|
|
Re: Linguistic Change, Science, Women.
Ruby Rohrlich (rohrlich@GWIS2.CIRC.GWU.EDU)
Sat, 2 Dec 1995 18:19:31 -0500
dogmatic, redundant writing, but it has also produced terrific stuff. If
you like Eisler's quote from my article, why don't you read the whole
article, and tell me what you think. As it happens, the women who write
well about issues in science are themselves frequently women who have
achieved in science, and really have a handle on the field. I can't even
say why it's important to me to have you read their point of view;perhaps
because you are open, it seems to me, to what women do and say; you
certainly cite them liberally. These women in science have all had good
experiences with the fair-minded, egalitarian male minority in science,
as well, and they're much too intelligent to damn all male scientists,
like Camille Paglia damns all academic feminists. You might read Sandra
Harding and Ruth Hubbard for a start. Besides, John, what if Katie
decides to go into science. You have to be prepared forall
contingencies. I'm really sorry not to have met her. I would like to
hear about her experiences at Annapolis. But when she comes to D.C.,
she can always have the couch in my living-room. Best regards. Ruby
|