From LISTSERV@listserv.uic.edu Fri Aug 25 10:56:03 2000 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 12:53:32 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at University of Illinois at Chicago (1.8d)" To: Laura Quilter Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG9910B" ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 11:35:10 -0700 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Comments: RFC822 error: Incorrect or incomplete address field found and ignored. From: Laura Quilter Subject: request for comments re: gay gene Comments: cc: UdisKessler@aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed hey fem-sf people - fyi - please respond directly to UdisKessler@aol.com >From: UdisKessler@aol.com >Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 10:39:56 EDT >Subject: gay gene >To: lquilter@igc.apc.org >X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 25 > >Dear Laura, > >My partner & I are writing an article on radical responses to the "gay gene" >controversy. Would you be willing to forward this request to your list? We >are both avid Utopia readers, and are very interested to hear what women who >think about radical feminist visions of the future think about the biological >origins (or lack thereof) of sexuality(ies). > >Thanks for any help you are willing to offer. > >Phoebe Lostroh & Amanda Udis-Kessler > > >Dear feminists, > >We are a sassy queer female couple working on an article about LGBT/queer >responses to the "gay gene" controversy. We feel that radical voices are >usually left out of the debate, or, if present, are not taken seriously. >This article represents a chance to include radical voices with other >perspectives and have them taken seriously, and will likely be published in >an anthology on genes/genetic testing and community. > >Would you be willing to tell us what you think of the so-called "gay gene" >or other kinds of biological arguments regarding the origins of (homo- or >bi-)sexuality(ies)? It's up to you whether we use organizational or >personal names as provided, use pseudonymns, or simply don't use names at >all. Any information you can give us regarding your political philosophy and >convictions or your socioeconomic status and gender identity would also be >helpful, so that we can draw connections between perspectives on the "gay >gene" controversy and the social and political demographics of those we >contact. > >If you would like an electronic copy of the article, let us know. We could >also send a copy of the final product to your list via the listserv manager, >if that's okay with her. > >Thank you for any assistance you can provide! > >Amanda Udis-Kessler and Phoebe Lostroh > >replyto UdisKessler@aol.com or >lostroh@student.hms.harvard.edu ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 20:13:47 +0100 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Lesley Hall Subject: Re: request for comments re: gay gene MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Wasn't there a lot of debate around this during discussions of Tepper's _The Gate to Women's Country_? Suggest a check of the list archives as I'm sure this has come up before. As a historian of sexuality I find it very dubious - for earlier arguments using 'biological science' as understood at the time ('inborn inversion' 'endocrine problems') a good volume with a critical take is Vernon Rosario (ed) Science and Homosexualities (there's a review of this on my webpage, see below!). Lesley Hall lesleyah@primex.co.uk website http://homepages.primex.co.uk/~lesleyah ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:23:12 -0500 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Todd Mason Subject: Re: request for comments re: gay gene: Hall MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" The notion of one (1) gene determining all of this, or even of a single gene being responsible for predilictions, seems possible but highly unlikely, and like most biological answers to sociological questions too much desired for avoiding "blame." Or, in some other matters, for justifying neglect (i.e. THE BELL CURVE). Thanks for the link. -----Original Message----- From: Lesley Hall [mailto:lesleyah@PRIMEX.CO.UK] Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 3:14 PM To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] request for comments re: gay gene Wasn't there a lot of debate around this during discussions of Tepper's _The Gate to Women's Country_? Suggest a check of the list archives as I'm sure this has come up before. As a historian of sexuality I find it very dubious - for earlier arguments using 'biological science' as understood at the time ('inborn inversion' 'endocrine problems') a good volume with a critical take is Vernon Rosario (ed) Science and Homosexualities (there's a review of this on my webpage, see below!). Lesley Hall lesleyah@primex.co.uk website http://homepages.primex.co.uk/~lesleyah ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 18:12:25 -0400 Reply-To: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" Sender: "For discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature" From: Frances Green Subject: Re: Linguistics and Science Fiction MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For any who may not know about Suzette Haden Elgin's "Linguistics and Science Fiction" newsletter, which is a very interesting potpourri (with, of course, a strong feminist viewpoint), details are available from ocls@ipa.net I've subscribed to this for some years, and always find it quite engrossing. She is preparing to switch to email distribution, except for those who can only use the printed version. Frances