Re: Patriarchy: Re: What Matriarchy?

Mary Beth Williams (
10 Sep 1996 11:30:08 GMT

In <511ee3$> (Bryant) writes:
>In article <50voh1$>,
>Mary Beth Williams <> wrote:
>>I'm sorry, Bryant, if I offended you through the use of a *stock
>>phrase* with which I assume most culturally literate Americans are
>Heh. Perhaps it is I who should clarify.
>I understood your use of a tired phrase to make an unfair point about
>man arguments. I responded with humor. The point (which you took
>pains to erase in your followup) is that you spoke for a group that
>indeed does commit the naturalistic fallacy on a regular basis, when
>arguing with folks like me who think that evolutionary science might
>light on the study of an evolved species of biological organism
>That was hardly a glaring example of straw-manning on my part, as you
>suggested with the "when did you stop beating your wife" business.
>I was hoping you might respond to the substance of the post instead of

>the joke which was post-scripted to it.
>>I promise in the future to simplify my level of discourse so
>>as not to offend you.
>Jeesh, grow up. It was a joke. You marxist postmodernist
>non-Amerinds really *are* a humorless lot.

No, they really are not... I too was responding with a joke (initially,
the *extreme outrage* over PP's being tossed in with SB's <g>), and it
seems that the medium of cyberspace did both of us an injustice. I
hope that we can both put this incident behind us and start again from
a new, and hopefully, more humor-filled, level of discourse. Of
course, Megafauna Steve's rabidly running to your defense did nothing
to add clarity to the situation, but I will try in the future to
respond directly to your comments, and not let other's impetuousness
taint our discourse.

Cheers (from one tired, laboring mom-to-be, which only adds to her
inappropriate crankiness...)

MB Williams
Dept. of Anthro., UMass-Amherst

p.s., as I'm trained more as an archy/fizzy than a cultural anthro.,
Post-processualist/marxist would be more fitting a description of my
theoretical framework than post-modernist... Just a process note, and
if you're unfamiliar with the framework, I could recommend some reading
(Hodder, Schiffer, Paynter, etc.) if you'd like (all in truly good
faith, I promise.)