"I do not think that Rajeender's public
mails merit moderation. If this guy has been sending
abusive personal emails, then he should be reported to
the police. "I strongly object to the second part of Sanil's judgement. All of a sudden we seem to be relying on State again instead of thinking of other dialogic and democratic options. I somebody is asking for moderating a person [for some time I suppose] instead of lodging a complaint, that is to be welcomed. That shows that we consider him not as a 'criminal' but who indulged in an undemocratic practice in an everyday context, at a public space. Something we all [ my be male members, going by binary logic!!] are prone to commit any time. Sanil seem to be having no doubt that wifebeating is deplorable and criminal. Does his silence on the other part imply that he considers 'eve teasing' and other everyday experiences are necessary evils to be accommodated by women in public sphere? On 6/11/07, sanil v <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Oh sanil, please don't imagine others to be so > > naive! > > Sorry. I did not imagine that. Nor do I appreciate the > wrong assumption! I did say that any attempt to launch > a critique of stereotypes based on the assumption that > certain words are linguistically condensed forms of > prejudices/meaning, is wrong. I suspect that the > charge of "stereotypes used to silence others" is > based on such a weak theory. > > My claim was not the trivial one that "not all > binaries are harmful or "critique steroetype is not > enough". It was about the logic that underlies the > very ideas of binaries and sterreotypes. > > > > Was also amused to see that the ways in which > > buddhijeevi men tell 'us' > > (I mean, the 'us' that Arunima was referring to) > > indirectly to shut up. > > Either it is 'lack of humour'/'lack of a sense of > > irony', or it 'lack of > > theoretical sophistication'. Well what is that, > > 'censorship', or > > 'moderation'? > > Here you are echoing Rajeender! Didn't he also tell us > that he did not care a damn about theory? > Some make a charge based on theoretically loaded > concepts like Binary-logic, stereotype and hegemony. > When it is pointed out to them that this theory is > unfounded, they turn around and declare that they do > not care for theorectical sophistication and all that > matter are insights and experience. This too is > amusing. > > Criticising a theoretical position - even if it is > part of the prevailing consensus - does not amount to > asking those who hold it to shut up. I have presented > my position on this group to invite comments and > criticism. I did not seek the support of the moderator > to exclude those who disagree with me. > > I agree with Arunima's observation on the > re-deployment of stereotypes. The counter strategy is > not to interpret but to invent new and creative uses. > Not to remove words from speech but to make them > appear in the most unexpected and dangerous places. > This is what 'theorectically non-naive' feminists > teach us. > > sanil > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Looking for earth-friendly autos? > Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ > > > > -- Dileep Raj Tel: 09447316701 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ greenyouth mailinglist is the activist support mailinglist for kerala To post to this group, send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
