> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Julie
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 9:04 PM
> To: Mary Gardiner; minae
> Cc: Grrltalk@Linuxchix. Org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [issues] Re: [grrltalk] Re: linuxchix logo
>
> I've heard mixed reaction to all the "grrl power" and other such
> reclaimation of "girl", "babe", "chick", etc.
>
> On the other hand, I'm in no position to be critical considering
> my e-mail address, the license plates on my car, and at least
> one of my web pages ;-)
>
> I don't think it's wrong for women to refer to =ourselves= by
> any term we want. But it needs to be =us= refering to =us=,
> and not someone else using a term we didn't create or we
> don't control.
>
> -- Julie (just another femme grrl jock dyke ...).
But if you refer to yourself as a femme grrl jock dyke, why is it derogatory
if a male refers to you as the same thing? My point is that we have far too
many double-edged words. It really strikes me funny that women can say "I'm
going out with the chix tonight" and it's taken to be an endearment. Yet if
a man were to say the same thing in the same context, he would be scolded
(perhaps severely) for using a derogatory term.
I can think of lots of words that fit this same mold. Are we *really* making
a stand for what is just, or are we simply further dividing ourselves from
other races and genders? Quite frankly, I think it's the latter. If you draw
the line at being called a femme grrl jock dyke by the male species, you
should draw that same line from others as well.
_______________________________________________
issues mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
