[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Re: ans Dauber (2)

On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, Michael Miroslav Korcok wrote:

> okay, there's some miscommunication, i think.
> 
> i don't cuss much.  i am not justifying my swearing.  Cornell debaters
> wouldn't know how to swear even if Doctor Stepp let them.  the current
> thread was "initiated" by some creative language choices by david klein
> and yuri kostun.  i barely know those guys - i think i passed 'em in
> some hall sometime.
> 
> i am not justifying males' swearing by using study results about women's
> swearing.  the swearing/gender topic was initiated by random puritans
> with too much time on their hands about 2 years back.  their assertion
> was that men shouldn't swear because it silences women.  i pointed out
> that this was stupid and treated women like fragile children.  then i
> pointed out that women are swearing more and that the top researcher in
> the area now says it gives women an advantage over men.
> 
> i have also argued that the taboo against swearing is part and parcel of
> disempowering women and that thus we ought not encourage it.  this
> doesn't justify male swearing.  it also doesn't tell you to swear.
> 
> i neither intend to nor do stake your liberation on my linguistic
> choices.  nor do i intend to tell you to be liberated: your life is your
> own.  most definitely i have no interest in speaking for you or for
> women in general.  i do, however, have at least as much a stake in
> understanding and addressing gender/power/language as you do.  
> 
> for example, the DoF here (i'm the assistant DoF/debate coach) is Doctor
> Pam Stepp.  she dislikes swearing in debate at least as much as Rodger
> does.  she is fairly understood as being in the forefront of addressing
> issues related to the participation of women in debate, academia, and
> more generally, in society.  we have excellent discussions on this
> issue.  i have no doubts whatsoever that women are fully capable of
> speaking for themselves in general and on this issue in particular.
> 
> actually, Pam has recently been tsk-tsking me, i tell her that she
> should post some of her good arguments and research - she is pretty deep
> on this stuff, (after all Rodger and Rogers ain't doing JACK), but she
> reminds me that right now she needs to keep focus on making sure Cornell
> is funded, so i tilt my head and sigh 'alas'.
> 
> finally, men's swearing makes their persuasive attempts more successful.
> that is something a debate coach should teach.  it also justifies men's
> swearing, but, more importantly, it dejustifies teaching debaters not to
> swear.
> 
> nice to meet you,
> michael korcok
>
References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page