beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (JB) (08/01/86)
[Ob/maintaining that certain air of savoir-faire] In article <2274@ihlpg.UUCP> kapa@ihlpg.UUCP (Perkins) writes: >> In article <719@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> cheryl@batcomputer.UUCP (cheryl) writes: >> >[Cheryl's story about discouraging males from taking AP Chem in >> > high school, and driving out one of the ones who took it anyway. -BDC] > >Another example of something that when men do it, it is sexist; >when women do it, it expresses solidarity. "This time for sure." "What time is it?" "Time" is the same word in both sentences - it must mean the same thing, eh? I'm not saying I agree with what Cheryl did (I don't think I do). But there is such a thing as context, and it makes a difference in how one interprets things. If operating under the assumption that something is true will help make it true, then assuming men and women are really operating in the same context, and therefore judging men's and women's actions by the same standard, makes sense. But in fact, men and women are operating in very different contexts, and if you want a realistic appraisal of an individuals actions, you have to take into account where that person is coming from. Just a thought. -- --JB ((Just) Beth Christy, U. of Chicago, ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!beth) "There's got to be another world, oh yeah. Boop, boop, boop, baby." --The Roches
awc@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Alex Cannon) (08/02/86)
In article <453@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>, beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (JB) writes: > [Ob/maintaining that certain air of savoir-faire] > > In article <2274@ihlpg.UUCP> kapa@ihlpg.UUCP (Perkins) writes: > >> In article <719@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> cheryl@batcomputer.UUCP (cheryl) writes: > >> >[Cheryl's story about discouraging males from taking AP Chem in > >> > high school, and driving out one of the ones who took it anyway. -BDC] > > > >Another example of something that when men do it, it is sexist; > >when women do it, it expresses solidarity. > > I'm not saying I agree with what Cheryl did (I don't think I do). But > there is such a thing as context, and it makes a difference in how one > interprets things. If operating under the assumption that something is > true will help make it true, then assuming men and women are really > operating in the same context, and therefore judging men's and women's > actions by the same standard, makes sense. But in fact, men and women > are operating in very different contexts, and if you want a realistic > appraisal of an individuals actions, you have to take into account > where that person is coming from. > Yeah, shame on the previous poster for criticising Cheryl's harrassment of those guys. She had a perfectly good reason... she's a woman. :-) :-) :-) ... > > --JB ((Just) Beth Christy, U. of Chicago, ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!beth) > Sorry Beth, couldn't resist. *I* don't think that way, and I'm sure *you* don't think that way, but you phrased it funny. Personally, I don't agree that (thinking) people should judge *anybody's* actions based on a general group. As far as Cheryl is concerned, I see a *lot* of bitterness that often erupts on innocent netters who happen to get in the way, but her last few postings have been free of nastiness, and when she leaves that part out, her opinions make a lot of sense. Alex Cannon Boston University