On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 12:19:44 -0500 Doug Henwood <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is a reference to a long (300-some comments) post on my Facebook > page that started with a question from a good friend of mine on > whether the concept of "charisma" is gendered male. Several men, > including Michael, thought the word and concept "gendered" were too > ugly to talk about. I note the absence of quotes on that characterization -- a characteristically free paraphrase. My own recollection is that a) I thought 'charisma' wasn't gendered and b) I wondered what conclusions one could draw, or practice one might change or initiate, should one conclude that it was. The exchange rapidly degenerated into utter silliness, to my way of thinking -- a complete intellectual sinkhole. Which suggested (to me) another reason that maybe arguing about the genderedness of terms is a pointless exercise, except insofar as it allows people to demonstrate that they are more feminist than thou. It did bring back to mind a wonderful exchange between Johnson & Boswell, though I can't seem to find it in the Life anywhere. IIRC Boswell thought you couldn't call a woman a 'blockhead' -- i.e. that the term was 'gendered' -- and Johnson thought you could. Anybody else remember this exchange? Did I dream it? Got a cit.? -- -- Michael J. Smith [email protected] http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org http://www.cars-suck.org http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com Any proposition that seems self-evident is almost certainly false. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
