Hmm. I agree that if the value of a woman's personal acheivements is skewed
by peoples perception of her looks then it is a bad thing but I am not
convinced that that is what is happening here.
Also, I absolutely disagree that just because two facts are presented in the
same context it in any way implies a causal connection between the two. I am
not prepared to walk on eggshells because other people are incapable of
making this distinction, to do so would be to allow them to continue to make
that mistake. I would rather point out the flaw in their reasoning and
confront it head on rather than avoid the issue.
I have been lucky enough to have been called beautiful myself on a few
occasions, I rather enjoyed it. I would hope that the people who said it
would go out and tell as many people as possible!
Ross.
----- Original Message -----
From: Marc 3 Poirier <mpoirier@virtu.sar.usf.edu>
To: <idm@hyperreal.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2000 12:39 AM
Subject: [idm] Re: better Riz than "chick"
quoted 6 lines "dude. pointing out that someone referred to as a 'he' is in actuality> > "dude. pointing out that someone referred to as a 'he' is in actuality
> > is a she is not misogynistic.
> >
> > pointing out that a person is attractive is not misogynistic."
> >
> > While I shouldn't speak for others, I have to say that the original
post
quoted 3 lines wasn't arguing that it was misogynist to identify Riz' gender. The word> > wasn't arguing that it was misogynist to identify Riz' gender. The word
> > in question wasn't "woman", it was "chick" and if you can't figure out
> > the connotative difference, then YOU'RE the "moron" in this picture.
And
quoted 2 lines no, pointing out that a person is attractive isn't *necessarily*> > no, pointing out that a person is attractive isn't *necessarily*
> > misogynistic. But in a sexist climate in which women's art-making
tends
quoted 1 line to get referenced with their looks in ways that men's art-maiking> > to get referenced with their looks in ways that men's art-maiking
rarely
quoted 22 lines is, to uncritically perpetuate that association is to make a comment> > is, to uncritically perpetuate that association is to make a comment
> > which, if not sexist in its intention, is nontheless sexist in its
> > effect. How many posts on IDM have you seen where Bernd Friedmann's
> > fetching cheekbones or Rob Brown's brooding good looks are the issue?
> >
> > later "dude".
> >
> > Drew
>
> Amen, Drew. You've gotten right to the core of this issue, a place that
> most of the IDMers can't seem to find. & add this one to the IDM FAQ
> (whoever is working on that) so that all of the IDM listers can hopefully
> post at least slightly more responsibly (& maybe then we can shake off the
> very tangible & heavy boys-club climate on this list).
>
> Marc Poirier
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org