Terri Oda wrote:
>
> > Vinnie ( a little tired of being called 'PC' <- which in most cases is
> > meaningless and is generally not something I self-identify as, every
> > frickin' time she challenges the damn status quo)
>
> Well, better to be called PC than "too sensitive" -- I get that one pretty
> often when I complain that something bothers me. "Can't you just ignore
> it?" "It's all in your head." "It's not their fault they're that way, so
> why are you upset about it?" :P Doesn't anyone ever think that just 'cause
> it's normal doesn't mean it isn't worth discussing and in some cases, maybe
> even changing?
Most of us who are in this discussion appear to think it's worth discussing
and maybe even changing. :)
I keep taking discussions we have here to Dancer, and to some of my other
geeky friends - mostly male. We tend to have a bit of defining-of-terms
time, then get down to issues and cases.
BTW: I find that if I use the word 'equalist' (or with the more maths-
knowledgable, 'equivalist'), I evade the whole 'feminism is anti-men'
debate. Tip for those who want to get into one of these discussions
with less 'defining-of-terms' time. But PLEASE don't let anyone corrupt
THESE terms for me!
I use them to mean 'someone who believes that society shouldn't place
artificial limits on what roles people can play within society'.
(And I made that up just now, so if its a flawed definition please
be gentle!)
Jenn V.
--
Humans are the only species to feed and house entirely separate species
for no reason other than the pleasure of their company. Why?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jenn Vesperman http://www.simegen.com/~jenn/
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
