Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG9803E" ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 11:17:51 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: such a tease ... >_What Are We Fighting For? Sex, Race, Class and the Future of >Feminism_, Joanna Russ's new analysis of feminist theory.... now >show a pub date of April 27. Yesterday I got the message from Amazon.com that this, which I preordered something like last July, under the impression that it was due out in October/November, has just been mailed! But given the time surface mail to London takes, don't expect it much before mid-May. Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 16:07:43 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: WaterLuv Subject: Re: Harlan Ellison sexist? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-03-29 02:07:43 EST, lilith writes: << > he participated in the civil rights march > on Montgomery, had his arm broken by a cop in the Century City riots, > almost became one of the Chicago Seven, refused to pay his federal taxes > for several years in protest of the Vietnam War (at the urging of Thomas > Pynchon), and attended a WorldCon as Honored Guest in Arizona in a tent > with his own food from home so he wouldn't spend a cent in a state that > had refused to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment? > Got this off of a Usenet posting. >> I agree with Lilith that there has been a rush to judgement here as to Harlan Ellison's feminist credentials. In his story, _A Boy and His Dog_, the protagonist didn't turn on the young woman out of any sense of misogynistic rage, but because he came to see that she was coniving and disloyal, and she was suggesting that he kill and eat his only loyal friend, his dog. It has been suggested that stories must be evaluated against a backdrop of the times in which they were written. I disagree. Good literature should stand on its own, and a stroy should be evaluated based on what it says and the backdrop of the times it describes. In _A Boy and His Dog_ we find a world in which the act of barbecuing the duplicitous young woman, barbaric by our civilized standards, may have made perfect sense to the protagonist. The story really made me think. I liked it then and still do today. Jim ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 01:19:04 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Catweasel Subject: Should one spit or should one swallow? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have been AWOL from these hallowed halls for several weeks, due to the need to earn money periodically to finance my REAl work. The weekend, I find, is far too short for my liking. Consequently my mail has been piling up, mainly uread and totally unanswerred, to an alarming level. Please, try to bear with me a minute, I know I had a point to make when I started this, but I have recently been diagnosed as suffering from CRAFT(1) disease, and it doesn't help. Ah, yes, Harlan Ellison has been discussed, sometimes disparagingly, over the last few days, starting, as near as I can gather, with "A Boy and His Dog." I feel the urge to add my two penn'orth to this discussion. "A Boy..." in my opinion, stands on its own merits, irrespective of the period it was written in or that in which it is being read. The only period which is relevant is that in which it is set: post appocalypse. Sexism is irrelevant in an environment where personal survival is always in question. The dog is essential for the boy's survival, and is also his teacher. Consequently, the dog must take precedence in any decision making. Besides, the girl looked healthy and well fed, I am sure she was delicious. It could be argued that the boy should have looked beyond personal survival to species survival, and stayed with the girl. In our terms this is also sexist, but in the boy's environment feminism, along with most aspects of freedom, was an unattainable luxury. Hell, he didn't even have the right to live, but had to work hard at it. To judge Ellison sexist on the basis of "A Boy..." or much of his other work is to miss the point. Ellison's characters are too busy coping with their realities to worry about relatively minor concepts. It is pointless to worry about the quality of life if you haven't first ensured that you have sufficient quantity of same. On now to Mr. Ellison's personal behaviour. The man is certainly a genius. He is undoubtedly outspoken. He may seem childish at times; I have no problem with that. If he is sometimes rude then I am sure many of you are already aware that I am not likely to support a move to censure him on that point. Had I been in his place when confronted by the gum-chewing Mrs. Levy I might possibly have acted in a similar manner. I am sorry, Mike, but I do think that, however logical and valid the reason for the gum, your wife should have swallowed before speaking. Somebody, possibly John Campbell, once said of Harlan Ellison "He has the heart of a lttle boy... pickled in alchohol on his desk." (1) Can't Rember A Fucking Thing Trust me, I'm a doctor. Catweasel Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 00:04:26 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: WaterLuv Subject: Re: Should one spit or should one swallow? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-03-29 19:19:19 EST, CatWeasel writes: << Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. >> Dogs are, after all, a man's best friend. Diamonds are a woman's best friend. So which sex do you think is smarter? Jim Who's not ALWAYS sexist. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 10:38:22 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: harlan: a jerk or not a jerk? Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail4.wayne.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >In my opinion, telling another person to spit out her gum is a lot more >disrespectful than asking a question with a gum in your mouth. Who is >he, after all to tell her how to behave, her father? No, he's an individual who's discussing issues in a public forum. A certain decorum is to be maintained. I do not even entertain questions of people who are eating, swiging drinks, chewing gum, etc. in a *public* forum. Private is a different matter, but Harlan's right. - G ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 10:46:20 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail4.wayne.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >I really am missing something here......HOW is chewing gum >disrespectful????? And what level of respect do you think Mr Ellison >deserves and yourself for that matter? I believe you are both just human >beings like the rest of us are you not. If someone judges another as fit to >engage in thoughtful conversation, I would submit that that is being pretty >darn respectful in this day and age. (see postings on guns and children: >the modern days response to disrepect). It's all connected, Donna. Our civilization has become extremely disrespectful of one another. Perhaps he was just as disrespectful for pointing out the gum chewing, but I don't think a student or participant at a lecture is paying attention to what's going on if their eating. I'm not going to discuss how JavaScript works with the girl in the front row popping her gum - she's loud, rude and a distraction from the purpose of the meeting. But, that's IMHO. Ellison deserves the same respect that I deserve and that you deserve: If you were on a panel, you would not find me chewing gum while asking you a question... - G ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 02:21:08 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: Should one spit or should one swallow? Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail4.wayne.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit ><< Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too > dark to read. >> > >Dogs are, after all, a man's best friend. Diamonds are a woman's best friend. >So which sex do you think is smarter? I do actually prefer dogs... - G ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 10:50:20 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail4.wayne.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit > Isn't Mr. Ellison a little old to be acting like the---what was the term >he was pushing for so long?---"enfant terrible" of the science-fiction >community? And "10 year old genius" is right...which is behavior considered >a bit slow for a man in his 60's. Who else is going to do it? We've stagnated. Ellison was able to take one the Campbellian writers, but no one's taken on the New Wave (Cyberpunk was an unfortunate reactionary blip on the map). Ellison has to be dethroned before he moves on from the "enfant terrible." I don't see it happening anytime soon. - G ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 02:38:09 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail4.wayne.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >A couple of things about the episode were bothersome, however. First of >all, it isn't entirely clear that an informal public lecture, where the >speaker is bouncing around all over the place, swearing, making extreme >comments, behaving like an absolutely brilliant, if manic 10 year old genius, >and generally being entertaining as all get out, operates under the same >rules of old fashioned decorum as a formal elementary school class room >does. Also, it was abundantly clear that the episode, complete with >Ellison's insistence that she spit the gum into his hand (!), was >primarily intended as theater of embarrassment rather than a lesson in >manners. We're talking Don Rickles here, not Emily Post or Ms. Manners. Fair enough: yes, that's Ellison going too far. I don't know if I would liken him to Don Rickles, nor would I liken him to Post, but beyond a simple "Could you please spit out the gum?" (or something like it) is too far. Don't forget, I did call him a "pinhead"...he is a jerk of the uptmost degree... But I'd still like to have his talent... - Geoffrey ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 08:13:30 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Maryelizabeth Hart Subject: Re: dueling quotes? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Catweasel stated: >Somebody, possibly John Campbell, once said of Harlan Ellison "He has >the heart of a lttle boy... pickled in alchohol on his desk." But I believe it to be Robert Bloch who said it of himself, and the end phrase was "in a jar on my desk." Anyone able to reference this? 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: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:46:31 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joel VanLaven Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980328123648.007b07b0@cs.net.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 28 Mar 1998, Julieanne wrote: > I have to agree with you Edward, I often find myself seeing American > culture as truly "alien" and fascinating, partly because it is so > all-pervasive through electronic and print media - and so there is this > constant exposure to it in other countries. I suspect it is partly due to > the country being originally settled by Puritans, with a whole host of > double-standards...one example which comes to mind is the extremes of > television: one the one hand, free-to-air TV is so aesthetically *clean* > morally, (even toothpaste ads have no hint of bathroom nudity etc)...but > flip-the-switch to cable and its anything goes.. Actually, the US wasn't just settled by Puritans. They were just so full of themselves that they impressed their cock-eyed history onto the entire country. In actual fact the US was "settled" by a large conglomeration of groups, some fleeing religous persecution (the Puritans, Quakers, and Catholics come to mind), some fleeing criminal and/or economic problems at home, some capitalists out to exploit something new, some brought as slaves, some brought as soldiers, and some explorers, free spirits, and lovers of the new and exciting. Of them all I see the Puritans as simply being the most obnoxious, snooty, and full of it. I don't see them as particularly seminal or important. I think that when we went looking in obnoxious snootiness for symbols of our longevity and high-browed nature (laughable indeed) we ended up there. I think that now that we are more sure of ourselves versus Europe and have more of our own culture (however screwy) we are dropping the pretense. I think there are other reasons for our being so screwy that don't have anything to do with the Puritans in particular. -- Joel VanLaven ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:58:21 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Penelope Gibbs Organization: UGA College of Vet. Med Subject: Re: Should one spit or should one swallow? A good dog is worth his or her weight in diamonds...from a woman who finds diamonds ok but prefers dogs anyday of the week. Penny > >Dogs are, after all, a man's best friend. Diamonds are a woman's best > friend. > >So which sex do you think is smarter? > > I do actually prefer dogs... > > - G > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 12:03:27 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Penelope Gibbs Organization: UGA College of Vet. Med Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk > > In a "formal elementary school class room" no one would have been chewing gum. > > > > As someone who has spent a lot of time in elementary classroom I'm afraid > I have to tell you--theory ain't practice. :^)ex > > Mike > In a "formal elementary school class room" all the gum would be stuck underneath the desk seat. :-> Penny ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 11:25:48 -0500 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: Gum respect & manners In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII > On Sat, 28 Mar 1998, Julieanne wrote: > >...but > > flip-the-switch to cable and its anything goes.. surely not!! as a "resident alien" I am frequently shocked by how Puritanical things are *even* on US cable tv!! Foul language is bleeped or looped, and nudity is obscured with that weird blurring effect. Of course, the programs that originally contained foul language and nudity are still aired, but in such eviscerated form that I was initially stunned when I first broke down and started paying the outrageously high US cable fees. (This sort of thing never happens in Canada, she said wistfully, knowing full well that a host of others would chime in to offer counter-evidence ... but you can still say "fuck" on the CBC!!) By way of addressing the "manners" question more directly, though, I, too, have always thought of conversations with gum in the mouth to be the height of rudeness - in fact I find the whole practice of chewing gum quite obnoxious - so you can imagine my surprise when I discovered that students took it as an affront to their individual liberty when I asked them, please, to not spit chewing tobacco in class!! yours anecdotally, 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: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 12:53:19 -0600 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: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk In-Reply-To: <6C1B5093BE8@calc.vet.uga.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Penelope Gibbs wrote: > > > In a "formal elementary school class room" no one would have been chewing gum. > > > > > > > As someone who has spent a lot of time in elementary classroom I'm afraid > > I have to tell you--theory ain't practice. :^) > > > > Mike > > > > In a "formal elementary school class room" all the gum would be stuck > underneath the desk seat. :-> > > Penny > But, of course. That way it's still available when you want to chew it again later in the day :^( Mike ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 17:30:40 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: Should one spit or should one swallow? In-Reply-To: <92191e46.351f27df@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, WaterLuv wrote: > Dogs are, after all, a man's best friend. Diamonds are a woman's best friend. > So which sex do you think is smarter? I have a dog and no diamonds, none of my female friends has diamonds either. You must be be hanging out woth wrong women. I think, people who would consider a diamond a "friend" might need therapy, regardless of their gender. Besides, the most common sex stereotype is that women like cats, for their independence. I personally like spiders the most. Snakes are OK, too. Going back to your comparison, the male version of diamonds (the favorite material posession) are cars. What is smarter? Beats me. I like weapons, computers, and high-tech audio-visual devices. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:35:16 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Frances Green Subject: Re: Story about guns (was:Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not...) I think it was Brown: I'll try to remember to take a look in my ancient yellowing collections. Wow, was he an SF writer! (Well, speculative, anyway!) Masses of wonderful short-shorts as well as more regular length. One of the first "grown-up" SF stories I ever read was "The Angelic Angleworm", where the universe was tangled with a erratic transcendental Linotype machine. Offhand, I don't recall any female characters other than the usual peripheral wives-and-girlfriends. On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 12:58:54 EST AnnyMiddon writes: >In a message dated 98-03-27 15:46:39 EST, E.F.James@READING.AC.UK >writes: > ..... >Also was the story written by Bradbury? On the one hand, it does >sound like >him, OTOH I keep thinking it was someone else. (The name Fredric >Brown keeps >bobbing up in the cesspool of my brain when I think of this story, but >my >memory is so spotty I'm not even sure Brown was an sf writer.) Damon >Knight >almost sounds right, too. > >Anny Middon >AnnyMiddon@aol.com > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:41:01 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Frances Green Subject: Re: Off topic Dogs OK, since this has gone so far off topic: If a dog's name is Reilly (or Riley?), does that dog lead a dog's life, or the life of Reilly (or Riley)? (Does anyone know who the Reilly (or Riley) was who led such an idyllic life? Is it, now I come to think of it, a British rather than an American saying?) Is a dead dog much of a friend? Probably diamonds would be better, as not subject to death. But a live dog might well be trained to fetch diamonds! On Mon, 30 Mar 1998 02:21:08 +0000 "Geoffrey D. Sperl" writes: >><< Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, >it's >too >> dark to read. >> >> >>Dogs are, after all, a man's best friend. Diamonds are a woman's best >friend. >>So which sex do you think is smarter? > >I do actually prefer dogs... > >- G > _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:44:14 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Joel VanLaven Subject: Re: Should one spit or should one swallow? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Marina wrote: > Going back to your comparison, the male version of diamonds (the > favorite material posession) are cars. What is smarter? Beats me. I like > weapons, computers, and high-tech audio-visual devices. Whooo-Hooo. There is nothing better more appealing than an abrasive, lethal, female techno-dweeb :) Sorry, I couldn't resist especially as I'm not wholly kidding :) -- Joel VanLaven ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 09:44:31 +1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Julieanne Subject: Re: Gum and guns, respect & manners In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:25 A 30/03/98 -0500, you wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Mar 1998, Julieanne wrote: >> >...but >> > flip-the-switch to cable and its anything goes.. > > surely not!! as a "resident alien" I am frequently shocked by >how Puritanical things are *even* on US cable tv!! Foul language is >bleeped or looped, and nudity is obscured with that weird blurring >effect. Of course, the programs that originally contained foul language >and nudity are still aired, but in such eviscerated form that I was >initially stunned when I first broke down and started paying the >outrageously high US cable fees. (This sort of thing never happens in >Canada, she said wistfully, knowing full well that a host of others >would chime in to offer counter-evidence ... but you can still say >"fuck" on the CBC!!) LOL - now *that* is funny :-) Nonetheless, it also illustrates the "alienness" that can be experienced/observed between cultures which have a common language and technological level, when most people would automatically assume there to be few appreciable differences. > > By way of addressing the "manners" question more directly, >though, I, too, have always thought of conversations with gum in the >mouth to be the height of rudeness - in fact I find the whole practice >of chewing gum quite obnoxious - so you can imagine my surprise when I >discovered that students took it as an affront to their individual >liberty when I asked them, please, to not spit chewing tobacco in >class!! This issue of 'manners' and alienness, reminds me of Elgin's 'Native Tongue' series - in which I recall a scene whereby a group of aliens were offended by being addressed by a human male. On a personal anecdote level, I felt offended by the rudeness of close jostling of people in Asian cities, in queues for example at ATMs, banks and office buildings etc, (where there was no need for crowding), and forcing myself to tolerate this "alien" difference in what is considered acceptable levels of invasion of 'personal space' in public places. Another one I recall vividly (but very fondly), was spending a weekend with an Italian family: with guests present, they went to great pains to 'dress for dinner' etc - the height of formality and good manners in their preparation for a formal dinner-party. However, meal-time conversations were punctuated by nearly all the people, of all ages and genders talking-with-their-mouth-full, constantly interrupting each other, various people getting up and moving around without excusing themselves etc:)) The following week I was visiting relatives in the UK where such behaviour would have been the ultimate in rudeness in such a formal social environment. Lastly, with regard to gun-carrying cultures such as the USA - I am reminded of when I first attempted to drive in Los Angeles. It was difficult enough to adjust to driving on the 'wrong' side of the road, from the 'wrong' side of the car, and often finding myself in the wrong exit lanes and making mistakes because of unfamiliarity. I was struck however, by the courtesy of other drivers. I had assumed from watching American TV that US drivers were just as bad-mannered and rude as everywhere else. When I mentioned this to my American friends, they just nodded and said "thats because you never know who is carrying a piece". Julieanne ppp98@cs.net.au ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 17:49:28 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: <199803300720.CAA01812@mail4.wayne.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 28 Mar 1998, Geoffrey D. Sperl wrote: > I'm not > going to discuss how JavaScript works with the girl in the front row popping > her gum - she's loud, rude and a distraction from the purpose of the > meeting. This reminds me of my high school in the Soviet Union where a girl could be sent home for wearing makeup, because "she is distracting other students", and "obviously did not come to school to study, looking like that." People "insulted" by chewing gum, should watch the Pink Floyd's movie "The Wall". That's exactly about the world they'd like to live in. And thank God that the time of their dominance has passed. If a teacher tells me to remove my gum, I'll tell him to remove his attitude. Or invent a time machine and go back to the 19th century. I am sure he could find the students he wants in some Victorian school for orphan girls, where he could slap them with a ruler for chewing in his class and get away with it. > But, that's IMHO. Ellison deserves the same respect that I deserve and that > you deserve: If you were on a panel, you would not find me chewing gum while > asking you a question... You can be picking your nose for all I care. I am interested in what you have to say, not in which one of the thousands meaningless and mutually exclusive "concepts of decent behavior" currently existing in the world you happened to be raised. The "manners" are just as arbitrary and part of individual choice, as religion. And if I cannot tell you how to pray, what to eat, and what clothes to wear in accordance with my version of faith, you cannot tell me, when I can chew and when I can't. In the place I came from, it's "indecent" to have long hair and jewelry for men. It's considered "disrespectful" to others. I wonder how much you would like to be beaten up on the street for having an earring. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 21:31:28 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "joseph santini: MPG" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" People, people... Having been given the slap-to-the-hand treatment by our wonderful list admin, i'm gonna keep this both short and feminist. How in the nine hells is chewing gum similar to wearing makeup, having long hair, or any of the other things mentioned below? It's distracting and annoying, and visibly so. Someone wearing makeup is not going to be constantly moving their jaws, nor is s/he going to have something obstructing his/her vocal chords when s/he speaks. Neither is a person with long hair. Im sick to death of people equating freedom, liberality, and "free will" with NOT having to conform to certain manners. I AM a student, I'm a feminist, I'm gay, I've rebelled against practically everything I can think of, and I still would not be inconsiderate enough to speak with gum in my mouth or chew while listening to a lecture in the name of personal freedom. It's just too much like killing someone in the name of personal freedom ("He can't tell me how to pray, you can't tell me how to be pacifist.") Of course I'm taking it to an extreme here, but think about it, okay? At 05:49 nox 3/30/98 -0600, you wrote: >On Sat, 28 Mar 1998, Geoffrey D. Sperl wrote: > >> I'm not >> going to discuss how JavaScript works with the girl in the front row popping >> her gum - she's loud, rude and a distraction from the purpose of the >> meeting. > >This reminds me of my high school in the Soviet Union where a girl could >be sent home for wearing makeup, because "she is distracting other >students", and "obviously did not come to school to study, looking like >that." > >People "insulted" by chewing gum, should watch the Pink Floyd's movie >"The Wall". That's exactly about the world they'd like to live in. And >thank God that the time of their dominance has passed. > >If a teacher tells me to remove my gum, I'll tell him to remove his >attitude. Or invent a time machine and go back to the 19th century. I >am sure he could find the students he wants in some Victorian school for >orphan girls, where he could slap them with a ruler for chewing in his >class and get away with it. > > >> But, that's IMHO. Ellison deserves the same respect that I deserve and that >> you deserve: If you were on a panel, you would not find me chewing gum while >> asking you a question... > >You can be picking your nose for all I care. I am interested in what you >have to say, not in which one of the thousands meaningless and mutually >exclusive "concepts of decent behavior" currently existing in the world >you happened to be raised. The "manners" are just as arbitrary and part >of individual choice, as religion. And if I cannot tell you how to >pray, what to eat, and what clothes to wear in accordance with my version >of faith, you cannot tell me, when I can chew and when I can't. > >In the place I came from, it's "indecent" to have long hair and jewelry >for men. It's considered "disrespectful" to others. I wonder how much >you would like to be beaten up on the street for having an earring. > > >Marina > > > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society > happens to be selling at the time." > Naomi Wolf > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * If you are so foolhardy as to ask a Whileawayan child to "be a good girl" and do something for you: "What does running other people's errands have to do with being a good girl? "Why can't you run your own errands? "Are you crippled?" -Joanna Russ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * joseph santini haverford college '01 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 21:42:21 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "joseph santini: MPG" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980330213128.007248a8@haverford.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I want to add: in the spirit of feminism, which is at essence making oneself heard, how is chewing gum (which obstructs the voice and makes it impossible for people like me (read deaf) to read your lips aiding anything at all? Communication doesn't work like that... * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * If you are so foolhardy as to ask a Whileawayan child to "be a good girl" and do something for you: "What does running other people's errands have to do with being a good girl? "Why can't you run your own errands? "Are you crippled?" -Joanna Russ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * joseph santini haverford college '01 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:16:08 -0600 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: Off topic Dogs In-Reply-To: <19980330.184102.18782.1.jjggww@juno.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Frances Green wrote: > OK, since this has gone so far off topic: > > If a dog's name is Reilly (or Riley?), does that dog lead a dog's life, > or the life of Reilly (or Riley)? > > (Does anyone know who the Reilly (or Riley) was who led such an idyllic > life? Is it, now I come to think of it, a British rather than an American > saying?) > I don't know where the phrase actually originated, but there was a 1949 movie called The Life of Riley starring William Bendix. I think it was also a TV series with Bendix in the early 50s. Mike Levy ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:15:09 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail2.wayne.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >People "insulted" by chewing gum, should watch the Pink Floyd's movie >"The Wall". That's exactly about the world they'd like to live in. And >thank God that the time of their dominance has passed. Marina, you are so far off in left field you no longer know what this discussion is about, do you? - G ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 17:32:28 +1000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Julieanne Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Marina wrote: > >You can be picking your nose for all I care. I am interested in what you >have to say, not in which one of the thousands meaningless and mutually >exclusive "concepts of decent behavior" currently existing in the world >you happened to be raised. The "manners" are just as arbitrary and part >of individual choice, as religion. And if I cannot tell you how to >pray, what to eat, and what clothes to wear in accordance with my version >of faith, you cannot tell me, when I can chew and when I can't. I agree Marina - I have no problem with addressing gum chewers etc, unless I am having difficulty understanding them, or I am made aware that the majority of surrounding participants are having problems...then I might politely point out that the gum-chewing is causing a problem with communication, and ask if they could do something about it? It takes the same amount of time, as making an insulting or embarrassing response... ...as they say, when in Rome... or when we are in Arkansas, is it socially acceptable to admire the children's guns....at the same time as we declare the offensiveness of their gum-chewing? Julieanne ppp98@cs.net.au ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 05:31:59 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: donna simone Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>People "insulted" by chewing gum, should watch the Pink Floyd's movie >>"The Wall". That's exactly about the world they'd like to live in. And >>thank God that the time of their dominance has passed. > >Marina, you are so far off in left field you no longer know what this >discussion is about, do you? > >- G My my, you are really in a lather about this aren't you? Where is the list post topic cops when you need them. I must come to Marina's defense. I think her comments are spot on. Though I am sure she will have her own words for you when she reads this enlightening commentary. I believe we are all speaking on opposite sides of the track. I do not for a minute debate that behaviors that are off-putting cause a listener to not listen: gum-chewing, eating with one's mouth open, etc. However, it is in the eye of the beholder and clearly we make different choices about how to respond. Mostly according to how we were raised. These are issues of "politeness". What I was reacting to was Mr Ellison manipulation of the inherent power of being "The Speaker" to intentionally humiliate another prefectly reasonable human being. And when everyone jumped in defending the request to not chew gum. I was astonished. The issue for me is about using one's acquired powers or stature to put someone else down, especially on the pretext of asking someone to be polite. That is an abuse of power. Ellison was trying to humiliate the woman. That is how it was received by the observers and he could not have done it without using the trivia of a politeness standard. I would have to say G that you have no idea of what my original point was yourself. If you want to sling hash that is... Can we all stop this gum thing and get back to books now? donna > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 12:45:22 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "M.J.Norman" Subject: Re: FSFFU: The Screwfly Solution Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > The whole thing makes me very glad that, for all its shortcomings, >I live in >the UK, where at least guns are not generally available. >Lesley Yes, it's nice to live somewhere where one can (almost) assume that most of the people one sees on the street probably do not have a gun (either in their pocket or at home). However, in my nearly five years living in the UK, I had to smile at the phrasing of your last sentence. If not guns, there is certainly an ample supply of misogynist men in the UK. :-) At least, that's my impression! Monica ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 12:45:45 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "M.J.Norman" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> > In a "formal elementary school class room" no one would have been >>chewing gum. >> > >> >> As someone who has spent a lot of time in elementary classroom I'm afraid >> I have to tell you--theory ain't practice. :^)ex >> >> Mike >> > >In a "formal elementary school class room" all the gum would be stuck >underneath the desk seat. :-> > >Penny You bet! So I always found it doubly amusing that the kids who put it there got so grossed-out when asked to move the desks around!:) Monica ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:16:08 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Laura Quilter Subject: Fwd: New Discussion Group; New Discussion List Comments: To: feministsf@uic.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U) >Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 14:43:14 -0600 >Reply-To: Utopias and Utopianism >Sender: Utopias and Utopianism >From: Peter Sands >Subject: New Discussion Group; New Discussion List >Comments: To: "SFRA-L@ebbs.english.vt.edu" , > iafa@ebbs.english.vt.edu >To: UTOPIA-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU >X-Status: > >Hello all, and apologies for crossposting. > >At long last we have a Listserv dedicated to the newly formed MLA >Discussion Group on Science Fiction, Utopian and Fantastic Literature. >The group held its first meeting in December 1997 in Toronto during the >MLA convention. > >If you think you might be interested in joining the Discussion Group >(which helps us justify our continued existence to the powers-that-be at >MLA headquarters), then please subscribe to the new list. If you're not >interested, please accept my apologies for this intrusion. > >. . . > >If you *are* interested, here is how to subscribe: > >1. Address an email message to: > >listserv@csd.uwm.edu > >2. Leave the subject line blank. > >3. In the body of the message, inserting YOUR ACTUAL NAME in the >appropriate spot below, write the following: > >subscribe sfuf yourfirstname yourlastname > >4. Send the message. > >IF you do not receive a welcome message from the list, or you receive an > >error message, or you otherwise suspect that your bytes have been >bitten, ask for assistance by emailing me at: > >sands@uwm.edu > >Cheers, > > > >-- >Peter Sands, U. Wisconsin-Milwaukee >sands@csd.uwm.edu || http://www.uwm.edu/~sands >Writing Center || http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/English/wcenter/ >English Department || http://www.csd.uwm.edu/Dept/English/ >Epiphany Project || http://mason.gmu.edu/~epiphany >414.229.4416 || 414.229.2643 (fax) > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 09:36:58 -0500 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: Off topic Dogs In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII I'm working with a really shaky memory here, but isn't the Life of Riley a novel by A.J. Cronin? e. On Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:16:08 -0600 Michael Marc Levy wrote: > On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, Frances Green wrote: > > > OK, since this has gone so far off topic: > > > > If a dog's name is Reilly (or Riley?), does that dog lead a dog's life, > > or the life of Reilly (or Riley)? > > > > (Does anyone know who the Reilly (or Riley) was who led such an idyllic > > life? Is it, now I come to think of it, a British rather than an American > > saying?) > > > I don't know where the phrase actually originated, but there was a > 1949 movie called The Life of Riley starring William Bendix. I think it > was also a TV series with Bendix in the early 50s. > > Mike Levy 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: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 10:36:29 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Frances Green Subject: Re: Story about guns "The Weapon" by Fredric Brown, Astounding Science Fiction 1951 (Included in anthology "Honeymoon In Hell") Last line: "He thought, only a madman would give a loaded revolver to an idiot." Other SF work includes Martians Go Home, The Lights in the Sky Are Stars, The Mind Thing. _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 17:56:33 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: FSFFU: The Screwfly Solution >However, in my nearly five years living in the UK, I had to smile >at the phrasing of your last sentence. If not guns, there is certainly an >ample supply of misogynist men in the UK. :-) At least, that's my >impression! Point taken! But do let me know of those fabled realms, countries which do not have an ample supply of misogynist men... The trouble with the UK is that sometimes these all seem to have become High Court Judges and think that a) a man whose wife is unfaithful and taunts him is perfectly justified in throwing her out of the window b) women who are raped are probably 'asking for it' c) women who kill husbands who had been violently abusive to themselves and their children are evil monsters who should be banged up for life. I am slightly encouraged that this sort of thing is not inevitable by the historical researches of 2 friends of mine, one of which has turned up an early C20th magistrate of impeccable establishment credentials who was a vigorous supporter of the suffrage movement and allied campaigns for women's rights, and another a second magistrate (actually the father of another friend of mine!) who took cases of child sexual abuse seriously way back before WWII and actually wanted to make things less traumatic for children giving evidence. Lesley Lesley_Hall@classic.msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 15:48:01 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: AnnyMiddon Subject: A Boy and His Dog Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I've been meaning to take a break and post about A Boy and His Dog. I liked the novella, and I liked the movie well enough to buy the DVD. Catweasel beat me to it, but had different things to say about it: In a message dated 98-03-29 19:19:19 EST, pvbuckland@BIGFOOT.COM writes: > "A Boy..." in my opinion, stands on its own merits, irrespective of the > period it was written in or that in which it is being read. The only > period which is relevant is that in which it is set: post appocalypse. Yes, the story and the movie are both very sexist. But it's a very blatant and open sexism, and one which (as Catweasel points out) derives from its dystopian setting. Given the post-apocalyptic world, the sexism of the characters (both on the surface and in the weird underground community) is woefully probable. (Any list subscriber who is naive enough to doubt this is sentenced to spending a month as a female line worker in the Mitsubishi plant in downstate Illinois.) In such circumstances, I can see the sexism as a dire warning. I'm far more bothered by sexism presented in a by-the-way sort of manner. I'm not sure when A Boy... was written, but the movie came out in 1975, and I'd guess the novella is from the early 60's. In terms of dramatic presentations, this puts A Boy... in roughly the same time period as television's Star Trek (the original series). In Star Trek, only one woman had a regular post on the bridge -- Lt. Uhura, and she was the communications officer, the future equivalent of a telephone operator -- which, along with schoolteacher, nurse, secretary, beautician and a very few others, was considered "a suitable job for a woman." If Kirk asked for the opinion of his staff, it wasn't Uhura's he asked for. Nearly every other woman on the show was there solely to provide sex to the male characters. In terms of written sf of the period, I was going to refer to Asimov's Susan Calvin stories, but I've talked about them before and don't want you to think I'm like the piano player who knows only one song. So instead I'll talk about the novella Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card. This was published in 1977, so it's a bit later than A Boy..., but since both were very popular novellas, it serves as a good example. In Ender's Game, the entire Battle School and Command School -- Ender, his army of children, the officers -- are male. Not a single female appears in the novella, in any role. (In the book-length version, Card changes this, making some of Ender's army girls, and giving Ender's sister a major role. But IIRC all the military officers are still men.) No explanation is ever given for why this group would be all male. This is the kind of sexism that really bothers me. The presumption that underlies these works is that it's the natural order of things that males be in control, and hold all the positions of power. These groups (Card's army and Roddenberry's Star Fleet decision-makers) are *of course* all male, they seem to say; why ever would it not be so? No, give me the upfront sexism of A Boy and His Dog anyday. Anny Middon AnnyMiddon@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 15:40:45 -0800 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Sandy Candioglos Subject: Re: A Boy and His Dog MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD5CBB.5FA34FE0" ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD5CBB.5FA34FE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wow..and I just read Ender's Game again the other day...how timely! In response to the below; in the book-length version of Ender's game, = there is (as you said), ONE female who is in the military school who is = mentioned; she's really really good, but she's definitely the exception. = When Ender asks the guy who takes him away to the military school if = there are any girls at the school, he is told that there are a few, but = not very many, because they don't have the "killer instinct", the = "right" drives to succeed in the harsh world of the military school. = This is presented as an "of course that's the way it is" (remember, = Ender's only 6 at this point, so isn't expected to understand this, so = it's OK to have to explain it). =20 I've put this down to Card growing up Mormon in Utah, where it is a = given that there are some things that women do and other things that men = do, and you don't do things that are the province of the other gender, = and that's just the way it is. I don't LIKE the offhand sexism in a lot = of his books, but I can understand it, and to me, it doesn't detract = (much) from what an incredible storyteller he is. I read his books for = the language and the story, and not for the message, and I enjoy them = greatly on that level. I've read most of his work that's been published = as books, and the only ones I haven't liked were most of the = "homecoming" series; I really liked the first one, Memory of Earth, but = I felt it went downhill from there; probably, for me, because I started = to lose the "story" aspect, and get mired in the "message" after about = the middle of the second book. I couldn't make myself keep reading by = the time I got partway into the third book. -Sandy >In terms of written sf of the period, I was going to refer to Asimov's = Susan >Calvin stories, but I've talked about them before and don't want you to = think >I'm like the piano player who knows only one song. So instead I'll = talk about >the novella Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card. This was published in = 1977, so >it's a bit later than A Boy..., but since both were very popular = novellas, it >serves as a good example. >In Ender's Game, the entire Battle School and Command School -- Ender, = his >army of children, the officers -- are male. Not a single female = appears in >the novella, in any role. (In the book-length version, Card changes = this, >making some of Ender's army girls, and giving Ender's sister a major = role. >But IIRC all the military officers are still men.) No explanation is = ever >given for why this group would be all male. >This is the kind of sexism that really bothers me. The presumption = that >underlies these works is that it's the natural order of things that = males be >in control, and hold all the positions of power. These groups (Card's = army >and Roddenberry's Star Fleet decision-makers) are *of course* all male, = they >seem to say; why ever would it not be so? >No, give me the upfront sexism of A Boy and His Dog anyday. >Anny Middon >AnnyMiddon@aol.com ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD5CBB.5FA34FE0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+Ii4XAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAbAIAAAEAAAARAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAAdwAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAEZvciBkaXNjdXNzaW9u IG9mIGZlbWluaXN0IFNGLCBmYW50YXN0aWMgJiB1dG9waWFuIGxpdGVyYXR1cmUAU01UUABGRU1J TklTVFNGQExJU1RTRVJWLlVJQy5FRFUAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgADMAEAAAAcAAAA RkVNSU5JU1RTRkBMSVNUU0VSVi5VSUMuRURVAAMAFQwBAAAAAwD+DwYAAAAeAAEwAQAAAEAAAAAn Rm9yIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gb2YgZmVtaW5pc3QgU0YsIGZhbnRhc3RpYyAmIHV0b3BpYW4gbGl0ZXJh dHVyZScAAgELMAEAAAAhAAAAU01UUDpGRU1JTklTVFNGQExJU1RTRVJWLlVJQy5FRFUAAAAAAwAA OQAAAAALAEA6AQAAAAMAcToAAAAAHgD2XwEAAAA+AAAARm9yIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gb2YgZmVtaW5p c3QgU0YsIGZhbnRhc3RpYyAmIHV0b3BpYW4gbGl0ZXJhdHVyZQAAAAIB918BAAAAdwAAAAAAAACB Kx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAEZvciBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIG9mIGZlbWluaXN0IFNGLCBmYW50YXN0 aWMgJiB1dG9waWFuIGxpdGVyYXR1cmUAU01UUABGRU1JTklTVFNGQExJU1RTRVJWLlVJQy5FRFUA AAMA/V8BAAAAAwD/XwAAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACLJcBBIABACAAAABSRTogWypGU0ZGVSpd IEEgQm95IGFuZCBIaXMgRG9nAPMIAQWAAwAOAAAAzgcDAB8ADwAoAC0AAgBdAQEggAMADgAAAM4H AwAfAA8ADwAXAAIALgEBCYABACEAAAA0MUU0N0E1QzAzQzhEMTExQjYwNjAwQTBDOTIxMkE1QgD7 BgEDkAYAoAsAACIAAAALAAIAAQAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAAAAALACkAAAAAAAMALgAAAAAAAwA2 AAAAAABAADkAgKa2bP5cvQEeAHAAAQAAACAAAABSRTogWypGU0ZGVSpdIEEgQm95IGFuZCBIaXMg RG9nAAIBcQABAAAAFgAAAAG9XP5sdFx65EPIAxHRtgYAoMkhKlsAAB4AHgwBAAAABQAAAFNNVFAA AAAAHgAfDAEAAAAeAAAAc2NhbmRpb2dAbWFpbGJveC5qZi5pbnRlbC5jb20AAAADAAYQhpbm2wMA BxAsCQAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAAV09XQU5ESUpVU1RSRUFERU5ERVJTR0FNRUFHQUlOVEhFT1RIRVJE QVlIT1dUSU1FTFlJTlJFU1BPTlNFVE9USEVCRUxPVztJTlRIRUJPT0stTEVOR1RIVkVSU0lPTk9G RU5ERQAAAAACAQkQAQAAAGAIAABcCAAAEA8AAExaRnX5XxU/dwAKAQMB9yACpAPjAgBjgmgKwHNl dDAgBxNNAoB9CoAIyCA7CW8yzDU1AoAKgXVjAFALAwZjAEELYG5nMTAzAjMLpiBXb3cuLgEAcGQg SSBqdXNrBUAJcGEVQEUVMASQJ4kEIEdhB4AgYWcLcWggdGgW0G8XUQXAZORheRUALmgU4BdAB3G4 bHkhCqIKhAqASQOguQlwc3ACIA+wF0BvF0NmYhjAFOA7IBclBuBvKGstbAnwZxdQIHbvBJAAkAIg F4BmFhcXAAeAniwXQglwG1AEIChhBCCSeQhgIHMLcGQpHgDAT05FIGZlAMAcIFwgdxhQHnIXJW0D EGn5AZByeR8gD3Ab4AMgIFXfB4ACMBzRCYAbQHMXYBZxrRXRbBjQI6ZnG+BkHgD8YnUFQCNUAQEL gCFgGMFhF0NleGNlBTAc0S4+IBTAF2ADoBYjFuBza3MEIBdSZ3UhoCBSAZBr7QeRaAdwFuB3GAAa diE+LwaQHhUKwBbRbiRxaXL6bAQgYQVAF1IhxB4AF2H7HoEagGwVQBdQLNQrxh/Renck1G4XkByC IaADgXl7JNEFkGEVkBphF2AhoGQ9AiAnBUAPgByQF0Miaz8DEBwgBcALgBWgC4BjdM4iHgMysAUQ Z2gzsBfg/wUQHJAuAh8gEvAmoAmAG1b7D4IccHcFsC5BHREqLwbw3ScRVClgIKEEIHAZ8SKx9zWh HsEDkSIdEQWgCHAxU38s0BZxF1IpsiFgHnE0kCj/CXAHgAbQBJAeABYmAiAj8VY2LMQ44m8LgHQe AHN3IHIx8iaAcAWQOXIagXU/FjIVoBUiPfI+lDryT0u/GnIyNBqQP0ELYjuhKScRdRkLJzJRcCUB PfMx0Hf7FzEakEMLER2wA2AD8BPgfT/wcAXQBbAEYELRA6BV/QGQaB4AIFAeQzvCL1EscP8ckBcy Lps+sBbBPfET4Cgi/yzRNqAioTHBLCE24RejSfr/StQeABUiHvIx1EsRSfor8vMXUjkQb3YzgRdx NxQXlP5nCfAEgU0EOsUVgzs7JxHjFWAx1ExJSx/AF1MBIPcPgBUxD7B4BAApgBchL2D/CQAFQB0R OKIb0kDhJPIVYP8xIAOgQAkhYFE1GpAd4juxbzHQB5BNww/AcgDQBUAo8m0S8GgpH9ADYSBBTsL3 RsIFAAmAaQJgLSEagCGQ/yXxMwItw1MjFdNWFx/QBbH7F1ITwnUW8CwSLlJcBU0E/zASXnYHgR8w UNBNBBVgCfD8am8mIymACcEs0CPxHOH/LnMcIByQOFJEExXTBGAVoftV5Tahazq2GvAnYURgAmD/ BAAXYDmTVlVfhj1TIvEEIL8VYDIyMfIhUCkgFUB3HkL/ZTYygxhQB4AFoCEwE+A0kPsPsAiBcxtA XWMj4moEF1LvJbBAQWkCHgBNH/BcQR0D7wrAF1BWph/gbDvBSpEisX9E4ylgI+BalB4jG0BPcWL/ AaAY0B4AXnId4jEGFWBAUf8AID+kCQAxVDKwXCM0kB7Avz9iTQRQ0EyBLIA1qCJhdT91kQGAJ8IG 4ERzN1JkZP8gITcFD7AFoBUxG9JTIzpRXy5AMfIAwCkgKlB5D7Bs3x0gKSAmsBXDRgJiJiQYku8V USSQBUAKsXQ7cwIwGpRfPfFFkXpzGQonIC0GEWT6eRkKPhNxAUBPcSXwWgHbGcF4QW09MR0gdwUQ AkD9J2FzHSA3BT9gBRAkshVg/ymwHaE+UUYgGoEJcB/gS8GtGpBBAJAEYHYWcVMVkH8AcBkFE4KC ZQ/gggxFcGy/T6FcE2xxVqVEIgGQbGoi/3iHKYAa8F5xX2Qx1CmwcLH3HvIagwuAa4eviL9EECmA v2oCTyQHMDAQOQALYHkXwfUgUmswEHc9NSLxPqET4P0nEVMgcTNRFeJEEHFBi1L/eHSOn4+vF1Iw EGQxC2AWG9sk0SGgTw+gHOFTBaACQB9FYzhmhWJnCBchMTk3vjc+kpWflq9BQy9gYjuxjwtgeEIu cQOgQSBCYpD/GCEk1U+zBuAcYWpjMFMaIP9EYAtgBcCX9UDhIWCcn52vf2xBNOI5siSDJnEWsAtQ ZX9/+6PvgjyYfCZDIsEeUUJ/LNBjUBbQmeAh4xUiCFBt5wOBFUCr5S0tFhQtoQQA/6efqK8KwHvg HQIPcAMQNLD3CfAz1FRhaSagD6CtcivyuyACJxFOMCEvYKDxZyAh+R/lYXA/YA+RG1GuX69vv5e5 WOFVYSxBA2Cy8yiC4v8brxyzHgBFcw9xE+A08kDC/7Uvtj97kUYCSaMdGbBzLHP/dhU00EYCFiYA kJRBJ9EwkV9igAXAuIO777z/QlbSSfxSQxbglMI3SrHXSWMYkLtxQSKhLlqAszFCZG4s0Pcc0h6B ZCFywq/Dv0hUXnL/IFAmIh6BRcFGQTageyEa4f/FQ7LTyW8P0IGvWgE4lhdS/74hNuNU5S5zI7Wh UrIiB4D3OGNPUgeQdabgyKMucs4//8p/QAMhULtjOTFl49DVLNH/QUOXsyzQCHAHQBeACyAXwf83 A0wJIBFmktUv1j8XIXoh/1nQLYIVIhhQLkHFVhogAJD/ItKDUxogamHTtBpRzLMekf9Fcr9F3A/d HxUiCAB5QAnwzzyBIZCHIiFxIEYcIHaB9wWBBAAc0S17kg+gWoAr8voqOicqzZceA+LP499U0f9i 4TUiGAAbQMwiySLNBTux9zASzXE+sD+nP+pvgoSzQP8eAEhSIpEXQ0ZAA1FwsVTllx0RoBNLM0ge gURvRiCfLDEX8u5v73+ChEFuLEF+TXkxAiD0//YP9xL3ZED+YThBa8H3z89GghoZBBBxAgD98AMA EBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAAAeAEIQAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAwCAEP////9AAAcwgKD64fpcvQFAAAgwgKD6 4fpcvQELAACACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAADhQAAAAAAAAMAAoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABG AAAAABCFAAAAAAAAAwAFgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAUoUAAHQQAAADAAmACCAGAAAAAADA AAAAAAAARgAAAAABhQAAAAAAAB4AEIAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFSFAAABAAAABQAAADgu MDIAAAAACwARgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAADoUAAAAAAAADABKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAA RgAAAAARhQAAAAAAAAMAE4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABiFAAAAAAAAHgAUgAggBgAAAAAA wAAAAAAAAEYAAAAANoUAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAB4AFYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAADeFAAAB AAAAAQAAAAAAAAAeABaACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA4hQAAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgA9AAEA AAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAADAA00/TcAABh2 ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD5CBB.5FA34FE0-- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 20:19:07 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: <199803310514.AAA00685@mail2.wayne.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Geoffrey D. Sperl wrote: > Marina, you are so far off in left field you no longer know what this > discussion is about, do you? > > - G Of course not, how could I? Indeed, they always told us in grade school that gum was an imperialistic invention of the Decadent West, designed to destruct the young brains of children of the Communist world. I think there were even posters illlustrating the decay caused in young bodies and minds by the gum, whith evil Westerners cheering on the background. Since I liked chewing gum, apparently there went my brain. So how could I possibly keep track of the discussion? Seriously, there was a time when some people could use their authority to insult others in the name of "manners", but fortunately, the world is evolving. I feel sorry for you, G. Because unless you change your judgmental attitude, you gonna hate it here in the 21st century. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:33:57 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "joseph santini: MPG" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 08:19 nox 3/31/98 -0600, you wrote: >On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Geoffrey D. Sperl wrote: > >> Marina, you are so far off in left field you no longer know what this >> discussion is about, do you? >> >> - G > >Of course not, how could I? Indeed, they always told us in grade school >that gum was an imperialistic invention of the Decadent >West, designed to destruct the young brains of children of the Communist >world. I think there were even posters illlustrating the decay caused in >young bodies and minds by the gum, whith evil Westerners cheering >on the background. Since I liked chewing gum, apparently there went my >brain. So how could I possibly keep track of the discussion? Ah. Hurt by childhood episode, our stalwart heroine insults the (perhaps aged? I'm thinking sean connery-ish) British schoolteacher on the basis that he would require her not to chew gum in his classroom. Not that he's implying the gum is evil or anything, mind, just that he thinks it's disrespectful and impedes communication. Which gum does. Try reading lips when someone's got gum in their mouth. Magnificently impossible, I assure you. > >Seriously, there was a time when some people could use their authority to >insult others in the name of "manners", but fortunately, the world is >evolving. I feel sorry for you, G. Because unless you change your judgmental >attitude, you gonna hate it here in the 21st century. Ah. Our stalwart heroine asserts that manners no longer have any importance at all - that any behavior is licensed appropriate - and angrily concludes that our meek and mild British arch-enemy (james bond movies come to mind) has a provincial and judgemental attitude because ::HE WOULD REQUIRE SOMEONE TALKING TO HIM IN A FORMAL CLASSROOM OR LECTURE SETTING TO NOT CHEW GUM.:: Apparently there are no sacred times. One would imagine the heroine would feel perfectly comfortable with the idea of her family and friends chewing gum at her funeral. Loudly. Clacking, even. Stop bashing geoff, marina, and look at what youre saying. He didn't imply you were stupid, just that you were ranting. Which you are. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * If you are so foolhardy as to ask a Whileawayan child to "be a good girl" and do something for you: "What does running other people's errands have to do with being a good girl? "Why can't you run your own errands? "Are you crippled?" -Joanna Russ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * joseph santini haverford college '01 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 20:35:57 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980330213128.007248a8@haverford.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 30 Mar 1998, joseph santini: MPG wrote: > How in the nine hells is chewing gum similar to wearing makeup, having long > hair, or any of the other things mentioned below? It's distracting and > annoying, and visibly so. Someone wearing makeup is not going to be > constantly moving their jaws, nor is s/he going to have something > obstructing his/her vocal chords when s/he speaks. Make up on girls, just as long hair on guys, _was_ considered "distracting and annoying", "not only to the teacher, but also to themselves and other classmates". Even if it did not "obstruct the vocal cords", it supposedly "encouraged flirting" which was a lot worse. It's exactly the same kind of mentality as the opposition to the gum. So they sent the girls to wash their faces in the bathroom and come back to class. Or cut a lock of hair on boys' heads to make them cut it all off. Besides, if you have trouble understanding me because of my gum, you can _politely_ tell me about it. Or just live with it. If I have trouble listening to someone because he has bad breath, it does not mean I'll tell him to go and brush his teeth first. (However, if he's ordering me in front of other people to spit out my gum, I probably will, even if he does not have bad breath). Anyway, this all comes down to the good old discussion about "intolerance towards intolerance" which can run forever. Marina "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 20:40:51 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Marina Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980331213357.007125ec@haverford.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Joseph, I don't mind my family chewing on my funeral. I would definitely chew on yours. And if you feel insulted by this, get help. Marina On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, joseph santini: MPG wrote: > At 08:19 nox 3/31/98 -0600, you wrote: > >On Tue, 31 Mar 1998, Geoffrey D. Sperl wrote: > > > >> Marina, you are so far off in left field you no longer know what this > >> discussion is about, do you? > >> > >> - G > > > >Of course not, how could I? Indeed, they always told us in grade school > >that gum was an imperialistic invention of the Decadent > >West, designed to destruct the young brains of children of the Communist > >world. I think there were even posters illlustrating the decay caused in > >young bodies and minds by the gum, whith evil Westerners cheering > >on the background. Since I liked chewing gum, apparently there went my > >brain. So how could I possibly keep track of the discussion? > > Ah. Hurt by childhood episode, our stalwart heroine insults the (perhaps > aged? I'm thinking sean connery-ish) British schoolteacher on the basis > that he would require her not to chew gum in his classroom. Not that he's > implying the gum is evil or anything, mind, just that he thinks it's > disrespectful and impedes communication. Which gum does. Try reading lips > when someone's got gum in their mouth. Magnificently impossible, I assure you. > > > > >Seriously, there was a time when some people could use their authority to > >insult others in the name of "manners", but fortunately, the world is > >evolving. I feel sorry for you, G. Because unless you change your judgmental > >attitude, you gonna hate it here in the 21st century. > > Ah. Our stalwart heroine asserts that manners no longer have any importance > at all - that any behavior is licensed appropriate - and angrily concludes > that our meek and mild British arch-enemy (james bond movies come to mind) > has a provincial and judgemental attitude because ::HE WOULD REQUIRE > SOMEONE TALKING TO HIM IN A FORMAL CLASSROOM OR LECTURE SETTING TO NOT CHEW > GUM.:: Apparently there are no sacred times. One would imagine the heroine > would feel perfectly comfortable with the idea of her family and friends > chewing gum at her funeral. Loudly. Clacking, even. > > Stop bashing geoff, marina, and look at what youre saying. He didn't imply > you were stupid, just that you were ranting. Which you are. > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > If you are so foolhardy as to ask a Whileawayan child > to "be a good girl" and do something for you: > "What does running other people's errands have to > do with being a good girl? > "Why can't you run your own errands? > "Are you crippled?" > -Joanna Russ > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > joseph santini > haverford college '01 > "Femininity is code for femaleness plus whatever society happens to be selling at the time." Naomi Wolf ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:28:48 EST Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: WaterLuv Subject: Re: Off topic Dogs Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit In a message dated 98-03-30 23:16:25 EST, you write: << > OK, since this has gone so far off topic: > > If a dog's name is Reilly (or Riley?), does that dog lead a dog's life, > or the life of Reilly (or Riley)? > > (Does anyone know who the Reilly (or Riley) was who led such an idyllic > life? Is it, now I come to think of it, a British rather than an American > saying?) > I don't know where the phrase actually originated, but there was a 1949 movie called The Life of Riley starring William Bendix. I think it was also a TV series with Bendix in the early 50s. Mike Levy >> Off Topic and Going to the Dogs, Heh. OK then, I'll take up the challenge and tell you, being one of the few on the list old enough to know, that the saying, "the Life of Reilly" comes from a Vaudevillian song made popular in the 1880s by Pat Rooney. It's a bit of a corruption of the original. Reilly was actually O'Reilly and the song was titled, "Are You the O'Reilly?" Are you the O'Reilly who keeps this hotel? Are you the O'Reilly they speak of so well? Are you the O'Reilly they speak of so highly? Gor blime me, O'Reilly, you're looking well. Old Jim ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:31:56 +0000 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: "Geoffrey D. Sperl" Subject: Re: Gum respect (was:harlan: a jerk or not a jerk?) Comments: To: "fantastic.&.utopian.literature"@mail3.wayne.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >Ah. Hurt by childhood episode, our stalwart heroine insults the (perhaps >aged? I'm thinking sean connery-ish) British schoolteacher on the basis >that he would require her not to chew gum in his classroom. Not that he's >implying the gum is evil or anything, mind, just that he thinks it's >disrespectful and impedes communication. Which gum does. Try reading lips >when someone's got gum in their mouth. Magnificently impossible, I assure you. I've been called an old soul, but this one takes the cake... :) I'm 25, quite American (born in Texas, raised in Detroit; though I've got some Scot blood), don't have Sean Connery hair (but I'm sure I will within the next 50 years), and only get to teach when I'm not butting heads with the faculty of a college - otherwise I'm a problem solver: I clean up the problems computer nerds make...I'm still trying to figure out how to kill off that virus Microsoft marketed as "Windows 95"... And bravo, Joe. I don't see how anyone could think I was saying chewing gum is the work of the devil and that we're all doomed to the Hell found in "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." Never said anything of the nature. The Cinnaburst wrappers thrown across my floor would be evidence to the contrary. I simply said I agreed with Ellison asking for the gum to be removed, and that I ask ( and do) the same. However, I *do not* agree with how Ellison did it. That was the entire point of the conversation: Ellison and how we react to him. Remember folks? It's an SF list... - Geoffrey ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:48:14 -0600 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Michael Marc Levy Subject: On chewing Gum and Harlan Ellison, an apology In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear fellow list members, I would truly like to apologize for ever having brought up the subject of Harlan Ellison and chewing gum on this list. Sincerely, Mike Levy