In response to this claim-
>
> << I think there are distinct differences in masculine and feminine styles
> of expression, if not of thought, although how in hell we can ever untangle
> how much is "inborn" from how much is culturally inculcated I do not know.
I'd like those who know a little more about cyborg theory to help me
here, please - but I wonder why it is necessary to 'untangle' that which
is inborn from that which is culturally inculcated, in order to achieve a
coherent and interesting narraative style.
> Certainly the more you suspend the rules about which sex may use which
> styles the more blurring and cross-over you get, but how to tell what that
> means?
RAther than suspending rules about sex, why not see them from a variety
of creative perspectives? Regarding science fiction - technology could be
used to 'mask' or subvert ones sex or sexuality (we haven't even started
on queer theory), or to make the rules a little more flexible.
Brigid Venables.
In some cases it's reaction against required norms, in others per-
> haps a function of unusual childhood circumstances or body chemistry, or
> who knows what else. >>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:06:24 PDT