Discussion of a Text: Part 3
Back to Part 2
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:04:02 -0500
From: wisdom's aspirant
Subject: Re: Slavegirl (FOR DIANE)
It really is a great privilege to be on this list and to be able to share in
all your ideas, not only Alan's but almost everyone's. This broadens my
whole horizon, makes my world ever so much bigger and more interesting.
I hope you will let things cool a bit before you make any co-moderator
decisions, Alan.
Deanna
>Just a little more and then I'll shut up - when Michael and I started C.
>(he's dead now for those who don't know) we thought about elists in gen-
>eral and agreed that to be on a list, any list, was a privilege, not a
>right - it's like being in a livingroom or bar, whatever.
>(And maybe in fact I should give up co-moderation now -
>I've done this for close to 8 years now.) I don't expect any thanks or any
>special consideration - but I won't ever work for a situation where I'm
>going to be targeted in the manner Diane did.
>
>Alan
>
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 10:17:48 +0300
From: Markku Nivalainen
Subject: Re: Slavegirl (FOR DIANE)
> *Contextually*, no I didn't think Diane was guilty of oppressive sexism.
When a man tells a woman dirty stories it's chauvinism.
When a woman tells a man dirty stories it's $1.50/min.
I'm beginning to understand what sexism means.
mn
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 03:51:27 -0400
From: Alan Sondheim
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
On the other hand - you're one of the people I would hope would want to
take over the co-moderating position so you can deal with this from the
viewpoint of performativity, not just analysis - if you would agree to it,
I would turn the position over to you immediately. I'm serious about this
- I'm really tired of these kinds of things which constantly arise, and I
can only have and learn from my way of doing things - just like Poetics or
Nettime or whatever you have take on the characteristics, to some extent,
of the moderator/s, no matter how back-channel the governance and daily
operations.
Alan - please think about this -
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:56:38 -0700
From: Sebastian Mendler
Subject: Re: Slavegirl (FOR DIANE)
On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Alan Sondheim wrote:
> I took Diane off the list. I'm not going to put my energy into running
> this to be insulted.
>
> I apologize if this action has bothered anyone; it happens only about once
> every two years or so -
Actually, I wasn't sure which of us offensive pricks she was referring to
;*)
/ / skip
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:42:50 +0200
From: Rowena
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
On 10 Apr 2001, at 3:49, Alan Sondheim wrote:
> But Diane's attack was ad hominem - it was name-calling, whatever
> routes it had. It has nothing to do with pc or not pc, at least as I
> understand pc, and my work or a lot of the work or discussion on this
> list is hardly pc.
Hi Alan,
you used the term pc in reaction to Wendlyn's post (quote from 8
april: "I don't feel the slightest desire to enlighten you; what I see
as your PC views honestly disgust me.")
I must admit this was one of the aspects of the whole conversation
that bothers me most. I didn't feel offended by your post that
started it, nor by Wendlyn's reaction but by dismissing her points
as pc and thereby stopping a legitimate concern of her.
I do think Jon is very right in pointing out that the meaning of a text
is not the same as the author's intent. You write a text and we read
it, we respond to it, some of us in writing. Our reaction is not
something you can control. I don't doubt you know and realize that
(or I would certainly not try to imply that you don't realize that).
We must realize that by writing (both fictional as
opinions/autobiography) one makes him/her self vulnerable to a
certain extent. (the degree depending on the nature of the text).
We as readers must keep this in mind when responding, hopefully
this makes us courteous. For me the difference between a
courteous and a non-courteous respons lies in the assumptions
you make about the author (you write this so you must be
sexist/pc/suffering from earlier trauma). This is not a clear cut
distinction, I know we don't read the text as text without any
background knowledge/without any context but I do think/hope it is
possible to find a ballance.
Rowena
I do value this list precisely because I have the feeling that most of
the time this ballance can be found here. I do thank you for
creating and sustaining this atmosphere, I do really apreciate it.
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:38:12 +0300
From: Markku Nivalainen
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
> you used the term pc in reaction to Wendlyn's post (quote from 8
> april: "I don't feel the slightest desire to enlighten you; what I see
> as your PC views honestly disgust me.")
Pardon my utter stupidity, but what is "pc"?
I suppose it isn't either personal computer or player character.
Webdictionary translates it to "leftist".
I'm so not understanding a bit.
mn
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 07:41:45 -0500
From: "Robert A. Kezelis"
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
on 4/9/01 9:19 PM, Alan Sondheim at wrote:
> Then get off my fucking list - or I'll do it for you.
>
> When it gets to a level of insult like this, I don't need to keep this
> space running for you.
>
> Alan
[[snip]]
bravo alan.
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 07:47:29 -0500
From: Wendlyn Alter
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
Rowena writes,
"For me the difference between a
courteous and a non-courteous respons lies in the assumptions
you make about the author (you write this so you must be
sexist/pc/suffering from earlier trauma)."
My immediate assumption about Diane was that she may well have been
sexually abused as a child, so she was lashing out in pain at having old
wounds recalled in such a visually powerful evocative way, as a wounded
animal will bite anyone, even someone they love. Of course I have no way of
knowing that about her; all we had to go by was her brief text. She may
just be a very hostile person, but I was curious to find out which. It
would have made a big difference in my mind.
However, David and Alan were also lashing out in pain, and I can give their
reactions the same degree of compassion.
Wonder how we all would have played this out if there weren't all this
woundedness and pain all around. We are a tender group, bruised green
and purple.
--Wendlyn
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:22:51 GMT
From: Rowena Alberga
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
mn asked:
> Pardon my utter stupidity, but what is "pc"?
> I suppose it isn't either personal computer or player character.
> Webdictionary translates it to "leftist".
> I'm so not understanding a bit.
>
pc stands for 'politically correct'
As far as I can see it is mostly used by people who perceive an unfair
demand to use not so offensive language (afro-amarican intead of
nigger).
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:30:07 -0300
From: Rose Mulvale
Subject: Re: boycott time?
Salwa -
It is here as where we live elsewise - we carry our selves into this space -
the toothache, the scar, as well as the smile and the welcoming hand. My
name is Rose, and I must admit that I have been thornful in times past.
It's just that my knickers are made of very slick material and are mostly
knot-free, and so I tend to slip out of verbal skirmishes. Rowena is right,
I believe, when she suggests that as much of what we read of another's
text is what we read _into_ it as what the author wrote _in_ it...
Does anyone do CM's Biorythm Charts? We're prolly just on a triple
critical or something!
In any event, welcome. From a Canadian.
- Rose, who would have written a different message altogether had she
been s*bbed yesterday.
ps "AE" - what realm is this, please?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Salwa Ghaly"
To: <CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: boycott time?
> Looks like I joined this list at the wrong time? Are you people into mud
> wresting or what? Some of the references suggest some of you are
> Canada-based? Tone down the rhetoric, will you?
>
> Looking forward to something cerebral, eh?
>
> Salwa Ghaly
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:40:24 GMT
From: Rowena Alberga
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
----- Origineel Bericht -----
Van: Wendlyn Alter
> My immediate assumption about Diane was that she may well have been
> sexually abused as a child, so she was lashing out in pain at
> having old
> wounds recalled in such a visually powerful evocative way, as a
> woundedanimal will bite anyone, even someone they love. Of course
> I have no way of
> knowing that about her; all we had to go by was her brief text.
Wendlyn, I don't know a thing about her,
she might be abused, she might think she has gotten a message from God
to write such things, she might just have written a program that is
supposed to start flamewars, she might have entered a contest in how
many mailinglist she could be trown out, she might just have been
totally bored and wanted to see what would happen ....
On the one hand I think it is a pitty we now don't get the change to
find out, but on the other hand I share Alan's suspicion that she was
not so much intreseted in a discussion (courteous or otherwise) about
it, but in a flaming session. I can sympathise wholeheartedly with his
wish to prevent such a thing.
Rowena
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:13:04 -0400
From: Alan Sondheim
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
Well, re: Wendlyn, I was reacting in part in relation to her other post a
long time ago; I felt she jumped in a similar way. But I like Wendlyn and
of course toned myself down (and she did as well). Diane _was_ ad hominem
(I assume against a male - there seems to be some confusion about who she
was attacking) and certainly wasn't asking for clarification and wasn't
contributory to the discussion.
What was odd - and this probably isn't true at all - the post I sent out
never reached her (the one about unsubbing); and it may me wonder if there
wasn't a troll there. I doubt it, but it was strange to get the error
message.
Alan
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Rowena wrote:
> On 10 Apr 2001, at 3:49, Alan Sondheim wrote:
>
> > But Diane's attack was ad hominem - it was name-calling, whatever
> > routes it had. It has nothing to do with pc or not pc, at least as I
> > understand pc, and my work or a lot of the work or discussion on this
> > list is hardly pc.
>
> Hi Alan,
>
> you used the term pc in reaction to Wendlyn's post (quote from 8
> april: "I don't feel the slightest desire to enlighten you; what I see
> as your PC views honestly disgust me.")
>
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:20:59 -0400
From: Alan Sondheim
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
In the states it's also used to refer to groups that push for changes and
legislation in a highly autoritarian way. - Alan
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Rowena Alberga wrote:
> mn asked:
>
> > Pardon my utter stupidity, but what is "pc"?
> > I suppose it isn't either personal computer or player character.
> > Webdictionary translates it to "leftist".
> > I'm so not understanding a bit.
> >
>
> pc stands for 'politically correct'
>
> As far as I can see it is mostly used by people who perceive an unfair
> demand to use not so offensive language (afro-amarican intead of
> nigger).
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 13:29:24 -0500
From: Elizabeth Barrette
Subject: Re: boycott time?
On 10 Apr 01, at 10:55, Sebastian Mendler wrote:
> Well, here's what happens: the moderator (that's Alan) explores all
> sorts of stuff in his experimental texts. Among other things, sex and
> other bodily functions, frequently in conjunction with obscure
> operating systems. (That's way oversimplified, of course. Hang out
> for a little bit and you will see his explanatory text.) Folks walk
> in, and either say "Wow, that's cool!" and post stuff re anything and
> everything, or go "What the ----!" and walk away confused. As far as
> I'm concerned, we're exploring the possibilities of computer-mediated
> communication, and just about anything is grist for *that* mill.
Don't forget the Pagans and other alternative spiritualists who
help figure out sticky philosophical questions like what a soul is,
whether or not it's eternal, and whether or not a computer could
possibly possess one. Don't forget the students and writers who
periodically post calls for input on papers or articles or stories.
Don't forget all the *extremely* cool, sometimes highbrow,
sometimes base, poetry by folks like Alan and Rose. Don't forget
all the wacky comments on politicians from around the world.
Don't forget the discussions of rocket science and space
exploration spawned by occasional NASA news updates.
Cybermind is like spring weather: if you don't like what you
see, wait five minutes, it'll change.
Blessings,
Elizabeth
> / /skip, presenting his $.02
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 23:13:00 +0400
From: Salwa Ghaly
Subject: Re: boycott time?
Rose and the others,
Thanks for the messages. This list promises to be quite therapeutic and
cathartic (for a change) albeit vicariously for me (!) Any meaty issues in
the offing though? Like gender roles in forums like this one,
hmmm???!!!
Rose, I did detect some Tory bashing somewhere...
Anyway, I'll stay tuned and amused.
Salwa
P.S. "AE" is the United Arab Emirates.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rose Mulvale
To: CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Sent: 4/10/01 6:30 PM
Subject: Re: boycott time?
Salwa -
It is here as where we live elsewise - we carry our selves into this
space - the toothache, the scar, as well as the smile and the welcoming
hand.
My name is Rose, and I must admit that I have been thornful in times
past.
It's just that my knickers are made of very slick material and are
mostly knot-free, and so I tend to slip out of verbal skirmishes. Rowena is
right, I believe, when she suggests that as much of what we read of
another's text is what we read _into_ it as what the author wrote _in_
it...
Does anyone do CM's Biorythm Charts? We're prolly just on a triple
critical or something!
In any event, welcome. From a Canadian.
- Rose, who would have written a different message altogether had she
been s*bbed yesterday.
ps "AE" - what realm is this, please?
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 23:23:26 +0400
From: Salwa Ghaly
Subject: living vicariously
Rose,
>Thank you. And you have piqued my curosity with "vicariously" -
>although that is perhaps how all life is lived here in Cyb - takes a real
>effort to bring it into the physical realm. Why is the opposite so much
>easier, I wonder?
Yes, good question: we all lead virtual, parallel lives in cyberspace, this
amazing site for psychological release, and I suspect, some other forms of
erzatz satisfaction.... But what's a better word than "vicarious" for those
who live off and through the *virtual* lives of others? Are they thrice
removed from the "real"?! :-)
Salwa
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:00:46 -0400
From: dstreever
Subject: Re: Slavegirl (FOR DIANE)
That was why I offered my second e-mail in apology :-( It just angers me to
see such ingrateful behaviour; that'd be like if I walked in your house and
cussed you out for having the wrong types of books in your shelf.
If I don't like your books that much, I should just stay out.
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:02:00 -0400
From: dstreever
Subject: Re: Slavegirl (FOR DIANE)
Actually, Lynne, I was *not* the first to swear, I admited that my first
email was the one (of two) with vulgarity, and apologized for my lack of
temper.
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:02:16 -0400
From: Jim Reith
Subject: Re: Slavegirl (FOR DIANE)
>Whew. I'm duly chastened.
>
>Will carefully censor myself from now on to avoid a similar fate. Too bad,
>not what I'd hoped for... but now the rules have been made clear, I will
>abide by them. I'm finally learning who's permitted to be vulgar, who's
>not; who may be safely criticized or teased, and who's too sensitive... It
>DOES take a while for newbies, this list has many complex unwritten rules.
I think you'll find that the major issue was the directed nature of
it. It was a very personal attack in a public forum. A few years back
the list suffered greatly from a series of these that wasn't
censored. Quick response it required and the older members of the
list will be supportive. Yes, every list/community has it's rules,
this has fewer than many and the delete key is all powerful in your
own viewport. I will admit to not reading large segments of this list
at times but it's selective and dependent on my busy-ness. Perhaps
the reposting of the original with the subject (FOR DIANE) was
misinterpreted as a personal attack on her end. We'll never know.
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:07:58 -0400
From: dstreever
Subject: Apology
Just to make it formal...
I apologize to the entire list for my lack of decorum. I usually
maintain a very civil attitude and professional manner, but I have a lot of
respect for Alan Sondheim.
Of course, I did not swear at Ms. Atler, nor would I have. Her attack was
not a vicious, calculated, cruel assault on someone (personally) whose work
I respect a great deal. Her critique was done without a potty mouth and
directed at the WORK, which I can understand and sympathize with. Work
is work; as much as I respect Alan's, I feel ALL work should be subjected
to the critique Wendlyn put it through...
I just can't abide with someone attacking someone else in their own "house",
so to speak. Alan's job is a thankless one, for which I'd like to thank him
now.
In regrets,
David
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:21:06 -0400
From: Jim Reith
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
> > you used the term pc in reaction to Wendlyn's post (quote from 8
>> april: "I don't feel the slightest desire to enlighten you; what I see
>> as your PC views honestly disgust me.")
>
>Pardon my utter stupidity, but what is "pc"?
>I suppose it isn't either personal computer or player character.
>Webdictionary translates it to "leftist".
>I'm so not understanding a bit.
Politically Correct - Adhering to widely believed "norms". This is
what turned the Mailman into the postal worker
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:33:26 -0400
From: dstreever
Subject: Re: Slavegirl (FOR DIANE)
Yeah, I didn't know if it was myself also ;-P but when I re-read it, I
saw Alan's name all over it...
**************
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 08:26:10 +0800
From: David Cohen
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
Then give her a ring.
The ABC is *not* a very pc kind of place.
regards,
David Cohen
(ABC journo)
----- Original Message -----
From: Kathryn Koromilas
To: <CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 12:45 AM
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
> Diane's email address seems to belong to abc.net.au (http://abc.net.au),
> which is the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (a very pc kind of place).
> Wonder if she's a journo or something there.... and the 0415 347 847 is an
> Australian mobile phone number.
>
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 20:31:03 -0400
From: dstreever
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
Laughing, I just might do that....
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Cohen"
To: <CYBERMIND@LISTSERV.AOL.COM>
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
> Then give her a ring.
> The ABC is *not* a very pc kind of place.
> regards,
> David Cohen
> (ABC journo)
>
**************
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 10:44:38 +1000
From: Esther Milne
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
Just shows you what a complicated and contested term is 'pc'!! Doubtless
both Paddy McGuiness and oh, help me out here [searching for a high profile
left commentator erm, um, oh what a surprise, can't find one], might both,
at some stage and with different semantics in mind, call the ABC 'pc'.
Muchas apologies for the sudden rush of Australian in-discussions! Now you
know how it feels you Americans! :)
Esther.
At 08:26 AM 11/04/2001 +0800, David wrote:
>Then give her a ring.
>The ABC is *not* a very pc kind of place.
>regards,
>David Cohen
>(ABC journo)
**************
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 21:21:40 -0400
From: dpres
Subject: Re: Slavegirl
PC stands for politically correct and is a rationale for adovating
censorship of unpopular and /or uncommon ideas.
onto Part 4
home
This page hosted by
Get your own Free Home Page