.... working on a growing map would be a really nice idea.
Am 05.02.14 11:39, schrieb Pauline van Mourik Broekman:
> Hey Marc, no sweat, that's how I - for one - read it completely; and I
> really don't understand how anyone could be insulted by such an incredibly
> generous list. Clearly, we're not looking here for an ultimate and newly
> objective 'map', that's the whole point! We're looking more for an
> approach and awareness, of different partialities, and how to robustly
> tilt them......
> Thanks for the hour, and hours, you put in :)
> marc garrett wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I just wanted to respond to those surprised I did not included them in
>> the list.
>> Well, of course I'm going to miss out names and you're missing the
>> point. It's an example not a literal replacement.
>> I spent an hour of my time compiling the selected 'female' names to
>> highlight how extensive this issue is.
>> We need to change this not by compiling lists (it's a start) but by
>> challenging our own compliance allowing it to happen. It misrepresents
>> our culture and practice and we should be embarrassed if we let it go on.
>> When ever women and working class people, are viewed through the usual
>> protocols and defaults of the patriarchal gaze of an 'assumed'
>> objectivity. It implements a mythology via processes of non-inclusion.
>> This enhances the condition to further introduce the idea of women and
>> others not included as subordinates rather than as being part of the
>> whole story.
>> Recognizing this condition is the start of being conscious of it.
>> Critiquing this repeated behaviour demands another level of engagement.
>> To borrow a phrase from Haraway, it would have to be “a feminist voice;
>> it is also a whisper of humanism”.
>> Wishing you well.
Prof. Monika Fleischmann
T:030-91530597 | M:01719751422
[log in to unmask]