"FEMINISTSF LOG9710C" ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 02:53:29 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Barbara Benesch Subject: Re: Cyberpunk, 3rd gender, child care Hi. I'm new to the list (this is my first day, in fact) and I had planned on just reading for a while before posting, but it's all too interesting for me to keep quiet. I hope I'm not violating any procedures or protocols, but if I am, please let me know so I don't repeat any mistakes. RE: Pat Mathews: I haven't read the Butler work in question, but I have read _Bone Dance_ by Emma Bull, and I agree that Sparrow is an excellent example of a third gender. I myself didn't really notice until about page 40 that I didn't know Sparrow's gender yet, but once I did, it drove me nuts and I switched back and forth several times before I got to the point in the story where it was confirmed that Sparrow had no gender. I found that I switched along the same lines the characters in the story did - when Sparrow was with women, I began to think Sparrow was female, but when Sparrow was with men, I started to change my mind and decide that Sparrow was male. This leads me into... RE: Cyberpunk To Joan Bowman: First of all, I tend to consider _Bone Dance_ by Emma Bull to fit into the cyberpunk category, albeit on the fringes. I also second Tonya Browning's suggestions of Pat Cadigan, and particularly Orson Scott Card's _Ender's Game_, cyberpunk or no. I'd also like to add _Bodyguard_ by William Dietz and Steven Barnes' _Street Lethal_, _Fire Dance_ and the third in the series whose title I can't remember (sorry). Also, as to where the "punk" in cyberpunk comes from, a portion of it at least comes from the rebellion against the pervading view of the future at the time cyberpunk first came into prominence. Up until cyberpunk, most science fiction viewed the future as either a post-nuclear/apocalyptic wasteland or a "Star Trek" type future in which no one did dishes, classism was erased, etc. Cyberpunk brought into view a third possibility for the future, in which mankind had essentially fallen under its own weight. In cyberpunk, there has been no technological epiphany to release us from daily drudgery, nor has there been a nuclear holocaust to blame our trials upon. Also, while I agree with Tonya that a good deal of cyberpunk is written by white males who seem to be entertaining at least in some small measure a fantasy in which the "computer nerd" is someone to be reckoned with in an arena outside of the computer lab, I would like to point out that there is more and more good cyberpunk being written with women and people of color in the starring roles. Steven Barnes' work features an African-American protagonist and William Dietz, while featuring a white male as the protagonist, the "Bodyguard" in question has lost a good portion of his mental faculties as a result of brain damage. I personally believe that as more and more "average" people gain access to computers, we will continue to see an increase in cyberpunk protagonists who are women and people of color, simply as a result of authors "writing what they know." In the '80s, computers were much more expensive than they are now, and so were mostly the province of people who could afford to buy them (white upperclass males), or the people who could afford to train to work with them through either trade schools or universities (also white upperclass males). I believe that as the computer becomes more and more accessible to the "average" person, so cyberpunk will grow to include a wider (and more interesting) audience. Also, while written by white upperclas males, the "punk" portion of cyberpunk encourages the writers of cyberpunk to portray women as something other than magic-users and psychics. Women in cyberpunk are much more often the "muscle" in stories than in most typical science fiction. For that alone it deserves recognition. Finally, RE: Child care I signed on after the initial reference to "shunting" children off to daycare, but I would like to comment all the same, and I will use some of my personal experience to do so. Much like some people refer to "shunting" children off to daycare, some people refer to "shunting" children off to summer resident camp. I went to a Girl Scout summer camp for a couple of weeks every summer from the time I was 11 years old, and I spent much of the year waiting anxiously for the time to go to camp to arrive. Granted, 11 years old is a little old for a discussion concerning child care, but I believe the spirit is much the same. My parents did not "shunt" me off to camp, in fact there were years I had to beg to be able to go, and as I grew older, I had to earn a portion of my camp fees through Girl Scout fund raisers and the like in order to be able to afford to go. Eventually I worked my way up to become a counselor at that camp for a couple of summers, and all the way the intention was to give the girls attending camp an enjoyable, worthwhile experience which gave them the chance to grow in confidence, independence, and self-esteem. In addition, anthropologists have found that in early tribal societies, all of the young children in the tribe were kept in a common area during the day, attended by a few of the women of the tribe while the rest of the women gathered, or, after the introduction of agriculture, worked in the fields. Then it was not called "day care", it was considered common sense to have all of the children of the tribe in one area attended by a few of the women, rather than forcing each woman to be responsible for attending to her own children. This was done for the good of the entire tribe, *including* the children, who learned to interact, to obey authority beside their parents, and to develop ideas and opinions beside what their parents taught them. Okay, I think that's about it. Again, if I've messed up on the usual procedure on this list, I apologize and ask that someone let me know that I've messed up so I don't continue to do so. Otherwise, I would like to say that I'm very excited to become a part of this discussion group and am very much looking forward to discussions in the future. -- Barbara Benesch ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:59:42 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: L Garforth Subject: Re: Cyberpunk suggestions? In-Reply-To: <971014163422_471867997@emout10.mail.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 14 Oct 1997, Nicole Youngman wrote: > << In terms of this list, I regard cyberpunk as the rhetoric of white, male, > upper middle-class authors, and their characters are represented as rugged > individualists, streetwise and incapable of sustained and fulfilling > relationships. >> > > What would your take on Sterling's _Heavy Weather_ be? I enjoyed it more than > his other works that I've read. I really liked _Heavy Weather_. Because I chanced upon it searching for eco-utopias (thinking of cyberpunk as the ultimate eco-dystopias - ie in their construction of totally un-natural environments; the _Blade Runner_ Connection is of course interesting here, especially in the way that green landscapes are used to connote escape into authenticity at the end), I had no idea what to make of it for a time. Now, I like it for its ambiguity; the way it extrapolates the extreme weather 'what if' and offers us human ingenuity - not natural but most definitely cultural if not sub-cultural - as a way of at least dealing with it; the way we probably always end up doing. No determinist solutions, no axis spinning changes (future primitivism/ a totally managed globe). I'm also wondering if it has any discursive relationship with Andrew Ross' _Strange Weather_ (a left cultural studies take on weather, environmental and techno-cultures) - there seem to be some interesting overlaps. I'm also wondering if it counts strictly as cyberpunk, given these themes? > >Another author & book I'd recommend is John Barnes' _Mother of Storms_. > > Me too, very original, I enjoyed it tremendously. > > Which brings me to a question: anyone familiar with any other works that deal > with climate or weather changes? No, but if you come up with some pass them on! I'm noticing that the global warming device is referred to all over the place, but simply as a narrative catalyst or explanation - from the execrable _Waterworld_ (sorry if I offend anyone?) to lager adverts. The other place to look I guess it at recent rash of *natural* disaster films - no more towering infernos or sinking ships (man's - sic - technology and built environment fails us, humanity's hubris etc), but the climate/earth itself fights back - volcanoes, and earthquakes seem to be de rigeur. None of them seem to be terribly interesting in themselves (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong), but en masse they make for an interesting cultural phenonmenon? Lisa ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 09:45:06 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Debra Euler Subject: Re: Cyberpunk suggestions? -Reply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >>> Nicole Youngman wrote: >>Which brings me to a question: anyone familiar with any other works that deal with climate or weather changes? Nicole-- Brian Aldiss' Helliconia series, which I frequently use as a benchmark to rate other SF. Debra Euler ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 09:50:56 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allen Briggs Subject: Re: Cyberpunk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > I hope I'm not violating any procedures or protocols, but if > I am, please let me know so I don't repeat any mistakes. Nah. People usually send one message per topic, and that sometimes makes it easier to follow a discussion. I, personally, prefer to get one or two beefier messages than a bunch of very short ones. In any case, "Welcome!" I look forward to hearing more from you in the future. > Also, as to where the "punk" in cyberpunk comes from, a portion of it at > least comes from the rebellion against the pervading view of the future at > the time cyberpunk first came into prominence. Definitely. I often forget this... > "Star Trek" type future in which no one did dishes, classism > was erased, etc. This is often said of "Star Trek". What I find kind of interesting is that the history of the Trek universe seems to have a punk-ish element, followed by a holocaust, followed by a post-apocolyptic society, followed by the TV series part... At least, from what little I know about it. I have a couple of friends who could probably write volumes on this. ;-) > I personally believe that as more and more "average" people gain access to > computers, we will continue to see an increase in cyberpunk protagonists who > are women and people of color, simply as a result of authors "writing what > they know. That's quite possible, although it should probably be mentioned that the seminal (!?) cyberpunk novel, _Neuromancer_ was written on a manual typewriter after Gibson saw an advertisement for the Apple //c computer (the portable computer that Heywood Floyd has on the beach in 2010). That is, you don't necessarily have to write what you know. In fact, I think it's a bit of a handicap to know too much. -allen -- Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 09:13:48 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Neil Rest Subject: Re: Cyberpunk suggestions? In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" L Garforth wrote: >eco-utopias (thinking of cyberpunk as the ultimate eco-dystopias - ie in >their construction of totally un-natural environments; the _Blade Runner_ >Connection is of course interesting here, especially in the way that green >landscapes are used to connote escape into authenticity at the end), Unfortunately, pasting outtakes from the opening of _The Shining_ (boy, I hope I have the right Stephen King story! that *is* the one in the lodge in Colorado, isn't it?) onto the end of _Blade Runner_ was a result of reflexive studio executive cowardice, and was definitely not part of the movie as it was made. The movie started out with much more of Phil Dick's disturbing meditations on what constitutes "being human". Neil Rest NeilRest@tezcat.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 09:09:48 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Neil Rest Subject: a suggestion for the management In-Reply-To: <971015025328_1958947341@emout20.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Barbara Benesch wrote: >Hi. I'm new to the list (this is my first day, in fact) and I had planned on >just reading for a while before posting, but it's all too interesting for me >to keep quiet. One of the things which has interested me about this list is the diversity, including geographic diversity, of the members. I stay curious about how people hear about it. Might it be worthwhile to add a sentence or two to the canned "you are now on the list" note a new subscriber receives suggesting that an early post tell where the person heard of the list? Neil NeilRest@tezcat.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:59:07 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Neil Rest Subject: Re: Cyberpunk In-Reply-To: <19971015095056.00357@puma.macbsd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Allen Briggs wrote: >That's quite possible, although it should probably be mentioned that the >seminal (!?) cyberpunk novel, _Neuromancer_ was written on a manual >typewriter A 1920s Underwood upright, which is now entombed in the center of the concrete slab under the new room on Gibson's house the book paid for. I happened to see the exchange at a science fiction convention when one of the premier techies explained the concept of "bandwidth" to Bill, who'd never heard of it. It was pretty funny. Neil Rest NeilRest@tezcat.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:01:46 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allen Briggs Subject: Re: Cyberpunk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > A 1920s Underwood upright, which is now entombed in the center of the > concrete slab under the new room on Gibson's house the book paid for. I like that. The man's definitely got a sense of humor. > "bandwidth" to Bill, who'd never heard of it. My point in my last message (which you probably understood, but I'll belabor anyway ;-), is that not knowing anything about the technology and not being "in the know, writing about what he knows" didn't hurt _Neuromancer_ at all, and had he known about things like bandwidth, he might have written a less "important" or "interesting" or "revolutionary" novel. But, we'll never know... He might have written the same novel, anyway. I read the three Wilhelmina(?) Baird novels _Clipjoint_, _Psychosis_, and ???, and I must say that I don't really think of them as cyberpunk. I have also had trouble pinning "feminist" on them, either. If someone has classified them as feminist cyberpunk, I'd like to know why... ;-) I also have trouble thinking of Bear's _Queen of Angels_ as cyberpunk, yet I've heard it described as such. Perhaps I'm just too strictly stuck on _Neuromancer_ and sequels as defining cyberpunk... _Idoru_ had a bit of cyberpunk feel to me, but it was sort of like a comic-book cyberpunk to me for some reason. Cheers, -allen -- Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:51:21 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Carrie A Preston Subject: Re: Cyberpunk, 3rd gender, child care In-Reply-To: <971015025328_1958947341@emout20.mail.aol.com> from "Barbara Benesch" at Oct 15, 97 02:53:29 am Content-Type: text/plain Barbara Benesch wrote: > Also, while I agree with Tonya that a good deal of cyberpunk is written by > white males who seem to be entertaining at least in some small measure a > fantasy in which the "computer nerd" is someone to be reckoned with in an > arena outside of the computer lab, I would like to point out that there is > more and more good cyberpunk being written with women and people of color in > the starring roles. > > Also, while written by white upperclas males, the "punk" portion of cyberpunk > encourages the writers of cyberpunk to portray women as something other than > magic-users and psychics. Women in cyberpunk are much more often the > "muscle" in stories than in most typical science fiction. For that alone it > deserves recognition. I just finished what I believe is the first cyberpunk novel I've read: _Vacuum_Flowers_ by Michael Swanwick. (I got the designation "cyberpunk" from the cover blurb, so I'm not sure, but it seems to fit the definitions of cyberpunk mentioned here.) This novel does not seem to directly address gender, but it does have a skilled, independent, physically and mentally mentally capable woman protagonist who is certainly more than a "magic-user or psychic." She does place great importance on her relationship with a particular man, but she ultimately doesn't let this get in the way of her own values and plans. Anyway, I was wondering if anyone else had read this book and has any comments. --C. Preston ******************************************************************************* Carrie A. Preston Carrie A. Preston 348 Mason Hall 3626 Cambrey Drive Michigan State University Lansing, MI 48906 East Lansing, MI 48825 (517) 321-0317 (517) 355 2136 presto10@pilot.msu.edu ***************************************************************************** There is water at the bottom of the ocean. --David Byrne ******************************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:12:28 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pamela Bedore Subject: Re: Butler's Ooloi In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Edrie J Sobstyl wrote: > Ok, that's a bit silly; a more subtle account might note that > for all their eschewing of heirarchy, the Oankali all seem to kowtow to > their ooloi a great deal. Lilith and her friends, for example, note > that the ooloi are smug and condescending. It's obvious to Lilith that > the ooloi is head of the household because everyone defers to it. Paul > Titus says the same thing, and argues in favour of liberating everyone > from ooloi authority. I think that since we live in a sex-stratified > society where males are dominant, we may tend to read Oankali society > through the lens which that provides, seeing deference to the ooloi as > a gendered phenomenon and drawing conclusions about their sex > accordingly. > > Any other thoughts? > I also wonder if there's a connection between the role of the ooloi in reproduction and their "maleness." Essentially, the ooloi completely control reproduction by being the DNA mixer in oankali sexual encounters, and by rendering the humans sterile if they fail to reproduce. This could be seen as related to human males controlling human reproduction until women had access to birth control. What do you think? pamela bedore department of english simon fraser university But play, you must, A tune beyond us, yet ourselves, A tune upon the blue guitar Of things exactly as they are -Wallace Stevens ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 18:42:51 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: Cyberpunk suggestions? Nicole asked: 'anyone familiar with any other works that deal with climate or weather changes?' How about M Bradley Kellogg (with William B Rosso) duology 'Lear's Daughters', 'The Wave and the Flame' and 'Reign of Fire' in which meteorology plays a significant part. Plus, of course, the Bujold short story 'Weatherman', which was later incorporated into 'The Vor Game' Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:14:51 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: patricia johnston Subject: climate/weather Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi, I just picked up a book called The Nitrogen Fix, by Hal Clement. I have not had the chance to read it yet, however a description of the title on the jacket is "A novel of the Ultimate Ecological Disaster". Don`t know if that fits into climate/weather. Will read it soon tho. Patricia ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:12:00 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: Cyberpunk >I read the three Wilhelmina(?) Baird novels _Clipjoint_, _Psychosis_, >and ???, and I must say that I don't really think of them as >cyberpunk. I have also had trouble pinning "feminist" on them, either. >If someonehas classified them as feminist cyberpunk, I'd like to know >why... ;-) I can't think why either! Good reads (though the last vol I thought an absolute cop-out), but not feminist--a strong central female, and no other females except a total baddy anywhere in the picture, doesn't speak of feminism to me, though the later novels did improve on this a little--and not particularly cyberpunk, except in having a similar urban grot setting. Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 17:11:05 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Allen Briggs Subject: Re: Butler's Ooloi Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > I also wonder if there's a connection between the role of the ooloi in > reproduction and their "maleness." Perhaps. Although _Ammonite_ has given me a different perspective of who is in control of gene mixing. :-) In thinking about it more, I think it might have been the fact that Lilith was female and that Nikanj was another character that didn't have definitely female features, so I cast its character as a male. At least, for me. -allen -- Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:13:46 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Edrie J Sobstyl Subject: Re: Butler's Ooloi In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII On Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:12:28 -0700 Pamela Bedore wrote: > I also wonder if there's a connection between the role of the ooloi in > reproduction and their "maleness." Essentially, the ooloi completely > control reproduction by being the DNA mixer in oankali sexual encounters, > and by rendering the humans sterile if they fail to reproduce. This could > be seen as related to human males controlling human reproduction until > women had access to birth control. > > What do you think? I quite agree with Pamela, and would add that the historical roots of beliefs about male "control" of reproduction go beyond the obvious practical observations about who "gets" to reproduce; (even there, most contemporary widely available birth control has been designed by men and according to their views about how contraception should be implemented/experienced, not women's.) But the idea of having a person of a particular sex (even if it's not one that humans have) responsible for the forming of offspring is a very ancient one, found in, e.g., Aristotle. The difference in Butler is that *both* men and women seem to provide the "matter" while only the ooloi provide the "form" of the offspring, whereas Aristotle believed men provided form and women merely matter. I am often struck by how many of the ideas I encounter in reading science fiction are similar (albeit with important new twists) to ideas I read in Philosophy 101 -- but then that's an occupational hazard of being a Philosophy professor, I'm sure those in other jobs notice their field reflected in what they read as well! Or are philosophers really that madly self-absorbed ... :) edrie ***************************** Edrie Sobstyl School of Arts and Humanities University of Texas at Dallas P.O. Box 830688 Richardson Tx 75083-0688 (972) 883-2365 (972) 883-2989 (fax) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:38:04 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marianne Reddin Subject: Re: Butler's Ooloi Content-Type: text/plain Hmmm. I read these about six months ago. I always thought of Nikanj as 'ooloi' or 'othergendered' or what have you, but if I had been 'forced to choose', I would have said female without a speck of hesitation. I find myself unable to dig at the reasons - perhaps the 'caring, nurturing' stereotype, perhaps something else. And maybe this has something to do with age/generation, I being only 20, and only 2 years out of the nest and so on. Marianne, who meant to post about this (as an alternate data point) when it first came up:) ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:53:24 -0500 Reply-To: Stacey Holbrook Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: More on kids (was: Re: Tomboys (and toys) and legitimate choices) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > On Mon, 6 Oct 1997, Stacey Holbrook wrote: > > > > > Men do make choices but not necessarily the same ones that women make. Few > > men actually have the option of staying home with the kids. > > I'm not sure, why so many people (and only in US) think that kids need > "someone to stay home with them", be that mother or father. Don't you > think that a child would benefit more being around other kids her age, > someone they could play with, instead of being stuck with a parent. Stuck with a parent? I think I should mention that I home-school my 9 year old daughter. My husband and I made this choice because we knew it was in the best interest of our daughter. Home-schooling is a commitment not only to our daughter but a commitment to our entire family. And no, I don't think that children benefit from exclusively "playing with children" their own age. The rigid age segregation of children in public schools for long hours every day (and also the fact that public school children spend very little time playing) is one of the many reasons we home-school. My daughter interacts with people of all ages and is very comfortable doing so. I also very strongly believe that young children should be forming close ties (or bonding) with their family. I'm not criticizing the choices that other families have made, but the choices the I have made (to home-school) are questioned and criticized so often that I get very tired of it. > A > parent who while having a dream job, confines him/herself to several years of > house arrest, where all they can do is to watch idiotic daytime shows. > And while having Master's degree, spend their time on "household duties" > which are equivalent to minimum-wage jobs (like cleaning or babysitting) > that do not require attending grade school. Do you think that when a > person spends the best years of their life like this, it's not going to > affect their personality, and eventually their relationship with > children? You are making a lot of assumptions in the above statement. I don't know where to start addressing them. First, I see a very clear contempt for people who choose child care and "household duties". This relates direcctly to the various "raising kids" threads. This contempt, which is found in the mainstream population, is one of the reasons childcare workers receive only minimum wage. There is also the assumption that a person that chooses to stay home is wasting hir life. There is the assumption that a Master's degree will invariably lead to a more fulfilling life. I don't agree with either of these assumptions. A Master's -might- lead to a higher income level but not necessarily to greater happiness. Am I wasting my life by staying home? Do I sit home and watch "daytime" television? The answer to these questions is -no-. Has my personality been changed by "spending the best years" of my life at home? Yes. Mostly for the positive with a couple of negatives thrown in. What job doesn't have negatives? (snip) > But that day I > promised myself, that I'll never, ever stay home, even if I have ten > children and all of them babies. Because I think that my children would > benefit much more of having a mother who is an independant person. Now you assume that a stay at home mom is not an independant person. My husband would bust a gut laughing at this one. Hmmmm... How do I get this post on topic to this list...? Well, home-schooling is an alternative lifestyle and many home-school families read feminist science fiction, fantasy and utopian books. > > > Marina Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 22:44:19 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michael Marc Levy Subject: Re: Cyberpunk suggestions? -Reply In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 15 Oct 1997, Debra Euler wrote: > >>> Nicole Youngman wrote: > > >>Which brings me to a question: anyone familiar with any other works > that deal with climate or weather changes? > > Nicole-- > > Brian Aldiss' Helliconia series, which I frequently use as a > benchmark to rate other SF. > > Debra Euler > Similar to Aldiss' Helliconia series in their depiction of worlds with weather patterns that change over the centuries rather than on a yearly basis are Michael Swanwick's Station of the Tide and Paul Park's Starbridge trilogy, beginning with Soldiers of Paradise. There are a number of ice age come again novels. John Christopher did one called The Long Winter and I think Piers Anthony may have done one as well. Early in his career J.G. Ballard did two weather catastrophe novels, The Drowned World and The Wind from Nowhere (aka The Burning World). Of course any number of writers have written novels set on alien worlds where the extreme weather is a major plot element, see, for example, C.J. Cherryh's recent Rider at the Gate and Cloud's Rider or LeGuin's Left Hand of Darkness etc. Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:14:40 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Neil Rest Subject: Re: _Vacuum_Flowers_ was Re: Cyberpunk, 3rd gender, child care In-Reply-To: <199710151851.OAA67853@pilot09.cl.msu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Carrie A Preston wrote: >Barbara Benesch wrote: > >> Also, while I agree with Tonya that a good deal of cyberpunk is written by >> white males who seem to be entertaining at least in some small measure a >> fantasy in which the "computer nerd" is someone to be reckoned with in an >> arena outside of the computer lab, I would like to point out that there is >> more and more good cyberpunk being written with women and people of color in >> the starring roles. >> >> Also, while written by white upperclas males, the "punk" portion of cyberpunk >> encourages the writers of cyberpunk to portray women as something other than >> magic-users and psychics. Women in cyberpunk are much more often the >> "muscle" in stories than in most typical science fiction. For that alone it >> deserves recognition. > >I just finished what I believe is the first cyberpunk novel I've read: >_Vacuum_Flowers_ by Michael Swanwick. (I got the designation "cyberpunk" from >the cover blurb, so I'm not sure, but it seems to fit the definitions of >cyberpunk mentioned here.) This novel does not seem to directly address >gender, but it does have a skilled, independent, physically and mentally >mentally capable woman protagonist who is certainly more than a >"magic-user or psychic." She does place great importance on her relationship >with a particular man, but she ultimately doesn't let this get in the way of >her own values and plans. > >Anyway, I was wondering if anyone else had read this book and has any comments. I *adore* Swanwick. He's the one author I forced my schedule to get to the reading of at Worldcon, and I'm excitedly looking forward to reading his latest, _Faust_. As for _Vacuum_Flowers_, I don't see it as cyberpunk, though that's somewhat incidental. It does have advanced computer technology permeating everything, but the overall mood, and the use of the computers is entirely different. You do, though, suggest a point which my be of importance to this list: What about works which take for granted the values and/or social changes "feminism" pursues, but with other concerns central to the individual work? The protagonist in _Vacuum_Flowers_ (it's been a while, I don't remember her name(s)) is many of the things a feminist would want to see, not least being the center and source of the action, but she's focused on other issues than gender equity. Similarly, the Varley stories where sex-change is minor out-patient surgery, and there mostly *aren't* sex roles. Neil NeilRest@tezcat.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 10:46:42 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Chris Shaffer Subject: Re: a suggestion for the management Comments: cc: Laura's new address In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19971015090948.006d8af4@tezcat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 09:09 AM 10/15/97 -0500, you wrote: >Barbara Benesch wrote: >>Hi. I'm new to the list (this is my first day, in fact) and I had planned on >>just reading for a while before posting, but it's all too interesting for me >>to keep quiet. > >One of the things which has interested me about this list is the diversity, >including geographic diversity, of the members. I stay curious about how >people hear about it. Might it be worthwhile to add a sentence or two to >the canned "you are now on the list" note a new subscriber receives >suggesting that an early post tell where the person heard of the list? > > >Neil >NeilRest@tezcat.com That's a good idea. I enjoyed the "introductions" we did a while back. I've carboned this to Laura, who should be rejoining the electronic world soon. As the "true" listowner, she gets to make this kind of change. ----- "Till death do you part means only one of you is getting out alive." --Lucan Chris Shaffer shaffer@uic.edu http://www.uic.edu/~shaffer/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:24:51 -0700 Reply-To: Sharle@ibm.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sharon McCaffrey Subject: Re: climate/weather MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit patricia johnston wrote: > > Hi, > I just picked up a book called The Nitrogen Fix, by Hal Clement. I have not > had the chance to read it yet, however a description of the title on the > jacket is "A novel of the Ultimate Ecological Disaster". Don`t know if that > fits into climate/weather. Will read it soon tho. > Patricia I saw another of his books in the bookstores about an ice man. Maybe he writes a lot about climate etc. The book I saw was from the 50's when paperbacks cost less than $1.00. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:22:06 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) In-Reply-To: <971011222817_441799483@emout07.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII That's what I've heard. However, it is not clear to me, why don't they organize a day care center on their own, and keep all that money for themselves. It's easier that to open a convenience store. Because you don't have to rent a place, you can just use your own apartment. After all, it's not a lot more than a professional babysitter, who could use her college education to make the time more interesting and useful for children. I've seen a daycare like that in Oklahoma, by the way. Just a woman (a white middle-class American) who looks after a group of kids in her own house. And whatever big money parents are paying, it's all hers. Why could not others do that? Daycares are not like Welfare programs or charities, they do not have to be established by the government or supported by big businesses. Anyone can do it. Marina On Sat, 11 Oct 1997, Nicole Youngman wrote: > << > Why it does not seem to work in the rest of the US? There are, like, > hundreds of Elementary Education majors in every American school I've > seen. Do they all go to college just for MRS degree? > >> > > I suspect one reason is that, while daycare is very expensive for the > parents, it doesn't pay well at all for the employees. Even someone with an > MA in early childhood education might not make more than a dollar or two over > minimum wage, if that. > > Nicole > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:35:04 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) Comments: To: Pat York In-Reply-To: <34405774.386@localnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 12 Oct 1997, Pat York wrote: > Why on earth would a man find a woman more attractive for having an > elementary ed. degree??? Once, I asked this question at my English class (a feminist one, by the way). It was not specifically about Elementary Ed, though. I just said how much it amased me to see smart, healthy young women in America, who would seriously plan to stay at home for twenty years, after graduating from _medical school_. And, if they were going to do that, what was the point to spend all that money to get Education at the first place. I mean, you don't need even junior high to know how to cook and clean. And a guy at the class told me, that "guys like to marry a girl with a degree, even if she's never going to use it". Because it's more satisfying to know that she is an intelligent person, and she chose _him_ nevertheless. In other words, it feels a lot better to know that you've got a person with a Master's degree to give up her life to become your free servant. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 18:52:53 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 12 Oct 1997, Michael Marc Levy wrote: > Yes, for non-degreed people, minimum wage or a couple of dollars more is > pretty much standard. > > Mike Levy > I forgot to mention this. Most of home day care centers in Russian neigborhoods in New York charge about $300 per month for a kid. Which is expensive, but less expensive than the housing in New York. The day care centers take about ten kids per adult. Which makes it $3,000 per month, $36,000 per year, minus taxes and rent for the apartment the owner has to pay for anyway, since she lives in it. Let's say, she gets $27,000 per year. I think it's not that bad, even for New York. I work in a Job Placement office, and we have job openings like "Receptionist" with a salary offered at $13,000 per year. I can't believe someone can actually live on that. Comparing to this, I think opening a day care is pretty profitable. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:56:58 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Ildiko Paulovitch Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) Marina, Simple, liability and illegality. Just one kid gets hurt in her/his home and the lawsuit would ruin them. Making money under the table is illegal. Nice idea and it can and does work for some, but most people wouldn't try it. ildiko ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:14:04 -0400 Reply-To: pyork@localnet.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat York Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) Comments: To: MARINA YERESHENKO MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think we're all missing the partnership aspect of the stay-at-home marriage partner. Now, honestly, how many of us have said at one point or another, 'I need a wife!' I know I have. Whichever partner in an equal-partners relationship stays home, that partner is a helluva lot more than an unpaid servant. The bookeeping alone is a small part-time job. Then add terrific meals, childrearing (usually yours and all the working folks'), volunteer work for the community etc. An advanced degree simply makes the homemaker a source of richer knowledge and culture to the whole family and to the community. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I've actually observed a number of highly successful partnership-relationships in which one person kept the homefires burning while the other did the money thing. Several were farm families, of course. It's a source of real sadness to me that ag-business pays so poorly these days that one or both farmers have to hold a 'town job' to make things go. When both members of the team are doing their jobs, it's a wonderful thing to see. Someone upstream mentioned the two part-time job family. I'm seeing more of that as well. People in my working class school district seem to be opting for such jobs in increasing numbers. The problem can be when part-time status destroys your chance to get benefits and gain seniority. Otoh, I've never seen so many people working 50 and 60 hour weeks as I do now. That crowd seems to trade stuff for time with their kids. The kids have a closet full of clothes and toys, but spend 'way too long at the sitter's. MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > > On Sun, 12 Oct 1997, Pat York wrote: > > > Why on earth would a man find a woman more attractive for having an > > elementary ed. degree??? > > Once, I asked this question at my English class (a feminist one, by the > way). It was not specifically about Elementary Ed, though. I just said > how much it amased me to see smart, healthy young women in America, who > would seriously plan to stay at home for twenty years, after graduating > from _medical school_. And, if they were going to do that, what was the > point to spend all that money to get Education at the first place. I > mean, you don't need even junior high to know how to cook and clean. And > a guy at the class told me, that "guys like to marry a girl with a > degree, even if she's never going to use it". Because it's more > satisfying to know that she is an intelligent person, and she chose _him_ > nevertheless. In other words, it feels a lot better to know that you've got > a person with a Master's degree to give up her life to become your free > servant. > > Marina > > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society > happens to be selling at the time." > Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:47:13 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long In-Reply-To: <199710131541.LAA03233@mail.gwi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 13 Oct 1997, Marilyn Nulman wrote: > Every time I read of elder abuse I wonder how those old people raised their > children. I know it isn't as simple as that, but I do wonder. I also > wonder if the people who shunt their little ones off to day care today won't > be cheerfully shunted off to nursing homes when their needs become > inconvenient for their now adult offspring. I am afraid I am going to repeat myself, but children _do not_ need an adult to stick around them for 24 hours. Those who want to realize one's potential are "shunting their little ones to day care" just as much as those who stay at home are simply lazy, spoiled, and immature, chosing to hide all their life behind their husband's back, instead of accepting adult's responsibility of combining career with parenthood. We can keep calling each other names, but I doubt it will resolve anything. Raising children means teaching them to survive in this world as independent human beings, including yourself being an example in that. Which twenty-four hour supervision is not going to accomplish . And playing with peers can be a lot more fun for them than staying all day with Mom who is watching TV. Children do not need constant attention. Most of people who think they do, simply forgot their own childhood, and how they had wished that all adults would go the Hell away for a while. So, for this people, the whole matter of childeraising becomes something detached and scientific, kind of like rules for training chimps in a circus to insure good performance, or raising award-winning cattle. They forget what it is like to be a child, and how important is independence for them. I am 23, and I remember my childhood like it was yesterday. And I can say that all children need is two simple things: first, their parents to love them (not smother with constant attention, but accept them the way they are, which means trust and encouragement to explore the life on their own, withouit being scared); second, their parents to be happy _themselves_, because those who aren't, eventually will start getting it out on their children. The latter is what makes "bad" parents, not a lack of some parental skills. If your own life sucks, you cannot be a good parent even if you have a Ph.D. in that. Because people who do hot love themselves, cannot be expected to love their children, at least, not in a healthy way. And sacrificing one's intellectual growth by locking oneself up in a house for years is a very good step towards giving up on life. About nursing homes. I wonder if it gets on people's nerves when I compare things to the way they were in my country, but I can tell you one thing. All children there were going to day care centers, and virtually _no one_ would put their parents or simply elderly relatives to nursing homes. They existed mostly for totally lonely old people, with no kin whatsoever. Disposing of one's old parents by placing them in a nursing home was considered a worse sin in public opinion than abortion is in USA. So, I don't think that day care for children would in any way lead to nursing homes for parents. My point is, basically, that children, no matter how small they are, do not need parents that are around for 24 hours a day. They need parents who love them, and also, have a life. And if they cannot get a life, they should at least get a job, so their children could have a life. :) Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:12:06 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Stacey Holbrook Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long Comments: To: MARINA YERESHENKO In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Marina--- It is extremely obvious to me you don't know what you are talking about. You have insulted me with your many (incorrect) assumptions. I have discovered that the loudest experts on raising children are those who don't have any. I suggest we tie up this thread and go onto something more on-topic. Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) On Thu, 16 Oct 1997, MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > On Mon, 13 Oct 1997, Marilyn Nulman wrote: > > > Every time I read of elder abuse I wonder how those old people raised their > > children. I know it isn't as simple as that, but I do wonder. I also > > wonder if the people who shunt their little ones off to day care today won't > > be cheerfully shunted off to nursing homes when their needs become > > inconvenient for their now adult offspring. > > I am afraid I am going to repeat myself, but children _do not_ need an > adult to stick around them for 24 hours. Those who want to realize > one's potential are "shunting their little ones to day care" just as much as > those who stay at home are simply lazy, spoiled, and immature, chosing to > hide all their life behind their husband's back, instead of accepting > adult's responsibility of combining career with parenthood. We can keep > calling each other names, but I doubt it will resolve anything. > > Raising children means teaching them to survive in this world as > independent human beings, including yourself being an example in that. > Which twenty-four hour supervision is not going to accomplish . And playing > with peers can be a lot more fun for them than staying all day with Mom > who is watching TV. > > Children do not need constant attention. Most of people who think they do, > simply forgot their own childhood, and how they had wished that all adults > would go the Hell away for a while. So, for this people, the whole matter of > childeraising becomes something detached and scientific, kind of like rules for > training chimps in a circus to insure good performance, or raising > award-winning cattle. They forget what it is like to be a child, and how > important is independence for them. > > I am 23, and I remember my childhood like it was yesterday. And I can say > that all children need is two simple things: first, their parents to love > them (not smother with constant attention, but accept them the way they > are, which means trust and encouragement to explore the life on their > own, withouit being scared); second, their parents to be happy > _themselves_, because those who aren't, eventually will start getting it > out on their children. The latter is what makes "bad" parents, not a lack of > some parental skills. If your own life sucks, you cannot be a good parent > even if you have a Ph.D. in that. Because people who do hot love > themselves, cannot be expected to love their children, at least, not in a > healthy way. And sacrificing one's intellectual growth by locking oneself > up in a house for years is a very good step towards giving up on life. > > About nursing homes. I wonder if it gets on people's nerves when I compare > things to the way they were in my country, but I can tell you one thing. All > children there were going to day care centers, and virtually _no one_ > would put their parents or simply elderly relatives to nursing homes. They > existed mostly for totally lonely old people, with no kin whatsoever. > Disposing of one's old parents by placing them in a nursing home was > considered a worse sin in public opinion than abortion is in USA. So, I > don't think that day care for children would in any way lead to nursing > homes for parents. > > My point is, basically, that children, no matter how small they are, do > not need parents that are around for 24 hours a day. They need parents > who love them, and also, have a life. And if they cannot get a life, they > should at least get a job, so their children could have a life. :) > > Marina > > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society > happens to be selling at the time." > Naomi Wolf > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:31:59 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Home schooling Comments: To: Stacey Holbrook In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Stacey, I think that home schooling is _wonderful_. However, not everyone wants to do that. Some people don't want to stay home, and they are still considered "unfit mothers" by many people, much more often than home schooling parents are. Elementary teachers make little money not only because people underestimate child-rearing, but also because the profession is considered unnecessary for many, since "good mothers raise their children themselves". I am pretty sure that you are an independent person while staying home. After all, independence is a part of personality, not a profession. However, when a woman is divorced, independent homemaking can be a lot more difficult. As well as when a married women have to ask her husband for money to buy a pair of stockings... I am not against any choices. I just don't understand why good career and good family have to be mutually exclusive. If men can have both, so can women, unless they convince themselves otherwise. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:09:20 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long Comments: To: Stacey Holbrook In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Stacey, I did not mean to insult you in any way. I am _really sorry_ if I did. I guess that's what happens when people start talking about something that is too personal for them. When I was twenty, all my friends and cousins of my age were married. My family kept asking me, when i would finally grow up, get married, and have children, like any normal woman. Most of people in college do not expect a female to be a sucessful proofessional and a good parent at the same time. Being female seems like some kind of desease, the same as one that would let one use either her arms, or her legs, but never both. Look, I was not talking about people like you, who consciously choses to devote her life to the family. It's not in any way worse than being a nuclear physicist. The problem is that not all people have a gift of parenting by nature. They might be simply better in something else. In which case, it would not be that bad for them to delegate part of the child-rearing to others, who love children to the point of making them their profession. Those, for whom it is the dream job of their lives. The decision to become a homemaker or a corporate executive does not make one a good or a bad parent. Non-working parents can neglect their children, and those who work 70 hours a week can take their kids with them and introduce them to challenges and joy of hard work, which does not have to be only for money. However, it is unrealistic to expect everyone to be a good full-time parent. It's a gift, like being a musician, and it's not for everyone. And when people are pushed to do something they do not really want, they can be very, very unhappy. Even though they would be doing exactly the same thing that for someone else would be the very meaning of life. And when parents are unhappy, so are children. And there is nothing worse than unhappy children. Believe me, it sucks to feel that your very existance had ruined somebody's life. I apologize for hurting your feelings. Marina On Thu, 16 Oct 1997, Stacey Holbrook wrote: > > Marina--- > > It is extremely obvious to me you don't know what you are talking about. > You have insulted me with your many (incorrect) assumptions. I have > discovered that the loudest experts on raising children are those who > don't have any. I suggest we tie up this thread and go onto something more > on-topic. > > Stacey (ausar@netdoor.com) > > > > On Thu, 16 Oct 1997, MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > > > On Mon, 13 Oct 1997, Marilyn Nulman wrote: > > > > > Every time I read of elder abuse I wonder how those old people raised their > > > children. I know it isn't as simple as that, but I do wonder. I also > > > wonder if the people who shunt their little ones off to day care today won't > > > be cheerfully shunted off to nursing homes when their needs become > > > inconvenient for their now adult offspring. > > > > I am afraid I am going to repeat myself, but children _do not_ need an > > adult to stick around them for 24 hours. Those who want to realize > > one's potential are "shunting their little ones to day care" just as much as > > those who stay at home are simply lazy, spoiled, and immature, chosing to > > hide all their life behind their husband's back, instead of accepting > > adult's responsibility of combining career with parenthood. We can keep > > calling each other names, but I doubt it will resolve anything. > > > > Raising children means teaching them to survive in this world as > > independent human beings, including yourself being an example in that. > > Which twenty-four hour supervision is not going to accomplish . And playing > > with peers can be a lot more fun for them than staying all day with Mom > > who is watching TV. > > > > Children do not need constant attention. Most of people who think they do, > > simply forgot their own childhood, and how they had wished that all adults > > would go the Hell away for a while. So, for this people, the whole matter of > > childeraising becomes something detached and scientific, kind of like rules for > > training chimps in a circus to insure good performance, or raising > > award-winning cattle. They forget what it is like to be a child, and how > > important is independence for them. > > > > I am 23, and I remember my childhood like it was yesterday. And I can say > > that all children need is two simple things: first, their parents to love > > them (not smother with constant attention, but accept them the way they > > are, which means trust and encouragement to explore the life on their > > own, withouit being scared); second, their parents to be happy > > _themselves_, because those who aren't, eventually will start getting it > > out on their children. The latter is what makes "bad" parents, not a lack of > > some parental skills. If your own life sucks, you cannot be a good parent > > even if you have a Ph.D. in that. Because people who do hot love > > themselves, cannot be expected to love their children, at least, not in a > > healthy way. And sacrificing one's intellectual growth by locking oneself > > up in a house for years is a very good step towards giving up on life. > > > > About nursing homes. I wonder if it gets on people's nerves when I compare > > things to the way they were in my country, but I can tell you one thing. All > > children there were going to day care centers, and virtually _no one_ > > would put their parents or simply elderly relatives to nursing homes. They > > existed mostly for totally lonely old people, with no kin whatsoever. > > Disposing of one's old parents by placing them in a nursing home was > > considered a worse sin in public opinion than abortion is in USA. So, I > > don't think that day care for children would in any way lead to nursing > > homes for parents. > > > > My point is, basically, that children, no matter how small they are, do > > not need parents that are around for 24 hours a day. They need parents > > who love them, and also, have a life. And if they cannot get a life, they > > should at least get a job, so their children could have a life. :) > > > > Marina > > > > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society > > happens to be selling at the time." > > Naomi Wolf > > > > > > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 23:34:35 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Nicole Youngman Subject: Re: Cyberpunk suggestions? << The other place to look I guess it at recent rash of *natural* disaster films - no more towering infernos or sinking ships (man's - sic - technology and built environment fails us, humanity's hubris etc), but the climate/earth itself fights back - volcanoes, and earthquakes seem to be de rigeur. None of them seem to be terribly interesting in themselves (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong), but en masse they make for an interesting cultural phenonmenon? >> I've noticed that too. We had _Twister_ not too long ago (which I have to admit I loved though the romantic sub-plot was a bit silly) and there've been a couple about volcanos, right? I saw the one Pierce (sp?) Brosnan was in and thought it was pretty awful as far as gender roles were concerned. But one thing that can be great about this kind of film is that it offers a chance to make a "thriller" without all the *human* violence--and maybe they do help to drive home the "nature bats last" idea! ;-) Nicole ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 15:53:45 GMT+1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Katherine Dall Organization: ELM Macquarie University Subject: Re: a suggestion for the management Neil Rest wrote: > One of the things which has interested me about this list is the diversity, > including geographic diversity, of the members. I stay curious about how > people hear about it. Might it be worthwhile to add a sentence or two to > the canned "you are now on the list" note a new subscriber receives > suggesting that an early post tell where the person heard of the list? Sounds like a good idea, and since I'm fairly new to the list I figured I may as well get in early on what may become a tradition. I'm a postgrad student in cultural studies at Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. I heard about the list while doing research for a lecturer doing a project on minority group uses of the internet. I was looking up feminist resources and got distracted by the offer of SF on Laura's web page. Feminist SF has been a long term addiction [and research interest] of mine, so I joined. As a result of the research project though, I've also become interested in the _lack_ of geographic diversity I've found in many discussion groups, to the extent that one new participant in a group [from New Zealand] was welcomed to the group, and to the United States. For me, it's really shattered the illusion I had, before getting on the net, of international community. I haven't been lurking for long enough to be able to tell if this list diverges from the usual pattern - anyone like to enlighten me? Anyway, a big hello to everybody - and I look forward to taking part in some interesting discussions. Kate. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:33:36 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sean Johnston Subject: Re: a suggestion for the management In-Reply-To: <2BF2BAB4B1D@pip.elm.mq.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >Anyway, a big hello to everybody - and I look forward to taking part >in some interesting discussions. > >Kate. Kate, Hiya. Howyadoin'? -Sean "There is no indignity in being afraid to die, but there is a terrible shame in being afraid to live."--'Ariden' in "Dr. Who" ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:56:13 -0700 Reply-To: peggyh@earthlink.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Peggy Hamilton Subject: Re: climate/weather MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sharon McCaffrey wrote: > > patricia johnston wrote: > > > > Hi, > > I just picked up a book called The Nitrogen Fix, by Hal Clement. I have not > > had the chance to read it yet, however a description of the title on the > > jacket is "A novel of the Ultimate Ecological Disaster". Don`t know if that > > fits into climate/weather. Will read it soon tho. > > Patricia > > I saw another of his books in the bookstores about an ice man. Maybe he > writes a lot about climate etc. The book I saw was from the 50's when > paperbacks cost less than $1.00. I think the book you're refering to is _Ice World_. It's not about climate or weather exeactly, but large portions are written from the point of view of a being who finds Mercury a little chilly. The ice wolrd in the title is Earth, because that's how this character thinks of it. It's an interesting look at the planet from an alien perspective. It plays more on our automatic assumption about the physical world that social structures, though Clement does make a point of the human girl being at least as intelligent, brave and capable as her brother. The "ecological disaster" in _The Nitrogen Fix_ doesn't have anything to do with weather, either. It's a chemical change in the atmosphere which has already happened before the story begins. Both books are in my library, but I haven't read either of them in several years. My favorite books by Clement are _Needle_, and _Though the Eye of the Needle_. When I read them as a teenager I really wanted a Hunter of my own. Peggy Hamilton ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 11 Oct 1997 07:09:12 -0900 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 16 Oct 1997, MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > > I forgot to mention this. Most of home day care centers in Russian > neigborhoods in New York charge about $300 per month for a kid. Which is > expensive, but less expensive than the housing in New York. The day care > centers take about ten kids per adult. Which makes it $3,000 per month, > $36,000 per year, minus taxes and rent for the apartment the owner has to > pay for anyway, since she lives in it. Let's say, she gets $27,000 per > year. I think it's not that bad, even for New York. I work in a Job > Placement office, and we have job openings like "Receptionist" with a > salary offered at $13,000 per year. I can't believe someone can > actually live on that. Comparing to this, I think opening a day care is > pretty profitable. It sounds like it. Back when I was first loooking for work as an accountant, I noticed that some firms had people who were well-dressed, or expected to be well-dressed, on very little pay. Casual listening in the break room revealed that they were all either young women living with their parents, or married to well-to-do-men. The one exception was one who lived from boyfriend to boyfriend and dropped out of a program she really wanted very near the end because her boyfriend dumped her and she now had no visible means of support.> Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:13:11 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Martha Bartter Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 18:22 10/16/97 -0500, you wrote: >That's what I've heard. However, it is not clear to me, why don't they >organize a day care center on their own, and keep all that money for >themselves. It's easier that to open a convenience store. Because you >don't have to rent a place, you can just use your own apartment. After >all, it's not a lot more than a professional babysitter, who could use >her college education to make the time more interesting and useful for >children. > >I've seen a daycare like that in Oklahoma, by the way. Just a woman >(a white middle-class American) who looks after a group of kids in her own >house. And whatever big money parents are paying, it's all hers. Why >could not others do that? Daycares are not like Welfare programs or >charities, they do not have to be established by the government or >supported by big businesses. Anyone can do it. > >Marina > But in many places, day care providers MUST get a license if they take care of more than a very few extra children. And the license depends upon such amenities as suitable bathrooms, play space, and adult/child ratios. (While I don't always approve of gov't interference in free enterprise, I DO approve of this one -- since some day care looks real good when one visits and gets real bad when no parents happen to come by.) Martha Bartter Truman State University ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:17:32 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sean Johnston Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >On Thu, 16 Oct 1997, MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > >> >> I forgot to mention this. Most of home day care centers in Russian >> neigborhoods in New York charge about $300 per month for a kid. Which is >> expensive, but less expensive than the housing in New York. The day care >> centers take about ten kids per adult. Huh? How many adults in Russia, or virtually anywhere, have ten kids? Or am I really out of touch? I thought the average was 2-4. > It sounds like it. Back when I was first loooking for work as an >accountant, I noticed that some firms had people who were well-dressed, >or expected to be well-dressed, on very little pay. Casual listening in >the break room revealed that they were all either young women living >with their parents, or married to well-to-do-men. The one exception was >one who lived from boyfriend to boyfriend and dropped out of a program >she really wanted very near the end because her boyfriend dumped her and >she now had no visible means of support.> Geez. That's really sad. -Sean "There is no indignity in being afraid to die, but there is a terrible shame in being afraid to live."--'Ariden' in "Dr. Who" ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:43:05 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Martha Bartter Subject: How I got here Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have absolutely no idea how I first heard about this list. I suspect the information came from someone who mentioned (on one of the other lists I read) that this list discussed subjects I have an interest in. I'm an academic retread, who returned after more than 25 years out of school to complete a BS, an MA and a Ph.D. I currently teach at Truman State University in Kirksville, MO, which has a lively Women's Studies minor program, and where the English faculty do not either disesteem or ignore fantasy & sf. A good place to work. Martha Bartter Truman State University ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:55:24 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MaryKay Bird-Guilliams Subject: Re: Cyberpunk suggestions? In-Reply-To: <971015155152_1868066714@emout16.mail.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII The book by Larry Niven "Lucifer's Hammer" has been on my mind anyway and you can certainly call it a science fiction nature gone wild kind of book. That kept me going, but it was so irritating how he handled the gender issues. Basically, it seemed to me that he used the disaster to illustrate how pointless "women's liberation" was and how as soon as primitive conditions rearose, men reasserted themselves as leaders (except for some errant "Amazon" bands). Mary K. Bird-Guilliams marykbg@wichita.lib.ks.us Reference Librarian Wichita Public Library ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:56:56 -0400 Reply-To: lguerra@ibm.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: luz guerra Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > > On Sun, 12 Oct 1997, Michael Marc Levy wrote: > > > Yes, for non-degreed people, minimum wage or a couple of dollars more is > > pretty much standard. > > > > Mike Levy > > > > I forgot to mention this. Most of home day care centers in Russian > neigborhoods in New York charge about $300 per month for a kid. Which is > expensive, but less expensive than the housing in New York. The day care > centers take about ten kids per adult. Which makes it $3,000 per month, > $36,000 per year, minus taxes and rent for the apartment the owner has to > pay for anyway, since she lives in it. Let's say, she gets $27,000 per > year. lg: Marina, you also have to take out the cost of utilities, meals, toys and other "stuff" the kids need, etc. You also have to consider how many parents default for a month or two -- which is operating money the daycare provider has to cover. Also insurance for the apartment (unless the daycare operation is completely illegal) and license. Then you have to consider sick days -- most home-run businesses such as daycare don't provide sick days for the operator -- yet working with children you are much more likely to get sick. Who pays for lost days?? Or for substitute workers? And then remember a one-woman daycare provider has no health insurance for herself. If her operation is illegal, she also has no unemployment or disability insurance. And then there is the question of vacation time, which she probably doesn't get, which means more likelihood of getting sick, burned out, etc. So in the BESt of circumstances MAYBE she gets somewhere around 27,000 with the numbers you lay out.... but I think it is unlikely. luz ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 15:31:26 GMT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Robin Reid Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Neil Rest wrote: > One of the things which has interested me about this list is the diversity, > including geographic diversity, of the members. I stay curious about how > people hear about it. Might it be worthwhile to add a sentence or two to > the canned "you are now on the list" note a new subscriber receives > suggesting that an early post tell where the person heard of the list? Hello--I saw this quote in another introductory posting, although I'd already decided to post an introduction. I found the list in a completely serendipitous manner: I was looking for an address of an SF journal and the web side for feminist SF came in up the listings, and I immediately clicked on the address and decided to join. I am an ass't professor (five years into a tenure track job but not tenured yet) in literature and languages. I work in NE Texas (rural rural rural), but was born and raised in Idaho (also rural), although I spent the fifteen years before moving to Texas in the northwest corner of Washington state. I have graduate degrees in English and Creative Writing; my official job title here is "Creative Writing and Critial Theory." I have been an SF fan since I was about six (the Mushroom Planet series was the first SF I remember reading). I was active in Trek fandom and in an apa for years as an undergraduate and graduate student. A few years ago I was doing my dissertation on representations of race and ethnicity in feminist theory and fiction and snuck SF into it (one of my committee members told me afterwards that he thought I should just do feminism and SF since it was clear that was my true love, and he was right). I have plans floating around in my head for a book on using SF in the college classroom that I'll be working on over the next few years. Most of my scholarship focuses on SF, and I was thrilled to see this listserv. Oh, on a personal note, I'm 42, a fourth generation Welsh American, and live with a housemate, nine cats,and three dogs. (On a catlist I was on, we noticed a pattern of people who loved SF or mysteries--I love both--also having LOTS of cats. It will be interesting to see if that's true here.) Some of my favorite SF writers: Joanna Russ forever (she was just starting to retire from the University of Washington when I was a doctoral student there, but I was too shy to ever approach her to say she'd been a major influence on my life for YEARS--if I'd made a fool of myself in front of her as I probably would I would just have to kill myself), Sherri S. Tepper, Vonda McIntyre, David Brin, James Tiptree, Jr., Lois McMaster Bujold, Elizabeth Moon, Barbara Hambly. And I'm still a Trekkie--doing a paper on _Deep Space 9_ as Star Trek's "Borderlands," (drawing on the work of Gloriz Anzaldua) for the popular culture association's conference next April. I'm looking forward to participating on the list--and I don't really believe in coincidence. Blessed Be, Robin Robin_Reid@tamu-commerce.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:16:30 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Laur, Erin M." Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >I've seen a daycare like that in Oklahoma, by the way. Just a woman >(a white middle-class American) who looks after a group of kids in her own >house. And whatever big money parents are paying, it's all hers. Why >could not others do that? Daycares are not like Welfare programs or >charities, they do not have to be established by the government or >supported by big businesses. Anyone can do it. > But this is exactly the reason that, unless I knew the "babysitter" personally, I would not want to use daycare like this for my children. *Anyone* can do it. That includes a wide variety of people I would not want caring for my children. A lot of the sexual abuse in daycare stories that circulate are BS, but that doesn't mean that it (and a horrible variety of other things) doesn't happen. Erin ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 19:30:49 GMT+100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Petra Mayerhofer Subject: Re: Maerlande Chronicles (was sf and gender) In-Reply-To: <199710110149.UAA15368@dfw-ix13.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT On 10 Oct 97 , Joanna Goltzman wrote: > I guess I do see the society Vonarburg creates as sexist (and that > is why I called it a reversal society), although I don't want to see > it that way. As you note, the men are reduced to sperm doners, which < snip > It is a bit late to react to Joanna's email, but I wanted to say that I agree with her. Maerlande is certainly a sexist society and in that it is reversal to the conditions nowadays. Reading Joanna's email, another parallel occurred to me. Lisbei is certainly in many ways one of the more enlightened persons in the society but she (subconsciously) does not want to be bothered about the problems of men (that's how I interpret the scene at Dougal's funeral when she has to say something about him). Partly because she is so involved in her own concerns and perhaps partly because of jealousy as she sees men as competitors for Tula's attention. This attitude reminds me of the attitude of some men nowadays who would not actively discriminate in any way but who can live quite happily with the advantages they have due to the patriarchal organisation of the society without bothering to think (or even do something) about it. Petra ** Petra Mayerhofer ** pm@ier.uni-stuttgart.de ** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 08:56:55 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Neil Rest Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Stacey Holbrook wrote: >Marina--- > >It is extremely obvious to me you don't know what you are talking about. >You have insulted me with your many (incorrect) assumptions. How? Neil Rest NeilRest@tezcat.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 12:55:58 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sean Johnston Subject: Re: Returned mail: User unknown In-Reply-To: <199710171531.PAA14994@etsuodt.TAMU-Commerce.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >I'm looking forward to participating on the list--and I don't really believe >in coincidence. > >Blessed Be, > >Robin >Robin_Reid@tamu-commerce.edu Robin, Welcome. C'mon in, the water's fine. I don't believe in coinkydinks either. Everything's too 'just so' to be random. -Sean "There is no indignity in being afraid to die, but there is a terrible shame in being afraid to live."--'Ariden' in "Dr. Who" ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 01:51:40 -0400 Reply-To: lguerra@ibm.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: luz guerra Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Neil Rest wrote: > > Stacey Holbrook wrote: > >Marina--- > > > >It is extremely obvious to me you don't know what you are talking about. > >You have insulted me with your many (incorrect) assumptions. > > How? > > Neil Rest > NeilRest@tezcat.com lg: Isn't this getting way into personal realm/away from topic? If Marina and Stacy have a personal issue to resolve, isn't that best done addressed to each other off the list? luz ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 19:04:36 UT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: Post-disaster societies (was Cyberpunk suggestions?) Mary Kay wrote The book by Larry Niven "Lucifer's Hammer" has been on my mind anyway [snip] he used the disaster to illustrate how pointless "women's liberation" was and how as soon as primitive conditions rearose, men reasserted themselves as leaders (except for some errant "Amazon" bands). It is often assumed that this would happen with the breakdown of civilisation (even by women authors), but an interesting take on this can be found in a couple of novels by John Christopher, a British writer who wrote several post-disaster novels in the 60s (differing kinds of disaster). In these he made an explicit point that the real power in the tribal-type group was a woman and the leader was the man she chose to be with (and, I think, long time since I read these, in at least one of the books she chose not on grounds of personal preference but what was best for the group). And there's a strong tradition of historical novels set in historically 'primitive' times which have the theme of the strong female ruler and the male year (or at least temporary) king--e.g. Henry Treece. Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 16:52:20 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Kristen L. Abbey" Subject: Andre Norton & introduction MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hi! I'm a grad student in Comp Lit at Rutgers, in my qualifying exams. I'm doing 2 orals in December, one on mythology and the other on 20th century women writers and the fantastic. I feel like I'm getting away with something; I've been allowed to put most of my favorite books in a big list & go talk about it as part of my PhD program. I grew up in a sci-fi household. My parents hid sci-fi novels from their parents under the covers & read with flashlights. My mother weaned me from fairy tales to fantasy novels in one easy step, Phillis Eisenstien's *Sorcerer's Son*. I've been hooked ever since. I found this list in the "normal" course of doing searces for Tanith Lee and Andre Norton online in preparation for my exam. I'm delighted to see I'm not the only one! I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions for me in trying to find out about the circulation of Andre Norton's novels-- whether she's ever been on the best seller list, how many books she's sold, and such. Thanks! _______________________________________________________________________________ kabbey@rci.rutgers.edu The critics are talking about this post: http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~kabbey Kristen L. Abbey "I laughed, I cried... PhD Student it was better than Cats" Comparative Literature --Times Book Review Rutgers University New Jersey, USA "...poetic, witty & adroit..." --Social Text _______________________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:41:45 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michael Marc Levy Subject: Re: Post-disaster societies (was Cyberpunk suggestions?) In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 17 Oct 1997, Lesley Hall wrote: > Mary Kay wrote > The book by Larry Niven "Lucifer's Hammer" has been on my mind anyway > [snip] he used the disaster to illustrate how pointless "women's liberation" > was and how as soon as primitive conditions rearose, men reasserted > themselves as leaders (except for some errant "Amazon" bands). > > It is often assumed that this would happen with the breakdown of civilisation > (even by women authors), but an interesting take on this can be found in a > couple of novels by John Christopher, a British writer who wrote several > post-disaster novels in the 60s (differing kinds of disaster). In these he > made an explicit point that the real power in the tribal-type group was a > woman and the leader was the man she chose to be with (and, I think, long > time since I read these, in at least one of the books she chose not on grounds > of personal preference but what was best for the group). > And there's a strong tradition of historical novels set in historically > 'primitive' times which have the theme of the strong female ruler and the male > year (or at least temporary) king--e.g. Henry Treece. > Lesley > Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com > And then there's Joanna Russ's fascinating take on the whole men will take over and women will have babies bit in We Who Are About To.... Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:46:28 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michael Marc Levy Subject: Re: Andre Norton & introduction In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 17 Oct 1997, Kristen L. Abbey wrote: > > I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions for me in trying to find out > about the circulation of Andre Norton's novels-- whether she's ever been > on the best seller list, how many books she's sold, and such. > > Thanks! > Norton is alive and well and living in Florida. It might be possible to get her address and ask her yourself. Some writers are hostile to academics but others are flattered by scholarly attention. My guess is that Norton would be one of the latter, especially since she herself has endowed a literary award, the Crawford Award, which is administered by an academic organization, the International Association for the Fantastic in the Arts. Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 01:05:19 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: John Cerulean Subject: LeGuin Mailing List Would anyone have any information on how to subscribe to the LeGuin mailing list? It is not mentioned on any of the usual list of lists, but I have heard that there is/was a small, private list. Thank you, Cerulean07@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:08:36 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Nalo Hopkinson Subject: Re: Cyberpunk In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 15 Oct 1997, Lesley Hall wrote: [in response to]: >the three Wilhelmina(?) Baird novels _Clipjoint_, _Psychosis_, > >and ???, and I must say that I don't really think of them as >cyberpunk. I > have also had trouble pinning "feminist" on them, either. >If someonehas > classified them as feminist cyberpunk, I'd like to know >why... ;-) > I can't think why either! Good reads (though the last vol I thought an > absolute cop-out), but not feminist NH: Wasn't the first one called _Crash Course?_ If so, I read them, too. I don't think they were particularly trying to be feminist. Good point, there weren't many female characters other than the protagonist; I hadn't thought of that. I found them to be good reads too, though I think the third one was attenuated. For me, one of the most interesting things about them was the triad in which the main character lives. But I found I wasn't entirely convinced by the description of it. I *hope* I'm talking about the same novels as everyone else... -nalo ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 21:44:05 -0700 Reply-To: Sharle@ibm.net Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sharon McCaffrey Subject: Re: climate/weather Comments: To: peggyh@EARTHLINK.NET MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peggy Hamilton wrote: > > Sharon McCaffrey wrote: > > > > patricia johnston wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > I just picked up a book called The Nitrogen Fix, by Hal Clement. I have not > > > had the chance to read it yet, however a description of the title on the > > > jacket is "A novel of the Ultimate Ecological Disaster". Don`t know if that > > > fits into climate/weather. Will read it soon tho. > > > Patricia > > > > I saw another of his books in the bookstores about an ice man. Maybe he > > writes a lot about climate etc. The book I saw was from the 50's when > > paperbacks cost less than $1.00. > > I think the book you're refering to is _Ice World_. It's not about > climate or weather exeactly, but large portions are written from the > point of view of a being who finds Mercury a little chilly. The ice > wolrd in the title is Earth, because that's how this character thinks of > it. It's an interesting look at the planet from an alien perspective. > It plays more on our automatic assumption about the physical world that > social structures, though Clement does make a point of the human girl > being at least as intelligent, brave and capable as her brother. > > The "ecological disaster" in _The Nitrogen Fix_ doesn't have anything to > do with weather, either. It's a chemical change in the atmosphere which > has already happened before the story begins. Both books are in my > library, but I haven't read either of them in several years. > > My favorite books by Clement are _Needle_, and _Though the Eye of the > Needle_. When I read them as a teenager I really wanted a Hunter of my > own. > > Peggy Hamilton Thanks for the review of Clement's books. They sound really interesting and worth reading. Sharon ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 22:10:16 -0400 Reply-To: pyork@localnet.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat York Subject: Re: LeGuin Mailing List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Cerulean wrote: > > Would anyone have any information on how to subscribe to the > LeGuin mailing list? > > It is not mentioned on any of the usual list of lists, but I have heard > that there is/was a small, private list. > > Thank you, > > Cerulean07@aol.com I would -really- love to know this as well. thanks. Pat York ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 Oct 1997 12:24:02 PDT Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Donna L. Hall" Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf) On Fri, 17 Oct 1997 13:16:30 -0400 "Laur, Erin M." writes: >>I've seen a daycare like that in Oklahoma, by the way. Just a woman >>(a white middle-class American) who looks after a group of kids in >her own >>house. And whatever big money parents are paying, it's all hers. Why >>could not others do that? Daycares are not like Welfare programs or >>charities, they do not have to be established by the government or >>supported by big businesses. Anyone can do it. >> > >But this is exactly the reason that, unless I knew the "babysitter" >personally, I would not want to use daycare like this for my children. >*Anyone* can do it. That includes a wide variety of people I would >not >want caring for my children. A lot of the sexual abuse in daycare >stories that circulate are BS, but that doesn't mean that it (and a >horrible variety of other things) doesn't happen. > Erin > Jumping in on an off-topic conversation (sorry) to add a bit. In California, at least a child care home has to be inspected and licensed. I'm not following this thread closely, but isn't it true that in many other societies, children are raised or looked after by other than the nuclear family group? And (bringing it to the topic) didn't Suzy Charnes' Trilogy (Walk to the End of the World, Motherlines, and The Furies) mention a group involvment in raising a child, in which the child was raised by more than her biological mother? It seems to me that the main character's child was raised this way, and thus incorporated into the culture of the Riding Women. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 00:57:50 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Barbara Benesch Subject: Re: raising kids (some on-topic) Donna L. Hall wrote: Jumping in on an off-topic conversation (sorry) to add a bit. In California, at least a child care home has to be inspected and licensed. I'm not following this thread closely, but isn't it true that in many other societies, children are raised or looked after by other than the nuclear family group? And (bringing it to the topic) didn't Suzy Charnes' Trilogy (Walk to the End of the World, Motherlines, and The Furies) mention a group involvment in raising a child, in which the child was raised by more than her biological mother? It seems to me that the main character's child was raised this way, and thus incorporated into the culture of the Riding Women. -------------------------- First off, yes, in Illinois child care homes need to be inspected and licensed. However, at least when my mother was doing child care out of our home, she was then eligible for government subsidizing for things such as cheese and child care. I don't remember that she ever participated in that program (this was when I was 9 to 12 or so), but I do know one of her friends who also did child care out of her home did participate. Okay, now for more on-topic: Donna's mention of the Suzy McKee Charnas trilogy reminded me of Robert Sawyer's trilogy of _Far-Seer_, _Fossil_Hunter_, and _Foreigner_. In Sawyer's trilogy, which may not entirely apply because it deals with an intelligent reptilian species (called Quintaglios) rather than humans, but in that world, the children were raised not even _knowing_ who their parents were. The eggs were laid in a creche and the children were raised by members of the tribe who were specifically chosen to do so. Incidentally, the Sawyer trilogy is a series that I would very enthusiastically recommend, first because he has obviously put a great deal of thought into the world and inhabitants he creates and makes sure that the reader cannot forget that the Quintaglios are not human. But in relation to this list, I would recommend the trilogy because it is one of the best examples of a true meritocracy that I have seen. Male and female only become an issue when a female comes into receptivity and begins looking for a mate (there are a few exceptions, but only a few). Otherwise, male and female isn't much of an issue in their society. Also, their deity is female. Someone (I'm sorry, I've just checked my e-mail after a few days and so it's all a blur) at one point mentioned books in which the ideals feminism strives for are basically realized, and these, I think are a good example (except for the little detail that these are not humans we're dealing with). Barbara Benesch BJBenesch@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 08:57:55 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: Re: Andre Norton & introduction Comments: To: kabbey@RCI.RUTGERS.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Kristen: Have you checked via the Witch World Web Site? http://www.xenite.org/witchwor.htm Maryelizabeth Mysterious Galaxy 619-268-4747 3904 Convoy St, #107 800-811-4747 San Diego, CA 92111 619-268-4775 FAX http://www.mystgalaxy.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 14:06:28 -0900 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Pat Subject: "LOST IN SPACE" Comments: To: Jean Lamb , Marietta Sue Dennis , jay m bainbridge , RevPat@aol.com Comments: cc: Bujold@unm.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII LOST IN SPACE by Ed Spivey Jr "Responding to growing pressure fro the media, the National Aeronautics & Space Administration has finally revealed which of the three astronauts was responsible for most of the trouble on board the space station Mir. "It was Curly." Patricia (Pat) Mathews mathews@unm.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 20:03:02 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Ideals of Feminism In-Reply-To: <971020005738_-593646958@emout13.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 20 Oct 1997, Barbara Benesch wrote: > Someone > (I'm sorry, I've just checked my e-mail after a few days and so it's all a > blur) at one point mentioned books in which the ideals feminism strives for > are basically realized, and these, I think are a good example (except for the > little detail that these are not humans we're dealing with). I'm just curious. What are the ideals of feminism? Any definitions? Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 20:48:56 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long Comments: To: luz guerra In-Reply-To: <3446FCEC.3191@ibm.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 17 Oct 1997, luz guerra wrote: > Neil Rest wrote: > > > > Stacey Holbrook wrote: > > >Marina--- > > > > > >It is extremely obvious to me you don't know what you are talking about. > > >You have insulted me with your many (incorrect) assumptions. > > > > How? > > > > Neil Rest > > NeilRest@tezcat.com > > lg: Isn't this getting way into personal realm/away from topic? If > Marina and Stacy have a personal issue to resolve, isn't that best done > addressed to each other off the list? > > luz > I don't have any personal issues to resolve, with anyone on the list. I said what I said, and I stand by every word. If anyone has taken it for a personal attack instead of the abstract argument it was, it's really sad. I am sorry they feel that way. All I was trying to prove, was that with all the public complaining on the lack of day cares, some one could at least try to resolve the problem in addition to talking about what's wrong with the current situation. Finally, nothing I said was in any way more insulting than the talk about "selfishness of childless people" or those "shunting away their little ones". No one made a big deal about _that_. Even though with all the pressure society puts on working mothers, the last thing they probably need are guilt trips from fellow feminists. And I don't remember any of them apologizing. As I already said once, it's always easier to act angry or upset (or spiteful -- remember "stupid" discussion of Demi Moore movies) than to come up with something better. Or prove, logically, that the opponent is wrong, instead of saying that she "does not know what she is talking about" (that _is_ an assumption, by the way). It's true that I don't have kids. However, I do have parents, and I am young enough to remember what it feels like to be a subject of parental experimentation. What people often forget, is that children are not some raw material for implementing some "progressive", "liberal", "feminist", or whatever child-raising theories. That they are actually human beings and deserve to be asked sometimes whether they are willing to participate in their parents' "search for pedagogical truth" or would rather hang out with their friends in their trivial, imperfect, drugs-and-firearms-ridden (or that's what adults believe) public school. Otherwise, someday, they might tell their parents that they have stolen their childhood. And believe me, that would hurt them more than anything I can say. And for God's sake, Stacey, I am not talking about you. I don't even know you. I've seen plenty of other families children who spent their "best years" running from a music tutor to a ballet class to some sport place they genuinely hated in order to satisfy their parents' vanity. Your case might be different, and it is not the point. What I am trying to say is that a lot of parents I've met who bent over backwards trying to be non-traditional, and considered "making something" of their children the central goal of their lives, would do the greatest favor to their children by just letting them be and getting on with their own lives. I am sure there are exceptions. But I am afraid, they just prove the rule. And one more time I repeat -- those who don't like a thread, don't have to read it, that's what Subject lines are for. They all are wellcome to start one of their own, we'll all be happy to participate. Thanks for your time, Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 21:23:12 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: MARINA YERESHENKO Subject: Tolkien In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I just finished reading the last part of The Lord of the Rings. I read Hobbit and the first two parts several years ago, and was absolutely fascinated. This time it was a little different. I still liked it a lot, but I think the author had really ambivalent feelings towards women. When I read the first three books, I was convinced that J.R.R. was gay, because women were practically absent from his world whatsoever, even as sex objects to be "rescued", which are mandatory for fairy-tales. The first half of the final, fourth book seemed pretty misogynistic, but towards the end, he seemed simply confused. There was this great powerful character, Eowyn, and she did not even die in the end, but the guy she was in love with, of course, married a half-elven beauty who hardly said a couple of words throughout the story and spent most of it in a safe, protected place of her father till "bad times" were over. The former was ready to die for the man she loved, the latter would not even marry him unless he won the war and became a king, and she's got the guy in the end. The only unusual part was that the hero was blonde, and the bimbo was dark-haired. Usually, it' the other way around. What I really liked, was the elven idea of death. That when Elfs, or distinguished members of other species, got sick of this world, thay boarded grey ships and "sailed West" to some magical land. It was really beautiful... By the way, since we were talking about suicide lately ("Atrocity in England" thread), does anyone remember _The River_? It's a short story by a guy whose name slips my mind, I think his last name was Young, and he also wrote _There Are Thirty Days In September_. In that story, a guy who tries to poison himself with gas, ends up floating down the river on something like a boat but flat and made of a bunch of tree trunks (I forgot the English word for that), which was exactly how he had always imagined death. And he meets a girl on that river, who was also trying to die, so they travel together, talking about what made them do that. Reaching the waterfalls that they an hear all the time would mean the end of the journey, but right when they come close to it, they decide that it's not what they really want, but it might be too late. It was a nice story, I wonder if anyone else here has read it. And what you all think about Tolkien? Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 00:05:32 -0400 Reply-To: gamgee@geocities.com Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Organization: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/8499 Subject: Re: Tolkien MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > And what you all think about Tolkien? > > Marina I think my e-address says it all... :) - Geoffrey ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 23:51:19 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michael Marc Levy Subject: Re: Tolkien In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 20 Oct 1997, MARINA YERESHENKO wrote: > I just finished reading the last part of The Lord of the Rings. I read > Hobbit and the first two parts several years ago, and was absolutely > fascinated. This time it was a little different. I still liked it a lot, > but I think the author had really ambivalent feelings towards women. When > I read the first three books, I was convinced that J.R.R. was gay, > because women were practically absent from his world whatsoever, even as > sex objects to be "rescued", which are mandatory for fairy-tales. The first > half of the final, fourth book seemed pretty misogynistic, but towards the > end, he seemed simply confused. There was this great powerful character, > Eowyn, and she did not even die in the end, but the guy she was in love > with, of course, married a half-elven beauty who hardly said a couple of > words throughout the story and spent most of it in a safe, protected place of > her father till "bad times" were over. The former was ready to die for the > man she loved, the latter would not even marry him unless he won the war and > became a king, and she's got the guy in the end. > > And what you all think about Tolkien? > Tolkien wasn't gay. By all accounts he was a happily married man and, by the lights of his culture, a good husband and father. He wrote The Hobbit for his kids. What he was, however, was an Oxford don, which is to say that he was a man who spent most of his life among men, with relatively little contact with or intellectual interest in women. At Oxford Tolkien was occasionally referred to as the Lord of the Strings, due to his talent for university politics. He was an arch conservative who fought long and hard to keep modern literature (and incidentally most literature by women) out of the curriculum. Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 01:13:44 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sean Johnston Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" What I am trying to say >is that a lot of parents I've met who bent over backwards trying to be >non-traditional, and considered "making something" of their children the >central goal of their lives, would do the greatest favor to their children >by just letting them be and getting on with their own lives. I am sure >there are exceptions. But I am afraid, they just prove the rule. Marina, I'd modify the sentence to say, "let them be themselves". As it stands, it could be interepreted as, "Let them alone" as in "leave them alone" as in "ignore them" as in 'neglect them'. -Sean "There is no indignity in being afraid to die, but there is a terrible shame in being afraid to live."--'Ariden' in "Dr. Who" ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 12:22:22 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Yvonne Rowse Subject: Re: Tolkien MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Marina My views on Tolkein are sadly twisted at the moment because I am reading Lord of the Rings to my 7yr old. We read The Hobbit in the summer and I quite lost my affection for this childhood favorite. Until you try to read it aloud you don't notice how convoluted most of the sentences are. We've read to page three hundred and something of LotR and I've had enough of it. To my mind most of the best bits are in the first book and we've got past those. I have to admit that as a teenager I read LotR over and over and I was probably pretty fed up with it before stating the rading aloud exercise. I recently read a book called _The Natural History of Make-Believe_ by John Goldthwaite that I found put into words much of my feelings for LotR. He writes: 'Very seldom does one encounter emotion this fraudulent and writing this bad in any genre. And there will be a hundred pages more of flashing and breaking like thunder before Tolkein brings the pother to its last, breathless gasp of cliches.' He names this Faerie-land's answer to Conan the Barbarian. I love the shire, i love the hobbits, particularly Sam, although I wish he were less subserviant ( was *he* gay do you think?), I like Faramir but the battles and high glory leave me bored to tears. Incidentaly, while we're talking about Oxford dons, how about CSLewis for a woman hater? His women are all evil or unpleasant and his girls have to be pretty and boyish (as opposed to girlish), able to follow orders and not blubber. I still have some affection for the Narnia books but they are full of petty nastiness that I could well live without. Yvonne ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 11:51:08 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Yvonne Rowse Subject: Re: raising kids (not sf?)--long MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Marina You wrote: > Finally, nothing I said was in any way more insulting than the talk about > "selfishness of childless people" or those "shunting away their little > ones". No one made a big deal about _that_. Even though with all the > pressure society puts on working mothers, the last thing they probably > need are guilt trips from fellow feminists. And I don't remember any of > them apologizing. Quite right. Perhaps we could *all* watch our use of emotive language. > As I already said once, it's always easier to act angry or upset (or > spiteful -- remember "stupid" disc