Re: questions in the form of comments...

From: Glenn D Humphreys (glenhump@soonet.ca)
Date: Wed Feb 06 2002 - 21:25:12 PST


Bruce tells me that the xmca listserv didn't want to accept my name for
some reason. However, after some repair work, it appears to be working. I
don't know that this note is really relevant, or even likely to be welcome
any longer. But I thought I would resend it anyhow -- if nothing else as a
token of my appreciation for xlchc/xmca over the last several years of my
career.

----------------------------------------------------
(Originally sent January 31/02)

I really enjoyed one of Diane's recent notes in her recent series to the
group (Wednesday, January 30):

>i know i should just let this all go, i'm just setting myself up, again,
>as the mythic man-hating monster... but what the heck? i'm no man-hating
>monster, but i'm
>not really sure that the ideas that have been expressed here
>
>by the women, and a few men, have been really grasped for their
>significance.
>so i'll be the mule, here:

I don't usually read xmca postings that closely any longer, ever since I
retired and coincidentally discontinued my doctoral thesis, having gotten
from it what I needed and no longer needing the formal title of the PH.D.
for anything practical in my life. That said, I do like to follow the
postings, and sometimes do a little (re)reading in my library. Out of a
sentimental attachment to xmca, I suppose. (I am actually more interested
in motorcycles and the biker life style these days)

However, one of my daughters is currently working towards her PH.D. in
anthropology and womens' studies -- and regularly lectures me (as a
prototypically dense elderly white male) in the intricacies of feminist
critical theory, hoping no doubt to correct some of my deficiencies.

On the other hand, my practically oriented wife (who has taught in the
secondary system for about two decades) thoroughly enjoyed the
contributions on Eric's joke that were contributed by Diane, Mary,
Elizabeth and others. Not because we found the joke offensive, which we
did not since neither of us felt that the joke was used as an attack on
each other when we began playfully toying with some of the wordings over
the supper table. But rather because we found it a problematic and
therefore rather stimulating issue that we encounter(ed) every day in our
careers as teachers.

So, my daughter and my wife and I individually responded differently to
Eric's joke, according to our personal status (current and historical),
according to our currently forgrounded political agendas, not to mention
our personal moods at the given time.

So, I guess that my response to Diane's assertion "HM. When is gender not
a factor?" is to agree with her -- and then ask why I should be influenced
by her claim. I tend to take the view that any social theory/orientation
has a useful implied ideology which can ground a program of social
action. It depends, I guess, on whose ox you want to gore in order to
successfully manage your day. However, there are also other political
agendas out there that need to be concentrated upon as our days unfold, and
sometimes it is useful to temporarily put aside some agendas in order to
concentrate on these (I was studying particular age/institutional-related
differences in power and consequent possibilities for specific kinds of
actions in educational institutions). So, in the interest of getting other
useful things done, it is simply necessary to put aside other issues and
foci ("gender" might be an example) from time to time.

I was torn about the tone of debate surrounding Eric's joke. Part of me
found it fascinating, and even a lot of fun, since I enjoy making trouble
in my own little world from time to time -- as my most committed youngest
feminist has become aware. On the other hand, the tone of violence
attending some commentary was unpleasant and disturbing. However, I am not
concerned for the future of xmca since my own conclusion is that these
things will happen in any group from time to time, and xmca, under Mike's
gentle ministrations, has shown itself to be exceptionally robust. The
activity system seems to have grown successfully in response to these kinds
of contradictions over the last several years.

So, keep it up, Diane.

Glenn D. Humphreys

P.O. Box 11,
Echo Bay, Ontario,
Canada, P0S 1C0
Email: glenhump@soonet.ca
Home: (705) 248-1226
Fax: (705) 248-1226 (Prearrange, please)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:00:18 PST