grammer/feminism (fwd)

Elaine Hills (ehills@SOLEIL.ACOMP.USF.EDU)
Tue, 7 Nov 1995 16:53:52 -0500


Your points are very valid at the least. We definitely should focus on
what unites us not what is dividing us. The problem, as you pointed out
is that what is uniting us today is the anger and personal problems
beneath that anger that people are carrying with them from their homes,
if they have such a structure.

So where do we begin?? What are we to do when we've got people like Newt
out there with his head you know where?? Is therapy the answer for the
adults? For the youths? I really don't know the answer to any of these
questions, nor do I believe that there is just one answer. I think a
further discussion of this would be excellent here and look forward to
hearing more to maybe spark some controversy in my own mind---we need
ideas, people!

Take care,


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 1995 12:14:04 EST
From: James Pasto <pasto@UMBSKY.CC.UMB.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list ANTHRO-L <ANTHRO-L@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU>
Newgroups: bit.listserv.anthro-l
Subject: grammer/feminism

I think this is a matter of perspective. PC is important, but it has
not had any effect on the growth of the corporate dictatorship that is taking
place in our society. Intellectuals in the academy have not united to stop
or at least massively protest the growth of what J. Jackson calls the "jail
industrial" complex; instead they have helped divide resistance by breaking
it down into a multitude of private interest groups. The academy reflects
the political institutions. Women have advanced in the university and that
is very good; but at the same time the funds for education ('lower' and higher
are being cut. This will curtail women's advancement much more than the fears
of men on campus. Yet, we are paralyzed it seems, and cannot mount an effective
resistence to this.

The last election needs to be seen as a wake up call to academics. There
has been a tremendous amount of selfish indulgence of academics over the last
years -- again this reflects the behavior of our corporate and political
leaders. We wonder why our children are lost, look at the role models they
have. Youth after youth in the community centers I work in keep asking
how adults expect them to get along when the adults themselves can't. I have
seen youth speak outs disrupted by adults arguing in the audience. That is
what the academy has become in some ways, a big argument that our children
see and imitate. But the arguements are now over who has the right to speak
and what can be said. This plays right into the hands of conservative
intersts. We need to open debate and discussion (not argument). We need
to forge a consensus that is built upon priorities (at this point if our
children are not a priority we are in big trouble) and effective resistance.
Academics need to work out their personal problems in therapy, not in the
classroom. Things are real serious. We need a serious response. Perhaps we
can start a discussion here about what that may be. But let's begin by seeing
what unites us not what divides us. That is the difference between resistance
politics and power-play. Peace

Jim Pasto
Anthropology/UMass Boston