Re: de-tenuring of Mary Daly (fwd)

[Andrew Wayne Austin <aaustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Katha,

Excluding men in a patriarchal society is not equivalent to excluding
blacks in a white supremacist society. You are using the classic liberal
equivalency test that abstracts persons from the power structure. Liberal
sexism and racism are founded precisely on the principles you espouse in
your posts. What's worse, open bigotry or liberal dissimulation of
oppression? Clearly we know which one is hardest to root out, especially
since the so-called "left" adheres to the latter.

Andy

On Mon, 2 Aug 1999, Katha Pollitt wrote:

>Hi Beth -- have to say i'm not so sympathetic to mary Daly's refusal to
>include men in her class. A clear violation of civil rights law. How
>would you feel about a prof who excluded women, or people of color, so
>that male (or white) students would feel "comfortable"? As for this
>particular man not being simpatico, every teacher I know has to struggle
>with students now and then who are on strange wavelengths, hostile to
>the course design and perspective etc. That's life.  Why should Daly get
>a dispensation? If she wanted to have an all woman consciousness raising
>group she could have started one in her living room.  But academic
>classes are about something else. And the idea that a roomful of women
>with a female prof would be intimidated by a lone male, who would
>dominate (as the nation piece argued) -- honestly, what crap.. it's up
>to the prof to run the class so that doesn't happen.
>   Katha
>