Re: ANTHRO-L Digest - 17 Mar ...

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: William Bangs: "History and Anthropology??"
• Previous message: Marsha Quinlan: "gendered animals"

Good morning, folks. My thought here is that there's nothing wrong with
a feminist anthro list, but that we ought to give the posting this
references a look. One thing I have yet to see on this list is a
standardized set of subject headers enclosed in [ ] as happens (for
example) on usenet newsgroups. There the problem is that establishing a
new group is hard as hell (it can take up to a year!); so, rather than
simply splinter off into yet another micro-issue oriented list, people
agree to insert helpful warnings about the subject matter in the subject
line. Now this obviously will be of slightly less use to those on this
list who can't see a rundown of their messages without actually opening
them. But it still seems to me that the only good reason to start a
micro-issue oriented list is if its proponents are being considerate of
the rest of us by not wanting to burden us with a lot of irrelevant
traffic. If this is the case, then by all means: start up the list! It
can be fun to have a group of friends who all share the same take on the
world, and if this is the goal, great! Just don't think you NEED to
start a fem-anth list because men on this list aren't in sympathy with you.

Ben Bangs

Do what's right, not what's easy!

• Next message: William Bangs: "History and Anthropology??"
• Previous message: Marsha Quinlan: "gendered animals"