There can be no doubt that in exposing and changing social patterns of
sexist language usage and gender stereotyping in our public discourse
feminism has made and continues to make important contributions to our
society. As sociocultural theorists we're well aware of how cultural
discourse patterns work to create and remove spaces for social
participation. Thus in so far as XMCA is a public space, the kinds of
complaints that Diane and others have voiced about the gender stereotyping
in Bill's "humorous" post participate in that general movement of critical
awareness, and hence are to be supported and applauded.
But XMCA also is a private space--a space in which people have gotten to
know each other over a period of many years; a space in which ideas are
co-created and exchanged; a space in which participants often are willing
to put their personal experiences "on the line," as it were, in the cause
of our joint and mutual benefit.
Perhaps insofar as XMCA also functions as a private space it is reasonable
to ask that our contributions be read more personally. What is
objectionable about Bill's "humorous" posting is that it reifies gender
relations in which women often participate with male mates from a position
of lesser power--hence the hidden nuances behind the everyday words. Having
revealed the basic dynamic of the "joke" there are many ways we can go. We
can recognize that perhaps Bill participates in gendered relations without
a critical awareness of power imbalances. We can lament how difficult it is
for all of us to make sense in our own personal lives of the conflict
between our culturally inherited patterns of gendered relations and our
ideological commitments. Yes, we can even "get" the humor in Bill's joke.
In short there are many ways we can respond within the private space of
XMCA besides with the outrage that has so well served the cause of social
transformation in public spaces.
David
_____________________
David Kirshner
Department of Curriculum & Instruction
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge LA 70803-4728
(225) 578-2332 (225) 578-9135 (fax)
dkirsh@lsu.edu
http://www.ednet.lsu.edu/tango3/coedirectory.taf?
_function=detail&Faculty_uid1=135&Users_uid2=135&_UserReference=59F4B47FBE3415E138CD68B2
"Cunningham,
Donald" To: "'xmca@weber.ucsd.edu'"
<cunningh who-is-at ind <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
iana.edu> cc: (bcc: David H Kirshner/dkirsh/LSU)
Subject: RE: Looking up River
01/28/2002
04:36 PM
Please
respond to
xmca
OK, I'll pee on the electric fence.
Among the things going on in the world that I am exercised about, gender
stereotyped jokes such as Eric forwarded are not included. I am happy to
step aside and let those who feel strongly about that carry on and try
myself not to be a cause of offense. And I confess that I do not see how
female participation on the xmca has been marginalized. Count me in as a
numb stick of wood, I guess.
It seems to me that there is no shortage of more pressing issues on which
we
could collaborate and maybe even do some good. The fact that one in four
females (if I remember correctly) in this country will be sexually
assaulted
in their lifetime is one. Does COP theory or CHAT theory provide us with a
means to a) understand this phenomenon; and b) do something about it?
djc
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Barowy [mailto:wbarowy@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 9:49 AM
To: xmca
Subject: Looking up River
Looking up River
A Play in less than one act
------------
Feminist says:
"That's goddamned offensive. Do something about it"
Numb-er-than-a-stick-of-wood guy says:
"huh?"
Feminist says:
"make a gesture towards giving up privilege"
Numb-er-than-a-stick-of-wood guy says:
"Ah. Ok. Since this is a play,"
" the only thing i can think of is not saying anything"
"So I guess I won't say anything for a month"
"See ya"
History (the Narrator) says:
"It won't make a difference -- what a Stupid Guy"
"You need to make a springboard. Try using what's below to start."
Numb-er-than-a-stick-of-wood guy doesn't listen, doesn't get it. Goes
offstage.
The audience sits and waits for the next act. But there is none. Nothing
happens. Some eventually think "What a stoopid play" and wait for the next
one.
------------------
Excerpted from:
Contact, Community and Multilogue.
Electronic Communication in the Practice of Scholarship.
http://w1.314.telia.com/~u31414381/writings/iscrat98/cocomu.html
"Second, as already noted, the presence of silent participants may be
problematic in several respects. In the sense that many subscribers seldom
if
ever contribute postings they do not contribute to the production of
collective
goods on the virtual commons (Smith, 1992; Kollock & Smith, 1994). From the
perspective of community building activity, lurkers by watching the
activities
without offering themselves up for observation may reduce the level of
trust
in
the community. This would seem to be a more sensitive issue on the xlists
with
their high proportion of multilogical activity in the mailflow than in the
electronic fora studied by Rojo (1995), where most users participated
mainly
in
the "fishing for information" mode, while relatively fewer users were
involved
in the more interactive modes of "enjoying the debate" or "social
networking".
Through the long and well archived existence of the xlist cluster it
provides
an interesting object for the study of list participation dynamics. The
role
of
lurkers on the xlists needs to be examined, as it is contradictory
construed
in
many ways: as problematic or as non-problematic, and as problematic for
diametrally opposite reasons. The presence of non-posting readers on the
xlists
has occasionally been seen as troublesome, both from the perspective of
community trust and as a potential dead-weight in the system. On the other
hand, in meta-discussions on the xlist multilogues, there has also been
worries
of the opposite kind: might there among the silent participants be an
alarmingly great number of silenced voices, are there people out there with
things to contribute, who are too intimidated by the discourse to dare post
their share? Then, discussions on the lists have repeatedly suggested that
lurking is not necessarily negative. For one thing, the academic
information
distributed through this activity system may legitimately be read as a kind
of
local community newspaper '- the newsletter analogy appears, for example,
in
the Xfamily Welcome Message '- where responses from the readership within
the
same medium are optional to exceptional. There is a logic to this, as the
information offered in the activity system where academic community is
built
basically refers to activities in other, related, activity systems, and the
canonical response to an item of information may be the active
participation
in
one of the list-related, offline activity systems. However, the presence of
lurkers does seem to introduce a contradiction in the multilogical activity
system: a split of the community into performers and audience and a
corresponding mismatch in construal of the activity. The performers act
within
a collaborative activity. Prevalent discursive practices manifestly provide
openings for others to enter the stage. The audience of lurkers, however,
act
within an activity of consumption '- keeping up with developments, enjoying
the
show. On the other hand, with reference to the power law phenomena emerging
in
the interactive dynamics of mailing lists it could be argued that unevenly
distributed rates of contribution is an inevitable logistic outcome. "
=====
Bill Barowy
"Everything is a becoming, without beginning or end"
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
http://auctions.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 11 2002 - 09:22:33 PST