>>> kelley <oudies at flash.net> 10/11/99 02:48PM >>>
i did not call charles a sexist from the get go. this is what i wrote:
<paraindent><param>left</param>analysis. doesn't strike me as one of ange's usual obsessions. chaz, yes.
> ange no. speaking of obsessions, chaz you know you complain because
others [ange and ted] condescend to you,
(((((((((((((((((((((((
Charles: My recall is that I criticize people for racist arguments or supporting racist positions in real world events. I don't think I have ever said "you are condescending to ME in a racist way." I respond to "condescencions" with condescensions ( whatever exactly that is; my terminlogy would be " I respond to disrespect with disrepect." The Aretha Franklin rule, r-e-s-p-e-c-t).
So, on the below, my recall is any disrepect of Kelley is in response to some disrespect she has shown me, without trying to figure out whether it can be characterized as racist.
The stuff about my agreeing with Kelley more than Angela or "slutty humor" is off the wall.
I didn't "ignore" the claim of sexism. I denied it.
I am not "condescending" to a lot of people. What I do is give respect if I get it. I don't give it if I don't get it.
Finally, I challenge white males as much as white females. Ask the white males if they think I'm easy on them.
CB
well i'm afraid that i think you
have a tendency to condescend to women. you don't seem to do it to me,
though you once did. i suppose that this is because you 'n' i share some
similarities with regard to philosophy of social science, so maybe you
respect me or something. or mebbe you just like my slutty humor. dunno.
don't care.
</paraindent>
i tried not to use inflammatory language. and, given that frances, charles and i had already had this convo, i didn't think it would be that hard to have again. charles and i did work that one out reasonably.
the sexism was raised when charles ignored what i said and belittled it.
i made that VERY clear. it's unfortunate that everyone is too busy to actually read the posts. i also very quickly noted that i could be wrong, that it wasn't an aboslute and subject to discussion and examination.
[...]
charles, you are right, i don't think you are a sexist in general and never said that. and i think, upon further reflections andn offlists pointing out that you are condescding to lots of people, then i agree that the incidents with angela didn't suggest a continuation of the charge of sexist condescension to women. sensitive to the issue because it has been ignored too often on the list, i saw it through a warped feminist lens that saw sexism everywhere. i am a human being and so should be allowed such mistakes and one of the ways those mistakes ought to be treated is with human compassion and a sense of humor, a willing ness to guide and teach rather than chastise and ridicule. a dose of patience too. and yes, i need to practice what i preach more often. i'm learning.
i continue to contend that your response of ignoring and belittling my concerns was sexist.
i suspect all of this is a good lesson in how two historically oppressed groups manage to beat each other up instead of joining hands in the struggle. both of us are probably more willing to challenge the other precisely because both of us perceive the other as weaker incomparison to the white males on the list. in turn, we see these activities as peculiarly sexist and racist.
again, i apologize for not being more calm and collected in my criticisms last week
k