[Marxism] Re: Hi Lana
bebop101 at comcast.net
Sun May 2 01:59:54 MDT 2004
I was sent the below off-list from someone who had read my post Hi Lana
here on Marxmail. I think the points this writer makes are absolutely
correct so I wanted to share them with others. I especially liked the
comment "Even if sex classification tells us a lot about how one was
brought up, it also fails to tell us a lot about individuality, and so much
is missed when we classify." I totally agree with this. Using a
commonplace computer metaphor to describe the same idea, knowing this or
that about a person's demographics (age, sex, ethnicity, class, etc.) may
help us guess certain things about the possible *inputs* into their life,
but such information says nothing about their *outputs* - their
individuality, who they are, etc. I should have left that comment about
not knowing Carrol's gender out. Part of what motivated me was the sense
of knowing Carrol a little from the quality of this person's posts, but
that isn't an excuse. I was careless, and I thank the writer below for
taking the time to write me about this. I've of course omitted their name
and so forth.
>I think this post was wonderfully patient and enlightening.
>But just one thing - not to detract from all the benefits or the risk you
>take in a public effort to reach out.
>My thought is that there are ways to discuss Carrol's post without asking
>this subscriber to be identified in terms of sex.
>(Even though it might not trouble Carrol personally that you asked.)
>What would be great is if one day no one will use terms of a dubious binary
>gender regime to identify people who join an academic discussion, a
>classroom, or any forum where one's genitals should not matter -- just as
>classifications of race do not. Even if sex classification tells us a lot
>about how one was brought up, it also fails to tell us a lot about
>individuality, and so much is missed when we classify.
>I hope you agree or at least find this worth considering.
More information about the Marxism