they can't go for one
tiny weekend without it!! Are meateaters so set in their ways that they can't
try something different? (Not the ones I know!) Perhaps DT is being less than
tolerant of difference when it comes to having to adapt her/his own habits?
My second comment is about the supposed homosexism of this network. I guess I
missed it. As a dyke, I'm so used to my presence being made invisible by the
heterosexism of the whole friggin' world that I'm amazed I didn't notice that
this list was privileging queers at the expense of straights. Perhaps, instead
of accusing "the list" of being anti-straight, those of you who feel discrimin-
ated against could name the specific instances so that the rest of us who missed
it would know what you're referring to. I'm not trying to fan any flames or
start a queer/straight fight; on the contrary, I cherish my straight allies.
But I do think this list might be a useful arena for examining our sexual-
identity biases.
Finally, I notice that people often get alarmed at a message that they feel is
too "harsh" or "abrasive," as in the reactions to Paige's recent post. I didn't
feel that way at all, but perhaps that's b/c I agreed with what she was saying.
Maybe we should try to remember 1. that we're all in a hurry when we post
messages (at least I know I should be grading papers now instead of surfing
the net), 2. that we're all passionate about what we do and thus use strong
language, and 3. that it's very hard to connote attitude thru these posts.
Unless someone just blatantly insults someone, we should try to give them the
benefit of the doubt and assume good intentions.
And now, back to work:)
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Oct 24 06:58:04 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Oct 24 06:58:03 1994
Received: from coral.bucknell.edu (coral.bucknell.edu [134.82.7.253]) by
csf.Colorado.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with SMTP id GAA23827 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 24 Oct 1994 06:58:01 -0600
Received: from gcarr.bucknell.edu by coral.bucknell.edu; (5.65/1.1.8.2/29Aug94-0956AM)
id AA02180; Mon, 24 Oct 1994 09:01:38 -0400
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 1994 09:01:38 -0400
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Glynis Carr)
Subject: Ecofeminist Lit Crit
I am working on developing a literary critical approach that is
specifically ecofeminist. Is anyone else out there working on a similar
project?
Glynis Carr
