|
|
Re: General broadsides and agendas
Donna M. Lanclos (lanclos@GARNET.BERKELEY.EDU)
Fri, 2 Feb 1996 16:48:25 -0800
Doesn't anthropology also include the study of social movements, and
socio-political paradigms? Shouldn't anthropologists also be interested
in the construction of "things" like "feminism" both by those who
self-identify as "feminists" and those who do not? Not to say that
that's *all* we should be interested in, but I've always considered it
appropriate.
Donna Lanclos
UC Berkeley Dept of Anthropology
lanclos@garnet.berkeley.edu
On Fri, 2 Feb 1996, Mr. E wrote:
> There are also quite a few feminist discussion listservs as well as
> newgroups that maybe more appropriate.
>
> At 11:36 AM 02/02/96 -0400, Kotliar wrote:
> > I don't think it is helpful to launch general broadsides against
> >"feminism" and "radical feminism" etc. etc. That would be equivalent as
> >labelling any critic of any work labelled as "feminist" as being a
> >"Reactionary", "Radical Hominists", Male Supramacist" etc. You might as
> >well use terms like "Pig face" and "Mush brain" to make your arguments. If
> >there is a particular scholar whose ideas you wish to engage, engage their
> >ARGUMENTS directly and specifically with counter arguments ("You suck"
> >doesn't count). The strength of the Internet is its ability to circumvent
> >the mass media tendency towards soundbites and mudslinging. I hear radical
> >used an an adjective agaisnt Republicans, feminists, economists etc. but
> >the term is less informative than it is inflammatory. Radical compared to
> >whom? Statements like "Feminists have gone beyond the laudable aims of the
> >early advocates women's rights". What does this mean? Which Feminist
> >agenda? Which feminists support this? Which specific aims of this
> >"agenda" are objectable? Reproductive freedom? Advocating for better
> >child-care opportunities? Protecting wives and husbands from spousal
> >battery? Allowing greater flexibilty for gender roles? Trying to eliminate
> >favortism and bias towards males in primary schools? Freedom of the
> >individual to select an adult sexual partner appropriate to preference and
> >not the specifications of State and community?
> > Is the extension of freedoms and opportunity the objectionable
> >"agenda", or is not the "agenda" but the particular methods of particular
> >activists which are objectionable? If you answer "They are all the same",
> >and cannot come up with any particular incidents, objections or arguments
> >but only exhibit a gut feeling of reaction and antipathy, than perhaps
> >there is an "agenda" at work here. We have met the enemy and it is us.
> > Since this is an anthropology list, perhaps it might be more
> >interesting to various members to discuss the cultural aspects of
> >perceptions and attitudes towards feminism in the various societies that
> >members of the list belong. For example in the States many women are
> >loathe to identify themselves as feminists, yet are in broad agreement with
> >many of the goals of modern feminists. Is this the case in other
> >societies? I think there is much anthropological fodder here.
> >
> >
>
|