Wed, 6 Mar 1996 02:39:56 EST

I agree with Tiffany Dawn Rogers concerning the lack of class,
manners, and discretion on Anthro-l.
I find that the guidelines established by the list-owners to mean
nothing in the context
of the "discussions" that I have observed. I agree with Tiffany that
this is a disgrace to Anthropology.
I especially note Kathy Hildebrand's rude and ignorant response to my
attempt to start a discussion on
Jean Baudrillard. Rather than a "term-paper" as she so arrogantly
assumed, I am writing an article for an English language magazine
with wide circulation in Germany and the Czech Republic on the
reception of Baudrillard in American Anthropology. With reference to
this list, Ms. Hildebrand will be quoted, and her affiliation to the
Society for Applied Anthropology noted.
Ms. Rogers characterization of the behaviors of an uncaring, arrogant,
and inept community of faculty
are more than proven.
I was also so appalled concerning Hugh Jarvis' involving himself in
the situation in Western Australia, that I asked some contacts in the
Australian anthropological community to respond. Not wishing to
add to a situation of wild rumor and accusation, I'll ask Mr.Jarvis
1. Is the heart of Mr. Jarvis' support for Rindos a "gay" issue?
2. Is there a personal relationship between Mr. Jarvis and Mr. Rindos
which directly relates to the accusations against the
administration at the University of Western Australia?
3. Will the Web site Mr. Jarvis is to establish on these matters
include all documentation from both
sides of the controversy?
4. Will Anthro-l be an open and uncensored forum on all the issues
raised concerning both the public
accusations and the "whispered" undercurrents of the Rindos/UWA

Also, do the guidelines for Anthro-l mean anything, or are they just
a convenient backup for list-owners
to manipulate issues in which they chose to involve themselves?


Kalex Griffin