[OPE-L] Fwd: [OPE-L] *enforcing* the list rule against flaming

From: Dogan Goecmen (Dogangoecmen@AOL.COM)
Date: Mon Nov 27 2006 - 04:46:54 EST

Rakesh writes:

attached mail follows:

I am not calling Jerry a racist or a sexist. If that is what I did say, I
am sorry. I am calling statements racist or sexist.  Jerry may have swell
relationships with minorities and women. That's not the point.

And I would have called those statements such no matter who had uttered
them. This has
nothing to do with Jerry. For example, to say that human behavior is the
the same as animal
behavior does to me suggest two problems in the case of rape: it seems to
naturalize rape and
disarm appropriate moral and political criticism and secondly it seems to
efface how the rape of women is an altogether different act than violence
against female animals in terms of meaning and concomitant psychological
effect. To fail to recognize this is insensitive to women. I follow Fausto
Sterling in seeing the analogy as sexist. I am not alone--again see the
many replies to Thorhill's book.

And for those who traffic in sociobiology there has been Marxist critiicsm
Marcel Prenant and
Joseph Needham to Richard Lerner and John Vandermeer to Stephen and Hilary
Rose that does
consider many sociobiological claims fascist, racist, sexist and
reactionary. I am not saying anything new here.


ps Dear Dogan, thank you for your statement. If you think this
appropriate, would you kindly it forward it to the list.

> Who ever made this decission I do not find it very wise. Punishment is the
> worst way of enforcing something since it does not aim at convincing.
> Rakesh
> made some claims and he gave more than once reasons why he makes these
> claims.
> I do not think that his claims are correct because to accuse  someone of
> racism requires to show that he/she is consciously and intentionally  aims
> to
> develop racist ideologies. This cannot be calimed of Jerry. But instead
> taking
> meaures to punish him it should have been argued. It should have been
> shown
> that he is wrong. This has not been done. Istead it has been moralised. To
> understand human beings as natural and social beings it was, is and will
> always  be
> necessary to draw analogies between humans and other animals. These
> analogies
>  however can become problematic and misused if they are politicised. 19th
> century  is full of these attempts.
> I hope you will reconsider your decission and enable Rakesh to explain  h
> imself and give him the opportunity to aplogise publicly.
> Regards
> Dogan
> In einer eMail vom 26.11.2006 18:46:41 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt
> ope-admin@RICARDO.ECN.WFU.EDU:
> Rakesh  has been given a "time out".
> If and when he is ready to change his  behavior and respect the list rule
> against flaming (i.e. personal abuse)  then he will be re-admitted.
> In solidarity, Jerry
>>  you'll
>> see that you don't know what you are talking about.
>> But  that's not unusual.
>>   I wil reiterate that Jerry's  reasserting nineteenth century ideas
>> about primitive communism or  savagery is the  very definition of
>> racism. My usage of the term  is precise. In fact it would have been
>> paternalistic and falsely  polite not to describe Jerry's claim as
>> racist. For that is exactly  what it is. I do not throw the term
>> around.
>> Or perhaps you  are so ignorant you don't know
>> the scholarly importance of the people  on whom I draw.  This is of
>> course most  probable.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 00:00:06 EST