>
> IMHO to "point out sexism directly" is to place ourselves in the traditional
> female role of protecting ourselves by controlling the 'stronger' and 'favor
> endowing' male. The point of 'educating' the male is IMHO again, that they will
> treat us right. That indicates that we are victems of their behaviour. Is this
> a healthy way of preceiving interpersonal relationships?
>
i think youre saying something important ani, but why cant pointing
out sexism COEXIST with building safe spaces for empowerment of voices
and self-image and self-defense as methods of "confronting" or changing
sexism?? why is it one or the other. i think either method isolated is
not complete. and besides, these methods are both inaccessible to MANY
MANY women in this world.... -anne
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 17 15:29:17 MST 1994
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 15:31:40 -0700 (MST)
From: anne jordan dashiell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: chaos and order
To: Ani Mareck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ANI WROTE:
> As I understand Chaos Theory (which, of course is minimially) folks are
> beginning to suspect that there is no such thing as chaos. That all the
> universe, god and everything is part of a balanced order. Which some might
> think suggests that the universe is about order. How would the intellectual
> construct of 'anarchy' fit into such a universe?
hmmm...yeah, i just dont think its enlightening anymore to think of the
universe as motivated by any order..not just because of the religious
baggage that that idea carries, but also just that it tends to close our
perceptions off to understanding the place and finding meaning in it in
any way other than scientific and rational. i just think that the idea of
chaos speaks to parts of us that we have been forced to deny, and that
the notion of complete order in the universe is only order WITHIN chaos.
i dunno, im rambling. i think it all depends on how you use the
definition in your own life. in mine, the idea of order doesnt account
for a hell of a lot of things that happen, but the idea of complete
randomness doesnt either. -anne
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 17 15:59:35 MST 1994
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 18:02:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Jayne S Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Jayne S Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Jayne S Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Men on the list
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am a bit confused by some of the posts related to men which have
appeared on this list in the past week or two. Perhaps you all could
help me understand what is going on here.
First, there was a post which said basically:
1) men are taking more than their share of the "air time" on this list,
2) when they post, they post too many things, and
3) their "tone" is too "authoritative" -- or if not *too* authoritative
at least *more* authoritative than the tone of the posts made by women.
This was unchallenged by the men -- several of whom (while they may not
have changed the way they post) seem to have started prefacing what they
say with an apology for *being* male. It was moderately challenged by
some of the women who seemed to argue that we, as women, have to take
some responsibility for *our responses* to the way "they", as men, "speak".
But, by and large, this observation about the way men post to this list
has been allowed to stand.
I guess, I would like to challenge it a bit more than has already been
done and to speak up in defense of the men -- since they haven't defended
themselves. Language *is* gendered. But, then it is also *cultured* and
*classed*. Furthermore, most of us are actually capable of moving from
one type of language to another as we change our situation. While
language is a *powerful* tool in the world -- there is *no* greater
source of power (IMHO) than the power to *name* the world (this is the
reason feminist writers have frequently paid tremendous attention to
language) -- I do not think it serves us well to demand that people
"de-gender", "de-culture", or "de-class" their language because *we* find
some of their idiosyncracies difficult to live with.
Furthermore, I think that if we did an honest analysis of past posts (at
least since I have joined the list), the *flaming* has been done as much
if not more by women than it has by men. Women seem to have been more
willing to engage in direct, personal attack and confrontation in
response to *ideas* and *opinions* than have the male members of the
list. By self-admission in many of the recent posts, women have also
*withdrawn* from participation in the list at an extremely high rate
because they were uncomfortable with the tone, the level of debate, the
subject matter, or whatever.
What does *this* say about *female* ways of posting? Are we all, as
females willing to be lumped together in some way? Let's see, we could
conclude that the women on this list are "overly emotional" -- they
personalize everything and resort to personal attack and flaming. Or we
could conclude, that they are all timid, afraid of ideas, cannot handle
academic debate... I am sure that everyone reading this is totally
steamed at this point. No one wants to be lumped into a group and judged
by the behavior of others who happen to share some characteristic with
him/her! I assume that this goes for the men as well.
Could I make a humble suggestion.... When we read a post that contains
language we find difficult to deal with -- language that evokes in us a
negative response -- could we: 1) think first about what caused that
response and try to name it and take some responsibility for our own
emotions, 2) decide whether the offense is really so great that it
requires confrontation, and 3) name or share our response to the language on
the list or in private
with the "offending" party? Nine times out of ten I will bet the person
who posted had no intention of being offensive, was probably unaware of
his/her "offensive" use of language, and would like to know how to change
that behavior so as not to offend.
I find the conversation on this list extremely stimulating. I have
valued the input of women *and* men on the list and I would hate to see
us create some kind of a list culture where we are all walking on
eggshells about our language, etc because we are afraid we might offend
someone.
Thanks,
Jayne
