From: "Ben Davidson" <bendavidson@totalise.co.uk> Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:46:43 -0000 Subject: Re: [Air-l] Identity and Internet
Ben wroted:
I am baffled that you don't see the link between these two events you describe.
ben, i must've been writing unclearly. i meant to draw this connection--but make a distinction--between establishing legitimacy and what existence means on a mailing list. i wanted to tread more lightly (than john) in claiming brown's 'existence' was in question and instead think about what challenging one's legitimacy online means...and why folks are drawn to as much interest in credentials as statements actually uttered.
I don't know about sexually charged, but wouldn't you say this is a fairly clear manifestation of power dynamics? CV's at dawn.
** that's kinda what i was getting at...again, perhaps i wasn't clear, but you put it nicely.
And anyway, isn't that really the objection to Lachlan? So far as I can see, folk simply don't like his style of contributions. He just doesn't use the right language, adopt the right (academic) 'voice' and often appears to be having a conversation with himself. He talks personally rather than academically.
** i think it's a bit more complicated than this...i think i'm rather fuzzy on what constitutes the 'right' language or 'right' academic voice here...but, i feel i have a clearer sense of when gender is used in insinuation to undermine someone speaking or asking a question.
I really enjoyed reading John's and Denise's postings about Identity and the Internet, and Mark's postings today about research gaps - seems a much more useful pursuit to springboard from all this into subjects that are relevant to the list, than focusing all this energy into labelling someone a troll and trying to eradicate them, bacause we don't like their style of engagement.
** again, i'd like to suggest it's a bit more complicated than this...but, i'm also glad to see the discussion shift to other topics.
This post of course reflects my own bias - as a practitioner in the mental health field, I get very hot under the collar when I see people damaged by the process of being labelled and pathologised by groups, groups who are often actually doing no more than trying to silence and deny the experience, often of domination and abuse, for which such people are trying to find expression.
** you lost me here ben. i have this hunch you're saying we shouldn't address the content of lachlan brown's posts because it would pathologize him and would "silence and deny [his] experience of domination and abuse"? this list doesn't seem the appropriate place for expression of such an experience...but, perhaps you can explain if i'm misunderstanding you off-list...i'm sure folks are over this thread. best, mary