>Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1998 17:56:36 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "M.A. King" <kingma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: response to "power and chat rooms"
>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Sue Morris wrote:
>
>> erm - forgive my naivety - but what exactly is the problem we women
>> supposedly have in "going the distance" in mail lists such as this
one?
>
>Hmm, this is really bizarre. OK, hands up: how many people think that
>Nesta was making some kind of sexist comment about women, and how many
>people think that she was commenting on *the list's* inhospitability to
>women? Personally, I thought it was rather clear that she meant the
>latter. But maybe I'm the one who's out in left field here.
-------------------
i did not assume that the comment was sexist (though the possibility
that it might be was not exactly the furthest thing from my mind), nor
did i assume its author's sex (i generally take little notice of the
(implied) sex of the person posting, unless there seems reason to
consider it (in this case, there was reason to consider it, but the
author's name rang no clear gender affiliation bells for me)).
though it occured to me that it might be a statement of the list's
inhospitability to women, i could find no corroboration with either my
own experience here or with any previous discussion i've observed here
taking place along gendered lines. having deleted it, my recollection
is that the comment came alone, without any surrounding con/text in
which to interpret it; hence my bafflement.
indeed, about all i'd been able to assume from the comment was that i
had missed the comments which had inspired it.
further confusing me was the meaning of this phrase "going the
distance." what distance? is there some end toward which we are all
going on this list? how long must i be on this list to be considered
one of those few women that have gone the distance? i?ll do my best not
to unsubscribe before then.
cheers, i hope,
markisha
---------------
>Nesta is quite right, judging from my experience, when she notes that
men
>tend to significantly outnumber women on academic e-lists. One reason
for
>that, I think, is that men tend to outshout women. Or maybe men tend
to
>shout at each other, and ignore women ... or women tend to ignore men
>shouting at each other. Something like that. Another reason, I
>would imagine, is that men are probably more likely than women to have
net
>access at home. And men still outnumber women rather substantially in
>Canadian philosophy departments--I don't know what the situation is in
>other countries and other Foucault-related disciplines, though I would
>imagine it's pretty much the same in polisci, which seems to be the
other
>main source of people on this list. (Though sociology I guess is
another
>one; I have no idea what the gender ratio tends to be there.)
>
>> the webpage address from which it originated - I too have created and
>> uploaded webpages in the past but it hasn't thus far improved my
psychic
>> abilities...)
>
>Ummm. :) Well, I apologize (to Mitch, as well) if they aren't easily
>accessible from the Spoon Collective site, which I assumed they were.
>
>Matthew
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com