File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1996/96-11-09.204, message 122


Subject: M-I: Re:"mostly accidental" sexist vocabulary
From: acaruso-AT-juno.com (Anthony J Caruso)
Date: Sat, 09 Nov 1996 16:48:47 EST


I would like to refer now to one posting I did make: I predicted
that m-i was off to a bad start because of the failure of list
members to respond to caruso's (mostly accidental) sexist vocabulary--
that only a woman had responded, and she had received no support
>from other list members. (I don't know whether she is still on the
list or not, but we have heard no more from her.)


	Two things:
	*One*  "that only  a woman responded"?  This is more
	sexist than the remarks that I (not mostly--totally, my
	friend accidentally) made earlier.  Is not the phrase "only a
	woman" (yes, exclude the "only a" because it is in
	reference to the fact that the reply came in a *singular*
	form.  If you care to take notice, good *person*, you will no
	doubt note that I have evolved to signing most of my posts
	"Comradely in *Marxism*"  This is indicative that I
	realize your point (a valid one) and have taken steps to
	change that behaviour, even though I think that 	99.99999%
of anyone on *earth* wouldn't be offended by 	the term
"Fraternally."  This is the scathing bulls*it that I 	would expect
>from some kind of imperialistic list, as well as 	the inference
that I *alone* have caused the downfall of 	this list.  Listen, my
friend, I am a member of the YCL, and 	hopefully very soon a
member of the CP-USA.  I strictly 	adhere to the Communist
Manifesto and anything that Karl 	Marx ever penned.  I am
currently fighting pleurisy and 	pneumonia, (which doesn't excuse
anything I do) and 	thought that this list could be a comfort to
me in my days of 	ill health.  However, I see that because of
ignorance like 	this, even this place is not a safehouse anymore.
*Please* 	people, *PLEASE* don't try to pin the inactivity of this
list 	on me, or on any one person.  If you do that, you are
	defeating Marxist purpose by singling out certain bodies to
	serve as your scapegoat.  *Don't* try that with *me.*  *I*
	know that it's not true, and I am sure that since most of this
	list is comprised of intellectuals, they would agree with me. 	
Next, you state that you haven't had time to do much
	posting...*Did it *EVER* cross your mind* that *other*
	people have lives, too.  In effect, you are part of the cancer
	that alledgedly plagues this list.  It was I, in fact, who
	originally posed the topics of the American Elections and
	the Russian Revolution, *did you know that ?!*  I expected
	the topics to fizzle away and die, but it started a flame.  
	Secondly....*If you insist on *me* watching what I type*
	(which is, I think, only fair) then please take care to
	*capitalise* my last name...It *is*, after all, a *Proper*
	Noun...

    But the socialist movement has, empirically, had a very bad
record on issues of women and race, and the nearly all-male compo-
sition of this list is probably one minor manifestation of that
200 year old record.

	Oh, I see...it is *MEN* who are destroying this list, is that
	it?  I seem to resent this remark (a deliberate remark, I
	might add) on the same censorship premise that you
		shoved down *my* throat.


    Pseudo-progressive foes of marxism can and repeatedly do make
effective use of that "unfortunate" record--and when marxists get
careless in their language or (in meetings and conversations, even
tone of voice or volume of foot shuffling), those tiny (?) failings
are vicious because they evoke a long history of real racism and
sexism inside the socialist and workers movements. Such slips
are nearly the equivalent of putting limburger cheese in the
ventilation system at a conference: they drown everything else out.

	If they drown everything else out, it is because the
		constituency of the said conference was never really
		focused on the subject in the first place.  Think about
it, if 	something is important to you, do you let something which
	is really all a bunch of distraction from the purpose take
	away your concentration?  It wouldn't *mine*  ;-)

think of that huge list of addresses that Paul Amar sent his stupid
posting to; most of the names on that list were probably hardened
academic pomos--but some of them might be people (grad students? others)
whose direction is up for grabs--and we may have given them the excuse
they needed to forget about Marxism and socialism and the workers'
struggle.

	Yeah...don't know of any *useless* posting around
		here...Not any *nitpicky* ones anyway.  >;-)
	Also, personally, if a person is not psychologically
		"hardened" enough to where he/she/it can be swayed from
	a topic by mere digression, then *I* don't think they are fit
	to be a Marxist!!  Karl would agree, I think.  Righty-o; we
	need to educate people, yes, but if someone isn't able to
	*stick* to a system, then do they really belong there?  I
	think that an unsure person can do more damage than help
	to *our* fight.  (*Take notice to the emphasis placed on the
	word "our."  It denotes the fact that I realize that this is
	the fight of *everyone* on this list, and *not* on this list,
	but to every working man, *woman* and child on this earth,
	even though I tend not to agree with people from time to
	time. This, to me, indicates that I grasp the concept of the
	importance of the said fight and the purpose of the said
	fight, or class struggle.  Thank You.)

    And finally, Aronwitz is not the only fat person in the United
States (or UK, Australia, etc)--my younger daughter is extremely
overweight, and after she lost her first longtime job as a computer
analyst because the effects of undiagnosed depression had snuck up
on her, she was unemployed for nearly four years, mostly I suspect
because of employer's more or less conscious prejudice against fat
people. So in the future let's try to lay off the merely physical
(or personal, as in depression or anxiety disorder) "defects" of
our enemies.

	This, I fully and %100 agree with you on...and, I agree, this
	is definitely a boil on the butt of humanity.  The people who
	discriminate against someone merely because of their
	physical appearances are no less humans than those they
	pick on (it's quite a sticky paradox, yes)  but I think that in
	our society, the re-emphasis on the "content of one's
		character" needs some reviving.  :-)

Comradely in *Marxism*

Anthony J. Caruso
acaruso-AT-juno.com


     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005