Subject: File: "FEMINISTSF LOG0205C" ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 01:42:12 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lori Selke Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry -- Men/boysinsportsindustry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <3CE16A4B.B4A85F5F@verizon.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 14 May 2002, Priscilla H. Ballou wrote: > Lori Selke wrote: > > Nevada's regulation of prostitution is an interesting example, > > actually. Women who work legally, in the brothels, work under a > > great deal of restriction. They pay out a lot of fees to the house > > and to the government; they work long shifts (some are on call 24 > > hours a day) and are often required to live on the premises. It's a > > good example of how legalizing an industry (any industry) doesn't make > > it fair or free from exploitation. This is one of the reasons why some > > activists are now advocating for decriminalization of prostitution, > > rather than legalization. I think it's also another place that's > > ripe with speculative fiction possibilities, too. > > Interesting. I tend to forget about the difference between > decriminalization and > legalization. Can you remind me of those details? (I've got the issue of > recreational drugs on my brain about this, too, although that's off topic for > this list.) Decriminalization can mean two things -- either repealing all the laws against an activity, or refusing to enforce any such laws on the books. Similarly, legalization can mean two things -- either just that an activity is allowed by law (this would then mean more or less the same thing as the first meaning of decriminalization, above), or that an activity is regulated by the law code. Special taxation would be an example of this. Lori -- selk@io.com, selk@sirius.com, http://www.io.com/~selk "This is no time of remorse. This is a time for cookies!" --Love and Rockets -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 04:34:15 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <3CE1BD91.52DAA2F@verizon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 09:44 PM 5/14/02 -0400, Priscilla H. Ballou wrote: >Christine Ethier wrote: > > > In a message dated 5/14/2002 2:51:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > vze23t8n@VERIZON.NET writes: > > > >> Prostitution is legal in some countries and, in the US, in some > >> states. (At > >> least Nevada. Any others?) > > > > Are you defining prostitution as sex for money or as sex to get ahead > > at work? > >Ah! Very good question. I had meant exchange of money for sex, but >there is a continuum. I wonder. Can one view adhering to "professional >dress codes" as a form of prostitution? Putting up with the kind of >sexual harassment which isn't far enough over the line to be >litigatable? And so on. How about getting a splinter stuck in one's thumb as a carpenter? The reason they call it work is that it's hard, not because it's fun. >Or am I stretching it too far? Probably. >Or is this wandering too off the topic of speculative fiction? Probably not, considering its ubiquity, especially in SF by men. It's not only Heinlein who turned into a dirty old man as he aged; Larry Niven has done the same and the character of the whore features prominently in the later works of Frank Herbert as well. Niven created an entire economy based on sex in Ringworld and his Wu character spends most of his time getting laid in the execrable sequels to the shallow but mildly interesting first in the series. Wu got to take the whore back home with him in the first book, but lost her to the State despite (or perhaps because of) her ability to cloud men's minds (Lamont Cranston, eat your heart out...) once she got them into bed. Herbert's characters do the same, but here the mystic secrets are held by female sexual adepts who enslave men with their wily pussy power. Fascinating, isn't it? That both Niven and Herbert posit pseudo-Oriental esoteric disciplines that allow women to control men sexually? Especially when we see the exact opposite in every society in the world. This is a trivial change rung on the same old whiny rapist tune, that the woman "made him do it," whatever "it" might be, from incestuous assault to murder. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 08:27:05 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Priscilla H. Ballou" Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lee Anne Phillips wrote: > At 09:44 PM 5/14/02 -0400, Priscilla H. Ballou wrote: > > >Ah! Very good question. I had meant exchange of money for sex, but > >there is a continuum. I wonder. Can one view adhering to "professional > >dress codes" as a form of prostitution? Putting up with the kind of > >sexual harassment which isn't far enough over the line to be > >litigatable? And so on. > > How about getting a splinter stuck in one's thumb as a carpenter? > The reason they call it work is that it's hard, not because it's fun. But the splinter comes from the very nature of the work. Skirts and high heels have *nothing* to do with what one does at one's desk while wearing them. Neither does smiling nicely at offensive or unwanted remarks, etc. Certainly work is hard, but putting up with the attendant bullshit shouldn't have to be. Priscilla -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 08:31:41 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Sarah Young Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Macho Men Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Lee Anne Phillips > >At 01:46 PM 5/14/02 -0400, Carey S Fontaine wrote: >>The pressure for women in the extreme (women in the sex industry) is >>comparable to the pressure for men in the extreme (men in the sports >>industry). Or said differently, the ultimate woman is a completely sexual >>feminine woman. The ultimate man is a completely masculine macho man. > >Henry Kissinger and Donald Trump never had any real >problem getting dates so I think this assessment may be >a bit naive. In the context of Native Tongue, we see that >the most "desirable" men are, in fact, those who are the >smartest and most skilled at building constituencies, which >is exactly the sort of competencies that make for >reproductive "fitness" in our own society. It's only >little boys and shallow women who find macho musclemen >attractive; most grownup women find competence, >success, and personality far more attractive than >mere looks. > I definitely agree that this is true, but, just as women feel the pressure from media and society to be and look a certain way, men do too. I know many wonderful men who still struggle with the ways in which they "fall short of" the media ideal. One of the main differences, I believe, is that feminism has created a safe space for women to communicate about these issues, and draw support from each other. The men I have known have felt much more isolated in their body image problems because common social interactions between men don't really create a space for that dialogue. I'm a large woman (somewhere between 250 and 275 lbs). My brothers and my most recent primary partner are also large. I received support from the feminist community, and from art and writings inspired by feminism, that allowed me to develop a strong and comfortable relationship with my body, societal ideal or not. Although I went through the shitty high school body image problems that most of us have faced, I was able to escape that largely due to other women, and feminist perspectives. James, Matt, and Mike have very little access to that support network, unfortunately, and the struggle to believe that they could be attractive to romantic partners has been an ongoing issue for all three of them. All three are highly intelligent, caring, loving people, and it's painful to see that when they look at themselves, they don't see what attracts partners, but only what might repel them. This is one small example of why I truly the believe the old standby that feminist approaches benefit everyone, not just women, because we are all hurt (in different ways) by the current system and societal pressures. --Sarah _________________________________________________________________ Join the world^Òs largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 07:56:17 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Michael J. Lowrey" Organization: The Working Class Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry --Men/boysinsportsindustry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Priscilla H. Ballou" wrote: > > Christine Ethier wrote: > > Are you defining prostitution as sex for money or as sex to get ahead > > at work? > > Ah! Very good question. I had meant exchange of money for sex, but > there is a continuum. I wonder. Can one view adhering to "professional > dress codes" as a form of prostitution? Putting up with the kind of > sexual harassment which isn't far enough over the line to be > litigatable? And so on. An article in this week's issue of BARRON'S defends discrimination on the basis of attractiveness, (specifically mentioning secretaries and receptionists), on the grounds that such work is about presenting oneself pleasantly to the customer! As a feminist, as a union steward for a 90%-female bargaining unit, and as a not-attractive person[1] whose day job includes receptionist duties, this one particularly disgusts me. Will this be the next stage in the anti-feminist backlash? Is this part of the path to the NATIVE TONGUE future? -- Michael J. Lowrey, Office Manager University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee [1]http://www.uwm.edu/MilwaukeeIdea/CC/OrngMike.jpg -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 08:56:01 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Sarah Young Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry -- Menboys in sports industry Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Alison Croggon > >I'm afraid I'm with Lee-Anne with her comments on the sex industry. >The commodification of the body (both masculine and feminine) and the >resultant reductive materialism is disastrous for human beings. To >commodify something as intimate as sexuality is particularly >problematic, and illustrates starkly social power relationships >precisely where people are most vulnerable. This is why women and >young men are in particular at the wrong end of those power >relationships (think of male relationships in prison). It bleeds out >in the soft porn of the advertising industry, cleavages selling cars >and so on, into practically every aspect of our lives. So we're >awash with images of sex which are radically alienated from actual >sexuality (none of the nakedness on show in magazines in the >supermarket looks like the paintings of Lucien Freud, for instance). >A ghastly depilated absence. The fake orgasm. The woman as passive >consumable item. Where is real sex in all of this, I wonder? I >mean, with all its ecstatic light and real darkness and mutual >mutability. It's all fluid free, hair free, anaesthetised. The >legal drug industry preys on women, making them docile when their >psyches rebel against this mundane pornography. I guess you can draw >some parallel there with drug use in sports, the victims of EPO &c, >who die of heart attacks and liver damage in their 30s in pursuit of >a mirage of masculinity... Yes, you can filter all this out, but the >culture does that for you in a nice soft focus way, and surely >thinking about something includes trying to see what is glamorised >out of perception? > >Best > >Alison > I very much agree on this... Modeling especially is a hot-button issue for me - I see commonly consumed magazines such as Elle, Glamour, Cosmo, and the plethora of girl-teen magazines as horrible reinforements of societal beliefs about beauty and attractiveness (frequently revolving around perfect bodies and female passivity). There's a good deal of porn like this too; I generally completely avoid porn directed by Blake, because it's all soft-focus models having pretty pseudo-sex. On the other hand, it's perfectly possible to find porn of real folks having genuinely fun sex. You have to be willing to do a bit of hunting, and it can be rather hit-or-miss, but there's lots out there, as my porn collection can attest. It's most common in women-produced porn, especially in the work of queer women, but it's even out there amidst the dregs of mainstream commercial porn. I'm basically not a capitalist at all, and I hope to see a world where commodification of human beings can come to an end. Where I differ from others in my views on this is that I envision a world that still includes sex work of various kinds, but within a completely different power structure than we currently have. I'd love to see this in regards to the sports industry as well. There are types of socialization and abuse even in high school and younger, that deeply upset me, and I believe desperately need to change. --Sarah _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 09:26:48 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Sarah Young Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry -- Men/boysinsportsindustry Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Carey S S Fontaine > >I agree Lori, Nevada is no safe haven, because of the basic illegal nature >of this work. I saw program on the Mustang Ranch. Hmmm. That was 24/7 >type work. This would tend to make person focus on their body a lot. Like >sports. > I think that there are major issues of stigmatization here. It's extremely difficult to fight for fair employment and fair legislation when the work in question is so highly stigmatized. There's an excellent example of some of these struggles on "Live Nude Girls Unite", about the unionization of the Lusty Lady in San Francisco. It's a great documentary, and I highly recommend it. The conditions in Nevada are deplorable - the regular physical checkups mandated by law are frequently performed by medical personnel who make no effort to hide their disdain for their clients, there are restrictions on where the women can work and live. Here's what I found on the actual code: http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-244.html#NRS244Sec345 Unfortunately, all it says, basically, is that individual counties have the right to impose whatever restrictions they see fit, so it's not very useful in clarifying the actual conditions in which these women work. Speaking of sci-fi and sexuality, though... How many folks are familiar with Spider Robinson's work. A good deal of it is relatively light humor, but I find his approach to sexuality absolutely wonderful. --Sarah (wishing for a world in which Lady Sally's Place is a possibility) _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 08:26:08 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Laura Quilter Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry -- Men/boys in sports industry Comments: To: Carey S Fontaine Comments: cc: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII in a sense, this parallel has been explored -- gladiator slave fiction. marion zimmer bradley wrote some in her very early years, and more recently severna park's second novel also used the gladiator slave themes. i can't come up with other novels off the top of my head but it's also a theme that's been explored in gay porn [the written kind, at least] and certainly in the movies. in this [sub-genre?], the gladiators are sexualized and fetishized for their skill & violence; depending on the novel's set-up there may be more or less sexual exploitation as well; and of course different novels have focuses on different genders .... although it's not a gladiator, Carey's description of "the ultimate man" & "the ultimate woman" reminded me of Piercy's WOMAN ON THE EDGE OF TIME -- the couple from the alternative (dystopic) future ... he is big, buff, a warrior, surgically enhanced for violence; she is vapid, useless, wholly sexualized, and surgically enhanced to be ultra-"feminine" [e.g., exaggerated hourglass figure] ... finally - my opinion on these matters is that of course exploitation of sexuality looks & is different from exploitation of people for their body in sports & other entertainments; and different from exploitation of people's bodies in labor / wage slavery; and different yet from exploitation of people's bodies within personal systems [e.g., the "family"]. there are huge, vast differences, and they don't exist just between these gross categories of exploitation: there are also differences within the categories -- e.g., differences between sex-work in nevada, and sex-work in the queer/sex-positive community in san francisco, and sex-work in thailand, and sex-work in 19th century london; or differences between serfs in 18th century russia, factory workers in 19th century ohio, maquiladoras and office-workers and graduate students and housewives; differences between the experiences of white people in those roles and black people, english & non-english speakers, fat women & thin, etc., etc. ... and let us not ever forget that there are differences in the experiences of all of the individuals' experiences -- people enjoy, hate, suffer, lose hope, resign themselves, find satisfaction despite -- to different degrees at different times in their own lives. but all this difference does not mean it's not useful to analyze what these systems of exploitation have in common. it can be incredibly useful. those who do it will hopefully be careful to not generalize harmfully or in a totalizing fashion, but it can still be a useful tool. laura quilter On Tue, 14 May 2002, Carey S Fontaine wrote: > Lee Ann Phillips wrote: > > "The sex "industry" is far more abusive of girls and women than *any* > sport is abusive of the men who play." > > Boys start playing sports around the same age little girls enter the sex > industry! I'm not sure why the parallel nature of women in sex industry > and men in sports industry cannot be explored in sci-fi. If fiction is > not a place to examine our society then what forum is? > > I never said the match was exact. Of course, sports is legal and that > helps alot. Yes, men would be respected more in patriarchial culture, > no matter what they do. Yes, the underbelly of sports is not revealed. > It seems all these athletes live on in heavenly bliss. And perhaps, it > takes a deeper history of sports from the female audience to appreciate > the symbolic, if not direct links. > > The pressure for women in the extreme (women in the sex industry) is > comparable to the pressure for men in the extreme (men in the sports > industry). Or said differently, the ultimate woman is a completely > sexual feminine woman. The ultimate man is a completely masculine macho > man. > > Again, any sci-fi books explore this topic? > > > > > ________________________________________________________ > Outgrown your current e-mail service? > Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. > http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus > > -------------------------------------------------- > This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for > discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To > unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to > LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > > Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > Laura Quilter / lquilter@exo.net -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 16:23:13 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry --Men/boysinsportsindustry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Perhaps not Priscilla if compared to weekend sports watching. Sci-fi story/novel has only to compare the subjects. However, complete emmersion in their fields (women/girls -- sex industry, men/boys -- sports industry) provides tension for a excellent story. Speculation: the story will be found in romance sci-fi? Any thoughts? Carey S. Fontaine -- On Tue, 14 May 2002 21:44:49 Priscilla H. Ballou wrote: >Christine Ethier wrote: > >> In a message dated 5/14/2002 2:51:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, >> vze23t8n@VERIZON.NET writes: >> >>> Prostitution is legal in some countries and, in the US, in some >>> states. (At >>> least Nevada. Any others?) >> >> Are you defining prostitution as sex for money or as sex to get ahead >> at work? > >Ah! Very good question. I had meant exchange of money for sex, but >there is a continuum. I wonder. Can one view adhering to "professional >dress codes" as a form of prostitution? Putting up with the kind of >sexual harassment which isn't far enough over the line to be >litigatable? And so on. > >Or am I stretching it too far? > >Or is this wandering too off the topic of speculative fiction? > >Priscilla > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 16:32:58 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Macho Men Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 14 May 2002 19:30:23 Lee Anne Phillips wrote: "It's only little boys and shallow women who find macho musclemen attractive; most grownup women find competence,success, and personality far more attractive than mere looks." Nice try Lee Ann, But this isn't a cross-gender argument. Men, if asked, identify with masculine. Women, if asked, identify with being feminine. This is why marketing promotes traditional roles and people buy into these sterotypes generation after generation. Try to sell women, weights, Art of War by Sun Tzu, war video games and see what happens? We know Barbie sells mostly to girls, who identify with being feminine. Same as GI Joe, or He-Man, which gets back into how to raise gender sensitive children. :) Cliche: Women like bad boys more than nice boys. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 16:42:18 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry --Men/boysinsportsindustry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks, Lori, "Decriminalization can mean two things -- either repealing all the laws against an activity, or refusing to enforce any such laws on the books." Decriminalization is a baby step toward legalization, sounds like to me. Worries me, who will 'refuse to enforce such laws on the books.' One administration refuses, next administration does enforce it. You know how it goes, similar to abortion debate. "Similarly, legalization can mean two things -- either just that an activity is allowed by law (this would then mean more or less the same thing as the first meaning of decriminalization, above), or that an activity is regulated by the law code. Special taxation would be an example of this." Decriminalization anchors the issue from plot point of view. It would be excellent opening of this sci-fi story type. Is there a special tax code on sports, anyone? If so, why not? Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 16:51:50 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hey! Lee Anne If you refer to Dune series by Herbert. That is #1 best selling sci-fi book of all time. That's my favorite sci-fi series. And those women controlled men with more than their "wily pussypower." This novel almost covers the subject heading. With the whore/prostitutes types and males sports contrasted. Later on in the Dune series you see women battling against the most male clones (with heightened physical abilities). Thanks for the insight. I had overlooked the Dune Series. I didn't see the Bene Gesserits as whores. They controlled men more with their kung-fu skills, minds and historical analysis of patterned behavior. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 16:59:00 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hmmm Priscilla. Lee Anne might be referring to restaurant work; you know the type high skirts, barely dressed cute clothes women serve food in. Hooters ring any bells! :) It might refer to other jobs whose very dress requires less clothes, like models wearing sheer dresses. Easily, this could be part of more comprehensive female character in sci-fi novel playing the whore and the sports jock. Boxers go around topless. Swimmers wear those speedos. I admit men do wear far more clothes than women. When men wear less clothes they are still considered more dressed than women. Men are afraid of the female body! It power of attraction?! :) Women would women/girls' sex work be less provocative if women topless were considered just as dressed or undressed as men. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:04:33 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Macho Men Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 15 May 2002 08:31:41 Sarah Young wrote: I definitely agree that this is true, but, just as women feel the pressure from media and society to be and look a certain way, men do too. I know many wonderful men who still struggle with the ways in which they "fall short of" the media ideal. One of the main differences, I believe, is that feminism has created a safe space for women to communicate about these issues, and draw support from each other. The men I have known have felt much more isolated in their body image problems because common social interactions between men don't really create a space for that dialogue." Excellent wording Sarah. I'm attractive myself, but I feel the pressure too. I'm more philosopher, writer, art type, but wrestled, swam, did track, gymnastics in junior h.s. and h.s. Men feel the pressure to be manly, workout, play and watch sports all the time. Hence the toys for boys and sports, which parallels the girls and sex pot image. Yes Femininism can benefit all, but we have to choose to let it. Now if those marketers are listening. ha ha. :) Carey S. Fontaine > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:12:00 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry -- Menboys insportsindustry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 15 May 2002 08:56:01 Sarah Young wrote: "I envision a world that still includes sex work of various kinds, but within a completely different power structure than we currently have." Yes. Humane sex work for women especially is doable somehow. I'd think the SF novel/story would tackled this under the subject heading. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:13:01 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Cynthia Organization: Prodigy Internet Subject: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I'm basically not a capitalist at all, and I hope to see a world where > commodification of human beings can come to an end. ... I envision a world >that still includes > sex work of various kinds, but within a completely different power structure > than we currently have. > --Sarah Sarah, I would like you to define what you mean by capitalism, especially since you associate it with the commodification of human beings. Human commodification existed milenia before capitalism as slavery, and later serfdom in feudal societies. I'd better establish my view of capitalism for clarity's sake. Capitalism is an economic system wherein production and distribution is privately and corporately owned. This means, to me that the choices of how spend and earn one's money--how much, on what, where, and with whom, is an individual's choice. Capitalism is not a political system although potical and social choices can be expressed through the individual's choice of how to spend and acquire money. The commodification of women has to do, I think, with religious views and laws which established women as property. The Ten Commandments basically makes women property by listing them among the things a man ought not to covet. The Christian conversion of Europe and then the Americas meant that Christian views of women as sinning Eves and property of Adams became part of secular law. Ireland's ancient Brehon laws, for example, assert rights for women that were later done away with when Ireland became Christian. (A wife can not be a slave; a wife has the right to be consulted on every issue; a wife can sue another party using her husband's assests or their joint assets for the legal fees without her husband's consent; a woman can own property and businesses; a woman can be elected sovereign over male contenders.) Christianity is an ascetic religion that teachess people they ought to go without sex, and if they can't go without have it carefully controlled by the religious authorities. To me this means all sorts of corruption is going to occur with sexuality. All healthy expressions of sexuality between consulting adults is going to be stigmatized to some degree with some of them crimes to this very day. This I think is has created the disaster which is the USA's, at least, current sexual culture. Women are property so their sex lives are services not expression of love or joy. Children are property so they also become required to perform sexual services and they are easily intimated into doing what they are told and shutting up about it too. Sex as something sinful becomes violent or candied porngraphic images rather than artistic expressions of human relating. Needed sexual services are scarce such as sex therapy and the unusual occupationof the woman here who works helping medical students develop skill in performing sexual medical proceedures. Sports become a way for people to become physical without being sexual, so naturally, until recently women were not allowed in sports either; women must not be physical, only sexually so to serve men. Sports is also used as the "opiate of the masses" to keep people talking about sports so that they won't be thinking and talking about other things (like how they are sexually repressed). The Sparrow bothered me for all these reasons. The Catholic Church sends a Jesuit mission to another planet. One man is thought to be Saintly and part of being a Saint is his celebancy. His saintlyness is apparent to all when he leads them in the first meeting with the aliens through his brilliance as a linguist. However, when one senitent species of aliens is murdering the infants of another senitent species, it is a Jewish woman in the group tries to stop the carnage by taking a child from its would be murderer and getttng the group to chant "We are many; they are few." OUr Saint is staying put in the protective center of the ring preyed upon sentient aliens. This Jewish woman's couragous act is not noted as saintliness. Also, the head of the group, an old Jesuit tells the MD 60 year old woman that the 26 year old (or so) tall young man should be the next leader and the woman agrees! (That really disgusted me.) Through the story the characters keep talking about baseball; this "proves" what down-to-earth good people they are and also shows how macho the Saintly Priest is. Although there is plenty of baseball talk, the MD woman who is also an anthropologist never considers what might happen when they introduce "gardening"--farming actually--to a culture that does not have it. They also never ask the alien people they meet any sexual questions other than who is male and female, so they have no idea of how reproduction and population concerns are addressed in this culture. Because they don't consider or ask about these things all but the Saintly Priest get murdered and he is put into a brothel to service the powerful other aliens. All these human characters are supposed to be highly intelligent but they make stupid mistake after stupid mistake while talking about baseball while blithely ignoring the implications of the alien's sexuality. And though I do find it realistic that those who talk sports tend not to be able to converse about anything else, or think about anythign else in detail, their baseball talk is not meant to show them as shallow and stupid. Although the book tries shows homosexuality as not negative, the homosexual in question does not ever have sex, and the hetersexual characters are never shown having sex outside of marriage. We are told of the terrible people who do have unmarital sex, and of course, a young man fresh out of college is a preferable as a leader to a fully educated professional woman of seasoned experience. And the young Jewish woman, what was her final role? Baby maker and preserver of babies of course. Cynthia -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:14:17 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry--Men/boysinsportsindustry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hmmm Michael, Fail to see what men in Barrons has to do with causing a feminist backlash???? Maybe a Menist backlash! Carey S. Fontaine -- On Wed, 15 May 2002 07:56:17 Michael J. Lowrey wrote: >"Priscilla H. Ballou" wrote: >> >> Christine Ethier wrote: >> > Are you defining prostitution as sex for money or as sex to get ahead >> > at work? >> >> Ah! Very good question. I had meant exchange of money for sex, but >> there is a continuum. I wonder. Can one view adhering to "professional >> dress codes" as a form of prostitution? Putting up with the kind of >> sexual harassment which isn't far enough over the line to be >> litigatable? And so on. > >An article in this week's issue of BARRON'S defends >discrimination on the basis of attractiveness, (specifically >mentioning secretaries and receptionists), on the grounds >that such work is about presenting oneself pleasantly to the >customer! As a feminist, as a union steward for a >90%-female bargaining unit, and as a not-attractive >person[1] whose day job includes receptionist duties, this >one particularly disgusts me. Will this be the next stage >in the anti-feminist backlash? Is this part of the path to >the NATIVE TONGUE future? > >-- >Michael J. Lowrey, Office Manager >University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee >[1]http://www.uwm.edu/MilwaukeeIdea/CC/OrngMike.jpg > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 07:32:50 +1000 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Alison Croggon Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <005e01c1fc55$4cd790e0$144b3841@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" At 5:13 PM -0400 15/5/02, Cynthia wrote: >I would like you to define what you mean by capitalism, especially since you >associate it with the commodification of human beings. Human commodification >existed milenia before capitalism as slavery, and later serfdom in feudal >societies. I'd better establish my view of capitalism for clarity's sake. >Capitalism is an economic system wherein production and distribution is >privately and corporately owned. This means, to me that the choices of how >spend and earn one's money--how much, on what, where, and with whom, is an >individual's choice. Capitalism is not a political system although potical >and social choices can be expressed through the individual's choice of how >to spend and acquire money. Well, we certainly live as some say in a post-capitalist society, since choice is withdrawn from the individual and into the abstractions of globalising corporations (the "defence" industry, IMF &c). Unless choice means 20 kinds of toothpaste. Zygmunt Bauman is interesting on all this, and on the alienations which happen to the individual in an individualised and fragmented society - From your description, I was sure The Sparrow must be intended to be ironic. He can't be serious! Best Alison -- "The only real revolt is the revolt against war." Albert Camus Alison Croggon Home page http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/ Masthead Online http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/ -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:37:00 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Priscilla H. Ballou" Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cynthia wrote: > Christianity is an ascetic religion that teachess people they ought to go > without sex, and if they can't go without have it carefully controlled by > the religious authorities. While there are certainly wide swaths of Christianity and Christians who hold this view, Christianity is not monolithic. Far from it. I know several Christian ministers and priests, as well as many lay folk, whose views are sex-positive and far from ascetic. I would encourage you not to generalize in this fashion. Priscilla -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:41:03 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Priscilla H. Ballou" Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alison Croggon wrote: > From your description, I was sure The Sparrow must be intended to be > ironic. He can't be serious! _The Sparrow_ is certainly far from flawless, but I think there may be other ways to read some of what was objected to. For instance, age and experience do not always equate to leadership skills. It's been too long since I read _The Sparrow_ (which I found harrowing to read but important) to get more specific. I don't know who the "he" is to whom you refer. _The Sparrow_ was written by a woman: Mary Doria Russell. BTW, I gather there are no spoiler conventions on this list? Is that correct? A major plot element was revealed in the message discussing this book. Priscilla -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 07:49:04 +1000 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Alison Croggon Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <3CE2D5EF.7EA2E053@verizon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sorry, Priscilla - as you can tell, I haven't read it. My question about irony was half serious; for example, the Jesuit wouldn't ask about the sexual life of alien beings because of his attitude towards sexuality, and so is sent to a brothel... Best A >Alison Croggon wrote: > >> From your description, I was sure The Sparrow must be intended to be >> ironic. He can't be serious! > >_The Sparrow_ is certainly far from flawless, but I think there may be other >ways to read some of what was objected to. For instance, age and >experience do >not always equate to leadership skills. It's been too long since I read _The >Sparrow_ (which I found harrowing to read but important) to get more specific. >I don't know who the "he" is to whom you refer. _The Sparrow_ was >written by a >woman: Mary Doria Russell. > >BTW, I gather there are no spoiler conventions on this list? Is that correct? >A major plot element was revealed in the message discussing this book. > >Priscilla > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. -- "The only real revolt is the revolt against war." Albert Camus Alison Croggon Home page http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/ Masthead Online http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/ -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:58:21 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Priscilla H. Ballou" Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Alison Croggon wrote: > Sorry, Priscilla - as you can tell, I haven't read it. My question > about irony was half serious; for example, the Jesuit wouldn't ask > about the sexual life of alien beings because of his attitude towards > sexuality, and so is sent to a brothel... He wasn't sent to a brothel. He was kept as a sex slave by the leader he'd been cultivating. Since apparently all spoilers are off, he (and all the earthers) had interpretted the transmissions they'd received on earth as beautiful songs, possibly of a spiritual nature. Rather, it turned out they were explicitly pornographic and their content related to rape. They had made unquestioned assumptions based on their own culture, and these turned out to be grievously wrong. Many died, human and other, and the Jesuit (whose name escapes me) spent years in the hell of the locked room where he was repeatedly raped because of it. Priscilla -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:26:45 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry -- Men/boys insportsindustry Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/14/02 2:22:43 PM Central Daylight Time, selk@IO.COM writes: << This is one of the reasons why some activists are now advocating for decriminalization of prostitution, >> Actually, advocating decriminalization of prostitution has been going on at least for 20 plus years among feminist activitists, if not longer.Decriminalization simply means, no law against it. Legalization means, usually, regulation of various sorts. The basic idea behind criminalization is simply not to penalize women for engaging in prostitution. -Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:03:15 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lori Selke Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry --Men/boysinsportsindustry Comments: To: Carey S S Fontaine Comments: cc: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 15 May 2002, Carey S S Fontaine wrote: > Thanks, Lori, > > "Decriminalization can mean two things -- either repealing all the laws against an activity, or refusing to enforce any such laws on the books." > > Decriminalization is a baby step toward legalization, sounds like to me. Worries me, who will 'refuse to enforce such laws on the books.' One administration refuses, next administration does enforce it. You know how it goes, similar to abortion debate. Not necessarily. One can revise legal penalties down to practically nothing, for example. If the penalty for prostitution were a $1 fine, you wouldn't find many police forces bothering to enforce the statute. And, of course, one can also legitimately argue that even if an activity is made entirely legal now, that doesn't guarantee that a future administration won't decide to make it illegal in the future, as well. Abortion is at least partially protected by the courts and the Constitution; the fight over recreational drug statutes (as a previous poster noted) would be a miore apropos parallel in this case. Lori -- selk@io.com, selk@sirius.com, http://www.io.com/~selk "This is no time of remorse. This is a time for cookies!" --Love and Rockets -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:16:10 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Laura Quilter Subject: women's languages question Comments: To: feministsf@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII does anybody know anything about the women's language in, i think, southern china? laura q -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 22:35:24 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: women's languages question Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 07:16 PM 5/15/02 -0700, Laura Quilter wrote: >does anybody know anything about the women's language in, i think, >southern china? Of course. It's called Nu Shu and was officially suppressed under the Communist regime in China, with many/most remaining examples burned or otherwise destroyed for any of several reasons, the most prominent being that male security forces assumed that the women must be spies because they were using a "secret code." The Red Guard burned thousands during their rampage. http://www.humanities.ualberta.ca/history111/secret_language_of_nu_shu.htm http://www.mienh.net/misc/articles/nu-shu.html http://www.saidit.org/archives/nov99/nov_rememberthis.html http://www.trentu.ca/arthur/archive/34/34-05/ae01.html It's primarily a written language, using unique characters to represent ordinary Chinese words using a syllabary rather than an "ideograph" as in standard Chinese. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 00:49:09 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Laura J. Mixon" Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020515040236.00a23500@www.leeanne.com> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit on 5/15/02 6:34 AM, Lee Anne Phillips at leeanne@LEEANNE.COM wrote: > by female sexual adepts who enslave men with their wily pussy > power. Fascinating, isn't it? wily pussy power. That's a keeper. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 01:40:35 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: John Snead Subject: Niven and Herbert (was Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry) Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <200205160110.178dxt5o93Nl3oW0@strange.mail.mindspring.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Lee Anne Phillips wrote: > Probably not, considering its ubiquity, especially in SF by men. > It's not only Heinlein who turned into a dirty old man as he aged; > Larry Niven has done the same and the character of the whore features > prominently in the later works of Frank Herbert as well. > > Niven created an entire economy based on sex in Ringworld > and his Wu character spends most of his time getting laid in > the execrable sequels to the shallow but mildly interesting first in > the series. Wu got to take the whore back home with him in the first > book, but lost her to the State despite (or perhaps because of) her > ability to cloud men's minds (Lamont Cranston, eat your heart out...) > once she got them into bed. Herbert's characters do the same, but here > the mystic secrets are held by female sexual adepts who enslave men > with their wily pussy power. Fascinating, isn't it? That both Niven > and Herbert posit pseudo-Oriental esoteric disciplines that allow > women to control men sexually? Especially when we see the exact > opposite in every society in the world. We may disagree on some issues, but I completely agree with you here. The rampant sexism in works by Niven and Heinlein also really bothers me, and its *really* nice to see someone else who sees Herbert's _Dune_ as *massively* sexist (as is every other book by him I've ever read). I've heard a number of people who claim to be feminists defend the Bene-Gesserit as images of female power (despite the fact that the goal of their vaunted breeding program is to produce the perfect *man*). -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 01:40:35 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: John Snead Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <200205160110.178dxt5o93Nl3oW0@strange.mail.mindspring.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Cynthia wrote: > > > > I'm basically not a capitalist at all, and I hope to see a world > > where commodification of human beings can come to an end. ... I > > envision a world that still includes > > sex work of various kinds, but within a completely different power > > structure than we currently have. > > > --Sarah > > Sarah, > > I would like you to define what you mean by capitalism, especially > since you associate it with the commodification of human beings. Human > commodification existed milenia before capitalism as slavery, and > later serfdom in feudal societies. I'd better establish my view of > capitalism for clarity's sake. Capitalism is an economic system > wherein production and distribution is privately and corporately > owned. This means, to me that the choices of how spend and earn one's > money--how much, on what, where, and with whom, is an individual's > choice. Capitalism is not a political system although potical and > social choices can be expressed through the individual's choice of how > to spend and acquire money. I'm not certain how Sarah defines Capitalism, but I would definitely say that while it is not a political system, it only works within a narrow range of political systems and so mandates the existence of a compatible political system. You need a social and political system where prices are set by "the market" (ie by competition and collusion between businesses) instead of by custom or government fiat. You also need a government that either avoids interfering in the economy or that does so primarily to aid businesses rather than the citizenry. For "effective and market driven" (ie inhumanly cruel) competition in wages capitalism requires a government that is willing to let unemployed people starve in the streets to increase their desperation for work Capitalism is basically an extension of serfdom, except that the mutual obligations between serf and lord (which obviously were mostly for the lords benefit, but which did provide [considerably lesser] benefits to the serf) is replaced by a system when workers become completely disposable and interchangeable - in a way it is more similar to slavery, except the chains are forged out of the workers' desperation for jobs instead of from iron and steel. Like many previous economic system in state-level societies, the only real freedom in capitalism is reserved for the upper classes. -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com democratic socialist in practice, anarcho-communist in theory -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 01:40:35 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: John Snead Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Macho Men Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <200205160110.178dxt5o93Nl3oW0@strange.mail.mindspring.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sarah Young wrote: > >Henry Kissinger and Donald Trump never had any real > >problem getting dates so I think this assessment may be > >a bit naive. In the context of Native Tongue, we see that > >the most "desirable" men are, in fact, those who are the > >smartest and most skilled at building constituencies, which > >is exactly the sort of competencies that make for > >reproductive "fitness" in our own society. It's only > >little boys and shallow women who find macho musclemen > >attractive; most grownup women find competence, > >success, and personality far more attractive than > >mere looks. > > > I definitely agree that this is true, but, just as women feel the > pressure from media and society to be and look a certain way, men do > too. I know many wonderful men who still struggle with the ways in > which they "fall short of" the media ideal. One of the main > differences, I believe, is that feminism has created a safe space for > women to communicate about these issues, and draw support from each > other. The men I have known have felt much more isolated in their > body image problems because common social interactions between men > don't really create a space for that dialogue. Also clearly such problems are quite common among men - over 40% of people with eating disorders are now male (the % of males among people with eating disorders has rapidly increased during the past decade). Not a terribly positive way of achieving equality (the change in the makeup of people with eating disorders is mostly due to more men having them instead of fewer women having them), if the pattern continues, equality will soon be achieved on that front). Clearly, out society screws up everyone's body image equally. -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 05:35:44 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -----Original Message----- > From: friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature > and other media [mailto:FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU]On Behalf Of John Snead > Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 4:41 AM > To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow > > > Cynthia wrote: > > > > > > > I'm basically not a capitalist at all, and I hope to see a world > > > where commodification of human beings can come to an end. ... I > > > envision a world that still includes > > > sex work of various kinds, but within a completely different power > > > structure than we currently have. > > > > > --Sarah > > > > Sarah, > > > > I would like you to define what you mean by capitalism, especially > > since you associate it with the commodification of human beings. Human > > commodification existed milenia before capitalism as slavery, and > > later serfdom in feudal societies. I'd better establish my view of > > capitalism for clarity's sake. Capitalism is an economic system > > wherein production and distribution is privately and corporately > > owned. This means, to me that the choices of how spend and earn one's > > money--how much, on what, where, and with whom, is an individual's > > choice. Capitalism is not a political system although potical and > > social choices can be expressed through the individual's choice of how > > to spend and acquire money. > > I'm not certain how Sarah defines Capitalism, but I would definitely > say that while it is not a political system, it only works within a > narrow range of political systems and so mandates the existence > of a compatible political system. You need a social and political > system where prices are set by "the market" (ie by competition > and collusion between businesses) instead of by custom or > government fiat. You also need a government that either avoids > interfering in the economy or that does so primarily to aid > businesses rather than the citizenry. > > For "effective and market driven" (ie inhumanly cruel) competition in > wages capitalism requires a government that is willing to let > unemployed people starve in the streets to increase their > desperation for work > > Capitalism is basically an extension of serfdom, except that the > mutual obligations between serf and lord (which obviously were > mostly for the lords benefit, but which did provide [considerably > lesser] benefits to the serf) is replaced by a system when workers > become completely disposable and interchangeable - in a way it is > more similar to slavery, except the chains are forged out of the > workers' desperation for jobs instead of from iron and steel. Like > many previous economic system in state-level societies, the only > real freedom in capitalism is reserved for the upper classes. > > -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com > democratic socialist in practice, anarcho-communist in theory > Rather curious, then, that capitalist nations have doubled life expectancy and produced mass movements for workplace rights, feminism, civil rights, gay rights, old age pensions, child laborers, religious minorities, which have done more for these 'minorities' (i.e. a large majority of the people) than any societies in history. You are talking about capitalism as some kind of stand-alone theoretical construct, not the actual capitalism we have had, which has been pragmatic enough to incorporate so many of the reforms struggled for by the people. To characterize it as you do is to completely dismiss the gains made by many truly heroic struggles: do my gay neighbors who live openly as a couple, have adopted a boy, started a doll-making business and a real estate business, and enjoy the respect of the community, not gained real freedoms worth having? and where else, other than in a capitalist nation, would they in fact have such freedom? Capitalism in practice is as moral or immoral as the capitalists, but it is remarkably pragmatic (because deep down it is amoral?), and willing to allow all kinds of nontraditional freedoms to be fought for and won, or partially won. I know this isn't the real topic, but I couldn't let such nonsense go by, and I do think it is highly relevant to feminism. Dave -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 06:04:56 -0600 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: PAT MATHEWS Subject: Re: women's languages question Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed There's more on this in Suzette Haden Elgin's latest newsletter. She's at ocls@madisoncounty.net. And according to her, it's not a language per se, it's a script. >From: Lee Anne Phillips >Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & >utopian literature and other media" >To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] women's languages question >Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 22:35:24 -0700 > >At 07:16 PM 5/15/02 -0700, Laura Quilter wrote: >>does anybody know anything about the women's language in, i think, >>southern china? > >Of course. It's called Nu Shu and was officially suppressed >under the Communist regime in China, with many/most >remaining examples burned or otherwise destroyed for >any of several reasons, the most prominent being that >male security forces assumed that the women must be >spies because they were using a "secret code." The >Red Guard burned thousands during their rampage. > >http://www.humanities.ualberta.ca/history111/secret_language_of_nu_shu.htm >http://www.mienh.net/misc/articles/nu-shu.html >http://www.saidit.org/archives/nov99/nov_rememberthis.html >http://www.trentu.ca/arthur/archive/34/34-05/ae01.html > >It's primarily a written language, using unique characters >to represent ordinary Chinese words using a syllabary >rather than an "ideograph" as in standard Chinese. > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 07:40:03 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Nu Shu - women's languages question Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 06:04 AM 5/16/02 -0600, PAT MATHEWS wrote: >There's more on this in Suzette Haden Elgin's latest newsletter. She's at >ocls@madisoncounty.net. And according to her, it's not a language per se, >it's a script. Yes, a syllabary like the Cherokee and Japanese Katakana and Hirigana scripts. Nu Shu is much easier to learn, since it includes only 300 glyphs, than the traditional Chinese writing system which demands knowledge of thousands of characters to achieve even basic literacy. While Chinese characters are not completely arbitrary, the effort required is very large. At the time Nu Shu were invented, women were forbidden to learn "men's writing." The patriarchal structure of feudal China was particularly onerous everywhere, and many of the customs centered around Nu Shu were attempts by women to mitigate the dreary restrictions and injustices imposed on them. The marriage system among the Yao in Hunan Province, however, was relatively egalitarian in comparison with the rest of China, and this is what left a little corner of freedom wherein the women were able to carve out a private domain. "Sworn Sisters" promised to love and support one another, even after arranged marriage, with letters and poems often disguised and smuggled in the form of embroidery or "decoration" on household objects. Some even refused to marry unless their husband allowed them to keep in touch with their women friends. Upon marriage, it was traditional for a sworn sister to present a book of poetry professing her love and care for her sister, and many other women would give gifts embroidered with poetry and sentimental sayings. A few forswore marriage altogether, and considered their sworn sister their primary relationship, although there is no record of such relationships being lesbian in nature, the Chinese drawing as much of a discrete veil over such matters as Victorian society did of "Boston Marriages." While the parallels between sworn sisters and the women of Native Tongue are tenuous, since there didn't seem to be any revolutionary intent, there is a certain similarity in that women's writing almost completely escaped male attention and was completely the creation of women, supporting women's needs and female relationships. in their parent's households so they would be free to -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:56:50 -0400 Reply-To: judithberman@earthlink.net Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Judith Berman Subject: Re: women's languages question Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu, feministsf-lit@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Laura Quilter wrote: does anybody know anything about the women's language in, i think, southern china? laura q Some varieties of women's language have been reported from minority areas of southern China. Many years ago I worked with speakers of Hmong, a minority language distributed through southeast Asia and southern China, Hmong is known as Miao in China (a term considered by some Hmong to be an ethnic insult). Our language consultants, male and female, were familiar with the types of Miao disguised speech reported by Chinese scholars as being a woman's "secret language." What we found was that the "secret languages" (called in Hmong lus rov, and resulting from various systematic rearrangements or expansions of each syllable, somewhat like Pig Latin) were known of and used by different groups for different purposes. In the province of Laos where our consultants originated, lus rov was used by teenagers and courting couples to prevent their conversation from being understood by outsiders and older people. Another Hmong woman from a different part of Laos would only discuss lus rov after all men, English and Hmong speakers, had left the room. Disguised speech of this general sort is reported from other places in Southeast Asia, for example, the Phillipines, where there is a similar variety of types and uses. Our report (Derrick-Mescua, Berman and Carlson, "Some secret languages of the Hmong,") was published in THE HMONG IN THE WEST (1982), ed. by Bruce Downing and Douglas Olney. The original Chinese articles on the women's secret language ("A Miao secret language," and "A comment on 'A Miao secret language'" appeared in MIAO AND YAO LINGUISTIC STUDIES: SELECTED ARTICLES IN [i.e. from the] CHINESE (1972), H.C. Purnell, ed. I haven't kept up with the Hmong literature and unfortunately can't tell you about more recent work. One comment about ladaan and the discussion thereof. The ease with which languages (or, rather, speakers of languages) can form new words for new, or newly interesting concepts, varies according to a number of linguistic and sociolinguistic factors. One place this shows up is with introduction of new objects, ideas, etc. with trade, migration or conquest. Indigenous North American languages vary widely where the origin of words like "horse" is concerned -- is the foreign word adopted, is the new animal named after a familiar one (e.g., dog), is a brand-new word generated? One purely linguistic feature that aids in formation of new words is the degree to which a language is, in the old typology, "synthetic." That is, the degree to which words ordinarily combine various lexical and grammatical concepts. English is generally considered "analytic" (at the opposite end of the typological spectrum), although derivation in English (consider words like "deinstitutionalize") is more synthetic than is, say, verb grammar. In Russian verbs, for example, concepts of person, gender, tense, aspect, determinacy and more can be combined in a single verb form. Meanwhile English speakers would have to use a number of words, each word embodying a smaller amount of information. A single Russian verb becomes, in English, "I was reading that book bit by bit." Many indigenous American languages are so-called "polysynthetic," where the derivational possibilities are extremely rich and flexible. Example: back in the 80s, Ojibwa-speaking students at SIFC made a t-shirt with a single Ojibwa word that trasnlated as "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles." (The root, if I recall correctly, being "turtle," with "not adult" "changed" and "warrior" being affixes or internal modifications.) Once when talking with an Ojibwa speaker from a remote northern community I had to take out a contact lens. He knew what it was but had never seen one before -- and on the spot made up an Ojibwa word for it -- "small eyeglass." In later conversations over the years with other Ojibwa speakers I mentioned this and was given other, different Ojibwa words, each made up on the spot -- "worn in the eye" being one. Internal language vitality and pressure from a dominant linguistic community can affect the degree to which new words are generated. For example, in some Native languages where a hundred years ago a new native word would have been generated, today the English is borrowed. I've heard Russian immigrants long in this country say things like parkovala kar (I parked the car) or zeroksovala (I xeroxed). But in general, generating new words for new concepts is not an extraordinary linguistic or social process. It's widespread and common. It is easier in some languages, and in some sociolinguistic contexts. Judith p.s. I'm posting this to both lists, since the discussion has been split between the two. > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:53:53 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 16 May 2002 07:32:50 Alison Croggon wrote: "Well, we certainly live as some say in a post-capitalist society,since choice is withdrawn from the individual and into the abstractions of globalising corporations (the "defence" industry, IMF &c). Unless choice means 20 kinds of toothpaste." Yes. We've entered Ayn Rand's Collectivist Universe. Something she warned us about. I think Cynthia means collective capitalism causes exploitation of other collective groups. :)) Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:56:22 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 15 May 2002 17:13:01 Cynthia wrote: "Human commodification existed milenia before capitalism as slavery, and later serfdom in feudal societies. I'd better establish my view of capitalism for clarity's sake. Capitalism is an economic system wherein production and distribution is privately and corporately owned. This means, to me that the choices of how spend and earn one's money--how much, on what, where, and with whom, is an individual's choice. Capitalism is not a political system although potical and social choices can be expressed through the individual's choice of how to spend and acquire money. The commodification of women has to do, I think, with religious views and laws which established women as property. The Ten Commandments basically makes women property by listing them among the things a man ought not to covet. The Christian conversion of Europe and then the Americas meant that Christian views of women as sinning Eves and property of Adams became part of secular law. Ireland's ancient Brehon laws, for example, assert rights for women that were later done away with when Ireland became Christian. (A wife can not be a slave; a wife has the right to be consulted on every issue; a wife can sue another party using her husband's assests or their joint assets for the legal fees without her husband's consent; a woman can own property and businesses; a woman can be elected sovereign over male contenders.) Christianity is an ascetic religion that teachess people they ought to go without sex, and if they can't go without have it carefully controlled by the religious authorities. To me this means all sorts of corruption is going to occur with sexuality. All healthy expressions of sexuality between consulting adults is going to be stigmatized to some degree with some of them crimes to this very day. This I think is has created the disaster which is the USA's, at least, current sexual culture. Women are property so their sex lives are services not expression of love or joy. Children are property so they also become required to perform sexual services and they are easily intimated into doing what they are told and shutting up about it too. Sex as something sinful becomes violent or candied porngraphic images rather than artistic expressions of human relating. Needed sexual services are scarce such as sex therapy and the unusual occupationof the woman here who works helping medical students develop skill in performing sexual medical proceedures. Sports become a way for people to become physical without being sexual, so naturally, until recently women were not allowed in sports either; women must not be physical, only sexually so to serve men. Sports is also used as the "opiate of the masses" to keep people talking about sports so that they won't be thinking and talking about other things (like how they are sexually repressed)." Superb history Cynthia. This agrees with my readings of history over the years. I couldn't have said it better. You manage to get sports parallel in as well, Bravo. ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:57:47 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 15 May 2002 17:37:00 Priscilla H. Ballou wrote: "Christianity is not monolithic. Far from it. I know several Christian ministers and priests, as well as many lay folk, whose views are sex-positive and far from ascetic. I would encourage you not to generalize in this fashion." Hmmm Priscilla, in theory yes they are, but practice is another thing. Everyday Christians have trouble accepting the animal nature of sex and the fact that sex can be enjoyed without marriage or even commitment. That's not accepting the nature of sex. Those Christians who are truly sex positive are minority in number. If the marjority Christians cannot see sex without guilt, then it is hardly a generalization. With all the problems, with the Catholic priest and sex, and hush-hush over the years. It is hard to untangle free-sexuality, from guilt-sexuality in Christianty. Some of the founding Holy Rome church members thought sex was only for procreation for centuries. Most christians still think women is sex and sex leads one to sin. In fact, Eve, in her discovery of sex discovered all that tossed her and her partner out of heaven. This seems a heavy load for one person or gender to bear. Let alone for generations after generation to throw off. Shackles don't come off easily if you don't have the intellectual key. Finally sex was used as a lever to control the masses of Christian folk. It's still used today. You know why? Because we all have a sex drive. It's an easy target for Christianity to attack or lay a guilt trip on someone. Look at our advertisement: one moment practice safe sex, but no ads for condoms on tv or radio. One moment don't have sex; another moment look at this little girls breasts, legs, tummy on fashion magazine cover or billboard, record label, heck anywhere you see women used to sell things by their sex. Masturbation is a sin in Christianity. Better to marry, sin of onism (spelling). Burning is not being married so you can relieve sexual drive. eck on and on. I like this report on The Sparrow but it makes Cynthia's point and Christianity and sex. They could hardly look the issue of sex, which is steeped in gender sterotypes, straight in the eye! Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:59:40 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I liked the SF nature of The Sparrow. Bravo. I didn't know author was woman. Interesting. Was she Jewish as well? Carey S. Fontaine -- ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:07:56 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: women's languages question Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Why call it Women's language? Describe it? Do women in US, or anywhere else have a women's language? Carey S. Fontaine -- On Wed, 15 May 2002 22:35:24 Lee Anne Phillips wrote: >At 07:16 PM 5/15/02 -0700, Laura Quilter wrote: >>does anybody know anything about the women's language in, i think, >>southern china? > >Of course. It's called Nu Shu and was officially suppressed >under the Communist regime in China, with many/most >remaining examples burned or otherwise destroyed for >any of several reasons, the most prominent being that >male security forces assumed that the women must be >spies because they were using a "secret code." The >Red Guard burned thousands during their rampage. > >http://www.humanities.ualberta.ca/history111/secret_language_of_nu_shu.htm >http://www.mienh.net/misc/articles/nu-shu.html >http://www.saidit.org/archives/nov99/nov_rememberthis.html >http://www.trentu.ca/arthur/archive/34/34-05/ae01.html > >It's primarily a written language, using unique characters >to represent ordinary Chinese words using a syllabary >rather than an "ideograph" as in standard Chinese. > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:10:13 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit :) This might be reason for male fear; thus the negative images of women in porn. I say enjoy women's wily pussy power. :) Or practice Buddhist detachment. :) Carey S. Fontaine -- On Thu, 16 May 2002 00:49:09 Laura J. Mixon wrote: >on 5/15/02 6:34 AM, Lee Anne Phillips at leeanne@LEEANNE.COM wrote: > >> by female sexual adepts who enslave men with their wily pussy >> power. Fascinating, isn't it? > >wily pussy power. That's a keeper. > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:15:17 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hmmm. Good and Bad exist in all systems. And lets not forget the considerably lesser benefits! People makes these systems greedy whatever that system is!!!!!!! Carey S. Fontaine -- On Thu, 16 May 2002 01:40:35 John Snead wrote: >Cynthia wrote: > >> > >> > I'm basically not a capitalist at all, and I hope to see a world >> > where commodification of human beings can come to an end. ... I >> > envision a world that still includes >> > sex work of various kinds, but within a completely different power >> > structure than we currently have. >> >> > --Sarah >> >> Sarah, >> >> I would like you to define what you mean by capitalism, especially >> since you associate it with the commodification of human beings. Human >> commodification existed milenia before capitalism as slavery, and >> later serfdom in feudal societies. I'd better establish my view of >> capitalism for clarity's sake. Capitalism is an economic system >> wherein production and distribution is privately and corporately >> owned. This means, to me that the choices of how spend and earn one's >> money--how much, on what, where, and with whom, is an individual's >> choice. Capitalism is not a political system although potical and >> social choices can be expressed through the individual's choice of how >> to spend and acquire money. > >I'm not certain how Sarah defines Capitalism, but I would definitely >say that while it is not a political system, it only works within a >narrow range of political systems and so mandates the existence >of a compatible political system. You need a social and political >system where prices are set by "the market" (ie by competition >and collusion between businesses) instead of by custom or >government fiat. You also need a government that either avoids >interfering in the economy or that does so primarily to aid >businesses rather than the citizenry. > >For "effective and market driven" (ie inhumanly cruel) competition in >wages capitalism requires a government that is willing to let >unemployed people starve in the streets to increase their >desperation for work > >Capitalism is basically an extension of serfdom, except that the >mutual obligations between serf and lord (which obviously were >mostly for the lords benefit, but which did provide [considerably >lesser] benefits to the serf) is replaced by a system when workers >become completely disposable and interchangeable - in a way it is >more similar to slavery, except the chains are forged out of the >workers' desperation for jobs instead of from iron and steel. Like >many previous economic system in state-level societies, the only >real freedom in capitalism is reserved for the upper classes. > >-John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com > democratic socialist in practice, anarcho-communist in theory > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:17:55 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: women's languages question Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Link to Suzette H Elgin please. Carey S. Fontaine -- On Thu, 16 May 2002 06:04:56 PAT MATHEWS wrote: >There's more on this in Suzette Haden Elgin's latest newsletter. She's at >ocls@madisoncounty.net. And according to her, it's not a language per se, >it's a script. > >>From: Lee Anne Phillips >>Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & >>utopian literature and other media" >>To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >>Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] women's languages question >>Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 22:35:24 -0700 >> >>At 07:16 PM 5/15/02 -0700, Laura Quilter wrote: >>>does anybody know anything about the women's language in, i think, >>>southern china? >> >>Of course. It's called Nu Shu and was officially suppressed >>under the Communist regime in China, with many/most >>remaining examples burned or otherwise destroyed for >>any of several reasons, the most prominent being that >>male security forces assumed that the women must be >>spies because they were using a "secret code." The >>Red Guard burned thousands during their rampage. >> >>http://www.humanities.ualberta.ca/history111/secret_language_of_nu_shu.htm >>http://www.mienh.net/misc/articles/nu-shu.html >>http://www.saidit.org/archives/nov99/nov_rememberthis.html >>http://www.trentu.ca/arthur/archive/34/34-05/ae01.html >> >>It's primarily a written language, using unique characters >>to represent ordinary Chinese words using a syllabary >>rather than an "ideograph" as in standard Chinese. >> >>-------------------------------------------------- >>This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >>discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >>unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >>LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: >> unsubscribe FEMINISTSF >> >>Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 10:07:10 -0600 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: PAT MATHEWS Subject: Re: Nu Shu - women's languages question Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed May I or would you forward this to Suzette? I think she'd like the elaboration. And for Chinese Sworn Sisters, read Gail Tsukayami's WOMEN OF THE SILK. >From: Lee Anne Phillips >Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & >utopian literature and other media" >To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU >Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Nu Shu - women's languages question >Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 07:40:03 -0700 > >At 06:04 AM 5/16/02 -0600, PAT MATHEWS wrote: >>There's more on this in Suzette Haden Elgin's latest newsletter. She's at >>ocls@madisoncounty.net. And according to her, it's not a language per se, >>it's a script. > >Yes, a syllabary like the Cherokee and Japanese Katakana >and Hirigana scripts. Nu Shu is much easier to learn, since >it includes only 300 glyphs, than the traditional Chinese writing >system which demands knowledge of thousands of characters >to achieve even basic literacy. While Chinese characters are >not completely arbitrary, the effort required is very large. At >the time Nu Shu were invented, women were forbidden to >learn "men's writing." The patriarchal structure of feudal China >was particularly onerous everywhere, and many of the customs >centered around Nu Shu were attempts by women to mitigate >the dreary restrictions and injustices imposed on them. The >marriage system among the Yao in Hunan Province, however, >was relatively egalitarian in comparison with the rest of China, >and this is what left a little corner of freedom wherein the >women were able to carve out a private domain. > >"Sworn Sisters" promised to love and support one another, >even after arranged marriage, with letters and poems >often disguised and smuggled in the form of embroidery >or "decoration" on household objects. Some even refused >to marry unless their husband allowed them to keep in touch >with their women friends. Upon marriage, it was traditional >for a sworn sister to present a book of poetry professing >her love and care for her sister, and many other women >would give gifts embroidered with poetry and sentimental >sayings. A few forswore marriage altogether, and >considered their sworn sister their primary relationship, >although there is no record of such relationships being >lesbian in nature, the Chinese drawing as much of a >discrete veil over such matters as Victorian society did >of "Boston Marriages." > >While the parallels between sworn sisters and the women >of Native Tongue are tenuous, since there didn't seem >to be any revolutionary intent, there is a certain similarity >in that women's writing almost completely escaped male >attention and was completely the creation of women, >supporting women's needs and female relationships. >in their parent's households so they would be free to > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 13:02:58 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lori Selke Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: Carey S Fontaine Comments: cc: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 16 May 2002, Carey S Fontaine wrote: > I liked the SF nature of The Sparrow. Bravo. > > I didn't know author was woman. Interesting. Was she Jewish as well? She converted to Judaism after leaving the Catholic church. Lori -- selk@io.com, selk@sirius.com, http://www.io.com/~selk "This is no time of remorse. This is a time for cookies!" --Love and Rockets -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 18:55:26 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lou Hoffman Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry -- Men/boysinsportsindustry Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_15c.d7a4d17.2a1592de_boundary" --part1_15c.d7a4d17.2a1592de_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/15/02 8:27:43 AM Central Daylight Time, sarah_whitman_young@HOTMAIL.COM writes: > Speaking of sci-fi and sexuality, though... How many folks are familiar > with Spider Robinson's work. A good deal of it is relatively light humor, > but I find his approach to sexuality absolutely wonderful. > > --Sarah (wishing for a world in which Lady Sally's Place is a possibility) > > I just reread "The Lady Slings the Booze." I wouldn't want to work there, but I'd sure like to visit once in a while. Lou ... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today, it's already tomorrow in Australia. ---- Charles Schultz --part1_15c.d7a4d17.2a1592de_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/15/02 8:27:43 AM Central Daylight Time, sarah_whitman_young@HOTMAIL.COM writes:


Speaking of sci-fi and sexuality, though...  How many folks are familiar
with Spider Robinson's work.  A good deal of it is relatively light humor,
but I find his approach to sexuality absolutely wonderful.

--Sarah (wishing for a world in which Lady Sally's Place is a possibility)



I just reread "The Lady Slings the Booze." I wouldn't want to work there, but I'd sure like to visit once in a while.

Lou

... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today,  it's already tomorrow in Australia.
---- Charles Schultz
--part1_15c.d7a4d17.2a1592de_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 19:31:22 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_116.1157d5b5.2a159b4a_boundary" --part1_116.1157d5b5.2a159b4a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit what passes for capitalism today - especially in the USA , is not remotely driven by 'invisible' or 'amoral' forces. Modern capitalism is instead a highly regulated form of protectionism where powerful economies are propped up by state and meta-state laws and sharp practice trade 'agreements' e.g. gatt I doubt that such a system can ever function separately from prejudice and discrimination as it relies heavily on social inequality, post-collonialism etc. to function effectively. example: racism perpetuated by states serves to garner support for unequal 'trade' backed up by military threat, sexism keeps the wage threshold down and justifies deregulated 'flexible' jobs in low pay, part time, no-bennifits, no-security sectors defined as traditionally feminine e.g ragtrade, service industries etc. Read Noam Chomsky, Niomi Klien, Maria Miles, Vandana Shiva etc. Bye Rachel --part1_116.1157d5b5.2a159b4a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit what passes for capitalism today - especially in the USA , is not remotely driven by 'invisible' or 'amoral' forces. Modern capitalism is instead a highly regulated form of protectionism where powerful economies are propped up by state and meta-state laws and sharp practice trade 'agreements' e.g. gatt
I doubt that such a system can ever function separately from prejudice and discrimination as it relies heavily on social inequality, post-collonialism etc. to function effectively.
example: racism perpetuated by states serves to garner support for unequal 'trade' backed up by military threat, sexism keeps the wage threshold down and justifies deregulated  'flexible' jobs in low pay, part time, no-bennifits, no-security sectors defined as traditionally feminine e.g ragtrade, service industries etc.
Read Noam Chomsky, Niomi Klien, Maria Miles, Vandana Shiva etc.

Bye
Rachel --part1_116.1157d5b5.2a159b4a_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 19:43:31 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: Re: Nu Shu - women's languages question Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_16d.dbcef37.2a159e23_boundary" --part1_16d.dbcef37.2a159e23_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "A few forswore marriage altogether, and considered their sworn sister their primary relationship, although there is no record of such relationships being lesbian in nature, the Chinese drawing as much of a discrete veil over such matters as Victorian society did of "Boston Marriages."" There is however interesting lesbian writing about Chinese 'Spinster' women in an essay In 'Out the other side', a collection of lesbian feminist essays published in the 80s by Virago [UK] Some women also lived in communes and may have practised 'free love' with other women though most bonds seem to have been between two women. Sworn women were often marriage resistors and wore a different hairstyle to married and 'single' women. The women mentioned in the essay were economically independent through the silk industry [i.e. were actual Spinsters] and many migrated to Shanghai to avoid the disapproval of the communists who, whilst at that time against marriage, were pro-heterosexuality. Bye Rachel --part1_16d.dbcef37.2a159e23_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "A few forswore marriage altogether, and
considered their sworn sister their primary relationship,
although there is no record of such relationships being
lesbian in nature, the Chinese drawing as much of a
discrete veil over such matters as Victorian society did
of "Boston Marriages.""

There is however interesting lesbian writing about Chinese 'Spinster' women in an essay In 'Out the other side', a collection of lesbian feminist essays published in the 80s by Virago [UK]
Some women also lived in communes and may have practised 'free love' with other women though most bonds seem to have been between two women. Sworn women were often marriage resistors and wore a different hairstyle to married and 'single' women. The women mentioned in the essay were economically independent through the silk industry [i.e. were actual Spinsters] and many migrated to Shanghai to avoid the disapproval of the communists who, whilst at that time against marriage, were pro-heterosexuality.

Bye
Rachel

--part1_16d.dbcef37.2a159e23_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 19:47:08 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/16/02 4:35:06 AM Central Daylight Time, davebelden@EARTHLINK.NET writes: << Rather curious, then, that capitalist nations have doubled life expectancy and produced mass movements for workplace rights, feminism, civil rights, gay rights, old age pensions, child laborers, religious minor >> Well, we've been over this topic before, but I have to again say that it's not capitalism as such that has done any of these things . Unless you call the continuing work of progressives and other reformists and revolutionaires seeking to change capitalism (and the systems prior to capitalism) as something capitalism has done. Unless you call the improvements in PUBLIC works as something capitalism has done.Unless you call democratic government something capitalism has done. Etcetcetc. I do not agree now, anymore than I have in the past, about the cause and effect you are positing. Just because capitalism occurred at the same time as any of these things does not mean that it is capitalism which 'caused' them. Creation of wealth, manufacturing, technological improvements? Historically related, but says nothing about the 'virtues' or efficacy of capitalism itself . Unfortunately with human history, what we have is not experimental evidence with 'controls', but the development of the world on a single time line. (Science fiction, of course, is one of several ways to do ''thought experiments' about what other ways human societies COULD have developed, but these are not proofs and it is unlikely we will ever arrive at proofs in the social sciences such as we have arrived at in the physical sciences, because we cannot develop the 'controls' for these complex cultural systems that can contravene the biases which we bring as human beings to explaining things, especially when the 'things' are the social systems in which we ourselves live and whose peculiarities we hold so dear, so often. Instead, humans experiment by actively living in our world, and none of our experiments are replicable in the scientific sense, although we must still make decisions about our future, based on what we do know about the world scientifically and otherwise. Assertions about cause and effect in history have to be examined with utmost skepticism, and especially with awareness of just how much what we want to believe and how we have accepted the world we live in, colors our explanations of things. If the uncertainty principle holds true in the physical universe, and the observer changes the observed even in the 'bedrock' physical sciences, how much more true this must be in the world of social observation and explanation.) As I've also said before, the ideology of capitalism amounts , in my view, to a religion and in that respect I am an agnostic, but I certainly do not agree with the deistic position (in this analogy) which claims that capitalism 'caused' all the various improvements of the last however many years (and that's said while I'm ignoring, for brevity's sake, the downside of those 'improvements', including but not limited to the colonialist and imperialist aspects of capitalism and their effects on various indigenous peoples, the earth, diversity of species, etc.)-Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 00:36:49 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Nu Shu - women's languages question Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 10:07 AM 5/16/02 -0600, you wrote: >May I or would you forward this to Suzette? I think she'd like the >elaboration. And for Chinese Sworn Sisters, read Gail Tsukayami's WOMEN OF >THE SILK. Of course you may. I hadn't seen the title but will look for it. Lee Anne -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 01:12:32 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <32.270a8004.2a159efc@cs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 07:47 PM 5/16/02 -0400, Joy Martin wrote: >In a message dated 5/16/02 4:35:06 AM Central Daylight Time, >davebelden@EARTHLINK.NET writes: > ><< Rather curious, then, that capitalist nations have doubled life expectancy > and produced mass movements for workplace rights, feminism, civil rights, > gay rights, old age pensions, child laborers, religious minor >> > >Well, we've been over this topic before, but I have to again say that it's >not capitalism as such that has done any of these things Indeed, in the USA. workplace rights, old age pensions, and prevention of child labor were the platform of Eugene Debs and the Communist Party. Capitalists were hauled kicking and screaming and dragging their heels into limited fair play and compassion by the concerted effort, grass-roots organizing, and progressive political power. Mr. Debs was asked once if he felt that his life had been a failure, since he hadn't won any of his quixotic Presidential bids. His reply was quite the contrary. that he felt proud that everything he'd worked for all his life had come to pass, a gift that few have the luck to see. And the relative success of the USA in relation to the nations of the world is quite simply that the whole country was stolen lock, stock, and barrel from the rightful owners. It's easy to show a profit when your business is piracy and murderous grand larceny but those profits are nothing to brag about. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 02:38:21 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: John Snead Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <200205170101.178zRv12O3Nl3pa0@farley.mail.mindspring.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Dave Belden wrote: > > John Snead Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 4:41 AM To: > > I'm not certain how Sarah defines Capitalism, but I would definitely > > say that while it is not a political system, it only works within a > > narrow range of political systems and so mandates the existence of a > > compatible political system. You need a social and political system > > where prices are set by "the market" (ie by competition and > > collusion between businesses) instead of by custom or government > > fiat. You also need a government that either avoids interfering in > > the economy or that does so primarily to aid businesses rather than > > the citizenry. > > > > For "effective and market driven" (ie inhumanly cruel) competition > > in wages capitalism requires a government that is willing to let > > unemployed people starve in the streets to increase their > > desperation for work > > > > Capitalism is basically an extension of serfdom, except that the > > mutual obligations between serf and lord (which obviously were > > mostly for the lords benefit, but which did provide [considerably > > lesser] benefits to the serf) is replaced by a system when workers > > become completely disposable and interchangeable - in a way it is > > more similar to slavery, except the chains are forged out of the > > workers' desperation for jobs instead of from iron and steel. Like > > many previous economic system in state-level societies, the only > > real freedom in capitalism is reserved for the upper classes. > > > > -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com > > democratic socialist in practice, anarcho-communist in theory > > > > Rather curious, then, that capitalist nations have doubled life > expectancy and produced mass movements for workplace rights, > feminism, civil rights, gay rights, old age pensions, child laborers, > religious minorities, which have done more for these 'minorities' > (i.e. a large majority of the people) than any societies in history. > You are talking about capitalism as some kind of stand-alone > theoretical construct, not the actual capitalism we have had, which > has been pragmatic enough to incorporate so many of the reforms > struggled for by the people. To characterize it as you do is to > completely dismiss the gains made by many truly heroic struggles: do > my gay neighbors who live openly as a couple, have adopted a boy, > started a doll-making business and a real estate business, and enjoy > the respect of the community, not gained real freedoms worth having? > and where else, other than in a capitalist nation, would they in fact > have such freedom? Capitalism in practice is as moral or immoral as > the capitalists, but it is remarkably pragmatic (because deep down it > is amoral?), and willing to allow all kinds of nontraditional freedoms > to be fought for and won, or partially won. > > I know this isn't the real topic, but I couldn't let such nonsense go > by, and I do think it is highly relevant to feminism. I think it's utterly incorrect to say that capitalism has given us any of this. When you look at wealthy, technologically advanced nations (ie the First World) the closer such nations are to either unregulated or state supported capitalism the worse the lives of the citizens (as a whole) are. The US is by first the most strongly capitalist First World nation and we have the highest disparity of wealth between the rich and the poor of any First World nation, the poor in the US have worse lives than in any First World nation, and people in the US work longer hours than in any other First World nation. The wonderful and progressive gains you are talking about have only come about due to people working (and sometimes dying) to limit and oppose capitalism, this has been done quite successfully in most of Northern Europe (most especially in Sweden, Denmark, and Norway). Poverty, homelessness, hunger, and lack of affordable medical care are all far less of a problem in these nations and the differential between wealthy and poor is *far* less in these nations. These nations have a mixture of state sponsored socialism and capitalism, rather than the somewhat purer capitalism of the US. They are often described as having democratic socialism (or sometimes social democracy). If you want to look at what unregulated capitalism was like, look at Britain in the mid 19th century, before the poor laws were passed. A more wretched and horrible place (for anyone other than the wealthy) is difficult to imagine (in any prosperous nation that was not either under direct military attack). Capitalism is a moral and social blight that civilized nations are working to overcome. Many people in the US talk about the great virtues of capitalism and the ability of people to better their economic position, but by and large social mobility in the US is low and the poor suffer, both because capitalism concentrates wealth in the hands of the wealthy and the US lacks sufficient social and governmental systems to separate the wealthy for the money they extracted from the toil of their workers. In any case, we are getting far afield here, so I'll now bow out of the capitalism discussion. -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 07:29:59 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Michael J. Lowrey" Organization: The Working Class Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lee Anne Phillips wrote: > Indeed, in the USA. workplace rights, old age pensions, and prevention > of child labor were the platform of Eugene Debs and the Communist > Party. Eugene Debs was the presidential candidate of the Socialist Party, not the Communist Party! -- Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey sole surviving member of the Tennessee Valley Local of the Socialist Party -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 07:16:17 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <3CE4F7C7.262C0F11@uwm.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 07:29 AM 5/17/02 -0500, Michael J. Lowrey wrote: >Lee Anne Phillips wrote: > > > Indeed, in the USA. workplace rights, old age pensions, and prevention > > of child labor were the platform of Eugene Debs and the Communist > > Party. > >Eugene Debs was the presidential candidate of the Socialist >Party, not the Communist Party! I should have known that, but I was temporarily impaired by lack of sleep. I apologize sincerely and applaud your own commitment to social justice and compassion at considerable personal risk and hazard. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 11:42:02 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: women's languages question Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, thank you ALL for the detail search, discussion on this SF subject. I got some books to read, and many lines of thought to examine. Fascinating plot potential here. Nice productive chatting. Maybe one day, a book list will appear on the subject topic Women/girls in sex industry -- Men/boys in sport industry. Thanks again. Carey S. Fontaine http://careysastrology.com http://eroticpoet.biz On Wed, 15 May 2002 08:26:08 Laura Quilter wrote: "but all this difference does not mean it's not useful to analyze what these systems of exploitation have in common. it can be incredibly useful. those who do it will hopefully be careful to not generalize harmfully or in a totalizing fashion, but it can still be a useful tool." Garruluously hilarious Laura. But I'm always suspect arguments that say all the differences mean nothing can be figured out or improved and thus can be ignored or forgotten. That how all feminism and racial equality is being watered down at this moment in time! You conclude with your humor though. I give you credit for that, Laura. Piercy's WOMAN ON THE EDGE OF TIME sounds perfect! I title is sooooo there. :) I'll check it out. Even though me and Laura different greatly in view, gender, age, looks, sexual fantasies, spiritual, philosophical and financial view points, something valuable came out of this. :)) Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:13:49 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Nu Shu - women's languages question Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Interesting Rachel! Sworn women marriage resistors fascinating concept. Any more? Carey S. Fontaine -- On Thu, 16 May 2002 19:43:31 Rachel Wild wrote: >"A few forswore marriage altogether, and >considered their sworn sister their primary relationship, >although there is no record of such relationships being >lesbian in nature, the Chinese drawing as much of a >discrete veil over such matters as Victorian society did >of "Boston Marriages."" > >There is however interesting lesbian writing about Chinese 'Spinster' women >in an essay In 'Out the other side', a collection of lesbian feminist essays >published in the 80s by Virago [UK] >Some women also lived in communes and may have practised 'free love' with >other women though most bonds seem to have been between two women. Sworn >women were often marriage resistors and wore a different hairstyle to married >and 'single' women. The women mentioned in the essay were economically >independent through the silk industry [i.e. were actual Spinsters] and many >migrated to Shanghai to avoid the disapproval of the communists who, whilst >at that time against marriage, were pro-heterosexuality. > >Bye >Rachel > > > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:16:59 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brilliant Joy. Pardon pun. :) Carey S. Fontaine -- On Thu, 16 May 2002 19:47:08 Joy Martin wrote: >In a message dated 5/16/02 4:35:06 AM Central Daylight Time, >davebelden@EARTHLINK.NET writes: > ><< Rather curious, then, that capitalist nations have doubled life expectancy > and produced mass movements for workplace rights, feminism, civil rights, > gay rights, old age pensions, child laborers, religious minor >> > >Well, we've been over this topic before, but I have to again say that it's >not capitalism as such that has done any of these things . Unless you call >the continuing work of progressives and other reformists and revolutionaires >seeking to change capitalism (and the systems prior to capitalism) as >something capitalism has done. Unless you call the improvements in PUBLIC >works as something capitalism has done.Unless you call democratic government >something capitalism has done. Etcetcetc. I do not agree now, anymore than I >have in the past, about the cause and effect you are positing. Just because >capitalism occurred at the same time as any of these things does not mean >that it is capitalism which 'caused' them. Creation of wealth, manufacturing, >technological improvements? Historically related, but says nothing about the >'virtues' or efficacy of capitalism itself . Unfortunately with human >history, what we have is not experimental evidence with 'controls', but the >development of the world on a single time line. (Science fiction, of course, >is one of several ways to do ''thought experiments' about what other ways >human societies COULD have developed, but these are not proofs and it is >unlikely we will ever arrive at proofs in the social sciences such as we have >arrived at in the physical sciences, because we cannot develop the 'controls' >for these complex cultural systems that can contravene the biases which we >bring as human beings to explaining things, especially when the 'things' are >the social systems in which we ourselves live and whose peculiarities we hold >so dear, so often. Instead, humans experiment by actively living in our >world, and none of our experiments are replicable in the scientific sense, >although we must still make decisions about our future, based on what we do >know about the world scientifically and otherwise. Assertions about cause and >effect in history have to be examined with utmost skepticism, and especially >with awareness of just how much what we want to believe and how we have >accepted the world we live in, colors our explanations of things. If the >uncertainty principle holds true in the physical universe, and the observer >changes the observed even in the 'bedrock' physical sciences, how much more >true this must be in the world of social observation and explanation.) As >I've also said before, the ideology of capitalism amounts , in my view, to a >religion and in that respect I am an agnostic, but I certainly do not agree >with the deistic position (in this analogy) which claims that capitalism >'caused' all the various improvements of the last however many years (and >that's said while I'm ignoring, for brevity's sake, the downside of those >'improvements', including but not limited to the colonialist and imperialist >aspects of capitalism and their effects on various indigenous peoples, the >earth, diversity of species, etc.)-Joy > >"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety >deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:19:59 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism, sports, sex, religion and The Sparrow Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Great accurate Reader's Digest truth, Lee Ann! :) Carey S. Fontaine -- On Fri, 17 May 2002 01:12:32 Lee Anne Phillips wrote: >At 07:47 PM 5/16/02 -0400, Joy Martin wrote: >>In a message dated 5/16/02 4:35:06 AM Central Daylight Time, >>davebelden@EARTHLINK.NET writes: >> >><< Rather curious, then, that capitalist nations have doubled life expectancy >> and produced mass movements for workplace rights, feminism, civil rights, >> gay rights, old age pensions, child laborers, religious minor >> >> >>Well, we've been over this topic before, but I have to again say that it's >>not capitalism as such that has done any of these things > >Indeed, in the USA. workplace rights, old age pensions, and prevention >of child labor were the platform of Eugene Debs and the Communist >Party. Capitalists were hauled kicking and screaming and dragging their >heels into limited fair play and compassion by the concerted effort, >grass-roots organizing, and progressive political power. Mr. Debs was >asked once if he felt that his life had been a failure, since he hadn't >won any of his quixotic Presidential bids. His reply was quite the contrary. >that he felt proud that everything he'd worked for all his life had come to >pass, a gift that few have the luck to see. > >And the relative success of the USA in relation to the nations of the world >is quite simply that the whole country was stolen lock, stock, and barrel >from the rightful owners. It's easy to show a profit when your business >is piracy and murderous grand larceny but those profits are nothing to >brag about. > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:21:05 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <116.1157d5b5.2a159b4a@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think it's partly a question of the glass half full or half empty. Rachel, your view, like Chomsky's for example, seems to see the glass almost entirely empty. This scares me, because I think it devalues the amazing headway that feminist, gay, socialist, civil rights, democratic etc. etc. campaigners have made. People have engaged in heroic struggles, and achieved solid gains that make a real big difference to people's everyday lives, every minute of every day. Your view scares me because I fear it dissuades people today from taking part in those hard-slogging campaigns, and the new campaigns that always have to be fought. If you actually believe that in spite of all those past efforts, this is still a worthless society, still entirely run by big capital for its own purposes, then why bother? Just retire to the academy and write articles excoriating the system: this preserves one's pc credentials, boosts one's own sense of secular holiness, and lets the society become what in your dark vision it already is. I feel way too many of my (baby boom) generation of radicals did just that, thus setting us back in a thousand ways compared to what could have been, and I don't want to see the best of the younger generations do the same. I'm not claiming to be a paragon here - I feel I have done the same, and I am regretting it. In a reformable society like ours, it's better to be a reformer than a revolutionary. It seems like John Snead is agreeing, in his line: "democratic socialist in practice, anarcho-communist in theory." But I think there has to be something rather amiss with a theory when it contradicts one's practice. I am social democrat too, John, and agree with your post about how the Europeans have done a better job on poverty, but what you are missing is where the wealth came from. How good would Swedish welfare be without Volvo? There are two halves here: the wealth producing elements and the wealth distributing elements. Distributing wealth is extremely hard, but so is producing it. Most systems over history have been extremely bad at wealth-production, with the result that those few people within them who dreamed of a Swedish level of health care or a child mortality rate of 5 per thousand remained just that - dreamers (or writers of science fiction). Being aware of everything that is bad is important, but so is being aware of everything that is good. I'd like to see some more celebrating (and awareness) on the left of the things that have been achieved. Lee Anne, your celebration of Eugene Debs is great - we need more of it. But here, I am sorry, I think you are quite wrong: > And the relative success of the USA in relation to the nations of the world > is quite simply that the whole country was stolen lock, stock, and barrel > from the rightful owners. It's easy to show a profit when your business > is piracy and murderous grand larceny but those profits are nothing to > brag about. I don't dispute the country was stolen, of course it was. But cutthroats have been stealing countries for millennia, and that alone does not produce wealth: it produces loot, which is quite different. The Spanish were the most powerful country in Europe; they looted the Americas and became the poor country of Europe. The Arabs today have a comparably huge bonanza of almost free loot - this time from oil - and on their present course are copying the Spanish: spending the money on luxuries and imports, while expelling the free-thinkers who could actually help them create wealth. In those countries, the loot has merely strengthened the patriarchal establishment. Kleptocracy is not kind to feminism. It was (not solely, but most notably) the small maritime nations of Holland and England which did something not seen in history, a rare and originally fragile accomplishment that became huge, and has created countries in which feminism is thriving. (Fragile: what if the Spanish Armada had won? It would have set nascent capitalism back a hundred years or more - so there would be no such thing as a feminist listserve today - neither feminism nor computers nor the Internet would yet have got out of the pages of utopian novels). The English and Dutch were pirates, too, of course, but they also created a domestic system where investment went into increasing productivity in both agriculture and industry. Yes, the loot was part of the investment, but not the bulk of it. The bulk of it came from domestic profits, as it does in the US today. Their system actually encouraged hard work, thrift, investment, ingenuity, science, research, free speech and thought, and became increasingly democratic. The fact that work and ingenuity was rewarded had much to do with laws of contract, the rule of law, a regulated rather than a free market, regulations passed by merchants running parliament. The democracy made the economic system more effective. It also made it reformable, so that the horrors of exploitation were mitigated over time: England became (I believe this is right?) the first country to outlaw slavery, one of the first to have universal suffrage. Yes, a better system would have found ways to generate productivity, profits, wealth, reinvestment in an upward spiral that would have brought everyone along with it, without the horrors of colonialism, slums, etc. that we all know about. But history had always been full of those horrors: what it had never seen before was the mix of wealth and reform that could produce a Swedish welfare system. I see no theoretical reason why that same mix will not bring an equivalent of that welfare system to the entire world population within about 200 - 300 years, (if we work as hard at reform as our predecessors did, and thereby create a regulated and civilized rather than a kleptocratic capitalism). Indeed if only present long term trends continue, it will! (but that's such a contentious claim that I withdraw it from the discussion). If a better system for women, children, gays and people of color can be devised than social democracy on a capitalist wealth-producing base, I would be the first to welcome it. I would love to see it demonstrated. At the moment, it's hard enough just to keep on reforming the thing we've got. Joy is quite right that we can't tell exactly what out of all the good stuff in our societies was created by capitalism, because we are not in a controlled experiment. But, Joy, your comment about the religion of capitalism cuts both ways. The alacrity with which you jumped on me for saying something good about capitalism made me feel as if I had blasphemed in some way. All I said was that if capitalism was so outrageously horrible, it was curious that capitalist societies had produced such great results (not discounting the awful results, of course). Now, above, I have argued that actually capitalism (in its Anglo-Dutch version, since exported to the US, the rest of Europe, Japan, India etc.) was demonstrably better than Spanish kleptocracy and other observed historical systems: none of them created a Swedish welfare system. So now you can reality go to town on me. History is never a hard science, but I don't find this that contentious a position. It's just not religiously acceptable to say it, on the left. It's almost like, in order to fight our battles, we humans have to focus entirely on (and thereby perhaps exaggerate) the enemy's evil: the Soviet Union was the Evil Empire, to Reagan, and the USA is the Evil Empire, to Chomsky. In a system that is open to reform, however, the opposition forces have a problem when they make actual gains. If they celebrate the fact that those gains were made, it's like they are praising the system (the enemy) at the same time. For that reason, it seems, the left is constantly hampered from trumpeting its own successes. I believe that the society we have today in the West is a creation of the left quite as much as of the right (I can't argue percentages - whether it's 50/50 or 30/70 - I wouldn't know how to start; and yesterday's left, if successful, becomes today's right, anyway - e.g. merchants were the 'left' against the feudal monarchy). But the fact that many people on the left would totally scoff at that idea (that the West is largely a creation of the left) is a measure of how far we have lost track of our own history, and how much we want to paint the West as evil. We need to keep in our minds just what it means, for example, for an old person without savings to have Social Security, or for a factory worker to have OSHA (where it's enforced), or for a woman to sign her own mortgage, or to have a reasonable expectation (which for most of us amounts to a 100% expectation) that her baby will live.... there are a million everyday examples. If those weren't achieved by the left (speaking widely), who were they achieved by? If they haven't been achieved yet, it's the left that will achieve them. But if they were achieved, then it shows we have a system at least that much amenable to reform. The system, then, is not entirely as evil as the left feels it has to portray it. So there is definitely something wrong with left rhetoric and Chomskian religious belief. The left has lost some common sense. Until its theory comes more into line with observed reality and social democratic practice, it will remain a small minority sect, hampering its chances of furthering reform. Sorry to have written at such length, but tackling the weight of such an entrenched belief system is a hard task. It's just as hard trying to persuade religiously dedicated capitalists, by the way, that they owe a great deal to the left. Viz my discussion with a libertarian right winger at: http://www.opendemocracy.net/dynamics/dynamic_website_document.asp?DocID=134 6&Action=DisplayPage dave web page: www.davidbelden.com -----Original Message----- From: friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media [mailto:FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU]On Behalf Of Rachel Wild Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 7:31 PM To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Capitalism what passes for capitalism today - especially in the USA , is not remotely driven by 'invisible' or 'amoral' forces. Modern capitalism is instead a highly regulated form of protectionism where powerful economies are propped up by state and meta-state laws and sharp practice trade 'agreements' e.g. gatt I doubt that such a system can ever function separately from prejudice and discrimination as it relies heavily on social inequality, post-collonialism etc. to function effectively. example: racism perpetuated by states serves to garner support for unequal 'trade' backed up by military threat, sexism keeps the wage threshold down and justifies deregulated 'flexible' jobs in low pay, part time, no-bennifits, no-security sectors defined as traditionally feminine e.g ragtrade, service industries etc. Read Noam Chomsky, Niomi Klien, Maria Miles, Vandana Shiva etc. Bye Rachel -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:35:32 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 17 May 2002 12:21:05 Dave Belden wrote: "But if they were achieved, then it shows we have a system at least that much amenable to reform"?? Hmmm reform at what cost? How do you reform stealing native lands?????? The Heart alone can refine and make an economic system work for everyone. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 15:21:30 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Cynthia Organization: Prodigy Internet Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I do want to say a few more words about capitalism before the discussion dies the death. It is not true that most Americans live worse than most Europeans. Not only have I visited/lived in European countries, but I have family living in Europe. One is staying with us for a while because things are so extremely bad in Spain. Spain has a defacto unemployment rate of about 50% with most of those employed barely earning enough to subsist. In the Europe, not counting the former Soviet block countries. The prevailing paradigm (sp) is still autocratic in nature in that it is believed a superior few should make the decisions for and take responsibility for the majority. This idealogy is put into practice through the varying forms of socialism that have a nodding acquaintance with capitalism. Complaints from the Spanish brothers-in-law and Austrian sister-in-law are that it is impossible for a private citizen to start a business because one has to pay such high taxes and fees before the business can open its doors to make money. Russians have never had the sort of socialism that the rest of Europe does nor has it ever had capitalism; what it has had is basically slavery, first under the Tzars and then under the totalarian governement that pleased to call itself communist. Russians still tend to think of capitalism as stealing and their Mafia is now a thriving industry which the Spanish brother-in-law who is visiting reports has been infiltrating into Spain. Now in the USA our idealogy is that the individual is responsible for herself. Therefore we like to think we have a democracy while we actually have a republic, but our thinking makes us really willing to tell our elected officials what we think. We also assume we can be the decision makers any time we decide to devote the time, money, and energy to campaigning. Our political system and ideology support the concept of capitalism in that capitialism is an extension of the notion that how money is earned and spent is the decision of the individual not the government. Europeans do not think this way. Talks with the Dutch brother-in-law who works for the Dutch consolate make this very clear. He believes individual's should not be given a choice of how many hours they work and that individual businesses do have the right to decided how long to operate. Now in the USA people did have to die to make sure that business interests were brought into better alignment with with the workers (individuals') needs. However, the idea of our government is the recognition of a system of checks and balances of power. Our government does look after workers and when it doesn't, the trade unions do, and when the trade unions don't the people themselves do it. Keeping things in balance is never ending work. Yes, the Cash Cow (corporations) are in the act of biting the Butt of the Farmer (the people) but Ralph Nader hasn't been murdered which is what would happen in other countries. (The Venezulia brother-in-law had to flee to Spain for exactly that sort of reason.) When we do manage to get the balance right, capitalism works extremely well with the American value of independence and individual responsibilty so long as rapant greed is curtained by our political structure. In Europe, capitalism is so curtailled by the socialist idea that one group of people is better qualified to make your decisions for you that no, people absolutely do not live better in most European countries than they do in the USA. As for charges that the USA is not a place where one can change social class. Please come down to Miami and investigate. Here people who came on rafts now make decent livings. One woman I know who came on a raft as a child now is a real estate agent, an executive secretary and lives with her imigrant husband (who is an MD) in a mansion. In addition to the immigrants being able to carve out decent lives, the group that has been traditionally poor in the USA, the black people also do quite well. This happens because here if an individual wants to sell flowers at a stand, they permit costs only $15 not thousands of dollars like in Europe. If they want to go into a profession, governmental student loans make it possible because the loans cover for both tuition and living expenses. In Spain, at least, there is no money for students' living expenses. I lived for three years in what was considered a "rough" neighborhood. (The people were really nice there.) I was the only white. My husband and I were the only educated people. In that neighborhood all the black people who chose to work owned their own homes and had good lives. The black people who rented and were on welfare *had specifically chosen to live that way* and lived better than the poor of Venezulia or the Dominican Republic (where my husband has lived). Yes America still has a very mobile society. If you live in an all-white region of the USA and work with all-white people who are mostly your own gender you obviously aren't going to see how people who come here with nothing, or started out with nothing, or lost everything and had to start all over again do indeed rise to a standard of living they would not be able to attain in Europe. Cynthia -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:33:15 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Laura Quilter Subject: recent discussions Comments: To: feministsf@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII i've enjoyed the recent discussions, insofar as i've had time to follow them ... but a few gentle reminders from your list-mistress seem in order: * keep discussion civil ... * try, just for the hell of it, to tie things back to sf * say things only when you have something substantive to add, beyond "right on sister" laura quilter listmistress -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 17:49:45 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lou Hoffman Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1bb.10fb2b7.2a16d4f9_boundary" --part1_1bb.10fb2b7.2a16d4f9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/17/02 2:22:27 PM Central Daylight Time, cynthea@PRODIGY.NET writes: > The black people who rented and were on welfare *had > specifically chosen to live that way* This may be true in some cases, but it is not for many people I know. I too live in a very racially/ethnically mixed neighborhood, and those people without good American English have a hard time getting a job that pays decently. Some people acquire English easily, but some don't, and it remains a huge problem. On the other hand, there seems to be a subcurrent feeling that in this society the 'boss' is always out to oppress the 'worker'. I've worked in many different jobs over the years, in many different areas, and every boss I've had has respected his or her employees' talents, supported them and did their best to work as a team. Some jobs were in manufacturing, some in service, and for quite some time now, in health care. My coworkers have not been moronic drudges, vacantly punching their daily clock, but strong women and men who are proud of their work. >but Ralph Nader hasn't been murdered which is what would >happen in other countries. (The Venezulia brother-in-law had to flee to >Spain for exactly that sort of reason.) Absolutely. I've done a good deal of activism in my time, and there's a lot of people who disagreed with what I was doing, but no one ever threatened my life. (Well there was a couple of young punks once, but I think it had more to do with me kissing another woman than the political work I was doing, and yes, yes, I KNOW the political is personal, etc. I was there when they came up with that line.) No, this country is not perfect, and there are other countries that have good ideas that are worth considering, but at least in this country we can try to improve things! Lou ... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today, it's already tomorrow in Australia. ---- Charles Schultz --part1_1bb.10fb2b7.2a16d4f9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/17/02 2:22:27 PM Central Daylight Time, cynthea@PRODIGY.NET writes:


The black people who rented and were on welfare *had
specifically chosen to live that way*


This may be true in some cases, but it is not for many people I know. I too live in a very racially/ethnically mixed neighborhood, and those people without good American English have a hard time getting a job that pays decently. Some people acquire English easily, but some don't, and it remains a huge problem.

On the other hand, there seems to be a subcurrent feeling that in this society the 'boss' is always out to oppress the 'worker'. I've worked in many different jobs over the years, in many different areas, and every boss I've had has respected his or her employees' talents, supported them and did their best to work as a team. Some jobs were in manufacturing, some in service, and for quite some time now, in health care. My coworkers have not been moronic drudges, vacantly punching their daily clock, but strong women and men who are proud of their work.

>but Ralph Nader hasn't been murdered which is what would
>happen in other countries. (The Venezulia brother-in-law had to flee to
>Spain for exactly that sort of reason.)

Absolutely. I've done a good deal of activism in my time, and there's a lot of people who disagreed with what I was doing, but no one ever threatened my life. (Well there was a couple of young punks once, but I think it had more to do with me kissing another woman than the political work I was doing,  and yes, yes, I KNOW the political is personal, etc. I was there when they came up with that line.)

No, this country is not perfect, and there are other countries that have good ideas that are worth considering, but at least in this country we can try to improve things!

Lou


... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today,  it's already tomorrow in Australia.
---- Charles Schultz
--part1_1bb.10fb2b7.2a16d4f9_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 20:20:43 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/17/02 11:20:13 AM Central Daylight Time, davebelden@EARTHLINK.NET writes: << The alacrity with which you jumped on me for saying something good about capitalism made me feel as if I had blasphemed in some way. All I said was that if capitalism was so outrageously horrible, it was curious that capitalist societies had produced such great results >> Dave- I don't know, I think I was reading fairly patiently a number of posts on this subject and when this assertion that capitalism made xyz reforms happen, I just couldn't let that one pass. Hardly think that disagreeing with that is accusing you of blasphemy. For the record, I also disagree with the position you seem to be taking that when we criticize capitalism, we are saying it's : a. worse than totalitarianism or feudalism or slavery or some other egregious system , b. we are saying it's so terrible we couldn't possibly change it., c. we're saying the West = capitalism ., d. we're ignoring the history of reform (the left, etal) and discounting that history, and so forth. Not only is that mixing apples and oranges, but it's saying we said apples, when in fact we said oranges, and then criticizing us for saying apples. Or maybe it's just red herring (to continue the food analogy:>)) Anyway, I don't seem to be able to sneak any science fiction into this post (perhaps there's an uncertainty principle in the herring somewhere? or maybe there's a cat in the herring?), so I'm retiring from the fray for now (until, I suspect, next go round).-Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 18:38:10 +0100 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Angela Barclay Subject: Re: Sci-Fi Women/girls in sex industry -- Men/boysinsportsindustry Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sarah: Here's a humorous anecdote to share with you about a Spider Robinson novel. About 4 summers ago I was so totally engrossed in _Deathkiller_ I got on the wrong plane from Vancouver and didn't realize I was heading for Calgary instead of Edmonton until I emerged into the terminal! It's a good thing actually, or else I wouldn't have had such an enjoyable time reading during the flight. It's been a while since I've 'gotten lost in it' but I recall _Deathkiller_ had some hot yet tender sex scenes mixed in its cyberpunk plot. (The approach to sex was one in which an experienced female joyously teaches a less experienced male to give and receive pleasure.) absent-minded Angela >Speaking of sci-fi and sexuality, though... How many folks are familiar >with Spider Robinson's work. A good deal of it is relatively light humor, >but I find his approach to sexuality absolutely wonderful. > >--Sarah (wishing for a world in which Lady Sally's Place is a possibility) > -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 20:47:42 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: prostitution Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_33.27358836.2a16feae_boundary" --part1_33.27358836.2a16feae_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Every job goes through a cycle, over work in beginning, then employees want humane conditions. It happened during the industrial revolution and sports too." again... I don't consider prostitution to ever be a *job* [it might well be work, as child labour is work] or certainly that it is not for the vast majority of prostituted people. I agree that the commercialisation of sexuality is damaging to human beings in general - and that being prostituted [even by ?choice?] is dangerous, 'soul-destroying', alienating etc. On the issue of legalisation, I don't recall that legalising slavery made it a particularly wholesome activity for example. I do think decriminalising prostitution would be helpful [possibly keeping laws around trafficking, pimping etc.?] In UK law it only needs a woman to be cautioned twice for soliciting and she legally becomes a 'common prostitute' on her record *forever* this means she is legally in a similar category as pedophiles and cannot work with children and in certain other professions. ByeBye Rachel --part1_33.27358836.2a16feae_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Every job goes through a cycle, over work in beginning, then employees want humane conditions.  It happened during the industrial revolution and sports too."

again... I don't consider prostitution to ever be a *job* [it might well be work, as child labour is work] or certainly that it is not for the vast majority of prostituted people. I agree that the commercialisation of sexuality is damaging to human beings in general - and that being prostituted [even by ?choice?] is dangerous, 'soul-destroying', alienating etc.
On the issue of legalisation, I don't recall that legalising slavery made it a particularly wholesome activity for example.
I do think decriminalising prostitution would be helpful [possibly keeping laws around trafficking, pimping etc.?] In UK law it only needs a woman to be cautioned twice for soliciting and she legally becomes a 'common prostitute' on her record *forever* this means she is legally in a similar category as pedophiles and cannot work with children and in certain other professions.

ByeBye
Rachel

--part1_33.27358836.2a16feae_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 21:05:20 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: marraige resistors Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_24.25965439.2a1702d0_boundary" --part1_24.25965439.2a1702d0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Carey... The essay I referred to is out of print in the UK but I'm imagining you are in the US so try and find it - Its called Spinsterhood and the Chinese Lesbian group: a visit to my aunts, Alice Lee, In Out the other side, ed Christian McEwan and Sue O'Sulivan, 1998 ISBN 0-86068-948-4. Other refs in the essay are to [quick but not thorough check] Agnes smedley [1930's US journalist] and Han Suyin 'my house has two doors', Johnathon Cape Ltd, 1980. The spinster unions also functioned as women's trade unions - for economic as well as 'sexual' justice through rejecting marriage Bye R --part1_24.25965439.2a1702d0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Carey...
The essay I referred to is out of print in the UK but I'm imagining you are in the US so try and find it - Its called Spinsterhood and the Chinese Lesbian group: a visit to my aunts, Alice Lee, In Out the other side, ed Christian McEwan and Sue O'Sulivan, 1998 ISBN 0-86068-948-4. Other refs in the essay are to [quick but not thorough check] Agnes smedley [1930's US journalist] and Han Suyin 'my house has two doors', Johnathon Cape Ltd, 1980.
The spinster unions also functioned as women's trade unions - for economic as well as 'sexual' justice through rejecting marriage
Bye
R --part1_24.25965439.2a1702d0_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 21:24:26 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_188.812f6d2.2a17074a_boundary" --part1_188.812f6d2.2a17074a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "I think it's partly a question of the glass half full or half empty. Rachel, your view, like Chomsky's for example, seems to see the glass almost entirely empty. This scares me, because I think it devalues the amazing headway that feminist, gay, socialist, civil rights, democratic etc. etc. campaigners have made. People have engaged in heroic struggles, and achieved solid gains that make a real big difference to people's everyday lives, every minute of every day. Your view scares me because I fear it dissuades people today from taking part in those hard-slogging campaigns, and the new campaigns that always have to be fought. If you actually believe that in spite of all those past efforts, this is still a worthless society, still entirely run by big capital for its own purposes, then why bother?" What I'm pointing out is that capitalism is not, in practice, the invisible hand of Adam Smith. Capitalism is not drifting around bestowing benevolent peace on Gay people because of the invention of the pink pound. The gains we are discussing are despite capitalism - but my main point is just to reiterate how regulated, legislated and protected capitalism is - as Chomsky would say it is welfare for the rich. It is problematic globally, for a country to champion a rhetoric where capitalism is seen as a kind of floaty wandering deity when in fact it is a highly biased system - look at patenting of genes for example... presently Pakistan cannot afford to take on US corporations legally, for their appropriation of several thousand years of development of Basmati rice. The corporations have 'patented' forms of Basmati just because they had the wherewithal to figure out its genetics ... thus the corporations own Basmati varieties they didn't contribute anything to the development of. Total doublespeak in action - with very real consequences. People fight better when they have better information and don't believe the soma beloved of the US [for example] state. Bye Rachel [currently residing in the 51st state of the Evil Empire] --part1_188.812f6d2.2a17074a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "I think it's partly a question of the glass half full or half empty. Rachel,
your view, like Chomsky's for example, seems to see the glass almost
entirely empty. This scares me, because I think it devalues the amazing
headway that feminist, gay, socialist, civil rights, democratic etc. etc.
campaigners have made. People have engaged in heroic struggles, and achieved
solid gains that make a real big difference to people's everyday lives,
every minute of every day. Your view scares me because I fear it dissuades
people today from taking part in those hard-slogging campaigns, and the new
campaigns that always have to be fought. If you actually believe that in
spite of all those past efforts, this is still a worthless society, still
entirely run by big capital for its own purposes, then why bother?"

What I'm pointing out is that capitalism is not, in practice, the invisible hand of Adam Smith. Capitalism is not drifting around bestowing benevolent peace on Gay people because of the invention of the pink pound. The gains we are discussing are despite capitalism - but my main point is just to reiterate how regulated, legislated and protected capitalism is - as Chomsky would say it is welfare for the rich.
It is problematic globally, for a country to champion a rhetoric where capitalism is seen as a kind of floaty wandering deity when in fact it is a highly biased system - look at patenting of genes for example... presently Pakistan cannot afford to take on US corporations legally, for their appropriation of several thousand years of development of Basmati rice. The corporations have 'patented' forms of Basmati just because they had the wherewithal to figure out its genetics ... thus the corporations own Basmati varieties they didn't contribute anything to the development of. Total doublespeak in action - with very real consequences.
People fight better when they have better information and don't believe the soma beloved of the US [for example] state.
Bye
Rachel
[currently residing in the 51st state of the Evil Empire] --part1_188.812f6d2.2a17074a_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 21:56:58 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: capitalism and back to Sci Fi... Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1bb.11006dd.2a170eea_boundary" --part1_1bb.11006dd.2a170eea_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gently reminded by our list-mistress I thought I'd start us off on a wonder about explorations of capitalist type systems in Feminist SciFi. OK, what about Joan Slonczewski's A door into Ocean seen through the viewpoint of Maria Miles' theory of Patriarchy and Accumilation... Miles argues that the development of the 'First World' is inextricably linked to the 'underdevelopment [i.e. deliberate plunder] of the 'Third world' [and historicaly the 'Second World'] - at one point she ponders a world that had no reserves in other landmass to plunder and argues another world would be needed instead to maintain a capitalist system. In Door ito Ocean there are two worlds [moons... echoes of the Dispossessed here]. The one moon - arid, military and feudal[ish] attempts to expand through the conquest of the other, wet, ecodiverse, egaletarian world. In doing so it imediately begins to wreck the ecosystem of the delecately ballanced ocean planet. What do you-all think of Door into Ocean as a model for capitalism at birth, as an allegory of our own planet's journey into two [?} conflicting systems of acumilation and ideas of 'wealth'? Also central to the premise of the book is ultimate passive resistance - the soley female beings of the ocean world reject violence against *people* as an unbreachable code [other living things are of course killed by them as their main sustinance is aquatic creatures]. Persons unable not to commit violence are considered maimed and are exiled - other would rather choose to die. There is an overt exploration of quaker notions of non-violence and bearing witness *but* crucially the oceanwomen can choose to die at will and with conciousness of reincarnation. They cannot then be tortured or enslaved - force does not work on them, as it does on us, through terror and compliance. What do you think? any comments? Bye Rachel --part1_1bb.11006dd.2a170eea_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gently reminded by our list-mistress I thought I'd start us off on a wonder about explorations of capitalist type systems in Feminist SciFi.
OK, what about Joan Slonczewski's A door into Ocean seen through the viewpoint of Maria Miles' theory of Patriarchy and Accumilation... Miles argues that the development of the 'First World' is inextricably linked to the 'underdevelopment [i.e. deliberate plunder] of the 'Third world' [and historicaly the 'Second World'] - at one point she ponders a world that had no reserves in other landmass to plunder and argues another world would be needed instead to maintain a capitalist system.

In Door ito Ocean there are two worlds [moons... echoes of the Dispossessed here]. The one moon - arid, military and feudal[ish] attempts to expand through the conquest of the other, wet, ecodiverse, egaletarian world. In doing so it imediately begins to wreck the ecosystem of the delecately ballanced ocean planet.

What do you-all think of Door into Ocean as a model for capitalism at birth, as an allegory of our own planet's journey into two [?} conflicting systems of acumilation and ideas of 'wealth'?

Also central to the premise of the book is ultimate passive resistance - the soley female beings of the ocean world reject violence against *people* as an unbreachable code [other living things are of course killed by them as their main sustinance is aquatic creatures]. Persons unable not to commit violence are considered maimed and are exiled - other would rather choose to die.
There is an overt exploration of quaker notions of non-violence and bearing witness *but* crucially the oceanwomen can choose to die at will and with conciousness of reincarnation. They cannot then be tortured or enslaved - force does not work on them, as it does on us, through terror and compliance.

What do you think?
any comments?
Bye
Rachel
--part1_1bb.11006dd.2a170eea_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 00:18:42 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: John Snead Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <200205180101.178Wlk3Pw3Nl3oW0@strange.mail.mindspring.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Cynthia wrote: > > I do want to say a few more words about capitalism before the > discussion dies the death. It is not true that most Americans live > worse than most Europeans. Not only have I visited/lived in European > countries, but I have family living in Europe. One is staying with us > for a while because things are so extremely bad in Spain. Spain has a > defacto unemployment rate of about 50% with most of those employed > barely earning enough to subsist. Talking about Europe as a whole seems to me to be no more useful than talking about North America as a whole, Spain is the not same as Sweden, and neither of them are terribly similar to Germany. > In the Europe, not counting the former Soviet block countries. The > prevailing paradigm (sp) is still autocratic in nature in that it is > believed a superior few should make the decisions for and take > responsibility for the majority. This idealogy is put into practice > through the varying forms of socialism that have a nodding > acquaintance with capitalism. Complaints from the Spanish > brothers-in-law and Austrian sister-in-law are that it is impossible > for a private citizen to start a business because one has to pay such > high taxes and fees before the business can open its doors to make > money. And yet (at least in the Northern European nations), everyone has access to tax-funded education (including college), health care, & medical care. This costs more than in the US, but the benefits obtained by the citizenry are also far greater. > Now in the USA our idealogy is that the individual is responsible for > herself. Therefore we like to think we have a democracy while we > actually have a republic, but our thinking makes us really willing to > tell our elected officials what we think. We can tell them anything we want, but most only the listen to what people with lots of money tell them. > We also assume we can be the > decision makers any time we decide to devote the time, money, and > energy to campaigning. Yes, and w/o campaign finance reform similar to what many European nations have, it's often a case of victory to the richest (or more often the candidate who appeals most to wealthy voters), since the wealthy can devote far more money to a campaign than the poor or the middle class. In Denmark and Sweden, ordinary citizens like school teachers can end up in national office, when was the last time that happened in the US? We are a plutocracy (almost everyone who holds national office comes from a wealthy family) which both caused and is reinforced by our commitment to nearly unrestrained capitalism. > Our political system and ideology support the > concept of capitalism in that capitialism is an extension of the > notion that how money is earned and spent is the decision of the > individual not the government. Europeans do not think this way. Talks > with the Dutch brother-in-law who works for the Dutch consolate make > this very clear. He believes individual's should not be given a choice > of how many hours they work and that individual businesses do have the > right to decided how long to operate. Also, businesses in Denmark are not free to exploit workers as they se fit nearly as much as they are here. We have some laws to protect people from oppression by those wealthier and more powerful than they are, in Europe there are far more laws like this and I don't see that as a bad thing. The relation between employer and employed is an unequal power dynamic, and in nations like Denmark, the state works to minimize and ameliorate this inequality. > Now in the USA people did have to die to make sure that business > interests were brought into better alignment with with the workers > (individuals') needs. However, the idea of our government is the > recognition of a system of checks and balances of power. Our > government does look after workers and when it doesn't, the trade > unions do, and when the trade unions don't the people themselves do > it. The same unions that have been under attack by the government since Regan took office in 1980. > Keeping things in balance is never ending work. Yes, the Cash Cow > (corporations) are in the act of biting the Butt of the Farmer (the > people) but Ralph Nader hasn't been murdered which is what would > happen in other countries. (The Venezulia brother-in-law had to flee > to Spain for exactly that sort of reason.) When we do manage to get > the balance right, capitalism works extremely well with the American > value of independence and individual responsibilty so long as rapant > greed is curtained by our political structure. > > In Europe, capitalism is so curtailled by the socialist idea that one > group of people is better qualified to make your decisions for you > that no, people absolutely do not live better in most European > countries than they do in the USA. In many cases, these nations do not have nearly the same level of natural resources as the US. However, median income is higher in some Northern European nations (due to far less inequality in wealthy) and the standard of living in Sweden is not far below the US now (and in fact was higher within the last decade). Given that they also have free medical care, no fears about poverty in old age, far longer vacations, free college and many similar benefits, I'd definitely say that life is better there for anyone who is not a member of the upper middle class or the upper class. > As for charges that the USA is not a place where one can change social > class. Please come down to Miami and investigate. Here people who came > on rafts now make decent livings. One woman I know who came on a raft > as a child now is a real estate agent, an executive secretary and > lives with her imigrant husband (who is an MD) in a mansion. Unsurprising since you are almost certainly talking about Cuban refugees. Poor people didn't flee Cuba when Castro took over, the rich did. These people often did not get out with their money, but they did escape with professional skills and similar benefits, so they were able to restart their lives at a point notably above many of the poorer inhabitants in the US, simply because they had received access to far more education. Given that college education is often beyond the reach of many of the poorer inhabitants of the US, this is an important difference. > In > addition to the immigrants being able to carve out decent lives, the > group that has been traditionally poor in the USA, the black people > also do quite well. This happens because here if an individual wants > to sell flowers at a stand, they permit costs only $15 not thousands > of dollars like in Europe. If they want to go into a profession, > governmental student loans make it possible because the loans cover > for both tuition and living expenses. In Spain, at least, there is no > money for students' living expenses. I know almost nothing about Spain, but in Sweden and Denmark getting a college education is *far* cheaper than in the US. Also, students don't end up burdened with loans, the government funds their education on the perfectly sensible theory that more education citizens will be able to contribute more to society. >I lived for three years in what > was considered a "rough" neighborhood. (The people were really nice > there.) I was the only white. My husband and I were the only educated > people. In that neighborhood all the black people who chose to work > owned their own homes and had good lives. The black people who rented > and were on welfare *had specifically chosen to live that way* and > lived better than the poor of Venezulia or the Dominican Republic > (where my husband has lived). In a word hogwash. I've known lots of poor people and my best friend works with homeless people. They do not choose to be on welfare except in the sense that they choose to do so to avoid homelessness and starvation (things that are not a fear to anyone in Northern Europe). > Yes America still has a very mobile society. If you live in an > all-white region of the USA and work with all-white people who are > mostly your own gender you obviously aren't going to see how people > who come here with nothing, or started out with nothing, or lost > everything and had to start all over again do indeed rise to a > standard of living they would not be able to attain in Europe. And if you life in most inner city neighborhoods you aren't going to see many people do anything but live and die in chronic, generational poverty. Compare the rates of illiteracy, homelessness, the % of people with college degrees and even the average life span between the US and various Northern European nations - the US does worse. Having a higher mean income (or even a higher median income) seems rather trivial compare to such real measures of a healthy society. -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 04:50:07 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <188.812f6d2.2a17074a@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 09:24 PM 5/17/02 -0400, Rachel Wild wrote: >What I'm pointing out is that capitalism is not, in practice, the >invisible hand of Adam Smith. Capitalism is not drifting around bestowing >benevolent peace on Gay people because of the invention of the pink pound. >The gains we are discussing are despite capitalism - but my main point is >just to reiterate how regulated, legislated and protected capitalism is - >as Chomsky would say it is welfare for the rich. Indeed, the farm bill (welfare for farmers) recently voted on will cost the US taxpayer more every year than the entire individual welfare system. The maximum benefit per farmer is *supposed* to be around half a million US dollars, but a few corporate farmers have taken in as much as US$24,000,000. Talk about "welfare queens." Of course, the US government realizes that it's hard to scrape by on a mere half million US dollars a year (unless of course you happen to be a Black welfare mother, in which case US$4000 is plenty) and makes it easy to restructure so that large corporate farmer's can make a decent living wage. Almost every major US industry is heavily subsidized by the government including wood products, cattle ranching, oil and gas, mining, iron and steel, and on and on. We even subsidize the Disney Corporation, McDonalds hamburgers, and the New York Stock Exchange. Direct payments amount to some US$150,000,000,000 per year while indirect payments, such as military expenditures to prop up our oil and other industries (US$291,000,000,000 per year -- more than the actual military budget each year because of deficit spending), intellectual property law extensions, and cut-rate selling off of public resources increase that sum by trillions of US dollars. In the meantime, the amount of taxes paid into the system by corporations has declined from approximately half of the US budget to less than 20%. >People fight better when they have better information and don't believe >the soma beloved of the US [for example] state. Funny you should mention soma, which actually leads us around again to SciFi, since soma is the "real" opiate of the masses invented by George Orwell for 1984. Much of so-called "cyberpunk" SciFi talks about a world in which corporations have essentially taken over major portions of what used to be exclusively State franchises, so transnational corporations run their own military operations for example, and the majority of humanity lives in desperate poverty, selling their bodies and health (the only thing they own) to serve the corporations. Oddly enough, this last already goes on as hazardous waste operations which currently kill thousands of US citizens every year are "exported" to poor countries that don't mind killing a few thousand citizens from time to time in return for cash, and the US government itself funds some of its secret programs by selling drugs (virtual soma) to the poorest of the poor, people whom the government presumably would desire to be both quiescent and powerless, just as in Orwell's dystopia. The only thing missing from the cyberpunk vision is private armies, although our so-called terrorist organizations might well be so described. For the most part, private armies are too expensive to maintain when the government does it so cheaply. It only costs a few millions of dollars to bribe enough politicians to make billions of dollars in military outlays, so capitalist logic precludes spending directly unless the cost benefit ratio is more favorable. This makes sense for the State as well, since wars are so popular that they serve as yet another "soma" to keep the citizens quiet. Orwell posited an endless phony war among the three great powers he foresaw, and we have our own trumped up "anti-terrorism" campaign to serve the same purpose, rocketing an unpopular political failure to soaring heights of polling approval. From the latest information coming out of the White House, it seems ever more likely that the government was well aware of the possibility of airliners being used to target major buildings, especially since it had already been done once in France (1994), and they had direct knowledge that Al Qaeda was planning on hijacking airliners despite lying about the fact for months afterward. We may recall that Al Qaeda was responsible for the suicide attack by boat-bomb on the USS Cole and had purchased a military trainer (A T-39) from the US and flown it to Sudan where it was used to train pilots in suicide tactics. One such flight resulted in the crash of the plane (surely the point, although prematurely) while trying to land at a Sudanese airport. You just can't find competent suicide pilots nowadays. Tch, tch. Al Qaeda was also responsible for the truck-bomb which was used to kill 300 Marines in Beirut, so the addition of the World Trade Center makes them the only terrorist group to have successfully used land, sea, and air to deliver suicide bombs. A related group, the Palestinian Liberation Front, purchased 100 ultralight aircraft with Libyan money and expected to use them to suicide-bomb Israel. They were deterred only by the fact that the Israelis found it easy to shoot them down and so abandoned the project. Hizbullah, yet another Middle East private army So it seems likely, although of course very difficult to prove, that the White House's deliberate provocation of the Palestinians and their supporters prior to 9/11 was deliberately intended to start a "1984" style conflict to strengthen a weak President's hold on the machinery of State. Haven't we seen this scenario in SciFi so many times before? Do we actually ever *learn* anything by speculating about futures? Is it just that so few people read science fiction or that, as seems more likely, so many people are fools? -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 11:15:19 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Cynthia Organization: Prodigy Internet Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01C1FE5D.4B4DFB60" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C1FE5D.4B4DFB60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The black people who rented and were on welfare *had specifically chosen to live that way*=20 This may be true in some cases, but it is not for many people I know. = I too live in a very racially/ethnically mixed neighborhood, and those = people without good American English have a hard time getting a job that = pays decently. Some people acquire English easily, but some don't, and = it remains a huge problem. I was talking about a very specific case of one neighborhood. It was = all English speaking and very much a subculture. In Miami one need not = speak any English to get a job since the city is predominantly Spanish = speaking (70%). However, when my husband and I lived in MA, he had had = a terrible time getting work because of his Spanish accent. He speaks = fluent English and his accent is mild (he works on having a good accent = in English) but his ethnicity was commonly held against him. So yes I = can verify your statements that people who don't speak English will have = a really tough time when even those who do but have a mild accent have a = tough time in areas without a ethnic population. Cynthia ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C1FE5D.4B4DFB60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The black people who rented and were on welfare=20 *had
specifically chosen to live that way*


This may be true in some cases, but it is not for many = people I=20 know. I too live in a very racially/ethnically mixed neighborhood, and = those=20 people without good American English have a hard time getting a job = that pays=20 decently. Some people acquire English easily, but some don't, and it = remains a=20 huge problem.
 
I was talking about a very specific case of one neighborhood. It = was all=20 English speaking and very much a subculture.  In Miami one need = not speak=20 any English to get a job since the city is predominantly Spanish = speaking=20 (70%).  However, when my husband and I lived in MA, he had had a = terrible=20 time getting work because of his Spanish accent. He speaks fluent = English and=20 his accent is mild (he works on having a good accent in English) but = his=20 ethnicity was commonly held against him. So yes I can verify your = statements=20 that people who don't speak English will have a really tough time when = even=20 those who do but have a mild accent have a tough time in areas without = a=20 ethnic population.
 
Cynthia
 ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C1FE5D.4B4DFB60-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 11:55:39 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Cynthia Organization: Prodigy Internet Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Talking about Europe as a whole seems to me to be no more > useful than talking about North America as a whole, Spain is the > not same as Sweden, and neither of them are terribly similar to > Germany. >From your description, Sweden seems to be quite different. However, Holland, Austria, Spain, Portugal, France, and England do not have higher living standards than we do. In some of these countries the wages are as high as ours, but living expenses are higher. In others wages are lower and living costs are not affordable by most. > > And yet (at least in the Northern European nations), everyone has > access to tax-funded education (including college), health care, & > medical care. This costs more than in the US, but the benefits > obtained by the citizenry are also far greater. A minority of people in France, Spain, Portugal, and possibly England go to college because the requirements are tough partly to keep people out. In Spain, tuition is covered but not housing for students. With their medical care, eye and dental is not covered. And in Spain very few people with or without an education can find welll paying work. In Portugal the situation in worse. In Holland and in most of Europe there is a very firm glass ceiling against women. A friend just back from Italy and Greece reports things are as bad in those two countries as in Spain. These are a lot of countries. > > We can tell them anything we want, but most only the listen to > what people with lots of money tell them. You seem to be forgetting Bush lost the popular election. This suggests most are not listening to the rich. > Yes, and w/o campaign finance reform similar to what many > European nations have, it's often a case of victory to the richest (or > more often the candidate who appeals most to wealthy voters), > since the wealthy can devote far more money to a campaign than > the poor or the middle class. Florida's gubinatorial race was bought by Jeb Bush. There is no doubt we need reform. There is no doubt we are in serious trouble when the Bushes can manage to have the Post Turtle appointed president. > > In Denmark and Sweden, ordinary citizens like school teachers > can end up in national office, when was the last time that happened > in the US? We are a plutocracy (almost everyone who holds > national office comes from a wealthy family) which both caused > and is reinforced by our commitment to nearly unrestrained > capitalism. Considering that the USA has many states bigger than Denmark in both landmass and/or population, the answer is clearly all the time. You seem to forget that Clinton was not from a wealthy family at all. Is Radar from a wealthy family? He is not in public office but he surely has national attention. Gore's family was wealthier than Clinton's but that is not saying much compared to the Bush fortune. > > > Also, businesses in Denmark are not free to exploit workers as > they se fit nearly as much as they are here. We have some laws > to protect people from oppression by those wealthier and more > powerful than they are, in Europe there are far more laws like this > and I don't see that as a bad thing. The relation between employer > and employed is an unequal power dynamic, and in nations like > Denmark, the state works to minimize and ameliorate this > inequality. Most of the European countries are very concerned workers are not exploited. However, we have many more laws to protect us than you seem to give credit for. I several times availed myself of the Labor Board's power and the few companies that mistreated me had to stop doing so. > > The same unions that have been under attack by the government > since Regan took office in 1980. There are two problems here. The problem of Reagonites trying to destroy the power of workers and the problem of some unions that have such tight regulations that they make things worse. The unions governing technical work in Hollywood are notorious and from what I hear from those in the Biz have driven film making pretty much out of Hollywood. In Florida, something surprising happened for the worse. The teachers union got Florida to pass a law that no doctor, psychologist, or other such professional can tell a teacher what to do in classroom regarding a particular child. Since my husband had worked for Medicade to go into classrooms to deal with children who were about to be kicked out of school permanently, he saw lots of abuse of children. For instance, a teacher pinned a child with cerebral palsy to the floor with a ladder. This teacher was not fired and now no is allowed into her classroom to prevent such abuse. Unions are a must to have; the attacks on them are awful, but we can not be blind that abuses do arise out of having unions. > > In many cases, these nations do not have nearly the same level of > natural resources as the US. However, median income is higher in > some Northern European nations (due to far less inequality in > wealthy) and the standard of living in Sweden is not far below the > US now (and in fact was higher within the last decade). It is not surprising the countries that are often smaller than many of our states do not have all our natural resources. But our individual states don't have all the resources our entire country has. However, they do have resources, and some we don't have nearly as much as (culture in form of ancient building, artworks, etc.) These does not mean they do not or can not produce enough for their citizens to live well. > > Given that they also have free medical care, no fears about poverty > in old age, far longer vacations, free college and many similar > benefits, I'd definitely say that life is better there for anyone who is > not a member of the upper middle class or the upper class. I have first hand reports that life is not better in Austria, Greece, Italy, Holland, England, Spain, or Portugal. > Unsurprising since you are almost certainly talking about Cuban > refugees. Poor people didn't flee Cuba when Castro took over, the > rich did. People have been coming from Cuba for decades and they are neither rich nor educated. A few are educated, the vast majority are not. These people often did not get out with their money, but > they did escape with professional skills and similar benefits, so > they were able to restart their lives at a point notably above many > of the poorer inhabitants in the US, simply because they had > received access to far more education. Nope sorry. I've taught them. I've lived among them.I'm friends with them. They do not have more and better skills. Given that college > education is often beyond the reach of many of the poorer > inhabitants of the US, this is an important difference. This again is not true. Many poor Americans don't think they can go and some don't want to go. But yes, money is available. It isn't easy to do but it is absolutely doable. I was destitute when I went to grad school. My husband I were very poor when he went to grad school. We both went to State schools for grad school and majority of students were not being supported by their parents. The students work and take student loans. > > I know almost nothing about Spain, but in Sweden and Denmark > getting a college education is *far* cheaper than in the US. Also, > students don't end up burdened with loans, the government funds > their education on the perfectly sensible theory that more > education citizens will be able to contribute more to society. This may be true of these two countries, but in all the countries I listed, few get to go to college and there is almost no good paying work when they get out. > >I lived for three years in what > > The black people who rented > > and were on welfare *had specifically chosen to live that way* and ... > > lived better than the poor of Venezulia or the Dominican Republic > > (where my husband has lived). > > In a word hogwash. I'm not surprised this is your reaction since the vast majority of poor people donot choose to live on welfare. But this was a sub-culture and yes these people did. > And if you life in most inner city neighborhoods you aren't going to > see many people do anything but live and die in chronic, > generational poverty. Compare the rates of illiteracy, > homelessness, the % of people with college degrees and even the > average life span between the US and various Northern European > nations - the US does worse. Having a higher mean income (or > even a higher median income) seems rather trivial compare to such > real measures of a healthy society. Again, I would suggest you go and live among these people as I have and then you will find that what you describe is not entirely a result of captialism. I'll be happy to correspond with you on this in private if you like. But at this point I feel I have taxed the listserves benevelence overmuch in discussing a non-sf topic And Spain is full of beggars. Cynthia -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 09:23:10 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Cynthia Ward Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Almost every major US industry is heavily subsidized by the > government including wood products, cattle ranching, oil > and gas, mining, iron and steel, and on and on. We even > subsidize the Disney Corporation, McDonalds hamburgers, > and the New York Stock Exchange. Direct payments amount > to some US$150,000,000,000 per year while indirect payments, > such as military expenditures to prop up our oil and other > industries (US$291,000,000,000 per year -- more than the > actual military budget each year because of deficit spending), > intellectual property law extensions, and cut-rate selling off of > public resources increase that sum by trillions of US dollars. By subsidy, are you including tax breaks (a different thing) under the term? It's hard to imagine the U.S. govt. subsidising, say, the U.S. stock exchange. Against what, the threat of cheaper foreign stock exchanges flooding our markets? Subsidies are far from unique to the U.S. government (which I'm not saying to justify ours. I find the tobacco subsidy particularly heinous). Interestingly, the most ardently anti-subsidy person I know is a Republican capitalist. Subsidies (govt. money purported to provide help) seem actually more in line with liberal than with classic conservative philosophy. > In the meantime, the amount of taxes paid into the system by > corporations has declined from approximately half of the US > budget to less than 20%. But that's OK, isn't it? I mean, the rich pay apx. 90% of U.S. income taxes. (I don't have the figures to hand, but if I see them again, I can send them along. And if someone knows the figures, please provide them. Thanks.) What I find particularly outrageous is the poor paying income taxes. As I recall, they get 3% of the U.S. tax burden. Reprehensible. > So it seems likely, although of course very difficult > to prove, that the White House's deliberate provocation > of the Palestinians and their supporters prior to 9/11 > was deliberately intended to start a "1984" style > conflict to strengthen a weak President's hold on the > machinery of State. No, it doesn't seem likely. This implies both a coordination and high level of planning that Baby Bush is incapable of (though his advisors are a lot smarter), and a cynical evil that I find hard to credit to the sheer number of people who would be involved, in an administration not yet a year old. And if I'm wrong, and such vile, cold-blooded manipulation happened, we'll find out soon enough. Such an evil will stay about as secret as the Iran-Contra Scandal, Watergate, and the Roosevelt administration's failure to warn the U.S. Navy that the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor. As the old expression goes, "never ascribe to malice what can be ascribed to stupidity." And U.S. foreign policy has never struck me as a work of Machiavellian genius, regardless of administration. Cynthia -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 13:37:20 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 17 May 2002 15:21:30 Cynthia wrote: "When we do manage to get the balance right, capitalism works extremely well with the American value of independence and individual responsibilty so long as rapant greed is curtained by our political structure." Enron???? Hmmm, One could argue our political structure runs rampant with greed. Just a thought. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 13:48:27 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Capitalism and Chaos Theory in SF Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 17 May 2002 20:20:43 Joy Martin wrote, Dave said: "But it's saying we said apples, when in fact we said oranges, and then criticizing us for saying apples." I love your clarity Joy, because Dave's sponsored Chaos Theory of social, political history was explored in depth in SF 1984. :) Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 13:57:15 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: prostitution as non-exhausted SF subject/plot Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 17 May 2002 20:47:42 Rachel Wild wrote: "On the issue of legalisation, I don't recall that legalising slavery made it a particularly wholesome activity for example." On slavery, I agree 100%. Slavery was 100% wrong, 100% explotation, and 100% greed. Prostitution can be transformed, much as prostitution keeps being maltransformed today. "In UK law it only needs a woman to be cautioned twice for soliciting and she legally becomes a 'common prostitute' on her record *forever* this means she is legally in a similar category as pedophiles and cannot work with children and in certain other professions." That's sad in UK. But to anchor this, prostitution/prostitutes is excellent SF subject/plot. Like Ayn Rand said, if it's worth thinking about, its worth writing about. I can't imagine women/girls dealing with negative laws around their bodies and prostitution is exhausted SF subject. Thanks Rachel Carey S. Fontaine > > ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 14:04:59 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 17 May 2002 21:24:26 Rachel Wild wrote: "What I'm pointing out is that capitalism is not, in practice, the invisible hand of Adam Smith. Capitalism is not drifting around bestowing benevolent peace on Gay people because of the invention of the pink pound. The gains we are discussing are despite capitalism - but my main point is just to reiterate how regulated, legislated and protected capitalism is - as Chomsky would say it is welfare for the rich. It is problematic globally, for a country to champion a rhetoric where capitalism is seen as a kind of floaty wandering deity when in fact it is a highly biased system - look at patenting of genes for example... presently Pakistan cannot afford to take on US corporations legally, for their appropriation of several thousand years of development of Basmati rice. The corporations have 'patented' forms of Basmati just because they had the wherewithal to figure out its genetics ... thus the corporations own Basmati varieties they didn't contribute anything to the development of. Total doublespeak in action - with very real consequences. People fight better when they have better information and don't believe the soma beloved of the US [for example] state." 1984 again. Brilliant. This should be in sf novel. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 14:21:39 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: capitalism and back to Sci Fi... Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Wonderful synopsis Rachel. Make book list of this theme too! Ha ha. I agree with what your saying. "force does not work on them, as it does on us, through terror and compliance." Hmmm. If force worked on us completely many would not still resist and strive for change. I think to be consistent, you mean: "force does not work on them, as it does on the majority of us through terror and compliance." Which explains why it is not necessary to kill Ralph Nader or others! Heck, the Nazi found other ways to make people comply without death. Women's lack aggression I find rather bending. Bending to notions of "women are nice." I watch tv program, usually women's program "Fast Women." It was about women who drive fast, fast cars, Racers, Land Racers, Track Racers, like Indy 500 and other types. Sponsors supports that hobby/industry. It just too expensive for 9-5 types. You'd have to be millionaire to do on your own. My point: Sponsors don't see women as winners in this sports and people in general think "Oh WoW That's Terrible" if a woman crashes. So "women shouldn't be doing race car driving idea" hoovers about. Maybe women don't feel that way. Maybe women feel free to write sf novels of aggressive even violent women characters. Maybe women want to write aggressive characters, but don't because of publishers. For example, Thelma and Louise people didn't like the aggression of those women, even if they were defending themselves against rape! I guess this subject's would be AGGRESSIVE WOMEN IN SF. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 17:01:46 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" , FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <000901c1fe88$a53054e0$9796520c@pavilion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 09:23 AM 5/18/02 -0700, Cynthia Ward wrote: >By subsidy, are you including tax breaks (a different thing) under the term? >It's hard to imagine the U.S. govt. subsidising, say, the U.S. stock >exchange. Against what, the threat of cheaper foreign stock exchanges >flooding our markets? Actually, the NYSE extorted $1.2 billion dollars from New York by threatening to move to New Jersey. > > In the meantime, the amount of taxes paid into the system by > > corporations has declined from approximately half of the US > > budget to less than 20%. > >But that's OK, isn't it? I mean, the rich pay apx. 90% of U.S. income >taxes. You're kidding, right? The top one percent of households pay about 24% of the Federal taxes on an average income of $1,117,000. This represents 2.6 million individuals and a little less than three trillion dollars, which is about as much money as the lowest 35% of the population makes combined, about one fifth of the total income of all US citizens. We have the most unequal distribution of wealth in the developed world. Low income Americans are worse off in real terms than the low income citizens of any other developed nation except Britain, which is not exactly a model of egalitarianism and easy upward mobility between classes. >What I find particularly outrageous is the poor paying income taxes. As I >recall, they get 3% of the U.S. tax burden. Reprehensible. This is simply nonsense. The poor pay a higher percentage of their total income in taxes than any other group, since the majority of their purchases are taxable at the state level and they pay a much higher percentage of their income in Federal payroll taxes. Payroll taxes, we may recall, are fixed. So are state and local sales taxes. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 10:29:47 +1000 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Alison Croggon Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020518020500.028aba60@www.leeanne.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" At 4:50 AM -0700 18/5/02, Lee Anne Phillips wrote: >So it seems likely, although of course very difficult >to prove, that the White House's deliberate provocation >of the Palestinians and their supporters prior to 9/11 >was deliberately intended to start a "1984" style >conflict to strengthen a weak President's hold on the >machinery of State. Haven't we seen this scenario >in SciFi so many times before? Do we actually ever >*learn* anything by speculating about futures? Is >it just that so few people read science fiction or that, >as seems more likely, so many people are fools? Not just in scifi. After all, it's recently been strongly suggested that the bombings of apartments which permitted Putin to re-enter the extremely unpopular war against Chechyna were not, as reported, done by Muslim terrorists, but by the Russian secret police. And since I had just read a book about the history of Stalingrad at the time the bombings happened, it was actually my first, horrible, thought, since the Russian/Soviet government can be and has been that ruthless and that cynical; and one can't help wondering with the WTC and Pentagon attacks, because as well as transforming Bush into a popular president, they effectively derailed what was becoming a troublesome and potent globalisation movement. And any reading about, say, Kissinger, whose shadowy figure turned up again after September 11 as a kind of unofficial "advisor", is enough to disabuse you of the notion that the government is too nice for this sort of thing. And this grim discussion reminds me of the world, not of 1984, though that has pertinence, but of Ian Irvine's Geomancer, which I read recently, a portrait of a place in "total war", which is, some say, the phase we're entering. Best Alison -- "The only real revolt is the revolt against war." Albert Camus Alison Croggon Home page http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/ Masthead Online http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/ -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 01:02:17 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/18/02 7:34:31 PM Central Daylight Time, acroggon@BIGPOND.COM writes: << deliberate provocation >of the Palestinians and their supporters >> Just want to point out that although bin Laden tries to link himself to the Palestinian cause he and his ilk really haven't done anything for the Palestinians nor are linked to them in any significant way (individuals may have some connection, but, as I read at least some Palestinians say, if he truly supported the Palestinian cause, let him come and fight in the intifada rather than attacking American office buildings), other than in propaganda from him and also from Israel and the US. (Propaganda that serves no one who wants peace, I might add.) Also, another interesting historical parallel to 911 etal (let's not forget how Bush got elected either), in re the conspiracy theory possibilities, is the attack by the fascists on the Reichstag in Germany which was blamed on the Jews, ended the Weimar republic and helped propel Hitler and the nazis to power and the world into WWII. Truth is stranger than fiction, with more plot twists than most of us would believe if we were to read them in a novel. And if it turns out that 911 is at all similar, I'm afraid none of the people that died, either here or in Afghanistan or elsewhere yet to come, will take much comfort in the truth coming out sooner or later (way too much later, from their point of view).-Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 08:27:23 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: <49.1d9f0a5e.2a188bd9@cs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 01:02 AM 5/19/02 -0400, Joy Martin wrote: >In a message dated 5/18/02 7:34:31 PM Central Daylight Time, >acroggon@BIGPOND.COM writes: > ><< deliberate provocation > >of the Palestinians and their supporters >> > >Just want to point out that although bin Laden tries to link himself to the >Palestinian cause he and his ilk really haven't done anything for the >Palestinians nor are linked to them in any significant way (individuals may >have some connection, but, as I read at least some Palestinians say, if he >truly supported the Palestinian cause, let him come and fight in the intifada >rather than attacking American office buildings), other than in propaganda >from him and also from Israel and the US. (Propaganda that serves no one who >wants peace, I might add.) Actually, bin Laden is in the mainstream of Arab intellectualism with his support for the "Palestinian Cause." The only safe complaint Arab intellectuals can make in their countries of origin, all more or less authoritarian and intolerant of dissent, is to fulminate about Palestine and then allow as how the Arabian states aren't supporting Palestinians enough. Even his implied criticism of Saudi Arabia, that Americans have been allowed in or near the holy places, would probably have drawn the unfavorable attention of the authorities had he made the claim anywhere that they could catch him. Bin Laden is a red herring anyway, like the imaginary Big Brother in 1984. The man is on dialysis, after all. One can hardly imagine him sneaking around from cave to cave with his dialysis machine and technician tucked under his arm. Although he was evidently a valiant fighter in his youth, and probably had more influence then, he's obviously a figurehead for whoever actually runs the organization, trotted out for publicity pictures like Ronald Reagan smiling vacantly in the Oval Office, who only played at being a hero on TV. >Also, another interesting historical parallel to 911 etal (let's not forget >how Bush got elected either), in re the conspiracy theory possibilities, is >the attack by the fascists on the Reichstag in Germany which was blamed on >the Jews, ended the Weimar republic and helped propel Hitler and the nazis to >power and the world into WWII. Truth is stranger than fiction, with more plot >twists than most of us would believe if we were to read them in a novel. And >if it turns out that 911 is at all similar, I'm afraid none of the people >that died, either here or in Afghanistan or elsewhere yet to come, will take >much comfort in the truth coming out sooner or later (way too much later, >from their point of view).-Joy Concocting "provocative incidents" is a very old game and has been a tool of tyrants and conquerors throughout history. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 11:56:36 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/19/02 10:28:32 AM Central Daylight Time, leeanne@LEEANNE.COM writes: << Actually, bin Laden is in the mainstream of Arab intellectualism with his support for the "Palestinian Cause." >> bin Laden isn't an 'Arab intellectual' , he's an opportunistic terrorist using the Palestinian cause and its support in the Arab world to justify his own agenda, without any particular accountability to the Palestinians or anyone else. Supporting the Palestinian right to selfdetermination and their own state is not synonymous with terrorism, whatever those terrorists who are undermining that cause may claim (not to mention rightwingers and other warmongers in the US who would like to paint all Arabs as the same, a very virulent prejudice at the moment). All sorts of claims are made by people who really represent no one, and are accountable to no one, and while I wouldn't say none of these folks are 'arab intellectuals', bin Laden isn't in the 'mainstream' of any intellectualism, Arab or otherwise. <> Indeed, and the German one is possibly the most instructive for the modern world. -Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 10:07:05 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Cynthia Ward Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My answers are throughout: > >By subsidy, are you including tax breaks (a different thing) under the term? > >It's hard to imagine the U.S. govt. subsidising, say, the U.S. stock > >exchange. Against what, the threat of cheaper foreign stock exchanges > >flooding our markets? > > Actually, the NYSE extorted $1.2 billion dollars from New York > by threatening to move to New Jersey. Ha! That sounds about right. Nothing that'll go away as long as the states compete with each other for businesses. (I don't think that qualifies as a subsidy, though. I presume it's in the form of a tax break?) > > > In the meantime, the amount of taxes paid into the system by > > > corporations has declined from approximately half of the US > > > budget to less than 20%. > > > >But that's OK, isn't it? I mean, the rich pay apx. 90% of U.S. income > >taxes. > > You're kidding, right? The top one percent of households pay > about 24% of the Federal taxes on an average income of > $1,117,000. This represents 2.6 million individuals and a little > less than three trillion dollars, which is about as much money > as the lowest 35% of the population makes combined, about > one fifth of the total income of all US citizens. I'm not kidding. The figures I'd seen didn't refer, however, to the "top 1% of households," it referred to "the rich," which to the best of my understanding comes out to more than 1% of U.S. households paying income tax. In the government's eyes, anyone in the top tax bracket is rich, but the top tax bracket starts, I understand, at under $100,000 (which is wealth in my eyes, if not the earner's!). How are they determining "top 1%"? It's possible to be one of the richest people in America and not actually earn an income of $1.1 million/year (although I don't know who would do something as risky as depending wholly on capital gains from land & non-dividend-paying stocks [capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than income, at least for most U.S. tax brackets]). Your figure appears to back my claim up, but I'd love to see more figures. Anyone? I'll see if I can find the ones I've heard. > We have the > most unequal distribution of wealth in the developed world. I'm not disputing that. > Low income Americans are worse off in real terms than > the low income citizens of any other developed nation Agreed. However, the poorest people I've ever seen outside Native American reservations were in Spain (and nearly everyone appeared to be poor in Spain, under Castro. I hope things have improved since then!) > except Britain, which is not exactly a model of > egalitarianism and easy upward mobility between classes. No. Whoever claimed the US is a difficult nation in which to advance is not paying attention to other countries. Yes, it is certainly tough here to advance out of poverty, and sometimes impossible; but try doing it in most every other country. There's a reason thousands of immigrants, legal and illegal, come to the U.S. every year to "make a better life for themselves and their families" (which is not to discount the reasons the political refugees come here, of course; but most of our immigrants aren't political refugees, thanks to our govt.) (By the way, both my middle-class parents came from "dirt poor" backgrounds, and all but one of their siblings [6 total] did the same. I doubt I'm the only person on the list who can make this claim.) > >What I find particularly outrageous is the poor paying income taxes. As I > >recall, they get 3% of the U.S. tax burden. Reprehensible. > > This is simply nonsense. It's nonsense that the poor should NOT pay income taxes? I'm confused. Or perhaps I was confusing. I meant to imply it's reprehensible the poor are paying =any= income taxes. > The poor pay a higher percentage > of their total income in taxes than any other group, since the > majority of their purchases are taxable at the state level and > they pay a much higher percentage of their income in Federal > payroll taxes. Payroll taxes, we may recall, are fixed. So > are state and local sales taxes. We do recall. Sales taxes are extremely punishing to the poor: regressive and disproportionately burdensome. Cindy -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 20:04:35 +0200 Reply-To: Torreif Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Torreif Subject: Re: Women's language abilities Comments: To: =?ISO-8859-15?B?ZnJpZW5kbHkgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBvZiBmZW1pbmlzdCBTRiwNCiAgICAg?= =?ISO-8859-15?B?ICAgICAgICAgZmFudGFzdGljICYgdXRvcGlhbiBsaXRlcmF0dXJlIGFu?= =?ISO-8859-15?B?ZCBvdGhlciBtZWRpYQ==?= In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Wednesday, May 8, 2002, 8:50:59 PM, Sarah Young wrote: SY> I perceive this as an aspect of judeo-christian sex-negativity (or, perhaps SY> more accurately, sex-specificity - that there are certain proscribed manners SY> in which sexuality is "ok" and many others in which it is "unacceptable") SY> that has thoroughly, and frequently without discussion, been absorbed into SY> the general worldview of many feminists, and many branches of feminism. Get your facts right before spouting this. Judaism is not sex negative at all, especially in comparison with the very sex-negative forms of Christianity which seem most prevalent in the US. Judaism even considers sex to be a mitzvah and requires a husband to sexually satisfy his wife (with no reciprocal requirement on wives). There is also no such thing as "Judeo-Christian" anything, and the term is highly offensive to me as a Jew. -- Wildbird mailto:torreif@subdimension.com Ivanova,"Always finding the good in every situation, eh Captain?" Sheridan,"Absolutely. If I didn't, I might end up like you." Ivanova,"Hye, what's that supposed to mean? Did anybody hear that? Did you hear that?" Corwin,"No, Commander." Ivanova,"Good. I swear, if we live through this, somebody's going to find their shower preferences reprogrammed to ice water." A Day in the Strife Owner/Moderator of: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MoonShield_WingSisters http://groups.yahoo.com/group/magevale ICQ: 82980723 Authorization required OutVale Wizard for MageVale MUSH, an adult kink-friendly role play MUSH Telnet:MageVale.mudservices.com:3333 -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 21:03:12 +0200 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Eike Pierstorff Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <49.1d9f0a5e.2a188bd9@cs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > the attack by the fascists on the Reichstag in Germany which > was blamed on > the Jews, It wasn't. It was blamed on the communists. >ended the Weimar republic and helped propel Hitler > and the nazis to > power and the world into WWII. The Nazis didn't need to be 'propelled', they were pretty much in power anyway. The NSDAP was strongest Party in two elections before the attack on the Reichstag and had 1 million members before Hitler decided not to accept new members (and it grew to 8 million after new members were accepted in the years following 1933). The Nazis did not come to power due to some silly publictity stunt. They came to power due to the overwhelming support of the german people, who obviously thought that a man who wanted to start a war and to kill all jews and homosexuals (and said so in his books and speeches) was just the right person to run the country. -- eike -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 16:34:16 -0400 Reply-To: silkstarlight@sprintmail.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Jo Ann Rangel Subject: NYTimes.com Article: In Pakistan, Rape Victims Are the 'Criminals' Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by silkstarlight@sprintmail.com. Sometimes I think to write fiction about such practices would be seen as incredulous to Western readers, then I come across articles such as this from the NY Times and as a writer I think to myself, gee, there it is again, such methods of law are being carried out in 2002, not 1902. It brings back to mind Handmaid's Tale, as well as The Lottery in a twisted way, that being how law and religion intermingle in its way of managing social climates. Was reading articles online this afternoon and thought this would be of interest. Jo Ann silkstarlight@sprintmail.com /-------------------- advertisement -----------------------\ Enjoy new investment freedom! Get the tools you need to successfully manage your portfolio from Harrisdirect. Start with award-winning research. Then add access to round-the-clock customer service from Series-7 trained representatives. Open an account today and receive a $100 credit! http://www.nytimes.com/ads/Harrisdirect.html \----------------------------------------------------------/ In Pakistan, Rape Victims Are the 'Criminals' May 17, 2002 By SETH MYDANS CHORLAKI, Pakistan - The evidence of guilt was there for all to see: a newborn baby in the arms of its mother, a village woman named Zafran Bibi. Her crime: she had been raped. Her sentence: death by stoning. Now Ms. Zafran, who is about 26, is in solitary confinement in a death-row cell in Kohat, a nearby town. The only visitor she is allowed is her baby daughter, now a year old and being cared for by a prison nurse. In photographs, Ms. Zafran is a tall woman with striking green eyes - a peasant woman of the hot and barren hills of Pakistan's northwest frontier country. Unschooled and illiterate, like most other women here, she may have little understanding of what has happened to her. But her story is not uncommon under Pakistan's strict Islamic laws. Thumping a fat red statute book, the white-bearded judge who convicted her, Anwar Ali Khan, said he had simply followed the letter of the Koran-based law, known as hudood, that mandates punishments. "The illegitimate child is not disowned by her and therefore is proof of zina," he said, referring to laws that forbid any sexual contact outside marriage. Furthermore, he said, in accusing her brother-in-law of raping her, Ms. Zafran had confessed to her crime. "The lady stated before this court that, yes, she had committed sexual intercourse, but with the brother of her husband," Judge Khan said. "This left no option to the court but to impose the highest penalty." Although legal fine points do exist, little distinction is made in court between forced and consensual sex. When hudood was enacted 23 years ago, the laws were formally described as measures to ban "all forms of adultery, whether the offense is committed with or without the consent of the parties." But it is almost always the women who are punished, whatever the facts. The case of Ms. Zafran fits a familiar pattern. But it raised an outcry, even in Pakistan, because of the sentence of death by stoning, a punishment called for by hudood but never carried out here. The facts of her case have become the subject of editorials and news stories in Pakistan, bringing her some notoriety, and in early May, a higher court called for a review of Ms. Zafran's sentence. But even if the case returns to a more typical course, she is likely to spend 10 to 15 years in prison as the result of her rape, said Rukhshanda Naz, who heads the local branch of a women's rights group called Aurat. As many as 80 percent of all women in Pakistani jails have been convicted under laws that ban extramarital sex, according to Aurat. Ms. Zafran, whether she was angry or just naïve, chose to point her finger at the man she said raped her. The assaults, she said, came sometimes on the hillside behind her house when she went to cut hay, sometimes at home when nobody was there to see. Sardar Ali Khan, her lawyer, said that Ms. Zadran had told him she cried when she was raped and that she had cried again as she spoke to him about what happened. Her husband, Niamat Khan, was serving a prison sentence for murder and in his absence, she had become the plaything of at least one of his brothers. "She complained to her mother-in-law and her father-in-law," her lawyer said, "but they just turned away." It was her pregnancy that forced her accusations into the open and led to her conviction for zina. Human rights groups say abuse of women is endemic in Pakistan. Often, they are locked inside their homes where they are subjected to beatings, acid attacks, burning and rape. Every year there are hundreds of "honor killings," in which a woman is murdered for perceived breaches of modesty. For the most part, abuses like these are carried out with impunity, and often with the support of traditional communities. Rape itself is a crime under hudood, but it is so difficult to prove that men are rarely convicted. On the other hand, human rights workers say, as many as half the women who report a rape are charged under zina laws with adultery. "With the men, they apply the principle that you are innocent until proven guilty," said Asma Jahangir, an official of the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and the author of a book on hudood. "With the women, they apply the principle that you are guilty until proven innocent." The man Ms. Zafran accused, Jamal Khan, was set free without charges. A case against him would have been a waste of the court's time. Under the laws of zina, four male witnesses, all Muslims and all citizens of upright character, must testify to having seen a rape take place. The testimony of women or non-Muslims is not admissible. The victim's accusation also carries little weight; the only significant testimony she can give is an admission of guilt. "The proof is totally impossible," said Ms. Naz. "If a woman brings a charge of rape, she puts herself in grave danger." If, on the other hand, the woman does not report the rape and becomes pregnant out of wedlock, her silence can be taken as proof of guilt. It is not only women but also young girls who are at risk, Aurat says. If girls report a rape, they face the same prospects of punishment as women. A man can deflect an accusation of rape by claiming that his victim, of any age, consented. If the victim has reached puberty, she is considered to be an adult and is then subject to prosecution for zina. As a result, the Aurat report says, girls as young as 12 or 13 have been convicted of having forbidden sexual relations and have been punished with imprisonment and a public whipping. With no safe recourse, rights workers say, rape victims often flee to the protection of influential families, which may take them in as servants. The harsh life of women like Ms. Zafran seems to blend with the harshness of the land on which they live. The dry, rocky hills along the frontier with Afghanistan, where only thorn bushes thrive, offer no hint to the people here that a gentler life is possible. Flat mud houses scattered like tiny forts across the landscape suggest that there is little companionship among the people who toil here. When Ms. Zafran was given in marriage to Niamat Khan, his family took possession of her and she disappeared into their mud-walled compound a mile away. Her parents rarely saw her again; they are too poor even to have a photograph to remind them of her. In this barren world, where people grow hard to survive, their tenderness for their daughter seems all the more painful. They sat silently one recent day on the string beds that are the only furnishings of their bare one-room home. Ms. Zafran's father, Zaidan, an unsmiling, weatherbeaten man, spread his hands as if he had no words to offer. "When we heard the sentence, we couldn't breathe," he said at last. "We couldn't think. For days we couldn't eat. There was nothing we could do for our daughter." He said he had sold his family's only possessions, two thin goats, to help pay for a lawyer. His wife, Shiraka, whose beauty seems only to have been deepened by her difficult life, looked away. "I have been sucked dry by grief," she said. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/17/international/asia/17RAPE.html?ex=1022840456&ei=1&en=d6fe694481983c27 HOW TO ADVERTISE --------------------------------- For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 07:13:06 +1000 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Alison Croggon Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <1e.285cd483.2a192534@cs.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" You might find this discussion of the current plight and history of Islam interesting (it's an interview with a bona fide Arab Intellectual). Http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/current/meddeb1.html The Islam promoted by Saudi Arabia (and therefore bin Laden) is a fundamentalist version which, as Meddeb points out, has little to do with the actual traditions of Islam. The Palestinian cause has been a football in the Arab world for decades now: the conflict is a useful political whipping boy. Interesting to ponder how it's US money that's fuelling its worldwide expansion, and also how crucial the US was to the creation of the Taliban... but all that's been said many times. Best A >In a message dated 5/19/02 10:28:32 AM Central Daylight Time, >leeanne@LEEANNE.COM writes: > ><< Actually, bin Laden is in the mainstream of Arab intellectualism > with his support for the "Palestinian Cause." >> > >bin Laden isn't an 'Arab intellectual' , he's an opportunistic terrorist >using the Palestinian cause and its support in the Arab world to justify his >own agenda, without any particular accountability to the Palestinians or >anyone else. Supporting the Palestinian right to selfdetermination and their >own state is not synonymous with terrorism, whatever those terrorists who are >undermining that cause may claim (not to mention rightwingers and other >warmongers in the US who would like to paint all Arabs as the same, a very >virulent prejudice at the moment). All sorts of claims are made by people who >really represent no one, and are accountable to no one, and while I wouldn't >say none of these folks are 'arab intellectuals', bin Laden isn't in the >'mainstream' of any intellectualism, Arab or otherwise. > ><been a tool of tyrants and conquerors throughout history.>> Indeed, and the >German one is possibly the most instructive for the modern world. -Joy > > > >"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety >deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. -- "The only real revolt is the revolt against war." Albert Camus Alison Croggon Home page http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/ Masthead Online http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/ -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 16:15:27 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lori Selke Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 19 May 2002, Eike Pierstorff wrote: > > the attack by the fascists on the Reichstag in Germany which > > was blamed on > > the Jews, > > It wasn't. It was blamed on the communists. True. > The Nazis did not come to power due to some silly publictity stunt. They > came to power due to the overwhelming support of the german people, who > obviously thought that a man who wanted to start a war and to kill all > jews and homosexuals (and said so in his books and speeches) was just > the right person to run the country. Not true. Electoral results for Nov. 6, 1932: The Nazi Party won 33% of the vote. One-third is not what I would call "overwhelming support." It might help to remember there were five other major parties on the scene. In the same election, the communists won 17% of the vote, the socialists 20%, and the Zentrum Party (a.k.a the Catholic Center Party) won 15% of the vote. Lori -- selk@io.com, selk@sirius.com, http://www.io.com/~selk "This is no time of remorse. This is a time for cookies!" --Love and Rockets -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 07:19:52 +1000 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Alison Croggon Subject: Re: Women's language abilities Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" At 8:04 PM +0200 19/5/02, Torreif wrote: >There is >also no such thing as "Judeo-Christian" anything, and the term is >highly offensive to me as a Jew. I quite understand your objections to Judaeism being conflated with Christianity, which is not a monolithic religion either. However, there are texts the religions share, and it seems to me a mistake also to deny the relationship between the two traditions, which is a profound one, and also with Islam. Christianity is an inherently misogynistic religion, but I'm fascinated how at the same time how female sexual imagery invades and subverts it - there's the full-on love poetry of The Song of Songs, or the love-mysticism of the Beguines in the 13C, or St John of the Cross, or the image of the Miraculous Hand, where the wound is startlingly cunt-like. Best A -- "The only real revolt is the revolt against war." Albert Camus Alison Croggon Home page http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/ Masthead Online http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/ -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 23:58:16 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 19 May 2002 10:29:47 Alison Croggon wrote: "but of Ian Irvine's Geomancer, which I read recently, a portrait of a place in "total war", which is, some say,the phase we're entering." Great Email Alison and sf book mention. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 00:03:34 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF,fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 19 May 2002 08:27:23 Lee Anne Phillips wrote: "like the imaginary Big Brother in 1984." Hmmmm. Imaginary?????? SF's got this (BB)concept right Lee Anne, not only in 1984 but other novels as well. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 00:15:51 -0400 Reply-To: carey.fontaine@lycos.com Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Carey S Fontaine Organization: Lycos Mail (http://www.mail.lycos.com:80) Subject: NYTimes.com Pakistan,Rape Victims Are the 'Criminals' & New Harvard Law Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 19 May 2002 16:34:16 Jo Ann Rangel wrote: "This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by silkstarlight@sprintmail.com... Rape itself is a crime under (Pakistan) hudood (law), but it is so difficult to prove that men are rarely convicted." Reminds me of the new Harvard ruling on rape. Carey S. Fontaine ________________________________________________________ Outgrown your current e-mail service? Get a 25MB Inbox, POP3 Access, No Ads and No Taglines with LYCOS MAIL PLUS. http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 06:11:41 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Women's language abilities Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 07:19 AM 5/20/02 +1000, Alison Croggon wrote: >At 8:04 PM +0200 19/5/02, Torreif wrote: >>There is >>also no such thing as "Judeo-Christian" anything, and the term is >>highly offensive to me as a Jew. > >I quite understand your objections to Judaeism being conflated with >Christianity, which is not a monolithic religion either. However, >there are texts the religions share, and it seems to me a mistake >also to deny the relationship between the two traditions, which is a >profound one, and also with Islam. Since the only common reference is to the Bible, by which I take it that you mean Tanach, I suppose one might consider parts of it to be speculative science and therefor germane. There is surprisingly little overlap between these three religions and from my own perspective I see only a very tenuous relationship. I realize that Christianity claims to have "perfected" Judaism and that Islam claims similarly to have "perfected" both but they are in fact radically different. Just as most Christians reject out of hand the Mormon claim to have perfected Christianity, Jews don't see any particular need to be "perfected" by outsiders. Judaism is the only religion which pays much attention to Torah and the commandments, the exact nature of the attention being *roughly* related to the style of Judaism one incorporates into one's life, but the relationship between Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, and even Reconstructionist Judaism is not even remotely equivalent to that between, say, Roman Catholics and Pentecostals. Being a Jew is much more like being a citizen of a country. Republicans and Democrats may differ on many issues, even to the point of rancor, but they nonetheless all agree that they are all citizens of the USA. One can quite easily be a Jew and an atheist at the same time, and quite a few Jews are. The same cannot be said of either Christianity or Islam, which are both inherently professions of a particular degree of faith in a particular belief system. Without that defining faith, one is not a member of that particular religion, but one is a Jew regardless of belief. Christianity pays only lip service to what they rudely call the "old testament" but explains away everything that plainly contradicts their belief system and ignores most of the rest unless it suits them. The foundation of the religion really lies in the books they themselves canonized and in the enactments of various leaders thereafter. Indeed, since the supposed "new covenant" supercedes all the commandments in Torah, the only real reason one reads Tanach as a Christian is to look for passages which can be construed to "presage" the birth of Jesus or reveal divinatory details of the future course of history. Likewise, Islam pays little or no attention to Tanach, since the words revealed by the Prophet supercede all previous work and are perfect in and of themselves. Moses and Jesus both are merely prophets who testify to the fact that there is only one G-d but the remaining details of their writings and speeches are profoundly irrelevant. While Jews and Muslims may agree that pig meat is not to be eaten, according to the precepts of their respective holy books, kosher is not the same as hallal. Christianity rejects both holiness principles. The so-called "Judeo-Christian tradition" is the invention of Christians, who abstract from this a validation for their own belief system as being part of a five or six thousand year old tradition rather than a new invention rather more founded in Graeco-Roman ideas of Pagan theology and mystery religion than Judaism. This callous appropriation of Judaism, making it into a mere precursor of Christianity and making Jews into mere players in a great "drama" of Christian redemption, with Jews serving as convenient puppets who set the stage for the reappearance of Jesus by gathering in Israel and rebuilding the Temple, is an extraordinary and insulting liberty, and Jews have a perfect right to be offended by it. These apocalyptic Christian beliefs also contribute heavily to the exacerbation of the "Middle East Problem," since right-wing Christian groups contribute heavily to right-wing Israeli agendas by skewing the politics of the USA toward intransigence and financing the inward gathering of Russian and other Jews of the Diaspora and settling them in Judea and Samaria, usually referred to in the news media as the West Bank. They also agitate for the expulsion of Muslims from Jerusalem, since the Dome of the Rock and other Islamic holy places "have" to be destroyed so that the restored Temple can be erected to serve as the official residence of the Antichrist and pulpit from which Jesus will supposedly rule the world. Islam is notably unimpressed by this Christian scheme, which is one of many reasons they have no particular love for the USA lately. And Christians form the bulk of the so-called "Jewish" lobby, since right-wing Christians are some forty to fifty million in number, a vital linchpin of the Republican coalition between Big Money and Big Religion. We notice how quickly the Christian right-wing deserted Bush when he foolishly tried to "get tough" with Israel. The man simply has no clue of what he's dealing with although he managed to backpedal quickly enough when the enormity of his error was impressed upon him by heads less boozed out and randomly truculent.. >Christianity is an inherently misogynistic religion, but I'm >fascinated how at the same time how female sexual imagery invades and >subverts it - there's the full-on love poetry of The Song of Songs, The Song of Songs is, in actuality, quite coy and elusive. A lot more is hinted at than described and much of the action transpires in a state of fugue which may or may not correspond to reality. At the time this book was canonized, it was widely understood to be an allegory of G-d's love for the Jewish people and their reciprocal yearning for G-d. Since Judaism rests not only on the written Torah but also on the oral Torah, which each of us heard at Sinai, the Song of Songs helps to preserve the tension between the intellectual desire for knowledge of G-d and the ecstatic desire for union. But the Song of Songs is not a Christian book, it was formed by Jews as an integral part of the Jewish tradition and retains its real meaning only within that tradition. Christians only "appropriated" it by way of a five finger discount, along with the rest of the Bible, and selectively use it to suit their own agenda. And while I agree that misogyny is a strong thread in Tanach, it is also true that the progress of almost every significant story is moved along by women. If one subscribes to the Reform view that the Bible has been edited by men, it seems clear that there are remnants of feminist traditions within it. If, on the other hand, one subscribes to the Orthodox view, it is equally clear that women are inherently closer to G-d and on a higher spiritual level, since they are exempt from many of the duties that help keep men in line. Men, because they are spiritually inferior to women, need the impetus of extra mitzvot to overcome their natural handicaps. Women don't need these extras because their natural inclination is to spirituality. That's why, in the Orthodox view, Jewishness is matrilineal despite the so-called "patriarchal nature" of Judaism. Women were the first to accept the Torah at Sinai, and women refused to contribute their jewelry to form the golden idol. It takes a woman to create a Jewish home and a child not raised in a Jewish home is not a Jew. Young girls are traditionally given their own set of Sabbath candlesticks when they reach the age of reason, because it is a woman's honor and privilege to usher in the transformative peace of the Sabbath, thereby bringing the light that is within woman's spiritual nature into the Jewish home and sanctifying it. This Jewish view is the basis of cultural feminism, although many women are now embarrassed by it, and was the feminism that preceded and formed the foundation of all the feminisms that now exist. So we see that the Bible, even if considered as speculative science fiction, is actually quite relevant to feminism and the history of the women's movement. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 07:46:49 -0600 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: PAT MATHEWS Subject: Re: Judaism, feminism, & later faiths Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Lee Anne Phillips (Snip long & fascinating explanation of the Jewish position) I think modern Americans use the term "Judeo-Christian tradition" in a political/cultural context to mean several things. The first (because I'm old enough to remember the change!) is "We used to say we're a Christian nation, but that excluded Jews, which is wrong, so we'll make up a more inclusive term." And IMR the turning point was sometime in the late 1940s. I was a little kid, but politically aware (thanks, Dad) and distinctly remember (if vague on the details) that just before then, anti-Semitism had actually been considered respectable by large numbers of Americans, some of them prominant! That's the first thing. The second is that both Christianity and Islam seem to need some sort of "People of the Book" concept to recognize that however great our differences, we have this common root. Heck, we still imagine ourselves to be the political descendants of people like Thomas Jefferson, too, though the gap between what we think and do today and 200 years ago is enormous! Not to say we're right in doing so, just where it comes from. _________________________________________________________________ Join the world^Òs largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:13:11 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <22.28c6afdc.2a16f85b@cs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Dave- I don't know, I think I was reading fairly patiently a > number of posts > on this subject and when this assertion that capitalism made xyz reforms > happen, I just couldn't let that one pass. I'm sorry if I was too jumpy. But I really felt that you leapt to make assumptions about what I was saying that were just not in what I wrote. For example I have no idea what you mean by referring to "this assertion that capitalism made xyz reforms happen." Are you thinking this is something I said? My point was rather the opposite: that it is the capitalist wealth-producing power plus the reforms from the left and center that have made the capitalist nations more open to feminist progress than other nations. There has been plenty of conflict here, between greedy capitalists and heroic (I am not being facetious) workers and feminists and our hope is that the conflict will continue, and that neither side will win, for it is the combo that has been so fruitful. I certainly was saying that capitalism has been the most efficient wealth-producing system in history, and that this wealth underlies most of the gains in human welfare and freedom made in the last 200 years (more on that below), but not that it 'made them happen'. It made the pie, we fought for a bigger slice: but with a bigger pie, there was more to go around. > Hardly think that disagreeing with > that is accusing you of blasphemy. Fair enough. But I was getting to feel as if any mention of the positive aspects of capitalism was a major no-no with some of the most articulate and smart people on this listserve. It felt to me as if I was breaching some article of faith, by praising capitalism at all. People tend to respond to anyone saying that there are these positive aspects, by listing more of the evils of the system. These I am well aware of, and they don't affect my arguments. > For the record, I also disagree with the > position you seem to be taking that when we criticize capitalism, we are > saying it's : a. worse than totalitarianism or feudalism or > slavery or some other egregious system , I really can't imagine where you got the idea that I thought this. Oh - because I talked of the Chomskian view being that the US is the Evil Empire? I do think there is a kind of weird self-centeredness in some radicals, Chomsky included, in ascribing all the worst things in the world to capitalism and the USA: as if Bin Laden is really a creation of the USA (which would imply others are not equally as capable of being fascistic/greedy/brutal or just plain mistaken as we are) or as if poverty worldwide is a result of capitalism - as if poverty did not precede it (and yes, I know about neo-imperialism), and as if the greatest gains in reducing poverty had not been made in capitalist countries, and as if most half-decently governed poor countries (e.g. China and India to mention two fifths of the world) were not now trying to work out their own versions of capitalism + reform in order to increase production. I agree with you, it would seem off the wall to think that anyone on the listserve would think capitalism worse than other systems. But now I think of it, I was, in fact, responding directly to John's writing, in which he does say capitalism is worse than feudalism: > > Capitalism is basically an extension of serfdom, except that the > > mutual obligations between serf and lord (which obviously were > > mostly for the lords benefit, but which did provide [considerably > > lesser] benefits to the serf) is replaced by a system when workers > > become completely disposable and interchangeable - in a way it is > > more similar to slavery, except the chains are forged out of the > > workers' desperation for jobs instead of from iron and steel. Like > > many previous economic system in state-level societies, the only > > real freedom in capitalism is reserved for the upper classes. You continue: > b. we are saying it's so terrible we couldn't > possibly change it., c. we're saying the West = capitalism ., d. we're > ignoring the history of reform (the left, etal) and discounting > that history,and so forth. Well, John's statement above does suggest b) and d) doesn't it? If you actually believe that "the only real freedom in capitalism is reserved for the upper classes," then you have just ignored all the very real freedoms won by the middle and lower classes. Rachel has since written: "The gains we are discussing are despite capitalism - but my main point is just to reiterate how regulated, legislated and protected capitalism is - as Chomsky would say it is welfare for the rich." I totally agree there is a ton of welfare for the rich, and have taken much time in sociology classes to try and persuade young middle class students who look down on 'welfare moms' that that is the case. But what is strange about Rachel's statement, and it echoes John's above, is that she somehow thinks the regulations and legislation around capitalism are all on behalf of the rich. What happened to all the gains made by the people? It was this kind of bizarre imbalance that I was responding to in my post. I do believe that many people have retreated from social activism into an excessively cynical view of our society, in which they criticize it quite one sidedly (many of the criticisms being just), without appreciating the positive aspects of our political and economic system at the same time. I said to Rachel I feared her negativism would feed that kind of passivity, but I wasn't accusing her or anyone on the listserve of falling into that passivity: just fearing that this kind of imbalanced rhetoric fosters it. John in fact specifically says that he acts differently from his beliefs: "democratic socialist in practice, anarcho-communist in theory" and I was saying I thought there was something amiss about that. Better to update the theory. When you add Lee Anne's completely bizarre statement, which I trust was made late at night in sleep-deprived state and doesn't reflect sober thought... > And the relative success of the USA in relation to the nations of > the world > is quite simply that the whole country was stolen lock, stock, and barrel > from the rightful owners. It's easy to show a profit when your business > is piracy and murderous grand larceny but those profits are nothing to > brag about. ...it appears that some people do seem to have equated the success of the USA (if not the whole of the West) with capitalism ('business') which they equate with larceny. 'Property is theft' is after all the old anarchist canard. Perhaps most of us on the left have not thought or studied much about wealth production. Rachel's post describes an sf novel based on the idea that capitalism is inextricably linked to deliberate plunder: > OK, what about Joan Slonczewski's A door into Ocean seen through the > viewpoint of Maria Miles' theory of Patriarchy and Accumilation... Miles > argues that the development of the 'First World' is inextricably linked to > the 'underdevelopment [i.e. deliberate plunder] of the 'Third world' [and > historicaly the 'Second World'] - at one point she ponders a world that had > no reserves in other landmass to plunder and argues another world would be > needed instead to maintain a capitalist system." If that's true, then I guess there's no hope for India and China, then? None for Africa? Or will India and China somehow get rich by keeping down Africa and the Arab countries? Finally we'll all be rich except the poor Africans who are paying for our luxuries? This is absurd. But it seems to be a very important ideological point to many on the left that the west is only rich because it exploits poorer countries. Any good economist can tell you that there simply was not and is not enough money in exploiting dirt poor countries to fuel the domestic investment that has created the current Western and Japanese/Tiger economies. Most of the investment always has come from domestic profits. A good book is David Landes 'The Wealth and Poverty of Nations - why some are so rich and some are so poor.' I wonder if underlying this view that capitalism is essentially theft is a basic failure to understand the difference between zero-sum and non-zero-sum exchanges? Non-zero-sum exchanges are those where both sides benefit - not necessarily equally. It is really worth reading Robert Wright's book 'Non-Zero' to get an idea how non-zero-sum exchanges underlie all biology as well as the growth of human communities and the bio-sphere. To relate it to Lee Anne's point above: if the culture of the pirates who steal a nation is a culture that fosters non-zero-sum exchanges within their group MORE than other cultures do, then their descendants will be comparatively wealthy: e.g. the US. If the conquerors' culture does not foster those exchanges so well, even if their stolen land has just as favorable geography, climate and natural resources, their descendants will end up weaker: they will be Mexico or Brazil or Argentina. My point for the feminist listserve is that it's the US in this fable that has been more supportive of feminism. That is partly because the richer country has more pie to go around, but probably more because the culture of the maritime capitalists of N. Europe which founded the US was much more intertwined with free enquiry, democracy and human rights than was that of the Iberian peninsula. ( e.g. The first printing press in Brazil was not set up until 1815 or thereabouts). Joy, you wrote yourself: > Just because > capitalism occurred at the same time as any of these things does not mean > that it is capitalism which 'caused' them. Creation of wealth, > manufacturing, > technological improvements? Historically related, but says > nothing about the > 'virtues' or efficacy of capitalism itself . Maybe this is the crux of your problem with what I have written. I simply think you are mistaken here. The Anglo-Dutch capitalism that was exported to and developed in the USA was much more successful in creating these things than the alternatives. It is not some kind of coincidence that the British barbarians took over India and forced China into submission in the Opium Wars - it was because their economic system was so much more powerful at creating wealth and innovation, including ships and guns. Capitalism (in its relatively free-thinking, democratic Anglo version) 'caused' this difference - do you have any other candidates? Unless you think you cannot talk about causation in history at all. In which case we are surely lost in trying to think about how to cause better outcomes in the future. It is equally no coincidence that the industrial revolution happened in England, and so it is now much better to be poor and especially a poor woman (I think I can say without being accused of cultural insensitivity) in England than in India. To put it at its most cynical, with more wealth per head, there were more scraps to be thrown to the poor in England, when they rioted in the streets. And given the greater growth of cities and education in the richer country, there were more wages and education for women, which enabled them to combine and organize and think new and more feminist thoughts, and so hold, in effect, feminist riots in the streets. But I think that the connection between Anglo capitalism and democracy/human rights goes deeper than this. It is a major reason for this kind of capitalism's success that it took place in a developing democracy and a developing atmosphere of free speech and enquiry. The democracy and the freer mental climate was one of the key differentiators of England and Holland from Spain, or the Spanish-controlled Southern half of the Netherlands, which never had the success Holland did. How could it, with the Inquisition? There were more seeds of a future democracy and a future feminism, then, in the misogynistic English puritans and shopkeepers who came to America, than there were in the misogynistic Spanish adventurers who went to South America, as well more seeds of future commercial success. Dave -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:48:32 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think it's not controversial to make the generalization that Western Europe has chosen a more social democratic path, involving better guaranteed social benefits for its citizens, than the US. It would seem likely that this was partly made possible by the threat from Russia. Just as The USA's more meager social welfare (the New Deal) was enacted under threat of communist revolution (when accused of being a communist, FDR said he was saving the US from communism), you can see Europe's welfare system being greater because the threat of revolution was greater. At the same time, European economies have for long been more controlled by the state, going back to the era of absolute monarchies. Whether the end of the Cold War is setting back social democracy in Europe is not clear. It is generally conceded that Europe has paid a price for this greater role of both employee welfare and state regulation, in slower economic growth and less innovative flexibility. This may well be a price worth paying. But it's no great surprise, then, that the innovative aspects of the modern world have come more from the USA: the computer revolution, genetic engineering, most of the best science fiction (I had to make the connection somehow). Rachel is quite right to point out the immorality of US companies getting a patent for Pakistani rice. But we should also remember that thirty years ago there were horrendous warnings of world famine, long before the year 2000; and the reason these did not come true was the Green Revolution, fostered greatly by US science. If we approve of the social democracies of Europe, John, we should recall that Hitler almost got rid of them. I love What If novels and scenarios, and this has been a favorite topic. There were many reasons for his failure, but the greatest is usually agreed to be America's entry into the war, and its greater industrial production. Hitler, I have read, was not that worried when America entered the war, because he knew that it was behind in war production, and particularly did not have certain key industries, such as lens-grinding, needed for all artillery. His advisers knew that it takes a seven year apprenticeship to develop lens grinders. The US took farm boys and girls from Kansas and trained them to be lens-grinders in seven weeks (or something like that). Women were brought in to work the factories, as all feminists know. Sixty years of Frederick Taylor's 'scientific management' experience, and its relative freedom of action, enabled US industry to turn around and out-produce the strongest industrial economy in Europe. The incredible productivity of US capitalism, then, along with its historical connection to democracy, saved democracy at that point. Where would feminism be today, without that? Hitler's idea for women was Kinder, Kirche, Kuche. Then, after the war, the Marshall Plan enabled the European economies, including Germany's, to get back on their feet: one of the most enlightened acts of foreign policy by a great power in world history - which suggests the US political system, at least then, was not quite as corrupt as some posts here would have it. For all its sins, US capitalism has been more good to feminism and social democracy than some people would like to think. I'm not denying its sins, just trying to mention it has a halo too. Or does anyone think Hitler would have been better? Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature > and other media [mailto:FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU]On Behalf Of John Snead > Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 3:19 AM > To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Capitalism > > > Cynthia wrote: > > > > I do want to say a few more words about capitalism before the > > discussion dies the death. It is not true that most Americans live > > worse than most Europeans. Not only have I visited/lived in European > > countries, but I have family living in Europe. One is staying with us > > for a while because things are so extremely bad in Spain. Spain has a > > defacto unemployment rate of about 50% with most of those employed > > barely earning enough to subsist. > > Talking about Europe as a whole seems to me to be no more > useful than talking about North America as a whole, Spain is the > not same as Sweden, and neither of them are terribly similar to > Germany. > > > In the Europe, not counting the former Soviet block countries. The > > prevailing paradigm (sp) is still autocratic in nature in that it is > > believed a superior few should make the decisions for and take > > responsibility for the majority. This idealogy is put into practice > > through the varying forms of socialism that have a nodding > > acquaintance with capitalism. Complaints from the Spanish > > brothers-in-law and Austrian sister-in-law are that it is impossible > > for a private citizen to start a business because one has to pay such > > high taxes and fees before the business can open its doors to make > > money. > > And yet (at least in the Northern European nations), everyone has > access to tax-funded education (including college), health care, & > medical care. This costs more than in the US, but the benefits > obtained by the citizenry are also far greater. > > > Now in the USA our idealogy is that the individual is responsible for > > herself. Therefore we like to think we have a democracy while we > > actually have a republic, but our thinking makes us really willing to > > tell our elected officials what we think. > > We can tell them anything we want, but most only the listen to > what people with lots of money tell them. > > > We also assume we can be the > > decision makers any time we decide to devote the time, money, and > > energy to campaigning. > > Yes, and w/o campaign finance reform similar to what many > European nations have, it's often a case of victory to the richest (or > more often the candidate who appeals most to wealthy voters), > since the wealthy can devote far more money to a campaign than > the poor or the middle class. > > In Denmark and Sweden, ordinary citizens like school teachers > can end up in national office, when was the last time that happened > in the US? We are a plutocracy (almost everyone who holds > national office comes from a wealthy family) which both caused > and is reinforced by our commitment to nearly unrestrained > capitalism. > > > Our political system and ideology support the > > concept of capitalism in that capitialism is an extension of the > > notion that how money is earned and spent is the decision of the > > individual not the government. Europeans do not think this way. Talks > > with the Dutch brother-in-law who works for the Dutch consolate make > > this very clear. He believes individual's should not be given a choice > > of how many hours they work and that individual businesses do have the > > right to decided how long to operate. > > Also, businesses in Denmark are not free to exploit workers as > they se fit nearly as much as they are here. We have some laws > to protect people from oppression by those wealthier and more > powerful than they are, in Europe there are far more laws like this > and I don't see that as a bad thing. The relation between employer > and employed is an unequal power dynamic, and in nations like > Denmark, the state works to minimize and ameliorate this > inequality. > > > Now in the USA people did have to die to make sure that business > > interests were brought into better alignment with with the workers > > (individuals') needs. However, the idea of our government is the > > recognition of a system of checks and balances of power. Our > > government does look after workers and when it doesn't, the trade > > unions do, and when the trade unions don't the people themselves do > > it. > > The same unions that have been under attack by the government > since Regan took office in 1980. > > > Keeping things in balance is never ending work. Yes, the Cash > Cow > > (corporations) are in the act of biting the Butt of the Farmer (the > > people) but Ralph Nader hasn't been murdered which is what would > > happen in other countries. (The Venezulia brother-in-law had to flee > > to Spain for exactly that sort of reason.) When we do manage to get > > the balance right, capitalism works extremely well with the American > > value of independence and individual responsibilty so long as rapant > > greed is curtained by our political structure. > > > > In Europe, capitalism is so curtailled by the socialist idea that one > > group of people is better qualified to make your decisions for you > > that no, people absolutely do not live better in most European > > countries than they do in the USA. > > In many cases, these nations do not have nearly the same level of > natural resources as the US. However, median income is higher in > some Northern European nations (due to far less inequality in > wealthy) and the standard of living in Sweden is not far below the > US now (and in fact was higher within the last decade). > > Given that they also have free medical care, no fears about poverty > in old age, far longer vacations, free college and many similar > benefits, I'd definitely say that life is better there for anyone who is > not a member of the upper middle class or the upper class. > > > As for charges that the USA is not a place where one can change social > > class. Please come down to Miami and investigate. Here people who came > > on rafts now make decent livings. One woman I know who came on a raft > > as a child now is a real estate agent, an executive secretary and > > lives with her imigrant husband (who is an MD) in a mansion. > > Unsurprising since you are almost certainly talking about Cuban > refugees. Poor people didn't flee Cuba when Castro took over, the > rich did. These people often did not get out with their money, but > they did escape with professional skills and similar benefits, so > they were able to restart their lives at a point notably above many > of the poorer inhabitants in the US, simply because they had > received access to far more education. Given that college > education is often beyond the reach of many of the poorer > inhabitants of the US, this is an important difference. > > > In > > addition to the immigrants being able to carve out decent lives, the > > group that has been traditionally poor in the USA, the black people > > also do quite well. This happens because here if an individual wants > > to sell flowers at a stand, they permit costs only $15 not thousands > > of dollars like in Europe. If they want to go into a profession, > > governmental student loans make it possible because the loans cover > > for both tuition and living expenses. In Spain, at least, there is no > > money for students' living expenses. > > I know almost nothing about Spain, but in Sweden and Denmark > getting a college education is *far* cheaper than in the US. Also, > students don't end up burdened with loans, the government funds > their education on the perfectly sensible theory that more > education citizens will be able to contribute more to society. > > >I lived for three years in what > > was considered a "rough" neighborhood. (The people were really nice > > there.) I was the only white. My husband and I were the only educated > > people. In that neighborhood all the black people who chose to work > > owned their own homes and had good lives. The black people who rented > > and were on welfare *had specifically chosen to live that way* and > > lived better than the poor of Venezulia or the Dominican Republic > > (where my husband has lived). > > In a word hogwash. I've known lots of poor people and my best > friend works with homeless people. They do not choose to be on > welfare except in the sense that they choose to do so to avoid > homelessness and starvation (things that are not a fear to anyone > in Northern Europe). > > > Yes America still has a very mobile society. If you live in an > > all-white region of the USA and work with all-white people who are > > mostly your own gender you obviously aren't going to see how people > > who come here with nothing, or started out with nothing, or lost > > everything and had to start all over again do indeed rise to a > > standard of living they would not be able to attain in Europe. > > And if you life in most inner city neighborhoods you aren't going to > see many people do anything but live and die in chronic, > generational poverty. Compare the rates of illiteracy, > homelessness, the % of people with college degrees and even the > average life span between the US and various Northern European > nations - the US does worse. Having a higher mean income (or > even a higher median income) seems rather trivial compare to such > real measures of a healthy society. > > -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com > > -------------------------------------------------- > This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for > discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To > unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to > LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > > Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 10:44:19 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 09:03 PM 5/19/02 +0200, Eike Pierstorff wrote: > > the attack by the fascists on the Reichstag in Germany which > > was blamed on > > the Jews, > >It wasn't. It was blamed on the communists. The two were pretty much conflated. Nazi propaganda of the time made much of the fact that Karl Marx was Jewish, as well as prominent members of the Communist and Socialist parties in Germany. The scurrilous forgery called The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, which details a supposed Jewish scheme to enslave the world with an army of anarchists, socialists, and communists, was well-known in Germany and an immediate response to the Reichstag fire, by Julius Streicher in Der Stuermer, an Anti-Semitic newspaper which was the vehicle of one part of the Nazi party, blamed the Jews, of which the Communists were only the front men. Our own Henry Ford believed that 75% of Communists were Jews and passed on this belief to Hitler and the Nazi propaganda machine. The Nazis asked Ford for permission to translate and reprint his serialized four-part series on the "Protocols" and placed them in doctor's offices and waiting rooms as casual reading material. Ford was one of Hitler's heroes, and a picture of Ford hung on his office wall in 1922. http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ds7.htm http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERjews.htm http://skepdic.com/protocols.html http://www.time.com/time/columnist/sachs/article/0,9565,183706,00.html http://worldatwar.net/event/reichstagsbrand/ > >ended the Weimar republic and helped propel Hitler > > and the nazis to > > power and the world into WWII. > >The Nazis didn't need to be 'propelled', they were pretty much in power >anyway Not really true, although they had power that was very disproportionate to the showings in voting results. He came to the Chancellorship with only 37% of the vote. >The NSDAP was strongest Party in two elections before the attack on the >Reichstag and had 1 million members before Hitler decided not to accept >new members (and it grew to 8 million after new members were accepted in >the years following 1933). >The Nazis did not come to power due to some silly publictity stunt. They >came to power due to the overwhelming support of the german people, who >obviously thought that a man who wanted to start a war and to kill all >jews and homosexuals (and said so in his books and speeches) was just >the right person to run the country. The last election, held in 1933 just *after* the Reichstag fire and despite a *huge* propaganda campaign, showed Germans as supporting the Nazis at a level of only 44%, which is hardly an overwhelming majority. Just as our own regime here in the USA was elected by less than half of the popular vote (and only a quarter of all eligible voters) it doesn't take a majority to rule a country; all you need is enough people to "go along." -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 21:40:07 +0200 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Eike Pierstorff Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020520094311.02664320@www.leeanne.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > The last election, held in 1933 just *after* the Reichstag > fire and despite a > *huge* propaganda campaign, showed Germans as supporting the Nazis > at a level of only 44%, which is hardly an overwhelming > majority. 44% votes for genocide is an overwhelming majority, especially when you remember that the other partys were anti-democratic (like the Catholic Zentrum, or, for completly other reasons, the communist party) or anti-semitic as well. So maybe I shouldn't say there was an an overwhelming majority for the NSDAP, but an an overwhelming majority for anti-semitism (and I fail to see the difference. It certainly wasn't much of a difference to Nazi-victims). > our own regime here in the USA was elected by less than half of the > popular vote (and only a quarter of all eligible voters) it > doesn't take a > majority to rule a country; all you need is enough people to > "go along." There is no "going along" with the Nazis - either you fight them or you support them. I happen to be born and to live in Germany. Hitler may be dead, but his supporters are still around, killing homosexuals and homeless people, attacking synagogues and jewish cementerys, establishing no-go areas for foreigners... (plus some of them attacked me and hurt me quite severly, so I guess it's something personal, too). Public opinion blames this on the Jews, who allegedly provoke anti-semitism by their annoying behaviour. And for the "Just as our own regime here in the USA" bit, if you compare George Bush to Adolf Hitler you don't know what you talk about. I'd like to bring this back to Science Fiction, but the only books I can think of are the rather apologetic "Fatherland" and Dicks "Man in the High Castle", neither of them particular good or feminist. I guess the "Drittes Reich" isn't something you should put into a novel. -- eike -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 14:54:24 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lori Selke Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 20 May 2002, Eike Pierstorff wrote: > > The last election, held in 1933 just *after* the Reichstag > > fire and despite a > > *huge* propaganda campaign, showed Germans as supporting the Nazis > > at a level of only 44%, which is hardly an overwhelming > > majority. > > 44% votes for genocide is an overwhelming majority, especially when you > remember that the other partys were anti-democratic (like the Catholic > Zentrum, or, for completly other reasons, the communist party) or > anti-semitic as well. So maybe I shouldn't say there was an an > overwhelming majority for the NSDAP, but an an overwhelming majority > for anti-semitism (and I fail to see the difference. It certainly wasn't > much of a difference to Nazi-victims). You cannot argue that 44% (or 33%, in 1932, as I noted earlier) is a majority at all, much less an overwhelming one. You might be able to argue that if you add up the votes for all the political parties that professed anti-Semitism as part of their platform, you would reach a majority. But you then don't get to include the communists in that total, as you seem to imply above. It's certainly true that Jews (and communists, and homosexuals, and...) were scapegoted in the early 30's in Germany, leading up to the assumption of power by the Nazi party. I'm not disputing that. And while there was no difference in the end between anti-Semitism and genocide, that doesn't mean that everyone who voted for an anti-Semitic party or candidate in the 1932-33 elections had death camps in mind when they turned in their ballots. This is a distortion of history and historical process. It better behooves us, I think, to be aware of the slow slide to fascism that occured in Germany in the thirties, than it is to assume an overt murderous streak in the "overwhelming majority" of voters at the time. The real world is, as always, more complicated than that. > I'd like to bring this back to Science Fiction, but the only books I can > think of are the rather apologetic "Fatherland" and Dicks "Man in the > High Castle", neither of them particular good or feminist. I guess the > "Drittes Reich" isn't something you should put into a novel. There's always Norman Spinrad's _The Iron Dream_. Not particularly feminist, but a great parodic dissection of the scary fascistic underlying themes of much classic space opera. (It's back in print, too, after a long absence.) Lori -- selk@io.com, selk@sirius.com, http://www.io.com/~selk "This is no time of remorse. This is a time for cookies!" --Love and Rockets -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 13:07:33 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Laura Quilter Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII SWASTIKA NIGHT by katharine burdekin, written in the 1930s, extrapolates nazism into the far future ... an excellent book > I'd like to bring this back to Science Fiction, but the only books I can > think of are the rather apologetic "Fatherland" and Dicks "Man in the > High Castle", neither of them particular good or feminist. I guess the > "Drittes Reich" isn't something you should put into a novel. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:58:36 +0200 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Eike Pierstorff Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -----Original Message----- > From: friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian > literature > and other media [mailto:FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU]On Behalf Of Lori Selke > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 9:54 PM > To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Capitalism and War > > > On Mon, 20 May 2002, Eike Pierstorff wrote: > > > > The last election, held in 1933 just *after* the Reichstag > > > fire and despite a > You cannot argue that 44% (or 33%, in 1932, as I noted earlier) is > a majority at all, much less an overwhelming one. I'm german. That means, "majority (of votes)" to me is "more (votes) than anybody else". I didn't know it's different in english. > get to include the communists in that total, as you seem to > imply above. True. > > It's certainly true that Jews (and communists, and > homosexuals, and...) > were scapegoted in the early 30's in Germany, You neglect (or don't know anything about) a long tradition of german anti-semitism (including phantasies of annihilation). > leading up to > the assumption > of power by the Nazi party. I'm not disputing that. I am disputing that. That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. You keep saying that the germans were more or less perfectly all right and that they were tricked into supporting the Nazis. I say they got what they wanted. >The real world is, as always, more complicated than that. Don't patronize me. I'm in disadvantage here: neither is my english good enough to lecture history by email nor can I quote anything that would mean much to you (unless you speak german). And I have enough crusades running and home, so I guess I shouldn't bother to take on another one in a place where it clearly does not belong. -- eike ----------------------------------- eike pierstorff eike.p@t-online.de inhabitant1@davenant.net "The gods do not protect fools. Fools are protected by more capable fools." (Larry Niven) -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:03:01 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Michael J. Lowrey" Organization: The Working Class Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Eike Pierstorff wrote: > > On Mon, 20 May 2002, Eike Pierstorff wrote: > > > > The last election, held in 1933 just *after* the Reichstag > > > > fire and despite a > > > You cannot argue that 44% (or 33%, in 1932, as I noted earlier) is > > a majority at all, much less an overwhelming one. > > I'm german. That means, "majority (of votes)" to me is "more (votes) > than anybody else". I didn't know it's different in english. The term "majority" is sometimes misused that way in English. We do have a separate term, however: "plurality" is technically the correct word for that situation. -- Michael J. Lowrey poli.sci. geek -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 17:01:13 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_6a.2038d893.2a1abe19_boundary" --part1_6a.2038d893.2a1abe19_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Rachel is quite right to point out the immorality of US companies getting a patent for Pakistani rice. But we should also remember that thirty years ago there were horrendous warnings of world famine, long before the year 2000; and the reason these did not come true was the Green Revolution, fostered greatly by US science." This is the very crux of what I'm arguing... when a 'country' believes its own hype like this it proves very difficult to stop what is going on with multinationals etc. OK, firstly when I'm talking about how regulated and protected capitalism is I'm talking about a set of trade practices that ensure unequal exchange in favour of the US/ 'first world' [where a large proportion of multinationals are based]. Time and again the US exerts its veto and uses military and economic threats to protect its interests worldwide *whilst* using arguments about unfettered trade to outlaw more humanitarian practice [the patents on AIDS drugs was a recent example] ...utter doublespeak in action. Secondly, the premise I was discussing by way of 'Door into Ocean' is that 'first world' _development_ was *not possible* without 'third world' _underdevelopment_. - this theme is central to ecofeminism and to many SciFi works... in SciFi terrans boldly go off to colonise nice new empty planets, planets full of stupid aliens, barren planets after hard struggle or planets full of *somebody else* - all mirroring perceptions of our own human history of conquest [from either side] - currently the green revolution is wreaking havoc in India and other countries precisely because it is based on the worst in US science - the green revolution is destroying whole cultures, wiping out biodiversity and the accompanying knowledge of how to use these disappearing species in a sustainable way to subsidise the overdevelopment of the west. In our history as a species we have not had other planets to take resources from... but only some of us have thought it justified to plunder from other lands rather than use less or distribute more equally what we did have - if some cultures have not put energy into producing technology to accomplish plunder does this make them less inclined to ideas like feminism? [I don't see that the two equate]. It is interesting that Dave mentions women in India - Feminists from Uttar Pradesh have charted the devastating effects of capitalism on women's lives. Within a *generation* women who led interesting and emancipated lives through a combination of gathering and light agriculture have seen their crops replaced by monoculture plantation. This has created a cash economy these women have little access to - it has brought alcohol misuses and an epidemic of domestic violence. These women have also begun to loose an extensive education in holistic farming etc. This is why so many have become involved in the Chipko resistance movement. There *is* world famine at the present time - largely helped by war and ecological decimation. Meanwhile Multinationals like Monsanto [who invented the obscenity of terminator seeds that do not produce viable progeny *expressly* so farmers have to buy from them year upon year] use the propaganda of feeding the world's poor to bolster their empire. Truly, when looking at situations like this I believe science is outstripping the horror potential of SciFi. Lastly this whole argument about the benevolence of capitalism feeds into notions of cultural superiority - which whilst non-palatable at anytime are particularly problematic at the moment. i.e.few gave a fig for women under Taliban rule in Afghanistan till it became expedient to hold their liberation up as an excuse for another war [over oil?] I don't think anyone on the list is accepting such ideas wholesale but we still need to come back to these themes and complexities - and I believe understanding them helps people oppose them. This is why we have 'greenwash' as illustrated above - precisely to confuse the 'educated'. I would like to continue to discuss the themes of development/ underdevelopment, colonisation/conquest in SciFi if anyone is interested. I have a great affection for parables such as leGuin's 'the word for world is forest' that use the metaphor of alienees to look at how non-western peoples have been viewed by western science etc. ByeBye Rachel --part1_6a.2038d893.2a1abe19_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Rachel is quite right to point out the immorality of US companies getting a
patent for Pakistani rice. But we should also remember that thirty years ago
there were horrendous warnings of world famine, long before the year 2000;
and the reason these did not come true was the Green Revolution, fostered
greatly by US science."

This is the very crux of what I'm arguing... when a 'country' believes its own hype like this it proves very difficult to stop what is going on with multinationals etc.

OK, firstly when I'm talking about how regulated and protected capitalism is I'm talking about a set of trade practices that ensure unequal exchange in favour of the US/ 'first world' [where a large proportion of multinationals are based]. Time and again the US exerts its veto and uses military and economic threats to protect its interests worldwide *whilst* using arguments about unfettered trade to outlaw more humanitarian practice [the patents on AIDS drugs was a recent example] ...utter doublespeak in action.
Secondly, the premise I was discussing by way of 'Door into Ocean' is that 'first world' _development_ was *not possible* without 'third world' _underdevelopment_. - this theme is central to ecofeminism and to many SciFi works... in SciFi terrans boldly go off to colonise nice new empty planets, planets full of stupid aliens, barren planets after hard struggle or planets full of *somebody else* - all mirroring perceptions of our own human history of conquest [from either side] - currently the green revolution is wreaking havoc in India and other countries precisely because it is based on the worst in US science - the green revolution is destroying whole cultures, wiping out biodiversity and the accompanying knowledge of how to use these disappearing species in a sustainable way to subsidise the overdevelopment of the west.
In our history as a species we have not had other planets to take resources from... but only some of us have thought it justified to plunder from other lands rather than use less or distribute more equally what we did have - if some cultures have not put energy into producing technology to accomplish plunder does this make them less inclined to ideas like feminism? [I don't see that the two equate].

It is interesting that Dave mentions women in India - Feminists from Uttar Pradesh have charted the devastating effects of capitalism on women's lives. Within a *generation* women who led interesting and emancipated lives through a combination of gathering and light agriculture have seen their crops replaced by monoculture plantation. This has created a cash economy these women have little access to - it has brought alcohol misuses and an epidemic of domestic violence. These women have also begun to loose an extensive education in holistic farming etc. This is why so many have become involved in the Chipko resistance movement.

There *is* world famine at the present time - largely helped by war and ecological decimation. Meanwhile Multinationals like Monsanto [who invented the obscenity of terminator seeds that do not produce viable progeny *expressly* so farmers have to buy from them year upon year] use the propaganda of feeding the world's poor to bolster their empire.
Truly, when looking at situations like this I believe science is outstripping the horror potential of SciFi.

Lastly this whole argument about the benevolence of capitalism feeds into notions of cultural superiority - which whilst non-palatable at anytime are particularly problematic at the moment. i.e.few gave a fig for women under Taliban rule in Afghanistan till it became expedient to hold their liberation up as an excuse for another war [over oil?]

I don't think anyone on the list is accepting such ideas wholesale but we still need to come back to these themes and complexities - and I believe understanding them helps people oppose them. This is why we have 'greenwash' as illustrated above - precisely to confuse the 'educated'.

I would like to continue to discuss the themes of development/ underdevelopment, colonisation/conquest in SciFi if anyone is interested. I have a great affection for parables such as leGuin's 'the word for world is forest' that use the metaphor of alienees to look at how non-western peoples have been viewed by western science etc.
ByeBye
Rachel --part1_6a.2038d893.2a1abe19_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 17:08:25 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Janet Dowling Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 18 May 2002 to 19 May 2002 (#2002-28) Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1a1.2875dce.2a1abfc9_boundary" --part1_1a1.2875dce.2a1abfc9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit um! I thought this was a feminist SF discussion forum. My digest today seems to suggest that this has become more of a political / human rights discussion forum. Important in its place- but should it be here? - or did we agree to broaden the remit? Janet Dowling --part1_1a1.2875dce.2a1abfc9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit um!

I thought this was a feminist SF discussion forum. My digest today seems to suggest that this has become more of a political / human rights discussion forum. Important in its place- but should it be here? - or did we agree to broaden the remit?

Janet Dowling --part1_1a1.2875dce.2a1abfc9_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 17:10:50 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Sarah Young Subject: Re: Women's language abilities Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed >From: Torreif > >Wednesday, May 8, 2002, 8:50:59 PM, Sarah Young wrote: > >SY> I perceive this as an aspect of judeo-christian sex-negativity (or, >perhaps >SY> more accurately, sex-specificity - that there are certain proscribed >manners >SY> in which sexuality is "ok" and many others in which it is >"unacceptable") >SY> that has thoroughly, and frequently without discussion, been absorbed >into >SY> the general worldview of many feminists, and many branches of feminism. > >Get your facts right before spouting this. Judaism is not sex >negative at all, especially in comparison with the very sex-negative >forms of Christianity which seem most prevalent in the US. Judaism >even considers sex to be a mitzvah and requires a husband to sexually >satisfy his wife (with no reciprocal requirement on wives). There is >also no such thing as "Judeo-Christian" anything, and the term is >highly offensive to me as a Jew. > >-- >Wildbird > I apologize for offending you with that choice of terms; it wasn't a hot-button of which I was aware. However, if you reread what I wrote, you will see that I clarified in my original post the issue of sex-specificity, as opposed to sex-negativity. I do stand by that statement. Mitzvahs regarding interactions between husband and wife don't contradict that point, they reinforce it, just as it is possible for christians to see sex within marriage as a holy act, while many see sex outside of marriage as something wholely different and unacceptable on religious grounds. --Sarah _________________________________________________________________ Join the world^Òs largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 17:12:54 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: FeministSF Comments: To: eike.p@T-ONLINE.DE Comments: cc: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_170.de6069e.2a1ac0d6_boundary" --part1_170.de6069e.2a1ac0d6_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit eike... Please keep up you posts - I think the experience and knowledge of contemporary German Anti-Fascists is very important at present. Here in the UK the debates about people asking Asylum seems very like 1930's anti-Semitism. People are being portrayed at a swarm of vermin and we are about to build detention centres - which are unlikely to be an immediate step to genocide but are scaring me nonetheless. Thanks ByeBye Rachel PS I have copied this to the list --part1_170.de6069e.2a1ac0d6_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit eike...
Please keep up you posts - I think the experience and knowledge of contemporary German Anti-Fascists is very important at present. Here in the UK the debates about people asking Asylum seems very like 1930's anti-Semitism. People are being portrayed at a swarm of vermin and we are about to build detention centres - which are unlikely to be an immediate step to genocide but are scaring me nonetheless.

Thanks
ByeBye
Rachel

PS I have copied this to the list --part1_170.de6069e.2a1ac0d6_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:28:55 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Michael J. Lowrey" Organization: The Working Class Subject: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To return to the theoretical topic of this list: How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this coming weekend? -- Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey attending for his 25th year in a row -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:02:18 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Erzebet Barthold Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <3CE96A97.ED7073FA@uwm.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" I will be there! I am a mere lurker here, however. Erzebet first time attendee >To return to the theoretical topic of this list: > >How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this >coming weekend? > >-- >Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey >attending for his 25th year in a row -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:11:47 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Laura Quilter Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <3CE96A97.ED7073FA@uwm.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII me, anyway -- and i'm very excited because i haven't been there in 3-ish years. shall we have a party? On Mon, 20 May 2002, Michael J. Lowrey wrote: > To return to the theoretical topic of this list: > > How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this > coming weekend? > > -- > Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey > attending for his 25th year in a row > > -------------------------------------------------- > This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for > discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To > unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to > LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > > Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > Laura Quilter / lquilter@exo.net -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 19:15:03 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Priscilla H. Ballou" Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Erzebet Barthold wrote: > I will be there! > I am a mere lurker here, however. They also serve who only lurk and read. Or so I devoutly hope. > Erzebet > first time attendee I had hoped to be a first time attendee this year, but my mother's moving into a retirement home last week put a crimp in my style. I was helping her pack, and now I'm trying to re-create order in my home since I've added a number of pieces of family furniture and many many knick-knacks etc. which had been in her house to my home. Maybe next year? Priscilla -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:23:00 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: heather w Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <3CE96A97.ED7073FA@uwm.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" I'll be there -- look for Broad Universe events friday afternoon and evening and saturday afternoon. Plus our information table next to the author signing area. Heather, wiscon attendee 8 (!) years in a row this year .*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.* heather whipple, web manager for Broad Universe heyiya@earthlink.net :: web@broaduniverse.org www.broaduniverse.org -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 19:57:34 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 3:55:50 PM Central Daylight Time, eike.p@T-ONLINE.DE writes: << You keep saying that the germans were more or less perfectly all right and that they were tricked into supporting the Nazis. >> Mmm, don't think (at least I hope not) anyone is saying the Germans were ok, that there was no antisemitism before the Reichstag attack or before Hitler. If there hadn't been, such an attack would not have worked to the degree it did. But it was a catalyst, as I understand it, for pushing the country over the edge - to that point it might have yet been possible to stop Hitler becoming head of state (or might not, we can't be sure of any of this because of course- we are back to that problem, there is no way to prove otherwise, because what happened happened, and the alternatives did not)- but for certain segments of the population, it made the difference in their support. In no way was I saying that ONLY because of a 'trick' did Hitler and his party take over. But it did serve the purpose, I think, for which it was intended, to provide an immediate propaganda basis for final consolidation of power and further aggression. An analogy to the US might be that because of the 911 attack, voices which normally might have been raised against an attack on Afghanistan, and various other attacks on civil liberties in the US, were silenced. People who were always gungho about attacking other countries, or who were antiArab, of course have been around for a while. 911 may not be a 'trick' in the sense the Reichstag attack was, although in the world of conspiracy theory, a lot of people think it's possible. But the effect has been similar to the Reichstag attack, in terms of use of it as propaganda by the government, increased popularity for a head of state who previously had much lower approval, and increased support for aggressive military actions everywhere because of that. The best science fiction connection to all this is still 1984, in my view, but that's not particularly 'feminist' science fiction. Glad to hear some suggestions from others on that point.-Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:04:39 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Women's language abilities Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 8:13:24 AM Central Daylight Time, leeanne@LEEANNE.COM writes: << Women don't need these extras because their natural inclination is to spirituality. >> Are you saying that women are naturally spiritual (as opposed to men not being?) or are you saying this is a Jewish belief?-Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:04:42 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 11:12:47 AM Central Daylight Time, davebelden@EARTHLINK.NET writes: << For example I have no idea what you mean by referring to "this assertion that capitalism made xyz reforms happen." Are you thinking this is something I >> Yes, it was something you said. But I''m not going to go back through this again. -Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:04:40 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Women's language abilities Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 8:13:24 AM Central Daylight Time, leeanne@LEEANNE.COM writes: << cultural feminism, although many women are now embarrassed by it, and was the feminism that preceded and formed the foundation of all the feminisms that now exist. >> cultural feminism came along after the early feminism of the second wave, which on the radical arm (as distinct from the more reformist NOW type arm) of the WLM included various positions such as prowoman line, etal. Many radical feminists of the early years view 'cultural feminism' , depending on which variation , as a retrograde position. Some 'cultural feminists' took up a line of women as inherently superior, 'essentially' or innately having this or that attribute, which is politically reactionary, whatever the intent of those women who followed that line.-Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:11:47 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: FEMINISTSF Digest - 18 May 2002 to 19 May 2002 (#2002-28) Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 4:09:12 PM Central Daylight Time, JADowling@AOL.COM writes: << I thought this was a feminist SF discussion forum. My digest today seems to suggest that this has become more of a political / human rights discussion forum. Important in its place- but should it be here? - or did we agree to broaden the remit? >> No actually we are just all straying a lot, as happens from time to time. Trying to get back on track, but sometimes going astray seems to be a necessity for a while. For whatever reason. Hang in there.-Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:25:32 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lou Hoffman Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_121.112c31cb.2a1aedfc_boundary" --part1_121.112c31cb.2a1aedfc_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 4:26:41 PM Central Daylight Time, orangest@UWM.EDU writes: > How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this > coming weekend? > > -- > Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey > attending for his 25th year in a row > > I'll be there! 25 years! I'm jealous, this is 7 for me. Lou ... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today, it's already tomorrow in Australia. ---- Charles Schultz --part1_121.112c31cb.2a1aedfc_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 4:26:41 PM Central Daylight Time, orangest@UWM.EDU writes:


How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this
coming weekend?

--
Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
attending for his 25th year in a row



I'll be there! 
25 years! I'm jealous, this is 7 for me.

Lou

... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today,  it's already tomorrow in Australia.
---- Charles Schultz
--part1_121.112c31cb.2a1aedfc_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 21:35:48 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rose Reith Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <121.112c31cb.2a1aedfc@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1190177477==_ma============" --============_-1190177477==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" >In a message dated 5/20/02 4:26:41 PM Central Daylight Time, >orangest@UWM.EDU writes: > >>How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this >>coming weekend? >> >>-- >>Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey >>attending for his 25th year in a row >> > > >I'll be there! >25 years! I'm jealous, this is 7 for me. > >Lou > >... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today, it's >already tomorrow in Australia. >---- Charles Schultz My daughter and I will be there. It's only our second time. I wish I had been aware of it earlier in my life. Rose & Cat Reith -- 'As a woman I have no country. As a woman my country is the whole world.' Virginia Woolf --============_-1190177477==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Re: [*FSFFU*] Wiscon
In a message dated 5/20/02 4:26:41 PM Central Daylight Time, orangest@UWM.EDU writes:
How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this
coming weekend?

--
Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
attending for his 25th year in a row


I'll be there! 
25 years! I'm jealous, this is 7 for me.

Lou

... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today,  it's already tomorrow in Australia.
---- Charles Schultz

My daughter and I will be there. It's only our second time.  I wish I had been aware of it earlier in my life.

Rose & Cat Reith
--
'As a woman I have no country. As a woman my country is the whole world.'
 Virginia Woolf
--============_-1190177477==_ma============-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 21:48:29 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <6a.2038d893.2a1abe19@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C20048.13FEB4A0" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C20048.13FEB4A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I agree with much of what you have to say - that the US uses its power to write trade regulations in its favor, yes. This is a major scandal and it requires concerted action by many countries - it may take a long time. I don't know about the experience you describe in Uttar Pradesh, but have no reason to doubt what you say. There are definitely huge problems with the disruptive power of capitalism (and agricultural revolutions in general), and the interests of the poor and powerless have to be fought for all along the way, usually by themselves, as there are few others to do it. I have taken part in campaigns that were trying to represent the interests of the poor of other countries to western institutions; and I think it fundamentally important that the kinds of struggles that created democracy, social welfare, brakes on monopoly, trade unions etc. in the West be engaged in more on a world wide basis, to counter the power of global corporations. That is the huge challenge of the coming century for social activists. Maybe in order to fight those battles we have to have a simplistic 'down with capitalism' philosophy, but I fear that's what led to Leninism. Surely we can develop a more balanced philosophy. I am certainly not one of those justifying plunder of other lands. You seem to misunderstand my point about capitalism and feminism: you ask, "if some cultures have not put energy into producing technology to accomplish plunder does this make them less inclined to ideas like feminism?" - I never said anything like that. My argument is more like this: 1) Traditional cultures (let's say above a hunter/gatherer level), have tended to be patriarchal, for reasons I guess mainly to do with the power of warriors, herders and land owners in those economies. 2) The modern, advanced city economy is one more conducive to feminism, at least in those societies that have traditions of democracy and human rights legislation, because many women get wages, careers, educations, independence, the ability to combine in social movements, at the ballot box etc. 3) The enormous productive power of modern capitalism made its leading practitioners (Britain, France, the USA etc) both the dominant imperialists (this I was not justifying or supporting in any way) and the leading urban centers with the most educated populations, who thus became the leading edge of the assault on patriarchal social values by women, gays etc. The plunder and the feminism are negative and positive effects of the same basic economic system. I do not believe the plunder is inevitable: democratic action can hold it in check (there are numerous examples, more domestic than international, but copying the domestic achievements on the international stage is the task we now have). You write: "There *is* world famine at the present time - largely helped by war and ecological decimation." Yes, there is a horrifying amount of famine. However, the UN figures show that while population has doubled in the last 40 years, the caloric intake per head in developing countries has actually grown by 38% in that time (from below 2000 calories to over 2600 - this is an average, of course - not everyone has benefited equally - as you say, wars disrupt food distribution). The proportion of people starving, by the UN definition, has gone down from 35% globally to 18%, and is projected to fall to 12% by 2010. Not only the proportion, but the actual number of people starving has fallen. Food is actually more plentiful and cheaper. The chief reason for this progress is the Green Revolution. All kinds of improved crops and livestock are involved in the Green Revolution - it has enormously increased production.Yes, it has been applied in problematic ways (traditional cultures get mangled in agricultural and industrial revolutions), and has ecological problems. But do you have a counter explanation for how a world population twice the size is now better fed? I would like to hear it. Seriously. Am I missing something? I understand the problem of cultural superiority. But with rare exceptions like Mbeki's odd views about AIDS in South Africa, it's not too often that people reject things that actually work from another culture: like penicillin. Antibiotics and protease inhibitors, to mention just a couple of results of capitalist science, do save lives that other cures can not save: they are superior. In the same way, traditional medicines, e.g. acupuncture, are becoming popular in the States, when they can do what allopathic medicine cannot, and are therefore superior. Hopefully, we can become clear what are the stripped down basics of the capitalism that has made many poor countries rich: it's nothing to do with the English language, or European music or dress styles, or Christian or Jewish religion, or clog dancing, or imperialism. It's democracy, free enquiry, limited liability and laws of contract, property rights, civil rights etc. One of the most interesting things to watch over the next decades will be China's embrace of capitalism: some people say that in order to compete successfully in world markets China will have to allow democracy, civil rights etc. - that capitalism is inefficient without it. But Singapore is making a strong bid to disprove that. I hope the optimists are right. I too would like to see all this explored more in science fiction. Certainly I fear the rampant rogue capitalism of many dystopian novels. But another future I fear in the 21st century is an anti-globalization movement that is so exaggeratedly anti-capitalist that it kills the best chance of ending poverty and famine we have. I think there will be enough opposition to capitalist horrors, as there has been in Europe and the US, but I fear that it will be fascist/fundamentalist, or some kind of revived communist dream, rather than democratic and inspired by the European/US examples. The more the feminists of Uttar Pradesh are persuaded that all capitalism is a "moral and social blight that civilized nations are working to overcome," to quote John Snead, the less likely they are to sign up with the Grameen Bank for microloans that have helped thousands of poor women become economically independent. Microlending, pioneered in India by Grameen, has long been taken up by feminists in the US to help poor women set up their own businesses: it was culturally superior to anything we had. I believe increasingly, the cultural flow will go every way, not just West to the rest. Dave -----Original Message----- From: friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media [mailto:FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU]On Behalf Of Rachel Wild Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 5:01 PM To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Capitalism "Rachel is quite right to point out the immorality of US companies getting a patent for Pakistani rice. But we should also remember that thirty years ago there were horrendous warnings of world famine, long before the year 2000; and the reason these did not come true was the Green Revolution, fostered greatly by US science." This is the very crux of what I'm arguing... when a 'country' believes its own hype like this it proves very difficult to stop what is going on with multinationals etc. OK, firstly when I'm talking about how regulated and protected capitalism is I'm talking about a set of trade practices that ensure unequal exchange in favour of the US/ 'first world' [where a large proportion of multinationals are based]. Time and again the US exerts its veto and uses military and economic threats to protect its interests worldwide *whilst* using arguments about unfettered trade to outlaw more humanitarian practice [the patents on AIDS drugs was a recent example] ...utter doublespeak in action. Secondly, the premise I was discussing by way of 'Door into Ocean' is that 'first world' _development_ was *not possible* without 'third world' _underdevelopment_. - this theme is central to ecofeminism and to many SciFi works... in SciFi terrans boldly go off to colonise nice new empty planets, planets full of stupid aliens, barren planets after hard struggle or planets full of *somebody else* - all mirroring perceptions of our own human history of conquest [from either side] - currently the green revolution is wreaking havoc in India and other countries precisely because it is based on the worst in US science - the green revolution is destroying whole cultures, wiping out biodiversity and the accompanying knowledge of how to use these disappearing species in a sustainable way to subsidise the overdevelopment of the west. In our history as a species we have not had other planets to take resources from... but only some of us have thought it justified to plunder from other lands rather than use less or distribute more equally what we did have - if some cultures have not put energy into producing technology to accomplish plunder does this make them less inclined to ideas like feminism? [I don't see that the two equate]. It is interesting that Dave mentions women in India - Feminists from Uttar Pradesh have charted the devastating effects of capitalism on women's lives. Within a *generation* women who led interesting and emancipated lives through a combination of gathering and light agriculture have seen their crops replaced by monoculture plantation. This has created a cash economy these women have little access to - it has brought alcohol misuses and an epidemic of domestic violence. These women have also begun to loose an extensive education in holistic farming etc. This is why so many have become involved in the Chipko resistance movement. There *is* world famine at the present time - largely helped by war and ecological decimation. Meanwhile Multinationals like Monsanto [who invented the obscenity of terminator seeds that do not produce viable progeny *expressly* so farmers have to buy from them year upon year] use the propaganda of feeding the world's poor to bolster their empire. Truly, when looking at situations like this I believe science is outstripping the horror potential of SciFi. Lastly this whole argument about the benevolence of capitalism feeds into notions of cultural superiority - which whilst non-palatable at anytime are particularly problematic at the moment. i.e.few gave a fig for women under Taliban rule in Afghanistan till it became expedient to hold their liberation up as an excuse for another war [over oil?] I don't think anyone on the list is accepting such ideas wholesale but we still need to come back to these themes and complexities - and I believe understanding them helps people oppose them. This is why we have 'greenwash' as illustrated above - precisely to confuse the 'educated'. I would like to continue to discuss the themes of development/ underdevelopment, colonisation/conquest in SciFi if anyone is interested. I have a great affection for parables such as leGuin's 'the word for world is forest' that use the metaphor of alienees to look at how non-western peoples have been viewed by western science etc. ByeBye Rachel ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C20048.13FEB4A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I = agree with much of=20 what you have to say - that the US uses its power to write trade=20 regulations in its favor, yes. This is a major scandal and it requires = concerted=20 action by many countries - it may take a long time. I don't know about = the=20 experience you describe in Uttar Pradesh, but have no reason to=20 doubt what you say. There are definitely huge problems with the = disruptive=20 power of capitalism (and agricultural revolutions in general), and the = interests=20 of the poor and powerless have to be fought for all along the way, = usually by=20 themselves, as there are few others to do it. I have taken part in = campaigns=20 that were trying to represent the interests of the poor of other = countries to=20 western institutions; and I think it fundamentally important that the = kinds of=20 struggles that created democracy,  social welfare, brakes on = monopoly,=20 trade unions etc. in the West be engaged in more on a world wide basis, = to=20 counter the power of global corporations. That is the huge challenge of = the=20 coming century for social activists. Maybe in order to fight those = battles we=20 have to have a simplistic 'down with capitalism' philosophy, but I fear = that's=20 what led to Leninism. Surely we can develop a more balanced=20 philosophy.
 
I am=20 certainly not one of those justifying plunder of other lands. You = seem to=20 misunderstand my point about capitalism and feminism: you ask, "if some = cultures=20 have not put energy into producing technology to accomplish plunder does = this=20 make them less inclined to ideas like feminism?" - I never said anything = like=20 that. My argument is more like this:
 
1) Traditional cultures (let's say = above a=20 hunter/gatherer level), have tended to be patriarchal, for reasons I = guess=20 mainly to do with the power of warriors, herders and land owners in = those=20 economies. 
 
2)=20 The modern, advanced city = economy is=20 one more conducive to feminism, at least in those societies that have = traditions=20 of democracy and human rights legislation, because many women get wages, = careers, educations, independence, the ability to combine in social = movements,=20 at the ballot box etc.  =
 
3)=20 The enormous productive power of modern capitalism made its leading=20 practitioners (Britain, France, the USA etc) both the dominant = imperialists=20 (this I was not justifying or supporting in any way) and the leading = urban=20 centers with the most educated populations, who thus became the leading = edge of=20 the assault on patriarchal social values by women, gays etc. The plunder = and the=20 feminism are negative and positive effects of the same basic economic = system. I=20 do not believe the plunder is inevitable: democratic action can hold it = in check=20 (there are numerous examples, more domestic than international, = but copying=20 the domestic achievements on the international stage is the task we = now=20 have).
 
You write:=20 "There *is* world famine at the present time - largely helped by = war and=20 ecological decimation." Yes, there is a = horrifying amount of famine. However, the UN figures show that while = population=20 has doubled in the last 40 years, the caloric intake per head in = developing=20 countries has actually grown by 38% in that time (from below 2000 = calories to=20 over 2600 - this is an average, of course - not everyone has benefited = equally -=20 as you say, wars disrupt food distribution).  The proportion of = people=20 starving, by the UN definition, has gone down from 35% globally to 18%, = and is=20 projected to fall to 12% by 2010. Not only the proportion, but the = actual number=20 of people starving has fallen. Food is actually more plentiful and = cheaper. The=20 chief reason for this progress is the Green Revolution. All kinds of = improved=20 crops and livestock are involved in the Green Revolution - it has = enormously=20 increased production.Yes, it has been applied in problematic ways = (traditional=20 cultures get mangled in agricultural and industrial revolutions), and = has=20 ecological problems. But do you have a counter explanation for how a = world=20 population twice the size is now better fed? I would like to hear it. = Seriously.=20 Am I missing something?
 
I understand=20 the problem of cultural superiority. But with rare exceptions like = Mbeki's=20 odd views about AIDS in South Africa, it's not too often that people = reject=20 things that actually work from another culture: like penicillin. = Antibiotics and=20 protease inhibitors, to mention just a couple of results of capitalist = science,=20 do save lives that other cures can not save: they are = superior. In the=20 same way, traditional medicines, e.g. acupuncture, are becoming popular = in the=20 States, when they can do what allopathic medicine cannot, and are = therefore=20 superior. Hopefully, we can become clear what are the stripped down = basics of=20 the capitalism that has made many poor countries rich: it's nothing to = do with=20 the English language, or European music or dress styles, or Christian or = Jewish=20 religion, or clog dancing, or imperialism. It's democracy, free enquiry, = limited=20 liability and laws of contract, property rights, civil rights etc. One = of the=20 most interesting things to watch over the next decades will be China's = embrace=20 of capitalism: some people say that in order to compete successfully in = world=20 markets China will have to allow democracy, civil rights etc. - that = capitalism=20 is inefficient without it. But Singapore is making a strong bid to = disprove=20 that. I hope the optimists are right.
 
I too would like to see = all this=20 explored more in science fiction. Certainly I fear the rampant = rogue=20 capitalism of many dystopian novels. But another future I fear in = the 21st=20 century is an anti-globalization movement that is so exaggeratedly=20 anti-capitalist that it kills the best chance of ending poverty and = famine we=20 have. I think there will be enough opposition to capitalist = horrors, as=20 there has been in Europe and the US, but I fear that it will be=20 fascist/fundamentalist, or some kind of revived communist dream, rather = than=20 democratic and inspired by the European/US examples. The more the = feminists of=20 Uttar Pradesh are persuaded that all capitalism is a "moral and=20 social blight that civilized nations are working to overcome," to quote = John=20 Snead, the less likely they are to sign up with the Grameen Bank for = microloans=20 that have helped thousands of poor women become economically = independent.=20 Microlending, pioneered in India by Grameen, has long been taken up by = feminists=20 in the US to help poor women set up their own businesses: it was = culturally=20 superior to anything we had. I believe increasingly, the cultural flow = will go=20 every way, not just West to the = rest.
 
Dave
 
 -----Original=20 Message-----
From: friendly discussion of feminist SF, = fantastic &=20 utopian literature and other media [mailto:FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU]On = Behalf Of=20 Rachel Wild
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 5:01 = PM
To:=20 FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU
Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*]=20 Capitalism

"Rachel is quite right to point = out the=20 immorality of US companies getting a
patent for Pakistani rice. = But we=20 should also remember that thirty years ago
there were horrendous = warnings=20 of world famine, long before the year 2000;
and the reason these = did not=20 come true was the Green Revolution, fostered
greatly by US = science."=20

This is the very crux of what I'm arguing... when a 'country' = believes=20 its own hype like this it proves very difficult to stop what is going = on with=20 multinationals etc.

OK, firstly when I'm talking about how = regulated=20 and protected capitalism is I'm talking about a set of trade practices = that=20 ensure unequal exchange in favour of the US/ 'first world' [where a = large=20 proportion of multinationals are based]. Time and again the US exerts = its veto=20 and uses military and economic threats to protect its interests = worldwide=20 *whilst* using arguments about unfettered trade to outlaw more = humanitarian=20 practice [the patents on AIDS drugs was a recent example] ...utter = doublespeak=20 in action.
Secondly, the premise I was discussing by way of 'Door = into=20 Ocean' is that 'first world' _development_ was *not possible* without = 'third=20 world' _underdevelopment_. - this theme is central to ecofeminism and = to many=20 SciFi works... in SciFi terrans boldly go off to colonise nice new = empty=20 planets, planets full of stupid aliens, barren planets after hard = struggle or=20 planets full of *somebody else* - all mirroring perceptions of our own = human=20 history of conquest [from either side] - currently the green = revolution is=20 wreaking havoc in India and other countries precisely because it is = based on=20 the worst in US science - the green revolution is destroying whole = cultures,=20 wiping out biodiversity and the accompanying knowledge of how to use = these=20 disappearing species in a sustainable way to subsidise the = overdevelopment of=20 the west.
In our history as a species we have not had other = planets to=20 take resources from... but only some of us have thought it justified = to=20 plunder from other lands rather than use less or distribute more = equally what=20 we did have - if some cultures have not put energy into producing = technology=20 to accomplish plunder does this make them less inclined to ideas like=20 feminism? [I don't see that the two equate].

It is interesting = that=20 Dave mentions women in India - Feminists from Uttar Pradesh have = charted the=20 devastating effects of capitalism on women's lives. Within a = *generation*=20 women who led interesting and emancipated lives through a combination = of=20 gathering and light agriculture have seen their crops replaced by = monoculture=20 plantation. This has created a cash economy these women have little = access to=20 - it has brought alcohol misuses and an epidemic of domestic violence. = These=20 women have also begun to loose an extensive education in holistic = farming etc.=20 This is why so many have become involved in the Chipko resistance = movement.=20

There *is* world famine at the present time - largely helped = by war=20 and ecological decimation. Meanwhile Multinationals like Monsanto [who = invented the obscenity of terminator seeds that do not produce viable = progeny=20 *expressly* so farmers have to buy from them year upon year] use the=20 propaganda of feeding the world's poor to bolster their empire. =
Truly,=20 when looking at situations like this I believe science is outstripping = the=20 horror potential of SciFi.

Lastly this whole argument about = the=20 benevolence of capitalism feeds into notions of cultural superiority - = which=20 whilst non-palatable at anytime are particularly problematic at the = moment.=20 i.e.few gave a fig for women under Taliban rule in Afghanistan till it = became=20 expedient to hold their liberation up as an excuse for another war = [over oil?]=20

I don't think anyone on the list is accepting such ideas = wholesale but=20 we still need to come back to these themes and complexities - and I = believe=20 understanding them helps people oppose them. This is why we have = 'greenwash'=20 as illustrated above - precisely to confuse the 'educated'.

I = would=20 like to continue to discuss the themes of development/ = underdevelopment,=20 colonisation/conquest in SciFi if anyone is interested. I have a great = affection for parables such as leGuin's 'the word for world is forest' = that=20 use the metaphor of alienees to look at how non-western peoples have = been=20 viewed by western science etc.
ByeBye
Rachel=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C20048.13FEB4A0-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:10:51 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lou Hoffman Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_b7.20d2d78c.2a1b06ab_boundary" --part1_b7.20d2d78c.2a1b06ab_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 8:37:22 PM Central Daylight Time, rreith@RACORES.COM writes: > My daughter and I will be there. It's only our second time. I wish I had > been aware of it earlier in my life. > > > Rose & Cat Reith > How old is Cat? My kids are 91/2. They love WisCon. We've been to quite a few conferences, and WisCon's childcare is one of the two best childcares I've seen. The boys were actually disappointed when they got too old for it. Now they are enamored of the Lego room and look forward to seeing the other kids year after year. See you there! Only 4 more, no, 3 1/2 days! Lou ... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today, it's already tomorrow in Australia. ---- Charles Schultz --part1_b7.20d2d78c.2a1b06ab_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 8:37:22 PM Central Daylight Time, rreith@RACORES.COM writes:


My daughter and I will be there. It's only our second time.  I wish I had been aware of it earlier in my life.


Rose & Cat Reith


How old is Cat? My kids are 91/2. They love WisCon.
We've been to quite a few conferences, and WisCon's childcare is one of the two best childcares I've seen. The boys were actually disappointed when they got too old for it.
Now they are enamored of the Lego room and look forward to seeing the other kids year after year.
See you there!

Only 4 more, no, 3 1/2 days!

Lou

... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today,  it's already tomorrow in Australia.
---- Charles Schultz
--part1_b7.20d2d78c.2a1b06ab_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:23:36 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rose Reith Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1190174299==_ma============" --============_-1190174299==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" She's 19 now. She had a good time last year and is planning to help with the video taping this year - or at least so I have been told. She's been making the arrangements herself. Like I said before, I only wish I had known about Wiscon sooner - it would have been good for all of us - I think my son who is now 25 would have really enjoyed meeting the other kids and spending time with other people who were bright and interested in the same kind of stuff. Now that he's "old" and married, he doesn't have time to go to things like this. Rose >In a message dated 5/20/02 8:37:22 PM Central Daylight Time, >rreith@RACORES.COM writes: > >>My daughter and I will be there. It's only our second time. I wish >>I had been aware of it earlier in my life. >> >> >>Rose & Cat Reith >> > > >How old is Cat? My kids are 91/2. They love WisCon. >We've been to quite a few conferences, and WisCon's childcare is one >of the two best childcares I've seen. The boys were actually >disappointed when they got too old for it. >Now they are enamored of the Lego room and look forward to seeing >the other kids year after year. >See you there! > >Only 4 more, no, 3 1/2 days! > >Lou > >... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today, it's >already tomorrow in Australia. >---- Charles Schultz -- 'As a woman I have no country. As a woman my country is the whole world.' Virginia Woolf --============_-1190174299==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Re: [*FSFFU*] Wiscon
She's 19 now. She had a good time last year and is planning to help with the video taping this year - or at least so I have been told. She's been making the arrangements herself. Like I said before, I only wish I had known about Wiscon sooner - it would have been good for all of us - I think my son who is now 25 would have really enjoyed meeting the other kids and spending time with other people who were bright and interested in the same kind of stuff. Now that he's "old" and married, he doesn't have time to go to things like this.
Rose


In a message dated 5/20/02 8:37:22 PM Central Daylight Time, rreith@RACORES.COM writes:
My daughter and I will be there. It's only our second time.  I wish I had been aware of it earlier in my life.


Rose & Cat Reith


How old is Cat? My kids are 91/2. They love WisCon.
We've been to quite a few conferences, and WisCon's childcare is one of the two best childcares I've seen. The boys were actually disappointed when they got too old for it.
Now they are enamored of the Lego room and look forward to seeing the other kids year after year.
See you there!

Only 4 more, no, 3 1/2 days!

Lou

... And don't worry about the world coming to an end today,  it's already tomorrow in Australia.
---- Charles Schultz

--
'As a woman I have no country. As a woman my country is the whole world.'
 Virginia Woolf
--============_-1190174299==_ma============-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:42:00 +0100 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Angela Barclay Subject: straying/upcoming discussion Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Comments: cc: FEMINISTSF-LIT@uic.edu Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit *This message has been posted on both the "on-topic" and "off-topic" lists. As Joy has recently indicated, our discussion this month keeps veering off the intersection between feminism and science fiction. Some members have voiced frustration over this, while others are obviously engaged in spirited discussion. This is a recurring problem on our list and points to the need to make some compromises. As a member of the BDG steering committee I would like to make some suggestions: The membership on each list tends to hover around 200. While many members belong to both the FSFFU and FSFFU-Lit listserves there are a considerable number of people who choose to subscribe to just one or the other- for the ability to more freely explore SF and feminism or alternately the desire to participate in a more structured discussion about a democratically selected feminist fantastic work. *So, let's continue to post general comments about SF and feminism to the FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU list and responses to the book of the month on the FEMINISTSF-LIT@UIC.EDU list.* While we are united in our passion about FSF we obviously differ in such significant ways as cultural background, political bent, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, age, gender . . . It has been interesting to learn more about Capitalism and Judaism, for example, in the past couple of weeks, but the discussion seems to have gotten rather acrimonious of late. Who was it that wrote political and religious debates are a lose-lose situation? I'm not saying we have to be namby-pamby nice to each other all the time- we wouldn't learn and grow that way. I am saying I felt that turning the computer on today and deleting a long list of emails about "Capitalism and War" was a disappointing waste of time. On a positive note, I was able to delete what was not interesting to me because most posters had used an appropriate subject line. *So, let's continue to change the title in the subject line when the discussion thread changes so that members can quickly determine what they wish to read.* *It would also be helpful if subscribers did more snipping and streamlining. There has been some very intelligent discussion this month, but at times it has been difficult to determine who said what. Perhaps members who want to make a statement about "Capitalism and War" or "Women's Language Abilities" could condense five posts on the subject to one per day.* I make these suggestions because I have found that the number of posts this month have been almost overwhelming. I think the sheer level of traffic on the FSFFU list may be silencing some members who might have something to say on the FSFFU-Lit list. Even though most of us sit quietly in front of our computer terminals, this asyncronous discussion seems like a loud public forum in which a small group of individuals are having a debate and others are having trouble getting a word in edgewise. *Our code of conduct demands that we share the floor- it also suggests that we take it. If you want to just lurk, listen and learn that's fine; but if you have a point to make or a question to ask, formulate it thoughtfully and hit "send."* Our listmistress also encourages us to have discussions behind the scenes. We can send private emails to congratule eachother on a particulary well-made point, to ask for clarification, to indicate our feelings have been hurt. I have had my most enjoyable FSFFU/FSFFU-Lit experiences one-on-one with other listmembers. And now I get to the task at hand: to remind you that from June 3 - 30 we will be discussing Marge Piercy's _Woman on the Edge of Time_. If you haven't read this 1976 FSF classic there's still time before the discussion begins. I've devoured half of it in the past two days and am really looking forward to hearing your interpretations of it. Angela -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:11:00 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Laura J. Mixon" Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit on 5/20/02 8:48 PM, Dave Belden at davebelden@EARTHLINK.NET wrote: > 1) Traditional cultures (let's say above a hunter/gatherer level), have > tended to be patriarchal, for reasons I guess mainly to do with the power of > warriors, herders and land owners in those economies. This is not entirely true. Margaret Sanday, an anthropologist, wrote an excellent book on female power structures in traditional cultures called FEMALE POWER AND MALE DOMINANCE, based on her doctoral thesis. She found that many non-Western cultures had female-male power sharing structures, prior to contact with Western explorers. It was common for European explorers to appoint a "head man" and deal only with him, thus setting in motion the disassembly of traditional tribal power and decisionmaking structures. Many of these prior traditional structures were patriarchal, but by no means all of them were. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:36:14 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Samuelson Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Even Beowulf had his feminine side. "Laura J. Mixon" wrote: > on 5/20/02 8:48 PM, Dave Belden at davebelden@EARTHLINK.NET wrote: > > > 1) Traditional cultures (let's say above a hunter/gatherer level), have > > tended to be patriarchal, for reasons I guess mainly to do with the power of > > warriors, herders and land owners in those economies. > > This is not entirely true. Margaret Sanday, an anthropologist, wrote an > excellent book on female power structures in traditional cultures called > FEMALE POWER AND MALE DOMINANCE, based on her doctoral thesis. She found > that many non-Western cultures had female-male power sharing structures, > prior to contact with Western explorers. It was common for European > explorers to appoint a "head man" and deal only with him, thus setting in > motion the disassembly of traditional tribal power and decisionmaking > structures. Many of these prior traditional structures were patriarchal, > but by no means all of them were. > > -------------------------------------------------- > This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for > discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To > unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to > LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > > Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 23:37:17 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Phoebe Wray Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/20/02 7:12:08 PM, lquilter@EXPLORATORIUM.EDU writes: << me, anyway -- and i'm very excited because i haven't been there in 3-ish years. shall we have a party? >> Laura, make sure you come to thee Broad Universe party! best, phoebe w -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:59:22 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: John Snead Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <200205210101.17a1My83t3Nl3pt0@osgood.mail.mindspring.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Rachel Wild wrote: > > "Rachel is quite right to point out the immorality of US companies > > getting a patent for Pakistani rice. But we should also remember that > > thirty years ago there were horrendous warnings of world famine, long > > before the year 2000; and the reason these did not come true was the > > Green Revolution, fostered greatly by US science." > > This is the very crux of what I'm arguing... when a 'country' believes > its own hype like this it proves very difficult to stop what is going > on with multinationals etc. Well said, and excellent description of both the faults of the current system and the reasons such faults are inherent in it. -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 22:59:22 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: John Snead Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <200205210101.17a1My83t3Nl3pt0@osgood.mail.mindspring.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Dave Belden wrote: > When you add Lee Anne's completely bizarre statement, which I trust > was made late at night in sleep-deprived state and doesn't reflect > sober thought... > > > And the relative success of the USA in relation to the nations of > > the world is quite simply that the whole country was stolen lock, > > stock, and barrel from the rightful owners. It's easy to show a > > profit when your business is piracy and murderous grand larceny but > > those profits are nothing to brag about. > > ...it appears that some people do seem to have equated the success of > the USA (if not the whole of the West) with capitalism ('business') > which they equate with larceny. > > 'Property is theft' is after all the old anarchist canard. Perhaps > most of us on the left have not thought or studied much about wealth > production. Rachel's post describes an sf novel based on the idea that > capitalism is inextricably linked to deliberate plunder: > > > OK, what about Joan Slonczewski's A door into Ocean seen through the > > viewpoint of Maria Miles' theory of Patriarchy and Accumilation... > > Miles argues that the development of the 'First World' is > > inextricably linked to the 'underdevelopment [i.e. deliberate > > plunder] of the 'Third world' [and historicaly the 'Second World'] - > > at one point she ponders a world that had no reserves > > in other landmass to plunder and argues another world > > would be needed instead to maintain a capitalist system." > > If that's true, then I guess there's no hope for India and China, > then? None for Africa? Or will India and China somehow get rich by > keeping down Africa and the Arab countries? Finally we'll all be rich > except the poor Africans who are paying for our luxuries? This is > absurd. But it seems to be a very important ideological point to many > on the left that the west is only rich because it exploits poorer > countries. Any good economist can tell you that there simply was not > and is not enough money in exploiting dirt poor countries to fuel the > domestic investment that has created the current Western and > Japanese/Tiger economies. Most of the investment always has come from > domestic profits. A good book is David Landes 'The Wealth and Poverty > of Nations - why some are so rich and some are so poor.' It doesn't seem absurd to me at all. Have you read any of Emmanuel Wallersteins's world systems theory? He clearly shows that the ideas you dismiss about the First World being built on the back of the Third is in fact true. Capitalism is not limited to any one nation, it requires both a core (these days the First World) and a periphery (the Third World). Without a place to extract cheap labor and cheap resources from the whole cancerous (in the sense of uncontrolled growth) system falls apart. Slonczewski's _A Door into Ocean_ seemed perfectly reasonable to me (as well as being a good read). There are two parts to this issue: 1) Western corporate capitalism is built on continual growth, there needs to be a continuing series of new markets for goods, new sources of raw materials, and new sources of cheap labor. Without that continued growth is impossible. As we've seen from various serious depressions, if a capitalist system stops growing it does not maintain a stable steady state economy, it shrinks. Most of the world may be able to achieve the economic benefits of capitalism, but eventually the continued growth is going to stop. Even if we move industry off earth in sufficient amounts (something I consider *extremely* unlikely) we will still eventually reach the limits of continued growth in our solar system. At that point, the capitalist house of cards all falls down. It's not a stable system and cannot be maintained in the long term. 2) The primary reason for the necessity of the Third World is cheap labor and cheap resources. Even if we manage to make recycling nearly 100% efficient so cheap resources aren't that much of an issue, cheap labor will continue to be. All those Nike sneakers and Levis jeans and many other other consumer goods that keep the whole rotten system running are made with the ill-paid suffering of people in the third world. If by some miracle the end up with a similar standard of living to our own, then there will still need to be an underclass to keep making that sort of crap. Maybe in 50 years the underclass won't be living in a third world country or be differentiated by the color of their skin, but as long as we have a capitalist system we will need to have cheap, ultimately disposable workers. The system does not work without that sort of worker base. To me one of the primary faults of capitalism is that it is essentially immoral - wealth is not created it is in part stolen. Every wealthy person is only wealthy because dozens of others are poor. Any system that mandates that must some be impoverished for the system to work is wrong. Do you really believe the US would have anything like its current standard of living without cheap labor from China, Indonesia, Mexico and all of the other places we get so many of our consumer goods from? Think what the US would look like w/o access to all these goods. Our economy isn't terribly stable now, would we really be able to maintain our current corporate capitalist system w/o that cheap labor? Wallerstein and others say no, and I agree. -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 00:23:53 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Lee Anne Phillips Subject: Re: Cultural Feminism in literature Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 08:04 PM 5/20/02 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 5/20/02 8:13:24 AM Central Daylight Time, >leeanne@LEEANNE.COM writes: > ><< cultural feminism, > although many women are now embarrassed by > it, and was the feminism that preceded and formed > the foundation of all the feminisms that now exist. >> > >cultural feminism came along after the early feminism of the second wave, Actually, second wave cultural feminism revisited the ur-cultural feminism of women like Charlotte Perkins Gilman, whose utopian Herland and With Her in Ourland are classics of cultural feminism along with Margaret Fuller's, Woman in the Nineteenth Century, Elizabeth Cady Stanton's, The Woman's Bible, Crystal Eastman's various pamphlet's and articles on the anti-war and Suffrage movements, and many others. Indeed, women's writing on the special gifts of women and their potential contributions to both civic and domestic life goes back many hundreds of years. Both the Temperance Movement and the Suffrage Movement were heavily influenced by cultural feminism, and the innate purity and high-minded morality of womanhood invoked to call men to fulfill their higher selves, eliminating drunkenness, vice, and political corruption by the sheer force of their feminine rectitude. Prostitution, the plight of the poor, children's welfare, and other pressing issues of the day which affected women also captured the interest of early Nineteenth Century feminists. The writings of Christine de Pizan, one of the first clearly feminist thinkers in the Fourteenth Century, were arguably cultural feminist in nature, since the widespread Medieval notion that men and women had completely different abilities and responsibilities allowed for few alternatives. Interestingly, her City of Women might be classified as a fantasy novel by today's standards. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 09:31:39 +0200 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Eike Pierstorff Subject: 1984 (was RE: [*FSFFU*] Capitalism and War) Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <3c.1e849e98.2a1ae76e@cs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > The best science fiction connection to all this is still > 1984, in my view, 1984 isn't an anti-Nazi or anti-capitalism book. It's mainly anti-communist (or rather, since Orwell was a socialist himself) an anti-Stalin book. After he fought in the spanish civil war, Orwell was severly disappointed with sovjet communism, since he realised how Stalin betrayed the spanish revolution (first by lack of support, then when sovjet communists actually fought the spanish communists). From then on, he considered Stalins rule to be 'totalitarianism', as opposed to the democratic socialism he was working for. -- eike -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 05:21:31 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: Re: Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you go to this university course on alternative histories and scroll down to the section 'The Nazi Theme' it mentions a couple more. http://www.personal.rdg.ac.uk/~lhsjamse/counterf.htm Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature > and other media [mailto:FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU]On Behalf Of Laura Quilter > Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 4:08 PM > To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU > Subject: [*FSFFU*] > > > SWASTIKA NIGHT by katharine burdekin, written in the 1930s, extrapolates > nazism into the far future ... an excellent book > > > I'd like to bring this back to Science Fiction, but the only books I can > > think of are the rather apologetic "Fatherland" and Dicks "Man in the > > High Castle", neither of them particular good or feminist. I guess the > > "Drittes Reich" isn't something you should put into a novel. > > -------------------------------------------------- > This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for > discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To > unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to > LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > > Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 05:44:30 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: Re: Capitalism: Over and Out Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > as long as > we have a capitalist system we will need to have cheap, ultimately > disposable workers. The system does not work without that sort of > worker base. I have not read Wallerstein and will look for him, though I am familiar with that argument, which I think incorrect. I think one thing you are missing is technological change. Just as an example from something I am familiar with, where it took seven people to manage the boilers in a big high rise office building 30 years ago, now the job is done better by half a person. The problem for this civilization in the future is less likely to be lack of cheap labor than lack of meaningful work when most production is automated. Hopefully, that's when we will all be deeply into further education and cultural creativity, but I fear it will be soma and video games. I guess I should bow out of this discussion now as I have taken up way too much space, but thank you for engaging seriously on this topic. Dave -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 08:00:45 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Michael J. Lowrey" Organization: The Working Class Subject: Re: Capitalism Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dave Belden wrote: > 1) Traditional cultures (let's say above a hunter/gatherer level), have tended to be patriarchal, for reasons I guess mainly to do > with the power of warriors, herders and land owners in those economies. Huh? Not according to modern anthropological studies! My mother's people, the Cherokee, not only had matrilineal kinship, but the households were matrilocal, and "divorce" could be initiated by either party. Tribal governance included both a male council and a women's council, each with clearly delineated jurisdictions. There was a "peace chief" or "war chief" (male) and a Beloved Woman (female). The Europeans kept trying to re-interpret this system in terms of kings/chiefs, and the Cherokee ignored that nonsense. Try telling a village's Beloved Woman that she was living in a patriarchy, and she would try to arrange for you to be cared for as any lunatic would be, since you had probably been bespelled out of your proper wits. -- Michael J. Lowrey, a/k/a Inali Gahistiski Cultures & Communities Program University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 08:03:45 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Michael J. Lowrey" Organization: The Working Class Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Priscilla H. Ballou" wrote: > I had hoped to be a first time attendee this year, but my mother's > moving into a retirement home last week put a crimp in my style. I was > helping her pack, and now I'm trying to re-create order in my home since > I've added a number of pieces of family furniture and many many > knick-knacks etc. which had been in her house to my home. > > Maybe next year? Next year in Madison! -- "Orange Mike" Lowrey only 3 days to wait! -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 09:24:55 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: list guidelines Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_14d.e265a89.2a1ba4a7_boundary" --part1_14d.e265a89.2a1ba4a7_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit *posted to both lists* I think the list guidelines suggested/ [reminded] are very useful. Would it work to put a guide in subject headings, as the book discussion group does, to indicate a thread - but instead to indicate it is offtopic? e.g. we could use the word 'tangent' - to indicate a subject that has come from the list but gone off to a life of its own? I have been participating heavily in the discussions on FSL and this has made me less likely to post to the strictly on topic FSf-lit --part1_14d.e265a89.2a1ba4a7_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit *posted to both lists*

I think the list guidelines suggested/ [reminded] are very useful.

Would it work to put a guide in subject headings, as the book discussion group does, to indicate a thread - but instead to indicate it is offtopic? e.g. we could use the word 'tangent' - to indicate a subject that has come from the list but gone off to a life of its own?

I have been participating heavily in the discussions on FSL and this has made me less likely to post to the strictly on topic FSf-lit --part1_14d.e265a89.2a1ba4a7_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 09:27:54 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Rachel Wild Subject: Wiscon - UK translation please Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_bc.26d6b20f.2a1ba55a_boundary" --part1_bc.26d6b20f.2a1ba55a_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It would be lovely if folk could describe the purpose and atmosphere of 'wiscon' to me Post me privately or to the list if you think all the uninitiated would like it Bye R --part1_bc.26d6b20f.2a1ba55a_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It would be lovely if folk could describe the purpose and atmosphere of 'wiscon' to me

Post me privately or to the list if you think all the uninitiated would like it

Bye
R --part1_bc.26d6b20f.2a1ba55a_boundary-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 08:31:04 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Marsha Valance Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I hope to be. Marsha Valance Regional Librarian Wisconsin Regional Library f/t Blind & Physically Handicapped 813 West Wells St. Milwaukee, WI 53233 1.800.242.8822 [in-state] >>> orangest@UWM.EDU 05/20/02 04:28PM >>> To return to the theoretical topic of this list: How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this coming weekend? -- Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey attending for his 25th year in a row -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 07:51:01 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: heather w Subject: Re: Wiscon - UK translation please Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" >It would be lovely if folk could describe the purpose and atmosphere >of 'wiscon' to me > >Post me privately or to the list if you think all the uninitiated >would like it The brand new issue of The Broadsheet, the newsletter for Broad Universe, features several articles about the Wiscon experience: http://www.broaduniverse.org/broadsheet.html Heather .*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.* heather whipple, web manager for Broad Universe heyiya@earthlink.net :: web@broaduniverse.org www.broaduniverse.org -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:58:32 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Priscilla H. Ballou" Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Michael J. Lowrey" wrote: > > "Priscilla H. Ballou" wrote: > > > I had hoped to be a first time attendee this year, but my mother's > > moving into a retirement home last week put a crimp in my style. I was > > helping her pack, and now I'm trying to re-create order in my home since > > I've added a number of pieces of family furniture and many many > > knick-knacks etc. which had been in her house to my home. > > > > Maybe next year? > > Next year in Madison! It is my devout wish. :-) Priscilla, starting to save now -- "Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new." - Albert Einstein -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 10:00:55 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Michael J. Lowrey" Organization: The Working Class Subject: Re: Wiscon - UK translation please Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rachel Wild wrote: > > It would be lovely if folk could describe the purpose and > atmosphere of 'wiscon' to me > > Post me privately or to the list if you think all the > uninitiated would like it I just spent almost an hour composing a praise-song about the wonders of WisCon, and my computer crashed (Windows!). Suffice it to say: They take their SF as literature seriously... and their fun sillily [is there such a word?] It's in Madison, Wisconsin, "the little town the Sixties won't let go of," a college town and a state capitol: perfect for serious politics, and serious partying, and serious sexuality, and serious frivolity, and serious spirituality; just right as a venue to "gather together many invited writers, editors, publishers, scholars, artists, women, and men from around the world to discuss science fiction and fantasy, with a emphasis on issues of feminism, gender, race, and class." It's a con for everybody who has ever felt marginalized by the mundane world, or by the academic world, _or by the fannish world_: geeks, genderbenders, hippies, libertarians, "deep ecology" theorists, hausfraus, leatherdykes, preachers, mixed-race folk, nerds, goths, entrepeneurs, shamans, role-players (in several senses of the word), wonks, Esperantists, Jacobites, Quakers, socialists, furverts, and everybody else. It's no accident that the Tiptrees originated in a discussion at WisCon... and the organization Broad Universe at another... and the Carl Brandon Society at yet a third! The only complaint I've ever heard that actually seemed to make any sense, is that they take written SF more seriously than they do badly-written television and films. I can live with that. I've been to SF conventions and literary conferences from Los Angeles to the Netherlands, and can state without equivocation that a WisCon is the most fun you can have without getting arrested, impeached and/or excommunicated! http://www.sf3.org/wiscon/ -- "Orange Mike" Lowrey -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 09:49:48 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Sheryl Subject: Re: Patriarchy amongst 'traditional' people Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I was hoping someone would bring up the Cherokees! This is my own (distantly related) nation, also. I've read enough of them and of the other nations who lived near them to think that 'patriarchal' is way, way off base. So is 'matriarchal,' of course. These are not the only ways that gender can work itself into socio-political arrangements. The Cherokees have/had a clan system, and if any 'ownership' could be said to happen, it's probably that the clan or the nation owns the land, and not any individual person (incidentally, only women 'have' clan--a man belongs to his mother's clan and does not pass on his clan affiliation to his children). There were women warriors amongst the Cherokee, and we should not forget the mistrustful and somewhat disbelieving response of Attacullakulla when he and his delegation first met for a formal discussion of land rights with a delegation of the British (in, oh, about 1765?): "Where are your women?" As no serious negotiations could be carried out without women present. Any male-only group attending such a conference was assumed to be a war party and not to have the authority to come to an agreement on other matters. I would assume that almost everyone knows that the Iroquois and the other nations living near them are/were also most definitely not partriarchal...I know much less about the nations living on the west coast and the great plains...in the SW, the Dine (Navajo) and Hopi only _seem_ patriarchal because of the Catholic/Spanish forced cultural overlays--as a child visiting the Southwest I can remember being told that women were not allowed to attend ceremonies in the kivas. But years later I was talking to a Hopi park ranger who laughed and explained that there were (and are) men's societies, women's societies, and mixed male/female societies. The Catholic missionaries were scandalized at the level of power held by women and did their best to put a stop to it by encouraging men to take over governance and power they had not held before. The belief that human beings are 'naturally' patriarchal, or that we tend to fall into patriarchal systems because of some 'natural' social or economic process, is one that we've all been taught--overtly or covertly--, but that does not turn out to be true. Sheryl LeSage U of Oklahoma -----Original Message----- From: Michael J. Lowrey To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU Date: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 7:58 AM Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Capitalism >Dave Belden wrote: >> 1) Traditional cultures (let's say above a hunter/gatherer level), have tended to be patriarchal, for reasons I guess mainly to do > with the power of warriors, herders and land owners in those economies. > >Huh? Not according to modern anthropological studies! My >mother's people, the Cherokee, not only had matrilineal >kinship, but the households were matrilocal, and "divorce" >could be initiated by either party. Tribal governance >included both a male council and a women's council, each >with clearly delineated jurisdictions. There was a "peace >chief" or "war chief" (male) and a Beloved Woman (female). >The Europeans kept trying to re-interpret this system in >terms of kings/chiefs, and the Cherokee ignored that >nonsense. Try telling a village's Beloved Woman that she >was living in a patriarchy, and she would try to arrange for >you to be cared for as any lunatic would be, since you had >probably been bespelled out of your proper wits. > >-- >Michael J. Lowrey, a/k/a Inali Gahistiski >Cultures & Communities Program >University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:03:15 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Cynthia Organization: Prodigy Internet Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -- > "Orange Mike" Lowrey > only 3 days to wait! I'll be there! Hills! Victorian buildings! Real trees as opposed to really big grass (palm "trees")! Not to mention extra friendly extra conversant people! (: Cynthia -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:13:54 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Cynthia Organization: Prodigy Internet Subject: Io Copiano 1984 Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > 1984 isn't an anti-Nazi or anti-capitalism book. It's mainly > anti-communist (or rather, since Orwell was a socialist himself) an > anti-Stalin book. > After he fought in the spanish civil war, Orwell was severly > disappointed with sovjet communism, since he realised how Stalin > betrayed the spanish revolution (first by lack of support, then when > sovjet communists actually fought the spanish communists). . My Spanish husband's mother's parents where communists and his father's parents were Francoists. The communists in Valencia had a list of people they were murdering, and communist grandfather of my husband would sneak out at night and go to the Francoists who were to be murdered and warned them. One to be murdered was the Francoist grandfather and my father-in-law answered the door and took the message that his father was on the hit list. This saved the Francoist's grandfather's life. My father-in-law wanted to leave Franco's Spain (though a lawyer there was no work there) and for wanting to leave was tossed in prison. He was next to a cell of a con artist who taught him to play chess at a master's level. However, they had to do this as a purely intellectual exercise since they had neither board nor pieces. I used this as an inspiration in a fantasy story called "Io Copiano" (a specific chess strategy) in my book New Myths of the Feminine Divine. (I'll have a few with me at Wiscon.) Has anybody else on the list used family stories as a starting point for their sf or fantasy? Cynthia -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:21:29 -0400 Reply-To: judithberman@earthlink.net Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Judith Berman Subject: Matriliny (was Capitalism) Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Matriliny is strongly linked to horticultural/hunting economies in the New World and Africa, where women traditionally did the horticulture (corn, beans and squash gardening in North America) and produced the bulk of the staple foods, while men hunted. Pastoralists (herding economies) on the other hand tend to be strongly patrilineal with accompanying lower status for women. Arguments have been advanced for the environmental/economic underpinnings of this, one being the nature of expansion of social groups (the possibilities of expansion depending largely on the number of women who can produce new members for your kin group - patrilineal groups can "acquire" women, and thus expand, much more quickly). The ancestral essay on this subject is by Mary Douglas, titled, if memory serves correctly (it often doesn't) "Is Matriliny Doomed in Africa?" published in, I think, AFRICA ca. 1960. Large swaths of North America were traditionally matrilineal. The Cherokee are one well-known example; so are the Six Nations (Iroquois). But virtually every group in the Southeast and eastern Woodlands was matrilineal as well, not to mention a number of peoples to the west and north. Nor is matriliny limited to horticultural economies. The buffalo-hunting Crow (who even gave their name to the type matrilineal kinship system) of the plains split off from the horticultural Hidatsa. Matriliny is widespread in the area I've worked in, the north Pacific coast, where the traditional economy is fishing/gathering. Matriliny, meaning that descent and social-group affiliation are reckoned through women, isn't the same as matriarchy. It's difficult and even misleading to characterize traditional gender relations in nPc societies according to our cultural categories, but in some of them there is what appears to be an oppressively patriarchal streak (for example, in myth and oral history of some nPc groups, for nearly every war or other social schism it's the woman's fault.) These are wives, though (i.e., from another kin group) -- the brother-sister relation often being the core male-female relationship in matrilineal societies. Once past child-bearing years, and this is an old tradition, nPc women can become very powerful and public figures -- I've heard of Native men from other parts of North America complaining about their behavior. There are also a lot of scattered traditions where women, often young girls, are the inventors and innovators of everything from new types of fish traps to highly valued textiles. Judith Michael J. Lowrey wrote: >Dave Belden wrote: > >>1) Traditional cultures (let's say above a hunter/gatherer level), have tended to be patriarchal, for reasons I guess mainly to do > with the power of warriors, herders and land owners in those economies. >> > >Huh? Not according to modern anthropological studies! My >mother's people, the Cherokee, not only had matrilineal >kinship, but the households were matrilocal, and "divorce" >could be initiated by either party. Tribal governance >included both a male council and a women's council, each >with clearly delineated jurisdictions. There was a "peace >chief" or "war chief" (male) and a Beloved Woman (female). >The Europeans kept trying to re-interpret this system in >terms of kings/chiefs, and the Cherokee ignored that >nonsense. Try telling a village's Beloved Woman that she >was living in a patriarchy, and she would try to arrange for >you to be cared for as any lunatic would be, since you had >probably been bespelled out of your proper wits. > >-- >Michael J. Lowrey, a/k/a Inali Gahistiski >Cultures & Communities Program >University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee > >-------------------------------------------------- >This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for >discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To >unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to >LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > >Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 12:05:18 -0400 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Dave Belden Subject: Re: Matriliny Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <006701c200d6$c25be980$c613ecd8@default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I was hoping someone would bring up the Cherokees! ...snip... > The Catholic > missionaries were scandalized at the level of power held by women and did > their best to put a stop to it by encouraging men to take over governance > and power they had not held before. > This is great stuff which every American school kid should be taught. > The belief that human beings are 'naturally' patriarchal, or that > we tend to > fall into patriarchal systems because of some 'natural' social or economic > process, is one that we've all been taught--overtly or > covertly--, but that > does not turn out to be true. > I'm sorry that my overly compressed statement left out these brilliant exceptions, and especially sorry if it sounded as if I thought there was such a thing as a natural tendency towards patriarchy. Also am distressed if my sloppy statement obscured my main point. I had in mind the traditional cultures of most long settled agricultural peoples from Japan and China across Asia, Europe, Africa to the Aztecs and Incas. I assume all of them started out much more egalitarian, like the hunter/gatherer communities they evolved from, but under pressure of population density, war, stock breeding etc. they became (to varying degrees and in varying ways) patriarchal. The Celts who settled Ireland had many pro-woman legal angles, but by the 19th century the Irish were hardly models of female participation in power comparable to the Cherokee, and this was the general direction of things elsewhere in Eurasia and much of Africa. Others on this listserve know much more about this than I do. What are the chief reasons that some of the North American cultures managed to avoid the extreme patriarchy that overtook so many agricultural societies, elsewhere? Was it lower population densities, more horticultural economies, absence of livestock, or did certain of their cultures somehow override the pressures that other cultures could not? I am not dedicated totally to materialist explanations of culture, but certainly need to see the interplay between culture and material life. Just received Judith Berman's post which is very helpful. I wasn't trying to make any kind of point about a putative universality of patriarchy, just the point that it was the modern economy which opened up traditional patriarchal cultures to feminism. Without modern cities we would all still be back on the farm under granddaddy's thumb - with honorable Cherokee and other exceptions. Once Ireland got the fastest growing economy in Europe, suddenly feminist legal options became realizable - divorce, abortion etc. But I have harped on that topic enough. Dave -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 18:45:11 +0200 Reply-To: Torreif Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Torreif Subject: Re: Capitalism and War Comments: To: =?ISO-8859-1?B?ZnJpZW5kbHkgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBvZiBmZW1pbmlzdCBTRiwNCiAgICAg?= =?ISO-8859-1?B?ICAgICAgICAgZmFudGFzdGljICYgdXRvcGlhbiBsaXRlcmF0dXJlIGFu?= =?ISO-8859-1?B?ZCBvdGhlciBtZWRpYQ==?= In-Reply-To: <000901c1fe88$a53054e0$9796520c@pavilion> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Saturday, May 18, 2002, 6:23:10 PM, Cynthia Ward wrote: CW> But that's OK, isn't it? I mean, the rich pay apx. 90% of U.S. income CW> taxes. Go back and study; the figure is far more skewed with the poor paying far more than the rich because of all the tax loopholes. -- Wildbird mailto:torreif@subdimension.com "Susan, we can't go back. We're here now. That's gone, and you're not going to recreate it by segregating yourself in a phony Tenctonese village. That's death, Susan. It's the loss of hope. I can't stop you if you decide to leave, but I won't go with you. It's against everything I believe. I have hope." George: Alien Nation, Dark Horizon Owner/Moderator of: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MoonShield_WingSisters http://groups.yahoo.com/group/magevale ICQ: 82980723 Authorization required OutVale Wizard for MageVale MUSH, an adult kink-friendly role play MUSH Telnet:MageVale.mudservices.com:3333 -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 13:05:21 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joell Smith Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C200C8.29DCF180" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C200C8.29DCF180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [*FSFFU*] WisconMy family and I will be there. 2nd year for my = husband and I, first year for the baby. DH is really looking forward to = volunteering with the kids and playing with all the cool stuff.=20 Joell Smith-Borne appreciative lurker ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Rose Reith=20 To: FEMINISTSF@UIC.EDU=20 Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 8:35 PM Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] Wiscon In a message dated 5/20/02 4:26:41 PM Central Daylight Time, = orangest@UWM.EDU writes: How many other than myself are going to be at Wiscon this coming weekend? -- Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey attending for his 25th year in a row ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C200C8.29DCF180 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [*FSFFU*] Wiscon
My family and I will be there. 2nd year = for my=20 husband and I, first year for the baby. DH is really looking forward to=20 volunteering with the kids and playing with all the cool stuff. =
 
Joell Smith-Borne
appreciative lurker
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Rose = Reith=20
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 8:35 = PM
Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] = Wiscon

In a = message dated=20 5/20/02 4:26:41 PM Central Daylight Time, orangest@UWM.EDU = writes:
How = many other=20 than myself are going to be at Wiscon this
coming=20 weekend?

--
Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
attending = for his=20 25th year in a row


------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C200C8.29DCF180-- -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:51:34 -0700 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Laura Quilter Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" In-Reply-To: <005501c200d8$a2d81000$fdbdd43f@oemcomputer> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII and rooms in exceedingly short supply. my partner & i got rooms for friday, and sunday ... but not for saturday. so if you haven't made your reservations yet, you should do so ASAP! [and if anybody has an extra bed they want to split for saturday night send me an email off-list ...] On Tue, 21 May 2002, Cynthia wrote: > > -- > > "Orange Mike" Lowrey > > only 3 days to wait! > > I'll be there! Hills! Victorian buildings! Real trees as opposed to really > big grass (palm "trees")! Not to mention extra friendly extra conversant > people! > > (: > > Cynthia > > -------------------------------------------------- > This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for > discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To > unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to > LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: > unsubscribe FEMINISTSF > > Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. > Laura Quilter / lquilter@exo.net -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 14:06:35 -0500 Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: "Michael J. Lowrey" Organization: The Working Class Subject: Re: Wiscon Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Laura Quilter wrote: > > [and if anybody has an extra bed > they want to split for saturday night send me an email off-list ...] Well, at present I do; I'm hoping to find somebody to split the room for the weekend, but... -- Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey pretty innocuous for a het boy -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 15:33:02 -0400 Reply-To: judithberman@earthlink.net Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Judith Berman Subject: Re: Matriliny Comments: To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dave Belden wrote: > What are the >chief reasons that some of the North American cultures managed to avoid the >extreme patriarchy that overtook so many agricultural societies, elsewhere? >Was it lower population densities, more horticultural economies, absence of >livestock, or did certain of their cultures somehow override the pressures >that other cultures could not? I am not dedicated totally to materialist >explanations of culture, but certainly need to see the interplay between >culture and material life. > I also believe that a range of factors are/were in play. One anthropological argument is that the status of women in any society is connected to their degree of control over the exchange of status goods (not just how important they are to food production, in other words). Which has both cultural and economic dimensions. Some other thoughts. The demographic profiles of hunter/gatherer and horticultural/hunting societies tend to be quite different from those of hierarchical, agricultural ones. The former have low fertility, low infant mortality, good nutrition and longer life spans -- resembling industrial societies, in fact. Agriculture (featuring draft animals, canal irrigation, large-scale raised-bed projects, and the like) is harder work for less nutrition. Agriculture comes about when environmental degradation and population pressures make a horticultural economy no longer viable. One tendency in the switch to agriculture is to change from higher-protein crops that take up more space, like corn and beans, to products that yield more calories per acre, such as manioc (tapioca). Plus, where you decrease the acreage available for hunting and foraging, the variety of foods you eat decreases. You can see the degradation in nutritional status during this switch among the Maya archaeologically, where stature declined around a foot over several hundred years. Children also take on a different economic value with agriculture. Women who move around a lot in the course of gathering or producing food have a big incentive to keep births low. Foraging societies also tend to have detailed knowledge of and access to medicinal plants, including those with contraceptive or abortifacient properties. (One of my professors referred to the horticultural/hunting Amazonian peoples as "the world's greatest pharmacologists.) With the advent of agriculture, on the other hand, a large number of children can be an economic asset. Communicable disease is also a bigger presence the bigger and denser your population is (though this was less a factor in the precolumbian New World than in the Old). The typical pre-industrial agricultural picture is high birth rate, high infant mortality, and short life spans. (When I refer to agriculture, I'm not talking about so-called nomadic pastoralists.) The demands of work, childbearing and child care, and degree of control thereof, has a huge effect on women's lives, obviously. And social hierarchy, with all it entails, is usually just incipient in horticultural societies (though there are important exceptions). Dehumanizing women, it seems to me, is often in a social context of dehumanizing other categories of people. Judith -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 18:47:28 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: Cultural Feminism in literature Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/21/02 2:25:37 AM Central Daylight Time, leeanne@LEEANNE.COM writes: << second wave cultural feminism revisited the ur-cultural feminism of women >> yes, the second wave unearthed a lot of first wave feminism that was concerned with topics that might fall under the rubric 'cultural feminism', but I was specifically referring to the cultural feminism of the second wave and where it occurred on the timeline. However, there are a variety of points of view that have been labeled 'cultural feminism', and the variety of political and philosophical positions under that term has included everything from analysis of women's culture, both in its good and bad aspects (culture of the oppressed), to particular strategies such as rewriting the Bible, to separatist fantasies, to reactionary promotion of women as 'innately' this or that (and many other varieties I'm not even touching on). Somewhere I have an interesting article tracing the ongoing influences of the more reactionary splinterings of the first wave into the middle of the century, and how that helped shore up feminine stereotypes that the second wave then had to battle, again. -Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 18:47:29 EDT Reply-To: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" Sender: "friendly discussion of feminist SF, fantastic & utopian literature and other media" From: Joy Martin Subject: Re: 1984 (was RE: [*FSFFU*] Capitalism and War) Comments: To: FEMINISTSF@uic.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/21/02 2:28:14 AM Central Daylight Time, eike.p@T-ONLINE.DE writes: << 1984 isn't an anti-Nazi or anti-capitalism book. It's mainly anti-communist >> My reading of it is that it's about any totalitarian state, whether from the left or right. It's specifically about the excesses of state power, and is equally applicable to fascist or Stalinist type regimes. Or any state that might be some future (or not so future) amalgam.-Joy "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-Benjamin Franklin -------------------------------------------------- This is the FEMINISTSF listserve, intended only for discussion of feminism and Speculative Fiction. To unsubscribe from this listserve, send a message to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU and in the body of the message say: unsubscribe FEMINISTSF Contact FEMINISTSF-request@UIC.EDU if there are problems.