Science Shmience

Diana York Blaine dyb0001 at jove.acs.unt.edu
Mon Nov 11 00:09:01 CST 1996


Thanks to all who have responded with such interesting comments to the
science thread.  Bill Burns suggests word choice is important, and
that perhaps "vulnerability" needs to be renamed.  But why should we
cringe away from the term itself and try to repackage it instead of
acknowledging that we are all vulnerable, obviously, that it's natural and
nothing to be ashamed of?  Believe me it took awhile to stop cringing when
I suggest this, as I too was socialized in the get-em-before-they-get-you
and "never let 'em see you sweat" USA.  What's wrong with being
vulnerable?  Or admitting it?  It reminds me of one of my favorite terms,
"the self-made man."  His independence of course set off by the dependence
of women.  Yet, how would anyone make oneself?  Aren't there parents?  A
wife?  Workers?  Natural resources used up? He's as dependent on
people as anyone.  But we refuse to admit it.  Also, I don't think
Irigaray "sets up" these binaries, I think she points them out.  And
illogical as they are, they're there.  A little test:  which is the
masculine and which is the feminine?  Strong/weak, Head/heart,
Reason/emotion,(it's too easy--I'll up the ante) subject/object,
presence/absence, (and some new fun favorites I've developed), dog/cat,
dry/wet and coffee/tea (I swear to you I saw a Mrs. Tea maker for sale in
some one-horse Texas town.  I never knew Mr. Coffee was married!  Do you
suppose the baby was delivered by Dr.Pepper?  He's probably cheating on
her with Diet Coke.) Anyway, they're dumb and illogical, but they're
entrenched.  That's where education comes in, I think, because rather than
getting mired down in these issues by looking at them, we expose them and
hence denude their power. A student asked where free will comes in. I
don't think we can claim free will unless we understand the history of our
own assumptions.  Diana





More information about the Pynchon-l mailing list