Mario Taboada wrote:
> Jess, in an enjoyable rant:
>
> <<And some academics draw from this an
essentially female point of view and
> voice. They usually define it as being more
concerned with relationships
> than with action or plot,...>>
>
> Less action, maybe. But less plot? This is
manifestly false in the mystery
> field.
In case I wasn't clear--I don't believe in an "essentially
female point of view," nor do I give much credence to that
wing of feminism that does believe in it.
I agree with you that such things are manifestly false. But
that is the core of the argument.
> <<emotions than logic,>>
>
> This dichotomy (which really doesn't exist for
humans) should, if anything, be
> turned around: in my experience, it's women who are
more analytical and men who
> rely more on "intuition", "gut feeling" and
"spontaneous reactions". I feel so
> sure enough of this to make a public fool of myself
by generalizing it...
The traditional stereotype of women, though, is that they are
over-emotional, and that it's men who think straight.
Victorian literature, especially the cheaper stuff (dime
novels, penny dreadfuls, and the like), are rife with this
notion.
"No, no, dear, your silly female emotionalism will only
muddle your pretty little head. Let us big, logical,
clear-thinking men deal with the kidnaping of your eighteen
children. You run off to the kitchen and fix us supper,
that's a good girl."
The essentialists of feminism turn this stereotype on its
head, and assert that emotions are to be preferred over
logic. I don't believe this, but that is where they are
coming from.
> <<social structures and dynamics (such as
family set-ups) than with the
> individual.>>
>
> This makes no sense. I would say that social
structures, etc. have been given
> about the same weight by male and female
writers.
Again, you're preaching to the choir.
jess
-- # To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to majordomo@icomm.ca. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 28 May 2000 EDT