Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:13:02 -0500
From: John Andrews
Subject: Re: An experimental gender group? (was: genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Count me in__good idea....May produce some revealing information about
gender morphing.
It also, may give the list, Philosophy and Psychology of Cyberspace, a shot
of adrenalin for contributive content and study...Johnny
-----Original Message-----
From: Philosophy and Psychology of Cyberspace
[mailto:CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM]On Behalf Of David Streever
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 8:12 PM
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: An experimental gender group? (was: genderfree = free?)
Sounds excellent Renata. I'll join if you'll have me.
At 04:06 PM 2/9/01 -0800, you wrote:
>--- Lynne Harding
>
>(about my suggestion to experiment on gender)
>
> > that sounds like an excellent idea...Wonder how the others feel
>about it?
>
>
>Maybe we should set up a temporary list (on Egroups or something)
>just for the experiment - anyone (except Lynne and me) feel like
>trying this out?
>
>Just imagine: a list where the main purpose is to cross/change
>gender barriers - one could choose to be male/female/other or be
>everything at the same time with different addies - like a gender
>playground. Maybe we'd even come up with interesting conclusions.
>,-)
>
>Jon, you could use it in your book.
>
>
> > BTW, sorry I didn't reply yesterday
>
>
>No prob. ,-) (I typo'd "no probe" <grin>)
>
>renata
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:49:53 -0500
From: Tom Ellis
Subject: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group? (was: genderfree =free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Here you go....right now I am set to moderate messags before they come into
the list, I may change that if it gets to be too much, but I figured it
would help me weed out people accidentally posting their names, etc ;)
Post message: genderfree@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: genderfree-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: genderfree-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
List owner: genderfree-owner@yahoogroups.com
URL to this page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genderfree
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:52:48 -0500
From: Tom Ellis
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group? (was: genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Please make sure that you each identify yourselves to me separately, so that
I know who is who. I will maintain a separate list.
[snip]
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:41:22 -0500
From: John Andrews
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group? (was: genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Tom...A little unclear as to making myself incognito to the group, upon
acceptance...
How would I make sure messages sent will have my new name and, I gather, new
address?
What is the criteria for acceptance to the 'genderfree-group'?
Thank you...Johnny
[snip]
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:49:59 -0500
From: Tom Ellis
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group? (was: genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
From what I saw in the thread(s), the idea is to get a 'new' email address;
they can be had on the web all over the place. Let me know in a separate
(private) email, your name, the email you are subbed to CM with, and your
gender.
Criteria...hmmm. The only thing I can think of is that by subbing, you
agree to not directly identify yourself or your gender. Simply carry on a
discussion, such as those we have here. Perhaps we should start by
transplanting the gender discussion there.
[snip]
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:55:41 -0500
From: John Andrews
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: Genderfree ~ Criteria
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Moreover, would appreciate a more generalized criteria for proper posting
and participation in this project, if you can - at this stage, Tom...Johnny
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:01:26 -0500
From: dpres
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group?(was:genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Well people could e-mail you their virtual gender but not necessarily their
actual gender...
Tom Ellis wrote:
> >From what I saw in the thread(s), the idea is to get a 'new' email address;
> they can be had on the web all over the place. Let me know in a separate
> (private) email, your name, the email you are subbed to CM with, and your
> gender.
>
> Criteria...hmmm. The only thing I can think of is that by subbing, you
> agree to not directly identify yourself or your gender. Simply carry on a
> discussion, such as those we have here. Perhaps we should start by
> transplanting the gender discussion there.
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:29:01 -0500
From: Tom Ellis
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group? (was:genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
True...I really don't care, I'm just willing to moderate whatever you all
decide :-)
Work it out here, the list is ready when the experiment is ready to go.
-----Original Message-----
From: Philosophy and Psychology of Cyberspace
[mailto:CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM]On Behalf Of dpres
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 10:01 PM
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group?
(was:genderfree = free?)
Well people could e-mail you their virtual gender but not necessarily their
actual gender...
[snip]
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:38:04 -0500
From: Alan Sondheim
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group? (was:genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Do you think there might be a way to sign up without using another email
account? I'm managing 2 and a huge amount of mail. I wonder...
What would be worthwhile would be to have a forward from the email list to
Cybermind - in other words, subscribe Cybermind - so that we'd get the
email here as well to talk about -
Alan
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 22:40:08 -0500
From: Tom Ellis
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group?
(was:genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Sure, people could sign up with any email address, but then others would see
it, and could thus deduce their identity/gender.
I'm open to suggestions.
[snip]
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 23:07:13 -0800
From: catcher at times
Subject: General remarks and questions (was: Announcement RE: An
experimental gender group? (was:genderfree =free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
I'm putting my replies to several posts here - hope I'm not too
unclear.
renata
--- Alan Sondheim
> Do you think there might be a way to sign up without using another
>email account?
I don't think that's possible - but you and I could co-use 1 new
addie (I could forward you the posts or you could come and check
them in the mailbox, whichever you prefer) - this would add to the
confusion too. ,-)
About moderator approving messages - I'm not sure. Tom, I assume
you're not going to change contents of a post, are you?
About rules: I don't know why we'd need rules - the whole idea was
being free (genderfree) in the first place, so rules would
contradict that, no?
About discussions: I suggest Jon sends some of the last gender
issues to the new list and we react to them from our new identity.
About identities: I think everyone should be free to be whoever they
wanna bee - if someone chooses to sub to the gendergroup with their
identity as known on CM, why not?
> What would be worthwhile would be to have a forward from the email
>list to Cybermind
I don't know if it'(s feasible to sub a list - but we can try it
out. If not, we could forward daily digests to CM - after all
"genderfree" is CM's baby, right? (what gender does that make CM, I
wonder?)
renata
****************
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 23:18:48 -0800
From: catcher at times
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group?
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
--- Tom Ellis
> True...I really don't care, I'm just willing to moderate whatever
>you all decide :-)
Oh Tom, this sounds so ... neutral! ,-)
> Work it out here, the list is ready when the experiment is ready to go.
A proposition:
- Anyone can sub, be it with their own addie or a new one, or both.
- Anyone who subs with a new addie, sends a mail to Tom, telling him
who h/she really is.
- Jon sends some of the gender stuff to the new list, to start
conversation
- Every topic is welcomed (because every topic is bound to be
influenced by gender)
- Daily digests are sent to CM
- Posting is not moderated, only edited by Tom to protect us from
outing
- Everyone is free to "out" everyone else, as long as this doesn't
become the main topic of the list
- We evaluate after 1 month
So ... whaddya think?
renata
****************
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 08:12:27 -0500
From: Tom Ellis
Subject: Re: General remarks and questions (was: Announcement RE: An
experimental gender group? (was:genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
I won't change any post content. I might just make it completely
unmoderated, but wanted to see how it goes first. Like I said, I'll run it
however the group feels it should be run; it is a group experiment, I'm just
facilitating :)
-----Original Message-----
From: Philosophy and Psychology of Cyberspace
[mailto:CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM]On Behalf Of catcher at times
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 2:07 AM
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Subject: General remarks and questions (was: Announcement RE: An
experimental gender group? (was:genderfree = free?)
I'm putting my replies to several posts here - hope I'm not too
unclear.
renata
[snip]
****************
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:37:23 -0500
From: David Streever
Subject: Re: An experimental gender group? (was: genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
I do write, and am published, and do know that it is not easy to change
your style. Your style is so much more than I think you are referring to
with this comment. I was editor of a newspaper as well, and most people are
never even aware of their writing style. Even I do not notice some of the
things I do which make my style "unique". It takes more than a couple
emails to verify someone's style, but you could with enough data.
At 04:22 PM 2/11/01 -0500, you wrote:
>This is an interesting comment. Taken as a given that it IS easy to change
>writing style etc, if this is true then what does that say about online
>identity?
****************
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:57:21 -0500
From: Tom Ellis
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group? (was:genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
I decided to turn off moderation of posts for the time being, as I will be
very busy over the next few days.
****************
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:00:29 +0800
From: Aileen Familara
Subject: Re: Announcement RE: An experimental gender group?
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Hello,
I've lurked for quite a while on cybermind, too shy to participate. I would
like to be part of this experimental gender group too. I'm interested in the
way communication transforms in this manner.
Thanks,
Aileen
****************
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:51:03 -0500
From: David Streever
Subject: Re: An experimental gender group? (was: genderfree = free?)
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
I'm in.
Dave S. :-)
****************
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 09:42:51 -0600
From: "E. Dettmar"
Subject: The Truth
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
I am sending from my Cybermind address; I am on genderfree as
fear_no_weevils@hotmail.com, my name is Emily Dettmar and I am Female.
****************
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 19:13:48 +0100
From: Rowena
Subject: Re: The Truth
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
On 14 Feb 2001, at 9:42, E. Dettmar wrote:
> I am sending from my Cybermind address; I am on genderfree as
> fear_no_weevils@hotmail.com, my name is Emily Dettmar and I am Female.
Isn't it a bit soon to reveal the truth ?
Rowena
****************
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:03:31 -0500
From: David Streever
Subject: Re: The Truth
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
I think this was supposed to go to the guy whose moderating only.
At 09:42 AM 2/14/01 -0600, you wrote:
>I am sending from my Cybermind address; I am on genderfree as
>fear_no_weevils@hotmail.com, my name is Emily Dettmar and I am Female.
****************
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:57:33 +0000
From: Jon Marshall
Subject: Re: General remarks and questions (was: Announcement RE: An
experimental gender group? (was:genderfre
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
On 12 Feb 01, at 23:07, catcher at times wrote:
> I'm putting my replies to several posts here - hope I'm not too
> unclear.
>
> renata
>
> About rules: I don't know why we'd need rules - the whole idea was
> being free (genderfree) in the first place, so rules would contradict
> that, no?
Well, possibly we might agree that if someone decides to use their
anonymity to simply abuse people who are on CM, and that this
becomes a problem they might be removed....
> About discussions: I suggest Jon sends some of the last gender
> issues to the new list and we react to them from our new identity.
Ok I will sub as myself as well (i'm already on the list:) to do this,
but it might take me until tomorrow to do some kind of read through.
> About identities: I think everyone should be free to be whoever they
> wanna bee - if someone chooses to sub to the gendergroup with their
> identity as known on CM, why not?
Agree.
> > What would be worthwhile would be to have a forward from the email
> > list to Cybermind
>
> I don't know if it'(s feasible to sub a list - but we can try it
> out. If not, we could forward daily digests to CM - after all
> "genderfree" is CM's baby, right? (what gender does that make CM, I
> wonder?)
If mail from gender-free is not automatically coming to the list, I
could forward stuff, from the jmarshal address to CM, if people did
not object. And if people can't sub to the list, and they want to
contribute, they could write stuff to me offlist and I could forward it
to Gender-free with a psuedonym.
finally just to repost Tom's info, in case people missed it the first
time
Post message: genderfree@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: genderfree-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: genderfree-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
List owner: genderfree-owner@yahoogroups.com
URL to this page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genderfree
jon
****************
From: jmarshal@ol.com.au
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:51:41 +0000
Subject: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
[to both gender free and Cybermind]
I've had something of a rough day - so forgive this somewhat quick
note.
I subbed to gender free under two names, so i can speak with my
'organiser' type voice, if necessary..
Renata vaguely suggested in a letter to this list, that we should
think about what the list is attempting.
one thing would be to see whether, without overt gender cues,
people could recognise the actual gender of participants.
Of course some people have been giving off explicit gender cues
already, but this does not stop the experiment, as they may or
may not be faking.
It may also be interesting to see how people cope without explicit
gender on a mailing list- particularly if we can get some topics
going.
It will be hard to discuss experiences of gender on the list without
giving away gender, but you could always speak of what you
'assume' gender experiences to be, I guess.
I dunno, Renata - anybody - what do you want to do with the list?
hopfully I will think better tomorrow
jon
****************
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:49:19 +0000
From: Jon Marshall
Subject: Gender Free Digest
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
If people would rather I didn't post these things then please say so.
As you can see little is happening yet
jon
[all messages are found further below]
****************
Subject: Re: Function of 'Gender Free'
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 04:13:18 -0800
From: catcher at times
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
--- Jon Marshall
> Of course some people have been giving off explicit gender cues
> already, but this does not stop the experiment, as they may or may
My idea was: first people sub with whatever genders/personalities
they wish. Then we develop threads in which we find out if gender
(faked or not) is unevitable.
It may be interesting to see how a male impersonates a female and
vice versa - also how a fe/male impersonates a fe/male of a
different character/background.
> It may also be interesting to see how people cope without explicit
>gender on a mailing list- particularly if we can get some topics
>going.
Right now it seems that everybody is somehow clinging to the
explicitness of gender (be it the absence of it). This is
interesting.
I think we're in need of topics. Jon, you might throw in a couple
... f.e. a topic that "asks for" a genderly approach and a neutral
one - see what we do with those.
> It will be hard to discuss experiences of gender on the list without
> giving away gender, but you could always speak of what you
>'assume' gender experiences to be, I guess.
Sex, power ... big gender issues, I think. Might be intersting to
see how we all react to those.
> I dunno, Renata - anybody - what do you want to do with the list?
As you might now by now, I don't really care for stuff you don't
learn from - so my 'this is one big playground" statement actually
meant "we could find out things about ourselves here" ... which is
what happens on playgrounds, as far as I can tell.
It might be a good idea to have someone onlist who's neutral and
hands us topics - one of your personae, Jon? Or should I develop
one?
Basically, this is an experiment. So:
- we will have to collect info on everybody who participates (not
only on who they really are, but on their personae and what they
want to accomplish by using them) - a questionnaire might be a good
idea (can we do that backchannel, Jon? Or am I imposing?)
renata, thinking
**********
Subject: Re: Function of 'Gender Free'
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 01:49:13 +1100
From: Jon Marshall
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
obviously i agree there is no point doing this if we don't learn
something from it.
And Renata, you are certainly not imposing - I might have to adjourn
some participation for a few days, while things get sorted out in my
life, so I might not be here very often anyway for a while.
If you do anything, I'd like to know the results though:)
sorry about my backing away a bit, and i hope it can soon be sorted out
I'll still try and post digests to CM, if people don't object - the
gender free list is currently quiet enough for this not to be too much
of a burden I hope
jon
****************
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:16:44 -0500
From: Magneto
Subject: Question
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Can someone tell me where the genderfree list is? I was under the
impression it was on yahoogroups but I keep getting "no matches found"
every time I search for it...
****************
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:31:02 -0500
From: Tom Ellis
Subject: Re: Question
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
It is not listed in the directory....
Post message: genderfree@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: genderfree-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: genderfree-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
List owner: genderfree-owner@yahoogroups.com
URL to this page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/genderfree
****************
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 09:57:26 +0000
From: Jon Marshall
Subject: Re: Question
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
On 17 Feb 01, at 9:16, Magneto wrote:
> Can someone tell me where the genderfree list is? I was under the
> impression it was on yahoogroups but I keep getting "no matches found"
> every time I search for it...
The way i think egroups works is that you basically cannot see
anything on a closed list until you subscribe, and then register with
egroups.
Just in case you are missing it, the subscription info is as follows:
Post message: genderfree@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: genderfree-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: genderfree-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Mails from the Genderfree List itself
From: genderfree Moderator
Subject: Welcome to genderfree
Hello,
Welcome to the genderfree group at Yahoo! Groups, a
free, easy-to-use email group service. Please
take a moment to review this message.
To start sending messages to members of this group,
simply send email to
genderfree@yahoogroups.com
If you do not wish to belong to genderfree, you may
unsubscribe by sending an email to
genderfree-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
You may also visit the Yahoo! Groups web site to
modify your subscriptions:
http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups
Regards,
Moderator, genderfree
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms
****************
From: Free 2Be
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:21:58 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [genderfree] hi
hi - i'm here as 'free to be'. i hope i'm pleased to
meet all of you. how many members this far?
free
****************
From: John Andrews
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:19:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [genderfree] Purpose
Is it not the purpose of 'genderfree' to hide or at
least not reveal true gender or identity...
I don't get it__Renata, suggested that identities be
revealed in the spirit of 'free'...
The 'Genderfree' posts in the past have served true
identity posting; how would the New Genderfree Group
benefit by repeating same protocol? Obstensibly, Jon
suggested the opposite, which was lauded and
accepted by acclimation - more or less...
****************
From: tellis_98@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 18:46:46 -0000
Subject: [genderfree] Re: Purpose
I'm just going to manage the list admin stuff and
let you all work out the details, like I said on CM.
That said, you won't hear too much from me here.
Enjoy!
Tom
--- In genderfree@y..., John Andrews
>
> Is it not the purpose of 'genderfree' to hide or at least not
> reveal true gender or identity...
>
> I don't get it__Renata, suggested that identities be revealed in
> the spirit of 'free'...
>
> The 'Genderfree' posts in the past have served true identity
> posting; how would the New Genderfree Group benefit
> by repeating same
> protocol? Obstensibly, Jon suggested the opposite,
>which was lauded
> and accepted by acclimation - more or less...
****************
From: puck@toughguy.net
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 22:23:10 -0000
Subject: [genderfree] Re: Purpose
John Andrews
>
> Is it not the purpose of 'genderfree' to hide or at least not
>reveal true gender or identity...
>
John,
I guess you are male,
Puck
****************
From: Free 2Be
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:33:12 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Purpose
>John Andrews
john, this doesn't look very successful on hiding your
gender... <G>
****************
From: John Andrews
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:18:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Purpose
<G>...Good point! I could say this
was a ruse to fool, but then the truth is that I was
so emotional about this whole thing, I forgot my real
gender. I am confused and refuse to allow my gender to
become tender and used...Therefore, I will at least
take your advice in subsequent posts and remove tell
tale hints, such as my real name...
Horrors! j
Free 2Be <i2amfree2be@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>John Andrews <newsouth42@y...> wrote:
john, this doesn't look very successful on hiding
your gender...
<G>
****************
From: John Andrews
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 19:24:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Purpose
No, I'm not male Puck and will prove it,
starting the next posts
Don't you think that is a little insensitive... j
puck@toughguy.net wrote:
>In genderfree@y..., John Andrews <newsouth42@y..wrote:
>Is it not the purpose of
>'genderfree' to hide or at least not reveal true
>gender or identity
>John,
I
guess you are
male,
Puck
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 13:32:32 +0100
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Purpose
On 13 Feb 2001, at 19:24, John Andrews wrote:
> No, I'm not male Puck and will prove it,
> starting the next posts..
> Don't you think that is a little
> insensitive... j
do you considered being called male an insult?
Puck
****************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 08:38:00 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] yahoo registration details
--- Robin Goodwill
> I had to choose between male or female, there is no
>'I would rather not say' option like there is for income
Does this mean that gender is more important than
money?
Tony
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:17:47 +0100
Subject: Re: [genderfree] yahoo registration details
On 15 Feb 2001, at 8:38, Tony Sevillo wrote:
> --- Robin Goodwill
>
> > I had to choose between male or female, there is no
> >'I would rather not say' option like there is for income
>
> Does this mean that gender is more important than
> money?
>
bit odd for a commercial enterprise
Puck
PS I have edited my gender
****************
From: Tony
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 10:15:59 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] yahoo registration details
--- Robin Goodwill
>PS I have edited my gender
I guess almost everyone has/will - btw, is there
anyone else around yet?
TS
****************
From: gen parker
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 14:21:15 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] yahoo registration details
--- Tony Sevillo
---
Robin Goodwill
>
> > I had to choose between male or female, there is no
> >'I would rather not say' option like there is for income
>
> Does this mean that gender is more important than
> money?
now i ask you, when was the last time people on CM
got into a dispute over the importance of money :)
g.
****************
From: gen parker
Date: Thu Feb 15, 2001 3:37am
Subject: Personal Details
Well I suppose we should introduce ourselves...
I'm a painter, a poet and a musician, and obviously
one of the people from Australia.
I like the old painters mainly - Da Vinci, Reubens and
such - though I have a shamefaced liking for Corot and
Gainsborough - and of course the Pre-Raphelites.
Musically I could play Chopin for ever - but luckily
you cannot hear me.
So who are the rest of you :)
g.
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Thu Feb 15, 2001 10:36am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Purpose
On 13 Feb 2001, at 19:24, John Andrews wrote:
> <P> <BR>No, I'm not male Puck and will prove it,
> starting the next posts...</P>
I am still waiting
(and wondering)
Puck
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Thu Feb 15, 2001 10:36am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] yahoo registration details
On 15 Feb 2001, at 10:15, Tony Sevillo wrote:
> --- Robin Goodwill
>
> > PS I have edited my gender
>
>
>
> I guess almost everyone has/will -
I meant that after registration with a gender it is possible to edit it -
for some reason Yahoo gives one the option 'no answer' there.
>btw, is there
> anyone else around yet?
Last time I looked there were 10 members.
Puck
****************
From: "Maurizio Mariotti"
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 13:24:47 +0200
Subject: Re: [genderfree] yahoo registration details
Tony Sevillo scripsit:
> I guess almost everyone has/will - btw, is there
> anyone else around yet?
Are you the famous Antonio Sevillo, the
globe-trotting Italian photographer?
Maurizio
PS Hi guys, it's me, the MM you know and love. I will watch the
game with great pleasure, but will not participate.
Not yet.
****************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:36:08 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] yahoo registration details
--- Maurizio Mariotti
> Are you the famous Antonio Sevillo, the
>globe-trotting Italian photographer?
My father was Spanish, hence the name.
> PS Hi guys, it's me, the MM you know and love.
Doing good in the confidence department, huh?
Tony
****************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:27:31 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] yahoo registration details
--- gen parker
> now i ask you, when was the last time people on CM
>got into a dispute over the importance of money :)
I've never seen it happen. Does this mean we are
secure about money? So maybe it means we're insecure
about gender because we keep talking about it.
Tony
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:40:42 +0100
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Personal Details
On 15 Feb 2001, at 14:37, gen parker wrote:
>
> Well I suppose we should introduce ourselves...
I am one of the europeans.
I am a student and I earn some money in the tourist industry.
Alas I don't play any musical instrument. I've once learned to play
the guitar but that knowledge seems all gone. I would like to learn
to play the bandoneon since I quite like tangomusic.
who next?
Puck
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 11:36:46 +0100
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Purpose
On 13 Feb 2001, at 19:24, John Andrews wrote:
> No, I'm not male Puck and will prove it,
> starting the next posts...<br>
I am still waiting
(and wondering)
Puck
****************
From: Free 2Be
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:53:10 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Personal Details
Well I suppose we should introduce ourselves...
this is likely a good thing. hi, i'm free to be. i'm a
being of undetermined gender, but some definite likes
and dislikes, mostly related to food and fashion. i am
reasonably, though not very, competent with computers,
and i dislike the shift key. i delude myself into
thuinking that this gives me a certain je ne sai
quois, in matters of style.
free
****************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:40:20 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Personal Details
--- Free 2Be
i delude myself into thuinking that this gives me a
certain je ne sai quois, in matters of style.
Brushing up your French wouldn't hurt either.
Tony
****************
From: Sondra Bono
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:44:11 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Personal Details
--- Free 2Be
> Well I suppose we should introduce ourselves...
Hi Free!
I'm Sondra. I was told that I'd land in the middle of
a circle of friends here, I hope you don't mind.
I don't have any doubts about my gender msyelf (I'm a
woman) but I thought it would be interesting to hear
what you have to say about it.
Sondra
I was told about this list on another list (confusing,
all those lists) <giggle>
****************
From: jmarshal@o...
Date: Fri Feb 16, 2001 4:51pm
Subject: Function of 'Gender Free'
I've had something of a rough day - so forgive this somewhat quick
note.
I subbed to gender free under two names, so i can speak with my
'organiser' type voice, if necessary..
Renata vaguely suggested in a letter to this list, that we should
think about what the list is attempting.
one thing would be to see whether, without overt gender cues,
people could recognise the actual gender of participants.
Of course some people have been giving off explicit gender cues
already, but this does not stop the experiment, as they may or
may not be faking.
It may also be interesting to see how people cope without explicit
gender on a mailing list- particularly if we can get some topics
going.
It will be hard to discuss experiences of gender on the list without
giving away gender, but you could always speak of what you
'assume' gender experiences to be, I guess.
I dunno, Renata - anybody - what do you want to do with the list?
hopfully I will think better tomorrow
jon
*****************
From: Free 2Be
Date: Fri Feb 16, 2001 10:47am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
> I dunno, Renata - anybody - what do you want to do
> with the list?
perhaps some questions about how the people on this
list percieve other people's gendered reactions would
be a good way to 'break the ice'. for instance,
something that has appeared on another list that i
subscribe to, which has a mostly female membership, is
that of gift buying, and how it differs between men
and women. how much of this action - which is, i
think, something done entirely by the person in
question - is something affected by gender?
free
**************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Sat Feb 17, 2001 0:30am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
--- Free 2Be
> gift buying, and how it differs between men and
women. how much of this action - which is, i think,
something done entirely by the person in question - is
something affected by gender?
You buy gifts because you're expected to and because
you want to get something in return.
What gifts I buy isn't affected by my gender but by
the gender of the receiver - it's all about pleasing,
right?
Tony
****************
From: Jon Marshall
Date: Sun Feb 11, 2001 2:42pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
speaking as Jon M, again, There is a theory that in Western English
speaking society, most gift giving involves women - ie men primarily
give gifts to women, women give gifts to women, women give gifts to men,
women buy gifts so that their men can give gifts to others. This is
perhaps not entirly correct as men have been known to buy gifts for each
other, without women being involved - but in one of the studies of what
people actually did, this seemed surprisingly close to the reality.
The explanation might be that women, in these socieites, are (or have
been) more associated with the 'personal' worlds evoked by the gift, and
are more concerned with making personal networks, as part of their
survival strategies - as until recently most women could not actually
survive easily through working in the 'market'.
Certainly my gift buying habits alter with the gender of the recipient.
jon
Free 2Be wrote:
>
> > I dunno, Renata - anybody - what do you want to do
> > with the list?
>
> perhaps some questions about how the people on this
> list percieve other people's gendered reactions would
> be a good way to 'break the ice'. for instance,
> something that has appeared on another list that i
> subscribe to, which has a mostly female membership, is
> that of gift buying, and how it differs between men
> and women. how much of this action - which is, i
> think, something done entirely by the person in
> question - is something affected by gender?
>
> free
>
**************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Sat Feb 17, 2001 12:52pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
On 17 Feb 2001, at 11:30, Tony Sevillo wrote:
> --- Free 2Be
>
> > gift buying, and how it differs between men and
> women. how much of this action - which is, i think,
> something done entirely by the person in question - is
> something affected by gender?
>
>
>
> You buy gifts because you're expected to and because
> you want to get something in return.
what do I want in return for a gift?
Maybe, to be honest, I like to show how smart and original I am in
my choice of presents. Or perhaps how well I know the person. Or
show how good a friend I am.
But apart from that. I do like to give presents. If I see something I
think would please one of my friends I might get it for him/her.
>
> What gifts I buy isn't affected by my gender but by
> the gender of the receiver - it's all about pleasing,
> right?
>
The presents I give are more directed to specific persons, they are
generally not gender specific.
Puck
***************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Sun Feb 18, 2001 10:39am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
On 17 Feb 2001, at 11:30, Tony Sevillo wrote:
> --- Free 2Be
>
> > gift buying, and how it differs between men and
> women. how much of this action - which is, i think,
> something done entirely by the person in question - is
> something affected by gender?
>
apparently only Tony and I are female, nobody else seems to
engage in gift giving.
Puck
****************
From: gen parker
Date: Mon Feb 19, 2001 0:31am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
Hi,
I buy gifts too, and now that i think about it I buy
more gifts for women than for men... I know also more
women buy me gifts. But I'm not sure what this has to
do with online behavior :)
What about virtual greeting cards and flowers?
Do you use these sites?
Perhaps Tony, you could be so kind as to tell us the
kinds of things that people taled about on the other
lists?
g.
**************
From: blencowe78@y...
Date: Mon Feb 19, 2001 2:48am
Subject: Re: Personal Details
Hi Puck and all;)
I'm one of the Aussies and, typical of my kind, I am worship the sun
and the sea. I'm not a student, much, anymore.
I once learned to paint but over time my grapical skills deserted me
thorough lack of practice. Currently yearning to travel again.
skp
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Mon Feb 19, 2001 10:13am
Subject: Re: Personal Details
hi skp
> I'm one of the Aussies and, typical of my kind, I am worship the sun
> and the sea.
does that mean you're of the sporty type?
>I'm not a student, much, anymore.
I am hanging on to that status. What did you study?
>
>Currently yearning to travel again.
>
where would you like to go?
Puck
**************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Tue Feb 20, 2001 1:16am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
--- Robin Goodwill
> apparently only Tony and I are female, nobody else
seems to engage in gift giving.
Where on earth did you come up with the gifts=female
link? Back that up with some facts, Puck.
Tony
**************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Tue Feb 20, 2001 1:22am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
--- gen parker
> Perhaps Tony, you could be so kind as to tell us the
> kinds of things that people taled about on the other
> lists?
What lists are you talking about?
Tony
***************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Tue Feb 20, 2001 1:23am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
--- gen parker
> What about virtual greeting cards and flowers?
I got a greeting card once and sent one back - not
into that stuff myself.
Tony
***************
From: nono nono
Date: Tue Feb 20, 2001 12:09pm
Subject: introduction of sorts
hello all,
i joined this list a couple of days ago thinking that
while this list probably won't help me answer the
which came first chicken or egg question of gender
influences, hopefully the comments on this list will
be informative and/or entertaining.
i live in the u.s. - love to travel whenever i get a
chance. i'm a student off and on and a parent always
on.
been working in libraries lately and i really love
being surrounded by books.
yare
****************
From: gen parker
Date: Wed Feb 21, 2001 1:25am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
--- Tony Sevillo
gen parker
>
> > What about virtual greeting cards and flowers?
>
> I got a greeting card once and sent one back - not
> into that stuff myself.
>
> Tony
That's sad, it can be great fun, choosing the
appropriate picture, and some let you combine things
together, and make your own.
I'm also sorry, i got confused, it was Free2Be who
mentioned the other lists....
it would still be nice to know what they said.
I guess 'Tony' is a more memorable nom de plume.
or nom d'type
g.
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Wed Feb 21, 2001 9:24am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
On 20 Feb 2001, at 12:16, Tony Sevillo wrote:
> Where on earth did you come up with the gifts=female
> link? Back that up with some facts, Puck.
>
Jon Marshall, our local authority, wrote:
>
> speaking as Jon M, again, There is a theory that in Western English
> speaking society, most gift giving involves women - ie men primarily
> give gifts to women, women give gifts to women, women give gifts to men,
> women buy gifts so that their men can give gifts to others.
Since we both mentioned we give presents to people of both
genders we are most likely female.
Though you sound so childish, you might be one of the exeptions
on this rule.
Puck
****************
From: blencowe78@y...
Date: Fri Feb 23, 2001 1:41am
Subject: ascribing gender
This conversation was overheard at the weekend, and it seems
appropriate to relay it here.
The QE2 visited the harbour in the city where I live last week. I took
my partner down to the wharves to see it leave.There was a large crowd
of people waiting to watch the ship depart. Looking up at the ship (a
spectacular sight BTW) we could see lots of the passengers crowding
the rails to look back at us. We could see the stewards on the next
deck down in their smart uniforms as they stood by the windows waving
and smiling at complete strangers (its was that sort of feeling that
day).
The bloke next to me turned to his partner (an attractive blonde) and
said something along the lines of "hasn't he got an interesting face"
indicating one of the stewards. His partner replied that she thought
that no doubt her man appreciated the stewards interesting face,
because the young man in question was actually a woman.
There followed a discussion between them on the gender of the steward.
Basically their respective positions were that the woman was assuming
the steward was female as that person was wearing mascara and
lipstick. This was not a good enough argument however as far as the
man was concerned. He insisted that the steward *must* be a male as
the jacket this person was wearing buttoned from left to right.
At one point I heard the man say that without his glasses he couldn't
tell if the steward was werring mascara and lipstick, but this in no
way alteretd his opinion that gender was determind by which way you
buttoned you jacket.
So, genderfree list members, how do you (respectively) construct
gender? (Hmm sounds like a contest - The Make-up or the Jacket)
skp
**************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:26pm
Subject: (Fwd) Re: [genderfree] ascribing gender
On 23 Feb 2001, at 1:41, blencowe78@y... wrote:
> So, genderfree list members, how do you (respectively) construct
> gender? (Hmm sounds like a contest - The Make-up or the Jacket)
concerning my own gender, I wear my father's jackets and never
any mascara.
concerning other people's gender, in practically all of the times I
don't think about what gender/sex someone is, I just know. When I
meet someone who's gender is not apparent this is most of the
time becuase there is some conflict between different
gendercharacteristics - for example, male looking face (and
pronounced adam's apple) with make-up and flamboyant clothes.
When one gets into a conversation there is also an element of
'spoken gender characteristics' an gendered name, a speech habit
(refering to one's own (prefered) gender and things like that. I do
admit I find it often quite difficult not to think of someone who is m2f
transgendered as a man, in spite of all the consious signals of
there feminity. An aquaintance of my is a f2m transgender, but for
me she it not (yet) male.
Puck
***************
From: Tony Sevillo
Date: Fri Feb 23, 2001 10:21pm
Subject: giving up
I've come to realize that I'm no good at trying to be
what I'm not. I'm gonna unsub this Tony person and
resub as myself.
I don't wanna play hide 'n seek - but you all feel
free to continue.
What I really want to do is, being me, try out if I
can come over as male, very female and all the other
things I am not.
I think you are all intelligent enough to comment on
my attempts even if you know it was me who wrote them.
Anyway, un- and resubbing now
renata
****************
From: gen parker
Date: Fri Feb 23, 2001 11:22pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] ascribing gender
--- blencowe78@y... wrote: >
> This conversation was overheard at the weekend, and
> it seems appropriate to relay it here.
>
> The QE2 visited the harbour in the city where I live
> last week.
So we can even work out where you are if we try hard
enough:)
> There followed a discussion between them on the
> gender of the steward.
> Basically their respective positions were that the
> woman was assuming
> the steward was female as that person was wearing
> mascara and
> lipstick. This was not a good enough argument
> however as far as the
> man was concerned. He insisted that the steward
> *must* be a male as
> the jacket this person was wearing buttoned from
> left to right.
I'm not sure, but if the jacket had buttoned the other
way, and the person was had short hair and a football
cap, we would guess they were female instantly,,:)
Women can usually wear men-like clothes on the job,
but it is unlikely the merchant navy would allow men
to wear women's jackets....
> At one point I heard the man say that without his
> glasses he couldn't
> tell if the steward was werring mascara and
> lipstick, but this in no
> way alteretd his opinion that gender was determind
> by which way you buttoned you jacket.
A male sailor in lipstick in public, on a farewell, I
think this is unlikely
> So, genderfree list members, how do you
> (respectively) construct
> gender? (Hmm sounds like a contest - The Make-up or
> the Jacket)
But was their really any lipstick? it surely is rather
a long way to look. What did you see?
g.
****************
From: "Maurizio Mariotti"
Date: Sat Feb 24, 2001 10:25am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] giving up
Tony Sevillo scripsit:
> I've come to realize that I'm no good at trying to be what I'm not.
> I'm gonna unsub this Tony person and resub as myself.
Might as well continue on CM, don't you think? Is it me not paying
attention, or genderfree never took off the ground? I mean, not
really.
Maurizio
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Sat Feb 24, 2001 2:56pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] giving up
On 24 Feb 2001, at 12:25, Maurizio Mariotti wrote:
> Tony Sevillo scripsit:
>
> > I've come to realize that I'm no good at trying to be what I'm not.
> > I'm gonna unsub this Tony person and resub as myself.
>
> Might as well continue on CM, don't you think? Is it me not paying
> attention, or genderfree never took off the ground? I mean, not
> really.
>
I agree, genderfree is pretty tame.
So what do we conclude? Without gender no spark?
Puck
**************
From: Jon Marshall
Date: Sat Feb 17, 2001 11:18pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] giving up
Robin Goodwill wrote:
>
> On 24 Feb 2001, at 12:25, Maurizio Mariotti wrote:
>
> > Tony Sevillo scripsit:
> >
> > > I've come to realize that I'm no good at trying to be what I'm not.
> > > I'm gonna unsub this Tony person and resub as myself.
> >
> > Might as well continue on CM, don't you think? Is it me not paying
> > attention, or genderfree never took off the ground? I mean, not
> > really.
> >
> I agree, genderfree is pretty tame.
>
> So what do we conclude? Without gender no spark?
>
> Puck
i have a vague feeling that somehow, in a list which is meant, at some
level to discuss 'the truth' about something, the strain of pretending
to be who we are not (to people who know us) means that we cannot say
what we might want to say without giving away who we are. So we are
almost unable to speak.
But at another level, it may mean that relationships among list members
become difficult, because of the absence of gender, as that usually
guides online behaviour - so the list appears to have no richness.
Also, I have heard backchannel, that some people find trying to write as
the other gender to their normal one, stressful, if interesting - so
that might also inhibit.
Perhaps we should start talking about something else, other than gender,
and just see if it can develop in some other way - but this is hard
because there is so little that we have not talked about on CM :)
jon
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Sun Feb 25, 2001 12:46pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] giving up
On 18 Feb 2001, at 10:18, Jon Marshall wrote:
> i have a vague feeling that somehow, in a list which is meant, at some
> level to discuss 'the truth' about something, the strain of pretending
> to be who we are not (to people who know us) means that we cannot say
> what we might want to say without giving away who we are. So we are
> almost unable to speak.
I think that if I had stumbled on this list without any knowledge of
the people who are part of it, I could have spoken more freely. Now
I feel indeed restricted because I try to hide things of myself I know
others might recognize.
>
> But at another level, it may mean that relationships among list members
> become difficult, because of the absence of gender, as that usually
> guides online behaviour - so the list appears to have no richness.
To find out if that is the case we would need a situation where the
above hinderence is not present.
> Also, I have heard backchannel, that some people find trying to write as
> the other gender to their normal one, stressful, if interesting - so
> that might also inhibit.
>
Do all who don't post suffer from this inhibition?
> Perhaps we should start talking about something else, other than gender,
> and just see if it can develop in some other way - but this is hard
> because there is so little that we have not talked about on CM :)
I have never before been part of a starting list, maybe the problems
of this list are partly to be 'blamed' on general starting dificulties? (I
am thinking of the lack of yet established identities, both of
persona as of the list as a whole, and things like that.
Has anyone experiences with the birth of lists? What does it take
to make them flow?
Puck
****************
From: nono nono
Date: Sun Feb 25, 2001 2:00pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] giving up
i'm someone who has been reading the posts on CM for
quite a while, but for one reason or another, hasn't
gotten around to participating in the discussions -
so the reason i haven't posted much on this list isn't
because of a fear of recognition.
there aren't very many members and diversity always
seems to liven things up.
i didn't have much to say about the question which was
asked of the group recently. i don't know which
direction this or that is supposed to button....i've
seen plenty of people of both genders wear
lipstick....
is the question of gender identity so easily answered?
whether we acknowledge(are aware of) influences which
shape our lives we are still shaped, at least to some
degree, by these influences. maybe the results of the
shaping is rebellion against constraints. does this
mean that those who rebel against the constraints have
succeeded in "neutralizing" gender to some degree? or
is the rebellion just another expression of that
person's gender?
***************
From: John Andrews
Date: Sun Feb 25, 2001 5:59pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] giving up ~ gave up early
Jon-Renata-Tony-Robin-Puck-Maurizio-Ren...
I decided early on not to enthusically participate in Genderfree for two reasons: 1st) The original
premise to, at least, hide true identities among ourselves was squashed as being not 'free to be
whatever' and being too structured. Believe it was Renata that led the charge in that respect.
For this thing to have legs, I didn't want to know anyone's true name, otherwise the SPARK of being
GENDERFREE would be like the moon at noon...New members identities' outside of our club, so to
speak, are hidden to us and we to them whether they assume a nom de plume or not.
2nd) Stupid me, I assumed a new gender and name while leaving my real name in Yahoo settings for
everyone to see__must be my gender!
John Andrews
***************
From: John Andrews
Date: Wed Feb 28, 2001 3:43am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Function of 'Gender Free'
<P> Test...<BR>
<P> <B> <I> Robin Goodwill
<puck@t...></I> </B> wrote: <BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT:
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> <TT> On 20 Feb
2001, at 12:16, Tony Sevillo wrote:<BR> <BR> <BR> >
Where on earth did you come up with the
gifts=female<BR> > link? Back that up with some
facts, Puck.<BR>> <BR> <BR> Jon Marshall, our local
authority, wrote:<BR> <BR> <BR> > <BR> > speaking as
Jon M, again, There is a theory that in Western
<BR> English<BR> > speaking society, most gift giving
involves women - ie men <BR> primarily<BR> > give
gifts to women, women give gifts to women, women give
gifts <BR> to men,<BR> > women buy gifts so that
their men can give gifts to others. <BR> <BR> Since we
both mentioned we give presents to people of both
<BR>genders we are most likely female.<BR> Though you
sound so childish, you might be one of the exeptions
<BR> on this rule.<BR> <BR> Puck<BR> </TT> <BR> <!--
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Wed Feb 28, 2001 3:06pm
Subject: Re: Function of 'Gender Free'
--- In genderfree@y..., John Andrews
> <P> Test...<BR>
> <P> <B> <I> Robin Goodwill
> puck@t...</I> </B> wrote: <BR>
> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT:
> 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> <TT> On 20 Feb
> 2001, at 12:16, Tony Sevillo wrote:<BR> <BR> <BR> >
> Where on earth did you come up with the
> gifts=female<BR> > link? Back that up with some
> facts, Puck.<BR> > <BR etcetera
So, what did you want to say John?
Puck
****************
From: John Andrews
Date: Wed Feb 28, 2001 3:18pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Function of 'Gender Free'
Noticed that for days there had been no messages from Genderfree...It bothered me, so I sent a Test
message to see if it was 'alive and well', or not...Thought the project had gone the way of 'has beens' - no
thanks to participants like me. Thanks for asking Puck...John
[snip]
******************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Wed Feb 28, 2001 8:02pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Function of 'Gender Free'
On 28 Feb 2001, at 7:18, John Andrews wrote:
>
> Noticed that for days there had been no messages from Genderfree...It
bothered me, so I sent a Test message to see if it was 'alive and well', or
not...Thought the project had gone the way of 'has beens' - no thanks to
participants like me. Thanks for asking Puck...John
>
I am here, but I am not sure if that means that the list is alive and
well ;-)
How come your message looks like (or is) HTML, but that my
program doesn't treat it as such ?
Puck
**************
From: John Andrews
Date: Thu Mar 1, 2001 7:26pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Function of 'Gender Free'
Puck...I do prefer HTML; moreover to answer your question, I copied one of the preference settings
from Yahoo Options for you to see....Do believe however, that Yahoo gave me an option at subscription
time to choose either Plain Text or HTML...Setting below I think affects some of the results
(Reply/Forwarding), as well....Johnny
Version
Default Yahoo! Mail version
___________________
use version appropriate for current browser
always use non-frames, non-javascript versi
*******************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Thu Mar 1, 2001 10:24pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Function of 'Gender Free'
John...I don't mind HTML, normally my program can handle both
(rich and plain), if someone posts HTML I see the text as intended,
so without the <br>: and stuff like that. I was wondering why your
posts are HTML but seem to be treated as plain text, both by my
program as by the archive on the Yahoo site.
Puck<br> <gr>
***************
From: John Andrews
Date: Thu Mar 1, 2001 10:58pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] Re: Function of 'Gender Free'
That is question I have asked myself in recent days__do you have any idea 'why', yourself Puck? j
*************
From: gen parker
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 0:39am
Subject: Re: [genderfree] giving up
--- Robin Goodwill
Feb 2001, at 10:18, Jon Marshall wrote:
> > > Also, I have heard backchannel, that some people
> find trying to write as
> > the other gender to their normal one, stressful,
> if interesting - so
> > that might also inhibit.
> >
> Do all who don't post suffer from this inhibition?
I don't think I do, but then I'm not sure if I post or
not :)
But it is a little difficult to try and write things
so that they might be hard to recognise....
That implies I'm recognisable!
And who knows if that is true....
I'm probably recognisable to myself though!
> I have never before been part of a starting list,
> maybe the problems
> of this list are partly to be 'blamed' on general
> starting dificulties? (I
> am thinking of the lack of yet established
> identities, both of
> persona as of the list as a whole, and things like
> that.
> Has anyone experiences with the birth of lists? What
> does it take
> to make them flow?
I have been on several starting lists, and the
difference between them is
Magic....
It might be harder than we might think to talk about
things without refering to our gender, or manifesting
our gender, in some way. I'm trying to think of
personal type topics, that don't involve my gender -
its difficult.... Hence I'm not starting one :) How
about you?
g.
****************
From: "Robin Goodwill"
Date: Sun Mar 4, 2001 9:22pm
Subject: Re: [genderfree] giving up
On 4 Mar 2001, at 11:39, gen parker wrote:
>
> I don't think I do, but then I'm not sure if I post or
> not :)
>
that was your 6th post.
Sondra Bono 1 post
nono 2 posts
skp 2 posts -
Free2be 3 posts -
John Andrews 7 posts -
Tony Sevillo: 9 posts -
Puck 17 posts
>
> I'm probably recognisable to myself though!
Did it ever happen to you that you found written words once by you
but that now seem to be alien from you?
> I have been on several starting lists, and the
> difference between them is
>
> Magic....
very enlightning
> It might be harder than we might think to talk about
> things without refering to our gender, or manifesting
> our gender, in some way. I'm trying to think of
> personal type topics, that don't involve my gender -
> its difficult.... Hence I'm not starting one :) How
> about you?
hence.. you mean you don't do difficult things?
Me neither, or at least, not right now. I am going to bed,
sweet dreams,
Puck
***************
Subject: [genderfree] have we all given up?
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:54:10 +0100
From: "Robin Goodwill"
just wondering....
Puck
This page hosted by
Get your own Free Home Page