On Mon, 28 Apr 1997, Neil Rest wrote:
> Lorie G Sauble-Otto <lorie@U.ARIZONA.EDU> wrote:
> >Let's be careful in a "feminist" discussion of SF--When we start in with a
> >discourse based on "hard science" it gets sticky and sexist. We need to
> >begin--as Many Many people, especially women, already have--to realize the
> >evolution of the genre--the traditionalist approach to genre is based on a
> >masculinist construct.
>
> Excuse me? It appears that you are saying that "hard science" is sexist.
> Certainly the human conduct of the activity may be, but in the sense of
> method and results, do you mean that there is something intrinsicly sexist
> about "hard science"?
>
Take a look at the discouse of reproductive technology and the way it is
represented in fem sci-fi for an idea of what I am implying.
> And as to the genre, are you saying that hard sf has been sexist (which is
> pretty much inarguable!), or are you saying, much more broadly, that
> "genre" is somehow sexist?
Guess I'm saying "yes" to both.
>
>
> Hoping that in requesting greater clarity I've been clear myself,
> Neil Rest
>
Lorie Sauble-Otto
Dept. of French & Italian
Mod Lang 549
The University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:06:07 PDT