>i already told you what i think ought to be done: self reflection
You know, girlfriend, I am too post-humanist Marxist to set store by Self, much less Self Reflection! Especially about gender (recall, for instance, your correct criticism of list-males' lockerroom banterings on Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issues!; also remember last year's debate on the history of sexing). As for post-humanist (but non-postmodernist) Marxist/Feminist enterprise, only Comrades Carrol Cox & James Farmelant seem to agree with me (not even dependable Comrades Michael Hoover and Charles Brown come to our side on this -- well, Comrades Hoover & Brown will be voted down at the next Curmudgeon Tendency meeting, 2-3; those who want to join the Curmudgeon Tendency should submit their application offlist to Michael Hoover or Yoshie Furuhashi -- Les Schaffer, Curtiss Leung, etc. are especially encouraged to apply, for I'm stacking the deck further against the Hoover-Brown faction).
But my adorable psychoanalysis-loving Leninist comrades on Leninist-International would agree with you. Here's Julio Fernández Baraibar in reply to Tahir Wood:
***** From: Julio Fernández Baraibar <julfb at sinectis.com.ar> To: <leninist-international at buo319b.econ.utah.edu>, <pen-l at galaxy.csuchico.edu>, <furuhashi.1 at OSU.EDU> Cc: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>, <marxism at lists.panix.com> Subject: L-I: RE: Gender & Free Speech (was Re: LM, Louis, and Free Speech) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 00:35:40 -0300 Reply-To: leninist-international at buo319b.econ.utah.edu
Tahir Wood wrote, answering Yushie:
> I think it is an unacceptably conservative limit on
> radical questioning of class society, which depends on
> institutions like the family, like romantic love, etc., to
> reproduce itself. I'm HIGHLY suspicious of a marxism that
> anxiously cringes away from such topics. Watch how quickly
> any discussion of gender issues peters out on the Marxism
> list (on this list it never even starts!). I don't think a
> marxism list should be just an alternative news channel. It
> should be a forum for radical critique without limits. I
> think that such a marxism would become more attractive to
> women, and rightly so.
> Tahir
>From the tango country I agree completely with you.
And I did a self critique because a lot of times I have not participated in
such discussions. But the presence of women from central or halfcolonial
countries is a need in a list that presumes of marxist and revolutionary.
All this discussion, for example, about socialism and feminism would have
had my own point of view. But, as it uses happen, I thought that there was
more important issues to pay attention. And this is not correct.
Tahir, I celebrate and share your opinion.
Tango macho Julio FB.
--- from list leninist-international at lists.econ.utah.edu --- *****
>20% of the women subbed [n= approx 15] post regularly/almost daily. 20%
>of the men subbed post regularly. of the women who post regularly [or did]
>2/5 are women of color. of the men, 10%.
Only 15 women subbed to LBO-talk? Or are you saying that 15 women post "regularly/almost daily" here??? I suspect that you might be using a _tad_ too generous definition of "regularly/almost daily."... I'm wondering if Daniel Davies can do a gender-divided statistical analysis on who replies to whom.... Don't men tend to reply disproportionately more often to men than women (except yours truly)? Whose posts tend not to get any reply -- men's or women's (yours truly excepted)? Also, I ask DD to measure the qualities of attitudes displayed (serious/frivolous, friendly/hostile, patronizing/respectful, etc.). :)
also a tango lover,
Yoshie