Re: (De)politicization of ANTHRO-L

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Rob Quinlan: "Evolutionary Psych."
• Previous message: Hugh Jarvis: "Anthro-l Policy on Ads (cc: J.P. Rushton & Anthro-l)"
• Maybe in reply to: John Hoopes: "(De)politicization of ANTHRO-L"

>
>I think it is crucial that Hugh Jarvis respond to Dwight Read's comments,
>especially given that a copy of the posting on the cessation of the
>"political" discussion of AA was forwarded to the Tedlocks (are they
>not subscribers to ANTHRO-L)? I'm somewhat less paranoid than Read is
>about this, but the appearance of impropriety is just as bad as the
>real thing. Is it really possible that the "politics" behind
>editorial policies at AA are also having an effect on free discussion
>on ANTHRO-L? Say it isn't so!

I personally thought D.R. was going a bit over the top--to be fair, Hugh
Jarvis may just have been wanting to spare other readers the tedium that
comes when people start beating the proverbial dead horse--which is what
seems to be happening with the AA business. But I also believe that if
people on ANTHRO-L want to go on wrangling about the editorial policies,
that's their perogative.

I am not a member myself, and I am something of a "lurker" on ANTHRO-L.
But I advise people who have a problem with any subject discussed on any
mailing list to do what I have been doing about the AA "criticism" (to use
the polite term)--delete the message after reading the first line. As Neil
Gaiman put it: "If you're offended by this sort of thing, there's a simple
solution--DON'T READ IT."

That way freedom of speech is preserved and everybody's happy.

Fiona Moore
al772@freenet.carleton.ca

• Next message: Rob Quinlan: "Evolutionary Psych."
• Previous message: Hugh Jarvis: "Anthro-l Policy on Ads (cc: J.P. Rushton & Anthro-l)"
• Maybe in reply to: John Hoopes: "(De)politicization of ANTHRO-L"