From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Jul  1 01:22:54 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 01:22:54 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <afns3b+nu9h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afoate+dlg3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "ssk7882" <skelkins at a...> wrote:

> Amanda wrote:
> 
> > But I must throw to you my personal least-favorite 
> > literature change, from the Just So Stories by Kipling, 
> > from "How the Leopard Got His Spots." 
> 
> > This alteration offends me because it changes the words the 
> > author chose.
> 
> One thing to keep in mind about "Just So Stories" is that
> it is a children's book.  It was written for children (as
> well as for adults), and it is read by children (as well as
> by adults).  Many of the currently available editions of 
> this book are marketted specifically for children.

Some novel about a highschool teacher has her assigning on essay on 
the poem (Emily Dickinson?) "There is no frigate like a book", except 
she changes it to "steamship" to spare herself an hour of students 
giggling over "frig it" puns.





From editor at texas.net  Mon Jul  1 02:41:32 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 21:41:32 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Editing literature to conform to current custom
References: <afns3b+nu9h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004301c220a8$d06575e0$097c63d1@texas.net>

Elkins the ever-gracious said

> This is a potentially inflammatory topic, but I really
> did feel the need to respond.  If people wish to follow
> up, please let us all try to remain civil.

But of course. I wasn't trying to inflame. I never am, I just seem to have a
talent for it....

> In a discussion on the main list about the insertion of
> Dean Thomas in the sorting ceremony of the first book,
> Amanda wrote:
>
> > But I must throw to you my personal least-favorite
> > literature change, from the Just So Stories by Kipling,
> > from "How the Leopard Got His Spots." After the Ethiopian
> > has changed his skin to black, and then dotted the leopard
> > all over with his fingertips (nicely explaining the little
> > rosettes of dots), and the leopard asks why the Ethiopian
> > doesn't go for spots too, what Kipling originally wrote was,
> > "Plain black's best for a nigger." In every single copy I
> > have seen that was printed within, say, the last 20 years
> > (at least), this has been changed to remove "nigger."
>
> That's your *least* favorite editorial change in the history
> of all literature, Amanda?  Really?

How to put this. It's the most blatant. I am not fond of the little
"clarifications" that have crept into the Chronicles of Narnia, or their
reordering, either, for another example, but they were not done for
political correctness, which is a Button Of Mine.

> > This alteration offends me because it changes the words the
> > author chose.
>
> One thing to keep in mind about "Just So Stories" is that
> it is a children's book.  It was written for children (as
> well as for adults), and it is read by children (as well as
> by adults).  Many of the currently available editions of
> this book are marketted specifically for children.

So revisionism is okay for children's books. Just children's books? How
young a child? Where do you draw the line? At what age of intended audience
does the author's work get to stand unaltered? Shall we "revise" Huckleberry
Finn, too, because young readers read that? It just seems to me that once
you start changing the past to fit the present, you have begun the long slow
slide to the Ministry of Truth (or whichever it was, it's been a long time
since I waded through 1984).

Ban things if you must, but ban the true words the author wrote; leave them
their integrity. Kipling's name is on words he did not write. C.S. Lewis',
as well. The changes are small, in the case of Lewis, probably vanishingly
so. But the point is, I don't think any changes to an author's work are
acceptable if made by other than the author; they are the only ones who are
(sorry) authorized to do so.

> One of the things to consider about young readers is that
> they do not have the historical knowledge that adults do.
> If they learn vocabulary from a book, they are likely to
> believe that it is acceptable vocabulary for use in their
> everyday lives.  "Nigger" is *not* an acceptable term in
> most circles of contemporary English-speaking society, for
> reasons that younger readers might well not yet have the
> background or the knowledge to appreciate.

<snip the rest of excellent argument that young minds cannot appreciate
historical changes in social acceptability of words, and parents may not be
involved in their reading>

You make a good point. But there are many, many things children read--we
either can try to sanitize them all, or we can let children learn from their
reading, as they are learning from the rest of the world around them, that
some things are acceptable and some are not. They may have to make some
mistakes to learn that. Mistakes are part of growing up, part of how you
learn, part of being alive.

If you had control over the information sources available to children's
minds, I might yield to your argument. But children do not only read
children's books. I might agree to revision, if this were the only channel
feeding bad vocabulary into a young mind. It is not.

I stood back and let my children risk falling, when the danger was not
tremendous, so that they could learn to balance. I stand and watch them ride
bikes and know they could take a tumble. I let them climb trees and know
they could fall. I will let them read books, unedited, and know they can
draw their own conclusions. Growing up is a complicated business, and I
don't think "cleaning up" literature is going to make things easier on
children in the long run, *not easier enough to justify the precedent it
sets.*

> Now, Kipling wasn't exactly a PC sort of fellow even in his own
> day, but I really don't think that his use of the word there was
> intended to be offensive.  I don't really believe that the author's
> intent there was to use an extremely derogatory term with the weight
> of generations of enslavement, colonialism and oppression behind it
> just to make some aesthetic or philosophical point.  That is really
> not how I, at any rate, read the authorial intent behind the use
> of the word in the passage you cited.
>
> So I'm afraid that I can't quite see the editorial change as
> "pandering."  It is not pandering.  It is a form of translation
> designed to keep the book accessable to readers who lack an adult's
> understanding of history and usage (ie, children) without leading
> those readers astray as to what constitutes acceptable or polite
> usage in the time and place in which *they* are living.

You have a point. But I still do not believe it is anybody's business,
except the author, to decide *what* the author's intent was. I believe
"nigger" was a term applied to anyone of color at that time in history.
Little Black Sambo is about a little Indian (as in India) boy. Yes, Kipling
no doubt was using a then-innocuous term, which has now become
not-innocuous. But that was what he wrote. Let it stand. Otherwise you set a
dangerous precedent. Other equally reasonable changes to other works suggest
themselves to ease understanding or to avoid offense, and as I said, we
begin our march to Orwellian editing.

What if, 100 years from now, the term "wizard" took on negative connotations
and some publisher decided that children would be traumatized by having to
read it and possibly add it to their vocabulary, and revisited the Harry
Potter books? It is a similar scenario.

--Amanda







From minga at idx.com.au  Mon Jul  1 02:14:48 2002
From: minga at idx.com.au (mingarooni)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 02:14:48 -0000
Subject: un petit cadeau du Canada
In-Reply-To: <afae1b+1qhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afoduo+dnt4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "lupinesque" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:
[snip] (French Editions)
> I have a report for you Sirius lovers out there:  the back cover
has 
> the studliest Sirius I've ever seen.  He's unshaven (ooh!) and 
> scowling (swoon!), and has a haircut and attire that suggest he
hangs 
> out in the very coolest cafes.  There's also a drawing of Lupin
that 
> makes him look very nice, but old enough to be Sirius's dad.  He
has 
> heavily gray hair and bags under his eyes along with the patched 
> clothes and smile, collectively making him look kind of like your 
> favorite uncle who's just suffered a long bout of pneumonia.  I'll 
> scan them in if I can, because there are websites with the front 
> cover (same as the French) but I've never seen one with the back.  
> Don't hold your breath, though.  I don't have a scanner.
> 
> Amy

Fortunately, I do have a scanner :)

All the French covers and back covers (and a couple of other goodies)
are now here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Graphics/Book-related%20Graphics/frenchhp/

(complete with Lockhart and Malfoy with black hair)(!!!)

and how cute is the French Harry?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Graphics/Book-related%20Graphics/frenchhp/frenchhp.jpg

enjoy!

Belinda





From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Jul  1 03:20:57 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 03:20:57 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <004301c220a8$d06575e0$097c63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <afohqp+edcu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> wrote:

> What if, 100 years from now, the term "wizard" took on negative
> connotations and some publisher decided that children would be 
> traumatized by having to read it and possibly add it to their 
> vocabulary, and revisited the Harry Potter books? It is a similar
> scenario.

I wish JKR had decided, even under a publisher's nagging, to call 
female mages wizardesses instead of witches. That small change would 
have saved so much conflict with confused Fundamentalists and so much 
confusion with Wicca.




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Jul  1 05:14:26 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 05:14:26 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <004301c220a8$d06575e0$097c63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <afoofi+73vp@eGroups.com>

Amanda wrote (explaining why the N-word should remain in the text 
exactly as the author wrote it):

>But the point is, I don't think any changes to an author's work are
>acceptable if made by other than the author; they are the only ones 
>who are (sorry) authorized to do so.

<snip>


>But that was what he wrote. Let it stand. Otherwise you set a
>dangerous precedent. Other equally reasonable changes to other 
>works suggest themselves to ease understanding or to avoid offense, 
>and as I said, we begin our march to Orwellian editing.
 

Well . . . 

Amanda's remarks do raise a quick question in my mind, so I think 
I'll go ahead and ask it.  

As I understand it, there are many English-language versions of the 
Bible.  Many of these versions exist solely as an attempt to make 
the text more accessible for today's reader (translating arcane 
phrases into modern slang and usage and such), and these versions 
were written to attempt to convey the ancient text in a way that 
makes sense in light of how much the world has changed.  I actually 
prefer these versions, myself.

So, uh, if it is OK to tinker with what Christians believe to be the 
*Word of God,* why is it not OK to make changes in a children's 
story to reflect that times have changed and the world is now a very 
different place?  Under Amanda's argument, shouldn't all copies of 
the New Testament, for instance, contain the books Paul wrote 
exactly as Paul wrote them because Paul didn't authorize any of 
these changes to his words?

Just wondering.

Cindy




From macloudt at hotmail.com  Mon Jul  1 08:26:51 2002
From: macloudt at hotmail.com (Mary Jennings)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 08:26:51 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Editing literature to conform to current custom
Message-ID: <F152NHlwywSfcq2toHi00002c92@hotmail.com>

Elkins, quoting Amanda:

> > > This alteration offends me because it changes the words the
> > > author chose.

Elkins replied:

> > One thing to keep in mind about "Just So Stories" is that
> > it is a children's book.  It was written for children (as
> > well as for adults), and it is read by children (as well as
> > by adults).  Many of the currently available editions of
> > this book are marketted specifically for children.

To which Amanda replied:

>So revisionism is okay for children's books. Just children's books? How
>young a child? Where do you draw the line?

IMO there are strong points on both sides of the argument.  I'm going to do 
my customary thing, which is wimp out and suggest a compromise.

A child who can read Kipling is probably old enough to understand the basics 
of the concept of "race" and discrimination.  On that basis, it would make 
sense to (a) keep the text true to the original and include 
footnotes/endnotes explaining that e.g. "nigger" was an acceptable term when 
Kipling wrote his stuff but that this term is now highly offensive, or (b) 
change the now-offensive words and include footnotes/endnotes explaining 
what the original words were and why they have been changed.  If the child 
is still confused, he/she can approach the parents for an explanation.

While I agree with Amanda that any type of change to the original text is 
akin to the rape of a virgin, Elkins is right in stating that many kids 
wouldn't understand the offensiveness of a lot of the old terms.  My young 
daughter came home from MIL's some months ago and sprouted the word 
"darkies".  It's a term MIL Dearest uses with relish, not because she's that 
much of a redneck (only somewhat so), but because she fails to see that 
though "darkies" was common 50 years ago it's an offensive term today 
(translation:  she's bloody ignorant).  I took Beth aside and explained that 
it's *not* a nice word to use and I didn't want her using it, even if Nanny 
did.  It goes without saying that I was livid at MIL.  Beth, of course, had 
no idea that it was an offensive term; she was simply repeating what she had 
heard.

Cindy also has a good point in regards to the differing translations of the 
Bible, but I would argue that translations are *always* iffy.  Kipling, 
however, wrote in modern English, which is why this situation is different 
from the Bible scenario.

See?  No flames anywhere ;)

Mary Ann
(who's impressed with her post as she hasn't had caffiene yet)

_________________________________________________________________
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com




From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Jul  1 08:55:04 2002
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 08:55:04 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <afoofi+73vp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afp5d8+qsrv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at c...> wrote:

> 
> As I understand it, there are many English-language versions of the 
> Bible.  Many of these versions exist solely as an attempt to make 
> the text more accessible for today's reader (translating arcane 
> phrases into modern slang and usage and such), and these versions 
> were written to attempt to convey the ancient text in a way that 
> makes sense in light of how much the world has changed.  I actually 
> prefer these versions, myself.
> 
> So, uh, if it is OK to tinker with what Christians believe to be 
the 
> *Word of God,* why is it not OK to make changes in a children's 
> story to reflect that times have changed and the world is now a 
very 
> different place?  Under Amanda's argument, shouldn't all copies of 
> the New Testament, for instance, contain the books Paul wrote 
> exactly as Paul wrote them because Paul didn't authorize any of 
> these changes to his words?
> 

Paul wrote in Greek. So, ALL English versions of his writings are in 
any case translations of the original.

Kipling's text in English, however, is the original text that Kipling 
wrote. Changing words in his stories is problematic since the stories 
are presented to the reader as the original Kipling stories (or so I 
assume. Are the books marked as "sanitized" in some way?).


Naama




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul  1 09:30:47 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 09:30:47 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <F152NHlwywSfcq2toHi00002c92@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <afp7g7+otpu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Mary Jennings" <macloudt at h...> wrote:

>Kipling, 
> however, wrote in modern English, which is why this situation is 
different 
> from the Bible scenario.
> 
I have had the following sitting awaiting final edits for about a 
week.  Although it doesn't address the Dean Thomas issue specifically 
(and was intended originally for the main list), I think it is 
germane to this thread, as I would say that Elkins' entire case is 
based on the fact that Kipling's English is no longer quite modern.

I wanted to check the details of some of the assertions I make as I 
do not have the US HP editions, so there could be more errors than 
usual in this post.

David

The fact that the Harry Potter books were revised for the US (but 
not, as I understand it, Canadian; I hope nobody will mind if I use 
the term 'American' to mean the US readership) market comes up fairly 
frequently on the main list.  This is just a few musings on the wider 
implications.

Languages *do* change over time.  That means that communities with a 
common that are separated begin to find that they diverge 
linguistically.  Undoubtedly this creates misunderstandings but it is 
a natural process.  Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan, Provencal, French, 
Romanche, Italian, and Romanian are all descended from Latin.  Some 
day in the far future, American and Australian may be considered to 
be different languages from British English.

It is hard to say whether television and other fast means of cultural 
exchange will delay, or even accelerate this development.  However, 
it is happening, and the Harry Potter series may in fact be a 
landmark in the process: for the first time, it was judged necessary 
to 'translate' a British text into an American (ie US) one.  We have 
yet, to my knowledge, to encounter the reverse case, in which an 
American book is translated into British English.

Americans may feel insulted that they are judged incapable of reading 
an only marginally alien text (though in fact the decision to revise 
the books is likely to be more to do with their attractiveness to 
children than any great difficulty in reading them); British readers 
may feel that their unique culture has been rejected as off-putting.  
We ought to be able to live with this.

I think that the existence of the American versions really does 
enrich the canon for fans.  My understanding is that JKR approved the 
changes that Scholastic introduced, so if the American version says 
that Dean is black, either it is making explicit what JKR already had 
decided, or it is an innovation that she was happy to embrace.  In 
either case, it's canon.

Some of the changes are baffling: if she agreed them, why not also 
put them in the UK versions (for example, the change from Enervate to 
Ennervate)? Lack of time?  A very few are hard to understand as they 
verge on Flints, for example, the change from 'one more curse' 
to 'one more death' in GOF 1.  A curse is most naturally interpreted 
as meaning the one (Imperius) which was placed on Crouch Sr or 
Moody.  Crouch Sr's death was not necessary to Voldemort's plan, and 
as far as we know was not planned, at least until after Voldemort was 
rebirthed.  Possibly Voldemort saw Harry's death as essential to the 
plan but the implication is a curse or death that will happen soon.  
Perhaps Pip will come up with a theory that suggests that some 
completely other and as yet unsuspected (except by her) death is 
involved.

But these differences just add to the interest in trying to decipher 
the meaning in the books.

D




From boggles at earthlink.net  Mon Jul  1 10:01:56 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 05:01:56 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to current
 custom
In-Reply-To: <afohqp+edcu@eGroups.com>
References: <afohqp+edcu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010401b945d78b7a0a@[199.174.5.135]>

At 3:20 AM +0000 7/1/02, catlady_de_los_angeles wrote:
>
>I wish JKR had decided, even under a publisher's nagging, to call
>female mages wizardesses instead of witches. That small change would
>have saved so much conflict with confused Fundamentalists and so much
>confusion with Wicca.

I agree that it would have spared a few people a certain amount of 
confusion, but I think most people can tell the difference between, 
say, the Good Witch of the North in the Wizard of Oz and the average 
Wiccan.  Rowling is drawing on that same cultural meme-pool.  I can't 
think of any precedent for the term "wizardess;" it would have to be 
"sorcerer" and "sorceress," and that would change the flavor quite a 
bit.  The nice young lady with the wand and the cauldron and the 
pointy hat is, in common culture, a witch, and personally, I am 
rather fond of people getting over the "all witches are EEEEEVILLLL" 
meme, whether the witches in question are fictional or not.

Besides, the Fundamentalists in question would have gotten upset over 
anything that portrayed people who use magic, cauldrons, broomsicks, 
etc. in a positive light, even if JKR had called them Pfurgleblatzes.

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  1 10:40:52 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 10:40:52 -0000
Subject: UFOs=Bludgers?
Message-ID: <afpbjk+f048@eGroups.com>

Hi all,

Whenever I sign onto CompuServe it treats me to tabloid headlines.  
Today it was "The best place to see UFOs is . . ." and the answer 
took my breath away: Scotland!  

According to their figures, Scottish UFO sightings occur at a rate of 
0.004 UFOs/sq km, compared to, e.g., 0.0002 sightings/sq km in the 
U.S.  And Scotland just happens to be the home of hundreds (up to 
1000, YMMV) of student wizards, all practicing Apparating, flying, 
levitating objects, playing Quidditch, etc.  Coincidence?  I don't 
think so!

Amy
wondering if there's a U.S. wizarding school in Area 51




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  1 11:10:37 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 11:10:37 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <F152NHlwywSfcq2toHi00002c92@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <afpdbd+38r6@eGroups.com>

Mary Ann wrote:

> IMO there are strong points on both sides of the argument.  I'm 
going to do 
> my customary thing, which is wimp out and suggest a compromise.
> 
> A child who can read Kipling is probably old enough to understand 
the basics 
> of the concept of "race" and discrimination.  On that basis, it 
would make 
> sense to (a) keep the text true to the original and include 
> footnotes/endnotes explaining that e.g. "nigger" was an acceptable 
term when 
> Kipling wrote his stuff but that this term is now highly offensive, 
or (b) 
> change the now-offensive words and include footnotes/endnotes 
explaining 
> what the original words were and why they have been changed.  If 
the child 
> is still confused, he/she can approach the parents for an 
explanation.

I gravitate toward compromise too (I prefer to think of it as boldly 
mediating between two fierce opponents rather than wimping out <g>), 
and I was thinking of (c), leave in the now-offensive words and 
include footnotes/endnotes explaining that the words are offensive 
and what they connoted (if different) in the original.  But then, I 
don't object to children reading things that I think are offensive; I 
figure they will sort it all out with the help of wiser readers, just 
as they must sort out stupid ideas and learn that even the best 
authorities shouldn't be accepted blindly--not even Grandma, not even 
Mom and Dad.  It does dismay me that they will be embarrassed along 
the way (shudders at the thought of child-Elkins meeting an Ethiopian 
and trying out her new word), and it dismays me more to think of 
black kids reading such things and feeling the shame that the words 
were intended to impose.

One thing I dislike about just changing offensive terms is that it 
gives an inaccurate picture of the author.  I have a collection of 
writings by a religious essayist, James Luther Adams, whose writings 
spanned the 20th century, and they have been edited to make would-be 
neutral "he" and "his" gender-neutral.  At first read I thought the 
author was way ahead of his time.  IIRC, I only learned that it was 
the editor's decision from asking about it--it wasn't footnoted or 
even noted in the preface (I could be wrong about this; the book is 
at work).  It really bothered me, as I felt that JLA had been 
misrepresented--not that he would have objected to the changes, but 
that they made him look like a groundbreaking feminist when in fact 
his language was conventional.  It also would have been interesting 
to see when, if ever, he began to use gender-neutral language, but 
any such evolution is erased by the editor's sweeping changes.

When I quote an author I may make changes like this, for the simple 
reason that I believe constantly referring to human beings as male 
sends girls and women a message that they are some kind of special 
case, or--and the theologians I quote sometimes literally believed 
this--not fully human.  I want to quote these authors (not just 
abandon them to the ash-heap on account of their sexism), but I don't 
want my own speech to be sexist, so if they are talking about 
humanity I will often change their "man" to "human," e.g.  However, I 
always explain that the changes were mine.  The history of language 
is like any other history:  we may bemoan it, but it's dangerous to 
rewrite it.

To swing back to the other side in true wimp, uh, I mean masterful 
mediator, fashion, Amanda asks how young a child needs language 
adjusted.  Well, I do adjust language when I talk to young children.  
I don't swear in their presence, for example, and if I'm reading them 
a book way beyond their comprehension, I bring the language down to 
their level as I go.  Likewise, although I couldn't name an exact 
age, I can see myself deciding that this particular child is too 
young to deal with the complexities of "nigger" (or any other not 
necessarily painful, just conceptually difficult, word) and 
editing 'til a later date.

Amy
who doesn't get what any of this has to do with Dean Thomas--guess I 
should catch up to the main list




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  1 11:55:16 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 11:55:16 -0000
Subject: Problems of translation (was Editing literature to conform to current custom)
In-Reply-To: <afoofi+73vp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afpfv4+scij@eGroups.com>

Posting two responses to one thread!  How rude.  AND it's long and 
rambly.  Caveat lector.

Cindy wrote:

> 
> Well . . . 
> 
> Amanda's remarks do raise a quick question in my mind, so I think 
> I'll go ahead and ask it.  
> 
> As I understand it, there are many English-language versions of the 
> Bible.  Many of these versions exist solely as an attempt to make 
> the text more accessible for today's reader (translating arcane 
> phrases into modern slang and usage and such), and these versions 
> were written to attempt to convey the ancient text in a way that 
> makes sense in light of how much the world has changed.  I actually 
> prefer these versions, myself.
> 
> So, uh, if it is OK to tinker with what Christians believe to be 
the 
> *Word of God,* why is it not OK to make changes in a children's 
> story to reflect that times have changed and the world is now a 
very 
> different place?  Under Amanda's argument, shouldn't all copies of 
> the New Testament, for instance, contain the books Paul wrote 
> exactly as Paul wrote them because Paul didn't authorize any of 
> these changes to his words?

Leaving aside the translation issue, which I know you were aware of 
(what?  Paul didn't write in Jacobian English? <g>), I think modern 
translations, of which the KJV was of course one, have the right idea 
but are naive if they think they can translate 1st-century concepts 
into 21st-century world views so easily.

One major problem is that these translations tend to vastly 
oversimplify the concepts they are trying to convey.  The Bible is a 
text that many of us study with extreme care for shades of meaning, 
so the farther it gets from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, 
the less chance we have of doing a good job.  I lean toward 
preserving the original meaning and footnoting extensively (very 
common, of course, with Bibles), but what *is* the original meaning?  
Translators rely on current archaeology, linguisitic studies, etc.  
Of course, this problem exists whether one decides to use modern 
slang or not.  However one solves the language problem, one is going 
by one's understanding of what exactly Paul meant by this now-arcane 
term.  That changes as new information about his era surfaces--which 
is why the Bible keeps being re-translated, and always will be.
  
I'd like to be specific, but most of my Bibles are at work, and the 
best online concordance I know is very biased in its choices of 
available translations.  When I lead Bible classes I hand around the 
various translations; the variety among them can lead to very good 
discussions itself.

Whenever these issues arise, I think of a translation of Lysistrata 
which grappled with the fact (I'm trusting that it's a fact, not 
knowing classical Greek) that Aristophanes made the Spartans (IIRC) 
sound like ignorant hicks.  I don't know how he did it; word choice, 
accent, whatever, but clearly the fact that he did it was important 
to his meaning.  So how does one get this across in modern English?  
The translator made them sound like the US stereotype of a hick:  
southern accent <grins in the direction of a certain Texas editor>, 
characteristic phrases, etc. . . . you could just *see* the guys 
scratching themselves.  This seemed overboard to me, but it 
illuminated a genuine puzzle of translation.  If the translator 
hadn't done this, how *would* he have conveyed this very important 
aspect of the play?  Should he have just left it out?

I'm not fluent in French, so I can't be sure, but so far it seems to 
me that the French translator of HP took that approach, with the 
result that I can detect no class distinction between Hagrid and Stan 
Shunpike on the one hand and Harry and Hermione on the other.  This 
resolution is no more satisfactory than the other.  It seems on the 
surface to be less intrusive, but in fact it *is* intrusive; by 
erasing the obvious class distinctions JKR draws with her language, 
it dramatically rewrites the characters as surely as giving a Spartan 
an Appalachian tinge does.

To bring it back to Cindy's point:  there is no way to present Paul's 
words exactly as he wrote them.  All we can do is try to explain all 
the nuances as best as scholars can understand them.  Each translator 
privileges a different value:  fidelity to the 1st-century 
Hellenistic world view (and of course there were many, and none of us 
knows exactly what Paul's was), clarity to the modern English-
speaking ear, ease of reading, preservation of the original rhythm, 
theological complexity, etc. etc.  Translators don't even agree upon 
whether they are trying to deliver the Word of God to our ears or 
provide us with an accurate translation of an important document of 
Ancient Near Eastern history or what.  But I would say that however 
much they "tinker" with it, they are good translators to the extent 
that they are trying to convey the author's intent and not replace it 
with their own.  That way they facilitate communication between the 
author (or Author) and the reader.  The issue is respect for the 
reader as much as for the author; overly loose translations treat all 
readers like children, unable to decide for themselves what is 
valuable and what isn't.  

Kipling is not so authoritative* an author, but for the reader's sake 
we should still be wary of assuming that we know best what ought to 
be conveyed.  If we don't want to convey to a new generation what 
Kipling was trying to say, perhaps we should just take him off the 
shelves.  But like the Bible, he has a lot of good mixed in with the 
bad.

Amy

*it's irresistible




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Jul  1 13:03:26 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 13:03:26 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <F152NHlwywSfcq2toHi00002c92@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <afpjuu+bpb1@eGroups.com>

Mary Ann wrote:

>"nigger" was an acceptable term when Kipling wrote his stuff 

Really?  I wasn't aware that this word was ever *acceptable.*  I 
thought it was *common* at one time, but I wasn't aware that it was 
ever *perfectly fine* with black people.  Maybe the history of the 
word in the U.K. is different than in the U.S.; I don't know.  Set 
me straight if I'm wrong there, but I would be surprised to hear 
that the N-word was ever intended to be a neutral term or an 
expression of endearment or some such.

Mary Ann:

> Cindy also has a good point in regards to the differing 
>translations of the Bible, but I would argue that translations are 
>*always* iffy.  Kipling, however, wrote in modern English, which is 
>why this situation is different from the Bible scenario.
 
Naama added:

> Paul wrote in Greek. So, ALL English versions of his writings are 
>in  any case translations of the original.


This is such a fascinating dialogue.  David has already addressed 
the fact that Kiping did *not* write for the modern ear, which is 
the very reason why we are having this discussion.

So, then.  To recap, Amanda kicked things off by objecting to the 
deletion of the N-word from "Just So Stories" on the ground that the 
author's original words should never be touched.  No exceptions, no 
excuses, if I read her post correctly.  This is a fairly extreme 
position and one that strikes me as rather difficult to defend.  
Elkins explained many of the reasons very well, so I won't attempt 
to re-state the reasons the deletion of the N-word strikes me as 
quite reasonable and justified in this instance.

Then, to make the point that we already *do* tolerate changes to 
authors' original words in other contexts, I suggested that no one 
objects to the many modern translations of the Bible that are done 
primarily to make it more accessible to the readers of today.  

Mary Ann responds that these translations are always iffy.  Yes, 
they are.  So if it is OK to flat-out change the language of the 
Bible (something that is already iffy before we start tinkering with 
it to make it accessible), how can anyone maintain that it is 
indefensible to delete a wicked racial slur from Kipling?  Indeed, 
the reasons to delete what I consider to be the most heinous, 
offensive, ugly racial slur that exists from "Just So Stories" 
strike me as far more compelling than the reasons to change an 
arcane phrase in the Bible like "Verily I say unto thee" to "Listen 
up, this part is important."

Naama points out that Paul wrote portions of the Bible in Greek, so 
we are already translating his words.  I think this is rather beside 
the point.  If the only appropriate policy is not to change the 
original words of the author, the logical conclusion is that Paul's 
writings should only be offered up in the original *Greek.*  I think 
that's rather silly, but that is where you wind up if you take the 
position that the author's words should *never* be changed.

In fact, there's ample precedent for changing literature to make it 
more accessible *for kids.*  There are many English-language 
versions of the Bible *for kids* where the text has been drastically 
altered and simplified.  So if it is just plain *wrong* to change 
the words of the author, these children's Bibles are entirely 
unacceptable, as they are *many* steps removed even from the English 
translations of Paul's original.

Naama:
 
> Kipling's text in English, however, is the original text that 
>Kipling wrote. Changing words in his stories is problematic since 
>the stories  are presented to the reader as the original Kipling 
>stories (or so I  assume. Are the books marked as "sanitized" in 
some way?).

This sounds like just a truth in advertising-type argument.  Sure, 
go ahead and add something to the title page explaining that 
offensive racial slurs have been deleted.  I don't object to that; 
it may already have been done with the work in question.  That 
argument really doesn't get to the core issue:  should the deletion 
of the N-word have been made in the first place?

As for the argument that Kipling's words shouldn't be changed 
because he originally wrote in English, it doesn't bear up well 
under scrutiny.  If Kipling had written the book in French with the 
same exact racial slur, and it had then been translated to English, 
would it then be OK to delete the N-word?  That seems like an odd 
place to draw a bright line.

Having a blanket policy that the author's original words are sacred 
and can never be changed is unnecessarily extreme and leads to 
rather silly results, IMHO.  Clearly, these issues have to be 
handled on a case-by-case basis, depending on many factors such as 
the historical setting of the book, to name just one possible 
factor.  

Now, I understand Amanda's suggestion that she wishes to expose her 
childen to the original slur in the text so that they can learn.  I 
think this argument collapses under close examination.  Readers can 
be divided into those who understand that the N-word has been 
deleted in the original text, and readers who have no clue about 
this and why it was done and what it all means.  If you leave the N-
word *in* the text, the readers who do *not* understand all of this 
may be badly misled about what Kipling was intending to say there -- 
and in the case of children, they really may get the wrong idea 
about the propriety of the N-word.  If you delete the N-word, 
however, people like Amanda are still free to explain the whole 
thing to their children, even to the point of explaining that she 
won't tolerate anyone uttering the N-word in her home.  Doesn't that 
indicate that the better policy might be to delete the slur in this 
particular case?
 
Cindy -- cheerfully suggesting that people who are terribly bothered 
by the deletion of the N-word from "Just So Stores" simply pencil it 
in




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Mon Jul  1 09:23:15 2002
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 09:23:15 +0000 (EST5EDT)
Subject: In case you missed it....
Message-ID: <1A355114E@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

and you want to see it....

The musical Buffy episode is on tomorrow night.  Well, it's 
on tomorrow night for people in my viewing area.  I know 
that the UPN/WB stations around the States are different 
but I'm sure it's going to be the same episode for 
everyone.

By the way....congrats, Brazil!  That was quite a game!

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

LORD OF THE SNITCH
Three men form the chaser-squad under the sky 
Seven are the teammates on their brooms of wood
Two are Bludger balls charmed to fly
One is the dork Ref all on his own
On the field of Quidditch where the Quaffles lie.
One Snitch flits over all, one grab will win it
One game may take three months, or may take but a minute
On the field of Quidditch where the Quaffles lie.

http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm



From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Jul  1 13:58:09 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:58:09 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] UFOs=Bludgers?
References: <afpbjk+f048@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D205FF1.000001.23741@monica>


lol, that explanation never even occured to me! However the headline I saw
continued "and the alcohol's not to blame!" so maybe I was being distracted
away from the Hogwarts solution.
K
-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 01 July 2002 11:40:55
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] UFOs=Bludgers?

Hi all,

Whenever I sign onto CompuServe it treats me to tabloid headlines. 
Today it was "The best place to see UFOs is . . ." and the answer 
took my breath away: Scotland! 

According to their figures, Scottish UFO sightings occur at a rate of 
0.004 UFOs/sq km, compared to, e.g., 0.0002 sightings/sq km in the 
U.S. And Scotland just happens to be the home of hundreds (up to 
1000, YMMV) of student wizards, all practicing Apparating, flying, 
levitating objects, playing Quidditch, etc. Coincidence? I don't 
think so!

Amy
wondering if there's a U.S. wizarding school in Area 51


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT



________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul  1 14:02:32 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 14:02:32 -0000
Subject: UFOs=Bludgers?
In-Reply-To: <3D205FF1.000001.23741@monica>
Message-ID: <afpndo+6n83@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Kathryn" <kcawte at k...> wrote:
> 
> lol, that explanation never even occured to me! However the 
headline I saw
> continued "and the alcohol's not to blame!" so maybe I was being 
distracted
> away from the Hogwarts solution.
> K

Ah yes, the Department of Accidental Magical Reversal at work there.  
They don't miss much, do they?

David




From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Jul  1 14:12:48 2002
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 14:12:48 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <afpjuu+bpb1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afpo10+a797@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at c...> wrote:

<snip>

> Mary Ann:
> 
> > Cindy also has a good point in regards to the differing 
> >translations of the Bible, but I would argue that translations are 
> >*always* iffy.  Kipling, however, wrote in modern English, which 
is 
> >why this situation is different from the Bible scenario.
>  
> Naama added:
> 
> > Paul wrote in Greek. So, ALL English versions of his writings are 
> >in  any case translations of the original.
> 
> 
<snip> 
> Then, to make the point that we already *do* tolerate changes to 
> authors' original words in other contexts, I suggested that no one 
> objects to the many modern translations of the Bible that are done 
> primarily to make it more accessible to the readers of today.  
> 
> Mary Ann responds that these translations are always iffy.  Yes, 
> they are.  So if it is OK to flat-out change the language of the 
> Bible (something that is already iffy before we start tinkering 
with 
> it to make it accessible), how can anyone maintain that it is 
> indefensible to delete a wicked racial slur from Kipling?  Indeed, 
> the reasons to delete what I consider to be the most heinous, 
> offensive, ugly racial slur that exists from "Just So Stories" 
> strike me as far more compelling than the reasons to change an 
> arcane phrase in the Bible like "Verily I say unto thee" to "Listen 
> up, this part is important."
> 
> Naama points out that Paul wrote portions of the Bible in Greek, so 
> we are already translating his words.  I think this is rather 
beside 
> the point.  If the only appropriate policy is not to change the 
> original words of the author, the logical conclusion is that Paul's 
> writings should only be offered up in the original *Greek.*  I 
think 
> that's rather silly, but that is where you wind up if you take the 
> position that the author's words should *never* be changed.

I'm not sure I follow your argument. You seem to equate 'translation' 
with 'changing the original words of the author'? If so, then I just 
flat out disagree with that equation. Translating Paul's Greek to 
English is not changing Paul's words, since it is presented *as* a 
translation. The problem of originality arises only when a text 
presents itself as the original. If the text is presented *as* a 
translation (or as abridged, or as otherwise different from the 
original), I have no problem with it. 

> In fact, there's ample precedent for changing literature to make it 
> more accessible *for kids.*  There are many English-language 
> versions of the Bible *for kids* where the text has been 
drastically 
> altered and simplified.  

Exactly. These texts most clearly do not presume to be the Bible, but 
merely a retelling of Bible stories in simplified language. 

 
> Naama:
>  
> > Kipling's text in English, however, is the original text that 
> >Kipling wrote. Changing words in his stories is problematic since 
> >the stories  are presented to the reader as the original Kipling 
> >stories (or so I  assume. Are the books marked as "sanitized" in 
> some way?).
> 
> This sounds like just a truth in advertising-type argument.  
Sure, 
> go ahead and add something to the title page explaining that 
> offensive racial slurs have been deleted.  I don't object to that; 
> it may already have been done with the work in question.  That 
> argument really doesn't get to the core issue:  should the deletion 
> of the N-word have been made in the first place?

For me the core issue is respect for the original text. If a text is 
not presented as the original text, then whatever changes have been 
put there are *not* changes to the text itself. The reader is (or can 
be) aware that the words he reads are different from the words the 
author wrote. If s/he cares about such things, s/he can go look up 
the original text. It's the same principle that guides the proper 
rules of quotation. Would you consider it a trivial matter if I 
presented something you wrote as a direct quotation when it's really 
a paraphrase? It's a form of violation, isn't it?

> 
> As for the argument that Kipling's words shouldn't be changed 
> because he originally wrote in English, it doesn't bear up well 
> under scrutiny.  If Kipling had written the book in French with the 
> same exact racial slur, and it had then been translated to English, 
> would it then be OK to delete the N-word?  That seems like an odd 
> place to draw a bright line.

I'd say that the same rule applies. It wouldn't be OK to just delete 
the N-word. The translation should be as close to the original as it 
possibly can. If the word is deleted in the translation, then, again, 
the text should be presented as "sanitized" (I don't know what term 
to use here. 'Abridged' is not it, right?).

> 
> Having a blanket policy that the author's original words are sacred 
> and can never be changed is unnecessarily extreme and leads to 
> rather silly results, IMHO.  

Well, that was precisely the kind of attitude that preserved the 
Hebrew Bible for so long. The differences between the Hebrew Bible I 
have at home and 1000 year old Bibles (and even, I think, the bits 
found in Qumran) are extroadinarily slight. Mutations were not 
permitted to creep in because every bit of the text was deemed holy - 
down to the punctuation marks. In principle, an entire Bible 
(manuscript) will be rejected for a single wrong letter. 
It's a problem that modern technology seems to have largely dispensed 
with. But ... the question of originality should never be treated 
lightly, IMO. 

<snip>
> 
>If you delete the N-word, 
> however, people like Amanda are still free to explain the whole 
> thing to their children, even to the point of explaining that she 
> won't tolerate anyone uttering the N-word in her home.  Doesn't 
that 
> indicate that the better policy might be to delete the slur in this 
> particular case?

But Amanda is a certified L.O.O.N (and also happened to have read the 
unedited text). What about people who have no idea that the N-word 
had been deleted? That choice just doesn't exist for them.

I'm with Amy on this issue. The offensive terms should be left in the 
text and footnotes added to clarify their meanings and connotations - 
past and present. 


Naama







From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Jul  1 14:26:07 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 15:26:07 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to current custom
References: <afpo10+a797@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D20667F.000003.23741@monica>


I have to agree with this as well and we should all applaud thos publishers
who do keep the original. For example I have a large collection of books by
W E Johns and even the most recent reprints have kept his original langauge,
which throughout the different series' could probably offend every race and
nationality on earth, with the exception of the noble Englishmen of course.
Most reprints use the solution of footnotes explaining that the words used,
and the attitudes shown, were common at the time but are deeply offensive to
many people now. I would hate to read a sanitized version of the books
because the original language and attitudes add flavour to the narrative and
it wouldn't be as good without them.

K
-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 01 July 2002 15:12:52
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to current
custom

-

But Amanda is a certified L.O.O.N (and also happened to have read the 
unedited text). What about people who have no idea that the N-word 
had been deleted? That choice just doesn't exist for them.

I'm with Amy on this issue. The offensive terms should be left in the 
text and footnotes added to clarify their meanings and connotations - 
past and present. 


Naama



From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Jul  1 13:32:05 2002
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 13:32:05 -0000
Subject: Sacrilege and English graveyards
Message-ID: <afplkl+in3h@eGroups.com>

Catlady writes:
> Can a Catholic answer if Catholics are bured in consecrated ground? 
> Can an Anglican (Little Hangleton has been decided to be in England 
> not Scotland) answer if Anglicans are buried in consecrated 
> ground?


I'm an Anglican who received primary education in a Roman Catholic 
convent school, so I would feel safe in saying that the chances of 
any convent agreeing to have their nuns buried in unconsecrated 
ground is non-existent (which is the example Pam quoted previously).

Archaeologists in England are sometimes given licences to work in 
areas which are no longer consecrated - if they find bodies which 
appear to have received Christian burial  they must remove them in a 
respectful manner (including putting up screens so passers-by can't 
gawp), may  do a limited amount of research on the bodies, but must 
ultimately pass them on to religious authorities for re-burial in 
consecrated ground. 

If a churchyard is completely de-consecrated there is usually an 
attempt to find any bodies that haven't completely crumbled to dust 
and rebury them in still consecrated ground. I'm not certain, but I 
think you're not allowed to de-consecrate or do any building on 
consecrated burial grounds for quite a number of years after its last 
recorded burial - certainly I would expect that if the Little 
Hangleton graveyard had been de-consecrated, then bodies (like the 
Riddles) given Christian burial in it as recently as 50 years ago 
would have been removed to consecrated ground.

We do frequently use old graveyards for secular use, and even build 
on them; Britain is an incredibly small, crowded, *old* country, and 
it's difficult to find any space for building on that hasn't been 
used, reused, and then used again. But a lot of old church graveyards 
are closed simply because burying anyone else there would mean having 
to disturb previous burials. They are not actually de-consecrated.

Burial space in general is hard to find - cremation following an 
Anglican funeral service is extremely popular amongst modern British 
Anglicans. No-one would insist that the ashes then *had* to be 
scattered or interred in or on consecrated ground, but it is an 
option. 

Leisure usage that doesn't involve disturbing or digging up graves 
has been permitted in English churchyards since time immemorial - our 
local churchyard, previously used as a graveyard and which is still 
used for the internment of ashes, is also used by people walking 
their dogs, for our church fetes, for barbeques (with permission), by 
local kids to play football in - and no-one would dream of batting an 
eyelid. There just isn't that much open space in East London. Denying 
people the right to use the open space around the church would 
actually be seen as un-Christian by the congregation. It's when 
people *damage* things that we start to talk about 'sacrilege'.

And the ceremony in the GoF graveyard scene would provoke very large 
howls of 'sacrilege' if Voldemort performed it in my local 
churchyard - probably from quite a lot of people who've never set 
foot inside the actual church.

Pip (finally de-lurking on OT chatter - hi!)






From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul  1 14:57:47 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 14:57:47 -0000
Subject: Editing 'literature'
In-Reply-To: <afpo10+a797@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afpqlb+soqh@eGroups.com>

Naama wrote:

> For me the core issue is respect for the original text. If a text 
is 
> not presented as the original text, then whatever changes have been 
> put there are *not* changes to the text itself. The reader is (or 
can 
> be) aware that the words he reads are different from the words the 
> author wrote. If s/he cares about such things, s/he can go look up 
> the original text. It's the same principle that guides the proper 
> rules of quotation. Would you consider it a trivial matter if I 
> presented something you wrote as a direct quotation when it's 
really 
> a paraphrase? It's a form of violation, isn't it?

I am very interested in this part of the argument, because of course, 
we quote each other all the time.  There is an (un-edited, I promise 
you) example above!

I sometimes get worried when debates get snippy on the main list 
precisely *because* posts are quoted verbatim and then made to mean 
more than, IMO, the author intended.  I have seen people get pushed 
into an extreme position because what seemed to me to be essentially 
an emotional reaction was being interpreted as a coherent position.

I would far rather people paraphrased my efforts with faithful 
intent, even if they did not mention they had done so, than that they 
take my literal words and use them against me.  (I should say I am 
happy to report that I don't recall that this has been done to me in 
any serious way.)

I think the implication is that you can never cross the same textual 
river twice: if the text has not changed, the context has.  It 
follows that the claims of the author cannot be absolute, because 
they cannot any more be realised.

For main list debates, I think it does mean trying to work out what a 
poster *meant* to say, and responding to that, rather than reacting 
to a form of words.

David, wondering if he has painted himself into a corner that says 
there is no such thing as a sacred text, and also wondering if post-
modernists deny the possibility of translation into other languages, 
because it involves discerning the intent of the author.




From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  1 17:09:49 2002
From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (virtualworldofhp)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 17:09:49 -0000
Subject: un petit cadeau du Canada
In-Reply-To: <afoduo+dnt4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afq2ct+mbst@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "mingarooni" <minga at i...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "lupinesque" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:
> [snip] (French Editions)
> > I have a report for you Sirius lovers out there:  the back cover
> has 
> > the studliest Sirius I've ever seen.  He's unshaven (ooh!) and 
> > scowling (swoon!), and has a haircut and attire that suggest he
> hangs 
> > out in the very coolest cafes.  There's also a drawing of Lupin
> that 
> > makes him look very nice, but old enough to be Sirius's dad.  
> 
> Fortunately, I do have a scanner :)
> 
> All the French covers and back covers (and a couple of other goodies)
> are now here.

Lupin is hideous!  He looks like he could be my grandfather. 
Definitely an image-ruiner.  I much like my imaginary pictures of him
better.  Did the artist not read all of POA where it is revealed that
Lupin, Potter, & Black are contemporaries?  :-P And I actually don't
much like the Sirius picture either.

Thanks anyway!

-Megan




From macloudt at hotmail.com  Mon Jul  1 17:46:39 2002
From: macloudt at hotmail.com (Mary Jennings)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 17:46:39 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to current custom
Message-ID: <F144h0NJjkJ5OFH62h900003450@hotmail.com>

Cindy wrote:

>Mary Ann wrote:
>
> >"nigger" was an acceptable term when Kipling wrote his stuff
>
>Really?  I wasn't aware that this word was ever *acceptable.*  I
>thought it was *common* at one time, but I wasn't aware that it was
>ever *perfectly fine* with black people.

:::::bangs head on computer desk:::::  That was *not* phrased properly, was 
it?  What I meant was that the N-word would have been thought of as 
acceptable--perhaps "normal" would be better--by Kipling's intended 
audience, which I assume is white Americans of his time.  A thousand 
apologies for not making myself clear.

>As for the argument that Kipling's words shouldn't be changed
>because he originally wrote in English, it doesn't bear up well
>under scrutiny.  If Kipling had written the book in French with the
>same exact racial slur, and it had then been translated to English,
>would it then be OK to delete the N-word?  That seems like an odd
>place to draw a bright line.

I would be interested (in a strictly objective manner) in knowing if other 
languages have direct translations for the N-word, and if so, if modern 
editions of Kipling have also changed these words to less or non-offensive 
ones.  Thinking of my parent's mother tongue (Dutch), I can think of a 
translation for Negro, but not for Nigger.  Of course there might be one, 
and my parents never used the word so I don't know it.  For that matter, was 
the N-word transation used in every language in the first place, or was a 
less offensive term used from the start?  Just curious.

>Now, I understand Amanda's suggestion that she wishes to expose her
>childen to the original slur in the text so that they can learn.  I
>think this argument collapses under close examination.  Readers can
>be divided into those who understand that the N-word has been
>deleted in the original text, and readers who have no clue about
>this and why it was done and what it all means.  If you leave the N-
>word *in* the text, the readers who do *not* understand all of this
>may be badly misled about what Kipling was intending to say there --
>and in the case of children, they really may get the wrong idea
>about the propriety of the N-word.  If you delete the N-word,
>however, people like Amanda are still free to explain the whole
>thing to their children, even to the point of explaining that she
>won't tolerate anyone uttering the N-word in her home.  Doesn't that
>indicate that the better policy might be to delete the slur in this
>particular case?

I agree, and stick my original point of including somewhere in the text what 
the original word was and why it has been changed.  It's better to let kids 
know where and how a word originated and why it's offensive rather than just 
tell them it's a bad word and not to use it.

I'm assuming that Beth didn't call anyone a "darkie" before she said the 
word to me and I could put her right.  She's pretty sensitive and would fall 
to pieces if she unknowingly insulted someone.  I don't wrap my kids in 
cotton wool (and they've got the bruises to prove it), but I don't believe 
in exposing them to possible hostility due to avoidable ignorance either.

Mary Ann
(who should proofread her posts better)

_________________________________________________________________
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com




From dicentra at xmission.com  Mon Jul  1 19:59:02 2002
From: dicentra at xmission.com (dicentra63)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 19:59:02 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <afpo10+a797@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afqca6+dl4h@eGroups.com>


Sometimes I watch Antiques Roadshow, a program that originated in the
U.K. and that was brought over here (U.S.) with great success.

The underlying assumption in AR is that original condition is valued
above all: if the table has the original finish, it's worth much more
than if you sanded it down and finished it to match the rest of the
kitchen woodwork.  You've got to have the original box for the toy,
and the original frame for the painting, or the value goes down
drastically.

This is because the items in question are valued for their
historicity: an identical item created two years ago, even if the
workmanship is of the same quality, doesn't even come close to scoring
a Big Price.

Just So Stories with the original language is valuable from a
historical standpoint, just like the table with the original finish. 
Even if the table's finish doesn't look very good anymore, Leigh and
Leslie Keno will love you forever if you don't touch it.  

Just So Stories with the amended language is more valuable from a
practical standpoint.  If what you value are the stories themselves,
not their historicity, it makes more sense to sand off the crummy
finish and make the table look good again, so you can use it in
everyday settings.

I do agree that amended texts should be labeled as such, from the
standpoint of integrity.  But I don't believe that an artist's words
are sacred (historical, yes; sacred, no). If they were, just about
everything we do on the main list is sacrilege because we're
interpreting a "sacred" text to our own ends (and isn't the Bible
subjected to that kind of thing every day?).  Besides, I challenge you
to find a text that an author wouldn't like another shot at, just to
touch up a couple of things.

And, as David said, the meaning of an unchanged text changes anyway,
because of the way language and culture change.  The N-word may not
ever have been polite language, but the concept behind it was more
socially acceptable in Kipling's day than it is now.

I'd rather see the word changed in books marketed for children.  
They'll learn about the N-word soon enough on the street.  In books
marketed as classics, leave it unchanged.

--Dicentra, who was going to write exactly what Elkins wrote, verbatim

  




From FRIED32 at aol.com  Mon Jul  1 18:47:04 2002
From: FRIED32 at aol.com (XLargeFry)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 18:47:04 -0000
Subject: More Cover Illustrations Please
In-Reply-To: <afoduo+dnt4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afq838+malq@eGroups.com>

A friend and I were wondering if
anyone has the British Childrens
Edition's cover illustrations
Scanned? Could we get them posted
to the files also?

We have heard that JKR stated that 
the Back of POA was the one She 
thought was closest to her Idea
of what Padfoot looked like.

XLargeFry
aka Zephyrus
aka Petros Petitoris
(Stone Seeker)

Receding back into lurking in the murky mists
 






From editor at texas.net  Mon Jul  1 20:25:21 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 15:25:21 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to current custom
References: <F144h0NJjkJ5OFH62h900003450@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <00b501c2213d$6d981400$087c63d1@texas.net>

Mary wrote, woozily:

> :::::bangs head on computer desk:::::  That was *not* phrased properly,
was
> it?  What I meant was that the N-word would have been thought of as
> acceptable--perhaps "normal" would be better--by Kipling's intended
> audience, which I assume is white Americans of his time.  A thousand
> apologies for not making myself clear.

Actually, Kipling was British. I believe he either grew up or served in
India for rather a long while, as most of his writing  is set there or
colored strongly thereby. His intended audience would have been the literate
residents of the British Empire of his day, whatever color they were.
Presumably largely white, but the Empire was a pretty damn big'n'diverse
place back then.

> I would be interested (in a strictly objective manner) in knowing if other
> languages have direct translations for the N-word, and if so, if modern
> editions of Kipling have also changed these words to less or non-offensive
> ones.  Thinking of my parent's mother tongue (Dutch), I can think of a
> translation for Negro, but not for Nigger.  Of course there might be one,
> and my parents never used the word so I don't know it.  For that matter,
was
> the N-word transation used in every language in the first place, or was a
> less offensive term used from the start?  Just curious.

This comment doesn't particularly answer the above question, I'm not trying
to. I have just been sitting here bemused at how many people are using the
euphemism "N-word." I will lift a comment I made offlist to someone:

"Here I must say that I categorically don't use that euphemism. "N-word."
How
have you let a set of sounds have such power over you, that you won't even
type it out? To quote Dumbledore, "Always use the proper name for things.
Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself." It is not a pleasant
word, it is offensive, it represents reprehensible things--but for that very
reason I will *not* give it such power as to fear to say or type it."

Even if you are avoiding the usage in order to avoid giving offense,
"N-word" gives so much power and strength to a set of sounds! I can't think
of another single word that is treated with such deference. Not even
Carlin's seven (seven?) words that must not be said on the air; no other
derogatory racial or sexist slur. Just this one. The occasion seldom rises
when I would ever use the word (and when it has arisen, it has been a usage
discussion similar to this, not *at* anyone, great heavens), but should any
occasion arise I will use the word itself. Not "N-word." We sound like the
frightened students of Hogwarts, discussing You-Know-Who.

--Amanda
-------------------------
one nation, *under God*




From editor at texas.net  Mon Jul  1 20:48:36 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 15:48:36 -0500
Subject: Texan! was Problems of translation (was Editing literature to conform to current custom)
References: <afpfv4+scij@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00d401c22140$ace97600$087c63d1@texas.net>

Amy baited:

> Whenever these issues arise, I think of a translation of Lysistrata
> which grappled with the fact (I'm trusting that it's a fact, not
> knowing classical Greek) that Aristophanes made the Spartans (IIRC)
> sound like ignorant hicks.  I don't know how he did it; word choice,
> accent, whatever, but clearly the fact that he did it was important
> to his meaning.  So how does one get this across in modern English?
> The translator made them sound like the US stereotype of a hick:
> southern accent <grins in the direction of a certain Texas editor>,
> characteristic phrases, etc. . . . you could just *see* the guys
> scratching themselves.

*ahem* Texans do not have the Southern accent. Dialect maps that show
Southern extending into east Texas were based on data gathered in the 1940s.
>From about the turn of the century, east Texans have the
mostly-Midlands-sounding accent of south Texas. [West and North Texans do
have accents, but they are not standard-issue Southern, they are *Texan.*
I'm not sure how they're classified.] My grandmother was born in Brenham or
Huntsville or something in 1900, and had a charming Southern accent (r-less
and all). My mother did not.

Texan "accents" these days tend to fall more into word usage, not diction.
Texans use words like "fixin to," "y'all," the double modal (might should),
etc. These usages, I think I read, are on the increase. Tremble.

--Amanda





From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Jul  1 21:39:36 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 21:39:36 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <F144h0NJjkJ5OFH62h900003450@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <afqi6o+334e@eGroups.com>

Mary Ann wrote:

> :::::bangs head on computer desk:::::  That was *not* phrased 
>properly, was  it?  

Clarification understood and accepted.  No offense intended or taken.

OK, a very quick aside before I take on some inflammatory issues 
quite directly.

I was thinking more about this view that an author's words shouldn't 
be touched no matter what, that they are owed tremendous deference, 
etc.  I was wondering whether the people who feel that way have the 
same view of other forms of art.  Two that come to mind for 
discussion are music lyrics and movies.

Lyrics first.  My niece came over recently, and she was singing the 
song from _West Side Story,_ "I Feel Pretty."  Now, I believe the 
original lyrics contain the phrase, "I feel pretty, and witty and 
gay."  But lo and behold, the sheet music had something else 
like "pretty and witty and *bright*," I believe.  "Gay" had been 
dropped.  I assume this change was made because "gay" now has a very 
different meaning when the lyric was first written.  It would strike 
modern audiences as rather off for a young woman in a story in which 
she falls in love with a man to be singing that she is "gay."

So is this change offensive?  

Similarly, there is a state in the South in the U.S. (Virginia?) 
that has a state song that does or did have the word "darkies" in 
the original version.  Would it be wrong to change that lyric on the 
ground that it is offensive to some citizens of the state?  Or 
should the state retain the racist language on the ground that that 
is what the original lyricist wrote?

Lastly, movies in the U.S. are routinely edited for broadcast 
television in the U.S. to delete offensive language and sexual 
scenes.  I have heard this is not done quite so much in Europe, but 
this is required in the U.S.  So does this sort of editing rape the 
vision of the director and screenwriter, or is it OK?  How is it 
different from deleting the N-word from Kipling?  

Anyway, let me get on to the other issue I wanted to address.

Amanda wrote:

>I have just been sitting here bemused at how many people are using 
>the euphemism "N-word." 

I believe "bemused" means "bewildered" or "confused" or "deep in 
thought."

Maybe I can clarify things, then.  I think it is rather plain that 
some people type "N-word" rather than typing out a vile, offensive 
racist slur because they wish to be considerate of those who *are* 
deeply offended by that slur.  That's one reason why *I* do it.  It 
strikes me as the considerate and kind thing to do.  I was taught 
that typing "N-word" or finding a way to re-phrase your thoughts 
when you can do so rather than using a horrific racial slur is just 
common courtesy.  

Like all matters of courtesy, however, it is not mandatory.  I mean, 
we do have free speech.  So anyone who wishes to use the slur in 
question rather than seek out and use well-understood alternatives 
is free to do so, I guess.

Amanda:

>Here I must say that I categorically don't use that euphemism. "N-
>word.  How have you let a set of sounds have such power over you, 
>that you won't even type it out? To quote Dumbledore, "Always use 
>the proper name for things. Fear of a name increases fear of the 
>thing itself." It is not a pleasant word, it is offensive, it 
>represents reprehensible things--but for that very reason I will 
>*not* give it such power as to fear to say or type it.

I really don't think the issue is whether you are allowing the N-
word to acquire some power it doesn't otherwise have by using it.  I 
would suggest that the oppression of people with dark skin and the 
ugly usage of this word to facilitate that oppression is what causes 
the word to be terribly offensive and creates its power.  Believe 
me, whether you say it or type it is *not* the source of its power, 
and your usage of it will in no way divest it of its considerable 
power to wound.  I wish it were that easy.

I would guess that some people are reluctant to use the slur when 
they can readily avoid it is not because they are "afraid" of a 
word.  That's a plot device JKR uses in a work of fantasy fiction.  
In the real world, many people choose not to use offensive language 
not out of fear, but out of consideration for the sensibilities of 
others and to avoid giving the impression that they personally 
approve of the word.


>Even if you are avoiding the usage in order to avoid giving offense,
>"N-word" gives so much power and strength to a set of sounds! I 
>can't think of another single word that is treated with such 
>deference. 

Did you ever stop to think about why that might be?  Could it be 
that the N-word carries with it the baggage of segregation, slavery, 
lynching and all manner of horrors visited upon the people who have 
been forced to hear this slur all too many times already?  Could it 
be that *to this day* people of color *are* all too often subjected 
to this particular slur by people who are not at all well-meaning?

>We sound like the frightened students of Hogwarts, discussing You-
>Know-Who.

Uh, no.  I think those like myself who use the N-word rather than 
use the slur "sound" like they wish not to give offense if they can 
possibly help it.  That could be because some people are all too 
aware that, to this day, usage of the N-word is *very* hurtful to 
those people who have had to suffer its usage.  And it is especially 
hurtful to children, which is why we ought to seize every 
opportunity to demonstrate to youth that the N-word has no place in 
a polite and racially diverse society.  

And perhaps some people are more than a little worried that tossing 
about a racial slur like this will cause others to conclude that 
their own political beliefs are similar to racist individuals who 
use the slur with great frequency and personal enjoyment.

Cindy (noting that Amanda's post somehow managed *not* to use the  
slur in question even once)






From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Jul  1 21:56:29 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 22:56:29 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to current custom
References: <afqi6o+334e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D20D00D.000001.82609@monica>


Briefly addressing the  subject of West Side Story - the edit of the song
strikes me as silly and supremely pointless. If the edit had been done to a
version of the musical re-staged to be set in the modern day then fine but I
think most people are bright enough to understand that a girl in the 1950s
is using the word to mean exactly what it did at that time and isn't trying
to claim she's suddenly changed her sexual orientation. Anyway that wasn't
what I wanted to respond to so we'll skip over that and get straight to
editing movies and tv.

I have no problem with a film or tv show being edited, although I may have a
problem with the way it's been done in certain cases (I'm thinking
particularly of the way Angel was edited by Channel 4 to fit a ridiculously
early slot, the resulting mess causing viewers to turn off in droves).
However, getting back on track (again) a movie is a collaboration to start
with, unlike most books. Most books are pretty much the creation of one
person (the author) whereas a film is the work of at least one script writer
 possible a script editor or two, the actors (how they interpret the script)
 the director and an editor, so there really is no 'original' version to
work with. In fact many director's cuts of movies are worse than the
original and stand as a great example of why editors are employed in the
first place. 

K


-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 01 July 2002 22:39:40
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to current
custom



OK, a very quick aside before I take on some inflammatory issues 
quite directly.

I was thinking more about this view that an author's words shouldn't 
be touched no matter what, that they are owed tremendous deference, 
etc. I was wondering whether the people who feel that way have the 
same view of other forms of art. Two that come to mind for 
discussion are music lyrics and movies.

Lyrics first. My niece came over recently, and she was singing the 
song from _West Side Story,_ "I Feel Pretty." Now, I believe the 
original lyrics contain the phrase, "I feel pretty, and witty and 
gay." But lo and behold, the sheet music had something else 
like "pretty and witty and *bright*," I believe. "Gay" had been 
dropped. I assume this change was made because "gay" now has a very 
different meaning when the lyric was first written. It would strike 
modern audiences as rather off for a young woman in a story in which 
she falls in love with a man to be singing that she is "gay."

So is this change offensive? 

Similarly, there is a state in the South in the U.S. (Virginia?) 
that has a state song that does or did have the word "darkies" in 
the original version. Would it be wrong to change that lyric on the 
ground that it is offensive to some citizens of the state? Or 
should the state retain the racist language on the ground that that 
is what the original lyricist wrote?

Lastly, movies in the U.S. are routinely edited for broadcast 
television in the U.S. to delete offensive language and sexual 
scenes. I have heard this is not done quite so much in Europe, but 
this is required in the U.S. So does this sort of editing rape the 
vision of the director and screenwriter, or is it OK? How is it 
different from deleting the N-word from Kipling? 



From pollux46 at hotmail.com  Mon Jul  1 22:15:31 2002
From: pollux46 at hotmail.com (charisjulia)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 22:15:31 -0000
Subject: The Many Tongues of HP
In-Reply-To: <20020630000121.37177.qmail@web21102.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <afqka3+iivc@eGroups.com>

Amy, on the Maurauders' French nicknames:

>Moony=Lunard (obvious)
>Queudver=Wormtail (queue-de-ver, "worm tail")
>Patmol=Padfoot  (? "Patte" means pad, but according to my 
>dictionary, 
>it's used for a rabbit's pad but not for a cat or dog's.  Still, 
>that 
>must be part of it)
>Prongs=Cornedrue (corne is antler--I don't get the rest of the 
>etymology) 
>
>The verb for "give a nickname" is surnommer, and that's the word 
>Lupin 
>uses when he says that Lunard is what his friends called him.

Ooh, interesting! I would like to read HP in French. I haven't seen 
any French translation in the local bookshops around here 
unfortunately, but they do have them in German and I'm saving up at 
the moment in a vain attempt to persuade myself that, yes, I * can* 
pass my German exam this August. 


But, ah, now you've hit on one of my very pet HP--connected peeves. 


One thing I'd like to know ? and maybe someone here can help me? -- 
is how the various foreign translators coped with things like the 
verses in the books. You know, like the Sorting Hat's songs or the 
one by the Merpeople. `Cos you see, to be absolutely honest, the 
Greek translation does not. Cope. Not much. In fact I'd say it's 
utterly failed. IMHO, that is to say naturally :--). But, well, take 
the riddle of the Sphinx for example. I don't like the translation. 
The rhyming is dubious, the rhythm wobbly and (most importantly) the 
clues non?existent. They were crammed into the two first verses while 
the rest is merely decorative, (very bad) poetry. After reading that 
passage I was left with the impression that Harry must be, not just 
plain bright, but rather a phenomenal * mind?reader* for solving that 
one. And I wouldn't mind half so much if I hadn't come up with a * 
much* better one myself in a matter of five minutes while * brushing 
my teeth* one night. I mean it's pathetic. IMHO. Always IMHO.


To be perfectly fair of course, I must admit I haven't actually 
bothered to actually * read* the whole of the books in Greek. I never 
thought it worth it. I 've leafed through them checking out my 
favourite bits and also had endless conversations with Greek friends 
who'd read the books translated. 


Once I leant my British copy of PS to a friend. The next day she 
called me up. "Hello," she said. "The Quidditch balls in English, 
they're called Qyaffle, Bludger and Snitch, huh?" "Yeah," I 
said. "Why, how are they translated into Greek?"

Pause.

Then "As the the red, the black and the gold balls."

Huh?

And there's a lot more of that. Moaning Myrtle is "Mirtia (a Greek 
girl's name) who cries" (does that even properly qualify as a name?) 
and the Whomping Willow becomes the "Willow that hits". The final 
blow for me came when I discovered the translation for the Marauder's 
Map: The "Magic Map". Similarly, Weasley's Wizard Wheezes becomes 
the "Magic Tricks of the Weasleys". 

The translation as a whole is supposed to be quite good, thought as I 
said, I wouldn't know, I haven't read it. But this sloppy handling of 
names and rhymes really does get to me. After all, these are the hard 
bits. These are the bits where a good translator would show their 
worth.

Charis Julia, who doesn't even want to get * started* on Tom Riddle, 
who's name, yes, Tom Riddle and * not* Anton Hert and tricky passages 
such as the Uranus joke. How did other translator's manage here? 





From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Mon Jul  1 23:10:40 2002
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (alyeskakc)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:10:40 -0000
Subject: Texan! was Problems of translation (was Editing literature to conform to current custom)
In-Reply-To: <00d401c22140$ace97600$087c63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <afqnhg+daac@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> wrote:

> Texan "accents" these days tend to fall more into word usage, not 
>diction. Texans use words like "fixin to," "y'all," the double modal 
>(might should),etc. These usages, I think I read, are on the 
>increase. Tremble.


I always thought Texans had more of a hard drawl than a true Southern 
accent. Especially those from West Texas and the DFW area. I don't 
notice it in folks from the Houston area. 

My dad, who is from Mississippi, says there is no such thing as a 
accent, it's a Southern drawl. Each state is different, some states 
have a hard drawl and other a soft drawl. It can also depend on what 
part of the state you're from as well. 

As for saying "fixin to" and "y'all", Texans aren't the only ones who 
say that. We even say that here in New Mexico.

Kristin





From cherryflip at clara.co.uk  Mon Jul  1 22:44:31 2002
From: cherryflip at clara.co.uk (Jodi Bailey)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 23:44:31 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] More Cover Illustrations Please
References: <afq838+malq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00e701c22150$de797fc0$cf8d7ed4@oemcomputer>


----- Original Message -----
From: "XLargeFry" <FRIED32 at aol.com>


> A friend and I were wondering if
> anyone has the British Childrens
> Edition's cover illustrations
> Scanned? Could we get them posted
> to the files also?
>

I've got scans of the covers up at
http://www.cherryflip.clara.net/hpcovers.htm (anything I try to do with
Yahoo seems to turn out much more complicated than it should, so it was
easier just to put them on my own webspace).

    Jodi





From jfaulkne at sas.upenn.edu  Mon Jul  1 23:30:01 2002
From: jfaulkne at sas.upenn.edu (Jen Faulkner)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 19:30:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to current
 custom
In-Reply-To: <afqi6o+334e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0207011857110.20115-100000@mail2.sas.upenn.edu>

On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, cindysphynx wrote:

> Lyrics first.  My niece came over recently, and she was singing the
> song from _West Side Story,_ "I Feel Pretty."  Now, I believe the
> original lyrics contain the phrase, "I feel pretty, and witty and
> gay."  But lo and behold, the sheet music had something else
> like "pretty and witty and *bright*," I believe.  "Gay" had been
> dropped.  I assume this change was made because "gay" now has a very
> different meaning when the lyric was first written.  It would strike
> modern audiences as rather off for a young woman in a story in which
> she falls in love with a man to be singing that she is "gay."
>
> So is this change offensive?

Actually, no.

As I understand, this change is based not at all on the meaning of the
word "gay," but rather on the placement of the song in the movie vs. the
stage play.

In the original stage production, "I Feel Pretty" opens Act II, after
the rumble has already taken place.  The song's bumped up in the film to
long before the rumble, setting it earlier in the timeline.  The change,
I believe, is then to alter "night" to "day" (by changing the rhyming
"bright" to "gay"), and "bright" is in fact Sondheim's original lyric.
The movie lyric is "I feel pretty and witty and gay / and I pity any
girl who isn't me today,"  while the stage lyric was "I feel pretty and
witty and bright / and I pity any girl who isn't me tonight."

It's the stage lyric, with "bright," that's in the sheet music.

(Now if it had been changed for the reason Cindy posited, that would
indeed offend me, not because Sondheim's lyrics had been changed -- I
certainly believe that dramatic exigencies can overrule the 'sanctity'
of an author's words, since one is then offering an interpretation, and
not a (tran)script -- but that they were changed due to homophobia.
Such a change would be patently offensive.  So I certainly hope my
understanding of why the lyrics were changed, and how, is correct!  And
the word "gay" had already in the 50s -- a similar meaning can be traced
back at least 20 years earlier, making its first appearance (as a
possible ad lib?) in a line by Cary Grant in *Bringing up Baby* (1938),
where, when asked why he's cross-dressing, he says, "Because I just went
gay all of a sudden!" -- acquired its present meaning, as I understand
it, anyway.)

--jen, who's look! look! posting. :)

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

"Clamavit lupus, >>Ergo huffabo, et puffabo, et tuam domum inflabo!<< Et
huffavit, et puffavit, et totam domum inflavit!" -- Tres Porcelli.

jen's fics: http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jfaulkne/fan/ (URL change!)
jen's LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/lysimache/





From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Mon Jul  1 23:59:16 2002
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 18:59:16 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Texan! was Problems of translation (was
 Editing literature to conform to current custom)
References: <afqnhg+daac@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D20ECD4.6030905@kingwoodcable.com>

alyeskakc wrote:
> I always thought Texans had more of a hard drawl than a true Southern 
> accent. Especially those from West Texas and the DFW area. I don't 
> notice it in folks from the Houston area. 
> 
> My dad, who is from Mississippi, says there is no such thing as a 
> accent, it's a Southern drawl. Each state is different, some states 
> have a hard drawl and other a soft drawl. It can also depend on what 
> part of the state you're from as well. 
> 
> As for saying "fixin to" and "y'all", Texans aren't the only ones who 
> say that. We even say that here in New Mexico.
> 
> Kristin

They also say "fixin to" and "might could" in the deep south. My husband's 
family is from Alabama, and they use it all the time. Now - as for those being 
used in NM. I don't remember this growing up in ABQ - I didn't use them, but 
that doesn't mean they didn't exist. Heck - mom would say ya'll and warsh - I 
guess that what one gets when growing up in the south and the north?

Now I'm in Houston, and I've added "reckon" and "ya'll" to my vocabulary, but I 
still have yet to add the double modal. I'm not sure I'll ever pick up on the 
Texan accent. I've been here 6 years and I still don't have it down.

Katze





From skelkins at attbi.com  Tue Jul  2 00:57:17 2002
From: skelkins at attbi.com (ssk7882)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 00:57:17 -0000
Subject: Editing literature to conform to current custom
In-Reply-To: <004301c220a8$d06575e0$097c63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <afqtpd+ogdh@eGroups.com>

Amanda wrote:

> So revisionism is okay for children's books. Just children's books?

Revisionism is okay for any books, as far as I'm concerned, so long
as the nature of the revision is duly marked.  Translation is, after
all, a form of revisionism.  So is the deletion of obscenities from
films which are to be aired on Network television.  I just don't have 
a problem with that.  

When people are interested enough to seek out the original source 
material, then they do so, whether this source material is 
unranslated Chaucer, Hans Christian Andersen's "The Little Mermaid," 
or the N-17 rated "Director's Cut" of a film that was released to the 
theaters only in a toned-down R-rated version.  Or, for that matter, 
the British editions of the Harry Potter books.

I do agree with you that when revisions are not marked as such, then 
that is problematic.  That, to my mind, really does constitute a 
violation of the author, as it sets forth others' words as his own.  
I expect for abridgements, translations and revisions to be clearly 
marked as such; when they are not, I too find it troubling.

As for Kipling, today at work (I work in a bookshop) I hunted down
a few copies of _Just So Stories,_ curious to see how this revision
had been handled in the editions that we have in stock.  I did indeed
find a 1996 edition of the book published by HarperCollins (under
their "Books of Wonder" imprint) that had revised the offending
sentence to read: "Plain black's good enough for me."  There was
no footnote, nor could I find anywhere any mention that this was
a revised edition.

I agree with Amanda that this is unacceptable.  Revised editions
really ought, IMO, to be marked as such.

All of the other editions that we had in stock had retained Kipling's 
original text.  One of them, a Weathervane edition from 1978, had a 
publisher's note at the beginning, acknowledging that some of 
Kipling's vocabulary was offensive by contemporary standards: "The 
language and references are those of Kipling; though they are no 
longer in vogue, they are of historical interest and literary note."  
None of these editions, however, was as obviously marketed to 
children as the HarperCollins edition was.


> Ban things if you must, but ban the true words the author wrote; 
> leave them their integrity. Kipling's name is on words he did not 
> write. 

So is Dostoevsky's.  

As you may know from the main list, I am not ordinarily a big fan of 
authorial intent <g>.  Nonetheless, I do generally assume that most 
authors want their works to be *read.*  By as many people as possible,
in as many languages as possible, for as many years as possible.  
Most of them, I dare say, would like to believe that people will 
still be reading their words long after they themselves have passed 
on.

Kipling had no way of knowing what effects his use of the word 
"nigger" would have on contemporary audiences.  Had he known, he 
likely would have chosen his vocabulary somewhat differently.  The 
fact of the matter is that that word is *extremely* hurtful and 
upsetting to many people.  Its use alone can cause a reader to throw 
a book aside in disgust or outrage.  Its use alone can cause parents 
to reject a book as unsuitable reading material for their children.  

So I just can't feel that in this case, the bowdlerization is horribly
unfair to the author, or that it is such a terrible assault on 
Kipling's integrity.  If I were Kipling, I think that I would far 
prefer for my works to continue to be read by their intended audience 
than to be cast aside due to a change in linguistic connotation that 
I had somehow failed to predict when I sat down to write sometime 
around the turn of the last century. 

Imagine, for example, that the word in question was "cunt," and that 
it was being used as a relatively value-neutral term for "woman."  
"Oh, black's good enough for a cunt."  Would you want your children 
reading this text?

Well, maybe you would, and maybe you wouldn't.  But many parents 
wouldn't. In fact, I dare say that a book using that particular word 
would be most unlikely to find itself on the shelves of the 
children's section of many public libraries, or in the reading rooms 
of many primary schools.  The book would not find its way into the 
hands of many children at all, regardless of its literary merits, 
because it would contain vocabulary that we as a society have deemed 
highly offensive and therefore unsuitable for children.


> It just seems to me that once you start changing the past to fit 
> the present, you have begun the long slow slide to the Ministry of 
> Truth (or whichever it was, it's been a long time since I waded 
> through 1984).

But we engage in this particular form of censorship all the time, do 
we not?  We rate movies based on vocabulary: films containing "bad 
language" are given a rating to indicate that they may be 
inappropriate for children.  Theaters will simply not allow children 
in to *see* films which carry "adult" enough ratings.  There are 
words that you will never hear in the US on network television.  
There are other words that you may hear, but only after "Prime Time," 
when it is assumed that younger viewers will be safely asleep.  There 
are web sites that endeavor to restrict access to younger people due 
to the feeling that their content might be inappropriate for 
children.  Libraries make decisions on which books to keep in 
the "children's section" and which in the "adult's section" based on 
a number of factors, one of which is the specific vocabulary used in 
the text.  Publishers decide how to market books based on the same 
criteria.  You will not have much success in getting a children's 
book published if it is riddled with the word "fuck."  

There are books that are "retold" for children, and there are films 
that sanitize stories for children, and there are alternate versions 
of films that have been edited to make them more suitable for 
children so that they can achieve a wider audience, or (in the US) so 
that they may be shown on network television. 

Does all this sort of thing really strike you as a step down the 
slippery slope to the totalitarian nightmare state?  I'm pretty 
nervous about civil liberties myself, you know, but frankly there are 
things far higher up on my list of "Things To Lie Awake Nights 
Worrying About" than the efforts to keep "bad language" from reaching 
the ears of young children.


> I stood back and let my children risk falling, when the danger was 
> not tremendous, so that they could learn to balance. I stand and 
> watch them ride bikes and know they could take a tumble. I let them 
> climb trees and know they could fall. I will let them read books, 
> unedited, and know they can draw their own conclusions. 

Do you let them see movies that have been rated "R" for language?  Or 
to look at pornographic magazines?

People vary a good deal when it comes to what they want their 
children to be exposed to, and at what age.  As a society, the only
fair way to deal with this fact is to try to achieve some sort of 
consensus regarding what language and concepts we consider 
"appropriate" for certain age levels.  When works of media cross
the lines that we have drawn, then we apply ratings, or we try to 
restrict children's access to the material, or we try to sanitize the 
material to make it better match our conceptions of what is fit for 
youthful consumption.

So I suppose that I'm just wondering now: do *all* of these measures 
bother you?  Or is it only the editing of text that gets your goat?


> What if, 100 years from now, the term "wizard" took on negative 
> connotations and some publisher decided that children would be 
> traumatized by having to read it and possibly add it to their 
> vocabulary, and revisited the Harry Potter books? It is a similar 
> scenario.

It is.

If the connotative meaning of the word "wizard" had changed in the 
same way that the connotative meaning of the word "nigger" has, then 
I would *certainly* not be bothered by the decision to revise the 
books.  I would applaud it.  Such revisions would keep the books in 
general circulation and prevent them from being relegated to the dust 
bins of "historical interest."  They would both preserve their status 
as living children's literature and maintain their accessability to a 
twenty-second century audience.  To my mind, these are all Good 
Things.

As with Kipling, I would certainly expect for there to be some note 
acknowledging that the changes had been made, and I would be irked if 
this were omitted.  I would also certainly hope that the original 
text would still be available to those who wished to read the 
books in their original form.  But would I object to the publication 
of a revised edition?  Heck, no!  I'd be all for it.



-- Elkins




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Tue Jul  2 01:06:16 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 11:06:16 +1000
Subject: About time - legalising witchcraft in Victoria, Australia
In-Reply-To: <F152NHlwywSfcq2toHi00002c92@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <3D218928.28118.419DCC@localhost>

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,4617836%255E286
2,00.html

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From pbnesbit at msn.com  Tue Jul  2 01:44:42 2002
From: pbnesbit at msn.com (harpdreamer)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 01:44:42 -0000
Subject: Editing Lyrics (Was: Re: Editing literature to conform to current custom)
In-Reply-To: <afqi6o+334e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afr0ia+lkka@eGroups.com>

 --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at c...> wrote:
> 
(Snip)
 
> OK, a very quick aside before I take on some inflammatory issues 
> quite directly.
> 
> I was thinking more about this view that an author's words 
shouldn't 
> be touched no matter what, that they are owed tremendous deference, 
> etc.  I was wondering whether the people who feel that way have the 
> same view of other forms of art.  Two that come to mind for 
> discussion are music lyrics and movies.
> 
> (Snip) 
 
> Similarly, there is a state in the South in the U.S. (Virginia?) 
> that has a state song that does or did have the word "darkies" in 
> the original version.  Would it be wrong to change that lyric on 
the 
> ground that it is offensive to some citizens of the state?  Or 
> should the state retain the racist language on the ground that that 
> is what the original lyricist wrote?

The state is Kentucky (my home state), and the song is "My Old 
Kentucky Home", written by Stephen Foster.  The lyrics *were* changed 
(I'm not sure of the year) to "the young folks". Many people who sing 
the song (usually at UK football games and The Kentucky Derby) 
probably aren't aware of the original words--they don't appear in any 
modern songbooks.  Strangely enough, the enslaved African-Americans 
took the song for their own--it was one of the favourites on 
plantations in Kentucky (we're talking about Central Kentucky--around 
Lexington), as well as in other places.  

Virginia *dropped* their state song ("Carry Me Back to Old Virginny") 
on the grounds that it was too racist.  They *still* have no state 
song to replace it.    
> 
> Lastly, movies in the U.S. are routinely edited for broadcast 
> television in the U.S. to delete offensive language and sexual 
> scenes.  I have heard this is not done quite so much in Europe, but 
> this is required in the U.S.  So does this sort of editing rape the 
> vision of the director and screenwriter, or is it OK?  How is it 
> different from deleting the N-word from Kipling?  

I see red when an "offensive" word is bleeped out of movies.  Sadly, 
even PBS has begun doing this.  I think the difference could be that 
racial slurs are not acceptable any more (unless you live in South 
Carolina...) by the population at large, whereas offensive language 
and sex scenes are acceptable to at least some of the population.  
Don't really know, it's just a guess.

(Snip discussion of the N-word)


>Peace & Plenty, 

Parker  

> Cindy 





From fluxed at earthlink.net  Tue Jul  2 02:48:31 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (A. Vulgarweed)
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 21:48:31 -0500
Subject: Editing literature, the power of words
In-Reply-To: <1025565044.1617.73568.m14@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <l03130300b946b3586b78@[67.28.34.57]>

responding to several things...hope that's OK

>At 3:20 AM +0000 7/1/02, catlady_de_los_angeles wrote:
>>
>>I wish JKR had decided, even under a publisher's nagging, to call
>>female mages wizardesses instead of witches. That small change would
>>have saved so much conflict with confused Fundamentalists and so much
>>confusion with Wicca.
>
and Jennifer wrote:
>I agree that it would have spared a few people a certain amount of
>confusion, but I think most people can tell the difference between,
>say, the Good Witch of the North in the Wizard of Oz and the average
>Wiccan.  Rowling is drawing on that same cultural meme-pool.  I can't
>think of any precedent for the term "wizardess;" it would have to be
>"sorcerer" and "sorceress," and that would change the flavor quite a
>bit.  The nice young lady with the wand and the cauldron and the
>pointy hat is, in common culture, a witch, and personally, I am
>rather fond of people getting over the "all witches are EEEEEVILLLL"
>meme, whether the witches in question are fictional or not.

The scary old lady with all the acoutrements is a witch also, culturally.
Oh, booga booga! But even in the Wiccan community itself there has been
controversy over whether to use the word "witch" or not, and some Wiccans
still refuse to do so. Among those Wiccans who DO use it, however, it is a
gender-neutral term; male witches are witches just as much as female ones.
(Which I like, because it undercuts a lot of the aspect of sexism that
holds that any man who takes on a traditionally female name or role is
somehow degrading himself; nope, none of the male witches I know think it's
an insult at all). JKR clearly does not use it that way. I also like that
because even in the history of magic in this world, in Western culture,
there's been a schism between "high magic," which is very spiritual and
noble and pure and abstract and usually practiced by men, and "low magic"
which is scary and evil and dirty and has a lot of sex and body fluids and
is just about base animal nature stuff, and is usually practiced by women.
JKR rolls right over that dichotomy pretty neatly too. Nope, males are
wizards and females are witches, end of story. Same kind of magic, no
stigma on one that the other doesn't have.

And yes, exactly, most people who pause to think about it for a minute or
two can easily tell the difference between the kind of witch Hermione
Granger is, the kind of witch Samantha on _Bewitched_ is, the kind of
witches who go to that scary dance school in _Suspiria_ are, and the kind
of witch I am. I would hope, anyway.

I mean, Snoopy isn't really all that much like actual real-world dogs, is
he? Maybe about as much as Buck Rogers is like actual astronauts.


>Besides, the Fundamentalists in question would have gotten upset over
>anything that portrayed people who use magic, cauldrons, broomsicks,
>etc. in a positive light, even if JKR had called them Pfurgleblatzes.

It's what they like to do, get upset. If pop culture ceased to provide them
with things to get upset about, they'd be very bored and sad.


And Rachel writes:
>
>By the way....congrats, Brazil!  That was quite a game!

Obrigata! Si, penta!.

Well worth shooting my sleep pattern all to hell for (coverage started at
5:30 in my time zone, and on a weekend night I find that *far* easier to
stay up for than to get up for).

and Cindy:
>
>Similarly, there is a state in the South in the U.S. (Virginia?)
>that has a state song that does or did have the word "darkies" in
>the original version.  Would it be wrong to change that lyric on the
>ground that it is offensive to some citizens of the state?  Or
>should the state retain the racist language on the ground that that
>is what the original lyricist wrote?

An original line in "My Old Kentucky Home" goes: "'Tis summer, and the
darkies are gay." I believe that in Kentucky, they no longer use that
line--either omitting that verse entirely or changing that line to
something else, for obvious reasons.

I'm generally opposed to bowdlerization to protect delicate sensibilities,
but in that case, no, I think you *have* to. If you have a line that
offends large numbers of people and that schoolchildren absolutely cannot
sing without giggling in your _state song_, it's gotta go. Now, most people
know what Stephen Foster originally wrote, and why it's not appropriate
today. To a certain degree (if I can do this without invoking Godwin's
Law), you might compare it to Germany purging the "Deutschland uber alles"
verse from "Das Lied der Deutschen." I don't know the words of that, but I
believe it was removed as much for its very bad associations as for its
content. I don't blame them.

on the N-Word:

And in editions of the Kipling book aimed at children in particular, it
doesn't bother me if the N-word is changed to something else. No, I don't
take refusing to say "the N-word" as a sign of weakness or fear. On what
basis would I be "afraid" of it; I'm not black. But I do know that black
people are hurt and angered by that word, with good reason--because it's a
*nasty hateful word.* And yes, I am also aware that many young black people
use it freely among themselves, as a sort of reclaiming, much as gays and
lesbians have done with words that are slurs against them and as feminists
have done with words like "slut" and "bitch." All well and good. I'm not
black, though, so I can't do it. Just can't. When I talk with friends IRL,
I swear like a sailor as a normal matter of habit and so do most people I
know...but there are indeed some words that one just doesn't say, and
racial slurs are those words. No good ever comes of them. Coming out of the
mouth of someone who isn't part of that group, they can't express anything
positive. Some "free-speech" types get all up in arms about this...I don't
see the big problem. I'm *fine* with that. There's LOTS of strong
historical reasons why that word just doesn't sound good coming out of my
pale mouth, no matter how "brave" or pomo or "honest" my intentions.

I _will_ point out that there *are* a few white people left, particularly
some less-educated and elderly ones, who _do_ use the word in what THEY
THINK is a neutral manner....as sort of synonymous with "Negro," which was
a fairly neutral word 50 years ago. They -really do not- *mean* any active
malice behind it. There is, however, no evidence that actual black people
have ever taken it that way or ever will, which shouldn't be surprising,
should it?.

There's a famous short poem by Countee Cullen that sums up the impact of
that word on a child horrifically and beautifully; cannot recall the title
of it, but it's in a lot of poetry collections. After reading that, I find
"N-word" should be good enough for anybody.

JKR's use of the dread of saying a word WRT Voldemort is very different,
because "Voldemort" is a NAME, and the tradition of names having power is
fundamental in tons of magical literature and folklore. Even now there are
all sorts of folk beliefs and religious tenets about speaking the names of
the dead, the enemy, of evil spirits, of God, etc. Our expression "Speak of
the devil," usually said when someone you were just gossiping about walks
into the room, started out as half of "Speak of the devil, and look, he
appears!" Dumbledore's probably right about fear to speak his name giving
him more power....but you *wonder* a little bit, don't you? Get a little
chill? It's a totally different usage, I think. Besides, if the whole
wizard community chanted "Voldemort" for days on end, it's not like his
power would *vanish*, would it?

AV





From skelkins at attbi.com  Tue Jul  2 03:58:31 2002
From: skelkins at attbi.com (ssk7882)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 03:58:31 -0000
Subject: Self-censorship and the power of the word
In-Reply-To: <00b501c2213d$6d981400$087c63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <afr8d7+9s08@eGroups.com>

Amanda wrote:

> "Here I must say that I categorically don't use that euphemism. "N-
> word." How have you let a set of sounds have such power over you, 
> that you won't even type it out? To quote Dumbledore, "Always use 
> the proper name for things. Fear of a name increases fear of the 
> thing itself." 

Well, I do generally *try* to use the proper names for things.  In my 
particular cultural and historical context, though, you know, the 
proper name for a person of color is "a person of color."

It is true that I do not like typing out the Word Which Must Not Be 
Named.  I'll do it, but I admit to a pause and a wince when I type 
those letters, and I will also try to rearrange my phrasing to avoid 
doing so.  This is because I recognize that it is a word that has 
tremendous power to wound those who read it.  Even when it is being 
used in a relatively benign context, the word *does* have the power 
to hurt.  It has the power to intimidate, and it has the power to 
cow.  I therefore tend to view its use as inherently aggressive.  It 
is an affront to the psyche, and so I try to avoid it whenever I can.

On these lists, for that matter, I also try to avoid using many words 
which, unlike the Dread N Word, I *do* use in real life.  I try not 
to swear, for example, even though in RL, I swear like a sailor.  In 
my social circle, the F Word does tend to get used as an all-purpose 
gerund.  But I realize that many people consider that sort of 
language an affont to their sensibilities, so I go out of my way not 
to use it here.  This is just courtesy, is it not?


> "It is not a pleasant word, it is offensive, it represents 
> reprehensible things--but for that very reason I will *not* give it 
> such power as to fear to say or type it."

I don't think that people try to avoid use of the "N Word" because 
they are afraid of it per se.  They try to avoid using it in order to 
show consideration to people for whom the word is an assault and an 
offense.  

It is not reluctance to use the word that has made it an assault and 
an offense. It is the accrual of meaning that the word carries along 
with it.  It is the fact that the word connotes far more than 
simply "a black person."  It means lynchings.  It means enslavement.  
It means Jim Crow and cross burnings and church bombings.  It means 
some customers being trailed by security in retail stores while other 
customers are left in peace; it means someone standing out on a 
street corner getting drenched in a New York downpour while yellow 
cab after yellow cab drives by, AVAILABLE signs clearly visible 
right above their windshields.  It means some people having to work 
twice as hard and twice as well just to get what other people are 
handed for free -- and then being told that their achievements can be 
chalked down to "tokenism."  It means police brutality.  It means a 
disproportionate number of the young men a certain segment of the 
population imprisoned or dead by violence before they reach the age 
of thirty.

That, at any rate, is what the word means to *me.*  And that accrual 
of meaning cannot be negated simply by refusing to recognize that it 
exists.  That accrual of meaning will only be negated when the social 
conditions which have led to it have been abolished, a goal which 
using the word does absolutely nothing to accomplish.  Until it *has* 
been accomplished, use of the word will continue to have the power to 
injure, and to anger, and to threaten, and to intimidate.

As I don't really want to do *any* of those things to the people 
reading my words, I try to avoid using vocabulary which might have 
that effect.


> Even if you are avoiding the usage in order to avoid giving 
> offense, "N-word" gives so much power and strength to a set of 
> sounds! I can't think of another single word that is treated with 
> such deference. 

The "C Word."  That one gets treated with tremendous deference as 
well.  At least where I live it does.


> We sound like the frightened students of Hogwarts, discussing You-
> Know-Who.

Do you think so?

I think that we sound rather more like Ron in _CoS,_ when he really 
has to struggle to bring himself to be able to repeat to Hagrid the 
loathsome epithet that Draco Malfoy has just flung at Hermione.  He 
can speak it, but it takes him a moment to bring himself to do so 
because the word's meaning is just so vile.

I can't say that when I read that scene my first thought was: "Oh, 
that Ron!  There he goes, being afraid of words again."  My reaction 
to the scene was just to think that Ron's parents had raised him 
right.

"Voldemort" isn't the Potterverse equivalent to "nigger."  "Mudblood" 
is.  If there is an equivalent to "Voldemort," then I'd say that on 
this list, at any rate, it is "Holocaust."  

Or perhaps, going by the "speak of the Devil, and he will appear" 
logic, it might be "Richard Abanes."

<glances quickly right and left>

But soft.  Keep your voice down.  Because you *know* that We Do Not 
Speak Of Such Things here. 



-- Elkins




From macloudt at hotmail.com  Tue Jul  2 08:48:21 2002
From: macloudt at hotmail.com (Mary Jennings)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 08:48:21 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] dialects and accents (was: Texan!) 
Message-ID: <F184H1ESCs0X1mtLVqB00003f99@hotmail.com>

Katze said:

>Now I'm in Houston, and I've added "reckon" and "ya'll" to my vocabulary, 
>but I
>still have yet to add the double modal. I'm not sure I'll ever pick up on 
>the
>Texan accent. I've been here 6 years and I still don't have it down.

Chances are you'll never speak like a true Houstonian (Houstonite?) as 
you're presumably over the age of 11 :)  While kids soak up languages and 
dialects like sponges it's rarer for adults to do so.  My parents are from 
the Netherlands, and while my mom's English grammer and vocabulary were 
outstanding (she moved to Canada when she was 37) she always kept her 
accent.  My dad's accent is even more pronounced.  I grew up in Canada, but 
have lived in a mid-sized town southwest England for 7 years.  According to 
the locals, I have a "darling" accent (cue retching noises).  I never have 
to give my name or address to the pizza delivery place as they know my 
accent, and I get called an American more times than I care to remember ;)  
Though I've picked up a lot of local intonations and vocab, and can sing a 
mean version of "I've Got a Combine Harvester", I still have, and always 
will have, an underlying Torontonian accent.

Not that I haven't picked up some West Country drawl, mind.  Whenever I have 
a chance to speak to my youngest brother on the phone, which is once every 
few months, he spends the entire time correcting my pronounciation of my 
vowels.  He's only teasing, of course, but only then do I realise that I 
have indeed gained some of the local drawl.

As an aside, a few years back West Country was voted by Brits as the second 
worst accent in the land, better only than London Cockney, which is what is 
spoken on "Eastenders".  The local drawl isn't that bad, really.  It's far 
more country bumkin than posh, and there's a habit of inserting "r"s 
wherever they like in any word.  Not quite Hagrid-ish, but close.

By the way, does anyone have any sunshine and heat they want to trade for 
torrential rain and cold?  I don't care what the calendar says...IT'S NOT 
JULY HERE!!

Mary Ann
(who's come to the conclusion that summer's not coming this year)

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com




From boggles at earthlink.net  Tue Jul  2 10:35:52 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 05:35:52 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Editing literature to conform to
 current  custom
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0207011857110.20115-100000@mail2.sas.upenn.edu>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0207011857110.20115-100000@mail2.sas.upenn.edu>
Message-ID: <p05010400b94728f0d0fb@[199.174.5.135]>

At 7:30 PM -0400 7/1/02, Jen Faulkner wrote:
>
>As I understand, this change is based not at all on the meaning of the
>word "gay," but rather on the placement of the song in the movie vs. the
>stage play.

You beat me to this, but you're absolutely correct.  I noticed this 
when the kids at the school I teach at performed the musical this 
past fall, and then I purchased the DVD to show my Spouse (who had 
never seen either) the differences.

>  -- a similar meaning can be traced
>back at least 20 years earlier, making its first appearance (as a
>possible ad lib?) in a line by Cary Grant in *Bringing up Baby* (1938),

The word "gay" has been used in print to mean "homosexual" since 
1935, and a "sexual undesirable" since the mid-1800s (for a while, it 
meant a prostitute).  I am always amused at homophobes claiming that 
the word has been "corrupted" who are clearly Baby Boomers, as the 
usage is demonstrably older than they are.


At 9:39 PM +0000 7/1/02, cindysphynx wrote:
>I really don't think the issue is whether you are allowing the N-
>word to acquire some power it doesn't otherwise have by using it.  I
>would suggest that the oppression of people with dark skin and the
>ugly usage of this word to facilitate that oppression is what causes
>the word to be terribly offensive and creates its power.  Believe
>me, whether you say it or type it is *not* the source of its power,
>and your usage of it will in no way divest it of its considerable
>power to wound.  I wish it were that easy.

I think my African-American students would disagree with you, at least in part.

I was _absolutely_ _shocked_ when I heard them tossing the noun in 
questions at each other - over and over, in all sorts of contexts.  I 
finally had to stop class one day and politely request that they not 
use it in my classroom - because I was born and raised in 
Mississippi, and there were too many people there who used it in its 
old sense.  The upshot of the discussion was that they felt that 
using it among each other really did rob the word of its power to 
hurt, for them; when it was decontextualized (not that they'd ever 
use those sorts of postmodern terms)  like that, it became just 
another word that claimed their identity as people of color.

Now, *I* can't use it like that, obviously.  Again translating from 
their terms into pomospeak, my skin color makes my speech the 
oppressor's language when directed at them; the term is not so 
decontextualized for them that my (or any other white person) 
speaking it wouldn't recontextualize it.  In fact, there was some 
discussion as to whether Hispanics and Asians have the "right" to the 
term or not; the majority opinion was that they had the right to use 
the term with each other, but not with African-Americans, at least 
not yet, but that it was less offensive for a Hispanic to use it than 
an Asian.  There was also some question about whether it was okay for 
an African-American student who was a first-generation immigrant from 
Africa to use it, or whether it didn't belong to them yet.  I was 
amazed at how much thought the kids put into this when I asked them 
about it; on the other hand, they might have been willing to think 
about anything other than similar triangles at the moment.

At any rate, to sum up, at least some people of color do use it 
precisely to rob it of its power to hurt, and they think it works. 
I'm not going to tell them not to use it that way, as that would be 
me being the oppressor again, just like I'm not going to let men 
dictate to me what "bitch" and "slut" mean when I apply them to 
myself or my coven-sisters in neutral or positive contexts.


At 12:57 AM +0000 7/2/02, ssk7882 wrote:
>If the connotative meaning of the word "wizard" had changed in the
>same way that the connotative meaning of the word "nigger" has, then
>I would *certainly* not be bothered by the decision to revise the
>books.

I find this confusing.  The meanings of the latter term didn't change 
at all; it has always meant meant pretty much exactly what it means 
now.  The society that uses the language changed; it changed such 
that that meaning that became unacceptable.

I find it unlikely that a society that, from ours, changed in such a 
way that the current meaning of "wizard" became similarly 
unacceptable would have failed to burn the Harry Potter books, so the 
question of whether they could be "translated" to not offend such a 
society is pretty much moot, IMHO.

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Tue Jul  2 12:18:09 2002
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (grey_wolf_c)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 12:18:09 -0000
Subject: The Many Tongues of HP
In-Reply-To: <afqka3+iivc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afs5m3+db5b@eGroups.com>

Charis Julia wrote:
> One thing I'd like to know ? and maybe someone here can help me? -- 
> is how the various foreign translators coped with things like the 
> verses in the books. You know, like the Sorting Hat's songs or the 
> one by the Merpeople. `Cos you see, to be absolutely honest, the 
> Greek translation does not. Cope. Not much. In fact I'd say it's 
> utterly failed. IMHO, that is to say naturally :--). But, well, take 
> the riddle of the Sphinx for example. I don't like the translation. 
> The rhyming is dubious, the rhythm wobbly and (most importantly) the 
> clues non?existent. They were crammed into the two first verses while 
> the rest is merely decorative, (very bad) poetry. After reading that 
> passage I was left with the impression that Harry must be, not just 
> plain bright, but rather a phenomenal * mind?reader* for solving that 
> one. And I wouldn't mind half so much if I hadn't come up with a * 
> much* better one myself in a matter of five minutes while * brushing 
> my teeth* one night. I mean it's pathetic. IMHO. Always IMHO.

I can help you... although only on the Spanish Editions, which I have 
read. IMO, the rhymes and songs have been weell translated. Better, in 
fact, than what I've comed to expect of fantasy books. There are two 
ways to translate a poem: keep the info, and forfait the rhymes, or 
keep the rhymes and forfeit the info. It is almost impossible (although 
depends heavily on the words used) to keep both the info and the 
rhymes/tempo/rythem of a poetry when translating. And a good translator 
doesn't even try: in a pick, we are told (yes, I've been a translator 
myself) to skip the rhymes and keep the information.

The Spanish editions, however, manage at times to keep both. They kept 
the rhymes, for example, in the Sphynx's riddle (I assume they just 
looked up a real, Spanish riddle with the same answer, although I don't 
know for sure, since I don't know the *English* original riddle). I 
used to do the same: in fact, I've got a library full of books with 
riddles, jokes and such for occasions where I need them. The important 
thing is that it does *not* look out of place, which means that the 
tranlator did a good job.

> Once I leant my British copy of PS to a friend. The next day she 
> called me up. "Hello," she said. "The Quidditch balls in English, 
> they're called Qyaffle, Bludger and Snitch, huh?" "Yeah," I 
> said. "Why, how are they translated into Greek?"
> 
> Pause.
> 
> Then "As the the red, the black and the gold balls."
> 
> Huh?

Just for the record, the Spanish editions keeps the original names for 
the balls. In fact, it keeps the original names for all the things 
except those who's name is a verb which describes it's function, in 
which case it has been tranlated (put-outer -> "apagador"; howler -> 
"aullador"; remember-all -> "recordadora"), which I approve of (as a 
side note, some of those objects changed back to their english names in 
later books, and they're responsible of the only translations errors of 
the books. Pretty minor issues, really).

However, there is one thing that you have to keep in mind. It is easy 
to keep those names when tranlating into another language that uses the 
latin alphabet. All you get is boys twisting their mouths around 
letters that make sense in their language, arranged strangely. They may 
say them differently, but they can still read them. This is nowhere as 
easy when translating into a language (like Greek) that uses another 
alphabet. 

To translate those names you'd have to go for a phonetic tranlation, 
which can be very difficult with words that you're not sure you can 
pronounce with sounds of your own langauge. Give a try, for example, at 
phonetically transcribing this Spanish old-timer: "El perro de San 
Roque no tiene rabo porque Ram?n Rodriguez se lo ha robado". If you're 
English speaking, you cannot phonetically translate it, since you 
simply haven't a "rr" sound, nor even an aproximate (and you've got 6 
in the phrase). Even simpler: try phonetically transcribing "Espa?a" or 
even "Jarama". The sounds "?" and "j" are not in English language. If 
the books had been in Spanish, and one of the balls had been named 
"jara?a" I don't know what I would have done to tranlate it into 
English. I don't know Greek, but I can imagine that faced with the 
task, I would have also eliminated the names (although I would have 
gone for something more imaginative, I admit).

> And there's a lot more of that. Moaning Myrtle is "Mirtia (a Greek 
> girl's name) who cries" (does that even properly qualify as a name?) 
> and the Whomping Willow becomes the "Willow that hits". The final 
> blow for me came when I discovered the translation for the Marauder's 
> Map: The "Magic Map". Similarly, Weasley's Wizard Wheezes becomes 
> the "Magic Tricks of the Weasleys". 

I have to point out that "Moaning" means "who moans" (i.e. cries) and 
"Whomping" means "who womps" (i.e. hits). They're descritptive, and 
must be translated. If you keep "Moaning Myrtle" in other langauages, 
the entire meaning is lost, and that must never happen. In Spanish, 
it's "Myrtle la Llorona", already hard to pronounce. Since Greek 
requires changing the letters, I aplaud that they change the name to 
something similar but pronouncable by Greek children.

I agree that the Maurader's map should have included a mention to 
marauders, but "Magic Tricks of the Weasleys" looks quite all right, 
form a translation point of view.
 
> The translation as a whole is supposed to be quite good, thought as I 
> said, I wouldn't know, I haven't read it. But this sloppy handling of 
> names and rhymes really does get to me. After all, these are the hard 
> bits. These are the bits where a good translator would show their 
> worth.

You're being excessively critical, and I guess you haven't had a real 
try at translating a book. Rhymes are specially difficult, since 
normally they have no soultion: as I've said, you cannot hope to 
translate both the information and the rhymes at the same time. The 
examples of the names you have given are correct, unimaginative maybe, 
but correct. The only two weak spots are the map's name and the riddle, 
which could have been handled better. That alone doesn't make a 
translation horrible. Not increadibly good, but far from bad.
 
> Charis Julia, who doesn't even want to get * started* on Tom Riddle, 
> who's name, yes, Tom Riddle and * not* Anton Hert and tricky passages 
> such as the Uranus joke. How did other translator's manage here?

Tom Ryddle (yes, the "y" is intentional) needs to have his name 
changed, or else the final showdown in the CoS makes no sense. Remember 
that "I am Lord Voldemort" in *every* language must be a play on words 
of Tom Marvolo Riddle. In Spanish: "Yo soy Lord Voldmort" goes to "Tom 
Sorvolo Ryddle". Not a big change, and the only thing is that you don't 
have the foreshadowing of having his surname mean riddle. But since we 
don't get to know his middle name until the end, I guess it's something 
we couldn't have guessed anyway. The Uranus joke is not that funny in 
the original anyway, and so, when translated into other languages still 
makes little sense why Ron would say it. It's been discussed before, 
though, so check the archives. As far as I can see, the translators 
have done a good job. I don't think I would have done a better one. in 
fact, in the case of Tom Riddle, I would've gone for the admission of 
defeat: putting an end-of-page note explaining why I couldn't make it 
fit. I applaud the Spanish translator that managed it.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  2 13:19:40 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 13:19:40 -0000
Subject: "common," not "inoffensive" (was Editing literature)
In-Reply-To: <3D20667F.000003.23741@monica>
Message-ID: <afs99c+7mlf@eGroups.com>

Kathryn wrote:

For example I have a large collection of books by
> W E Johns and even the most recent reprints have kept his original 
langauge,
> which throughout the different series' could probably offend every 
race and
> nationality on earth, with the exception of the noble Englishmen of 
course.
> Most reprints use the solution of footnotes explaining that the 
words used,
> and the attitudes shown, were common at the time but are deeply 
offensive to
> many people now. 

One quick note, though:  I'd like to reiterate Cindy's point:  most 
of them were offensive at the time too.  Common, yes, but only among 
the noble Englishmen, not among the people to whom they referred, who 
knew perfectly well that they were being insulted in the worst way.

Amy
pretty sure she'd have been as offended to be called a kike 100 years 
ago as today




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  2 13:32:07 2002
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (S_Ings)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 13:32:07 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Amanda!
Message-ID: <afsa0n+mr8u@eGroups.com>

*drags very large cake into middle of room - well away from the 
drapes - and proceeds to top it with many, many candles. Lights 
candles and stands back from the heat, glancing in concern at nearby 
paper streamers*

Yes, our very own Amandageist is having a birthday. Someone drag her 
in here quickly, before all those candles burn the room down. :-D

Birthday wishes can be sent to this list or directly to Amanda at: 
editor at texas.net

I hope the day is magical, filled with wonder and that someone takes 
the kids off your hands long enough for you to celebrate!

Happy Birthday, Amanda!

Sheryll

P.S. In case anyone wonders, Amanda did dare me to set the room on 
fire with too many candles. Anyone have a water balloon? A fire 
extinguisher? :)




From FRIED32 at aol.com  Tue Jul  2 12:18:02 2002
From: FRIED32 at aol.com (XLargeFry)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 12:18:02 -0000
Subject: More Cover Illustrations Please
In-Reply-To: <00e701c22150$de797fc0$cf8d7ed4@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <afs5lq+8t2s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Jodi Bailey" <cherryflip at c...> wrote:
 

> I've got scans of the covers up at
> http://www.cherryflip.clara.net/hpcovers.htm 
> (anything I try to do wit Yahoo seems to 
> turn out much more complicated than it 
> should, so it was easier just to put them
> on my own webspace).
> 
>  Jodi


Thank you so much! Those are Awesome.

XLargeFry





From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Tue Jul  2 14:41:29 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 14:41:29 -0000
Subject: Usage Of Racial Slurs (WAS Editing literature to conform to current  custom)
In-Reply-To: <p05010400b94728f0d0fb@[199.174.5.135]>
Message-ID: <afse2p+hl0e@eGroups.com>

Parker wrote (regarding the N-word):

>I think the difference could be that 
> racial slurs are not acceptable any more (unless you live in South 
> Carolina...) 

Just to be crystal clear for list members who are unfamiliar with 
racism in the United States, I'm pretty sure that it is not 
acceptable *anywhere* in this country to use a racial slur, and 
especially the Mother Of All Racial Slurs, the N-word.  I am fairly 
certain South Carolina is not an exception.

And, of course, Amy explained quite nicely that these slurs were 
never acceptable to those on the receiving end.

I wrote:

> I really don't think the issue is whether you are allowing the N-
> word to acquire some power it doesn't otherwise have by using 
>it.  I would suggest that the oppression of people with dark skin 
>and the ugly usage of this word to facilitate that oppression is 
>what causes the word to be terribly offensive and creates its 
>power.  Believe me, whether you say it or type it is *not* the 
>source of its power,and your usage of it will in no way divest it 
>of its considerable power to wound.  I wish it were that easy.

Jennifer wrote:

> I think my African-American students would disagree with you, at 
>least in part.

I am not surprised that the tendency of some African Americans to 
use the N-word would come up in this discussion.  So let's address 
it.

I indicated that using the N-word will not divest it of its power to 
wound.  Some African Americans have been using the N-word as a 
method of self-reference or to refer to other African Americans.  I 
suggest that these students be asked whether their usage has done a 
single thing to diminish the power of this slur to wound.  If they 
are being honest, they would admit that the slur retains the same 
power to wound that it always had.  And if they deny this, then 
perhaps they can explain how they would react if a police officer 
addressed them in this fashion -- regardless of the officer's skin 
color.


>The upshot of the discussion was that they felt that 
> using it among each other really did rob the word of its power to 
> hurt, for them; when it was decontextualized (not that they'd ever 
> use those sorts of postmodern terms)  like that, it became just 
> another word that claimed their identity as people of color.


The N-word has no place in polite, dignified and civilized society.  
It is entirely possible that Jennifer's students simply haven't yet 
worked out how they should behave in a polite, dignified and 
civilized society.  I was young once; I know that maturity takes 
time.  Hopefully, they have someone in their lives who can clarify 
things for them.  That the N-word enjoys popularity among students 
who I believe must have a lot to learn, or rap singers seeking 
notoriety, or comics seeking to shock their audiences really doesn't 
bear at all on the issue whether the word retains the power to 
insult and to wound.  It clearly does.
 
>Again translating from 
> their terms into pomospeak, my skin color makes my speech the 
> oppressor's language when directed at them; the term is not so 
> decontextualized for them that my (or any other white person) 
> speaking it wouldn't recontextualize it.  

Actually, the "thrill" of using the N-word for these kids, I 
suspect, is the fact that it is something they feel they can say but 
that white people cannot say.  Perhaps it makes them feel powerful 
to have this one thing in the world -- usage of the N-word -- as 
their exclusive domain.

In my very humble opinion, that is really quite sad.

Cindy





From macloudt at hotmail.com  Tue Jul  2 15:07:26 2002
From: macloudt at hotmail.com (Mary Jennings)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 15:07:26 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday, Amanda!
Message-ID: <F73Ld8Lq7R3TOkIt1tF0000460b@hotmail.com>

Our Birthday Elf wrote:

>Yes, our very own Amandageist is having a birthday. Someone drag her
>in here quickly, before all those candles burn the room down. :-D

Happy Birthday, your Geistliness!  I'm not worried about the drapes catching 
fire, because knowing you all the balloons are filled with water anyway ;)

Have a magical day and I hope you're spoiled rotten!

Mary Ann
(off to raid the Butterbeer)


_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com




From drumforever at earthlink.net  Tue Jul  2 16:32:29 2002
From: drumforever at earthlink.net (Betty Landers)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 12:32:29 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Texan! was Problems of translation (was Editing literature to conform to current custom)
References: <afqnhg+daac@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003d01c221e7$08f48600$c85285ce@bettysue>

Oh, we say it in North Carolina, too.  Speaking of Texas accents or lack thereof, I have noticed some are distinctive, but others I have trouble differentiating between it and a regular Southern accent.
Bye for now.
Betty.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "alyeskakc" <Alyeskakc at aol.com>
To: <HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 7:10 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Texan! was Problems of translation (was Editing literature to conform to current custom)


> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> wrote:
> 
> > Texan "accents" these days tend to fall more into word usage, not 
> >diction. Texans use words like "fixin to," "y'all," the double modal 
> >(might should),etc. These usages, I think I read, are on the 
> >increase. Tremble.
> 
> 
> I always thought Texans had more of a hard drawl than a true Southern 
> accent. Especially those from West Texas and the DFW area. I don't 
> notice it in folks from the Houston area. 
> 
> My dad, who is from Mississippi, says there is no such thing as a 
> accent, it's a Southern drawl. Each state is different, some states 
> have a hard drawl and other a soft drawl. It can also depend on what 
> part of the state you're from as well. 
> 
> As for saying "fixin to" and "y'all", Texans aren't the only ones who 
> say that. We even say that here in New Mexico.
> 
> Kristin
> 
> 
> 
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
> 
> Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
> 
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!
> 
> Is your message...
> An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
> Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
> Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
> None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
> Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
> 
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________ 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> 





From dizzylizzy182 at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  2 16:48:21 2002
From: dizzylizzy182 at yahoo.com (Elizabeth Sager)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:48:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Digest Number 686
In-Reply-To: <1025434075.349.97927.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020702164821.77996.qmail@web40002.mail.yahoo.com>

In particular, I want to have some good
> discussion 
> topics, similar to the ones we see on this list.  I
> was hoping to 
> pick your brains and see what you think would be
> some of the neatest 
> topics to go with.
> 
> 
> Some I am already thinking about:
> 
> Name Origins

This is a good one. Name origins can be fun and
interesting.

> Comparisons of the Old Four (Lupin, Black, Potter,
> and Pettigrew) to 
> the New Four (Granger, Weasley, Potter, and
> Longbottom)

What Rita said -- not sure about that. ;)

> Predictions for the rest of the series...what we
> think could and 
> should happen.

Good. This all sounds good. *steeples her fingers and
pet her Evil!Kitty*

My suggestions:
1. Have a discussion about appearances and how they
really are deceiving. i.e. Snape in the first book,
Draco/Heir in the second, Lupin, Sirius,
Scabbers/Peter in the third, Moody in the fourth, etc.


2. Death. Who has died so far? How did this effect
characters? Who do you think will die next? What makes
you think this? 

3. Harry growing up. What sort of things is he
starting to realize as he grows into a man?

These are just off the top of my head. I believe there
is a file with questions in the HP4GU main file that
can be simplified for a younger audience.

Liz

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com



From editor at texas.net  Tue Jul  2 18:52:09 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 13:52:09 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday, Amanda!
References: <afsa0n+mr8u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006901c221f9$92c5b900$ab7763d1@texas.net>

Rylly Elf
> *drags very large cake into middle of room - well away from the
> drapes - and proceeds to top it with many, many candles. Lights
> candles and stands back from the heat, glancing in concern at nearby
> paper streamers*
>
> Yes, our very own Amandageist is having a birthday. Someone drag her
> in here quickly, before all those candles burn the room down. :-D

Amandageist glides into the room with the seductive grace and sympathetic
motion of a very large water balloon. She blinks until her eyes adjust to
the bright flames, and then beams at the immense cake. The parts she can see
which aren't covered with candles look very nice indeed, and surely such a
large cake won't melt all *that* quickly.

She decides any house-elf creative enough to make such a wondrous cake can
surely either prevent the room catching fire or can restore it handily, so
she declines to blow out the candles. She has forgotten her portable fan,
anyway. Instead, she whips out a long stick, some marshmallows, and other
fixings, and floats gently near the ceiling making s'mores for anyone who
cares to come celebrate with her.

Mindful of the natures of some who may happen by, she also is pleased that
Rylly Elf remembered to set out some premium-grade motor oil, Purina Goat
Chow, Acme Brand British Person Food, and various snacks from the Kosher R
Us Munchie Store in addition to the ubiquitous butterbeer and frogs. No,
wait--how sweet! Rylly has gotten some chocolate *horned toads* from the
Bluebonnet Hills Magical Sweet Shop! They shoot chocolate sauce from their
eyes! How cool. Amandageist reminds self to do something nice for Rylly when
nobody is around to notice the slip in character....

--Amanda, Agedgeist




From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk  Tue Jul  2 20:49:57 2002
From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman)
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 20:49:57 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Amanda!
In-Reply-To: <006901c221f9$92c5b900$ab7763d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <aft3ll+2o0k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> wrote:
> Rylly Elf
> > *drags very large cake into middle of room - well away from the
> > drapes - and proceeds to top it with many, many candles. Lights
> > candles and stands back from the heat, glancing in concern at 
nearby
> > paper streamers*
> >
> > Yes, our very own Amandageist is having a birthday. Someone drag 
her
> > in here quickly, before all those candles burn the room down. :-D
> 
> Amandageist glides into the room with the seductive grace and 
sympathetic
> motion of a very large water balloon. She blinks until her eyes 
adjust to
> the bright flames, and then beams at the immense cake. The parts 
she can see
> which aren't covered with candles look very nice indeed, and surely 
such a
> large cake won't melt all *that* quickly.
> 
> She decides any house-elf creative enough to make such a wondrous 
cake can
> surely either prevent the room catching fire or can restore it 
handily, so
> she declines to blow out the candles. She has forgotten her 
portable fan,
> anyway. Instead, she whips out a long stick, some marshmallows, and 
other
> fixings, and floats gently near the ceiling making s'mores for 
anyone who
> cares to come celebrate with her.
> 
> Mindful of the natures of some who may happen by, she also is 
pleased that
> Rylly Elf remembered to set out some premium-grade motor oil, 
Purina Goat
> Chow, Acme Brand British Person Food, and various snacks from the 
Kosher R
> Us Munchie Store in addition to the ubiquitous butterbeer and 
frogs. No,
> wait--how sweet! Rylly has gotten some chocolate *horned toads* 
from the
> Bluebonnet Hills Magical Sweet Shop! They shoot chocolate sauce 
from their
> eyes! How cool. Amandageist reminds self to do something nice for 
Rylly when
> nobody is around to notice the slip in character....
> 
> --Amanda, Agedgeist

Hmm, just the butterbeer and chocolate for me thanks.  (What's Acme 
Brand British Person Food? I fear the explanation may force me to 
come after you with a very big stick).

Anyway...


Happy Birthday!

Catherine




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  2 21:19:51 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 14:19:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday, Amanda!
In-Reply-To: <F73Ld8Lq7R3TOkIt1tF0000460b@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20020702211951.8141.qmail@web13702.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  All Right! Everybody party harty with Amanda! May you have all your wishes filled and plenty of Harry Potter goodies to add to the many you may have! Happy Birthday and enjoy , enjoy, enjoy!
Schnoogles,
Wanda the Witch of Revere<massachusetts and Her Very Merry Band of Muggles 100%


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From editor at texas.net  Tue Jul  2 22:08:05 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 17:08:05 -0500
Subject: A very bizarre call
Message-ID: <003101c22214$f1c05800$437c63d1@texas.net>

This is weird. I just got a call from (hang on ::plays first part of
conversation that got recorded because my machine picked up::) a David
Rodriguez with (what sounded like) Taras, Pravlak, and Millionay (a law
firm) in D.C.

Mr. Rodriguez said that State Department records show I took the Foreign
Service exam in 1992 (actually, I took it twice and couldn't have told you
the years offhand, so he's probably right). Apparently somebody sued them
for discriminatory practices towards women in the selection process, and
some of the women who didn't make it to the oral exam may get there.
Including me.

*blinks* Is this bizarre or what? I didn't give him any information he
didn't already have, but I okayed it for him to send me information on the
case and said yes, I was interested in taking the oral exam.

Maybe there is a real case. Or maybe the whole terrorist thing has made
careers in diplomacy suddenly a tad less attractive and the droves who had
applied in past years are not droving anymore? Who knows? I know I was
within a few points of the cutoff once, and made it to the orals once.

I just thought this was a nicely weird thing to happen on my birthday,
thought I'd share. And if anyone's in DC, open your phone book and see if
you can figure out who the heck this firm is......

--Amanda, maintaining her dignity and refusing to acknowledge the figures
littered about her on the ground, helpless with laughter at the idea of
Diplomat!Amanda





From pennylin at swbell.net  Wed Jul  3 01:28:37 2002
From: pennylin at swbell.net (plinsenmayer)
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 01:28:37 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Amanda!
In-Reply-To: <afsa0n+mr8u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <aftk05+5833@eGroups.com>

Hi --

Happy, Happy Birthday, Amandageist!  

:::throws confetti and takes a large slab of that virtual birthday
cake:::  I suppose virtual cakes have no calories, yes?

I join Sheryll in hoping that someone did some babysitting so you
could get out on the town (well, okay, at least go out to dinner).  :--)

Penny
(who is fairly sure that East Texans have a distinct accent .... this
West Texan can spot an East Texan the second he opens his mouth)






From temporary_blue at yahoo.ca  Wed Jul  3 02:52:39 2002
From: temporary_blue at yahoo.ca (temporary_blue at yahoo.ca)
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 22:52:39 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Visualizing Characters
Message-ID: <20020703025239.32783.qmail@web14302.mail.yahoo.com>

The following question arises from the current
discussion regarding racial diversity on the main
HPFGU list.  I'm interested by the glimmers of how
people read that have emerged in the course of that
thread.

I don't actually visualize characters and settings as
I read.  I focus almost solely upon the words I am
currently reading--I don't picture Harry as a boy with
messy black hair, green eyes and a scar unless JKR
specifically mentions any of those characteristics in
the passage that I'm reading.  I've always assumed
that Hogwarts was multi-racial/ethnic, but I've never
really drawn up a mental image of any of those
characters.  The characters, to me, are names,
personalities and actions--their physical selves don't
really impact upon me.

In short, I'm curious as to how other people read.  Do
you having a 'movie' running parallel to the words
you're reading?  Or does anyone out there understand
what I said in the above paragraph and find that it
applies to them as well?

Ann
(new to the list)


______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca




From catlady at wicca.net  Wed Jul  3 04:52:34 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 04:52:34 -0000
Subject: EVERYTHING!
Message-ID: <aftvui+2blm@eGroups.com>

Happy Birthday to everyone whom I forgot to congratulate at the proper 
time.

Happy Birthday, Amanda! It's still your birthday for 2.5 hours 
here on the West Coast. I ROTFL at your reply. Thanks for the 
s'mores -- but beware, the Gryffindor Common Room on FAP became full 
of suspicious!tea and brave!brownies and other adjective!food from 
the innocent start of making s'mores in their fireplace.

Amy, I think I read the same translation of Lysistrata as you did 
(how many translations of Lysistrata are there?), at the public 
library, probably in 1970. Now that your mention brought it back to 
my mind, I seem to recall the translator's note explaining that he 
had given the Spartans TEXAS accents, not Southern nor hillbilly.

Grey Wolf: last year someone reported that their language's 
translation simply translated what Lavender, Trelawney, and Ron had 
said, without explaining why this was supposed to be funny. Another 
person replied with their language's translation of Ron's little joke. 
As I recall, Lavender said: "Ooh, Miss Trelawney, what is this 
heavenly body in the fourth house?" and Trelawney replied; "It is 
Uranus, my dear", and Ron said: "Lavender, can I see your heavenly 
body, too?"

The riddle: 
First think of the person who lives in disguise,
Who deals in secrets and tells naught but lies.
Next, tell me what's always the last thing to mend,
The middle of middle and the end of end.
And finally give me the sound often heard
During the search for a hard-to-find word.
Now string them together, and answer me this,
Which creature would you be unwilling to kiss?

The answer:
spy - d - er = spider

"Amanda, maintaining her dignity and refusing to acknowledge the 
figures littered about her on the ground, helpless with laughter at 
the idea of Diplomat!Amanda"

Surely the State Department needs people to speak "forthrightly" to 
countries who have offended the USA. 




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  3 07:41:49 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 07:41:49 -0000
Subject: Visualizing Characters
In-Reply-To: <20020703025239.32783.qmail@web14302.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <afu9rt+7eqo@eGroups.com>

Ann wrote:

> I don't actually visualize characters and settings as
> I read.  I focus almost solely upon the words I am
> currently reading--I don't picture Harry as a boy with
> messy black hair, green eyes and a scar unless JKR
> specifically mentions any of those characteristics in
> the passage that I'm reading.  I've always assumed
> that Hogwarts was multi-racial/ethnic, but I've never
> really drawn up a mental image of any of those
> characters.  The characters, to me, are names,
> personalities and actions--their physical selves don't
> really impact upon me.
> 
> In short, I'm curious as to how other people read.  Do
> you having a 'movie' running parallel to the words
> you're reading?  Or does anyone out there understand
> what I said in the above paragraph and find that it
> applies to them as well?

Hi, Ann!  Welcome to the list!

For me it's an "it depends."  Some characters have a vivid visual 
presence in my mind, while others are "names, personalities, and 
actions," with only very occasional visual flashes.  There doesn't 
seem to be any correlation with how well or often they are described; 
e.g. I haven't much of a visual Harry walking around in my head as I 
read, whereas I do tend to visualize Ron and Hermione quite a lot.  
But it all varies.

Now that you've asked this question, it occurs to me that the trouble 
with movies (and to a lesser extent, illustrations) is not so much 
that they replace my mental images with those of the director, but 
that they put images into my head at all, when what is in my head as I 
read is largely something non-visual.

That's the case with characters, anyway.  My mental image of *places* 
is much stronger, and more indelible (less delible?).  As I read now, 
post-movie, I fight to keep the movie people-images out of my head, 
but the movie *place-images* can't hold a candle to the ones I've been 
imagining.  I know what the room with the Mirror of Erised looks like, 
and that thing in the movie is just a pretender.

To ramble away from the topic, this reminds me of the most difficult 
homesickness I've ever suffered, which was when I was on a foreign 
study program 10,000 miles away from home.  I missed parents and 
boyfriend, but the most powerful waves of homesickness took the form 
of flashes of place-memory; e.g., opening the padlock on my room door 
brought on a memory of the garage door at home that could bring me 
close to tears.

Amy Z
wondering if this means she loves places more than people




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  3 07:54:14 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 07:54:14 -0000
Subject: The Sphinx in Spanish
In-Reply-To: <aftvui+2blm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afuaj6+srj7@eGroups.com>

Rita explained:
 
> The riddle: 
> First think of the person who lives in disguise,
> Who deals in secrets and tells naught but lies.
> Next, tell me what's always the last thing to mend,
> The middle of middle and the end of end.
> And finally give me the sound often heard
> During the search for a hard-to-find word.
> Now string them together, and answer me this,
> Which creature would you be unwilling to kiss?
> 
> The answer:
> spy - d - er = spider

which, I note, needs "translating" for most American accents as well, 
as we pronounce the "r" at the end of "spider," hence Harry's "er..." 
(which a US author would generally write "uh...") doesn't really match 
the sound at the end of "spider."

I bet I'm not the only American child who grew up saying "Errrr..." 
whenever she came to "er" in a book, nor the only adult who still has 
to shake her head and remembUH it's probably pronounced UH.

Grey Wolf, how did the Spanish translation deal with this?  Does the 
word for spider end in a sound that's plausibly close to the sound 
someone makes while thinking?  Or did the clue take another form 
entirely?  And was the creature being guessed even a spider?  (I 
really hope so.  One of the things I like about this passage is that 
the sphinx is giving Harry a clue warning about another obstacle, the 
one he in fact encounters next.  It made up for the fact that when I 
first read the line "Which creature would you be unwilling to kiss," I 
was sure the answer would be Dementor, and was a bit disappointed it 
was just a random icky creature.  Then, wham! turns out to be not just 
any icky creature, but the one that's about to chomp Harry.)

Amy
who never tires of translation questions no matter how bored everyone 
else gets




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Wed Jul  3 08:33:50 2002
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (grey_wolf_c)
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 08:33:50 -0000
Subject: The Sphinx in Spanish
In-Reply-To: <afuaj6+srj7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <afucte+mahf@eGroups.com>

Amy wrote:
> Grey Wolf, how did the Spanish translation deal with this?  Does the 
> word for spider end in a sound that's plausibly close to the sound 
> someone makes while thinking?  Or did the clue take another form 
> entirely?  And was the creature being guessed even a spider?  (I 
> really hope so.  One of the things I like about this passage is that 
> the sphinx is giving Harry a clue warning about another obstacle, the 
> one he in fact encounters next.  It made up for the fact that when I 
> first read the line "Which creature would you be unwilling to kiss," 
> I was sure the answer would be Dementor, and was a bit disappointed 
> it was just a random icky creature.  Then, wham! turns out to be not 
> just any icky creature, but the one that's about to chomp Harry.)
> 
> Amy
> who never tires of translation questions no matter how bored everyone 
> else gets

Warning: This post may contain Spanish and traces of nuts

Once the warning is out of the way: for those who understand Spanish, 
here's the tranlated version:

"Si te lo hiciera te desgarrar?a con mis zarpas,
pero eso s?lo ocurrir? si no lo captas.
Y no es f?cil la respuesta de esta adivinanza,
porque est? lejana, en tierras de bonanza,
donde empieza la regi?n de las monta?as de arena
y acaba la de los toros, la sangre, el mar y la verbena.
Y ahora contesta, t?, que has venido a jugar:
?a qu? animal no te gustar?a besar?"

It's slightly different, but with the same structure (they give you 
other clues, but they're mainly about it's syllables). However, for 
convenience, I'm giving an aproximate translation (bear with me, this 
one's difficult)

"If I did it to you, I'd rake you with my claws"
     In Spanish, "ara?a" (the answer) means scratch (as in the verb "to 
scratch") appart from "spider"
"But that will only happen if you don't get it"
     No clue here, I think. Just a threat.
"Since it's not easy the answer to this riddle"
     No clue here either. Just to mantain symetry and rhyme
"Since it's far, in lands of bonanza/fair weather"
     Again, no big clue, but it places you for the next
"Where the region of sand mountains start"
     This can refer to many places (and in fact, Harry thinks of 
several): Sahara, Arabia, or any country of North Africa. However, 
Spanish people associate the African desert with "Arabia", since that's 
where the arabs traditionally live.
"And ends the one of bulls, blood, sea and verbena/traditional Spanish 
party"
     Bulls are in many places, but when you mention blood, it almost 
always refers to bullfighting. Sea is more vague, but la verbena is a 
traditional Spanish party from Andaluc?a. So, they're refering to Spain 
("Espa?a")
"And now answer, you, who have come to play:
     Again, a nice non-clue for rhyme (which was there in the original)
"What animal wouldn't you like to kiss?"
     This last two where probably put in by the tranlator, to mantain 
coherence with the original English riddle (As I've said, she's 
especially good). I actually got this one, since I've heard a lot of 
the "black widow's kiss".

Start of "Arabia" + end of "Espa?a" = Ara?a

So, Amy, answering your question, there is no sound of thinking ("ehhh" 
in Spanish), but there is a mention to Spain, which was well liked by 
every Spanish I've met, and the general structure of the riddle was the 
same (good translating). An extra clue is included at the very 
beggining (one that actually helps to solve the riddle to Harry), but, 
in essence, the riddle is very close indeed.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From bray.262 at osu.edu  Wed Jul  3 16:34:10 2002
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2002 16:34:10 +0000 (EST5EDT)
Subject: Happy 4th!
Message-ID: <362DB158EA@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

Have a great 4th of July!!

May you have a great day full of fun with your friends and 
family.  And may it be a safe holiday for us all!  Watch 
out for those rogue rockets and cherry bombs!  :-)

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

LORD OF THE SNITCH
Three men form the chaser-squad under the sky 
Seven are the teammates on their brooms of wood
Two are Bludger balls charmed to fly
One is the dork Ref all on his own
On the field of Quidditch where the Quaffles lie.
One Snitch flits over all, one grab will win it
One game may take three months, or may take but a minute
On the field of Quidditch where the Quaffles lie.

http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm



From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  3 22:35:56 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 15:35:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy 4th!
In-Reply-To: <362DB158EA@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>
Message-ID: <20020703223556.97434.qmail@web13702.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  Rachel Bray <bray.262 at osu.edu> wrote: 
Have a great 4th of July!!

The same feeling from all of us here in Revere,Massachusetts! Will see the fireworks in Boston and enjoy the music of the Boston Pops! Everybody who celebrates this holiday, have fun and enjoy the company of friends and family! Happy Birthday to the USA!

Schnoogles,

Wanda the Witch of Revere,Massachusetts and Her Very Merry Band of Muggles 100% 


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From anise_leinen at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  4 05:13:32 2002
From: anise_leinen at yahoo.com (Catherine Danielson)
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 22:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Visualizing characters
Message-ID: <20020704051332.38174.qmail@web21409.mail.yahoo.com>

I do visualize characters and scenes in a lot of
detail, but only since going to film school. It has a
lot to do, I think, with the way you're taught to
think visually. My writing has become much more
visual, too, which is an improvement. :) Now, I don't
know if it's worth going to film school just for that,
but there you go. I've always composed music for
scenes in my head, but then I'm a musician. I suppose
it comes down to the way you're hardwired. 
Cathy D. 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Thu Jul  4 07:30:21 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 17:30:21 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Visualizing characters
In-Reply-To: <20020704051332.38174.qmail@web21409.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3D24862D.9969.4D4D66@localhost>

On 3 Jul 2002 at 22:13, Catherine Danielson wrote:

> I do visualize characters and scenes in a lot of
> detail, but only since going to film school. It has a
> lot to do, I think, with the way you're taught to
> think visually. My writing has become much more
> visual, too, which is an improvement. :) Now, I don't
> know if it's worth going to film school just for that,
> but there you go. I've always composed music for
> scenes in my head, but then I'm a musician. I suppose
> it comes down to the way you're hardwired. 
> Cathy D. 

I'm very visual in my reading - I have very firm images of what characters look like, 
what places look like, etc. My visual image of Hogwarts is very heavily based on my 
own school - I attended an Australian APS school, which were modelled on the 
British Public (private) Schools - and as Hogwarts also seems to have a basis in 
that, a lot of the images match quite well.

And for my own convenience and to help my visualisation, I once spent two weeks 
of inflicted stress leave from work relaxing by constructing a detailed plan of 
Hogwarts based on the information from the books - to me, it helps to know where 
things are, and while I can't say my plan is accurate, it is at least accurate to my 
vision, which makes things easier for me.


 Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From editor at texas.net  Thu Jul  4 15:05:58 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 10:05:58 -0500
Subject: The bizarre call revisited
Message-ID: <004d01c2236c$4f472d20$e57663d1@texas.net>

With Debbie's help offline, we found the firm! It's Terris, Pravlik, and
Millian, LLP (formerly Terris, Pravlik, and Wagner). They are a "highly
respected environmental and civil rights law firm" according to one site.
Terris is Bruce J. Terris. The Millian is Kathleen L. Millian. The Pravlik
is Carolyn Smith Pravlik. They are indeed out of Washington D.C.

I can see they filed an amicus curiae on behalf of the National Bar
Association in the Bush/Gore thing, and they do a lot of environmental,
civil rights, and "public interest" stuff. Oh, well. It's nice to know they
actually exist.

Thanks to everyone who poked around for me! I'll let you guys know when I
get any sort of notification from them.

--Amanda






From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk  Thu Jul  4 17:33:08 2002
From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman)
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 17:33:08 -0000
Subject: The Return of Thursday Next.
Message-ID: <ag20sk+409b@eGroups.com>

For all of those who introduced me to The Eyre Affair - the sequel is 
just about out in hardcover over here (Lost in a Good Book).

Someone just told me about the website, which is really funny if the 
humour of the books really appeals to you.  Check out the adverts 
which crop up, for instance - 

www.thursdaynext.com

Catherine, who is eagerly awaiting her copy, which should arrive on 
Saturday.  Yay!




From pollux46 at hotmail.com  Fri Jul  5 00:42:41 2002
From: pollux46 at hotmail.com (charisjulia)
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 00:42:41 -0000
Subject: The Many Tongues of HP
In-Reply-To: <afs5m3+db5b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ag2q21+aijm@eGroups.com>


In my last message I was being rather critical of the Greek 
translation of the HP books and Grey Wolf replied by pointing out the 
difficulties of a successful translation. Sorry if this answer comes 
slightly late, but I wanted to borrow the Greek version first from my 
cousin before writing, so as to be absolutely sure of what I `m 
saying and to supply myself with a few direct quotes. But, hey, I've 
answered posts much later that this before now :--)

*    *    *

Before I turn to some of Grey Wolf's observations I `d like to clear 
something up. 

Grey Wolf wrote:

>You're being excessively critical, and I guess you haven't had a 
>real 
>try at translating a book.  

Well, now, I have to admit that in a way you `re right. I have never 
actually been an * official* translator of anything. That is to say, 
I have never translated a whole book from start to finish nor had 
anything I've translated published. I am, however, bilingual and have 
therefore been translating things almost since I could speak. My 
English and my Greek are equally good, though I will make the 
occasional mistake in both languages and do have my weak points. My 
written English, for example, is way worse than my written Greek, as 
I rarely have a chance to exercise it. On the other hand, most of the 
books I read are in English, for I `m generally not too fond of Greek 
prose. 


But translating passages, songs, jingles, nonsense verses, oh, just 
about anything comes my way, is something I do do a lot of . As a 
matter of fact, I am seriously thinking of giving up Law, which I am 
currently studying and in which my interest is minimal, to go for 
Foreign Languages and Translation. And, yes, I do recognize the 
difficulties it entails. I have been there, racking my brains for 
hours on end trying to remember a word that just will * not* be found 
or juggling meanings around in an attempt to find the right 
combination. And, no, I would never be so critical of another's 
efforts had I not had a go at it myself. 


But as far as the Potter series is concerned, I have. I've translated 
quite a few chapters from the books and a great deal of my favourite 
parts. Most especially I `ve concentrated on the verses, riddles and 
names in the books as these _ are_ the hardest to tackle. And, just 
for the record, I've found translations I prefer for every single one 
of the examples I brought up in my last post.

*    *    *

Grey Wolf wrote:

>There are two 
>ways to translate a poem: keep the info, and forfait the rhymes, or 
>keep the rhymes and forfeit the info. It is almost impossible >
(although 
>depends heavily on the words used) to keep both the info and the 
>rhymes/tempo/rythem of a poetry when translating. And a good 
>translator 
>doesn't even try: in a pick, we are told (yes, I've been a 
>translator 
>myself) to skip the rhymes and keep the information.


Well, I `m going to have to disagree with you here, There always * 
is* a good translation that retains both the info and the rhymes etc. 
And then one or two to spare as well.  Language is a tool made by 
humans to be used by humans and, what's more, a most complicated and 
comprehensive tool at that. If you know juuuust that right way to 
tweak it you can do almost anything you want with it. Putty in your 
hands, I'm telling you. The question is, of course, whether you have 
the determination, patience and (mostly) time to search around for 
the best tranalation you can possibly get. 


>Just for the record, the Spanish editions keeps the original names 
>for 
>the balls. In fact, it keeps the original names for all the things 
>except those who's name is a verb which describes it's function, in 
>which case it has been tranlated (put-outer -> "apagador"; howler -> 
>"aullador"; remember-all -> "recordadora")


That's a good rule, IMO, and the one that I `ve adopted in my own 
translations of the HP books. It would  also seem to be the rule the 
Greek translator has gone by, some times more successfully than 
others. To recount your examples, "sbistiras" is good, being the 
direct opposite of "anaptiras" (cigarette lighter). "Exapsalmos" 
(howler) is unfortunate as it's a word most children would not be 
familiar with. Otherwise it's quite OK really. "Mpala mnimis" 
(remembrall) could be better. I see no reason to not make it one word 
("Mnimompala")


>However, there is one thing that you have to keep in mind. It is 
>easy 
>to keep those names when tranlating into another language that uses 
>the 
>latin alphabet. All you get is boys twisting their mouths around 
>letters that make sense in their language, arranged strangely. They 
>may 
>say them differently, but they can still read them. This is nowhere 
>as 
>easy when translating into a language (like Greek) that uses another 
>alphabet.


Actually, there's no great difference. In Greek all you get is people 
twisting their mouths around the same exact words, that are however 
spelt with different symbols. Perhaps you `re thinking that there is 
a different logic to reading and writing in Greek, as there (or so 
I'm told) behind the Chinese alphabet. But the idea is in fact just 
the same. The Greek and the Latin alphabets are closely related and 
the problems that would thus arise from spelling an English word with 
Greek letters are trifling.


>To translate those names you'd have to go for a phonetic tranlation, 
>which can be very difficult with words that you're not sure you can 
>pronounce with sounds of your own langauge. Give a try, for example, 
>at 
>phonetically transcribing this Spanish old-timer: "El perro de San 
>Roque no tiene rabo porque Ram?n Rodriguez se lo ha robado". If 
you're 
>English speaking, you cannot phonetically translate it, since you 
>simply haven't a "rr" sound, nor even an aproximate (and you've got 
>6 
>in the phrase). Even simpler: try phonetically transcribing "Espa?a" 
>or 
>even "Jarama". The sounds "?" and "j" are not in English language. 
>If 
>the books had been in Spanish, and one of the balls had been named 
>"jara?a" I don't know what I would have done to tranlate it into 
>English. I don't know Greek, but I can imagine that faced with the 
>task, I would have also eliminated the names (although I would have 
>gone for something more imaginative, I admit).
>

I think I understand what you're saying, but I fail to see what 
difference it makes. This is a question of accent really, isn't it? 
The Greek "r" sounds, I believe, pretty much like the Spanish one (a 
rolling "r") and, no, I cannot think of a way to put it on paper in 
an English context. Similarly there is no possible way to write the 
Greek letter "gama" using the Latin alphabet. Huh, forget about 
writing it. Most foreigners I've come across can't even * hear* it 
properly at first. 

However, I have no qualms over substituting the English "r" for the 
Greek one or using a "g" in the place of the third letter of the 
Greek alphabet. The effect is nothing different to that of a German 
saying "winifersity" instead of university. It's the same word. Just 
a different pronunciation, which in English doesn't sound quite 
right. But as long as the German when talking about universities 
isn't saying "kerplofulots" , they are likely to have no trouble in 
communicating with the average English speaker. And anyway, this 
isn't about some Greek kids coming across some English kids, 
saying "Bludger" and then squabbling over who's pronounsed it 
properly. Let the Greek kids say it their own way. It isn't radically 
different from the English one.

I said:
>> And there's a lot more of that. Moaning Myrtle is "Mirtia (a Greek 
>> girl's name) who cries" (does that even properly qualify as a 
>>name?) 
>> and the Whomping Willow becomes the "Willow that hits". The final 
>> blow for me came when I discovered the translation for the 
>>Marauder's 
>> Map: The "Magic Map". Similarly, Weasley's Wizard Wheezes becomes 
>> the "Magic Tricks of the Weasleys". 

Grey Wolf responded:
>
>I have to point out that "Moaning" means "who moans" (i.e. cries) 
>and 
>"Whomping" means "who womps" (i.e. hits). They're descritptive, and 
>must be translated. If you keep "Moaning Myrtle" in other 
>langauages, 
>the entire meaning is lost, and that must never happen. In Spanish, 
>it's "Myrtle la Llorona", already hard to pronounce. Since Greek 
>requires changing the letters, I aplaud that they change the name to 
>something similar but pronouncable by Greek children.
>
>
>I agree that the Maurader's map should have included a mention to 
>marauders, but "Magic Tricks of the Weasleys" looks quite all right, 
>form a translation point of view.


Well, what do you mean by changing the letters? If you mean 
translating the word "Whomping" into Greek, of course that is a 
decision I too applaud, no question about it. The meaning has to come 
across. But if you're referring to the conversion of "Whomping" 
into "who whomps", well, then that's a different matter, because I 
would argue that Greek requires no such thing. In fact keeping the 
word as a verb form used as an adjective would sound *much * better. 
The particular verb form I would recommend here would be a participle 
(er, at least I think that that's the right word for "metoxi". I 
never studied English grammar.) Anyway, the name Whomping Willow is a 
play on "weeping willow", a phrase that exists in Greek as well. 
(itia i kleousa) Something like "Itia I Tiptousa/Dernousa" or 
whatever would be much better.


Oh, and incidentally, I made a bit of a mistake there in my last 
post. It is not "Magic Tricks of the Weasleys" or the "Willow that 
Hits." Rather, it's "magic tricks of the Weasley's", the "willow that 
hits" and etc. I don't know if this makes much of a difference to 
your mind, but me, it peeves. A capital is what makes a name a name.


And, no, even "Magic Tricks of the Weasleys" is no competition in my 
opinion to "Weasley's Wizard Wheezes". Such poor translating implies 
that there is no word in Greek that could be used to mean "wheeze" 
(which I think you will agree is something quite different from a 
trick-- and especially magic trick, which to me suggests a conjuror 
at a children's party.) And this, in fact, is where we reach the 
heart of my disapproval of the current translation. It undervalues 
the richness of the Greek language, which is in fact a beautiful and 
expressive one. The translation is drab, dull, flat, banal. Greek 
isn't.


>The only two weak spots are the map's name and the riddle, 
>which could have been handled better. That alone doesn't make a 
>translation horrible.

 Err, the * only* two weak spots? You really want me to launch into a 
fully?blown rant hauling out * every* disagreement I have with the 
translation? Hmm . . . Nah . . .  I think I'll leave that for another 
day.

>>Charis Julia, who doesn't even want to get * started* on Tom 
>>Riddle, 
>> who's name, yes, Tom Riddle and * not* Anton Hert and tricky 
>>passages 
>> such as the Uranus joke. How did other translator's manage here?
>
>Tom Ryddle (yes, the "y> " is intentional) needs to have his name 
>changed, or else the final showdown in the CoS makes no sense. 
>Remember 
>that "I am Lord Voldemort" in *every* language must be a play on 
>words 
>of Tom Marvolo Riddle.

Err, well, I don't want to come across as overly sensitive or 
anything, but, Grey Wolf, you're really making me feel a bit as if 
you're scolding a little child here. Of course I realise that the 
anagram of Tom Riddle's name here is central to the plot. Same as I 
know that "moaning" means  "to moan" and that the Greek alphabet is 
different to the Latin one. And, yes, of course I took these things 
into consideration before expressing opinions. In fact it took me a 
long time to overtly conclude that the Greek edition of the series 
was unsuccessful exactly because I * do* appreciate the difficulties 
that the translator must have faced. But, now, as I said at the 
beginning of this message, I `ve tried my own hand at this. As far 
the I AM LORD VOLDEMORT thing is concerned, the problems are actually 
not as great as one would imagine. Check out the two names for 
yourself. What you are translating here are * sounds*, as opposed to 
meanings, and therefore, exactly because Tom Marvolo Riddle * sounds* 
the same no matter what language you're using and the Greek for Lord 
is conveniently Lordos, all that's left to do is play around with the 
middle name (which, I concede, has to be sacrificed) till you can fit 
in the "eimai o" (I am)  part in. 


>The Uranus joke is not that funny in 
>the original anyway, and so, when translated into other languages 
>still 
>makes little sense why Ron would say it. It's been discussed before, 
>though, so check the archives. As far as I can see, the translators 
>have done a good job. 

Actually, I agree that the joke is not all that funny. I find it 
rather rude to say the truth. But it's been put there and it * does* 
serve a purpose in illuminating the character's pubescent age. 
However, since a direct translation is no good, the translator should 
either have exchanged it for a joke of her own or done away with the 
whole exchange completely. It would make more sense to have Trelawney 
miffed at the Gryffindor boys for giggling over the "midget in 
glasses" thing. Keeping the passage as it is with no joke anywhere 
discernable, merely leaves you wondering what on earth got into her 
when she later loads them with extra homework. (BTW, I was around 
when the matter was brought up on the main list and do remember that 
the Polish edition makes a play on "heavenly body", with Ron then 
saying something like "can I see you're body too, Lavender?" This 
would have worked in Greek as well.)


Finally, Grey Wolf, just to prove my point, I'd like to submit the 
following. The official Greek translation of the sphinx's riddle and 
the one I came up with myself. I'm using gringlish here, that is 
Greek with latin letters. (Read "i" as "ee" in beetroot, "e" in egg, 
x as "h" in herring, "th" as in thistle, "ou" as "u" in Uranus and, 
err, don't worry about the rest :--)

Prota skepsou pos to simperenis,
Meta, tin arxi sto hnari kathos beneis 
Ke tin mesi tis paxnis kathos vgenis
Telos, na pis s' emena ena ap' ta arthra
Na teriazi stin kedistra, stin ifantra.
Ki enose ta tora ola touta me mia pleksi
Ke idou, sou bgeni i polipothiti leksi.
Tote mono pia esi thena kerdisis
An bris oti aidiazis na filisis.


English translation: 

"First think of how you conclude it,
Then, the beginning as you enter the trail
And the middle of the dew as you come out.
Finally, tell me one of the articles 
That suits the darner, the weaver.
And now bring all of these together with a twist
And behold, you are left with the desired word.
Only then will you win
If you find what you be disgusted to kiss."


If you can make any sense of the first four lines I congratulate you. 
I cannot.


Prota pes ti' ne panta arxi tis arxis,
St' apotelioma telos, ma sthn mesi den tha bris.
Istera skepsou tis Egiptou theo,
Tis xoras ap' opou katagome `go.
Telos, ti skepazi ta kria proina
Grasidi ke dentra ?- ma bgale to pa--
Sirapse ta mazi ke apanta afto :
Me pio zoo tha itan ena filaki frikto?

English translation:

"First say what is always the beginning of the beginning,
The end to the end, but you wouldn't find in the middle."

The first letter of "arxi" (beginning) and the last one 
to "apotelioma" (ending, end) is _a _. There is no such letter 
in "mesi" (middle).


"Then think of a god of Egypt,
The country from which I come from."

I'm rather proud of this as it nicely slips in a reference to the 
sphinx itself. What I'm looking for here is Ra. This could be a bit 
iffy of course, as I can't be 100% sure younger readers would  be 
familiar with the name. However I can definitely remember that I knew 
it at age 8 or 9, and I'm pretty sure I learnt it at school while 
studying the Ancient Egyptian civilization in history, so that covers 
that. Besides, I then have Harry think about how Hermione pestered 
him and Ron about the ancient Egyptian gods after the Weasley's 
vacation there the summer before. He recalls that one name she 
mentioned was Ra.

"Finally, on cold mornings, what does cover 
The grass and the trees ? but take away the pa--"

The answer here is paxni = dew. Without the pa?we're left with ?xni.

"Stitch them together and answer me this:
With what animal would a kiss be awful?"

A?ra?xni. Araxni. Or in English, spider.


It may not be a brilliant translation, but at any rate it makes 
sense, the whole of it rhymes and ?you'll just have to trust me on 
this ?and the beat of the words is right. (something very important 
in Greek poetry Greek uses stresses, meaning that the intonation of a 
word has got to be exactly  where it is, you can't play around with 
it as in English. E.g. it's always a-RA-xni, not A-raxni or ara?XNI, 
CHA?ris, not Cha ?RIS. ) 


I respect your observations, Grey Wolf, and I hope that you will 
respect that my opinion remains unchanged. I'm truly not being unduly 
critical, excessively demanding or arrogant. But the translation is 
just not good. I would like to apologise, however, if I came over as 
rather more bellicose than I intended. I sometimes do that when 
something matters to me, and this for whatever reason, does. Inside, 
however, I always remain perfectly calm. Well . . .  almost always.


Charis Julia, who is not as obnoxious as she sometimes sounds. Really.







From catlady at wicca.net  Fri Jul  5 18:44:05 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 18:44:05 -0000
Subject: The Many Tongues of HP
In-Reply-To: <ag2q21+aijm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ag4pdl+urho@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "charisjulia" <pollux46 at h...> wrote:
> 
> To recount your examples, "sbistiras" is good, being the 
> direct opposite of "anaptiras" (cigarette lighter).

It has been speculated that the name "Putter-Out" has a double or 
hidden meaning: us readers are meant to think it means 'put out' the 
light, like 'extinguish', but it could mean 'put out' like put out 
the good silverware, the guest towels, the bowls of nibblements for 
the living room... Someone said that Dumbledore really used the 
Putter-out to put out (I would feel more natural saying 'put up') 
warding spells (like security cameras and motion detectors) around 
the Dursley house. 

> And anyway, this 
> isn't about some Greek kids coming across some English kids, 
> saying "Bludger" and then squabbling over who's pronounsed it 
> properly. Let the Greek kids say it their own way. It isn't 
> radically different from the English one.

That's fine for Snitch and Quaffle, but "Bludger" clearly means 
"one who bludges"; the verb "bludge" is probably a back-formation 
from "bludgeon".




From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Fri Jul  5 21:18:21 2002
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (alyeskakc)
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 21:18:21 -0000
Subject: dialects and accents (was: Texan!)
In-Reply-To: <F184H1ESCs0X1mtLVqB00003f99@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <ag52et+k1jr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Mary Jennings" <macloudt at h...> wrote:


> By the way, does anyone have any sunshine and heat they want to 
trade for 
> torrential rain and cold?  I don't care what the calendar 
says...IT'S NOT 
> JULY HERE!!


I don't know about the rest of the Western states, but here in New 
Mexico, we would gladly trade some sunshine and heat for a few days 
of torrential rain. Maybe even a few weeks. 

Those of you in water logged states, we will gladly accept any and 
all water sent our way. 

Kristin *in water starved New Mexico*




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Jul  6 13:34:11 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 13:34:11 -0000
Subject: Movie effects (was verbatim clarificatum)
Message-ID: <ag6rkj+7i2o@eGroups.com>

On the main list Leon Adato wrote about the corrosive effects of the 
movie:

<<<<<<<With the onset of summer months, and the extra leisure time it 
brings many folks, it is not surprising that people have been 
watching it (mayhap repeatedly) and therefore getting "neural 
cellulose" - the unsightly wrinkles and sags of logic that comes from 
overindulging in empty calories.>>>>>

Shouldn't that be celluloid cellulite?

David





From macloudt at hotmail.com  Sun Jul  7 10:56:55 2002
From: macloudt at hotmail.com (Mary Jennings)
Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 10:56:55 +0000
Subject: Dursley
Message-ID: <F72IVB0gAitkUWqmdq800008f3b@hotmail.com>

Warner Brothers are obviously tight-fisted and anal retentive.  Here's an 
excerpt from the local paper Western Daily Press (North Somerset, England):


"Movie chiefs have banned a Gloucestershire town from using a little Harry 
Potter magic to drum up business.

It had been hoped to open up a visitor centre dedicated to the boy wizard in 
Dursley.

The Potter books' author JK Rowling lived in South Gloucestershire and she 
named Harry's adopted family the Dursleys after the town.

The Vision for Dursley group which promotes the town asked film-makers 
Warner Brothers for permission to establish a Harry Potter visitor centre.  
But the movie magnates have said no"


The article goes on to say how the council had hoped to be able to cash in 
(as it were) on HP as the town could do with regenerating and desparately 
needs the tourist money.  Gloucester Cathedral has had a 15% rise in 
visitors since the first movie came out as people flock to see the movie 
sets, but the rest of the local area is out of luck.  Tourism is especially 
needed after the foot-and-mouth disaster of last year.

Personally I think Warner Brothers needs a good slap up side the head.  What 
with all the revenue they're making off the back of HP, the least they could 
do is allow those places which influenced the creation of HP to benefit as 
well.

:::::gets off her soapbox:::::

Mary Ann
(picking out a heavy blunt object)


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx




From katzefan at yahoo.com  Sun Jul  7 18:34:56 2002
From: katzefan at yahoo.com (katzefan)
Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 18:34:56 -0000
Subject: Fake fifth book
Message-ID: <aga1kg+8hrk@eGroups.com>

Apparently at least one HP fan in China has gotten fed up with 
waiting for the fifth book. The following appeared (with a photo of 
the book cover) on the Canadian Press photo wire late last 
week:

'A new book titled "Harry Potter and Leopard Walk Up to Dragon,"
written by an anonymous Chinese author, is selling at 
bookstores in Beijing. The fake fifth book in the Harry Potter 
series, which bears the name of series author J.K. Rowling, is 
selling for 10 Yuan (US$1.20) at book stalls in the city. Photo, 
taken July 5, shows the fake book's cover. (AP Photo)'

----------------------------------
The book cover appears to have been cribbed directly from the 
artwork showing Harry being rescued by Firenze, with the 
addition of an extremely large, nasty-looking snake rearing up in 
front of them. The Fates suggest a very large lawsuit in the 
offing....





From coriolan at worldnet.att.net  Sun Jul  7 18:37:34 2002
From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc2001)
Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 18:37:34 -0000
Subject: Frodo Baggins Charged With War Crimes
Message-ID: <aga1pe+d4p@eGroups.com>

This is pretty funny: scroll down to July 6.


http://www.coldfury.com

  - CMC


   




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Sun Jul  7 19:24:07 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (rvotaw1)
Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 19:24:07 -0000
Subject: Dursley
In-Reply-To: <F72IVB0gAitkUWqmdq800008f3b@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <aga4gn+i91k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Mary Jennings" <macloudt at h...> wrote:
> Warner Brothers are obviously tight-fisted and anal retentive.  
Here's an excerpt from the local paper Western Daily Press (North 
Somerset, England):
> 
> "Movie chiefs have banned a Gloucestershire town from using a 
>little Harry Potter magic to drum up business. It had been hoped to 
>open up a visitor centre dedicated to the boy wizard in Dursley.
> 
> Personally I think Warner Brothers needs a good slap up side the 
>head.  What with all the revenue they're making off the back of HP, 
>the least they could do is allow those places which influenced the 
>creation of HP to benefit as well.

I agree.  I think that any and all of England should be able to use 
Harry Potter to attract visitors!  I for one would love a Harry 
Potter themed amusement park/ shopping area.  How about a Hogwarts 
Castle that you could tour, a Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley shopping 
area, an assortment of rides based on the Chamber of Secrets, the 
Triwizard Championship, etc.  I've never been to England, but that 
would be a sure way to get me packing my bags!

Richelle 

P.S. I'm new to this group, wandered over from the HP for Grownups 
group.





From zeff8 at attbi.com  Sun Jul  7 22:06:36 2002
From: zeff8 at attbi.com (zeff8)
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 18:06:36 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Fake fifth book
References: <aga1kg+8hrk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002701c22602$90154ba0$0f07f50c@attbi.com>

Do you really think a commuinist country like china, will allow such a law
suit?
I don't think so.. Best bet for JK is to put the word out and the fans then
show their distaste for anyone who buys the bogus book. That and refuse to
sell to china and the countries that do that kind of copying.



----- Original Message -----
From: "katzefan" <katzefan at yahoo.com>
To: <HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 2:34 PM
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Fake fifth book


> Apparently at least one HP fan in China has gotten fed up with
> waiting for the fifth book. The following appeared (with a photo of
> the book cover) on the Canadian Press photo wire late last
> week:
>
> 'A new book titled "Harry Potter and Leopard Walk Up to Dragon,"
> written by an anonymous Chinese author, is selling at
> bookstores in Beijing. The fake fifth book in the Harry Potter
> series, which bears the name of series author J.K. Rowling, is
> selling for 10 Yuan (US$1.20) at book stalls in the city. Photo,
> taken July 5, shows the fake book's cover. (AP Photo)'
>
> ----------------------------------
> The book cover appears to have been cribbed directly from the
> artwork showing Harry being rescued by Firenze, with the
> addition of an extremely large, nasty-looking snake rearing up in
> front of them. The Fates suggest a very large lawsuit in the
> offing....





From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Jul  8 00:12:47 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 00:12:47 -0000
Subject: THEME PARK (WAS Dursley)
In-Reply-To: <aga4gn+i91k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agaldv+o7pl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "rvotaw1" <rvotaw at i...> wrote:

> I agree.  I think that any and all of England should be able to use 
> Harry Potter to attract visitors!  I for one would love a Harry 
> Potter themed amusement park/ shopping area.

http://www.angelfire.com/tx5/worldofmagic/




From jenP_97 at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  8 16:59:00 2002
From: jenP_97 at yahoo.com (jenP_97)
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 16:59:00 -0000
Subject: Mike the Goat has moved in next door...
Message-ID: <agcgck+8pvn@eGroups.com>

Yes, yes, another update on the neighbors to the south... 
You know the ones...

My neighbors with the sewage problem and the stoned lawn-
mowing habits seem to have acquired a new family member: a 
baby goat.  Now while I can appreciate the merits of a goat 
(hi, Mike!), especially around this area where dry grass 
(and ALL the grass is dry in the summer) is a huge fire 
hazard, it's virtually unnecessary in the middle of town, 
where most people water their lawns/shrubs/plants.  It also 
seems a bit strange in the *middle* of town, where the lots 
are about 60' x 150' max, and half that space is taken up by 
a house and garage.  However, I can still make allowances 
for a more "natural" way of living... you know, the free 
fertilizer, the lack of fumes from the lawn mower, the 
companionship of a new pet... that kind of thing.  In fact, 
when we get a bigger yard (as in more than an acre of land), 
I fully plan on adopting some kind of grazing animal to 
help with the yard work.  

But my neighbors have locked this poor thing in the back 
yard, which they just *rototilled* a week ago.

So there are no plants back there for him to munch on.

They don't have to worry about mowing their lawn back there 
anymore... they don't have one.  They have maybe one bush back
there... and the rest is soft, "feet-sink-in-when-you-walk-
on-it" dirt.  The only thing I can think of that they're 
feeding that goat is either dog food or trash from the house 
(natural garbage disposal?), and that's not quite what I 
imagine is the high life for a goat.  Maybe Mike can prove 
me wrong, but I'll wait for his comment.

Of course, livestock is not allowed in our residential 
neighborhood per the zoning regulations, so I could always 
call them in... but it seems a little pointless, doesn't it?  
Maybe they're just "fattening him up" before a little old-
world supper, eh?

JenP, the mystified.  




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Mon Jul  8 13:10:02 2002
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 13:10:02 +0000 (EST5EDT)
Subject: Mike the Goat has moved in next door...
Message-ID: <54BD044EE@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

word of caution.....

My neighbors back in my hometown got goats once.  I adored 
them but I woke up one morning about a week after they 
bought them to my father yelling profanities and slamming 
the front door.......seems the goats had found a new 
perch....the top of my dad's new car.  :-)  And since then 
I've heard a couple people say that's happened to them, 
too.  Keep an eye on your cars!  They may turn into the 
prop for a rowdy game of King of the Mountain!

Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

LORD OF THE SNITCH
Three men form the chaser-squad under the sky 
Seven are the teammates on their brooms of wood
Two are Bludger balls charmed to fly
One is the dork Ref all on his own
On the field of Quidditch where the Quaffles lie.
One Snitch flits over all, one grab will win it
One game may take three months, or may take but a minute
On the field of Quidditch where the Quaffles lie.

http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm



From lmccabe at sonic.net  Mon Jul  8 17:39:48 2002
From: lmccabe at sonic.net (Linda C. McCabe)
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 10:39:48 -0700
Subject: A couple questions for Brits
Message-ID: <AKELJIAAIHFIEHOGCIBLMEOMCLAA.lmccabe@sonic.net>


Hello,
I'm writing a fan fic, (like so many others) and wanted to verify that a few
things we do here in the states is also done across the pond.

1) Do British children go from house to house Trick-or-Treating for candy on
Halloween?

2) At sporting events there's a few songs by the British rock group Queen
that have become commonplace anthems.  Such as "We Will Rock You" and "We
are the Champions."  Knowing that football (soccer) matches in England can
get a bit rough and rowdy - I'm assuming that those songs might also be sung
and have the stadium stomp with "We Will Rock You" done by fans.  Is this
true?  I'd like to introduce a little Muggle subversive sport spirit to
Quidditch, but want to make sure that the Brits also make use of those
songs.

3) Do Brits play basketball, ice hockey and/or street hockey?

Just wondering.

Thanks in advance,

Athena




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Jul  8 17:50:01 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 18:50:01 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] A couple questions for Brits
References: <AKELJIAAIHFIEHOGCIBLMEOMCLAA.lmccabe@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <3D29D0C9.000001.79203@monica>




Hello,
I'm writing a fan fic, (like so many others) and wanted to verify that a few
things we do here in the states is also done across the pond.

1) Do British children go from house to house Trick-or-Treating for candy on
Halloween?


not really.It's becoming a little bit more common now but it's still pretty
unusual.

2) At sporting events there's a few songs by the British rock group Queen
that have become commonplace anthems. Such as "We Will Rock You" and "We
are the Champions." Knowing that football (soccer) matches in England can
get a bit rough and rowdy - I'm assuming that those songs might also be sung
and have the stadium stomp with "We Will Rock You" done by fans. Is this
true? I'd like to introduce a little Muggle subversive sport spirit to
Quidditch, but want to make sure that the Brits also make use of those
songs.


yes there are songs but pretty much each team has it's own little collection
- wither actual songs (The Saints go marching in for Southampton and You'll
Never Walk Alone for Liverpool) or completely original words - usually set
to a common tune. National games are similar and you get a whole spectrum of
chanting and siging from Rule Britannia through Three Lions to songs for
individual players etc.


3) Do Brits play basketball, ice hockey and/or street hockey?

Ice Hockey's quite common but nowhere near as popular as in the US,
basketball happens but not much and street hockey is almost uneard of. If
you're looking for other sports which have a big following you're best bet
is probably Rugby - like American football but without the padding, but if
you're looking for what kids/teens play on their own then it's either
football or cricket, mainly football.

K



From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul  8 20:13:00 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 20:13:00 -0000
Subject: A couple questions for Brits
In-Reply-To: <3D29D0C9.000001.79203@monica>
Message-ID: <agcroc+qejc@eGroups.com>

Athena:

> I'm writing a fan fic, (like so many others) and wanted to verify 
that a few
> things we do here in the states is also done across the pond.
> 
> 1) Do British children go from house to house Trick-or-Treating for 
candy on
> Halloween?

Kathryn:

> not really.It's becoming a little bit more common now but it's 
still pretty
> unusual.
> 
I'd say it's become quite common, but it is recent, so if your fic is 
set, say in the MWPP era it might not have happened.

David




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Jul  8 20:17:43 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 21:17:43 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: A couple questions for Brits
References: <agcroc+qejc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D29F367.000003.79203@monica>


Athena:

> I'm writing a fan fic, (like so many others) and wanted to verify 
that a few
> things we do here in the states is also done across the pond.
> 
> 1) Do British children go from house to house Trick-or-Treating for 
candy on
> Halloween?

Kathryn:

> not really.It's becoming a little bit more common now but it's 
still pretty
> unusual.
> 

David:
I'd say it's become quite common, but it is recent, so if your fic is 
set, say in the MWPP era it might not have happened.


I wonder if it's a regional thing? I never get trick or treaters but I live
in a flat over a shop so I'm pretty inaccessible but I know my parents don't
get them either.

My parents live in Stevenage nr London which is a reasonable sized town,
what about other UK members - do you get trick or treaters and if so where
do you live?

K



From lmccabe at sonic.net  Mon Jul  8 21:23:47 2002
From: lmccabe at sonic.net (linda_mccabe)
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 21:23:47 -0000
Subject: A couple questions for Brits
In-Reply-To: <agcroc+qejc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agcvt3+t37d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "davewitley" <dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> Athena:
> 
> > I'm writing a fan fic, (like so many others) and wanted to 
verify 
> that a few
> > things we do here in the states is also done across the pond.
> > 
> > 1) Do British children go from house to house Trick-or-Treating 
for 
> candy on
> > Halloween?
> 
> Kathryn:
> 
> > not really.It's becoming a little bit more common now but it's 
> still pretty
> > unusual.
> > 
> I'd say it's become quite common, but it is recent, so if your fic 
is 
> set, say in the MWPP era it might not have happened.
> 
> David


I was thinking of Harry.  Whether or not he might have gone Trick or 
Treating while living in Surrey.  I thought if he did that he might 
have had a few sweets pocketed away before Dudley snatched Harry's 
sackful of candy.  Just thought it might be an interesting contrast 
to the Halloween feasts at Hogwarts, but don't want to include that 
if it wouldn't be likely in Britain.

I grew up Trick or Treating and looked forward to it each year.  
That was long before I knew anything about what the holiday was 
about.  It just seemed like a fun time for kids.  Get dressed up in 
a weird costume and go house to house begging for candy!  Such a 
deal.

--So if ice hockey is more common than street hockey -- does that 
mean people watch it on the telly?  (Maybe on satellite TV or at 
sports bars?) I'm looking for games where there's a similarity in 
game strategies to the scoring in Quidditch.  Football where there's 
a goal and goalie is similar enough to hockey (even if there aren't 
the same number of players).  Basketball doesn't use a goaltender, 
but it still has players who will try and block shots, rebound, etc.

What I'm looking for is the likelihood that a sports crazed Muggle 
such as Dean Thomas might be up on different sports such as 
basketball and hockey.  We know he loves football.  But could he be 
a fan and know some of the strategies of hockey even if he never put 
on a pair of skates in his life?

And thanks for the tip on Rugby, but I don't really want to learn 
all about these games - just enough to be dangerous...;-)

Athena




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Jul  8 21:51:53 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 21:51:53 -0000
Subject: A couple questions for Brits
In-Reply-To: <agcvt3+t37d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agd1hp+9296@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "linda_mccabe" <lmccabe at s...> wrote:

> What I'm looking for is the likelihood that a sports crazed Muggle 
> such as Dean Thomas might be up on different sports such as 
> basketball and hockey.  We know he loves football.  But could he be 
> a fan and know some of the strategies of hockey even if he never 
> put on a pair of skates in his life?

Harry isn't sports-crazed, but he knows enough that, in Book 1, when 
Oliver is explaining Quidditch to him: "The Chasers throw the Quaffle 
and put it through the hoops to score," Harry recited. "So -- that's 
sort of like basketball on broomsticks with six hoops, isn't it?"





From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Jul  8 21:56:39 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 22:56:39 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: A couple questions for Brits
References: <agcvt3+t37d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D2A0A97.000005.79203@monica>



--So if ice hockey is more common than street hockey -- does that 
mean people watch it on the telly? (Maybe on satellite TV or at 
sports bars?) I'm looking for games where there's a similarity in 
game strategies to the scoring in Quidditch. Football where there's 
a goal and goalie is similar enough to hockey (even if there aren't 
the same number of players). Basketball doesn't use a goaltender, 
but it still has players who will try and block shots, rebound, etc.

What I'm looking for is the likelihood that a sports crazed Muggle 
such as Dean Thomas might be up on different sports such as 
basketball and hockey. We know he loves football. But could he be 
a fan and know some of the strategies of hockey even if he never put 
on a pair of skates in his life?

And thanks for the tip on Rugby, but I don't really want to learn 
all about these games - just enough to be dangerous...;-)

Athena

I don't know abou satellite tv - which Dean might well have had at home if
either of his parents were as sports crazed as him, but Ice hockey isn't
really shown on terrestrial tv (except channel 5 at about 3am but then they
also show baseball and aussie rules football at that time so I don't think
it counts because they get about 12 viewers). If he was up on other sports
it would most likely be rugby and cricket, maybe field hockey (but kids
usually only learn that, and therefore only get interested, at senior
school). Rugby could be considered quite similar to quidditch in some ways,
although no goal tender, but there are sort of equivalents to chasers and
beaters. (does it show that I know nothing about it?)

Hell if he comes from London he could conceivably go and watch - football,
rugby, cricket, ice hockey, basketball,  american football, motor racing,
and greyhound racing without travelling too far!

K



From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul  8 22:12:54 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 22:12:54 -0000
Subject: A couple questions for Brits
In-Reply-To: <agcvt3+t37d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agd2p6+b2v3@eGroups.com>

Athena:

> I was thinking of Harry.  Whether or not he might have gone Trick 
or 
> Treating while living in Surrey.  I thought if he did that he might 
> have had a few sweets pocketed away before Dudley snatched Harry's 
> sackful of candy.  Just thought it might be an interesting contrast 
> to the Halloween feasts at Hogwarts, but don't want to include that 
> if it wouldn't be likely in Britain.

Difficult one.  On the one hand, the Dursleys might think it cute 
their darling Dudley sweetly offering to wreak nameless crimes upon 
their neighbours.  On the other, they are pretty conservative and 
could look on trick or treating as a vulgar American custom.  In 
either case I doubt they'd let Harry join in.

> I grew up Trick or Treating and looked forward to it each year.  
> That was long before I knew anything about what the holiday was 
> about.  It just seemed like a fun time for kids.  Get dressed up in 
> a weird costume and go house to house begging for candy!  Such a 
> deal.

My vague childhood memory is of dressing up and carrying turnip 
lanterns at Hallowe'en, but I'm not sure what we all *did* when we 
were out on the streets.

> --So if ice hockey is more common than street hockey -- does that 
> mean people watch it on the telly?

I'd say mostly no.  The Guildford Flames near where I live are one of 
the top teams in the country, I believe, and I don't think their 
games are televised.  Their followers have to turn up to the matches 
to be able to see them.  (It's quite fun to go to the matches, just 
because the sport doesn't attract big money)  But Dean could do that: 
I don't know if there's a team local to his part of London.

  (Maybe on satellite TV or at 
> sports bars?) I'm looking for games where there's a similarity in 
> game strategies to the scoring in Quidditch.

I can't really think of any sport where such a large part of the game 
hinges on a single action.  Oddly enough, I suppose the 'Golden Goal' 
phase of the soccer World Cup knock-out matches comes closest: but 
league matches don't have that.  In some versions of rounders (the 
British version of baseball) if the fielding team catches the ball 
then the batting team is all out.  But rounders is not a commercial 
game at all.

  Football where there's 
> a goal and goalie is similar enough to hockey (even if there aren't 
> the same number of players).  Basketball doesn't use a goaltender, 
> but it still has players who will try and block shots, rebound, etc.
> 
> What I'm looking for is the likelihood that a sports crazed Muggle 
> such as Dean Thomas might be up on different sports such as 
> basketball and hockey.  We know he loves football.  But could he be 
> a fan and know some of the strategies of hockey even if he never 
put 
> on a pair of skates in his life?

That's entirely possible.  To be a sports fan doesn't require any 
actual ability (or desire) to play, any more than HPFGU membership 
requires wizarding ability.

David




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  9 03:23:02 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 20:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Mike the Goat has moved in next door...
In-Reply-To: <agcgck+8pvn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020709032302.70784.qmail@web13706.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  jenP_97 <jenP_97 at yahoo.com> wrote: 
Yes, yes, another update on the neighbors to the south... 
You know the ones...

My neighbors with the sewage problem and the stoned lawn-
mowing habits seem to have acquired a new family member: a 
baby goat.  

Jen, I wouldn't trust them with a baby anything! They can't even take care of themselves or their kids, and of course where they live, to even think of proper feeding of a baby goat? No way! If you have to protect the little cutie, call for help because these people just don't care about life of anykind. They sound like that family from the X Files with ( the episode about inbreeding! Yuck!). Keep on your toes and don't hesitate to call in for Backup! Power of the media! Worse comes to worse! I just can't believe they would stoop that low and endanger a baby goat. But these are the neighbors from hell, so yeah, they would. Just watch out for the little baby. 

Schnoogles,

Wanda the Witch and Her VEry Merry Band of Muggles 100% aka 3 Stooges, now worrying about a baby goat!


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From macloudt at hotmail.com  Tue Jul  9 08:23:05 2002
From: macloudt at hotmail.com (Mary Jennings)
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 08:23:05 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Halloween in England and stitching news
Message-ID: <F10oIuey8ciHWaG8n8B0000b04d@hotmail.com>

David, in regards to trick-or-treating in Britain, said:

>I'd say it's become quite common, but it is recent, so if your fic is
>set, say in the MWPP era it might not have happened.

To which K replied:
>I wonder if it's a regional thing? I never get trick or treaters but I live
>in a flat over a shop so I'm pretty inaccessible but I know my parents 
>don't
>get them either.
>
>My parents live in Stevenage nr London which is a reasonable sized town,
>what about other UK members - do you get trick or treaters and if so where
>do you live?

I live in Weston-super-Mare (no giggling in the back row, please), and I had 
two lots of trick-or-treaters come by the house last October.  One lot 
didn't count anyway, because they were our Young Guide Leaders who dropped 
by to say hello and sponge some candy ;)  The other group of kids were 
preteen boys who didn't even have bags with them to hold their candy, so 
they didn't actually know what they were doing.  I'd say it's catching on, 
but *very* slowly.

One thing to keep in mind is that many Christians here link Halloween with 
Paganism and, in extreme cases, Satanism.  And I'm not talking just the "HP 
is Evil" brigade; I'm talking Church of England (some of their vicars 
anyway).  While only 15% or so of the population are practicing Christians 
several people I know are uncomfortable with the whole idea of Halloween 
because for them it still holds spiritual significance of some non-Christian 
sort.  It will be a long while, I think, before it's seen as a fun, secular 
reason for dressing up in ridiculous costumes and consuming your own body 
weight in mini Mars bars.

Now on to the second topic of my post...

:::::bounces up and down with glee:::::  This morning my lovely postman 
brought me the latest cross stitch pattern book I ordered.  And yes, it's 
Harry himself, along with loads of other patterns, including alphabet 
samplers, the Sorting Hat, Snape (looking decidedly vampirish) and even 
several poses of Norbert.  The book is WB and DMC approved so it's nice 
quality stuff.  The book is French but that's no worry as the charts are 
very clear and are colour rather than symbol.  If anyone wants more info 
about this email me privately and I'll gladly give you any info you need to 
order it for yourself.

Mary Ann
(happily deciding what she's going to stitch first)


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com




From mike at aberforthsgoat.net  Tue Jul  9 10:16:58 2002
From: mike at aberforthsgoat.net (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 12:16:58 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Mike the Goat has moved in next door...
References: <agcgck+8pvn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006d01c22731$c3dda9c0$0200a8c0@shasta>

Bother. I go to all this trouble to spy on Jen, and before I can
even get started, she busts my cover. What a waste of time!

> The only thing I can think of that they're
> feeding that goat is either dog food or trash from the house
> (natural garbage disposal?), and that's not quite what I
> imagine is the high life for a goat.  Maybe Mike can prove
> me wrong, but I'll wait for his comment.

Actually, we goats generally prefer baked sole with Champaign and
truffle sauce. That herbicide-on-four-legs business was part of a
systematic plan to undermine hircine rights and deprive us of our
natural nutrition and habitat (five star restaurants).

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
_______________________

"Of course, I'm not entirely sure he can read, so that
may not have been bravery...."





From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Jul  9 14:50:07 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 15:50:07 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Halloween in England and stitching news
References: <F10oIuey8ciHWaG8n8B0000b04d@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <3D2AF81F.000004.04175@monica>


Oooh, that's a good point - I hould have thought of that. My aunt is head
mistress of a boarding school and her chaplian had a fit when she did a big
Halloween thing for the kids - really didn't like the fortune teller, which
since it was the art mistress dressed up and everyone knew it was just for
fun and she didn't claim to have any actual ability seemed a little ott, but
then he tried to get the HP books banned from the school too - until my aunt
pinned a newspaper article about the Archbishop of Canterbury saying the
books were good and dealt with the struggle between good and evil, to his
front door!

K
btw - email me details about the HP cross stitch book? I just finished a map
for my father which took 6 years and I'm looking for a new project,
preferably slightly smaller than the map!
-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 09 July 2002 09:23:12
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Halloween in England and stitching news
I live in Weston-super-Mare (no giggling in the back row, please), and I had

two lots of trick-or-treaters come by the house last October. One lot 
didn't count anyway, because they were our Young Guide Leaders who dropped 
by to say hello and sponge some candy ;) The other group of kids were 
preteen boys who didn't even have bags with them to hold their candy, so 
they didn't actually know what they were doing. I'd say it's catching on, 
but *very* slowly.

One thing to keep in mind is that many Christians here link Halloween with 
Paganism and, in extreme cases, Satanism. And I'm not talking just the "HP 
is Evil" brigade; I'm talking Church of England (some of their vicars 
anyway). While only 15% or so of the population are practicing Christians 
several people I know are uncomfortable with the whole idea of Halloween 
because for them it still holds spiritual significance of some non-Christian

sort. It will be a long while, I think, before it's seen as a fun, secular 
reason for dressing up in ridiculous costumes and consuming your own body 
weight in mini Mars bars.

Now on to the second topic of my post...

:::::bounces up and down with glee::::: This morning my lovely postman 
brought me the latest cross stitch pattern book I ordered. And yes, it's 
Harry himself, along with loads of other patterns, including alphabet 
samplers, the Sorting Hat, Snape (looking decidedly vampirish) and even 
several poses of Norbert. The book is WB and DMC approved so it's nice 
quality stuff. The book is French but that's no worry as the charts are 
very clear and are colour rather than symbol. If anyone wants more info 
about this email me privately and I'll gladly give you any info you need to 
order it for yourself.

Mary Ann
(happily deciding what she's going to stitch first)


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com


________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



From coriolan at worldnet.att.net  Tue Jul  9 16:39:10 2002
From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc2001)
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 16:39:10 -0000
Subject: Membership Drop on HP4GU
Message-ID: <agf3je+p8mi@eGroups.com>

Just over a week ago, HP4GU listed about 4200 members. Now it's 
dropped to below 4000.  Was there some policy stance proclaimed by 
the moderators that prompted 200 plus folks to resign or protest? Is 
some assiduous soul weeding out defunct e-mail addresses? Or is there 
some other explanation at work?

  - CMC




From pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no  Tue Jul  9 20:40:17 2002
From: pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no (pengolodh_sc)
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 20:40:17 -0000
Subject: Membership Drop on HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <agf3je+p8mi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agfhnh+fum2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter "coriolan_cmc2001" wrote:
> Just over a week ago, HP4GU listed about 4200 members. Now
> it's dropped to below 4000.  Was there some policy stance
> proclaimed by  the moderators that prompted 200 plus folks to
> resign or protest? Is some assiduous soul weeding out defunct
> e-mail addresses? Or is there some other explanation at work?
> 
>   - CMC

I think Yahoo!Groups has a policy of weeding out members with 
bouncing mailaddresses - if a number of messages from the group 
go ::bounce!::, I think Yahoo!Groups simply unsubs that address.  I 
have seen messages to this effect from mods of various Groups I am 
on.  The problem is most pronounced with Hotmail-users, apparently 
(because they have a 2MB inbox maximum, and it goes bounce the moment 
you're over that limit - some other mail-suppliers do not bounce 
immediately).

Best regards
Christian Stub?






From Ali at zymurgy.org  Tue Jul  9 21:11:38 2002
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (alhewison)
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 21:11:38 -0000
Subject: What is a US style graduation?
Message-ID: <agfjia+t5e6@eGroups.com>

This is a bit of a confession. It annoys me when I see posts about 
Harry's graduation, or about any Hogwart's Graduation. In England, 
Graduation ceremonies only take place for degrees, in tertiary 
education, and not for secondary education. Students don't get their 
results for weeks after term has ended, and the way our exam system 
works, you can pass a whole stack of subjects - or none, so what 
would you be a graduate of?  

BUT,

 a couple of weeks ago, I read an article about how some British 
schools are now having a US style "Prom" - forgive me if this isn't 
the right wording. In Britain this could equate to nothing more than 
a celebration without exam results being involved. Well, it then 
occured to me that as the WW doesn't seem to have a University, then 
they could perhaps have some kind of ceremony to mark the 
official "Qualification" of the young wizards- AKA a "graduation". We 
have not been told how the OWL or NEWT system works, so I suppose 
that to be a "fully qualified" wizard as opposed to a an "of age" 
wizard, there might be a requirement for a certain number of exam 
passes.

Anyway, sorry for all that waffle, it's just made me wonder how the 
US system works. Are there a standard number of subjects that have to 
be passed? Is the standard set across States or across the Country as 
a whole? can true comparisons be made from one school to another - 
for instance, With our A'Levels: the standard is arguably the same 
for whatever subjects you choose to take wherever you take them (In 
England & Wales). 


Ali

Who doesn't think that Harry would ever have gone trick-or-treating. 
It's still in its infancy here as we have Bonfire Night only a few 
days later. Some kids do go out, but 10 years ago I think it would 
have been quite rare. When I was growing up, Halloween 
was "celebrated" by eating toffee apples, having apple-dunking 
competitions and blindfold tasting tests. I don't remember any 
sinister links to satanism, but just a low key bit of fun. 




From pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no  Tue Jul  9 22:04:27 2002
From: pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no (pengolodh_sc)
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 22:04:27 -0000
Subject: What is a US style graduation?
In-Reply-To: <agfjia+t5e6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agfmlc+evgf@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter, "alhewison" wrote:
> This is a bit of a confession. It annoys me when I see posts
> about Harry's graduation, or about any Hogwart's Graduation.
> In England, Graduation ceremonies only take place for degrees,
> in tertiary education, and not for secondary education.
> Students don't get their results for weeks after term has
> ended, and the way our exam system works, you can pass a
> whole stack of subjects - or none, so what would you be a
> graduate of?  
> 
> BUT,
> 
>  a couple of weeks ago, I read an article about how some
> British  schools are now having a US style "Prom" - forgive
> me if this isn't  the right wording. In Britain this could
> equate to nothing more than  a celebration without exam results
> being involved. Well, it then  occured to me that as the WW
> doesn't seem to have a University, then  they could perhaps
> have some kind of ceremony to mark the  official
> "Qualification" of the young wizards- AKA a "graduation". We 
> have not been told how the OWL or NEWT system works, so I
> suppose  that to be a "fully qualified" wizard as opposed to
> a an "of age" wizard, there might be a requirement for a
> certain number of exam passes.
> 
> Anyway, sorry for all that waffle, it's just made me wonder
> how the US system works. Are there a standard number of
> subjects that have to be passed? Is the standard set across
> States or across the Country as a whole? can true comparisons
> be made from one school to another - for instance, With our
> A'Levels: the standard is arguably the same for whatever
> subjects you choose to take wherever you take them (In England
> & Wales). 
> 
> 
> Ali
> 
> Who doesn't think that Harry would ever have gone trick-or-
> treating. 
> It's still in its infancy here as we have Bonfire Night only
> a few days later. Some kids do go out, but 10 years ago I think
> it would have been quite rare. When I was growing up, Halloween
> was "celebrated" by eating toffee apples, having apple-dunking
> competitions and blindfold tasting tests. I don't remember any
> sinister links to satanism, but just a low key bit of fun.

I spent almost a year in highschool in Kentucky, so I will attempt to 
provide a few answers based on the Kentucky way.  Systems differ in 
detail from state to state, and are the responsibility of the states -
 I suspect any attempt by the Federal government to introduce a 
unitary nationwide educational system would be doomed to failure.  
Nevertheless, standards aren't too different, as there are nationwide 
standardised tests, mostly used by universities and colleges to 
decide who should be admitted.  Schools measure themselves by these 
tests, and compare themselves to other schools.

First, prom and graduation are not directly linked - at least, in 
Kentucky they were not.  Prom is a formal dance event, similar to the 
Yule Ball - for male students, lounge suit was the barest minimum of 
expected attire, and dinner jacket/tuxedo or evening outift 
(tailcoat, white starched vest, white starched shirt with attachable 
collar, white bowtie, black patent pumps with black silk bows, etc.) 
outfits were preferred.  In Kentucky only students of the last two 
years (juniors and seniors) could go alone to prom, younger students 
could only go as the date of a junior or a senior.  

Graduation was a separate event.  I'll give some description of what 
I observed, as a service to non-US members who've not seen one.  It 
takes place a few days after the end of term - the finals at my 
highschool (and across Kentucky, as the school was not a private 
school) were one-period affairs, with mostly multiple choice answers, 
and marked/graded locally.  The affair took place in the gym, so that 
a maximum number of people would be present - the extended family and 
friends of the graduates would be present, as well as a number of 
lower-year students, and all teachers and staff at the highschool.  

When the time arrived, the schoolband starts playing the last part of 
Edgar's Pomp And Circumstance No. 4 (the singing part, called "Land 
of Hope and Glory" (or "Rand of Hopp and Gurolly" for some non-
anglophones)) on cycled repeat, while the Seniors, wearing gowns and 
those bizarre caps looking a bit like Polish czapkas, file in from 
the entrance-doors to the stand of seats at the opposite end of the 
Gym.  Then some speeches followed, by the principal Mr North (a 
bastard who beat up students, and cheated on his wife with his 
secretary), the Valedictorian (best student, if I got things right), 
and the Salutatorian (second best student, as I understood).  

Then diplomas were handed out.  In Kentucky, there were three or four 
different diplomas.  The basic diploma simply required that one had 
passed the quivalent of 22 one-year subjects (some subjects only 
lasted one semester).  One couldn't take more than seven subjects per 
year, so unless there was a special case, skipping years was not 
common.  The core subjects, including four years of English, maths up 
to Algebra I(I think), Geography, PNC (basic Science-subject), US 
History, World History, etc., had to be passed to get a diploma.  
Beyond this there was the honour's diploma, which required more 
subjects, and more advanced subjects, and I think there was a higher 
level honours diploma as well, which was even harder.  In addition 
there was the Kentucky Governor's Diploma, with requirements for a 
high number of subjects, including many Advanced Placement subjects 
(subjects at the level of first year in college - these subjects are 
chosen by the students), including several year of at least one 
foreign language, and a requirement for grades above a certain level.

Results of the standardised tests mentioned on top have no bearing on 
graduation.

Note that it is almost eight years since I was in Kentucky, so I may 
have misrembered some things, and some things may have changed.  
Still, I hope this helps.

Best regards
Christian Stub?




From editor at texas.net  Tue Jul  9 22:39:56 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 17:39:56 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Mike the Goat has moved in next door...
References: <agcgck+8pvn@eGroups.com> <006d01c22731$c3dda9c0$0200a8c0@shasta>
Message-ID: <00f001c22799$8d918900$8d7663d1@texas.net>

The Goat said

> Actually, we goats generally prefer baked sole with Champaign and
> truffle sauce. That herbicide-on-four-legs business was part of a
> systematic plan to undermine hircine rights and deprive us of our
> natural nutrition and habitat (five star restaurants).

This from the goat who drank all the motor oil at my birthday party.

--Amanda




From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca  Tue Jul  9 23:21:57 2002
From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari)
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 23:21:57 -0000
Subject: What is a US style graduation?
In-Reply-To: <agfjia+t5e6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agfr6m+id29@eGroups.com>

This is a Canadian graduation, but basically US-style. 

I graduated May 2001. Anyone who looks eligible to pass Grade 12 in 
about January got to come. If you didn't pass Grade 12, you were 
barred from attending another graduation the next year. :-)

On the day of the graduation, the Opera House was booked. The students 
marched in as the Symphonic Band played that theme from Star Wars, 
everyone in blue robes with the scholars' hats that had to be rented 
beforehand. For a boring four hours, everyone sat on the floor 
listening to the Valedictorian, the Principal, the Superintendant, the 
Chairs (local media personalities), the Trustee, the Head of the 
Leadership Committee, the Head of the Grad Committee, the winners of 
every award you could think of, intersparsed with performances by the 
Jass Choir, against a very expensive background. Then, one by one all 
650 students walked across the stage, shaking hands with the 
principal, and receiving a fake diploma.

Three days later was the Prom at the biggest convention centre in the 
city, overlooking the nicest view in the city. The food was really 
bad, though. For that occasion, everyone was decked out in dresses 
starting at $250 (mine) and going considerably higher. More boring 
speeches. Lots more boring speeches. Some people rent their own 
limousines, a substantial bunch. Supposedly, dancing afterwards but 
since lots of parents there, after the prom most people ditched their 
parents and headed off to after-prom parties. 

A glorification of crass commercialism, materialism etc. If I ever 
have my own children, I'm going to suggest taking them on a trip to 
the mountains rather than attending their graduation/prom. 

I would be profoundly disappointed if Harry, Ron, and Hermione were to 
engage in such pathetic behaviour. I expect a huge party, but I don't 
see Hermione breaking her parent's bank on a dress from Madame 
Malkin's, and Ron sulking because his parents won't foot the bill for 
his own flying limousine.

Eileen

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "alhewison" <Ali at z...> wrote:
> This is a bit of a confession. It annoys me when I see posts about 
> Harry's graduation, or about any Hogwart's Graduation. In England, 
> Graduation ceremonies only take place for degrees, in tertiary 
> education, and not for secondary education. Students don't get their 
> results for weeks after term has ended, and the way our exam system 
> works, you can pass a whole stack of subjects - or none, so what 
> would you be a graduate of?  
> 
> BUT,
> 
>  a couple of weeks ago, I read an article about how some British 
> schools are now having a US style "Prom" - forgive me if this isn't 
> the right wording. In Britain this could equate to nothing more than 
> a celebration without exam results being involved. Well, it then 
> occured to me that as the WW doesn't seem to have a University, then 
> they could perhaps have some kind of ceremony to mark the 
> official "Qualification" of the young wizards- AKA a "graduation". 
We 
> have not been told how the OWL or NEWT system works, so I suppose 
> that to be a "fully qualified" wizard as opposed to a an "of age" 
> wizard, there might be a requirement for a certain number of exam 
> passes.
> 
> Anyway, sorry for all that waffle, it's just made me wonder how the 
> US system works. Are there a standard number of subjects that have 
to 
> be passed? Is the standard set across States or across the Country 
as 
> a whole? can true comparisons be made from one school to another - 
> for instance, With our A'Levels: the standard is arguably the same 
> for whatever subjects you choose to take wherever you take them (In 
> England & Wales). 
> 
> 
> Ali
> 
> Who doesn't think that Harry would ever have gone trick-or-treating. 
> It's still in its infancy here as we have Bonfire Night only a few 
> days later. Some kids do go out, but 10 years ago I think it would 
> have been quite rare. When I was growing up, Halloween 
> was "celebrated" by eating toffee apples, having apple-dunking 
> competitions and blindfold tasting tests. I don't remember any 
> sinister links to satanism, but just a low key bit of fun.




From goku_n_vegeta_02 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 10 00:18:19 2002
From: goku_n_vegeta_02 at yahoo.com (goku_n_vegeta_02)
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 00:18:19 -0000
Subject: Sad News
Message-ID: <agfugb+if3b@eGroups.com>

Today my cat Blacky died. He was fourteen years old. For a year he 
has been losing weight and was once put on kidney medicaion. But just 
about a month ago we had to take him to the vet because he was crying 
and just these last few days he started really going down hill. My 
mom and I were going to take him to the vet to have him put to sleep, 
but we got out wish and he died with us. Luckily it was quick and I 
pray painless. His heart just stopped. My mom and I were both both 
petting him and telling him that it was okay to let go, and he did. A 
few hours ago we took him to the vet to have him cremated and we 
should have his ashes back between one and two weeks.

Last night I was upset enough to go sit with him at three in the 
morning and I cried and petted his head, hoping that he would go in 
my arms. I slept in the living room with him in the reclining chair 
and kept my hand in the laundry basket (we made a bed for him to try 
and keep him comfortable. We didn't want him to get hurt wandering 
around the house, Blacky recently went blind) with him just so he 
knew I was there. Then today when he died I didn't cry until 
afterward. I was in shock and I guess I still am. But I tried to stay 
strong for my mom. I hate death. But I'm just glad that that angel is 
not suffering anymore.

Before I send this out I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were 
on animal afterlifes. Two of my parents friends are very very 
religious, and they told us on several occasions that animals do not 
have souls. I want to believe that they do have souls, but since they 
have read the bible several times I'm questioning my beliefs. Does 
the bible say that animals don't have souls? And this is OT, but what 
does it say about homosexuals? Ruth and Ernie (my parents friend I 
just mentioned) say that all homo's will go to hell. Me being 
bisexual I am terrified.

Thanks for listening,
Shaynie





From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Jul 10 00:37:30 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 19:37:30 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter]  stitching news
References: <F10oIuey8ciHWaG8n8B0000b04d@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <005a01c227a9$fa0ff020$3c9fcdd1@istu757>

Mary Ann writes:

> :::::bounces up and down with glee:::::  This morning my lovely postman
> brought me the latest cross stitch pattern book I ordered.  And yes, it's
> Harry himself, along with loads of other patterns, including alphabet
> samplers, the Sorting Hat, Snape (looking decidedly vampirish) and even
> several poses of Norbert.  The book is WB and DMC approved so it's nice
> quality stuff.  The book is French but that's no worry as the charts are
> very clear and are colour rather than symbol.  If anyone wants more info
> about this email me privately and I'll gladly give you any info you need
to
> order it for yourself.

Glad to hear it's good--I'm about to order it myself.  There is one place
that I know of in the U.S. that carries it.  I have an internet friend who
works there--I had her check it out for me to see if it had Hogwarts castle
and the size of the chart for it.  She promptly check and wrote back to
inform me that yes, it had "Warthog Castle."  She's not into HP to say the
least!  We got it straight though!  So it is easy enough to read even though
I don't speak a word of French?

Richelle





From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 10 02:27:55 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 19:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Sad News
In-Reply-To: <agfugb+if3b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020710022755.86838.qmail@web13702.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  goku_n_vegeta_02 <goku_n_vegeta_02 at yahoo.com> wrote: 
Today my cat Blacky died. He was fourteen years old. 

Shaynie, I know your pain! My Freeway was 19 years old and she passed away back in 1995. I miss her tons! She was such a part of my life. I don't know for sure about an animals soul but I know she had one, she was her own special cat with her own special antics! We are not really allowed to get into a reglious comment because of such a wide diversity of reglions and people on this list so I sent you another email off list. But I just wanted you to know I know what your feeling and keep remembering all the fun things your cat has done. Always happy thoughts! You will have the tears now and then, I still do! I love my Freeway, always! Notice I didn't put it past tense, she is and always be a part of me! With you at this sad time.

Schnoogles,

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Band of Muggles 100%(my muggles share your grief at this time) 


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
New! SBC Yahoo! Dial - 1st Month Free & unlimited access

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Jul 10 13:41:09 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:41:09 -0000
Subject: Membership Drop on HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <agf3je+p8mi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <aghdhl+k66t@eGroups.com>

Day 1032, 13:15pm.  In the Big Riddle Castle, the castle-mates are 
doing this week's task.  They have been asked to produce 75 forum 
posts a day continuously for three years, about *nothing at all* 
while sticking slavishly to canon.

Meanwhile, Caius Marcius goes to the Diary Room:

> Just over a week ago, HP4GU listed about 4200 members. Now it's 
> dropped to below 4000.  Was there some policy stance proclaimed by 
> the moderators that prompted 200 plus folks to resign or protest? 
Is 
> some assiduous soul weeding out defunct e-mail addresses? Or is 
there 
> some other explanation at work?

(cue basilisk hissing music)

Who dies?  *You* decide!

To vote for Hagrid, write 'Hagrid' in the Riddle Diary, 
or dial j-e-n-n-y-r-a-v-e-n-c-l-a-w
To vote for Ginny, write 'Ginny' in the Riddle Diary, 
or dial l-i-n-s-e-n-m-a-y-e-r
To vote for Snape, write 'Snape' in the Riddle Diary, 
or dial c-i-n-d-y-s-p-h-y-n-x





From boggles at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 10 20:14:50 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:14:50 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] What is a US style graduation?
In-Reply-To: <agfjia+t5e6@eGroups.com>
References: <agfjia+t5e6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010401b9523b6baba1@[66.32.49.165]>

At 9:11 PM +0000 7/9/02, alhewison wrote:
>
>Anyway, sorry for all that waffle, it's just made me wonder how the
>US system works.

I'm a high school teacher in Texas, and, unfortunately, there isn't 
so much a US system as there are 50 different state systems that bear 
a certain resemblance to each other.  What I will be describing is 
the Texas system, which is also pretty close to that I went through 
as a high school student in Mississippi and not too different from 
other state systems across the South; the California and
New York versions are slightly different from this and from each other.

>Are there a standard number of subjects that have to
>be passed?

More or less.  To earn a high school diploma, one must earn a certain 
number of credits; passing a semester-long class earns half a credit, 
and passing a year-long one earns a full credit.  The number of 
credits is one of the things which varies by state; in Texas, the 
minimum requirement is 22 credits, but 24 credits is strongly 
recommended.  In Mississippi at the time I graduated, I recall the 
requirement was only 20 credits (I believe it is more now).

Here's where things get goofy: the different states require different 
mandatory subjects to be among those credits.  Texas offers three 
different diplomas.  What is called the Minimum Plan diploma requires 
four credits in English, three in math including Algebra I, two in 
science, two and a half in history, one-half credit in economics, two 
credits in physical education including Health, half a credit in 
Speech Communications, and one credit an a technology-related course; 
the rest of the credits can be electives.  The Recommended Plan 
diploma, which a student must earn if s/he wishes to attend college, 
requires another credit each in science and history, two credits of a 
foreign language, one credit in the Fine Arts, and states that the 
three credits in mathematics must be Algebra I, Algebra II, and 
Geometry.  The Distinguished Plan diploma further requires a third 
year of a foreign language, either a fourth math credit and a fourth 
science credit or two and a half credits in career preparation 
courses (for example, an internship), and either a senior project or 
a high score on Advanced Placement tests.  The standards for any 
given state are likely to come close to matching either the Minimum 
or the Recommended diplomas, but are unlikely to match them exactly; 
for instance, when I was a student in Mississippi, the graduation 
plan was close to the current Texas Minimum Plan, but required only 
two mathematics courses, and Algebra was not required.

>Is the standard set across States or across the Country as
>a whole?

Across a given state, the standards are pretty much the same.  From 
state to state, they can vary quite a bit.

>can true comparisons be made from one school to another -
>for instance, With our A'Levels: the standard is arguably the same
>for whatever subjects you choose to take wherever you take them (In
>England & Wales).

The only usable comparisons between schools in different states are 
the national college-entry exams, like the SAT, ACT, or the Advanced 
Placement (AP) exams.  the first two are norm-referenced tests that 
are supposed to measure one's scholastic aptitude, rather than 
precisely what one has learned, so in some sense they're not a fair 
comparison; a magnet school for the academically gifted is likely to 
score higher than a "regular" school even if the quality of 
instruction is the same.  The AP exams, on the other hand, are 
content-referenced; they measure the student against a set of 
pre-listed criteria in a specific subject area, not against the 
scores of other students.  They're graded on a scale of one to five; 
one is not passing, two is borderline, three is a minimal pass, four 
is passing, and five is a high pass.  Students who score fours and 
fives (and, at some state colleges, threes) on AP exams are often 
given credit for the introductory-level course in that subject area. 
Most schools offer honors or other high-level courses for student who 
wish to take the AP exams; while a magnet school might have more 
students taking the exams, a class that makes fours and fives at any 
school is generally evidence of good instruction.

A US high school graduation is generally a lot like a college 
graduation, except the parents are less well-behaved - the students 
dress in rented robes and mortarboards (either black or in the school 
colors; the school I teach at uses blue ones), march in in line, sit 
in rows and listen to various speeches ranging from the platitudinal 
to the mildly inspiring (including ones from the student body 
president, the saludatorian (second best student in the graduating 
class), and the valedictorian (best student)), walk across the stage 
in alphabetical order, receive either their diploma or (more often) a 
diploma cover from the school's principal and the district's 
superintendent, and march back out.  The actual diplomas are usually 
mailed to the student a couple of weeks later.  Individual schools 
and districts can make the event quite fancy; in our district, and in 
the school I was graduated from, the teachers and principals wore 
their academic gowns and hoods as well, and an auditorium was rented 
for the occasion from a local college (in both cases the school's gym 
would have been too small).


>When I was growing up, Halloween
>was "celebrated" by eating toffee apples, having apple-dunking
>competitions and blindfold tasting tests. I don't remember any
>sinister links to satanism, but just a low key bit of fun.

The only "sinister links to Satanism" in Halloween celebrations are 
the ones paranoids put there.  What you describe is closer to the old 
Pagan celebrations than plastic masks, electric doorbells, and 
pre-wrapped candy are.  :)


-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Thu Jul 11 11:14:04 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 11:14:04 -0000
Subject: Membership Drop on HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <aghdhl+k66t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agjp9s+chhq@eGroups.com>

David wrote:

> (cue basilisk hissing music)
> 
> Who dies?  *You* decide!
> 
> To vote for Hagrid, write 'Hagrid' in the Riddle Diary, 
> or dial j-e-n-n-y-r-a-v-e-n-c-l-a-w
> To vote for Ginny, write 'Ginny' in the Riddle Diary, 
> or dial l-i-n-s-e-n-m-a-y-e-r
> To vote for Snape, write 'Snape' in the Riddle Diary, 
> or dial c-i-n-d-y-s-p-h-y-n-x

LOL!  Or, ominously, these powerful wizards may be submitting votes 
themselves.  Hm, didn't I hear Jenny say she was having Yahoo 
problems?  Can it be that Hagrid has more influence than we thought?

Amy
never going to say anything bad about Snape again




From macloudt at hotmail.com  Thu Jul 11 13:03:07 2002
From: macloudt at hotmail.com (macloudt)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 13:03:07 -0000
Subject: Trying to reach Linda
Message-ID: <agjvmb+ubk9@eGroups.com>

Please excuse my use of the board for a personal message, but Linda 
contacted me about the HP cross-stitch book and my message to her 
bounced.  So, Linda, if you read this, the ISBN number is 2 84270 286-
7.

Dizzy Elf shall now resume slamming her ears in the over door.

Mary Ann
(who hates her computer some days)




From meboriqua at aol.com  Thu Jul 11 13:32:23 2002
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 13:32:23 -0000
Subject: Membership Drop on HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <agjp9s+chhq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agk1d7+jca7@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "lupinesque" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:

>Hm, didn't I hear Jenny say she was having Yahoo problems?  Can it be 
that Hagrid has more influence than we thought?>

Yeah, *right* - like Hagrid would be able to cause problems with Yahoo 
Messenger...  unless he thinks he's helping.

--jenny from ravenclaw, furious that Yahoo Messenger is *still* saying 
I'm disconnected ***********************************************




From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Thu Jul 11 13:52:00 2002
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 13:52:00 -0000
Subject: LOTR movie - second time!
Message-ID: <agk2i0+teu9@eGroups.com>

Hi,

Yesterdary, I saw LOTR for the second time. WOW!! What a movie. It's 
odd how it replicates the way I experienced the book - no matter how 
often I read it, it still managed to grip me in an almost too intense 
way. The same with the movie. I was just as involved (and really 
terrified at some points) as I was the first time I saw it. I have to 
say again - WOW!

I'm sure some people here saw LOTR more than once. Did you find it as 
compelling the second time like I did or was the experience 
different? 


Naama




From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Thu Jul 11 15:32:06 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:32:06 -0000
Subject: Sad News
In-Reply-To: <agfugb+if3b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agk8dm+5797@eGroups.com>

Shaynie wrote:
> Today my cat Blacky died. He was fourteen years old....
> Before I send this out I was wondering what everyone's thoughts
were 
> on animal afterlifes. Two of my parents friends are very very 
> religious, and they told us on several occasions that animals do
not 
> have souls. I want to believe that they do have souls, but since
they 
> have read the bible several times I'm questioning my beliefs. Does 
> the bible say that animals don't have souls? And this is OT, but
what 
> does it say about homosexuals?...

Oh, Shaynie, I am sorry to hear about your cat.  It is very hard to
lose  a pet.  At least you have the comfort of knowing that you made
him happy for many years.

I imagine that other people here are wondering about your questions
about religion, and I think I can say a few things that may be
informative, while not being inflammatory. In general, the Bible is
not very specific about the afterlife, mostly just referring to it as
a garden. (Paradise means garden in Persian.) I don't think it ever
clearly says whether animals have souls, but there are certainly
places where God expresses his concern for animals. For example, God
tells Jonah that He has spared the evil city of Nineveh for the sake
of its innocent children and livestock.  (Jonah is my favorite book,
and is very comforting if you think God is angry with you.) 

As for homosexuality, discussions of it in the Hebrew Bible (the Old
Testament) pretty clearly refer to men only, not women.  One should
also note that the Old Testament bans a huge variety of behaviors that
are quite accepted in modern society. In the New Testament, I don't
think Jesus ever mentions homosexuality at all, although he does
condemn some other types of sexual behavior (for example, a man
divorcing his wife for another woman.)  I think the only mention of
homosexuality in the New Testament is by Paul. 

I really can't claim to be any expert on the Bible, but then again,
maybe your parents' friends aren't experts, either!

I hope this helps.

Judy




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Thu Jul 11 18:31:04 2002
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 13:31:04 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Sad News
References: <agfugb+if3b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D2DCEE8.2080806@kingwoodcable.com>

I'm sorry to hear about your cat. I've lost a few cats in my life, and it's 
always difficult. He certainly must've had a loving home to live for 14 years.

Take care
Katze

goku_n_vegeta_02 wrote:
> Today my cat Blacky died. He was fourteen years old. For a year he 
> has been losing weight and was once put on kidney medicaion. But just 
> about a month ago we had to take him to the vet because he was crying 
> and just these last few days he started really going down hill. My 
> mom and I were going to take him to the vet to have him put to sleep, 
> but we got out wish and he died with us. Luckily it was quick and I 
> pray painless. His heart just stopped. My mom and I were both both 
> petting him and telling him that it was okay to let go, and he did. A 
> few hours ago we took him to the vet to have him cremated and we 
> should have his ashes back between one and two weeks.
> 
> Last night I was upset enough to go sit with him at three in the 
> morning and I cried and petted his head, hoping that he would go in 
> my arms. I slept in the living room with him in the reclining chair 
> and kept my hand in the laundry basket (we made a bed for him to try 
> and keep him comfortable. We didn't want him to get hurt wandering 
> around the house, Blacky recently went blind) with him just so he 
> knew I was there. Then today when he died I didn't cry until 
> afterward. I was in shock and I guess I still am. But I tried to stay 
> strong for my mom. I hate death. But I'm just glad that that angel is 
> not suffering anymore.
> 
> Before I send this out I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were 
> on animal afterlifes. Two of my parents friends are very very 
> religious, and they told us on several occasions that animals do not 
> have souls. I want to believe that they do have souls, but since they 
> have read the bible several times I'm questioning my beliefs. Does 
> the bible say that animals don't have souls? And this is OT, but what 
> does it say about homosexuals? Ruth and Ernie (my parents friend I 
> just mentioned) say that all homo's will go to hell. Me being 
> bisexual I am terrified.
> 
> Thanks for listening,
> Shaynie





From boggles at earthlink.net  Thu Jul 11 21:07:18 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 16:07:18 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Sad News
In-Reply-To: <agk8dm+5797@eGroups.com>
References: <agk8dm+5797@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010403b953a3516f37@[66.32.50.234]>

At 3:32 PM +0000 7/11/02, judyserenity wrote:
>
>I don't think it ever
>clearly says whether animals have souls, but there are certainly
>places where God expresses his concern for animals.

Well, there's Ecclesiastes 3:21 - it seems to assume that animals 
have spirits, although it professes to not know what happens to them.

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From mike at aberforthsgoat.net  Thu Jul 11 21:49:28 2002
From: mike at aberforthsgoat.net (Aberforth's Goat)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 23:49:28 +0200
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Sad News
References: <agk8dm+5797@eGroups.com> <p05010403b953a3516f37@[66.32.50.234]>
Message-ID: <009b01c22924$d722f8b0$0200a8c0@shasta>

Jennifer wrote,

> Well, there's Ecclesiastes 3:21 - it seems to assume that
animals
> have spirits, although it professes to not know what happens to
them.

There's also the cryptic statement in Genesis 9,5 that God will
ask an accounting of animals. (It seems to men that God will
punish animal that attack human beings, though the translation
seem to be pretty difficult. It certainly has me worried that my
neighbor's tom cat - who has drawn blood on more than one
occasion - has fire and brimstone in store for him.)

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray)
_______________________

"Of course, I'm not entirely sure he can read, so that
may not have been bravery...."





From huntleyl at mssm.org  Thu Jul 11 22:13:26 2002
From: huntleyl at mssm.org (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 18:13:26 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Sad News WARNING: Bible Discussion
References: <agk8dm+5797@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003101c22928$2ec6b400$abccedd1@Huntley>

Judy:
>As for homosexuality, discussions of it in the Hebrew Bible (the Old
>Testament) pretty clearly refer to men only, not women.  One should
>also note that the Old Testament bans a huge variety of behaviors that
>are quite accepted in modern society. In the New Testament, I don't
>think Jesus ever mentions homosexuality at all, although he does
>condemn some other types of sexual behavior (for example, a man
>divorcing his wife for another woman.)  I think the only mention of
>homosexuality in the New Testament is by Paul. 

You know, you've brought up quite an interesting topic here. ^_^ (I mean that in a good way, btw).  The Old Testament and the New Testament certainly do seem to differ a little in terms of what is okay and what is not.

I think one thing you have to remember about alot of the rules from the Old Testament (i.e. don't partake of blood, homosexuality, and the myriad of, IMO confusing, rules about "clean" food) were created, I believe, as a code for the Israelites *before* Jesus came along.  These people had to do all *sorts* of strange (in a modern sense) things to save their souls, including animal sacrifice.  I'm not sure if I believe this, but I believe my pastor said once that a big reason for all the rules and rituals were...

a) The Israelites were traditionally bad kids.  ^_~ j/k.  But throughout the Old Testament they repeatedly ignore God's will.  Whenever they got near a group of "heathens" they almost invariably forgot who they were and what they were supposed to be doing.  In other words, they had a hard time following the most basic rules, let alone achieve the sinlessness that would let them into Heaven (which they couldn't do anyway, because NO ONE is *that* good).

b)  In order to make this fact abundantly clear, the code for living as a "good" Israelite was made deliberately impossible for a mortal to even comprehend living up to.  The point being, of course, that no one is perfect and they needed *Jesus* to save them from their imperfections (this is the purely Christian view - as I was taught it - on things, btw..I don't know how Jewish people interpret it).

Another interesting thing is that when Jesus *did* come along, he was much more lenient than anyone would have expected.  Yes, he condemned adultery, but he preached forgiveness for the adulteress (it is inferred in these sections that the man was rarely punished).  *He* could say, "This is wrong." b/c he had never done any wrong, but he also said it was wrong for a human #1 to say "You are wrong" to human #2, b/c human #1 is just as sinful as human #2.

...okay, that was pretty confusing...but read it a couple times really slowly and I think you'll be able to figure out what I was trying to say ^_^.

So basically, I'm not entirely clear if the Bible condemns homosexuality (esp. between women).  However, based on my knowledge of the Bible, I am fairly certain that any Christian who gives a homosexual a hard time is sinning just by doing so.  A "good" Christian *tries* to be free of sin.  The one that believes he or she has actually gotten nearer to this goal than the Average Joe is living a lie. ^_~  All in my very humble opinion, of course.  I must say that Christians who go around condemning others is a pet peeve of mine, though.  It gives us all a bad name.

On a brighter note! As for animals having an afterlife...the I believe there's a famous passage in the Bible that states that in Heaven "the lion will lie down with the lamb."

Now, this may be metaphorical, but I've always chosen to interpret as "I will see Fluffy again in the afterlife."

^_^

laura (who, after reading the HBFile, *thinks* this topic is not taboo, has tried very hard not to be offensive, wants everyone to know the opinions stated within are OPINIONS, and is dreadfully sorry if she's offended anybody.) 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no  Thu Jul 11 23:00:44 2002
From: pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no (pengolodh_sc)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 23:00:44 -0000
Subject: Sakes alive, it's hot!
Message-ID: <agl2ms+1v8m@eGroups.com>

So.  Today, it was 30 degrees centigrade (86F) in the shadow here in 
Lofoten.  30 degrees centigrade!  Nearly 200 km North of the Arctic 
Circle!  Temperatures like this shouldn't be allowed.  
Weatherforecast now reports that we have a blitzer of a thunderstorm 
headed our way from the South - yesterday South-Eastern Norway 
suffered 29000 lighting-strikes within a period of 12 hours, which is 
a fair bit over the normal.  24 hours later, large areas in that 
region are still without electric power (so if I grow very silent all 
of a sudden, you know the reason).  Of course, today we also had a 
cruiseship here, so I got to guide a busload of people for 3 hours 
and 45 minutes - wearing red shirt and black, long trousers, while 
sitting right at the front of the coach, with maximum exposure to the 
sun (I have a summerjob as busguide for day-excursions for passengers 
on cruiseships coming to Lofoten).  Yes, it was hot.

Also, one of the regular scheduled stops on the particular tour I had 
today is an old church.  Today, however, this attraction was off 
limits to us, as there was a funeral from that church today (funerals 
in Norway as a rule takes place from churches/houses of worship 
according to the religion of the person in question, or from the home 
of the nearest relation in the case of an atheist).  Thus the routine 
was to just drive slowly past the church, while giving a brief 
rundown of the more interesting details of the church, without 
stopping - to the noticeable irritation fo the staff-escorts provided 
by the ship. 

We were scheduled to drive past the church an hour prior to 
commencent of the funeral-service, and so did - and had maximum bad 
luck with the timing of the arrival.  Just as the buses slowed down 
to a crawl past the church, we see that the hearse has already 
arrived, and members of the family are carrying the coffin into the 
church in preparation of the funeral - while four buses full of 
tourists with cameras and videorecorders are driving by at slow 
speed.  Later, at our next stop, I was informed by the guide from an 
other bus that the staff-escort on her bus still had insisted that 
they should stop, and let the passengers out, even after seeing the 
coffin being carried in.  Some people just...!

Best regards
Christian Stub?




From poco214 at comcast.net  Fri Jul 12 03:33:00 2002
From: poco214 at comcast.net (poco214)
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 23:33:00 -0400
Subject: US style graduation (kinda long)
Message-ID: <00aa01c22954$d26ac700$e8c22744@jdover01.nj.comcast.net>

I should know...I graduated this year in June. Yay!

I went to a public school...requirements for private schools are different.

Anyway, in New Jersey the state requirements are:
4 years of English
3 years of History (2 have to be US History, 1 of either World History or World Culture)
3 years of Math
3 years of Science
2 years of a Language (our school offers Spanish and French)
2 years of Fine/Practical/Performing Arts 
One year of Phys. Ed./Health for every year attended.  So if you flunk English your senior year you have to take English and gym again.

I had to take the HSPT (High School Proficiency Test) in 11th grade to graduate...now students take the HSPA ( a revamped version).

The ceremony was at 10:00 am, the Saturday after the last day of school.

Our graduation took place on the football field, where folding chairs are set up in rows with an isle down the middle and a podium in the front.  Relatives sat in the bleachers.  We walked in to Pomp and Circumstance around the track to our seats.

The top ten students were seated by rank in the first row on one side( I was third! ), the class officers on the other.  All the other students got to sit where they wanted.

We wore robes and hats of our school colors.  Boys in garnet and girls in gold (though they were actually maroon and yellow).  The hats do not stay on very well and look ridiculous.  The robes are really hot when you're wearing them over a dress or a suit and you're sitting in the hot sun.  I thought I was going to die of heat stroke.

A couple of administrators, the class advisors (two teachers), the class president, the valedictorian, and the salutorian made speeches.  We then get our names called and walked up to receive our diploma.  Our actual diploma is up at the school; they don't give them to us until afterwards in case someone is a discipline problem during the ceremony.  

We got to write a message of 10 words or less on a card and a teacher read our message over the microphone as we shook hands with the administrators.

In other schools, graduation is a solemn ceremony but not in our school. -_-*
People hired planes with trailing messages and brought boat horns to honk.  I think I saw a couple of signs and foam fingers in the stands.

Afterwards, there were about 10 different bar-b-ques to go to, held by random students.  We spent the next few days party hopping.

Prom is a totally unconnected event.

Ours took place in the first week of June.  It was highly formal.  Most students came in a limo, though one group rented a trolley.  My friends and I came in an antique Rolls-Royce and an orange '72 Chevelle convertible :)  We stayed overnight at a friend's house and then drove up to Pennsylvania the next day, where we stayed the weekend.  Most people rent a hotel afterwards in another town and stay overnight there.  

Phew, this was a long post!

Hope that was at least a little helpful :) 

Dana


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dizzylizzy182 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul 12 07:27:08 2002
From: dizzylizzy182 at yahoo.com (Elizabeth Sager)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 00:27:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Sad news
In-Reply-To: <1026458066.1045.9958.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020712072708.80318.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com>

I'm sorry your cat died. I love my kitties (all six of
them) no matter what I say, and know I would be in
quite a flap if one of them were to die. :( (Plus I've
had a cat as well as various other pets die on me
before.)

I would love to think animals have souls. I think they
do. I don't know the Bible's official word on it. But,
the Bible was written by men. I'm not saying that it
would be clearer if it were written by women (:D), but
there is most definitely likely to have been some sort
of static between God and the authors of the Bible. 

I'm no expert on the Bible, really, but as far as I've
learned the word is that its not *being* homosexual
that it condemns, but sodomy. I, of course, could be
completely wrong, and will not disagree with you if
you tell me so. (Nor will I respond to flames, I'm not
a bigot, and am only human.)

But I'm still sorry your cat died.

Liz (who loffs you all even though she's become a
horrible lurker)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com



From starling823 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul 12 11:08:03 2002
From: starling823 at yahoo.com (Sternel)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 04:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: US style graduation -- NY style
In-Reply-To: <1026458066.1045.9958.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020712110803.66524.qmail@web14510.mail.yahoo.com>

I don't even remember who asked about graduations in
the first place, but i'll inflict New York state's
Regents system on you all.
Public schools in NY are run by the state Board of
Regents, which sets the standards that all public
schools must conform to. Private schools can choose to
use these standards, and most, afaik, do, but i have
heard of some that find them useless and go their own
way.

There are two kinds of diplomas in NY:  Regents, and
local.  In order to receive a Regents diploma, you
must pass a certain number of exams in required
subjects.  As memory serves, I had to pass:  two
science (Earth Science and Bio -- I also did
Chemistry), three Math (we used to have this
"sequential program", now it's something called Math A
and Math B.  Don't ask.), four history (Global
studies, after a two year course, American history,
civics and economics, the last two being locally
written exams), four years of English, the exam for
the foreign language of your choice, and one year's
course of either art or music.  ::phew!::
of course, the board of Regents changes their mind
every year and alters somethign, and this is as it was
when I graduated HS in 1998.  My brother and sisters
are starting to come up against different
requirements.  Makes things very confusing.

A local diploma is simply the standard high school
diploma conferred on students who cannot manage all
those Regents.  While I personally had no problem
passign and exceedign the Regents requirements, there
are a lot of students who do -- my brother, for
example, who has missed lots of school due to very bad
athsma, and who has a minor learning disability.  He
will be earning a local diploma, but we're crazy proud
of him anyway. We weren't sure he'd go to college, but
he wants to study history. =)

Anyway, once having gotten all the paperwork out of
the way, the "merriment of commencement commences..."
=)...our school being green and white, girls in white
and boys in green.  we purchased our robes, they were
cheap and thin and you could see the color of our
dresses underneath, but what do you want for cheap
robes?  The descriptions from others pretty much is
typical around the country.

Whoever asked on this -- have you enough information
yet?  Ask and ye shall receive... ;)

=====
"Live each season as it passes; breathe the air, drink the drink, taste the fruit, and resign yourself to the influences of each." 
--Henry David Thoreau

Abbie Tilden 
starling823 at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com



From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 13 05:08:56 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 05:08:56 -0000
Subject: Sad News WARNING: Bible Discussion
In-Reply-To: <003101c22928$2ec6b400$abccedd1@Huntley>
Message-ID: <agocl8+sp1f@eGroups.com>

Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote:
> the code for living as a "good" Israelite was made deliberately
impossible for a mortal to even comprehend living up to.  The point
being, of course, that no one is perfect and they needed *Jesus* to
save them from their imperfections (this is the purely Christian view
- as I was taught it - on things, btw..I don't know how Jewish people
interpret it).<

Well, I can answer that for at least one Jewish person (me). The
Jewish belief system doesn't talk about a Messiah as necessary for
reconciling individual humans with God. The idea that humans are
inherently sinful in not a Jewish idea; the rules are definitely meant
to be followed. 

It is true that thousands of years ago, there was an idea that sins
could be atoned for by offering animal sacrifices (along with olive
oil, grain, etc) but in modern times the idea is that sins against God
(i.e., breaking of religious rules) can be atoned for with prayer. 
Sins against other *people* must be made up to the injured party as
well as to God, by apologies or restitution as appropriate. 

As for the various biblical passages where the ancient Israelites are
condemned for breaking the rules, I think it is possible that this was
an attempt to cope with "the problem of evil", as opposed to
necessarily listing real infractions.  In other words, now that
monotheism had been adopted, there was a question of why bad things
still happened when the people were worshipping an all-powerful,
benevolent God.  The answer the ancient Israelites came up with was
that they must have worshipped God correctly. So, they believed that
if something really bad happened (such as the Babylonian captivity),
then they must (almost by definition) have done something really bad.
 This idea has also largely been abandoned in Judaism, with a variety
of competing explanations of "the problem of evil" instead.

By the way, I meant to say before that my personal belief is that
animals *do* have souls.  Hey, my understanding is that Mike is a
Theologian, and he's a goat.  So, there you have it!  ;-)

Judy




From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 13 21:13:10 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 21:13:10 -0000
Subject: Sad News WARNING: Bible Discussion  -- Correction
In-Reply-To: <agocl8+sp1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agq556+jmv0@eGroups.com>

I said:
> [after] monotheism had been adopted, there was a question of why bad
things still happened when the people were worshipping an all-powerful,
benevolent God.  The answer the ancient Israelites came up with was
that they must have worshipped God correctly.<

I meant to say:
The answer the ancient Israelites came up with was that they must have
worshipped God INcorrectly.

This should make considerably more sense now.

Judy




From coriolan at worldnet.att.net  Sun Jul 14 21:41:39 2002
From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc2001)
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 21:41:39 -0000
Subject: John Wellington Wells
Message-ID: <agsr6j+bukm@eGroups.com>

John Wellington Wells, the protagonist of an early Gilbert & Sullivan
play The Sorcerer, sings:

  Oh! my name is John Wellington Wells,
            I'm a dealer in magic and spells,
                  In blessings and curses
                  And ever-filled purses,
            In prophecies, witches, and knells.
            If you want a proud foe to "make tracks"--
            If you'd melt a rich uncle in wax--
                  You've but to look in
                  On the resident Djinn,
            Number seventy, Simmery Axe....

                       Barring tautology,
                       In demonology,
                       'Lectro-biology,
                       Mystic nosology,
                       Spirit philology,
                       High-class astrology,
                       Such is his knowledge, he
                  Isn't the man to require an apology!


G & S fans will be pleased - and HP fans may be interested - in 
learning that the talented Mr. Wells maintains a website advertising 
his goods and services.  His prices seem competitive with the Diagon 
Alley competition.


http://www.jwwells.com/index.html

   - CMC




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Jul 14 23:18:12 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 23:18:12 -0000
Subject: John Wellington Wells
In-Reply-To: <agsr6j+bukm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agt0rk+jrj3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "coriolan_cmc2001" <coriolan at w...> wrote:

> G & S fans will be pleased - and HP fans may be interested - in 
> learning that the talented Mr. Wells maintains a website 
> advertising his goods and services.  His prices seem competitive 
> with the Diagon Alley competition. 
> http://www.jwwells.com/index.html

Yes, but does he have a Famous Wizard card?





From timregan at microsoft.com  Mon Jul 15 18:34:16 2002
From: timregan at microsoft.com (dumbledad)
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 18:34:16 -0000
Subject: Membership Drop on HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <agfhnh+fum2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agv4j8+4ta9@eGroups.com>


> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter "coriolan_cmc2001" wrote:
> > Just over a week ago, HP4GU listed about 4200 members. Now
> > it's dropped to below 4000.  Was there some policy stance
> > proclaimed by  the moderators that prompted 200 plus folks to
> > resign or protest? Is some assiduous soul weeding out defunct
> > e-mail addresses? Or is there some other explanation at work?
> > 
> >   - CMC

Hi All,

I unsubscribed while on holiday too avoid clogging my inbox. I don't 
know if others did this too.


          Cheers,


            Tim.





From chetah27 at hotmail.com  Mon Jul 15 19:41:28 2002
From: chetah27 at hotmail.com (aldrea279)
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:41:28 -0000
Subject: LOTR movie - second time!
In-Reply-To: <agk2i0+teu9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <agv8h8+bgcb@eGroups.com>

Namaa:
> I'm sure some people here saw LOTR more than once. Did you find it 
as 
> compelling the second time like I did or was the experience 
> different? 

Oh, definately different.  Infact, I picked up on ALOT more things 
the second time than I did the first time.  I had *just* finished 
reading the book when I went into the theater and watched it...and, I 
will admit, I was *hating* it in the beginning.  I was just sitting 
there going "WTH?! They cut- no, wait, what about- hey! What 
the...".  I'm just glad I knew ahead of time that Tom Bombadil was 
going to be gone, otherwise I might have been even more upset.  But 
then it got to Rivendell...and that's where I really got into it.  
When I watched it the second time, I think I appreciated it more for 
being a movie instead of an interpretation of the book(maybe Chris 
Columbus should think about that one, eh? =P).  

I can't wait for the second movie, although I'm a little peeved at 
Shelob being moved around.  And the Scouring of the Shire will be 
gone, also, from the third movie...now, how in the world are they 
going to end it? 

Aldrea

(I could go on and on about LotR, but I figure this is long enough 
for my first post at OTChatter) 





From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Tue Jul 16 19:39:34 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 19:39:34 -0000
Subject: Webview (was Membership Drop on HP4GU)
In-Reply-To: <agv4j8+4ta9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah1spm+blii@eGroups.com>

Tim wrote:

> I unsubscribed while on holiday too avoid clogging my inbox. I 
don't 
> know if others did this too.

Very wise!  But did you realise that you can switch to webview by 
going to any of the group webpages e. g.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/messages

and clicking on Edit My Membership in the top right hand corner.  
When the page loads, under Message Delivery select the Special 
Notices radio button.  That way you retain your membership (so if the 
craving becomes too much on holiday you can just pop into an internet 
cafe and check in), but your inbox remains pristine: I think we have 
had one special notice in the 15 months I have been a member.

Elf Davey




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 16 20:17:18 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 20:17:18 -0000
Subject: Webview (was Membership Drop on HP4GU)
In-Reply-To: <ah1spm+blii@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah1v0e+h0ki@eGroups.com>

Helpful!David elfed:

> under Message Delivery select the Special 
> Notices radio button.  That way you retain your membership (so if 
the 
> craving becomes too much on holiday you can just pop into an 
internet 
> cafe and check in), but your inbox remains pristine: I think we 
have 
> had one special notice in the 15 months I have been a member.

If you do get a Special Notice, it's 20 to 1 it will be because the 
release date for OoP has been announced.  Wouldn't that be worth 
interrupting your vacation for?

Amy
imagining people all over the world whooping in unison




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Tue Jul 16 22:35:41 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 22:35:41 -0000
Subject: Reader sexism
Message-ID: <ah273t+c6c3@eGroups.com>

On the main list, Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote:

>Well, what I really meant to say -- and this may not be much better 
in your eyes -- is that...*tries to think of how to word this 
correctly* That by some of the standards some people have used (and, 
really, I didn't have any specific listies in mind here -- although I 
did have quite a number of specific articles that I've read -- I wish 
I had them so that I could put some references in here) to make 
statements like "JKR is sexist" (paraphrasing here) -- by those same 
standards one could also say that *they* must be sexist.   *pauses* 
I'm not sure exactly how to say it so that it would make sense, 
except to say that my goal wasn't to prove that any listies or the 
writers of these articles *were* sexist. 

I would like to try to express what I believe can happen, and I also 
think may be what Laura was expressing.

I think it is possible as a reader to have an unconscious sexist (or 
racist, or any other -ist) bias in our 'instinctive' reading of the 
text.  When we then draw together our readings (often in a way that 
is also unconscious and leads to that 'big picture' that Amy 
mentioned springing into our minds seemingly out of nowhere) we then 
draw conclusions which reflect those instinctive readings, and 
consciously observe those conclusions to have a tinge of sexism about 
them.  We then may go one step further and decide that we think that 
the books themselves betray sexist assumptions, or convey a sexist 
worldview.

We may then end up criticising the author for something that we 
ourselves have inserted by our interpretive processes into the text.

I will try to give a couple of examples.  First, a bad example:  
suppose we are conditioned to believe that in boarding school stories 
any female teacher is a figure of fun or peripheral in some way.  We 
may then decide, every time we come across a female teacher, that she 
is an unimportant character, or one designed to illustrate the folly 
of a woman trying to do a man's job.

At the end of our reading, we may then say 'How sexist!  All the 
important teachers and all the positive role models are male!'

This is a bad example not only because I doubt any HPFGU member is so 
extreme, but also because a good author has many means at her 
disposal to signal which characters are important, and it is a very 
dull reader who does not absorb these and refine his reading 
accordingly.

The second example - I tread on thinner ice here - is a real one, but 
fortunately I have forgotten who most of the posters were.  It 
concerns the Quidditch world cup, and it was a thread that occurred 
soon after the turn of the year.

It was being suggested, IIRC, that the description of the world cup 
is to a degree sexist because the most prominent person in the action 
is Viktor Krum (and IIRC because he is idolised by the crowd - though 
that speaks potentially to their sexism , not JKR's. But I must try 
to avoid canon points here).  Pippin (I remember that much) pointed 
out that in point of fact the match was won by the female Irish 
chasers, to which the riposte was (again IIRC) that that doesn't 
count because, well, they didn't count because they weren't prominent 
in the narrative!

Against such an argument there is no real recourse.  If crucial 
elements drop out of your gestalt impression when you read, then you 
will never be convinced that the picture is balanced.  (I should 
hasten to add here that I do agree with Amy's main list assessment of 
Hogwarts.)

So, I think that it is possible for criticisms of JKR's works to 
arise from essentially circular arguments.

And, if you were to back me up against a wall and wave Cindy's Big 
Paddle at me, I would say that, yes, it happens on HPFGU too.

Not that that means that HPFGU members are sexist, or racist, or 
whatever.  But it may at times mean that they are, well, just a 
little gullible.

You may of course think that that is a *worse* accusation than sexism 
or racism.

David




From timregan at microsoft.com  Tue Jul 16 22:49:13 2002
From: timregan at microsoft.com (dumbledad)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 22:49:13 -0000
Subject: Reader sexism
In-Reply-To: <ah273t+c6c3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah27t9+smqd@eGroups.com>

--- davewitley wrote:
> I think it is possible as a reader to have an unconscious sexist
> (or racist, or any other -ist) bias in our 'instinctive' reading 
> of the text.

Hi All,

Too true. If you want to experience this in yourself (warning - it's 
a scary realization) try the implicit attitude tests now at:
* Intro http://www.tolerance.org/hidden_bias/
* Tests http://www.tolerance.org/hidden_bias/02.html

          Cheers,


           Tim.






From huntleyl at mssm.org  Tue Jul 16 23:43:19 2002
From: huntleyl at mssm.org (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 19:43:19 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Reader sexism
References: <ah27t9+smqd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001601c22d22$91781820$44c3edd1@Huntley>

Tim:
>Too true. If you want to experience this in yourself
>(warning - it's 
>a scary realization) try the implicit attitude tests now at:
>* Intro http://www.tolerance.org/hidden_bias/
>* Tests http://www.tolerance.org/hidden_bias/02.html

         
I have taken these tests before, and while I appreciate the message this website is trying to put out, I can't help but feel that their methods of testing for "unconscious bias" are a little..well, sketchy.

To begin with, the first time I took one of their tests (which was designed to test if you associate liberal arts with women and math/sciences with men), I received a score of "inconclusive".  The site suggested that I retake the test, but that if I really wanted to know what a result of "inconclusive" meant, I had to click on a link which directed me to a page which basically accused me of cheating.  

If you read between the lines on this page, however, you would discover that what a test result of "inconclusive" *really* meant was that you did not produce the desired results: i.e. you either made no mistakes (you'll have to actually take the test to figure out what I'm saying, BTW) or did not make mistakes in any specific pattern.  Namely, that you had no "hidden biases" that their test could pick up.

But they don't actually *say* anywhere that "you have no hidden biases that our test could pick up".  That is because the site's makers, for whatever reason, chose to start with the assumption that *every* person taking their tests MUST have a hidden bias towards each of their issues and that people who apparently *didn't* must be either cheating or following the rules incorrectly.  Not very scientific, is it?    

Secondly, the fact is, that the way the tests are designed, the first word-word or word-picture association exercises essentially *train* you to associate whatever concepts they put together.  In the gender bias test this would be "male" with "math or science" and "female" with "liberal arts".  Then, when the do the old switch-a-roo, of course you're bound to make "mistakes" (which they would have you believe are actually unconscious preferences)So who's cheating now?

I agree with the point of the site, that the various "-isms" are often ignored and that people often *do* have these so-called hidden-biases that need to be recognized and dealt with, but I strongly resent the shady method they employ in order to prove this point.  I also find it extremely disappointing and counter-productive that people who are supposed to be on the Good side would sink to the level of *duping* people into listening to what they have to say. (Furthermore, I find it rather insulting to my intelligence, to tell the truth)

So, the point is, don't be *too* hard on yourself if this particular site accuses you of racism or sexism or whatever it may be.  They cheat.

Shame on them.

laura


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From timregan at microsoft.com  Wed Jul 17 04:05:52 2002
From: timregan at microsoft.com (dumbledad)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 04:05:52 -0000
Subject: Social Psychology (was Re: Reader sexism)
In-Reply-To: <001601c22d22$91781820$44c3edd1@Huntley>
Message-ID: <ah2qf0+ml7j@eGroups.com>

--- "Laura Ingalls Huntley" wrote:
> I have taken these tests before, and while I appreciate the
> message this website is trying to put out, I can't help but 
> feel that their methods of testing for "unconscious bias" are 
> a little..well, sketchy.

Hi All,

Well off topic now ...

I don't really agree with Laura's criticisms, but I'm no social 
psychologist so who knows. Anyway here are my thoughts on Laura's 
points

1) It's not scientific. 
The Social Psychologists I work with are very scientific (maybee too 
much sometimes). The science behind the particular implicit attitude 
experiments we're talking about is referenced from 
http://www.tolerance.org/hidden_bias/tutorials/06.html

2) They just give "inconclusive" rather than negative results.
I think they give positive, inconclusive, and negative results. 
Since they are testing the difference inreaction time between an 
implicit response and a rationalised response one way to `trick' the 
test is to count to three before responding to each question. Hence 
when they detect consistently ponderous responses they have to give 
an `inconclusive' result. They may ere on the side of false 
positives for this category.

3) The training session biasses the result.
I'd be surprised if the pictures and questions used in the training 
sessions weren't randomized. The social psychologists I work with go 
out of their way to do that in experimental set-up. Did you compare 
the tutorial phase with others who had logged in from different PCs?


          Cheers,


           Tim.





From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 17 05:12:23 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 05:12:23 -0000
Subject: sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah273t+c6c3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah2ubn+49d4@eGroups.com>

David said that some readers might see biases on JKR's work even if 
there were none, and gave as an example:

> It was being suggested, IIRC, that the description of the world cup 
> is to a degree sexist because the most prominent person in the 
> action is Viktor ...Pippin (I remember that much) pointed 
> out that in point of fact the match was won by the female Irish 
> chasers, to which the riposte was (again IIRC) that that doesn't 
> count because, well, they didn't count because they weren't 
> prominent in the narrative!
> 
> Against such an argument there is no real recourse.  If crucial 
> elements drop out of your gestalt impression when you read, then 
> you will never be convinced that the picture is balanced... 
> So, I think that it is possible for criticisms of JKR's works to 
> arise from essentially circular arguments.<


I haven't been following the sexism thread on the main list, but I 
remember a past discussion on this topic.  It's quite possible that I 
was the person who made the "female Irish chasers aren't evidence 
against sexism" comment, although I haven't checked to make sure.  In 
case it *was* me, let me say that I think the real disagreement may 
be about the definition of sexism. 

Sometimes, sexism is equated with jobs being assigned on the basis of 
gender, with women excluded from some occupations, and generally, men 
excluded from other occupations.  If that's the definition of sexism, 
then the Wizarding World isn't sexist.  There doesn't seem to be any 
jobs that are forbidden to women (or men.)  And, the fact that some 
of the Quidditch World Cup players are female is evidence against a 
gender-based division of labor in the Wizarding World, whether the 
female players are mentioned prominently or not.  So, if one 
defines "sexism" as "having a gender-based division of labor", then 
the female Irish chasers are evidence that the Wizarding World isn't 
sexist.  

However, I see gender-based divisions of labor as pretty much 
irrelevant to sexism.  To show what I mean, here is an example taken 
from another story marketed to children, Disney's Jungle Book movie.  
Mowgli sees a girl of his own age getting water from a stream.  The 
girl sings, "Father's in the forest hunting, mother's cooking in the 
home, I must go to fetch the water, 'till the day that I am grown.... 
When I'm grown... I will have a handsome husband, and a daughter of 
my own; I'll send her to fetch the water; I'll be cooking in the 
home."  (This is from memory, so it may not be exact.)  My sister 
felt this scene was quite sexist, and worried that it set a bad 
example for her children.  I didn't see this as sexist at all, which 
upset her.  My feeling was "Why is dividing labor on the basis of 
gender sexist *per se*?" 

Maybe at this point I need to explain why I see division of labor as 
irrelevant to sexism.  I'm not convinced that there ever 
were "matriarchal utopias" in the human past, but there is no 
question that women wielded considerable power in, say, some of the 
Native American societies that existed in the past.  The interesting 
thing is that these societies often had a rigid gender-based division 
of labor.  The reason women had power in these societies was that the 
societies were matrilocal  -- that is, a husband would move in with 
his wife's extended family.  So, even if only men could be the 
warriors and hunters, women still had enormous protection against 
spousal abuse, had a major support system in place if their husbands 
abandoned them, etc.  The division of labor had little or no effect 
on how well women were treated.

I feel that "equal opportunity" in the workplace is neither necessary 
nor sufficient for a non-sexist society.  Since I don't feel that the 
division of labor is all that relevant to whether a society is sexist 
or not, I don't see the gender make-up of the Quidditch teams as 
relevant to whether the Wizarding World is sexist.

Anyway, whether the Wizarding World is sexist is a different question 
from whether JKR is sexist.  An author might portray a very sexist 
(or racist) society as a way of drawing attention to the problem of 
sexism (or racism.) Portraying a sexist society doesn't necessary 
mean that the *author* is sexist. 

I don't see JKR as sexist, and I don't really see combating sexism as 
an important goal for JKR's books -- they are primarily intended as 
entertainment.  But, *if* the books had combating sexism as their 
goal, I'd say the most important thing would be to feature female 
characters, especially girls, prominently.  This would send a message 
that females matter as much as males, and would provide characters 
with whom girls reading the books could identify. 

I'd say that the JKR books are something of a disappointment when it 
comes to featuring female characters, particular considering that JKR 
is female and has a daughter.  (This doesn't *obligate* her to write 
about girls, but it gives her a personal stake in literature that 
benefits girls.) I recently read somewhere (I can't remember if it 
was on HPfGU or not) that a lot of girls find JKR's young female 
characters hard to identify with.  Many girls see Hermione as too 
self-righteous and overcontrolled; many of the other young female 
characters (Myrtle, Pansy, Fleur) are unsympathetic. This may be why 
so many readers hope Ginny may be fleshed out more in future books 
(or write stories themselves that flesh out Ginny's character.) 

So, the female chasers may serve as evidence that women can have a 
variety of jobs in the Wizarding World, but I don't see that as 
relevant to sexism.  I'd define a non-sexist society as one where the 
needs and desires of both genders are given equal weight.  If one 
accepts that definition of sexism, and if it's really the case that 
the JKR books meet the needs of boys better than the needs of girls 
(which I can't say for sure), then the JKR books could be called 
sexist.  (I still wouldn't call them that myself, because I think 
that "sexism" is a strong word that should be used sparingly.)

-- Judy 




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 17 12:16:37 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 12:16:37 -0000
Subject: sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah2ubn+49d4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah3n75+bs5o@eGroups.com>

Judy wrote:

> However, I see gender-based divisions of labor as pretty much 
> irrelevant to sexism. To show what I mean, here is an example 
taken 
> from another story marketed to children, Disney's Jungle Book 
movie. 
> Mowgli sees a girl of his own age getting water from a stream. The 
> girl sings, "Father's in the forest hunting, mother's cooking in 
the 
> home, I must go to fetch the water, 'till the day that I am 
grown.... 
> When I'm grown... I will have a handsome husband, and a daughter of 
> my own; I'll send her to fetch the water; I'll be cooking in the 
> home." (This is from memory, so it may not be exact.) My sister 
> felt this scene was quite sexist, and worried that it set a bad 
> example for her children. I didn't see this as sexist at all, 
which 
> upset her. My feeling was "Why is dividing labor on the basis of 
> gender sexist *per se*?" 

Well, it's not, *per se.* In my household, I do the dishes and my dh 
pays the bills. We've decided the division of labor based on how 
much each of us likes those particular chores. (If only traditional 
gender division were the *rule,* I could prevail upon him to do all 
the snow-shoveling . . . wouldn't that be great?) The problem with 
portrayals like The Jungle Book's (Kipling again!) only kicks in 
because they are so much the norm and we so seldom see the opposite. 

Why does this matter? Because it is terribly restrictive to girls 
whose talents lie in "masculine" directions and boys whose talents 
lie in "feminine" ones. Before 30 years ago, as I don't have to tell 
you, girls had very few choices without really rocking the boat; 
before 100 years ago they had even fewer choices without breaking the 
law. Every man reading this who loves taking care of his children, 
and every woman who loves . . . well, gosh, almost every job I can 
think of--any female lawyers on this list? ministers? college 
professors? journalists? business owners? electricians? managers? 
doctors?--should shudder at the prospect.  Too bad, folks:  you might 
be really good at it, it might be the work you love, it might be the 
best work available in your community, but you can't do it, at least 
not without an enormous extra burden of difficulty that is not laid 
on people of the other sex.  I'll never forget surveying my high 
school teachers about why they went into teaching--over half the 
women said "my choices were teaching, nursing, or secretarial work."

Again, it's a big-picture thing . . . of course any given woman can 
stay home and cook and raise the kids. It's a wonderful, happy free 
choice, when it is a free choice. But seeing the possibilities of 
other choices is important. A society that dictates who can do what 
job lacks freedom in an essential way.  I agree with you that 
division of labor is only a piece of the issue, but it is far from 
irrelevant. 

> I feel that "equal opportunity" in the workplace is neither 
necessary 
> nor sufficient for a non-sexist society.

As a woman in an overwhelmingly male-dominated field (and, as I wrote 
above, many of them are), I can't see it this way. My passion is to 
be a minister. If I had been born 40 years earlier, I would have had 
a very hard time fulfilling that passion. If I'd been born 80 years 
earlier, I still would have been ordained but only if I were about 50 
times more persistent than my male colleagues. (I'm proud and happy 
to say that I never had to give it a thought, as the ministry in my 
tradition is now 50/50--not surprisingly. So many of us are so good 
at it that it really makes me sad to think of how many women, and 
congregations, missed out on the opportunity all these decades.  I'm 
unspeakably grateful to the women who blazed the trail, and the men 
who got the heck out of their way or even helped.)

So I am delighted that the Irish Chasers are female because if every 
Quidditch player we ever encountered were male, it would suggest that 
women aren't allowed to play, or are unfairly passed over, or aren't 
very good at it. (The first two would be cases of the WW's sexism, 
not JKR's.)

> So, the female chasers may serve as evidence that women can have a 
> variety of jobs in the Wizarding World, but I don't see that as 
> relevant to sexism. I'd define a non-sexist society as one where 
the 
> needs and desires of both genders are given equal weight. 

Such as the desire to be Chaser on a professional Quidditch team?

Amy Z





From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Jul 17 16:33:36 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:33:36 -0000
Subject: The K-word (was sexism and division of labor)
In-Reply-To: <ah3n75+bs5o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah4690+caof@eGroups.com>

> Judy quoted The Jungle Book:

> >The 
> > girl sings, "Father's in the forest hunting, mother's cooking in 
> the 
> > home, I must go to fetch the water, 'till the day that I am 
> grown.... 
> > When I'm grown... I will have a handsome husband, and a daughter 
of 
> > my own; I'll send her to fetch the water; I'll be cooking in the 
> > home." (This is from memory, so it may not be exact.) 

That's more or less my memory too.  Judy's has now been demonstrated 
to be better than mine anyway.  The nameless girl acts like a 
manipulative stereotype, too, dropping her jug by pretended accident 
so Mowgli has to offer to pick it up.

Amy then commented:

> The problem with 
> portrayals like The Jungle Book's (Kipling again!) only kicks in 
> because they are so much the norm and we so seldom see the 
opposite. 

While I agree wholeheartedly with Amy's point here, I feel it is only 
fair to point out that, while Kipling may have committed many sins, 
even sexist ones ('A woman is only a woman, but a good cigar is a 
smoke' - did Freud comment on this line, I wonder?), he was not 
responsible for this particular distillation of '50s values.

That honour belongs to Walt Disney, whose screenplay writers invented 
this scene in the movie.

David, worried he's treading on Amanda's territory by pointing out 
book-movie confusion




From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 17 16:35:23 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:35:23 -0000
Subject: More about sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah3n75+bs5o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah46cb+ll0h@eGroups.com>

I wrote:
>> I see gender-based divisions of labor as pretty much 
>> irrelevant to sexism. <<

And Amy replied:
> it is terribly restrictive to girls 
> whose talents lie in "masculine" directions and boys whose talents 
> lie in "feminine" ones.

I definitely agree that rigid gender roles can make a lot of people
unhappy, and I consider it a problem. I just don't consider it
*sexism*, because it doesn't necessarily impact one gender more than
the other.  I was thinking of discussing this in my last post, but I
was afraid I had already gone on at too much length. 

Suppose that, in the Wizarding World (WW for short), only men could be
athletes, and only women could be musicians.  (In fact, the only
professional musicians I can remember being mentioned are females,
Celestina Warbuck and the Weird Sisters.)  Would this make people less
happy than if both genders could choice these roles?  Yes -- there
would be a lot of frustrated female athletes and male musicians, not
to mention that audiences would be deprived of watching and hearing
these people perform.  So, it would be a bad policy.

But, would it make the WW sexist?  I'd say no, because it wouldn't
favor one gender over the other, assuming that being an athlete or
being a musician were equally well paid, etc. It would just be a
stupid way of assigning jobs to people. There have been plenty of bad
systems of assigning jobs in the past; some of the communist societies
had remarkably dumb systems.  It's a problem that some societies have,
whether they are sexist or not. 

I just looked up sexism in a dictionary, and it was defined as 1)
discriminating in favor of members of one sex; or 2) assuming that a
person's abilities and social functions are determined by his or her
sex.  (Well, actually this was the definition of sexist; sexism wasn't
listed separately.)  In other words, it lists two different
definitions. I prefer the first one, which defines sexist as the
mistreatment of one sex relative to the other.  The second definition
refers specifically to the gender division of labor (and other
behaviors), which seems to be the other definition that people are
adopting here. 

Maybe the right question  is *why* do I prefer definition #1 to
definition #2? Well, I feel a definition of sexism should: 1) help
feminists (who I'd say can be either male or female) decide where to
focus their efforts in helping women; 2) help people tell if the
treatment of women in a particular society is improving or not; and 3)
help people develop hypotheses of why some societies treat women
better than other societies do. (Clearly, I'm more focused on the
problem of anti-female sexist societies than anti-male sexist
societies. I think societies where men are treated worse than women
might exist, but I don't think any of the large human societies
currently have that problem.) 

I'd actually say that my preferred definition of "sexism" parallels
the way the term racism is used, while the "gender division of labor"
definition of sexism does not. When people talk about racism (at least
in Western societies), they are almost always referring to racial 
minorities being treated worse than the White majority.  If there is a
claim that whites are being treated worse (as is often made in debates
over affirmative action), this is given a different name, such as
"reverse discrimination."  In other words, the very term "racism"
implies that some races are treated worse than others, not just that
each race is treated differently.  

If we use the term "sexism" to refer to any case where men and women
are expected to act differently, then what term will we use to refer
to women being treated worse than men are?  If there is no term that
specifically refers to mistreatment of women, then won't that problem
become invisible?

It would be interesting to see if there is correlation between which
definition of sexism a person adheres to, and whether that person
believes mistreatment of women is a serious problem.  I suspect that
there is; I can say right off the bat that radical feminists almost
never define sexism as referring primarily to a gender division of
labor.

I want to point out another reason why I am unhappy with a focus on
women achieving in traditionally male roles.  What does this say about
the importance of traditionally female roles?  If there is a parallel
emphasis on how great it is for men to take on traditionally female
roles, fine.  But, that is almost never the case.  Women who take on
traditionally male occupations are lauded; men who take on
traditionally female occupations are (at best) ignored.  Perhaps the
intended message is "People of either gender can take on any role,"
but the message people may perceive is "Traditionally male occupations
are important; traditionally female occupations are unimportant."  If
men and women still largely occupy different roles (which is the case
in the US), then the net effect may be a reduction in the respect
women receive.  I think one can easily make this criticism of JKR's
work.  Yes, she has made sure to point out that women can be Quidditch
players and that there have been Headmistresses of Hogwarts and female
Ministers of Magic in the past.  But, when it comes to showing (human)
men in traditionally female roles such as primary caregiver,
secretary, nurse, food preparer, etc., she just doesn't do it

 I said:
>> I'd define a non-sexist society as one where the needs and desires
of both genders are given equal weight. <<

And Amy asked:
> Such as the desire to be Chaser on a professional Quidditch team?<

If men are allowed to do anything they want, while women are
restricted to a limited number of occupations, then, yes, that is
sexist and the N.O.W. (National Organization for Witches) should do
something about it. (I actually doubt that there are any societies in
which women are excluded from some professions, while all professions
are open to men. It just doesn't seem to work that way.)  However, if
women are being kept off of Quidditch teams while men are being denied
the chance to be musicians, then I'd say N.O.W. should skip that
issue, and focus on cases where women are being mistreated. 

Moving from Hogwarts back to the real world, I'd say that fixing the
gender-based division of labor is a good cause, but it's not something
that I think women's organizations should be expected to do.  Women's
organizations have their hands full with domestic violence, the
feminization of poverty, female infanticide in Asia, genital
mutilation in Africa, and far too many other problems.  They just
don't have the resources to also tackle problems where men and women
are impacted equally.  In other words, if both men and women are being
limited, why should fixing the problem be considered women's
responsibility?  

By the way, Porphyria's post 41345 and Deb's post 41346 (on the main
list) express a lot of what I was trying to say in my last post. In
particular, they explain what sort of female characters I'd like to
see in JKR's books, and why I don't think a "head count" of women in
jobs such as Quidditch player or Minister of Magic is important.  (I
hope this sort of cross-list reference is considered OK.) 

-- Judy




From kkersey at swbell.net  Wed Jul 17 15:58:52 2002
From: kkersey at swbell.net (kkersey_austin)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 15:58:52 -0000
Subject: Membership Drop on HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <agf3je+p8mi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah447s+g7ob@eGroups.com>

First of all - hi everyone! This is my first post, though I've 
been lurking on HPfGU for a couple of months after finally 
getting the "family set" of books from my mom and reading them 
all in a week's time. For some reason I thought the fifth book 
was already out so it was quite a nasty shock when I finished GoF and 
found out not only was it not out yet, but that I might have to wait 
another year...

Anyway, regarding the drop in membership:

Members in "bouncing" status are not included in the membership count, 
and Yahoo has been making some changes in how it handles bounces. I 
was stuck in bounce limbo for awhile myself, but (thanks to help from 
Kelley and Penny) got reinstated. 

A "bounce" is an unsuccessful attempt to deliver an email message - 
e.g. if your mailbox is full, or your ISP has their email server down 
for maintenance (grrrr...) - used to be Yahoo would keep trying and 
would automatically bump you back to normal status after a while, at 
least under most circumstances. The new system asks the bounced member 
to reconfirm the email address, instead of just trying to send over 
and over to dead addresses. While they were changing over, it 
seems that neither method was in place, so I was probably not alone in 
getting stuck.

The HPfGU apparently does not automatically un-sub you if you bounce 
(some groups are set to do that) - in fact there are currently nearly 
a thousand members in bounced status. Moderators can see more info 
e.g. the dates that members bounced, and can reset (or delete) 
bouncing members.

I don't know if this accounts for the drop in membership, but I'll bet 
I wasn't the only one affected.

I learned about the changes by scanning through the "listhelp" list, 
BTW.

Karen, who will be going back to lurk mode now


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "coriolan_cmc2001" <coriolan at w...> wrote:
> Just over a week ago, HP4GU listed about 4200 members. Now it's 
> dropped to below 4000.  Was there some policy stance proclaimed by 
> the moderators that prompted 200 plus folks to resign or protest? Is 
> some assiduous soul weeding out defunct e-mail addresses? Or is 
there 
> some other explanation at work?
> 
>   - CMC





From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Wed Jul 17 20:20:37 2002
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 20:20:37 -0000
Subject: More about sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah46cb+ll0h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah4jil+kq97@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "judyserenity" <judyshapiro at e...> wrote:
<snip>
> 
> I just looked up sexism in a dictionary, and it was defined as 1)
> discriminating in favor of members of one sex; or 2) assuming that 
> a person's abilities and social functions are determined by his or 
> her sex.  (Well, actually this was the definition of sexist; sexism 
> wasn't listed separately.)  In other words, it lists two different
> definitions. I prefer the first one, which defines sexist as the
> mistreatment of one sex relative to the other.  The second 
> definition refers specifically to the gender division of labor (and 
> other behaviors), which seems to be the other definition that 
>people are adopting here. 

But these two definitions are hardly independent of each other, are 
they? Historically, women were discriminated against *because* it was 
thought that their "abilities and social functions" were of a certain 
(inferior) nature. Generally speaking, discrimination is an external 
description. It is on the basis of our belief in equality that we can 
discern discrimination. But a male chauvinist *believes* that women 
are inferior to men in certain ways, and *therefore* he will actively 
discriminate against them. 

> 
> Maybe the right question  is *why* do I prefer definition #1 to
> definition #2? Well, I feel a definition of sexism should: 1) help
> feminists (who I'd say can be either male or female) decide where 
> to focus their efforts in helping women; 2) help people tell if the
> treatment of women in a particular society is improving or not; and 
> 3) help people develop hypotheses of why some societies treat women
> better than other societies do. 

Don't you think that understanding the cultural image of the sexes 
would give more insight to question 3, at least? 

<snip>
> 
> I'd actually say that my preferred definition of "sexism" parallels
> the way the term racism is used, while the "gender division of 
> labor" definition of sexism does not. When people talk about racism 
> (at least in Western societies), they are almost always referring > 
to racial  minorities being treated worse than the White majority. > 
If there is a claim that whites are being treated worse (as is  > 
often made in debates  over affirmative action), this is given a > > 
different name, such as "reverse discrimination."  In other words, > 
the very term "racism" implies that some races are treated worse > > 
than others, not just that each race is treated differently.  

Hmmm. You don't think that a society in which members of a certain 
race are *limited* to certain occupations is deeply racist? I do. The 
fact that Jews, for instance, were debarred from many, many 
occupations (both in the Christian and the Muslim worlds) was not out 
and out discrimination? 
Also, I cannot think of an example of a society where such limits 
were symmetrical - i.e., where one race is limited to certain 
occupations and another race to a different bunch of occupations, 
*and* where each group of occupations has more or less the same 
social prestige. 

> If we use the term "sexism" to refer to any case where men and 
> women are expected to act differently, then what term will we use  
> to refer to women being treated worse than men are?  If there is no 
> term that specifically refers to mistreatment of women, then won't 
> that problem become invisible?

I'm looking forward to a state of affairs when such a question will 
become relevant. So far, when women and men have been expected to act 
differently, the brunt of most of the restrictions and sanctions were 
on the women. 
> 
<snip>
> 
> I want to point out another reason why I am unhappy with a focus on
> women achieving in traditionally male roles.  What does this say 
> about the importance of traditionally female roles?  If there is a 
> parallel emphasis on how great it is for men to take on  
traditionally female  roles, fine.  But, that is almost never the 
case.  Women who take on traditionally male occupations are lauded; 
men who take on traditionally female occupations are (at best) 
ignored.  Perhaps the intended message is "People of either gender 
can take on any role,"but the message people may perceive is 
"Traditionally male occupations are important; traditionally female > 
occupations are unimportant."  

I have a bit of a problem with this attitude (which I've encountered 
many times) because I think there is a certain naivetee to it. It 
sounds very well. Why should traditionally male roles be viewed as 
more important than traditionally female roles? Isn't being a mother 
and home maker an enormously important role? Well, it is in a way. 
But in another way ... no, it isn't. *Economically*, it isn't. In 
terms of power, money, social influence - it isn't important. What 
you call "traditionally male roles" are those social functions that 
are important in these "worldly" aspects. Aren't we, in a sense, as 
important as the amount of money/assets that we own? Women (in 
western society, at least) have been traditionally denied access to 
those roles that carry with them social power. That's why I'm really 
not impressed with the post modern feminism with it's emphasis on 
equalising the value of female roles vs. male roles. The bottom line 
for me is that, in the long run, you can't dissociate cultural values 
from economic values. 

<snip>
> 
> If men are allowed to do anything they want, while women are
> restricted to a limited number of occupations, then, yes, that is
> sexist and the N.O.W. (National Organization for Witches) should do
> something about it. (I actually doubt that there are any societies 
> in which women are excluded from some professions, while all 
> professions are open to men. It just doesn't seem to work that > 
way.)  

Well, men can't give birth and find it very hard to lactate, so in 
all societies it is the women who nurse babies. Other than that?  In 
Taliban Afghanistan, women could not leave the house without a male 
relative escorting them. Girls were denied education of the most 
basic sort. Other than domestic work, women could do nothing. On the 
other hand, I haven't heard that men were not allowed to clean, cook 
or take care of a child. This is an extreme case, but from the little 
I know, women are similarly restricted in other Muslim, conservative 
societies (Saudi Arabia? Yemen?).

<snip>
 
> Moving from Hogwarts back to the real world, I'd say that fixing 
> the gender-based division of labor is a good cause, but it's not 
> something that I think women's organizations should be expected to 
> do.  
> Women's organizations have their hands full with domestic violence, 
> the feminization of poverty, female infanticide in Asia, genital
> mutilation in Africa, and far too many other problems.  They just
> don't have the resources to also tackle problems where men and 
> women are impacted equally.  In other words, if both men and women 
> are being limited, why should fixing the problem be considered > > 
women's responsibility?  

I'm far from being an expert on any of these issues, but... isn't 
domestic violence easier to deal with when the woman is capable of 
earning enough to supporting herself and her children? And from the 
little I've read, female infanticide in Asia is *directly* linked to 
economic considerations. Feminization of poverty - is that not 
related to the ways and means in which women can earn a living? 
I don't know enough of these issues to make a positive statement 
here, but it certainly seems to me that labor division is not 
unrelated to them. 


Naama  




From siriuskase at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 17 21:43:38 2002
From: siriuskase at yahoo.com (siriuskase)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 21:43:38 -0000
Subject: Membership Drop on HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <agfhnh+fum2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah4oea+b3gb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "pengolodh_sc" <pengolodh_sc at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter "coriolan_cmc2001" wrote:
> > Just over a week ago, HP4GU listed about 4200 members. Now
> > it's dropped to below 4000.  Was there some policy stance
> > proclaimed by  the moderators that prompted 200 plus folks to
> > resign or protest? Is some assiduous soul weeding out defunct
> > e-mail addresses? Or is there some other explanation at work?
> > 
> >   - CMC
> 
> I think Yahoo!Groups has a policy of weeding out members with 
> bouncing mailaddresses - if a number of messages from the group 
> go ::bounce!::, I think Yahoo!Groups simply unsubs that address. 

This sorta happened to me.  I logged on to the membership list and I
WASN'T THERE, but I was on the bounce list.  I was using a yahoo box
and it filled up.  But I was still subscribed, just bouncing.  When I
got over the motion sickness, I noticed a verifiy command and clicked
on it after cleaning out my inbox.  Now I'm back to normal and feeling
much better.

SK




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Thu Jul 18 02:35:51 2002
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 22:35:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Birthday wishes (just under the wire)
Message-ID: <20020718023551.6840.qmail@web14609.mail.yahoo.com>

Bad Birthday Elf, nearly forgot about this one!

*stacks gifts and other goodies on table and flings
confetti about the room*

Vikki is having a birthday today! She's been with us
on and off for about a year. Though she's no longer a
member of our list, I'm sure she'd appreciate some
birthday owls. They can be sent to:
elvenwren at yahoo.com

I hope some of you join me in wishing her a very happy
bithday.

Sheryll

=====
"We need to be united and strong. We'll have losses and scares, sure. And you'll be there for each other, helping each other through the bad times."
 blpurdom - Harry Potter and the Psychic Serpent, Chapter 26

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From ken.kuller at veritas.com  Thu Jul 18 14:08:56 2002
From: ken.kuller at veritas.com (ken_kuller)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 14:08:56 -0000
Subject: New Member
Message-ID: <ah6i5p+b3ha@eGroups.com>

I am new to this group, and haven't finished surfing the message 
history yet.  I have noticed a lot of birthday-related chatter, so 
I'll volunteer the fact that I have the same birthday as Harry Potter.

More accurately, Harry Potter happens to have been born on my 
birthday.

Ken Kuller




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Thu Jul 18 14:19:26 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 14:19:26 -0000
Subject: More about sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah46cb+ll0h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah6ipe+c7do@eGroups.com>

Judy wrote:

> Suppose that, in the Wizarding World (WW for short), only men 
could be
> athletes, and only women could be musicians.  <snip> Would this 
>make people less happy than if both genders could choice these 
>roles?  Yes -- there would be a lot of frustrated female athletes 
>and male musicians, not to mention that audiences would be deprived 
>of watching and hearing these people perform.  So, it would be a 
>bad policy.
> 
> But, would it make the WW sexist?  I'd say no, because it wouldn't
> favor one gender over the other, assuming that being an athlete or
> being a musician were equally well paid, etc. It would just be a
> stupid way of assigning jobs to people. 

Very, very interesting discussion.

I'm not sure I totally agree that sexism requires that there be 
favoritism of one gender over the other, though.  (Boy, I hope I'm 
not distorting what Judy is saying -- correct me if I did, Judy.)

Let's say the government adopts a policy that only men must fight in 
wars (or, if you like, men must fight and women must fill support 
roles).  Is this sexism?  Well, if we ask whether this policy favors 
men over women or women over men, we might not agree on an answer.  
Whether a policy favors a particular group can be quite subjective, 
I'd say, so it probably isn't the most reliable definition 
of "sexism."

So in Judy's example, I have to question the assumption that pay is 
the only (or even the primary) measure of determining whether two 
jobs are equivalent.  If athletes are accorded more respect, if the 
work is more interesting, if the careers of athletes are more stable 
and secure, then those who are allowed to be athletes *are* being 
favored over those who are allowed to be musicians.  And, of course, 
for the individual who would like to be an athlete simply as a 
matter of taste and personal preference, the objective equality of 
athlete and musician is small comfort.

Judy:


> I just looked up sexism in a dictionary, and it was defined as 1)
> discriminating in favor of members of one sex; or 2) assuming that 
>a person's abilities and social functions are determined by his or 
>her  sex.  <snip>  In other words, it lists two different
> definitions. I prefer the first one, which defines sexist as the
> mistreatment of one sex relative to the other.  The second 
>definition refers specifically to the gender division of labor (and 
>other behaviors), which seems to be the other definition that 
>people are adopting here. 

I think each of part of the definition is compelling.  In fact, 
people who engage in assumptions based on gender may, if given the 
chance, take the next step to discrimination. 

But making assumptions about a person's abilities based on gender 
can be equally insidious and harmful.  This is particularly so in 
the areas of gender and race, where the assumptions regarding women 
and people of color are frequently negative and unkind.  For 
example, the assumption that a woman are more emotional and 
therefore are less likely to be tough lawyers can lead to exactly 
the same place as simply discriminating against women by deciding 
outright not to hire women lawyers.  The assumption, in my mind, is 
sexist.  I mean, if that assumption isn't sexist, then what is it?

 
> I'd actually say that my preferred definition of "sexism" parallels
> the way the term racism is used, while the "gender division of 
>labor" definition of sexism does not. When people talk about racism 
>(at least in Western societies), they are almost always referring 
>to racial  minorities being treated worse than the White majority.  

Well, I'd say racism also includes unfounded assumptions (about 
preferences, tendencies, predispositions and the like) about people 
based on skin color.  

> If we use the term "sexism" to refer to any case where men and 
>women are expected to act differently, then what term will we use 
>to refer to women being treated worse than men are?  

Mmmm, I'd call it gender discrimination.  After all, when we talk 
about "racial discrimination," we usually mean that one race is 
being discriminated against.  In other words, treated worse.

>If there is no term that specifically refers to mistreatment of 
>women, then won't that problem become invisible?

Well, no.  I see "sexism" as a broad term that encompasses 
preconceived notions about individuals based on gender and can 
include discrimination that results from those preconceived 
notions.  It can also include plain old misogyny and resulting 
discrimination or mistreatment, IMO.


> I want to point out another reason why I am unhappy with a focus on
> women achieving in traditionally male roles.  What does this say 
>about the importance of traditionally female roles?  

I think it says that no one should have their options limited to 
traditionally female roles due to societal expectations or 
barriers.  It says that in the past, many women *were* confined to 
these roles for all the wrong reasons.  

And it also says that, in my experience, there are many 
traditionally female roles that haven't been valued all that much by 
society (using the measures I mentioned above, such as pay, status, 
stability) -- which suggests that society has long been sending a 
message that traditionally female roles aren't valued all that 
much.  Many traditionally female roles *were* underappreciated, and 
many traditionally female roles *still are* underappreciated, IMO.  
So perhaps the focus on women achieving in traditionally male roles 
hasn't changed society's message about traditionally female roles 
all that much.


>If there is a parallel
> emphasis on how great it is for men to take on traditionally female
> roles, fine.  But, that is almost never the case.  Women who take 
>on traditionally male occupations are lauded; men who take on
> traditionally female occupations are (at best) ignored.  Perhaps 
>the intended message is "People of either gender can take on any 
>role," but the message people may perceive is "Traditionally male 
>occupations are important; traditionally female occupations are 
>unimportant."  If men and women still largely occupy different 
>roles (which is the case in the US), then the net effect may be a 
>reduction in the respect women receive.  

I don't know about this.  

Let's say 100% of women used to be nurses, and this traditional 
female role was accorded little respect.  Now only 50% of women are 
nurses, and 50% have moved on to the traditionally male occupation 
of doctor.  How is there a net effect of a reduction in the respect 
women receive?

Judy:

> If men are allowed to do anything they want, while women are
> restricted to a limited number of occupations, then, yes, that is
> sexist and the N.O.W. (National Organization for Witches) should do
> something about it. <snip>  However, if
> women are being kept off of Quidditch teams while men are being 
>denied the chance to be musicians, then I'd say N.O.W. should skip 
>that issue, and focus on cases where women are being mistreated. 

In that instance, I'd say that N.O.W. has twice as much work to do 
to set things right.  Arbitrary restrictions on opportunity *are* a 
form of mistreatment, in my mind, anyway.


>In other words, if both men and women are being
> limited, why should fixing the problem be considered women's
> responsibility?  

It isn't.  It's society's responsibility.

I don't doubt that there are life and death issues all over the 
world involving gender.  But I really do think we can try to improve 
the lot of all women facing any form of gender discrimination or 
inequity without spreading ourselves too thin.

Using racism as an example, apartheid existed in South Africa at a 
time when African Americans in the U.S. were fighting for things 
like integration of schools and workplaces.  The fact that the 
plight of South African blacks was far more dire than that of 
African Americans wouldn't have struck me as an especially 
compelling reason to ignore racism or racial discrimination in the 
U.S. at the time.

Cindy




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Thu Jul 18 16:55:48 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 16:55:48 -0000
Subject: Yet More about sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah6ipe+c7do@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah6ruk+9m5s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at c...> wrote:
> And it also says that, in my experience, there are many 
> traditionally female roles that haven't been valued all that much 
by 
> society (using the measures I mentioned above, such as pay, status, 
> stability) -- which suggests that society has long been sending a 
> message that traditionally female roles aren't valued all that 
> much.  Many traditionally female roles *were* underappreciated, and 
> many traditionally female roles *still are* underappreciated, IMO.  
> So perhaps the focus on women achieving in traditionally male roles 
> hasn't changed society's message about traditionally female roles 
> all that much.

Which is the chicken, and which is the egg?  Were the roles 
underappreciated because done by women, or were women forced to do 
the underappreciated roles?
> 
Cindy again:
> 
> Let's say 100% of women used to be nurses, and this traditional 
> female role was accorded little respect.  Now only 50% of women are 
> nurses, and 50% have moved on to the traditionally male occupation 
> of doctor.  How is there a net effect of a reduction in the respect 
> women receive?
> 
That depends on how public perception works.  Either women doctors 
will get respect, or doctors generally will lose respect on the 
grounds that they are women.  The men will then leave.

It gets most interesting with those jobs where the *work* is 
identical but there is a different perception based on gender.  What 
exactly is the difference between a cook and a chef?  

David




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Thu Jul 18 17:53:38 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 17:53:38 -0000
Subject: Yet More about sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah6ruk+9m5s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah6vb3+b2hd@eGroups.com>

David asked:

>Which is the chicken, and which is the egg? Were the roles 
>underappreciated because done by women, or were women forced to do 
>the underappreciated roles?

Well, you know, I'm no *expert* or anything, but I'll take a shot at 
this.  I think that "sexism" (assumptions about the abilities and 
inherent traits of women) led to the belief that women are best 
suited for certain things:  schoolteacher, nurse.  If you take 50% 
of the population and limit them to just a few occupations like 
these, there won't be much scarcity in these fields.  In fact, you 
will hardly have to pay people in these occupations anything at all, 
as they have nowhere else to go.

So I think women (and racial minorities) were forced into 
underappreciated positions (based at least in part on sexist or 
racist assumptions or beliefs).

Although . . . I really have no idea, and I'm just guessing, and I 
fully expect to be set straight by someone who knows what they're 
talking about.  ;-)


I wrote:

> > Let's say 100% of women used to be nurses, and this traditional 
> > female role was accorded little respect.  Now only 50% of women 
> > are 
> > nurses, and 50% have moved on to the traditionally male 
> > occupation 
> > of doctor.  How is there a net effect of a reduction in the 
> > respect women receive?
> > 

David asked:

> That depends on how public perception works.  Either women doctors 
> will get respect, or doctors generally will lose respect on the 
> grounds that they are women.  The men will then leave.
 
Ah, but I was challenging the idea that encouraging women to move to 
traditionally male occupations will have a net effect of *reducing* 
the respect women receive.  So even if society decides doctors are 
no longer worthy of respect now that the job is being done by women, 
we still don't have a net effect of a *reduction* in the respect 
women receive, right?  In this hypothetical, the women are trying to 
hit a moving target, to be sure, but they are no *worse* off than 
they when they were all nurses.  

Actually, I was thinking more about why I'm not too happy about the 
idea that arbitrary gender restrictions on occupational choice are 
not especially troublesome if they do not favor one gender over the 
other.    

Not too long ago, there were laws in the U.S. prohibiting 
interracial marriage between whites and blacks.  These laws applied 
to both races equally, didn't they?  These laws didn't favor or 
advantage one race over another or even one individual over 
another.  Everyone's choice of a mate was restricted:  a white who 
wanted to marry a black was just as constrained as a black who 
wanted to marry a white.  Nevertheless, these laws were struck down 
because of their inherent racism -- they limited opportunity based 
on race, despite their "equal application" to all citizens.  

So it seems to me that whether an arbitrary law or rule "favors" one 
gender or race over another isn't the end of the analysis at all.  
In the case of arbitrary gender rules, the restriction itself is 
offensive and objectionable, even if the restriction applies to both 
genders equally and results in no favoritism at all.

Cindy (who was pondering this debate while mowing the lawn)




From speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com  Thu Jul 18 20:14:39 2002
From: speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com (frankielee242)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 20:14:39 -0000
Subject: Yet More about sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah6ruk+9m5s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah77jf+lu4f@eGroups.com>

David wrote:
 
> It gets most interesting with those jobs where the *work* is 
> identical but there is a different perception based on gender.  What 
> exactly is the difference between a cook and a chef?  

A cook has tattoos.

There is plenty of documented evidence that women in the same
industries in the same positions even within the same companies have
more responsibilities but are paid less than their male co-workers. I
have experienced this phenomenon first-hand...

IMO, the gap stems from some women (NOT all) expecting to be rewarded
for their hard work without asking and from some men (again, NOT all)
kicking and screaming for (and getting) raises without doing much
"work."  In general (not everyone is like this), these behaviors seem
to be learned at home.

I think the gap also stems from older people in management who are
having trouble adjusting from the days when women confined themselves
to "traditional" jobs. Even though it's illegal in the U.S. to ask
about family planning, some managers automatically assume that all
women will get married, get pregnant and quit. Therefore, they aren't
willing to invest in, promote or pay much to an employee they think
has no long-term future.


Frankie, between rounds of kicking and screaming for a raise in the
boss-man's office.








From speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com  Thu Jul 18 21:04:46 2002
From: speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com (frankielee242)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 21:04:46 -0000
Subject: Sad News WARNING: Bible Discussion
In-Reply-To: <agocl8+sp1f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah7ahe+3kup@eGroups.com>

First Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote:
> the code for living as a "good" Israelite was made deliberately
> impossible for a mortal to even comprehend living up to.  The point
> being, of course, that no one is perfect and they needed *Jesus* to
> save them from their imperfections (this is the purely Christian view
> - as I was taught it - on things, btw..I don't know how Jewish people
> interpret it).

Then Judy wrote:
> Well, I can answer that for at least one Jewish person (me). The
> Jewish belief system doesn't talk about a Messiah as necessary for
> reconciling individual humans with God. The idea that humans are
> inherently sinful in not a Jewish idea; the rules are definitely meant
> to be followed.


My understanding of the lists of things "Thou Shalt Not Do" in the
Torah, the Bible and most other ancient religions is that a number of
the taboos were in place on the grounds of public health. For example,
not eating pigs which carry all sorts of parasites if incompletely
cooked, not sleeping around and picking up all sorts of STDs, not
eating or touching people with your left hand as there are no leaves
in the desert to wipe your...   

With this in mind, what Liz the Lurker pointed out about the Bible's
stance against sodomy makes sense. Homosexuality isn't limited
strictly to sodomy, after all. I'll have to get in touch with some
friends who were in a "Queers for Christ" Bible study group and see
what they have to say about it.

Here's where I get confused. Which version of the Bible is closest to
the Dead Sea Scrolls? Isn't that where most of the books in the New
Testament came from? Is the Christian Old Testament merely a copy
(plus or minus a few books) of the Torah?

On the cat soul front, Shaynie, I'm sorry your lost your cat. =( 

However, most eastern religions and a number of western pre-christian
religions hold that everything has a soul, even stones, trees and bits
of poop. =P  Seriously. Check out Chuang Tsu some time.

Can of worms, anyone?


Frankie, sincere of heart but questionable of taste.




From editor at texas.net  Thu Jul 18 21:29:18 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 16:29:18 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Yet More about sexism and division of labor
References: <ah77jf+lu4f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002a01c22ea2$2e073880$397e63d1@texas.net>

> There is plenty of documented evidence that women in the same
> industries in the same positions even within the same companies have
> more responsibilities but are paid less than their male co-workers. I
> have experienced this phenomenon first-hand...
>
> IMO, the gap stems from some women (NOT all) expecting to be rewarded
> for their hard work without asking and from some men (again, NOT all)
> kicking and screaming for (and getting) raises without doing much
> "work."  In general (not everyone is like this), these behaviors seem
> to be learned at home.

Actually, some of it stems from a no-longer-valid cultural reality: men were
paid more because they were assumed to have wives and families to support.
Women who were working were presumably supporting only themselves, because
wives were generally at home being supported by their
proportionally-higher-paid husbands. The biased pay scales stemmed from and
reinforced the traditional setup. I'm not making a value judgement here,
either--just saying that there was a genuine cultural underpinning to the
bias.

And it's true, too, that some of it is what you are saying, that men's and
women's expectations differ, but I don't think it's learned at home (or
anywhere). Women, *in general,* like to interact via cooperation and
consensus; men, *in general,* function more competitively in a hierarchichal
approach. I think it's hardwired. So men tend to challenge the system for
more compensation (i.e., kick and scream), and women tend to want to feel
there is a consensus that they deserve it (i.e., wait to be rewarded).

--Amanda




From huntleyl at mssm.org  Thu Jul 18 23:11:36 2002
From: huntleyl at mssm.org (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 19:11:36 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Yet More about sexism and division of labor
References: <ah77jf+lu4f@eGroups.com> <002a01c22ea2$2e073880$397e63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <003901c22eb0$7796f9a0$4fccedd1@Huntley>


Amanda:
>And it's true, too, that some of it is what you are saying, that men's and
>women's expectations differ, but I don't think it's learned at home (or
>anywhere). Women, *in general,* like to interact via cooperation and
>consensus; men, *in general,* function more competitively in a hierarchichal
>approach. I think it's hardwired. So men tend to challenge the system for
>more compensation (i.e., kick and scream), and women tend to want to feel
>there is a consensus that they deserve it (i.e., wait to be rewarded).

I guess that must mean that my hard-wiring is hopelessly flawed, then.  Or, perhaps I'm just the mannish type.

I won't try to pretend that what you've said here doesn't provoke feelings of resentment (not towards you, but towards this viewpoint, which I come across so often) in me.  Everyone *is* entitled to their opinion, however, this one has always particularly pained me.  

First, because it runs so contrary to everything that I know (i.e. observed throughout my life).  Secondly, because although *I* know you didn't mean to imply that women who act in the way you described as male are somehow abnormal, the net result of the expectations that I feel result in this viewpoint is that women who do *not* act in this way are viewed as somehow masculine (and vice versa for men).  And being viewed as having a "male" attitude about something when one is female almost inevitably leads to accusations of either being "Butch" (as in the lesbian stereotype) or bitch.  Basically, a guy can be aggressive-competitive, but a women has to make due with working hard and hoping someone notices.

And you know what?  Being aggressive-competitive *isn't* necessarily a respectable or honorable thing to be.  But in a competitive society such as our own, just because you *deserve* something doesn't mean that you're going to be handed it on a silver platter.  Mostly, you're going to have to speak up and *make* people notice your value, because in every situation there's bound to be someone else just as valuable.  And as far as I can see, society has little problem with men who understand this.  They get dubbed things like "Go-getter" or "Leader".  Women, on the other hand, who behave like this tend to be considered heartless or unfeminine or hard.

And that's what I feel is my biggest argument against your reasoning -- the fact that if a women *does* happen to buck her "hard-wiring", she gets put down for it.  She gets ahead where the more passive women wouldn't, yes -- but she loses her femininity in the process.

As far as I can see, things like being aggressive or competitive or hard-working or intelligent or friendly or funny or charismatic are all *individual* traits -- brought on in the *individual* by nature or nurture or a combination of the two.  It seems inherently wrong to me that any of them would be hardwired or gender-specific.  The tendencies you describe probably exist, but I believe that they are they product of a society with the left-over expectations and biases of the past (a VERY recent past, I might add, so no wonder) -- that feminine is defined as soft, motherly, emotional, and unassuming; while masculine is aggressive, strong, stable, and competitive.  And God help the person (male or female) who has too many of the traits attributed to the opposite sex.  How *dare* a woman fight to further herself, and any man who would rather stay home to cook and clean instead of braving the competitive business world must be either homosexual or brow-beaten by his over-bearing wife.  Most people would bristle at the suggestion that they think like this, and, indeed, most people don't.  But what I do believe is that vestiges of this thinking remain lodged in our society, and will probably do so for a long time to come.

laura  


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From anise_leinen at yahoo.com  Fri Jul 19 01:58:25 2002
From: anise_leinen at yahoo.com (Catherine Danielson)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 18:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <1026975134.511.30705.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020719015825.10100.qmail@web21402.mail.yahoo.com>


Hi all (delurks briefly and waves.) First post, been
reading for a bit before diving in the waters. :)
I'm so glad to see that that awful scene in The Jungle
Book bothered SOMEBODY else besides me!!! Yuck. It
wasn't one of Disney's best anyway, IMHO. However, I
have always had an utterly illogical love for the 1975
cartoon version of Robin Hood, which made me want to
marry a fox when I grew up. :)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com



From catlady at wicca.net  Fri Jul 19 02:04:11 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 02:04:11 -0000
Subject: More about sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ah46cb+ll0h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah7s2r+dufa@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "judyserenity" <judyshapiro at e...> wrote:

> Suppose that, in the Wizarding World (WW for short), only men could
> be athletes, and only women could be musicians.  (In fact, the only
> professional musicians I can remember being mentioned are females,
> Celestina Warbuck and the Weird Sisters.) 

At least the lead guitarist for The Weird Sisters is male (and human, 
which I had formerly wondered about) and I wouldn't be surprised if 
the whole band was male. It's in Quidditch Through the Ages, about 
the team The Pride of Portree:

"Their most famous Chaser, Catriona McCormack, captained the team to 
two League wins in the 1960s, and played for Scotland thirty-six 
times. Her daughter Meaghan currently plays Keeper for the team. 
(Her son Kirley is lead guitarist with the popular wizarding band The 
Weird Sisters.)

Frankie wrote:

> IMO, the gap stems from some women (NOT all) expecting to be
> rewarded for their hard work without asking and from some men 
> (again, NOT all) kicking and screaming for (and getting) raises 
> without doing much "work." 

At least some of it comes from women being, on the average, shorter 
than men (I myself am 5' 2.5" and taller than several of my female 
colleagues). Studies of the pay of male executives in the 1970s and 
1980s found that, among otherwise matching men, each additional inch 
of height resulted in an additional $1000/year in salary. It is said 
that all people have a reflex of perceiving taller = better (and 
therefore seeing the quality of the same quality work as better when 
done by a taller person) either because of conditioning when we were 
infants and our parents were much taller than us, or as a genetically 
inherited human instinct. 




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Fri Jul 19 02:58:10 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 02:58:10 -0000
Subject: who worked and why (was sexism and division of labor)
In-Reply-To: <002a01c22ea2$2e073880$397e63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <ah7v82+pmk8@eGroups.com>

> a no-longer-valid cultural reality: men were
> paid more because they were assumed to have wives and families to 
support.
> Women who were working were presumably supporting only themselves, 
because
> wives were generally at home being supported by their
> proportionally-higher-paid husbands. 

This was middle-class reality, but never true for very poor people.  
Most women through most of history have worked for the simple reason 
that they or their families would starve, be evicted, etc. unless 
they helped to bring in money (or, in agricultural societies, raise 
food).  Yes, plenty of men have insisted that their wives not work 
(even though the family really needed the income) because they 
believed it was their role to be the sole provider, but plenty more 
have sacrificed their (as they saw it) masculinity because going 
without that income was just not an option.  Look at old photos of 
factory women, migrant farmworkers, etc.: the women in those photos 
aren't just young women supporting themselves until they get 
married.  They are mothers to the little girls combing cotton beside 
them.  The whole family went off to work.

I.e., I'm not sure this cultural reality was ever real except for a 
small percentage of people.

Amy Z




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Fri Jul 19 03:19:04 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (A. Vulgarweed)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 22:19:04 -0500
Subject: Division of Labor
In-Reply-To: <1026975134.511.30705.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <l03130305b95d24965942@[65.57.12.205]>



>I'd actually say that my preferred definition of "sexism" parallels
>the way the term racism is used, while the "gender division of labor"
>definition of sexism does not. When people talk about racism (at least
>in Western societies), they are almost always referring to racial
>minorities being treated worse than the White majority.  If there is a
>claim that whites are being treated worse (as is often made in debates
>over affirmative action), this is given a different name, such as
>"reverse discrimination."  In other words, the very term "racism"
>implies that some races are treated worse than others, not just that
>each race is treated differently.

Well, racism and sexism are different in some ways and have different
rationalizations, so can never be exactly paralleled. But "gender division
of labor" certainly _does_ parallel the way *racism* plays out in some
ways. Until fairly recently, in the US, blacks were barred from certain
jobs (usually the prestigious, interesting, well-paying ones) entirely, and
herded into others, such as service jobs, janitorial work and domestic
work, perhaps entertainment and athletics for the enjoyment of whites. Some
people at the time _did_ argue that this was a "separate but equal"
division of labor. And some people believed that it was only right and
natural because of black people's different capabilities and interests. It
is *definitely* a VERY MAJOR and important form that "some races being
treated worse than others" took. Not the only one, but a major one that had
great impact on the education, economic status, social status, and overall
hopes and dreams of many generations of people. I think a gender-based
division of labor has pretty much the same effect, because where in the
world does such a division exist in which things like economic power,
social status, education level, and influence *really are* divided equally
among different jobs? I *don't want* a drinking fountain of our very own,
thank you.

Frankly, changing white society's attitude about the capabilities of blacks
as a group proved easier than getting all people to respect and pay a
janitor as much as a lawyer (regardless of the race of either). And if you
use this as a parallel for the situation of women, well, a lawyer will
probably still always be paid better than a homemaker--unless the homemaker
has married for money very, very, well, in which case I'd say there's
another word that more accurately describes her profession. ;) Can't help
but think MLK Jr. would have been quite a bit less inspiring had his
platform been:, "Hey, blacks make great janitors, and we really shouldn't
bother fighting for our rights to be lawyers 'cause that's too
low-priority--but we should get more respect for our traditionally Black
roles! Let's honor janitors! We can hold our heads up high regardless of
the division of labor, 'cause that's just a side issue."

That would not have gone over. And women shouldn't settle for it either. As
I see it, the biggest problem with the traditional gender-based division of
labor is that women only get *one* choice -- well, okay, let's throw in
nurse, teacher, secretary and that ever-popular turn-of-the-century
standby, sweatshop worker. OK, that's five choices. Men get....*everything
else.* If you don't consider that mistreatment of women, then you must have
a very different definition of "mistreatment" than I do.



>
>If we use the term "sexism" to refer to any case where men and women
>are expected to act differently, then what term will we use to refer
>to women being treated worse than men are?

Let's see: Oppression is ever-popular. Plus, let's just talk about the
problem specifically, whatever it may be: job discrimination, female
infanticide, female genital mutilation, spousal abuse, honor killings,
forced marriage, trafficking in women, sexual slavery, education
discrimination....all these are *products* of sexism, but I think "sexism"
is already too general and watered-down a term to apply to, say, a woman
beaten to death because the wind blew her veil off.

If there is no term that
>specifically refers to mistreatment of women, then won't that problem
>become invisible?

Again, "mistreatment" is a term that I see as much broader (no pun
intended) than you're using it to mean. I would call what you're talking
about "oppression," which seems like a stronger word to me anyway, and it
can easily be modified with a "female" or "of women."

Also, this may be just an association I have, but "mistreatment" sounds
like what happens when you beat your cart-horse too hard--i.e., when you
overstep your bounds with this creature that you have a charge to be
responsible for. You know, sort of like the way marital rape used to be a
contradiction in terms, because after all, a husband has a *right*.

>It would be interesting to see if there is correlation between which
>definition of sexism a person adheres to, and whether that person
>believes mistreatment of women is a serious problem.  I suspect that
>there is; I can say right off the bat that radical feminists almost
>never define sexism as referring primarily to a gender division of
>labor.

??? First off, the two definitions of sexism you listed, as has been said,
don't contradict each other at all; I personally hold both of them.

And second, which schismatic sub-school of radical feminism do you mean?
Cause there are hundreds, and they sure all don't agree with each other on
much of anything.
>
>I want to point out another reason why I am unhappy with a focus on
>women achieving in traditionally male roles.  What does this say about
>the importance of traditionally female roles?  If there is a parallel
>emphasis on how great it is for men to take on traditionally female
>roles, fine.  But, that is almost never the case.

That's because it's pretty rare in real life.
Why? Partly *because* it's not rewarded, either economically or socially
(and is rewarded socially even less for men than it is for women).
And also partly because only a *relative few* people are temperamentally
suited at all to full-time caregiver occupations, IMHO. It's very demanding
work, it can be very draining and tedious, and only *some* people feel a
call to it or have a talent for it. That's why it's extremely wrong, IMO,
to force women who are not suited for it to do it, and also to keep men who
*are* suited for it from doing it. But as long as the traditional
_breadwinner_ onus rests on men, you'll see fewer men doing this type of
work because, well, it doesn't pay very well. And as long as it's harder
for women to get higher-paying work than men (which it is, still), you'll
find relatively few women who are able to bring home enough bacon to allow
Mr. Mom to stay at home. Were the economic pie more evenly divided, it
might not be so rare. As it is, I do have a few househusbands in my circle
of friends; without exception, their wives or partners are among the lucky
and smart and ambitious ones who rake in enough money to support a family!
So you can't improve the situation of one without taking up the cause of
the other.

And, as I said above, there IS a MUCH WIDER RANGE of fascinating,
compelling, risky, challenging, exciting, rewarding "traditionally male"
work to choose from. Almost all professions, with the exception of
caregiving ones, *are* "traditionally male." A music journalist (that's
what I do) doesn't have all that much in common with a fighter pilot, who
doesn't have much in common with an archaeological researcher, who doesn't
have much in common with a Senator...except that they're *all*
"traditionally male" occupations. I can understand wanting to celebrate the
fact that _almost every single realm of human endeavor, whether
intellectual, political, physical, and/or entrepreneurial_ is now at least
nominally open to women, whereas 50 years ago it was not.


Women who take on
>traditionally male occupations are lauded; men who take on
>traditionally female occupations are (at best) ignored.  Perhaps the
>intended message is "People of either gender can take on any role,"
>but the message people may perceive is "Traditionally male occupations
>are important; traditionally female occupations are unimportant."  If
>men and women still largely occupy different roles (which is the case
>in the US), then the net effect may be a reduction in the respect
>women receive.  I think one can easily make this criticism of JKR's
>work.  Yes, she has made sure to point out that women can be Quidditch
>players and that there have been Headmistresses of Hogwarts and female
>Ministers of Magic in the past.  But, when it comes to showing (human)
>men in traditionally female roles such as primary caregiver,
>secretary, nurse, food preparer, etc., she just doesn't do it

Well, Hagrid is primary caregiver to an array of creatures, and certainly
is as maternal as anyone else in the books anywhere with little
Norbert....And Dumbledore seems to spend as much time hovering over Harry's
hospital bed as Madam Pomfrey does....OK, that's stretching it...Remember,
she is trying to appeal to kids (including, probably first and foremost,
the kid in herself), and when it comes to fascination, Transfiguration
trumps cooking anyday.

Nevertheless, I'll betcha anything the Potions Master is a *great* cook. We
just don't get to see it 'cause he never has company. :)

>
> I said:
>>> I'd define a non-sexist society as one where the needs and desires
>of both genders are given equal weight. <<
>
>And Amy asked:
>> Such as the desire to be Chaser on a professional Quidditch team?<
>
>If men are allowed to do anything they want, while women are
>restricted to a limited number of occupations, then, yes, that is
>sexist and the N.O.W. (National Organization for Witches) should do
>something about it. (I actually doubt that there are any societies in
>which women are excluded from some professions, while all professions
>are open to men. It just doesn't seem to work that way.)


Huh?? Although women are not *legally* excluded from many professions in
the US (although there are some, notably combat positions in the Armed
Forces, which tend to be the ones that lead to high-ranking positions later
on if you survive), they are *de facto* excluded or barely represented in
many, from construction workers to Senators. We still have a long way to go
on that one. Meanwhile I can't think of anything that officially excludes
men, except maybe matron in a women's prison or Girl Scout troop leader.

>Moving from Hogwarts back to the real world, I'd say that fixing the
>gender-based division of labor is a good cause, but it's not something
>that I think women's organizations should be expected to do.  Women's
>organizations have their hands full with domestic violence, the
>feminization of poverty,

Naama made excellent points about how the feminization of poverty is in
part a *direct result* of unfair labor divisions regarding women. So, to
some extent, is domestic violence. And even FGM is often justified within
the cultures that practice it with the insistence that "if you're not cut
you won't get a good husband." Well, why is having a husband such a matter
of life and death? Rigid division of labor, that's why!


female infanticide in Asia, genital
>mutilation in Africa, and far too many other problems.  They just
>don't have the resources to also tackle problems where men and women
>are impacted equally.  In other words, if both men and women are being
>limited, why should fixing the problem be considered women's
>responsibility?

But where in the world does the division-of-labor issue impact men and
women EQUALLY? Has this *ever* happened?

AV





From editor at texas.net  Fri Jul 19 03:20:00 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 22:20:00 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Yet More about sexism and division of labor
References: <ah77jf+lu4f@eGroups.com> <002a01c22ea2$2e073880$397e63d1@texas.net> <003901c22eb0$7796f9a0$4fccedd1@Huntley>
Message-ID: <003001c22ed3$2b741440$487d63d1@texas.net>

Prequel: I said
> >Women, *in general,* like to interact via cooperation and
> >consensus; men, *in general,* function more competitively in a
hierarchichal
> >approach. I think it's hardwired. So men tend to challenge the system for
> >more compensation (i.e., kick and scream), and women tend to want to feel
> >there is a consensus that they deserve it (i.e., wait to be rewarded).

Laura responded:
> I guess that must mean that my hard-wiring is hopelessly flawed, then.
Or, perhaps I'm just the mannish type.

Me:
This reaction is precisely why I put those *'s around *in general.* Maybe I
should have put them in caps. I mean "in general," in the same way you can
say with reasonable accuracy that women are less muscular than men, or
smaller, or more flexible. As a rough measure, it's true. When you start
looking at individuals as opposed to broad generalities, it is not
necessarily the case.

Laura:
> First, because it runs so contrary to everything that I know (i.e.
observed throughout my life).

Me:
Actually, in my experience I have found it to be broadly accurate. But
again, in a very general sense; individuals are individuals. These styles of
interaction are not mutually exclusive, and everyone has the ability to use
both, and every situation will be different as well.

Laura:
  Secondly, because although *I* know you didn't mean to imply that women
who act in the way you described as male are somehow abnormal, the net
result of the expectations that I feel result in this viewpoint is that
women who do *not* act in this way are viewed as somehow masculine (and vice
versa for men).  And being viewed as having a "male" attitude about
something when one is female almost inevitably leads to accusations of
either being "Butch" (as in the lesbian stereotype) or bitch.  Basically, a
guy can be aggressive-competitive, but a women has to make due with working
hard and hoping someone notices.

Me:
There's always going to be people who label others. Personally, I have found
this broad generalization to be a useful tool to help me interpret someone's
style, and it helps me to more easily interact with them. I don't have time
for value judgements, and if someone wants to label me as a lesbian because
I can handle competition and confrontation, fine. Hell, there was a rumor
around one place I worked that I was a lesbian, because I wore a certain
kind of *boots.* Why does this matter?

Nor is consensus-building necessarily a passive thing. It can be active and
aggressive as all get-out. It requires a different *style,* that's all.

Laura:
> And you know what?  Being aggressive-competitive *isn't* necessarily a
respectable or honorable thing to be.  But in a competitive society such as
our own, just because you *deserve* something doesn't mean that you're going
to be handed it on a silver platter.  Mostly, you're going to have to speak
up and *make* people notice your value, because in every situation there's
bound to be someone else just as valuable.  And as far as I can see, society
has little problem with men who understand this.  They get dubbed things
like "Go-getter" or "Leader".  Women, on the other hand, who behave like
this tend to be considered heartless or unfeminine or hard.

Me:
And so what? The women who are go-getters and leaders probably understand
what's operating here. Do you want the results, or do you have to have the
results *and* the happy labels? The results, but only phrased your way? I
know loads of men who are labeled rather unfriendly things because of their
competitive natures, too....your "society says" and "society feels" comments
are as much a generality as my gender tendencies, you know.

Laura:
> And that's what I feel is my biggest argument against your reasoning --
the fact that if a women *does* happen to buck her "hard-wiring", she gets
put down for it.  She gets ahead where the more passive women wouldn't,
yes -- but she loses her femininity in the process.

Me:
Loses it to who? Herself? I doubt it. And to whom else does it matter? Loses
it to her friends? No. Loses it to her lover? No. Loses it to her
co-workers, boss? Why the hell are they worrying about her femininity? They
should be concerned with effectiveness or ability. Again, you aren't saying
she can't move ahead, you're saying she can't move ahead with the
terminology you'd like.

Laura:
> As far as I can see, things like being aggressive or competitive or
hard-working or intelligent or friendly or funny or charismatic are all
*individual* traits -- brought on in the *individual* by nature or nurture
or a combination of the two.

Me:
They are. I never said they weren't.

Laura:
  It seems inherently wrong to me that any of them would be hardwired or
gender-specific.  The tendencies you describe probably exist, but I believe
that they are they product of a society with the left-over expectations and
biases of the past (a VERY recent past, I might add, so no wonder) -- that
feminine is defined as soft, motherly, emotional, and unassuming; while
masculine is aggressive, strong, stable, and competitive.  And God help the
person (male or female) who has too many of the traits attributed to the
opposite sex.

Me:
Actually, I think some gender tendencies are hard-wired; I've seen them
manifest in very, very small children. You may say that they had already
managed to be impressed somehow with our cultural values and were acting
accordingly, but I'm talking very, very small, just over a year or so,
hardly aware of gender at all. But clearly, this is going to be an
unanswerable thing.

Personally, I think the hard-wiring is there and real, but that as I said,
neither style obviates the other being used and individualism plays a
tremendous and overarching role.

Laura:
 How *dare* a woman fight to further herself, and any man who would rather
stay home to cook and clean instead of braving the competitive business
world must be either homosexual or brow-beaten by his over-bearing wife.
Most people would bristle at the suggestion that they think like this, and,
indeed, most people don't.  But what I do believe is that vestiges of this
thinking remain lodged in our society, and will probably do so for a long
time to come.

Me:
No question. But again, I point out that you are speaking in the same sort
of generality as I was. Broadly, men and women have different styles of
interaction. Just as broadly, society is a factor in emphasizing those
styles and society often disapproves of those who depart from them. But in
any specific situation or any particular individual, these broad
generalizations cease being as useful as considering the particulars.

--Amanda, hoping this clarified a bit




From editor at texas.net  Fri Jul 19 03:46:12 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 22:46:12 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Division of Labor
References: <l03130305b95d24965942@[65.57.12.205]>
Message-ID: <004601c22ed6$d46baa60$487d63d1@texas.net>

Vulgarweed said

> Well, racism and sexism are different in some ways and have different
> rationalizations, so can never be exactly paralleled. But "gender division
> of labor" certainly _does_ parallel the way *racism* plays out in some
> ways. Until fairly recently, in the US, blacks were barred from certain
> jobs (usually the prestigious, interesting, well-paying ones) entirely,
and
> herded into others, such as service jobs, janitorial work and domestic
> work, perhaps entertainment and athletics for the enjoyment of whites.
Some
> people at the time _did_ argue that this was a "separate but equal"
> division of labor. And some people believed that it was only right and
> natural because of black people's different capabilities and interests. It
> is *definitely* a VERY MAJOR and important form that "some races being
> treated worse than others" took. Not the only one, but a major one that
had
> great impact on the education, economic status, social status, and overall
> hopes and dreams of many generations of people.

Slightly off the topic, but I've read some interesting guidelines for
employers that date from the nineteenth century that offer helpful
classifications, such as
--Slavic people are good for heavy work, they're strong, but not very smart
--Italians are intelligent, but they are prone to volatility and aren't too
reliable
--Irish are not reliable, they drink, and they're not as strong as Slavs
etc. We tend, these days, to think of "racism" as only applying to blacks,
Hispanics, and sometimes Asians. The "visible" races. But it was used to
great effect to keep many ethnic minorities in their place for many years.

Just an interesting sidenote.

--Amanda




From editor at texas.net  Fri Jul 19 03:51:50 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 22:51:50 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Division of Labor
References: <l03130305b95d24965942@[65.57.12.205]>
Message-ID: <004a01c22ed7$9e489b40$487d63d1@texas.net>

Vi;garweed said

> Meanwhile I can't think of anything that officially excludes
> men, except maybe matron in a women's prison or Girl Scout troop leader.

Men *can* be co-leaders of troops. There are just strict guidelines that
prohibit them being alone with the girls; there must always be an adult
female present as well.

--Amanda






From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Fri Jul 19 12:50:25 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:50:25 -0000
Subject: Division of Labor
In-Reply-To: <004a01c22ed7$9e489b40$487d63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <ah91uh+rrgt@eGroups.com>

Vulgarweed said:

> > Meanwhile I can't think of anything that officially excludes
> > men, except maybe matron in a women's prison or Girl Scout troop 
leader.

I can think of one.  Male labor and delivery nurse.  I read a labor 
law case in which a particular hospital barred a male nurse from 
this specialty.  Too many female patients objected to having him as 
their nurse while they were delivering a baby.  He sued, and *he 
lost!*  The court said gender under these circumstances was a BFOQ 
(Bona Fide Occupational Qualification) and the hospital could take 
customer preferences for female nurses into account in deciding how 
to staff the position of labor and delivery nurse.  So he lost his 
job because of his *gender.*

I was pretty surprised, myself.  I didn't care at all about the 
gender of my labor and delivery nurses, so long as they arranged to 
get me some *drugs!*  ;-)

Cindy




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Fri Jul 19 15:20:29 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:20:29 -0000
Subject: Division of Labor
In-Reply-To: <ah91uh+rrgt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah9ant+e0n2@eGroups.com>

A. Vulgarweed wrote:

> > > Meanwhile I can't think of anything that officially excludes
> > > men, except maybe matron in a women's prison or Girl Scout 
troop 
> leader.

Cindy, taking "division of labor" literally, responded:
 
> I can think of one.  Male labor and delivery nurse.  I read a labor 
> law case in which a particular hospital barred a male nurse from 
> this specialty.  Too many female patients objected to having him as 
> their nurse while they were delivering a baby.  He sued, and *he 
> lost!*  The court said gender under these circumstances was a BFOQ 
> (Bona Fide Occupational Qualification) and the hospital could take 
> customer preferences for female nurses into account in deciding how 
> to staff the position of labor and delivery nurse.  So he lost his 
> job because of his *gender.*

Yikes!  That does surprise me, and I hope it's just a case of a bad 
decision that won't be replicated too many places.  Given how many 
women I know have been perfectly happy to have a male obstetrician, I 
can't imagine that many hospitals really find their patients won't 
tolerate a male nurse in the delivery room.

Amy




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Fri Jul 19 15:24:59 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:24:59 -0000
Subject: New Member
In-Reply-To: <ah6i5p+b3ha@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ah9b0b+kgll@eGroups.com>

Ken wrote:

> I have noticed a lot of birthday-related chatter, so 
> I'll volunteer the fact that I have the same birthday as Harry 
Potter.
> 
> More accurately, Harry Potter happens to have been born on my 
> birthday.

Welcome, Ken, and aren't you lucky!  If you hie yourself over to the 
main list website (HPforGrownups) and click on "database" over on the 
left, you'll see "Birthdays" as one of the options.  Add yourself, 
and you will be toasted with butterbeer on the same day we toast HP 
and JKR (who was also born July 31).  

Amy the Friendly Poltergeist




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Fri Jul 19 15:27:06 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:27:06 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Division of Labor
References: <ah9ant+e0n2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D382FCA.000001.84729@monica>



-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 19 July 2002 16:20:36
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Division of Labor

Cindy, taking "division of labor" literally, responded:

> I can think of one. Male labor and delivery nurse. I read a labor 
> law case in which a particular hospital barred a male nurse from 
> this specialty. Too many female patients objected to having him as 
> their nurse while they were delivering a baby. He sued, and *he 
> lost!* The court said gender under these circumstances was a BFOQ 
> (Bona Fide Occupational Qualification) and the hospital could take 
> customer preferences for female nurses into account in deciding how 
> to staff the position of labor and delivery nurse. So he lost his 
> job because of his *gender.*

Yikes! That does surprise me, and I hope it's just a case of a bad 
decision that won't be replicated too many places. Given how many 
women I know have been perfectly happy to have a male obstetrician, I 
can't imagine that many hospitals really find their patients won't 
tolerate a male nurse in the delivery room.

Amy

Do you think maybe it depends when they asked the female patients. Maybe
three or four months before they deliver they object in theory to having a
male nurse but I'm thinking when they arrive at the hospital in labour most
of them wouldn't care if the nurse was a purple elephant as long as he could
deliver the baby.

K



From speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com  Fri Jul 19 19:36:23 2002
From: speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com (frankielee242)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 19:36:23 -0000
Subject: Division of Labor
In-Reply-To: <3D382FCA.000001.84729@monica>
Message-ID: <ah9pnn+1gqo@eGroups.com>

K wrote: 
> Do you think maybe it depends when they asked the female patients.
> Maybe three or four months before they deliver they object in theory
> to having a male nurse but I'm thinking when they arrive at the 
> hospital in labour most of them wouldn't care if the nurse was a
> purple elephant as long as he could deliver the baby.

Actually, one of the account managers in my company just had a baby.
She and the other mothers here all swap stories of their deliveries
and as far as I can tell, none of them have any preferences one way or
the other about nurses-- just the OBs. Half of the all of the women
here won't see a male OB/Gyn and half of them won't see a female
OB/Gyn. I realize the company I work for (an ad agency) is not
representative of society as a whole, but if there's a 50/50 split
here, how did they find enough women of a one opinion to get that poor
nurse fired? Perhaps they were objecting specifically to him?

Going back up the Division of Labor thread-- generalizations about
people's behavior in the work place and where it originates are just
generalizations. I can only speak for my own experiences and thoughts. 

That said, it seems to me that the generalizations made about the
impact someone's sex, race, age, height, creed, etc. has on their
abilities are still very much in use. I've sat in meetings where
managers decided which woman to fire based on bust size. I've sat in
meetings with clients of one race who didn't want specific other races
working on their ads. I've sat in my office with angry, overworked
women who expected manna from heaven and I've sat in my office with
incompetent men who demanded more money. 

On the bright side, there are fewer and fewer people who are willing
to act on their personal beliefs about stereotypes (a number of the
managers I mentioned above were fired). There are more and more people
becoming/growing up aware that these rediculous preconceptions exist
and they work to overcome subscribing to them. We've still got a way
to go, though...

My two cents, nickle and a couple of dimes.
Frankie





From fluxed at earthlink.net  Fri Jul 19 21:33:28 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 21:33:28 -0000
Subject: Sad News WARNING: Bible Discussion
In-Reply-To: <ah7ahe+3kup@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <aha0j8+3d4t@eGroups.com>

I'm so sorry about your cat-friend, Shaynie. It's one of the hardest 
things, to lose someone. People who say "it was only a cat" should be 
publicly lashed.


and Frankie wrote:

> On the cat soul front, Shaynie, I'm sorry your lost your cat. =( 
> 
> However, most eastern religions and a number of western pre-
christian
> religions hold that everything has a soul, even stones, trees and 
bits
> of poop. =P  Seriously. Check out Chuang Tsu some time.


This may be my Pagan perspective talking now, but even at the peak of 
the Christian phase I went through as a child, the concept of a 
living being that *didn't* have a soul never made any sense to me. 
How could that be?

Frankly, the notion that only humans have souls sounded to me like 
the kind of arrogance and smug self-superiority that is utterly 
incompatible with Christian humility. How dare we presume to know 
what God's plan is for the whole rest of Creation? How dare we place 
ourselves so far above everything else that lives and breathes? Seems 
to me that it's only a short step from that to deciding that humans 
we [want to] feel superior to don't have souls either, or don't have 
souls as "good" as ours (a grave error that Christians have, in fact, 
made often).

Let's "err" on the side of generosity - I think God/The Great 
Whatchamacallit does.


> Can of worms, anyone?

Yum. Heatin' it up in the microwave right now.

AV





From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 20 16:01:52 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 16:01:52 -0000
Subject: Sexism -- is division of labor the key?
In-Reply-To: <l03130305b95d24965942@[65.57.12.205]>
Message-ID: <ahc1hg+lams@eGroups.com>

My internet connection was down, and so I was offline most of
Thursday.  I get back on and - Wow, there's been a lot of comments. 
I'll respond to as many as I can of the comments that seem addressed
to me. 

There's really three topics being discussed here.  The original topic
was how gender is presented in the JKR books. Then, the topic moved to
division of labor, and whether that's central to sexism.  In between,
there was a detour in which the meaning of the word "sexism" was
discussed. 

I'm going to talk about the biggie first-- whether division of labor
is the cause of problems such as violence against women, and whether,
as a result, feminists should focus on division of labor as their main
issue.  I'll talk about the Harry Potter book issues next, and the
language issues (i.e., what the word "sexism" should mean) last. I'm
going to put each topic in a separate post, because I have a feeling
that this will be long. 


Before I say anything else, I want to say that I care deeply about the
treatment of women, and feel that on a worldwide basis, women are
seriously oppressed in a variety of ways.  A few posters seem to think
that I am trivializing the problems women face, or that I there's no
need to fix the division of labor because everything is already fine,
and that's not what I think at all.  In fact, people who know me
sometimes accuse me of being obsessed with the problem of improving
women's situation. I've spent a lot of time thinking about questions
like "What causes some men to be violent towards women?" or "What is
the best way to reduce the feminization of poverty?" 

I've certainly gotten the message that other women here believe that
division of labor is the key to problems facing women.   What I don't
understand is why other women here feel that way.  Can anyone point to
any society, now or in the past, where abolishing the division of
labor ended the oppression of women?  Can anyone think of any society
where the gender division of labor has been abolished *at all*,
regardless of whether this fixed the problem of oppression of women? 
 What are the grounds for thinking that abolishing the division of
labor is even possible, let alone that women's low status will
disappear as a result? 

Maybe what people here are saying is "We've reduced the division of
labor, and women's power in society has gone up some as a result. 
Therefore, if we keep working on the division of labor, eventually it
will be abolished and women's status will equal men's."  While I see
why people might believe this, I don't think it's true.  I think there
was some improvement in women's power and status as a result of making
gender discrimination illegal, but it has now more-or-less leveled
off.   The achievable by campaigning for equal access to jobs were
modest, and we've already gotten almost all of them.  Don't believe
me?  Well, consider the following:

1) In the 1950's, the percentage of single mothers in the US who had
incomes below the poverty line was 30%.  And in the 1990's, the
percentage of single mothers in the US who had incomes below the
poverty line was - you guessed it -- 30%.   Equal opportunity
legislation and the opening of more professions to women didn't reduce
the feminization of poverty.  In fact, during the past few decades,
the feminization of poverty dramatically increased, mostly due to the
huge increase in female-headed families. (By the way, I do not think
feminism caused the increase in female-headed families.  But, that's
another topic.) 

2) Cindy talked about physicians, and asked what happened if this
profession moved from being 100% male to being 50% male, 50% female. 
David replied: "Either women doctors will get respect, or doctors
generally will lose respect on the grounds that they are women. The
men will then leave."

What David describes - a profession losing respect because women
joined it, resulting in men abandoning that field - is in fact well
documented.  Probably the clearest example of this is secretarial
work, which was almost exclusively a male profession about a century
ago.  Women joined the field, pay and prestige plummeted; and
virtually all the men left.  This isn't the only example, however - I
have also seen this documented for tailors, and it now appears to be
happening in pharmacy.  These are just ones I've seen studies on, and
it's not even a topic I've paid a lot of attention to; I'm sure
there's plenty of other examples. 

In fact, it happened in my own field - I thought I was so clever,
going into a male-dominated field!  Unfortunately, a lot of women had
the same idea.  The good jobs that had attracted me suddenly were no
longer offered, replaced by low-paying, supposedly part-time jobs that
had different titles, but were in fact the exact same jobs, with the
exact same hours.  All this was accompanied by very blatant "there go
the neighborhood" comments, and even published editorials, by men in
the field.  I've never been able to make more than $15,000 a year,
even working 60 or more hours a week, and have never received
benefits.  When the (predominantly female) people in my job situation
tried to unionize, the State of Michigan said we were not entitled to,
because we were (supposedly) not full time.  

So, in regards to women moving into male-dominated professions - I've
been there, I've done that, and it was a total disaster for me.  

3) Most high-prestige occupations require long hours, and there is a
great deal of competition to succeed in them.   This means that if
women are still doing the bulk of the childcare and the housework,
they will be at an extreme disadvantage.   I remember pointing this
out to classmates when I attended (a politically very conservative)
college, and having people tell me "Well, women will just have to try
harder, then."   This is bunk.  In many of these professions, people
are trying as hard as is humanly possible - medical students and
residents often work to the point of collapse - so "trying harder"
just isn't an option.  In politics, business, and a variety of other
fields, people scratch and claw their way to the top; anything that
disadvantages women means that fewer women will succeed.   So,
focusing on making men's work available to women, without reducing the
share of "women's work" that men do, will have only limited success.

In fact, focusing on women in the workplace can have the unintended
consequence of trivializing women's role in bearing and raising
children.  It makes it sound as if having and raising children is
something one can easily do in their spare time, without compromising
one's ability to climb the ladder of success.  Sure, mothers realize
that children require major effort, but what about other people (men,
say)?  I very vividly remember a conversation I once had with a young
man active in the Right-to-Life movement.  I was saying that even if
one believes a fetus is a person, forcing a woman to remain pregnant
is a very big deal, on the order of requiring a person to donate bone
marrow, or maybe even a kidney.  He flat out said that he thought
pregnancy and childbirth were no big deal.  He said, "I knew a woman
who gave birth, and went back to work the same day."  He seemed to
think that having children was something women could do on their lunch
hour, perhaps sandwiched in between a trip to the dry cleaner and
stopping by the bank, and still make it back in time for their 1:30
p.m. meeting.   For many years, a large part of my time and effort has
been spent trying to have children (with no success) so I see giving
birth as a major accomplishment, not as some little trivial thing. 

4) Even if all the gender-based barriers in the workplace vanished,
that might not affect all that many women on a worldwide basis. Of the
6 billion plus humans on Earth, I don't think very many get to pick
the type of work they do. Throughout human history, if your parents
farmed, you farmed, end of story. For most people around the world, I
suspect that this is still true.  Even in the United States today, I
suspect most people don't feel that have much say in the type of work
they do - they do whatever work they have to, to earn a living.  Some
posters have said that in the past, men could do whatever they wanted,
while women had very little choice in what they did.  I don't see it
that way.  Until about 100 years in the US (probably a little longer
ago in England), most people worked in and around their homes.  Males
and females both had a wide variety of tasks to perform, but neither
had much choice in what tasks they did.  This is probably still true
for most people worldwide.  Reducing gender barriers in the workplace
seems like a minor issue to me, because most of the human race isn't
even in the workplace; they are effectively self-employed, working at
home.  And, I'm not totally convinced that the current Western model
of working in a specific occupation, outside the home, will be the
most common model in the future.  It seems just as possible to me that
most people in the future will work on a variety of (probably
information-based) tasks at home, as that they will go off to work at
an assembly plant.  


So, that's why I think working to end the division of labor is mostly
a dead end at this point. 
But, if ending the division of labor isn't the answer, does that mean
it's hopeless to try to fix women's problems?  I don't think so at
all. There seem to be societies where women's status is good, or at
least was good, despite a division of labor on the basis of gender.  
I referred to this earlier, when I said that women's status in
matrilocal societies generally was high, despite the fact that these
societies often had a rigid gender division of labor.   True, there
were only a few of these societies and we don't have that much
information on them, but it's quite possible that women had more power
in these societies than in any modern societies.   For example, it is
true that in these Native American societies, men were the warriors,
and generally only a man could be the "Chief Warrior" and represent
the village at tribal councils.  But, how did a man get to be Chief
Warrior?  In at least a few tribes, he was appointed by the Chief
Mother, who could replace him at will.   That sounds like a lot of
power in women's hands to me.  

So, it seems likely that societies have existed where women had a lot
of power in spite of (or perhaps even because of) a gender division of
labor.  That's why I can't agree with statements such as Naama's claim
that "So far, when women and men have been expected to act
differently, the brunt of most of the restrictions and sanctions were
on the women." (Naama)


So, to sum up:
1) I think there is little more to be gained by pushing for an end to
the gender-based division of labor in the workplace.  
2) Based on the historical data, it appears possible to have a
gender-based division of labor without women having low status and
power. So, I don't buy the argument that the gender-based division of
labor is the cause of women's low status and power in modern
societies.  I think it's possible for mistreatment of women to end,
even if tasks are still divided on the basis of gender. 


Let me also try to reply to some of the specific comments people made:


I said that:
 >> Women's organizations have their hands full with domestic
violence, the feminization of poverty, female infanticide in Asia,
genital mutilation in Africa, and far too many other problems. They
just don't have the resources to also tackle problems where men and
women are impacted equally<<

Naamagatus replied:
>isn't domestic violence easier to deal with when the woman is capable
of earning enough to supporting herself and her children? And from the
little I've read, female infanticide in Asia is *directly* linked to
economic considerations. Feminization of poverty - is that not related
to the ways and means in which women can earn a living?<

These are reasonable questions, but I'd still say fixing the division
of labor isn't going to help that much here.  I've already talked
about how the emphasis on the reducing the division of labor hasn't
helped reduce the feminization of poverty. On the topic of domestic
violence, the idea here again seems to be that reducing the division
of labor reduces the feminization of poverty, which then makes it
easier for women to leave.  Even if this were true, reducing the
gender division of labor would be at best a partial solution to the
problem of domestic violence.  My concern is that if one woman leaves
an abusive man, he's just going to look for a new woman to abuse.  And
if that woman leaves, there will be nothing stopping him from trying
to find a third woman to abuse. Solving the problem of abuse requires
sanctions on abusers (which could be social disapproval, jail, or
various other things.)  Saying, "The victim should leave" doesn't fix
the underlying problem. 

About female infanticide in Asia being linked directly to economic
considerations, I absolutely agree with the idea that economic
considerations are the primary reason for female infanticide.  In some
societies they may be the sole reason.  However, I think the
particular economic considerations involved have nothing to do
division of labor.  Boys are preferred because these societies are
strongly patrilocal - that is, girls leave their parents and move in
with their husbands; boys remain at home and support the parents in
their old age.  Even if a gender-based division of labor was somehow
abolished in these societies, the problem would still remain -
daughters' labor would go to benefit a different family, so parents
would still prefer sons.   And, in plenty of societies with a rigid
gender-based division of labor, girls are no more likely than boys to
be killed in infancy. (In a few, they are less likely to be killed in
infancy.).  So, I just don't think focusing on division of labor is
the way to fix infanticide. 


AV said:
>And even FGM [female genital mutilation] is often justified within
the cultures that practice it with the insistence that "if you're not
cut you won't get a good husband." Well, why is having a husband such
a matter of life and death? Rigid division of labor, that's why!<

Really? Do you think that without a rigid division of labor, girls
would stop caring about their popularity with boys?  I don't.  I think
a desire to be popular with the opposite sex is instinctive (except
for a few people who want to be popular with their own sex.)   Women
who succeed in male-dominated professions want to be desired as
romantic partners.  Men want to be desired as romantic partners. 
Almost everyone, especially during adolescence, wants to be desired as
a romantic partner.  "Do this, or you won't be desirable," is going to
be a very compelling argument, no matter how labor gets divided. 

Cindy said: 
> I really do think we can try to improve the lot of all women facing
any form of gender discrimination or inequity without spreading
ourselves too thin.
Using racism as an example, apartheid existed in South Africa at a
time when African Americans in the U.S. were fighting for things like
integration of schools and workplaces. The fact that the plight of
South African blacks was far more dire than that of African Americans
wouldn't have struck me as an especially compelling reason to ignore
racism or racial discrimination in the U.S. at the time.<

On the topic of feminists spread themselves too thin, the reality is
that feminists often have very little resources and political capital.
 A good example is MS magazine, which has only been able to publish
sporadically throughout its 30-year history because of a lack of
funds.  When you consider just how many magazines are out there
spreading the message that women's proper function is to be men's
sexual playthings, it's pretty depressing to think that not even one
feminist magazine can be stable in the long run.  So, spreading
themselves too thin sounds like a crucial issue for feminists, as far
as I can tell.  

On the topic of whether it's possible to focus simultaneously on
problems abroad and at home -- Cindy, I agree that there's no moral
reason to avoid working on problems that occur in one place, just
because one is working on problems that occur elsewhere. However,
there is the practical problem of only having so much time to spend
writing letters, only so much money to donate, etc.  So, I think
prioritizing is very important.  

Cindy said she:
>was thinking more about why [she's] not too happy about the idea that
arbitrary gender restrictions on occupational choice are not
especially troublesome if they do not favor one gender over the other.
Not too long ago, there were laws in the U.S. prohibiting interracial
marriage between whites and blacks. These laws applied to both races
equally, didn't they? These laws didn't favor or advantage one race
over another or even one individual over another. <

I'd say the laws disadvantaged Blacks.  At the time the laws were
made, almost everyone with lots of money and social power was White. 
The laws made marrying these rich, powerful people off limits to
Blacks, therefore reducing the competition Whites faced in finding a
rich, powerful person to marry. This isn't the only reason these laws
were bad, but it's one of the reasons they were bad. 

I'd like to point out a parallel with divorce laws, which also seem to
apply equally to both genders, but in fact work to men's advantage. 
Right now, divorces are easy to obtain in the US, for both men and
women. 200 years ago, divorces were almost impossible to obtain in the
US, for both men and women.  So, the divorce laws are fair because
they affect men and women equally, right?  I'd say no. Divorce was
hard to obtain back in the days when there was a shortage of women,
and divorce is easy to obtain now that there is a shortage of men.  In
other words, when there were lots of single men around, and married
women could have easily found a new man, the men in power made
divorces hard to obtain (and adultery was often technically punishable
by death, although that was rarely enforced.) Now that there are lots
of single women around, and married men can easily find a new woman,
the men in power have made divorces easy to obtain (and adultery isn't
really punishable at all.)  Is it fair to blame modern divorce laws on
 "the men in charge"?  I'd say yes; the big change in divorce laws
occurred around 25 years ago, when there were hardly any women in
government. 

AV also said, tongue-in-cheek:
"Hey, blacks make great janitors, and we really shouldn't bother
fighting for our rights to be lawyers 'cause that's too
low-priority--but we should get more respect for our traditionally
Black roles! Let's honor janitors! We can hold our heads up high
regardless of the division of labor, 'cause that's just a side issue."

The difference is that it is possible, in the right political
environment, to divide labor evenly between Blacks and Whites, so that
Blacks don't get disproportionately stuck being janitors.  There is no
way to divide childbearing evenly between males and females.  If we
want equal respect for women, we need respect for childbearing.  And,
it seems that the process of childbearing bonds mother to their
children, so that women then do the bulk of child*care*, too.  Is it
possible to get men to do half (or more) of the childcare?  I'm not
sure; I know of no human society where this happens. It may be that
men will only be willing to do half the childcare if childcare is
respected, which would mean that respect for women's traditional roles
would have to happen before an equal division of labor could be
achieved. I want to be clear, I'm not saying feminists should focus
their efforts on "educating people about the value of women's roles."
I'm just saying that I don't agree with the analogy that you are
making. 

Of course, this brings up the question of what feminists should do, if
they are not going to focus on gender barriers in the workplace, and
not going to focus of educating people to think of women's traditional
roles more positively. And, I do have some ideas there.  (No surprise,
right?)  But, I've said an awful lot -- over 5000 words in these three
posts, not counting quotes.  So, I'm not sure anyone wants to hear
anymore from me at the moment. I can talk later about my ideas of what
feminists should do, if anyone is interested. 

Exhausted!Judy




From lmccabe at sonic.net  Sat Jul 20 16:04:29 2002
From: lmccabe at sonic.net (Linda C. McCabe)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 09:04:29 -0700
Subject: Quick question for Brits about vegetarianism
Message-ID: <AKELJIAAIHFIEHOGCIBLAEGFCMAA.lmccabe@sonic.net>


Do Brits have the term "vegan" in your vocabulary?  Or is this just really a
California thang?

I'm not all that up on the difference between "regular" vegetarians and
vegans other than knowing that vegans are far stricter in what they can
consume.

Just wondering if in a fan fic I can use the term vegan or if I should just
say strict vegetarian.  It's just a small detail.  I don't need any big
explanations as to what is allowed in that dietary regimen.

thanks in advance,
Athena





From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 20 16:05:13 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 16:05:13 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
Message-ID: <ahc1np+d1uo@eGroups.com>

I made (at least) two points on JKR's portrayal of women. 

The first point was that if JKR wanted to combat sexism and raise the
status of women, she should have had plenty of sympathetic,
interesting female characters, and devoted lots of pages to them
(regardless of whether they were in traditionally female roles or
traditionally male roles.)   A passing reference to some female
Minister of Magic hundreds of years ago doesn't help girls any.   

You can call this the "One Molly Weasley is worth 100 nameless female
Quidditch players" argument.  (OK, the female chasers in the QWC had
names, at least last names, but they were extremely sketchy
characters.)   I think that characters like Molly Weasley show that
women can be strong, that they make things happen, that they count.  I
think reading about Molly Weasley encourages people to see mothers in
a positive light.  Since many girls identify strongly with the
maternal role, and with their own mothers, I think reading about Molly
Weasley helps girls to see themselves in a positive light.

I don't think an offhand reference to some female MoM (minister of
magic, not mother) does anything like this.  There's nothing to
identify with, no character to capture the imagination.  There's just
not enough in these passing references to alter girls' views of
themselves. If the goal is to have girls grow up thinking they can
change the world, I think the character of Molly Weasley's
accomplishes more than all those contrived references to female
witches who had leadership positions in the past.  Thinking of oneself
as valuable and capable is more important than seeing particular
careers as appropriate for women. 

So, if Molly Weasley is so great, why do I think JKR's portrayal of
women could be better?  Well, because there's only one of her.  Of
course, there's Hermione, who is also a strong female character.  But
that's about it for interesting, substantive female characters, in
1500-plus pages.   Against them, there's a whole bunch of unappealing,
one dimensional female characters (Pansy, Petunia, Rita, Bertha,
Myrtle - one hardly knows where to begin.)   

And, then there's my second point, which was that JKR's brief
references to women in traditionally male roles might actually be
harmful to kids' views of women.  This admittedly is speculative, but
I think kids might have gotten a better impression of women in the
Wizarding World if JKR had left out those token references to
successful women in the past.

Why?  Well, let's start with the Hogwarts founders.  Suppose Slytherin
and Gryffindor were the only founders.   What impression would that
give?  Well, probably that the WW (Wizarding World) was pretty sexist
1000 years ago, just like muggle society was, and wouldn't let women
run schools.  In other words, it wouldn't say much about women; if
noticed at all, it would probably be taken as a comment on the sexism
of the WW in the past.

But, JKR didn't write just two founders; she wrote four, two of whom
were women.  The men did a lot -- Slytherin was building his Chamber
of Secrets and training his basilisk, Gryffindor designed the Sorting
Hat and outmaneuvered Slytherin, and they starting the epic conflict
that forms the background of the series. The two female founders, in
contrast, didn't seem to do much of anything.  If readers even really
notice that two of the founders were female (a big if), then the
impression they may get is that women accomplish much less than men,
even when there is no sexism holding women back.

The same problem occurs with those brief references to female
Ministers of Magic in the past.  Assuming readers notice them, they
will think "OK, there's no sexism preventing women from holding posts
in the Ministry of Magic."  But, if there's nothing preventing women
from holding posts in the ministry, why are there so few women working
there during the time frame of the story? I can only recall JKR
mentioning one current "Ministry witch" by name - nosy, dimwitted
Bertha Jorkins.  Bertha's sole role in the story is to be outwitted
and victimized by one male after another - the boy who hexed her,
Crouch Sr., Wormtail, Voldemort.  If JKR had set up the WW so that
women were forbidden to work in the Ministry of Magic, a lot of girls
would probably bristle (Hermione-like) at the unfairness of it all,
and perhaps be motivated to succeed in government as a way of showing
up sexist men.  But, that's not what JKR did.  Instead, she made it
clear that women can work in the Ministry, but then showed us a
complete failure as the only example of a woman (in the current time
frame of the story) who does so.  The (unconscious) impression girls
may get is that women are allowed to work in government, but it's a
disaster when they do. 

Now, consider the Quidditch World Cup.  Suppose JKR's focus on it
makes some American kids notice world cup soccer for the first time,
and they end up considering it very important.  Will this improve the
kids' view of women?  Probably not.  In the real world, (as far as I
know) there hasn't been any female World Cup players.  Sure, the
effect here is likely to be small, because kids are often interested
in sports anyway.  But, if JKR wants to use her books as a way to
raise girls' self-esteem, or motivate them to go out and make a
difference in the world, throwing in a couple of female Quidditch
players will at best have no effect. 

So, those were the points I was trying to make about the role of women
in the JKR books.  I want to make it clear that I like the books
anyway. I really don't see combating sexism as an important goal for
JKR's books.  But, if someone asked me whether the books do a good job
of combating sexism, I'd have to say "No." 


Ok, let me also try to reply to some particular things people here
said:
                                      

I said I was unhappy when stories focused on women achieving in
traditionally male roles, because it makes female roles seem
unimportant: >> "If there is a parallel emphasis on how great it is
for men to take on traditionally female roles, fine. But, that is
almost never the case."<<

AV responded to my statement:  > That's because it's pretty rare in
real life. <

And Cindy responded to my statement:
> Let's say 100% of women used to be nurses, and this traditional
female role was accorded little respect. Now only 50% of women are
nurses, and 50% have moved on to the traditionally male occupation of
doctor. How is there a net effect of a reduction in the respect women
receive? <

And Naama said: 
> I have a bit of a problem with this attitude (which I've encountered
many times) because I think there is a certain naivetee to it....Women
(in western society, at least) have been traditionally denied access
to those roles that carry with them social power."

I think there was a misunderstanding of what I meant here. I was
talking just about the portrayal of men's and women's roles in
fiction, not about the roles they occupy in real life.

AV, Rowling portrays all sorts of things that don't exist at all in
real life, such as dragons, basilisks, magic potions, etc.  If JKR
wanted to show a stay-at-home wizard dad, she could have. 
Cindy, I don't think women's moving into male-dominated roles in real
life reduces the respect women receive.  I just meant that the way JKR
depicts males and females in fiction could do that, in the ways I
discussed above.
Naama, I said quite a bit about trying to get women more power in my
last post.  However, even if you still think that a general attack on
the division of labor is the best way to get women more power, I'd
still say that offhanded comments about female Quidditch players or
female Ministers of Magic isn't helpful.  I think portraying women's
traditional roles as important will do more to raise girls'
self-esteem and inspire them to "take on the male power structure"
than will an occasional mention of a woman playing in (or winning) the
QWC. 
                                                       


I also said: 
>> when it comes to showing (human) men in traditionally female roles
such as primary caregiver,  secretary, nurse, food preparer, etc.,
[JKR] just doesn't do it <<

AV (A. Vulgarweed) said:
>Well, Hagrid is primary caregiver to an array of creatures <

True, that's why I specified human men.  The male house elves do
traditionally female work, too.  But humans (full humans) aren't
depicted doing it. 

And I said: 
 >> the only professional musicians I can remember being mentioned are
females, Celestina Warbuck and the Weird Sisters. <<

And Rita (Catlady_de_los_Angelos) replied:
>At least the lead guitarist for The Weird Sisters is male (and human,
which I had formerly wondered about) and I wouldn't be surprised if
the whole band was male. It's in Quidditch Through the Ages.....<

I missed that.  Thanks, Rita.  (I don't think it affects the
discussion much, though.)

-- Judy




From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 20 16:08:49 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 16:08:49 -0000
Subject: Sexism -- what should the term mean?
Message-ID: <ahc1uh+3jkq@eGroups.com>

I said: 
>> the very term "racism" implies that some races are treated worse
than others, not just that each race is treated differently.<<

To which Naama replied:
> You don't think that a society in which members of a certain race
are *limited* to certain occupations is deeply racist? I do.<

I definitely wasn't trying to argue that it is possible to treat races
"separately but equally." (I really have no idea whether it's ever
possible to treat races differently, without treating one of them
worse; separate certainly wasn't equal in the US.)  My point was that
the term "racism" definitely carries the connotation of one race being
treated worse, and I think the term "sexism" should carry the
connotation of one sex being treated worse.  Amy was saying that
dividing up tasks based on gender limits both males and females, which
sounded as if she saw sexism as something that might impact men and
women equally.  I don't want the term "sexism" to lose its meaning of
unfair treatment of women, and come to mean limitations that apply to
both genders equally.

Several people here have said that they think "sexism" should refer
both to dividing up work on the basis of gender and to treating women
unfairly, because they think dividing up work on the basis of gender
is intrinsically unfair to women.  If I understand correctly, AV,
Naama, and Cindy feel this way. With this usage, sexism still means
"treating women unfairly", and therefore means basically the same
thing I think it means, although we have a difference of opinion as to
whether dividing up work on the basis of gender is always unfair to
women or not. 


I said:
>> If there is no term that specifically refers to mistreatment of
women, then won't that problem become invisible? <<

I actually ran right into this problem in my last post.  I needed a
word that referred to mistreatment of women in general.  I wanted to
say, "I'm going to talk about the biggie first-- whether division of
labor is the cause of sexism."  But, since sexism is also being
defined as "division of labor", this wouldn't have made any sense.  It
would have sounded as if I were saying, "I'm going to talk about the
biggie first-- whether division of labor is the cause of division of
labor."  Using the term "sexism" to mean both "mistreatment of women"
and "division of labor" can lead to the unexamined assumption that
division of labor is the cause of mistreatment of women.


A. Vulgarweed said:
>>"mistreatment" sounds like what happens when you beat your
cart-horse too hard--i.e., when you overstep your bounds with this
creature that you have a charge to be responsible for. You know, sort
of like the way marital rape used to be a contradiction in terms,
because after all, a husband has a *right*.<<

This is exactly why I want to reserve the term sexism to refer to all
ways in which society treats women worse than men.   There simply
isn't any other satisfactory term.  When I tried to substitute
"mistreatment of women", I appeared to be trivializing things such as
domestic violence. I didn't use the word "oppression" because it's
associated with the failed ideology of Marxism. (And every time
someone says "oppression", I think of Monty Python - I think a lot of
people tune out as soon as the word "oppression" is used.)  Cindy
suggested the term "sexual discrimination", but this already has a
strong implication of job discrimination, and probably makes people
think primarily or solely of denying equal access to jobs, not of
domestic violence and other problems that exist outside the workplace.


I said:
>> I can say right off the bat that radical feminists almost never
define sexism as referring primarily to a gender division of labor.

And AV asked: 
> which schismatic sub-school of radical feminism do you mean? Cause
there are hundreds, and they sure all don't agree with each other on
much of anything.<

A lot of people use the term "radical feminist" to mean extreme
feminist.  However, the term originally meant feminists who want
separate institutions for women.  I think that's still the best
definition of a radical feminist, and it's the one I use.  Separate
institutions for women would make it almost impossible to eliminate
the gender division of labor. So, despite the wide range of radical
feminsits, one thing they have in common is that eliminating the
gender division of labor is almost never their main goal. 


-- Judy




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Sat Jul 20 16:15:00 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 17:15:00 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Quick question for Brits about vegetarianism
References: <AKELJIAAIHFIEHOGCIBLAEGFCMAA.lmccabe@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <3D398C84.000001.79499@monica>


Yes we use the term vegan. And as far as I know the differenc is vegetarians
abstain from meat (and some of them from fish too) whereas vegan's abstain
from all animal products eg no dairy foods etc

K
-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 20 July 2002 17:04:32
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Quick question for Brits about vegetarianism


Do Brits have the term "vegan" in your vocabulary? Or is this just really a
California thang?

I'm not all that up on the difference between "regular" vegetarians and
vegans other than knowing that vegans are far stricter in what they can
consume.

Just wondering if in a fan fic I can use the term vegan or if I should just
say strict vegetarian. It's just a small detail. I don't need any big
explanations as to what is allowed in that dietary regimen.

thanks in advance,
Athena



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT



________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



From lmccabe at sonic.net  Sat Jul 20 16:30:35 2002
From: lmccabe at sonic.net (linda_mccabe)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 16:30:35 -0000
Subject: Sexism -- what should the term mean?
In-Reply-To: <ahc1uh+3jkq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahc37b+67jq@eGroups.com>

In replying to Judy Serenity's request for a term to describe the 
mistreatment of women.  Jumping in here and admitting I haven't read 
all the previous posts...I think the word you may be looking for is 
misogyny.  It's a much tougher word than merely sexism, but it 
describes actions to actively suppress and oppress women.  It's 
generally thought of as being inherently violent.  And part of the 
culture in the oppression of a class of people is the ever present 
threat of violence.  Those that stray out of their prescribed roles 
are accused of not "knowing their place."  And that leads to hate 
crimes.  This is a quick and dirty synopsis of my explanation of 
gender-based hate crimes.  In a nutshell, these following crimes 
should be considered hate crimes against women:

gang rapes
serial rapes
serial murders of girls and women

Basically any crime where the victim is targeted because of their 
status.  And those crimes I mentioned above are done when a girl or 
woman is attacked simply because she was born female.  It impacts 
every woman who realizes that she is also vulnerable because she 
lives in a world that encourages rape in males to keep women in a 
submissive position.

And for those who find that hard to swallow.  I submit that the 
commonplace occurence of gang rapes shows that I am correct.  For if 
it were a cultural aberration, then it would be very difficult for a 
group of five guys to hold a woman down.  Instead the other four 
guys would be holding the one cretin back.  If rape were culturally 
unacceptable, it would be as common as cannibalism.

'nuff said for now.

Athena.








From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Jul 20 19:51:34 2002
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 19:51:34 -0000
Subject: Does education make someone a 'superior' person?
Message-ID: <ahcf06+eeva@eGroups.com>

In the 'class' debate over on HPFGU, I quipped:

 >For all we know the trolley lady could be a working-class research 
 >witch who does the six times yearly job for some extra cash to buy 
 >the rare herbs she needs. [grin]

And Elkins quipped back:
>Are you saying that if this were the case, then she would be in some 
>way *superior* to an ordinary run-of-the-mill trolley lady who had 
> no such intellectual ambitions? [*exceptionally* evil grin]

Then Eric wrote in post # 41469:
> For all we know, Stan Shunpike's spending his
> spare time working on the Great Wizarding World Novel, or painting 
> and hoping to be the wizard world's answer to Rembrandt. "Day jobs" 
> have a long, honored history in the art world, and we see so little 
> of him that this could well be the case. 

And it just started me wondering:
Do we see someone with 'intellectual ambitions' (or artistic 
ambitions) as superior to someone without? Is there a bias 
towards 'education makes you superior'?

Or does education actually *make* you a better person?

Pip
(lighting the blue touch paper and then standing well back)






From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sat Jul 20 20:29:16 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 20:29:16 -0000
Subject: Sexism -- is division of labor the key?
In-Reply-To: <ahc1hg+lams@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahch6s+ampg@eGroups.com>

Judy wrote:

> I'm going to talk about the biggie first-- whether division of 
>labor is the cause of problems such as violence against women, and 
whether, as a result, feminists should focus on division of labor as 
>their main issue.  

Uh, oh.  We're already in trouble here.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that the division of labor (meaning 
that certain jobs or opportunities are off-limits or less available 
based on gender) is "the cause" of mistreatment of women.  Nor would 
I say that division of labor should be the "main focus" of feminists.

You know what I think might be going on here?  It seems that your 
argument is focusing quite a bit on achieving equality and 
fundamental fairness *between groups.*  In other words, it sounds 
like you're saying that policies should be evaluated based on how 
they positively or negatively impact women *as a group* instead of 
women *as individuals.*  Or in the case of race, how policies affect 
a minority group *as a group* instead of minorities as individuals.

If I'm reading your remarks correctly, I think this focus on group 
advancement could be where we have a difference of opinion.  If all 
women are directed to law and all men are directed to medicine, and 
the career prospects in these fields are identical, I would see a 
*big* problem there, whereas I gather that you would not.  IMHO, 
whether women *as a group* and men *as a group* wind up equally well-
off is *not* the issue.  Restrictions like the one I just outlined 
violate *individual* liberties.  That is what causes them to be so 
offensive.  

I would say that it makes sense to level the playing field as much 
as you can for each individual and let the chips fall where they 
may.  Therefore, if you level the playing field and women are *not* 
advantaged as a group by that level playing field, I would not see 
that as a failure at all.  Should that happen, I would guess that 
there may be other factors at work, and I would say we should 
continue to combat any of those factors that are the result of 
sexism.  

Anyway.  I'll expand further in response to some of the ideas 
expressed below.

Judy:

> I've certainly gotten the message that other women here believe 
>that division of labor is the key to problems facing women.   

I can only speak for myself, but the key to problems that women face 
varies based on the problems that particular women are facing.  For 
some women, division of labor may not a problem at all.  In fact, 
this may well be the case for women who are in the most dire of 
circumstances around the world (although I do find many of the 
arguments persuasive that many of these problems can be traced to 
arbitrary gender divisions of labor).

But for other women, it can be the whole enchilada.  I mean, the 
situation of a woman in a country that allows women to be killed for 
certain infractions of local custom has totally different issues 
from a professional woman who is being denied opportunities on her 
job because of her gender.  They may well be different problems with 
different causes.  I fail to see why we should ignore the problems 
of the professional woman if we are not convinced that addressing 
her problems will improve the lot of all women as a group.


>Can anyone point to any society, now or in the past, where 
>abolishing the division of labor ended the oppression of women?  

No, I can't.  

I think the question is specious, however.  There are *many* factors 
that cause the oppression of women.  That abolishing arbitrary 
divisions of labor is not a talisman does not mean it is not worth 
the bother.

Here's a race-based example.  Civil rights activists in the U.S. 
challenged practices such as segregated seating on buses and 
segregated water fountains.  Abolishing those practices did not end 
racial discrimination, obviously.  Does that mean that civil rights 
activists were wasting their time in challenging those practices?  

Of course not.  That is because ending racial oppression requires 
many small steps on many fronts.  The same is true for battling the 
oppression of women.

>Can anyone think of any society where the gender division of labor 
>has been abolished *at all*, regardless of whether this fixed the 
>problem of oppression of women? 

No, I can't.

This suggests to me that there is no place in the world that has 
achieved true gender equality.  Does this mean we should throw in 
the towel?  I'd say no.  I can say with great pride that there have 
been *tremendous* strides in eliminating the gender division of 
labor in the U.S., thank goodness.  


>  What are the grounds for thinking that abolishing the division of
> labor is even possible, let alone that women's low status will
> disappear as a result? 

Well, each instance in which a woman is allowed to choose her own 
path unencumbered by arbitrary gender restrictions is a victory -- 
even if the woman in question doesn't benefit by any objective 
measure such as increased wealth.  There is something to be said for 
being allowed to choose the path that appeals to you for intrinsic 
and wholly personal reasons.  

As for whether it is possible . . . well, maybe it isn't possible to 
eliminate every single arbitrary gender restriction.  I fail to see 
why this means we shouldn't accomplish whatever we can accomplish.

 
Judy:

> Maybe what people here are saying is "We've reduced the division of
> labor, and women's power in society has gone up some as a result. 
> Therefore, if we keep working on the division of labor, eventually 
it
> will be abolished and women's status will equal men's."  While I 
see
> why people might believe this, I don't think it's true.  I think 
there
> was some improvement in women's power and status as a result of 
making
> gender discrimination illegal, but it has now more-or-less leveled
> off.   The achievable by campaigning for equal access to jobs were
> modest, and we've already gotten almost all of them.  

First, I think that you're assuming that if we have obtained all we 
can achieve -- if we have reached the pinnacle of gender equality -- 
that we can declare the battle won and move on.  I, for one, feel 
that it is important to guard against backsliding -- that once 
women's advocates let their guard down or move on, those hard-fought 
gains will be eroded.

Second, I am using a different definition of "women's status" than 
you are, I think.  When I say I hope that women's status will equal 
men's, I mean that both genders will have a choice of all careers 
unencumbered by societal expectations or arbitrary restrictions.  I 
actually think there is plenty of room for improvement in this 
area.  

An example.  I worked for a law firm that had a very liberal 
parental leave policy.  All parents (biological and adoptive) could 
take 8 weeks of paid leave, could take six months of unpaid leave, 
and could work part-time for six months.  In the 12 years I worked 
there, only *one* man took the 8 weeks of paid leave.  Adoptive 
fathers did not take the leave; adoptive mothers did.  Why?  Because 
of gender bias -- the men were afraid that taking the leave would 
make them look less committed and their careers would suffer.

So, no.  I'm not ready to claim that arbitrary restrictions on 
division of labor are a thing of the past.

Judy:

<snip stats suggesting that the percentage of single mothers in 
povery has remained constant>

Again, I think it is a mistake to look at the economic plight of one 
particular group of women (single mothers) and draw conclusions 
about whether strides in workplace equality are unimportant or have 
had no positive effect.  I'd imagine that some of these women have 
benefited from increased workplace opportunity and some have not.  I 
don't think we can draw additional conclusions based on the 
statistics provided.  

I do, however, raise an eyebrow at the idea that these women would 
have been better off in any sense if they had been limited in their 
job search to teacher, nurse and secretary and had been prevented 
from becoming firefighters, plumbers and police officers.

Judy:

> What David describes - a profession losing respect because women
> joined it, resulting in men abandoning that field - is in fact well
> documented.  Probably the clearest example of this is secretarial
> work, which was almost exclusively a male profession about a 
>century ago.  Women joined the field, pay and prestige plummeted; 
>and virtually all the men left.  

Well, I'm a lawyer.  Our profession was once predominately male.  My 
graduating class was about 35% female, and I understand that top law 
school graduating classes today are often over 50% female.  I can 
tell you that starting salaries at the most prestigious places of 
employment have *not* plummeted due to the increased numbers of 
women.  In fact, starting salaries for new lawyers in prestigious 
positions have remained quite lucrative.

Judy:

>This isn't the only example, however - I
> have also seen this documented for tailors, and it now appears to 
>be happening in pharmacy.  

Pharmacy?  I recently read a Wall Street Journal article explaining 
how pharmacies are having such a tough time finding pharmacists that 
they now offer perks like signing bonuses.  The entry of women into 
this profession appears not to have been a drag on prestige or 
salary at all.

As for tailors, I can only guess.  If salaries in that profession 
are declining, that could be related to an influx of new immigrants 
doing that work.  I really don't have enough information to know for 
sure.

In other words, you may well be seeing declining salaries in some 
professions not due to an influx of women, but due to other economic 
factors.

Judy:
 
> In fact, focusing on women in the workplace can have the unintended
> consequence of trivializing women's role in bearing and raising
> children.  

I'm a stay-at-home mom these days, and do I appreciate the efforts 
of those who suggest that the contributions of mothers are 
important.  I really do.

That said, my own opinion is that anyone who wants to stay home 
should stay home regardless of whether others think it is trivial.  
After all, there are *lots* of academic and career choices one can 
make that others may think are a waste.  Some people sneer at any 
choice or profession that does not rake in the bucks.  That's just 
life.

Rather than attempt to change the attitudes of strangers so that 
they will value my choice to stay at home, it would be much more 
helpful if activists could make sure that there are fewer barriers 
to my return to the workplace.  After all, one reason some women 
fear leaving the workplace when they have children is that they 
worry that it will be difficult to re-establish a career when the 
children are older.  Ironically, then, one thing feminist activists 
can do to encourage women to stay home if they would like to do so 
is to eliminate arbitrary divisions of labor so that jobs are open 
to us when we do wish to return.

Judy:

> 4) Even if all the gender-based barriers in the workplace vanished,
> that might not affect all that many women on a worldwide basis. Of 
>the 6 billion plus humans on Earth, I don't think very many get to 
>pick the type of work they do. 

Again, this argument seems premised on the idea that activists in 
the U.S. should examine the plight of women as a group worldwide 
(which is highly variable anyway) and develop policy in the U.S. on 
that basis.  As I've already explained, I'm not so sure about this.

There is one other thing to consider, however, in deciding how to 
pick your battles.  In the U.S., the laws are already on the books 
to prevent a good deal of the mistreatment of women, discrimination 
against women, and arbitrary divisions of labor.  Achieving a 
desired result in the U.S. may be *far* easier than achieving a 
desired result in a country with more intractable problems.  In a 
way, then, gender equality in the U.S. may well be the "low hanging 
fruit."

Is it wholly unreasonable to devote some resources to continuing to 
fight for equality in the U.S., which already has a legal framework 
and culture that is receptive to the idea of individual gender 
equality?

Judy (on laws prohibiting blacks and whites to marry):

> I'd say the laws disadvantaged Blacks.  At the time the laws were
> made, almost everyone with lots of money and social power was 
>White.  The laws made marrying these rich, powerful people off 
>limits to Blacks, therefore reducing the competition Whites faced 
>in finding a rich, powerful person to marry. This isn't the only 
>reason these laws were bad, but it's one of the reasons they were 
>bad. 

Once again, I think there is too much of a focus on how arbitrary 
restrictions impact groups instead of individuals.  

The problem with a law prohibiting the races to marry is that it 
prevented *individuals* from making a fundamental and highly 
personal decision (selection of a mate) based on their race.

Also, I must say that I am not completely persuaded by the idea that 
one objection to these laws is that they prevented blacks from 
marrying *up.*  I think one reason that this argument wasn't one of 
the central arguments is that it ignores the fact that blacks had 
limitations at the time on ownership of property, for one thing.  It 
also ignores the cold hard fact that blacks were not seeking to 
marry whites as a means of wealth acquisition.  

Imagine if we tweak the facts a bit.  Assume that blacks and whites 
as groups were equally wealthy in the 1960s, when these laws 
existed.  Under your analysis, this would mean that a law 
prohibiting interracial marriage would be just fine because it 
doesn't disadvantage either group economically.  Both groups are 
limited to their own race, true, but there are plenty of rich whites 
and plenty of rich blacks, so there would be no reason to object to 
this law.

And that just doesn't feel right to me at all.  


> AV also said, tongue-in-cheek:

> "Hey, blacks make great janitors, and we really shouldn't bother
> fighting for our rights to be lawyers 'cause that's too
> low-priority--but we should get more respect for our traditionally
> Black roles! Let's honor janitors! We can hold our heads up high
> regardless of the division of labor, 'cause that's just a side 
issue."
> 
Judy replied:

> The difference is that it is possible, in the right political
> environment, to divide labor evenly between Blacks and Whites, so 
>that  Blacks don't get disproportionately stuck being janitors.  
>There is no way to divide childbearing evenly between males and 
>females.  If we want equal respect for women, we need respect for 
>childbearing.  

Whoa!  "If we want equal respect for women, we need respect for 
childbearing"?  I don't get this at all.  Many women do not have 
children.  How is their lot in life improved if there is increased 
respect for childbearing?

As a stay-at-home mother, I am not too terribly troubled by the fact 
that some people don't value "childbearing" as much as they might 
value something else (academic success, career success, athletic 
success).  Heck, even *I* don't value my childbearing *as an 
accomplishment* to the extent I value other things I have 
accomplished.  Really, there's hardly any comparison at all.  For 
me, 9 months of pregnancy and a day of labor was a walk on the beach 
compared to the effort required to complete my education.  ;-)

In the U.S., many people value things that pay a lot, and they don't 
value things that pay nothing.  To those people, childbearing is no 
exception.  Seriously, just speaking for myself, I would be *much* 
more interested in policies and programs that made being a stay-at-
home mom *easier* than those that tried to make others respect that 
choice.  

Another example.  When I left the workplace to stay home, I shopped 
around for disability insurance.  If I were disabled, my family 
would have to hire someone to do all of the things I do (and my 
husband might even have to switch to a less demanding career), so I 
thought it would be prudent to look into this.  I learned that I 
could not obtain disability insurance at any price.  The problem, 
you see, is that you can only buy disability insurance if you have 
income.  Stay-at-home moms have no income, so I was refused a policy 
outright.  This is the sort of pointless restriction that 
discourages people from staying home with their kids.  

Judy:

>It may be that
> men will only be willing to do half the childcare if childcare is
> respected, which would mean that respect for women's traditional 
>roles
> would have to happen before an equal division of labor could be
> achieved. 

I do know some women who are the primary breadwinners in their 
families.  Some have stay-at-home husbands.  And I feel quite 
certain that the thing that has made this possible is the removal of 
arbitrary barriers to the women's career choices.  In the families I 
am thinking of, the women make a lot more money, so the men stay 
home, cut their hours, take leaves, work part-time and such.  This 
is not because the men have been convinced of the value of 
childrearing.  It is simple economics -- economics made possible by 
the reduction in arbitrary gender divisions of labor in the 
workplace.

Cindy




From meboriqua at aol.com  Sat Jul 20 21:04:19 2002
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 21:04:19 -0000
Subject: Sexism -- is division of labor the key?
In-Reply-To: <ahc1hg+lams@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahcj8j+mren@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "judyserenity" <judyshapiro at e...> wrote:

> My concern is that if one woman leaves an abusive man, he's just 
going to look for a new woman to abuse.  And if that woman leaves, 
there will be nothing stopping him from trying to find a third woman 
to abuse. Solving the problem of abuse requires sanctions on abusers 
(which could be social disapproval, jail, or various other things.)  
Saying, "The victim should leave" doesn't fix the underlying problem.> 

This is an enormous topic and I've been reading everyone's comments 
with avid interest.  I don't think I am nearly as eloquent as most of 
the people posting on this topic so I've been reading, not writing.  
This paragraph, however, jumped out at me and raised my feminist 
hackles so I had to jump in.  I think Judy's comments here were right 
on, but I wanted to add some of my own.

In our society (and probably in many others, but I can't really 
comment on societies I am not familiar with), women are constantly 
blamed for things that are not their fault: what few reported rapes 
end up in trial often end up with the woman's sexual history being 
questioned and the accuser walking free.  Women are expected to know 
how to defend themselves and to simply walk away from abusers in 
domestic situations.  Boy, does this make me angry!  Aside from a need 
for harsher sentences for abusers (men who murder their 
partners/spouses often serve just a few years in jail, while women who 
kill their partners/spouses *in self defense* often are sentenced to 
many years in jail), men simply need to be better educated on how to 
treat women.  

When I was in college, a police woman came to my school to talk to a 
group I was a part of about rape.  She spent all of her energies on 
how we women should avoid walking alone at night, how we should watch 
what we wear, etc.  While I am not saying that I should walk around my 
neighborhood (Harlem) at 2 in the morning in a mini skirt and tank top 
with no bra and expect no one to bother me, I was furious with this 
woman for not addressing some of the things men could do to avoid rape 
and abuse.  Women cannot, IMO, stop rape; men can.

Many men are raised to believe they are invincible, while many women 
are raised to believe that they are worthless without a husband.  My 
students truly believe that it's okay for men to be promiscuous but 
women who are promiscuous are whores.  Women shouldn't cheat on their 
partners, but they should expect and allow their male partners to 
cheat on them.  Where is this being learned?  It is being learned at 
home, and in the media (which is pretty damned powerful in the US).  

Hatred of women is so deeply rooted in our society and comes out so 
subtly (much like racism), that we are only scratching the surface 
with our discussion here.

--jenny from ravenclaw ****************




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Jul 20 23:17:54 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 23:17:54 -0000
Subject: Labels (was Yet More about sexism and division of labor)
In-Reply-To: <003001c22ed3$2b741440$487d63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <ahcr32+q1bh@eGroups.com>

Amanda wrote:


> There's always going to be people who label others. Personally, I 
have found
> this broad generalization to be a useful tool to help me interpret 
someone's
> style, and it helps me to more easily interact with them. I don't 
have time
> for value judgements, and if someone wants to label me as a lesbian 
because
> I can handle competition and confrontation, fine. Hell, there was a 
rumor
> around one place I worked that I was a lesbian, because I wore a 
certain
> kind of *boots.* Why does this matter?

I think what you are saying at bottom is that your sense of self and 
what you are is stronger than the labelling that others put on you.  
Quite apart from the practical issue that some of these labelling 
people may be in a position to take decisions that affect you life 
significantly, which is bad enough, it matters more fundamentally 
because most of us are *not* like that.

I consider that most people's sense of the kind of person they are is 
very strongly affected by what they are told about themselves by 
others.  It would be nice to think that it is part of growing up to 
develop an independent sense of self (though I believe many cultures 
consider it anti-social to do so), but for the majority it just ain't 
so: that's what JKR means when she calls the patronus a very advanced 
form of magic.

So I consider that shrugging and saying 'who cares what they think?' 
is unrealistic advice.

David




From southernscotland at yahoo.com  Sat Jul 20 23:56:07 2002
From: southernscotland at yahoo.com (\lila phillips)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 16:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: E-mail assistance requested
In-Reply-To: <1026887883.1604.77873.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020720235607.64331.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com>

Hi, guys!

I need a little help here. I'm going on vacation
tomorrow, and am on several of the "HP" groups. 

I've looked all over on Yahoo!, and I cannot find an
option for no e-mail until I get back. 

How do I do this, please? I don't want to overflow my
box, nor miss any of the daily digests. I enjoy all of
the lists quite a lot.

I'd really rather not unsubscribe to each list until I
return. I'd just like to catch up when I get back. 

Thanks in advance for any assistance! 


lilahp


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com



From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Jul 21 00:09:53 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 00:09:53 -0000
Subject: E-mail assistance requested
In-Reply-To: <20020720235607.64331.qmail@web14507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ahcu4h+ipo5@eGroups.com>

Go on the website for each yahoo!group (this one is 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/messages ) and click 
Edit My Membership on the colored stripe between the banner ad and the 
real top of the form. In this group, it's purple/lavendar. Select the 
button for "No email.  Don't send me email, I'll read the messages at 
the Web site.". It's under the third pastel stripe under the colored 
stripe already mentioned. 

Enjoy your holiday!

(oops, I put "lick Edit My Membership" instead of "click"!)

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "\\lila phillips" <southernscotland at y...> 
wrote:
> Hi, guys!
> I need a little help here. I'm going on vacation
> tomorrow, and am on several of the "HP" groups. 
> I've looked all over on Yahoo!, and I cannot find an
> option for no e-mail until I get back. 
> How do I do this, please? I don't want to overflow my
> box, nor miss any of the daily digests. I enjoy all of
> the lists quite a lot.
> I'd really rather not unsubscribe to each list until I
> return. I'd just like to catch up when I get back. 
> Thanks in advance for any assistance! 
> lilahp





From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Jul 21 01:06:18 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 01:06:18 -0000
Subject: Yet More about sexism and division of labor
In-Reply-To: <003001c22ed3$2b741440$487d63d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <ahd1ea+hjop@eGroups.com>

Amanda wrote:

>Women, *in general,* like to interact via cooperation and
>consensus; men, *in general,* function more competitively in a
> hierarchichal approach. I think it's hardwired. 

and continued:

>I mean "in general," in the same way you can
> say with reasonable accuracy that women are less muscular than 
>men, or smaller, or more flexible. As a rough measure, it's true. 


Hmmm.  I'm not sure that suggesting that women in general interact 
via cooperation and consensus but men in general function more 
competitively is at all the same as saying that women in general are 
less muscular or smaller.

The difference in my mind is that things like muscle mass and height 
can be objectively measured and quantified and are readily 
observable.  Traits like competitiveness cannot be objectively 
measured or quantified in any reliable way that I can think of, and 
competitiveness is not always readily observable.  Indeed, any 
attempt to measure and quantify competitiveness may be unreliable 
due to the biases of the tester or biases in the test itself.  

That is why I think it is a risky practice to interact with a woman 
like me and begin with preconceived notions that I am more likely to 
be cooperative rather than competitive.  

In any event, it isn't a mistake many people would make more than 
once.  ;-)

Cindy -- joining Laura in the Atypical Females corner





From drumforever at earthlink.net  Sun Jul 21 01:36:11 2002
From: drumforever at earthlink.net (Betty Landers)
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 21:36:11 -0400
Subject: about changing groups to nomail
Message-ID: <001401c23057$0f78d3e0$ad13fc9e@bettysue>

It's actually easier than going to each individual group's site.  go to http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups.  Click on "edit my groups."  There you'll see a bunch of combo boxes.  You can either do it with each individual group or you can go down to the bottom where it says "set all of the above to:".  If you have more than 1 page of groups, you'll have to go to each page, which you can do from the "edit my groups page", and click edit my groups again once you're on the next page.  Hope I didn't confuse you too much.
Betty
"Bad news, Harry. I've just been to see Professor McGonagall
about the Firebolt. She -- er -- got a bit shirty with me. Told me
I'd got my priorities wrong. Seemed to think I cared more about
winning the Cup than I do about you staying alive. Just because I
told her I didn't care if it threw you off, as long as you caught
the Snitch first." Wood shook his head in disbelief. "Honestly,
the way she was yelling at me... you'd think I'd said something
terrible..." 
Oliver Wood, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban Ch. 12





From boggles at earthlink.net  Sun Jul 21 06:16:41 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 01:16:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Sexism -- what should the term mean?
In-Reply-To: <ahc1uh+3jkq@eGroups.com>
References: <ahc1uh+3jkq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010400b960012a0e73@[66.32.249.158]>

At 4:08 PM +0000 7/20/02, judyserenity wrote:
>
>I said:
>>>  If there is no term that specifically refers to mistreatment of
>women, then won't that problem become invisible? <<

No.  It's certainly not invisible to women, and never has been.  The 
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is not that strong!  But it's moot, as there 
is a word with that specific meaning; as Athena has already pointed 
out, it's "misogyny".

>But, since sexism is also being
>defined as "division of labor", this wouldn't have made any sense.

Sure it would.  It would have been mildly ambiguous, but everyone 
would have figured out what you mean.  That a word has two 
definitions does not mean one or the other is somehow eclipsed.


-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From boggles at earthlink.net  Sun Jul 21 06:39:13 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 01:39:13 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat
 sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahc1np+d1uo@eGroups.com>
References: <ahc1np+d1uo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010401b960026357f0@[199.174.12.231]>

At 4:05 PM +0000 7/20/02, judyserenity wrote:
>
>You can call this the "One Molly Weasley is worth 100 nameless female
>Quidditch players" argument.  (OK, the female chasers in the QWC had
>names, at least last names, but they were extremely sketchy
>characters.)   I think that characters like Molly Weasley show that
>women can be strong, that they make things happen, that they count.  I
>think reading about Molly Weasley encourages people to see mothers in
>a positive light.  Since many girls identify strongly with the
>maternal role, and with their own mothers, I think reading about Molly
>Weasley helps girls to see themselves in a positive light.

Lovely.  What about those women and girls who are reading the books 
who are infertile, such as myself?  To establish the entire worth of 
a female character in her childbearing and nurturing abilities is 
hardly encouraging to us!  And no woman spends her entire lifetime as 
a childbearer, even if she remains a mother; we all become crones 
sooner or later.  We need our Minerva McGonagalls in there, in 
support of non-maternal roles, as well.  Otherwise, we could end up 
modelling a society that cherishes women as long as they're fertile - 
and discards tehm the moment they're not.

>Thinking of oneself
>as valuable and capable is more important than seeing particular
>careers as appropriate for women.

Except that you are associating Molly with a career, or at least a 
lifeswork - you're positioning her as a career mother and caregiver. 
That simply isn't a lifeswork open to all women.  It is a 
traditionally female role, yes - and when it was pretty much the only 
one open to women, those of us who were not suited to it suffered 
even more than the average woman.  I would not want us to return to 
that.

>So, if Molly Weasley is so great, why do I think JKR's portrayal of
>women could be better?  Well, because there's only one of her.  Of
>course, there's Hermione, who is also a strong female character.  But
>that's about it for interesting, substantive female characters, in
>1500-plus pages.   Against them, there's a whole bunch of unappealing,
>one dimensional female characters (Pansy, Petunia, Rita, Bertha,
>Myrtle - one hardly knows where to begin.)

You have very carefully omitted McGonagall, Sprout, Hooch, and the 
other female teachers.  Of those, one (Trelawney) is portrayed as 
unappealing, and the others are - well - there.  In our culture, 
teacher is a traditionally female role, as well - one that happens to 
be open to those of us who cannot or should not bear children.  Is 
there a reason you are choosing to devalue that role?

>If JKR had set up the WW so that
>women were forbidden to work in the Ministry of Magic, a lot of girls
>would probably bristle (Hermione-like) at the unfairness of it all,
>and perhaps be motivated to succeed in government as a way of showing
>up sexist men.

Or, equally likely IMHO, give up fatalistically - "oh, how awful, but 
there's nothing I can do about it."  That seems to be the reaction to 
sexism of most non-feminist women I know personally.  We Hermiones 
are fairly rare (and probably way over-represented on a HP fanlist).

>But, that's not what JKR did.  Instead, she made it
>clear that women can work in the Ministry, but then showed us a
>complete failure as the only example of a woman (in the current time
>frame of the story) who does so.  The (unconscious) impression girls
>may get is that women are allowed to work in government, but it's a
>disaster when they do.

I don't think _any_ person, boy or girl, would take Bertha as an 
example of anything.  Moreover, if it were clear that a good half of 
the MoM was female, no one would have any reason for doing so.  It is 
only if Bertha is a *token*, and clearly hired only because she 
outdid all the other male applicants in her group, that this makes 
any sense at all.  And that's certainly not the impression I get.

>Sure, the
>effect here is likely to be small, because kids are often interested
>in sports anyway.

Really?  Girls being interested in sports is a fairly rare phenomenon 
here - none of the local high schools have girls' football teams 
(meaning US-style football, with the helmets and all).

>I think portraying women's
>traditional roles as important will do more to raise girls'
>self-esteem and inspire them to "take on the male power structure"
>than will an occasional mention of a woman playing in (or winning) the
>QWC.

Why?  Obviously girls see women's traditional roles as important - 
they benefit from many of them directly (mothers, grandmothers, and 
teachers, especially).  The problem is that adult males, and to a 
lesser degree adult females, don't.  If anyone, it's the boys we 
should be targeting here - which is largely what JKR seems to do with 
Molly.  She makes her important, and more specifically makes her 
maternal an nurturing role important, to Harry, and hopefully through 
him the young male reader who identifies with him.

She also lets us see a mentoring relationship between a young girl, 
Hermione, and an older, successful woman, McGonagall.  I wish we saw 
more of it, but it's Harry's story, and by definition such a 
relationship wouldn't be too freely shared with the male students.


>True, that's why I specified human men.  The male house elves do
>traditionally female work, too.  But humans (full humans) aren't
>depicted doing it.

In fact, Arthur Weasley is depicted as rather hopeless as a 
disciplinarian.  Do you see that as reinforcing Molly's power in the 
household, or as Arthur abdicating his responsibility towards his 
children?  I'll admit, I saw it as the latter.


-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Sun Jul 21 09:28:59 2002
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 09:28:59 -0000
Subject: Sexism -- is division of labor the key?
In-Reply-To: <ahcj8j+mren@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahdusr+fldd@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "jenny_ravenclaw" <meboriqua at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "judyserenity" <judyshapiro at e...> 
wrote:
> 
> > My concern is that if one woman leaves an abusive man, he's just 
> going to look for a new woman to abuse.  And if that woman leaves, 
> there will be nothing stopping him from trying to find a third 
>woman to abuse. Solving the problem of abuse requires sanctions on 
>abusers (which could be social disapproval, jail, or various other 
>things.) Saying, "The victim should leave" doesn't fix the 
underlying problem. 
> 

<snip>
> This paragraph, however, jumped out at me and raised my feminist 
> hackles so I had to jump in.  I think Judy's comments here were 
right on, but I wanted to add some of my own.
> 
> In our society (and probably in many others, but I can't really 
> comment on societies I am not familiar with), women are constantly 
> blamed for things that are not their fault: what few reported rapes 
> end up in trial often end up with the woman's sexual history being 
> questioned and the accuser walking free.  Women are expected to 
>know how to defend themselves and to simply walk away from abusers 
>in domestic situations.  Boy, does this make me angry!  Aside from a 
>need for harsher sentences for abusers (men who murder their 
> partners/spouses often serve just a few years in jail, while women 
>who kill their partners/spouses *in self defense* often are 
>sentenced to many years in jail), men simply need to be better 
>educated on how to treat women.  
> 
Since I made the original comment to which Judy replied (I think), I 
feel obliged to clarify my position. I originally asked whether it is 
not true that "domestic violence easier to deal with when the woman 
is capable of earning enough to supporting herself and her children." 
Men need to be better educated on how to treat women, yes, of course. 
Do you suggest that a battered woman sits and waits until her 
husband/boyfriend has a change of heart? I'm sure you don't. A woman 
must be able to dissociate herself from an abusive husband/boyfriend. 
I'm not talking only about leaving him, but also about pressing 
charges against him. If a woman is economically dependent on her 
mate, if she knows that without him she and her children will starve, 
she will remain in an abusive relationship. She will neither take 
steps herself (like leaving him) nor call in the assistence of the 
law. My opinion is that economic independence of women is the first 
necessary step. Only after that is achieved, can anti abuse laws 
really kick in. 
Human nature being what it is, I simply don't believe that educating 
men is any kind of solution. There will always be bullies and 
sadists. There will always be people who take advantage and exploit 
those weaker than them. The only effective way to decrease bullyism 
is to minimise the opportunities for it. In the case of women abuse, 
this means empowering women - through legal *and* economic means. 

And to Judy: Of course, the best thing would be that this abusive man 
was put behind bars. But until he is? You are not seriously 
suggesting that a woman should stay with an abusive man in order to 
save one of her "sisters" from him, are you?! 

Naama




From alchemillalady at aol.com  Sun Jul 21 09:48:55 2002
From: alchemillalady at aol.com (alchemillalady)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 09:48:55 -0000
Subject: Fanfic  sites for a 9 year old
Message-ID: <ahe027+sjir@eGroups.com>

My nine-year-old daughter (a committed HP fan) found me reading some 
fanfic, and wants to read (perhaps contribute) her own.  Can anyone 
recommend child-oriented fan fic sites?

Thanks, Alchemilla Lady




From heidit at netbox.com  Sun Jul 21 09:55:25 2002
From: heidit at netbox.com (heidi tandy)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 02:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Fanfic  sites for a 9 year old
In-Reply-To: <ahe027+sjir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020721095525.1917.qmail@web9503.mail.yahoo.com>


--- alchemillalady <alchemillalady at aol.com> wrote:
> Real-To:  "alchemillalady" <alchemillalady at aol.com>
> 
> My nine-year-old daughter (a committed HP fan) found
> me reading some 
> fanfic, and wants to read (perhaps contribute) her
> own.  Can anyone 

There really aren't any that many, simply because in
the US, there's a law that says that you can't take
personally identifying information from kids under 13
- in other words, they can't be registered users of
your site, which means that you can't accept fics from
them. So I'd recommend that a 9 year old should not
poke around FictionAlley, but if you want
recommendations of individual stories, you could
certainly ask in our Help! I'm Looking For... section
here:
http://www.fictionalley.org/fictionalleypark/forums/forumdisplay.php?&forumid=19

Jenna's site has a lot of young users, but not much
fanfic as of yet:
http://www.harrypotterfans.net/fanfic/index.html

To be honest, I think that it's best to just ask for
recommendations for individual stories, rather than
play around on a site. 

heidi

=====
heidi tandy

They say its a sign of mental health to hold apparently contradictory ideas in your mind. The world of late has been a particularly exotic stew of horror and beauty. There are killers, there are saints. The trick is to find the right spot on the spectrum between abject despair and total obliviousness. And then carry on...
Joel Achenbach

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com



From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 21 10:52:12 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 10:52:12 -0000
Subject: Division of labor (NOT whether it's *the* key)
In-Reply-To: <ahch6s+ampg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahe3os+k4gu@eGroups.com>

Judy wrote:

> > I'm going to talk about the biggie first-- whether division of 
> >labor is the cause of problems such as violence against women, and 
> whether, as a result, feminists should focus on division of labor 
as 
> >their main issue.  

Which biggie was that?  I haven't heard anyone on here suggesting 
either of these things.  There seems to be a very clear understanding 
that sexism is a many-headed monster and those who, in my favorite 
definition of feminism, "believe that women are human," can be 
usefully employed working on any of them.

Judy wrote:
 
> >  What are the grounds for thinking that abolishing the division of
> > labor is even possible, let alone that women's low status will
> > disappear as a result? 

Cindy wrote:
 
> Well, each instance in which a woman is allowed to choose her own 
> path unencumbered by arbitrary gender restrictions is a victory -- 
> even if the woman in question doesn't benefit by any objective 
> measure such as increased wealth.  There is something to be said 
for 
> being allowed to choose the path that appeals to you for intrinsic 
> and wholly personal reasons. 

YES!!  "Something to be said...":  ah, the grace of understatement.  
My job is one of the most important things in my life.  The idea of 
being unable, whether by active law, passive law or extreme social 
pressure, to pursue my vocation literally makes me feel ill.   

> > What David describes - a profession losing respect because women
> > joined it, resulting in men abandoning that field - is in fact 
well
> > documented.  Probably the clearest example of this is secretarial
> > work, which was almost exclusively a male profession about a 
> >century ago.  Women joined the field, pay and prestige plummeted; 
> >and virtually all the men left.  

This was a major concern in my tradition as women flooded in over the 
past twenty or thirty years.  It's a bit hard to measure 
respect . . . I think simple awe of clergy has dropped considerably, 
but there are other factors causing this shift, e.g. well-publicized 
cases of sexual and other forms of abuse by clergy (nor do I think 
it's a bad thing.  I'll take plain old respect for a hard job done 
well, thanks, and skip the awe altogether).  But as for salaries, we 
have kept them from plummetting upon the entry of women into the 
field through deliberate efforts to make sure this does not occur.  
Some things about the field make these efforts easier (e.g. all UU 
ministers' salary info is tracked by a single office), some make it 
harder (e.g. most UU churches have only one minister, so that 
patterns of discrimination are hard to detect and almost impossible 
to prove; churches are almost the only institutions that are 
permitted by law to discriminate on the basis of sex; etc.).  It 
takes efforts such as instructing congregations on fair pay, 
encouraging women to advocate for fair pay, encouraging congregations 
women to go for the best-compensated jobs (since they vary so 
widely), etc.  So far, so good; women tend to be newer to the field 
so overall are paid less, but when you compare a woman and a man, 
each with 10 years of experience, their pay is equal.  It takes 
CONSTANT VIGILANCE!

Amy Z




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Jul 21 12:28:16 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 12:28:16 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahc1np+d1uo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahe9d0+2p1k@eGroups.com>

Judy wrote:

>I think that characters like Molly Weasley show that
> women can be strong, that they make things happen, that they 
>count.  I think reading about Molly Weasley encourages people to 
>see mothers in a positive light.  Since many girls identify 
>strongly with the maternal role, and with their own mothers, I 
>think reading about Molly Weasley helps girls to see themselves in 
>a positive light.

I would dearly love to believe this.  I really would.  But I have 
some problems with it.

Many girls and boys already have role models in their lives 
fulfilling the maternal role.  And the teacher role.  And the nurse 
role.  Children already know that women can be strong and fulfill 
those roles.

What many children do not know or experience is strong women in 
other roles.  The airline pilot role.  The plumber role.  The 
surgeon role.  That is why I think it is far more useful for 
children to see women in these roles -- not because these jobs 
are "better" or "more valuable" but because seeing women in these 
roles allows the child to see something they might not otherwise 
experience.  

> I don't think an offhand reference to some female MoM (minister of
> magic, not mother) does anything like this.  There's nothing to
> identify with, no character to capture the imagination.  There's 
>just  not enough in these passing references to alter girls' views 
>of themselves. If the goal is to have girls grow up thinking they 
>can change the world, I think the character of Molly Weasley's
> accomplishes more than all those contrived references to female
> witches who had leadership positions in the past.  Thinking of 
>oneself as valuable and capable is more important than seeing 
>particular careers as appropriate for women. 

Mmmm, I don't agree with you on that last sentence.  You can depict 
a woman as a capable homemaker, but I don't see how that depiction 
will encourage girls to see themselves as capable of changing the 
world.  As a stay-at-home mom, even I don't see how my success or 
competence in this role will encourage my daughters to think they 
can change the world.

It's perfectly fine to have homemaker Molly Weasley as the most 
developed character in the books.  We ought to be honest with 
ourselves, though, and realize that this fact means the books do not 
have very good role modeling of women in non-traditional careers.  I 
guess I can't get behind the idea that depicting a strong homemaker 
is likely to encourage girls to see themselves as exerting influence 
and enjoying success in some other domain that is not the home -- 
such as in the business world.  Similarly, I can't see how depicting 
an especially competent black basketball player is likely to help 
black children envision themselves as chemists.  

I also sense that you're setting up a comparison between Molly on 
the one hand and contrived and token mentions of women on the other 
hand, and then going on to say that the portrayal of Molly is 
better.  I don't think anyone is arguing, however, that token 
mentions of women are what the books need.  That's why I don't find 
the argument especially compelling.
 
> So, if Molly Weasley is so great, why do I think JKR's portrayal of
> women could be better?  Well, because there's only one of her.  


Yes, but . . . 

Are you saying you want to see more Molly Weasley homemaker 
characters, or are you saying that there ought to be women in non-
traditional roles who *are* better developed?  I'd much prefer the 
latter, myself.


> And, then there's my second point, which was that JKR's brief
> references to women in traditionally male roles might actually be
> harmful to kids' views of women.  This admittedly is speculative, 
but
> I think kids might have gotten a better impression of women in the
> Wizarding World if JKR had left out those token references to
> successful women in the past.

<snip>

>If JKR had set up the WW so that
> women were forbidden to work in the Ministry of Magic, a lot of 
girls
> would probably bristle (Hermione-like) at the unfairness of it all,
> and perhaps be motivated to succeed in government as a way of 
showing
> up sexist men.  But, that's not what JKR did.  Instead, she made it
> clear that women can work in the Ministry, but then showed us a
> complete failure as the only example of a woman (in the current 
time
> frame of the story) who does so.  The (unconscious) impression 
girls
> may get is that women are allowed to work in government, but it's a
> disaster when they do. 

Mmmm, I think you're making a pretty big assumption there.  It 
sounds like you're assuming that when women meet *complete* barriers 
to their participation in a profession, they will respond as 
tenacious fighters who will be motivated to succeed in that 
profession.  But if women aren't absolutely barred from a profession 
and instead see women in that profession struggling, then they will 
form the impression that they shouldn't even bother to enter the 
profession.

As you might imagine, I don't think those assumptions are correct.  
Way back when I was considering career options, I did not even 
consider certain professions from which women were barred at the 
time.  In fact, it doesn't surprise me at all that the women who are 
pioneers in a profession might struggle at first.  That other women 
are struggling wouldn't deter me from entering the profession to the 
extent a prohibition would.  


>But, if someone asked me whether the books do a good job
> of combating sexism, I'd have to say "No." 

I would agree with this.  The problem is simply that the books have 
relatively few adult female characters, the adult female characters 
that do exist are almost entirely in traditionally female roles, and 
they don't even do much in those roles.  That is hardly a recipe to 
expand the horizons of young girls.


>I think portraying women's
> traditional roles as important will do more to raise girls'
> self-esteem and inspire them to "take on the male power structure"
> than will an occasional mention of a woman playing in (or winning) 
>the QWC. 
                                                        
I really don't think this is a fair comparison at all.  You're 
comparing a token and meaningless mention of a female character 
(female Quidditch players) against an in-depth and meaningful 
portrayal of a homemaker?  Obviously, a meaningful portrayal of any 
female character is more satisfying and inspiring than a token 
mention.

If JKR is interested in raising girls' self-esteem and inspiring 
them to take on the male power structure, however, then I think the 
best way to do that is to show a *variety* of female characters 
behaving competently in a *variety* of roles.

Besides, I can't help questioning what you mean when you suggest 
that JKR should "portray women's traditional roles as important."  I 
think she is already doing that.  Being a deputy headmistress is 
important.  Being a nurse is important.  Being a mother is 
important.  The problem, IMHO, is one of *balance.*  There aren't 
women in traditionally male roles, and this lack of balance can 
undermine a girls' self-esteem by suggesting that they can only be 
competent in a traditionally female role.  

There are, however, well-developed wizarding world male characters 
in traditionally female roles (all of the male teachers).  This 
sends the message that men can occupy traditional male roles *and* 
traditional female roles, whereas women are limited to traditional 
female roles.  I don't see how that can inspire self-esteem and 
confidence in young girl readers.

And adding more Molly Weasleys won't help.

Cindy




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Jul 21 13:00:08 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 14:00:08 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
References: <ahe9d0+2p1k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3AB058.000001.88973@monica>


Judy wrote:

>I think that characters like Molly Weasley show that
> women can be strong, that they make things happen, that they 
>count. I think reading about Molly Weasley encourages people to 
>see mothers in a positive light. Since many girls identify 
>strongly with the maternal role, and with their own mothers, I 
>think reading about Molly Weasley helps girls to see themselves in 
>a positive light.

And then Cindy argued:

>I would dearly love to believe this. I really would. But I have 
>some problems with it.

>Many girls and boys already have role models in their lives 
f>ulfilling the maternal role. And the teacher role. And the nurse 
>role. Children already know that women can be strong and fulfill 
>those roles.

>What many children do not know or experience is strong women in 
>other roles. The airline pilot role. The plumber role. The 
>surgeon role. That is why I think it is far more useful for 
>children to see women in these roles -- not because these jobs 
>are "better" or "more valuable" but because seeing women in these 
>roles allows the child to see something they might not otherwise 
>experience. 

Judy also wrote:

> I don't think an offhand reference to some female MoM (minister of
> magic, not mother) does anything like this. There's nothing to
> identify with, no character to capture the imagination. There's 
>just not enough in these passing references to alter girls' views 
>of themselves. If the goal is to have girls grow up thinking they 
>can change the world, I think the character of Molly Weasley's
> accomplishes more than all those contrived references to female
> witches who had leadership positions in the past. Thinking of 
>oneself as valuable and capable is more important than seeing 
>particular careers as appropriate for women. 

To which Cindy added:

>Mmmm, I don't agree with you on that last sentence. You can depict 
>a woman as a capable homemaker, but I don't see how that depiction 
>will encourage girls to see themselves as capable of changing the 
>world. As a stay-at-home mom, even I don't see how my success or 
>competence in this role will encourage my daughters to think they 
>can change the world.

I know that pretty much all we've seen of Molly so far is Molly Weasley the
mother but I think JKR may be setting her up to be more than that. From the
way Albus was interacting with her I think she's going to be quite important
in the fight against Voldemort - but that could be just my innate love of
Molly as a character speaking. So she may end up as the archtypal
have-it-all female character, saving the world *and* fulfilling a more 
traditional' role as wife and mother, although frankly doing anything other
than being a mother when she has 7 children amazes me, especially with kids
that seem to be trouble-magnets like the Weasleys. Anyway the point I was
trying to make is that we shouldn't necessarily judge how women are
portrayed in the series until all seven books are out since, assuming they
keep increasing in length, or even stay static from now on, we're only half
way through. She's unlikely to introduce to many more major characters from
now on leaving room for development of those we already have. While I admit
that the male characters outnumber the female ones she may have plans for
developing some of the women we already know. Minerva and Molly seem
destined for more non-traditional, changing the world type action, hermione
obviously is an important part of things anyway, and personally i think
Hooch might be getting a bigger role. Don't ask me why because I couldn't
say, it's just a feeling I get. Also by the end of the series Ginny will be
17 (I think) so we should get to see her developing, at the moment is
difficult to judge what sort of role model she would be because she's just a
kid.

K



From meboriqua at aol.com  Sun Jul 21 13:24:13 2002
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 13:24:13 -0000
Subject: Sexism -- is division of labor the key?
In-Reply-To: <ahdusr+fldd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <aheclt+5dks@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "naamagatus" <naama_gat at h...> wrote:
 
> Do you suggest that a battered woman sits and waits until her 
> husband/boyfriend has a change of heart?>

No, of course I don't suggest that.  Why would anyone?

>A woman must be able to dissociate herself from an abusive 
husband/boyfriend. I'm not talking only about leaving him, but also 
about pressing charges against him. If a woman is economically 
dependent on her mate, if she knows that without him she and her 
children will starve, she will remain in an abusive relationship. She 
will neither take steps herself (like leaving him) nor call in the 
assistence of the law.>

There is no one answer to why so many women stay with abusive 
husbands/partners.  Economic independence is one of several things 
that can help a woman walk away.  Education is another.  The law is a 
third.  It is very difficult for women to press charges against 
abusive partners.  Restraining orders are not always effective, and 
jail sentences are few and far between.  Many abusive men actually go 
after their partners after they have left.  I can't imagine how 
terrifying that must be, or how helpless that would make me feel, 
especially if I thought the law would not help me enough to get that 
man away from me permanently.

> Human nature being what it is, I simply don't believe that educating  
men is any kind of solution. There will always be bullies and sadists. 
There will always be people who take advantage and exploit those 
weaker than them. The only effective way to decrease bullyism is to 
minimise the opportunities for it. In the case of women abuse, this 
means empowering women - through legal *and* economic means.>

I also think anger management, mediation and conflict resolution 
should be a part of every junior high school and high school 
curriculum.  Too many of my students think that smacking someone good 
and hard is the way to solve problems.  They think this way when it 
comes to a disagreement with someone in the classroom, in the street 
or in the home.  They think a child who receives a good "beating" is 
more likely to behave better the next time around.  Both boys and 
girls in my classes don't seem to make any effort to control their 
hands when it comes to anger.  These same kids grow up to have 
professions related to the law; would you want one of these people to 
respond to a domestic violence call in your neighborhood?  I wouldn't 
(and I really like my students!). 

--jenny from ravenclaw ***************




From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Sun Jul 21 15:03:32 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 15:03:32 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahe9d0+2p1k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <aheig4+jb3h@eGroups.com>

Cindy, Amy, Naama, and Jennifer made lots of interesting points,
including many about women's issues in the real world.  I'm going to
start with the points about the JKR books, though, because I think I'm
given some misimpressions of what I believe in regards to the books. 


I said, "One Molly Weasley is worth 100 nameless female Quidditch
players"

Jennifer Boggess Ramon replied:
> Lovely. What about those women and girls who are reading the books
who are infertile, such as myself? To establish the entire worth of a
female character in her childbearing and nurturing abilities is hardly
encouraging to us! And no woman spends her entire lifetime as a
childbearer, even if she remains a mother; we all become crones sooner
or later. We need our Minerva McGonagalls in there, in support of
non-maternal roles, as well. Otherwise, we could end up modelling a
society that cherishes women as long as they're fertile -and discards
tehm the moment they're not.<

I think that childless women are going to have to look elsewhere for
positive childless female characters to identify with, because JKR
didn't do a good job of providing any in her books.  I agree that
McGonagall comes closest, but as you say later in your post, she's
still a bit skimpy. 

And Cindy asked:
> Are you saying you want to see more Molly Weasley homemaker
characters, or are you saying that there ought to be women in
non-traditional roles who *are* better developed? I'd much prefer the
latter, myself.<

I'd prefer the latter, too, Cindy. We already have Molly Weasley, but
the books completely lack well-developed female characters in
non-traditional roles and could really use one or more. 

I seem to have given the perception that I'm opposed to portrayals of
women in non-maternal roles.  I'm not, in fact, I wish JKR had
included more of them.  My complaint is that most of her female
characters are way less interesting and substantial than her male
characters.  Molly Weasley is the only adult women that I see as a
truly three-dimensional character.  Even McGonagall, the next-best
developed adult female character, really has a limited range of
behaviors and emotions.  (McGonagall is portrayed as ranging from
angry to stern-but-helpful, whereas Molly is sometimes sad, sometimes
joking, sometimes angry, sometimes worried, sometimes affectionate,
etc.) 

It's true that I welcome positive portrayals of mothers.  This is
because 1) I think there are not enough positive portrayals of mothers
in our society and 2) I think most girls tend to identify with their
own mothers, and hence, with the maternal role. (I suspect that very
few young girls think of themselves as infertile, regardless of their
actual biological state.) Therefore, I think positive portrayals of
mothers are good for girls' self-esteem, even for the self-esteem of
girls who eventually grow up to be childless.  But, I'd also love some
meaty, in-depth female characters in non-maternal roles.  It's the
token "Helga Hufflepuff" types who tick me off. 

Cindy said:
> I also sense that you're setting up a comparison between Molly on
the one hand and contrived and token mentions of women on the other
hand, and then going on to say that the portrayal of Molly is better.
I don't think anyone is arguing, however, that token mentions of women
are what the books need. That's why I don't find the argument
especially compelling.<

I don't think *I'm* setting up this comparison; I think that is how
JKR wrote the female characters. Given that those are the only choices
in the books, I'll go for the well-developed female character, whether
she's in a traditional role or not.  And, perhaps no one on this list
was saying that JKR's token references were what girls needed, but
that is definitely how I interpreted some of the comments on the main
list. So, I was saying why I don't agree with the view that token
characters help. 

Jennifer Boggess Ramon didn't think girls need characters like Molly
Weasley, saying:
>Obviously girls see women's traditional roles as important - they
benefit from many of them directly mothers, grandmothers, and
teachers, especially). The problem is that adult males, and to a
lesser degree adult females, don't. If anyone, it's the boys we should
be targeting here - which is largely what JKR seems to do with Molly.
She makes her important, and more specifically makes her maternal an
nurturing role important, to Harry, and hopefully through him the
young male reader who identifies with him.<

And Cindy seems to agree, saying:
> Many girls and boys already have role models in their lives
fulfilling the maternal role. And the teacher role. And the nurse
role. Children already know that women can be strong and fulfill those
roles.<

Hmm, I'm not convinced that girls necessarily view the maternal role
positively.  I certainly didn't while I was growing up. My father was
extremely hostile and derogatory towards my grandmothers and my
mother. I picked up a very low opinion of mothers from him, which I
think strongly hurt my view of myself.  I think there's a lot of
devaluing of the maternal role in our society, and that this can
affect kids' views of their mothers, and can also affect some girls'
views of themselves.  I agree with the point that it's also important
for boys and men to view mothers positively, and that characters like
Molly Weasley help them do that. 

Cindy said:
> I can't see how depicting an especially competent black basketball
player is likely to help black children envision themselves as
chemists.<

I'm saying it would only help if the Black child had a parent (of the
same gender) who was a basketball player. The idea here is that kids
identify with their parents (particularly the parent of the same
gender, and particularly for girls.) My claim is that whether society
views the same sex parent's occupation in a positive or a negative
light will affect how the child sees herself. The claim you seem to be
making, Cindy, is that kids identify with all characters that have the
same gender or race as themselves. I think that may be true to some
extent, but I think they identify more with a character that is
similar to their same-sex parent. 

Sure, not all mothers are stay-at-home moms, but almost all do some of
the maternal functions that Molly Weasley does, such as cooking, and
comforting their kids when they are upset.  Not many kids have a
mother who is the head of a government, and none that I know of have a
mother who is a star world-cup soccer player.  So, I think most girls
would identify Molly Weasley (at least partially) with their own
mother, but far fewer would identify a female Minster of Magic with
their mother. Therefore, a positive portrayal of a mother might have
more impact on a girl's opinion of herself than would a positive
portrayal of a female head of government, even if both portrayals were
equally fleshed-out. I imagine this effect would be pretty small, but
then, it's only one set of books; probably the effect will be fairly
small no matter how JKR portrays women. 


Jennifer Boggess Ramon said:
> In our culture, teacher is a traditionally female role, as well -
one that happens to be open to those of us who cannot or should not
bear children. Is there a reason you are choosing to devalue that
role? <

I hope I'm not devaluing the role of teacher, because I teach, too.  
The reason I didn't cite any of the female Hogwarts teachers as
examples of well-developed, substantial female characters is because I
think they're *not* well-developed and substantial.  It has nothing to
do with the fact that they're teachers. 

I seem to somehow have given the impression that I think women should
be denied roles other than wife and mother.  I don't think that at
all.  I think the way JKR portrays women in non-traditional roles is
useless, or worse than useless, in encouraging girls to strive for
those non-traditional roles.  I also think that trying to get women
into roles like professional athlete (that is, traditionally male
roles with no overt political power) does little or nothing to solve
the problems facing women as a group.  And, I think the role of mother
should be held in higher regard in our society than it currently is. 
But, I definitely want roles other than mother to be open to women.
I'm not a mother, and I want *some* sort of role open to me. 



I said:
>>If JKR had set up the WW so that women were forbidden to work in the
Ministry of Magic, a lot of girls would probably bristle
(Hermione-like) at the unfairness of it all, and perhaps be motivated
to succeed in government as a way of showing up sexist men.<<

And Jennifer Boggess Ramon replied:
> Or, equally likely IMHO, give up fatalistically - "oh, how awful,
but there's nothing I can do about it." That seems to be the reaction
to sexism of most non-feminist women I know personally....
I don't think _any_ person, boy or girl, would take Bertha as an
example of anything....  <

And Cindy said:
>It sounds like you're assuming that when women meet *complete*
barriers to their participation in a profession, they will respond as
tenacious fighters who will be motivated to succeed in that
profession.<

Well, this actually would be a pretty easy thing to investigate, if
someone works at a school where they can get a substantial number of
girls to participate.  Divide the girls into two groups.  Group A)
reads a story where women aren't allowed to work in government, and
Group B) reads a story where women are allowed to work in government,
but the only one shown doing so is a complete loser. Then, see which
group of girls is more motivated to work in government in the future.
 I'd very confidently guess Group A, but I don't know if this study
has been done, so I don't know if the data is out there. 



Jennifer Boggess Ramon said
>Arthur Weasley is depicted as rather hopeless as a disciplinarian. Do
you see that as reinforcing Molly's power in the household, or as
Arthur abdicating his responsibility towards his children? I'll admit,
I saw it as the latter.<

I don't really see it as either.  I see Arthur and Molly both as good,
loving parents.  I think they've assigned parenting tasks based on
their respective personalities, and do a good job of complementing
each other. 



And Kathryn had an interesting point:
> I know that pretty much all we've seen of Molly so far is Molly
Weasley the mother but I think JKR may be setting her up to be more
than that. From the way Albus was interacting with her I think she's
going to be quite important in the fight against Voldemort <

I'd like that!

-- Judy




From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 21 13:12:11 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 13:12:11 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
Message-ID: <ahebvb+hclp@eGroups.com>

First of all, my goal is not to try to deliberately say what JKR 
should write in future books.  My goal is to waste time.

According to Dumbledore's trading card, he enjoys chamber music.  
So I got to thinking about other characters and here's what I came up 
with (feel free to contradict me if necessary):

BILL WEASLEY: Based on his roadie-for-AC/DC appearance, I'd figure 
him to be into Led Zeppelin, the Ramones, Van Halen (not Van Hagar or 
Van Cherone), etc.

FRED AND GEORGE: "Weird Al" Yankovic (since they're a couple of 
clowns).  And by the way, it's pronounced yank-oh-vik, not vich.  
(Sorry, it's just almost everybody I talk to pronounce it "vich").

GINNY: I hate to say it, but probably groups like N-Stync or 
Britney Spears.  Sorry, but she almost fits the stereotype.

HAGRID: Being a bit of a woodsman, he'd probably enjoy Creedence 
Clearwater Revival.

HERMIONE: She'd probably enjoy classical music, such as Gershwin or 
Mozart.

SNAPE: With his black robes and long hair, Severus Snape could 
probably enjoy various heavy metal groups like Slayer.

Any other ideas?

Sincerely, Jack

----------
"Wait, are you singing Myxolidian scales or something?" - Shannon W. 
Bell





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Jul 21 18:13:22 2002
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 18:13:22 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <aheig4+jb3h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahetk2+liog@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "judyserenity" <judyshapiro at e...> 
wrote:

> I think that childless women are going to have to look 
elsewhere for positive childless female characters to identify 
with, because JKR didn't do a good job of providing any in her 
books.<

Hermione has children???  <g> I'm not nit-picking here. 
Hermione is such a dynamo and so important to the books that 
really, I think focusing on the lack of other female characters is 
missing the forest for the trees. If a girl, or a woman, can't identify 
with Hermione, she isn't likely to enjoy the series in the first 
place, and she'll find something else to read.

Pippin
reminding Judy about Mafalda Hopkirk, of the Improper Use of 
Magic Office, who seems to be as good at nailing the wrong 
person for the right crime as any other ministry official. (CoS ch. 
2) 




From kkersey at swbell.net  Sun Jul 21 18:16:42 2002
From: kkersey at swbell.net (kkersey_austin)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 18:16:42 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <ahebvb+hclp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahetqa+ep57@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "darkstar_2814" <darkstar_2814 at y...> 

> SNAPE: With his black robes and long hair, Severus Snape could 
> probably enjoy various heavy metal groups like Slayer.
> 

Oh, I don't know about that. I picture his music collection including 
only "Famous Bassoon Solos" and Beethoven symphonies. 

Dah dah dah DUM...

Karen 







From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 21 19:45:17 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 19:45:17 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <ahetqa+ep57@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahf30d+aksd@eGroups.com>

Come on, he's like Morpheus from Neil Gaiman's _Sandman_ series, not 
Squidward from _Spongebob Squarepants_.





From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Jul 21 19:59:43 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 20:59:43 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
References: <ahf30d+aksd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3B12AF.000001.85157@monica>


On behalf of those of us who have managed to avoid both of those things can
I just say - huh?

K
-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 21 July 2002 20:57:12
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they
listened to Muggle music)

Come on, he's like Morpheus from Neil Gaiman's _Sandman_ series, not 
Squidward from _Spongebob Squarepants_.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT



________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 21 20:08:33 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 20:08:33 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <3D3B12AF.000001.85157@monica>
Message-ID: <ahf4c1+htbl@eGroups.com>

I meant in appearance for Snape: Black robe, pale, long, black hair.  
I'd suggest that you do read the Sandman series.  The character is a 
far cry from the whole Cape-n-Spandexed, sidekicked, gender-at-the-
end-of-the-name, every-tool-and-weapon-named-after-them, square-
jawed, bad-joke-and-pun-making, "BIFF!"-"BAM!"-"POW!"-sound-effect-
generating, multimillionaire-playboy-or-reporter-bitten-by-a-
radioactive-fill-in-the-blank, stereotype that non-comic readers have 
about comics.

Also, the Sandman series is a bit like the TV series _Red Dwarf_: You 
should attempt to read them in the proper order to understand what 
the frag's going on.  It's pretty addictive.

Sincerely, Jack

-----------
"And I'm up while the dawn is breaking, even though my heart is 
aching.  I should be drinking a toast to absent friends instead of 
these comedians." - Elvis Costello




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Jul 21 20:13:58 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:13:58 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
References: <ahf4c1+htbl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3B1606.000003.85157@monica>



-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 21 July 2002 21:08:39
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they
listened to Muggle music)

I meant in appearance for Snape: Black robe, pale, long, black hair. 
I'd suggest that you do read the Sandman series. The character is a 
far cry from the whole Cape-n-Spandexed, sidekicked, gender-at-the-
end-of-the-name, every-tool-and-weapon-named-after-them, square-
jawed, bad-joke-and-pun-making, "BIFF!"-"BAM!"-"POW!"-sound-effect-
generating, multimillionaire-playboy-or-reporter-bitten-by-a-
radioactive-fill-in-the-blank, stereotype that non-comic readers have 
about comics.

Also, the Sandman series is a bit like the TV series _Red Dwarf_: You 
should attempt to read them in the proper order to understand what 
the frag's going on. It's pretty addictive.

Sincerely, Jack

-----------
"And I'm up while the dawn is breaking, even though my heart is 
aching. I should be drinking a toast to absent friends instead of 
these comedians." - Elvis Costello

I do keep meaning to read them but I never got around to it - and I like the
stereotype comic book heroes! Although Nightwing is my personal favourite
and he never got bitten or zapped by a radioactive anything. I was reading
Preacher which is also unlike most comic books (although probably deeply
offensive to many people) until I graduated uni and lost my access to my
(then) boyfriends comic book collection.

K



From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 21 20:24:38 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 20:24:38 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <3D3B1606.000003.85157@monica>
Message-ID: <ahf5a6+it0o@eGroups.com>

Kathryn,

What pisses me off is the fact that, thanks in part to the Adam West 
Batman TV series, "civilians" (non-comic readers; the equivalent of 
Muggles for us comic-book geeks) think every character is like that 
long rant I wrote earlier.

Plus, do this little test: Go up to some random Joe Sixpack on the 
street, and ask him who his (or her) favorite superhero is.  95% of 
the time, it will be:

- Superman
- Batman
- Wonder Woman
- Spider-Man
- One of the X-Men (usually Wolverine)

Nobody ever says Green Lantern, the Creeper, or Starman (and I don't 
mean the John Carpenter movie).

Jack

-----------
"Outside in the cold distance, a wildcat did growl.  Two riders were 
approaching, and the wind began to howl." - Jimi Hendrix




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Jul 21 20:46:11 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:46:11 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
References: <ahf5a6+it0o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3B1D93.000005.85157@monica>



-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 21 July 2002 21:24:42
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they
listened to Muggle music)

Kathryn,

What pisses me off is the fact that, thanks in part to the Adam West 
Batman TV series, "civilians" (non-comic readers; the equivalent of 
Muggles for us comic-book geeks) think every character is like that 
long rant I wrote earlier.

Plus, do this little test: Go up to some random Joe Sixpack on the 
street, and ask him who his (or her) favorite superhero is. 95% of 
the time, it will be:

- Superman
- Batman
- Wonder Woman
- Spider-Man
- One of the X-Men (usually Wolverine)

Nobody ever says Green Lantern, the Creeper, or Starman (and I don't 
mean the John Carpenter movie).

Jack

-----------
"Outside in the cold distance, a wildcat did growl. Two riders were 
approaching, and the wind began to howl." - Jimi Hendrix


I am not what you'd call a fan but I stunned myself earlier this week when I
mentioned to my father that a) Stan Lee had given his seal of approval to
the Spiderman film (which I haven't yet seen) and b) that there was a
daredevil film out this summer and he replied who? to both comments.
Although having said that he also asked who Jeremy Irons was the other day
so my father might not be the best example for anything :)

Personally Nightwing is my favourite but the next two both appear on your
list (sort of) sine they're both X-Men. I used to like Spidey too till they
did that whole cloning thing.

K



From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 21 21:03:23 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:03:23 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <3D3B1D93.000005.85157@monica>
Message-ID: <ahf7ir+1g99@eGroups.com>

Well, well, well.  Once again, we've gotten completely off-topic.  
Actually, if you think about it, several characters could be the 
equivalent of comic characters.  Some examples:

Harry: Could be like Tempest.  Black hair, just beginning to learn 
the full extent of his abilities, the scar.
Ron: Could be the current Flash ('cause of the red hair).
Hermione: Beast from X-Men (scholarly, has a tendency towards know-it-
all-ism [and yes, I know that's not a real word]).
Hagrid: Colossus (the gentle giant).

You see what I mean?




From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Sun Jul 21 21:13:52 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:13:52 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahetk2+liog@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahf86g+an2a@eGroups.com>

I wrote: 
> > I think that childless women are going to have to look elsewhere
for positive childless female characters to identify with, because JKR
didn't do a good job of providing any in her books.<

And Pippin replied:
> Hermione has children???  <g> I'm not nit-picking here. Hermione is
such a dynamo and so important to the books that really, I think
focusing on the lack of other female characters is missing the forest
for the trees. If a girl, or a woman, can't identify with Hermione,
she isn't likely to enjoy the series in the first place, and she'll
find something else to read.<

It's true that Hermione has no children, but I'd consider her a girl,
not a woman. Jennifer was talking about childless women identifying
with characters whose life situation was similar to their own. If that
is what one is looking for, I don't think Hermione fits the bill. Her
life situation isn't that similar to an adult childless woman's
situation. 

I did mention Hermione earlier in this discussion, although given all
that I've posted here lately, it might be easy to overlook. I said
that Hermione was one of the two well-developed female characters in
the story, the other being Molly. I agree that Hermione is a good
character, but I'm not sure so many girls can identify with her. What
about girls who don't do well in school?  And, if one is looking for a
"role model" for girls, probably an adult character is needed. 
 

On the topic of female MoM employees, Pippin reminded me about Mafalda
Hopkirk, of the Improper Use of Magic Office --
Yeah, I wondered if I might be forgetting any other female MoM
employees who were mentioned by name. That's why I hedged and said
Bertha Jorkins was the only one I could *recall*. This way, I've left
myself an escape clause in my argument -- if a character isn't easy to
recall, then I'd say the character probably doesn't have much
influence on people's views. 

-- Judy




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Jul 21 21:48:56 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 22:48:56 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
References: <ahf7ir+1g99@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3B2C48.000001.44649@monica>


This is the third time I've tried to reply so frgive me if my comments are a
tad terser than usual I am not typing the full thing out again!

harry as Tempest *shrugs* Don't really know anything about Tempest so I can
t really comment. I would have compared him to Peter parker just after he
got bitten, dragged into the fight whether he wants to be or not because of
something that wasn't his fault.
Hermione as Beast, yeah I can see that.
Ron I would have said was the third Robin, especially just before and after
Batman lets him wear the suit. eternal sidekick, loyal, rave, unsure of his
own abilities but willing to jump in anyway if necessary, trying to emerge
from the shadow of his predecessors (Ron's borthers or the other Robins)
Dumbledore as Professor Xavier anyone?

Oh and please tell me what the third Robin was called because it's driving
me up the wall here, was he Tim Drake or was that number 2?

K
-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 21 July 2002 22:03:32
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they
listened to Muggle music)

Well, well, well. Once again, we've gotten completely off-topic. 
Actually, if you think about it, several characters could be the 
equivalent of comic characters. Some examples:

Harry: Could be like Tempest. Black hair, just beginning to learn 
the full extent of his abilities, the scar.
Ron: Could be the current Flash ('cause of the red hair).
Hermione: Beast from X-Men (scholarly, has a tendency towards know-it-
all-ism [and yes, I know that's not a real word]).
Hagrid: Colossus (the gentle giant).

You see what I mean?



From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk  Sun Jul 21 22:26:37 2002
From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 22:26:37 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <3D3B1606.000003.85157@monica>
Message-ID: <ahfceu+tes@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Kathryn" <kcawte at k...> wrote:
> 
> 
> -------Original Message-------
> 
> From: HPFGU-OTChatter at y...
> Date: 21 July 2002 21:08:39
> To: HPFGU-OTChatter at y...
> Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world 
(if they
> listened to Muggle music)
> 
> I meant in appearance for Snape: Black robe, pale, long, black 
hair. 
> I'd suggest that you do read the Sandman series. The character is a 
> far cry from the whole Cape-n-Spandexed, sidekicked, gender-at-the-
> end-of-the-name, every-tool-and-weapon-named-after-them, square-
> jawed, bad-joke-and-pun-making, "BIFF!"-"BAM!"-"POW!"-sound-effect-
> generating, multimillionaire-playboy-or-reporter-bitten-by-a-
> radioactive-fill-in-the-blank, stereotype that non-comic readers 
have 
> about comics.
> 
> Also, the Sandman series is a bit like the TV series _Red Dwarf_: 
You 
> should attempt to read them in the proper order to understand what 
> the frag's going on. It's pretty addictive.
> 
> Sincerely, Jack
> 
> -----------
> "And I'm up while the dawn is breaking, even though my heart is 
> aching. I should be drinking a toast to absent friends instead of 
> these comedians." - Elvis Costello

I thought this was a Roy Orbison track (the Comedians/Mystery Girl, 
circa 1990).  Was it written/previously recorded by Elvis Costello?

Catherine




From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 21 22:33:43 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 22:33:43 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <3D3B2C48.000001.44649@monica>
Message-ID: <ahfcs7+5nft@eGroups.com>

Kathryn,

Tempest was originally the character Aqualad, aka Prince Garth of the 
Idyllists.  A while back (6 years ago for us, 2 years ago DC Universe 
Time), he discovered, thanks to Aquaman's father, that he had been 
lied to most of his life.  His purple eyes were not a sign of 
weakness; rather, they were a sign of mysticism.  So, he was taken 
into another dimension, where he was trained in the ways of the 
supernatural.  While only 6 months went by in our world, nearly 3 1/2 
years went by for him.  When he returned, he had the scars, various 
supernatural powers, and "hydrokinetic" abilities.

And by the way, the Robins are as follows: 

1). Dick Grayson is now Nightwing, and lives in Bludhaven (Gotham's 
evil twin).
2). Jason Todd was Robin for a while, and got slaughtered by the 
Joker.
3). Tim Drake is currently Robin.

And let's not forget Carrie Kelly, the Robin from the classic Frank 
Miller mini-series _The Dark Knight Returns_.

Anyway, I hope this helps you out some.

Jack




From HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com  Sun Jul 21 22:47:58 2002
From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com (HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 21 Jul 2002 22:47:58 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPFGU-OTChatter 
Message-ID: <1027291678.155.27515.w42@yahoogroups.com>


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPFGU-OTChatter group:

Which Weasley are you like in 
appearance and attitude? 

  o Arthur 
  o Molly 
  o Bill 
  o Charlie 
  o Percy 
  o Fred/George 
  o Ron 
  o Ginny 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/surveys?id=946612  

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From fluxed at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 22 00:02:51 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (A. Vulgarweed)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 19:02:51 -0500
Subject: Sexism, division of labor
In-Reply-To: <1027239149.1009.53433.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <l0313030fb960cd0e5ac5@[65.57.12.205]>

JudySerenity:

>I've certainly gotten the message that other women here believe that
>division of labor is the key to problems facing women.   What I don't
>understand is why other women here feel that way.

Well, I think you're oversimplifying some other peoples' positions here. I
certainly do not believe division of labor is *the* key. I think there are
many keys, and that is one of them.

Can anyone point to
>any society, now or in the past, where abolishing the division of
>labor ended the oppression of women? Can anyone think of any society
>where the gender division of labor has been abolished *at all*,
>regardless of whether this fixed the problem of oppression of women?

Well, exactly. It never has happened to my knowledge, so we can't tell if
it would "fix the problem" or not. Do I think it would, all by itself? Of
course not. But I do think it is one of SEVERAL necessary conditions that
must be changed to have a truly non-oppressive society.

>So, in regards to women moving into male-dominated professions - I've
>been there, I've done that, and it was a total disaster for me.

I'm sorry to hear that, but it's certainly not the case all the time or for
everyone. I'm pretty happy with my "male-dominated" gig - something I
notice mostly when I'm interacting with others in my field but not my
workplace. At the newspaper where I work, both my immediate supervisor (the
music editor) and my department's overall supervisor (the editor-in-chief)
are also women, and I haven't seen any significant drop in prestige or pay
for those roles. None of us make a lot of money, but then, going into arts
reporting in the first place, we never really expected to - that's a field
hazard, not a gender one. And the E-I-C makes enough for her husband to
stay home with their two toddlers. I realize this is not a common
situation. But it's not as uncommon as some people think - a lot of the
publishing world is female-driven nowadays, and has not lost significant
prestige as a result. It doesn't pay particularly well, but then it never
did!

>3) Most high-prestige occupations require long hours, and there is a
>great deal of competition to succeed in them.   This means that if
>women are still doing the bulk of the childcare and the housework,
>they will be at an extreme disadvantage.   <snip>  So,
>focusing on making men's work available to women, without reducing the
>share of "women's work" that men do, will have only limited success.

Well, this is something I see the "division of labor" question as
addressing: why *should* women necessarily do the bulk of the childcare and
the housework? In my notions of a more equitable division of labor, this
too would be divided far more evenly.

>AV said:
>>And even FGM [female genital mutilation] is often justified within
>the cultures that practice it with the insistence that "if you're not
>cut you won't get a good husband." Well, why is having a husband such
>a matter of life and death? Rigid division of labor, that's why!<
>
>Really? Do you think that without a rigid division of labor, girls
>would stop caring about their popularity with boys?  I don't.  I think
>a desire to be popular with the opposite sex is instinctive (except
>for a few people who want to be popular with their own sex.)   <snip> "Do
>this, or you won't be desirable," is going to
>be a very compelling argument, no matter how labor gets divided.

Yes, but forced clitoridectomy of a child by her relatives is rather a
different matter than an adult woman stressing out over Cosmo, isn't it?
FGM is usually done when the girls are too young to have much concept of
this, and they don't _choose_ it.

There is a *vast* difference between _wanting_ a romantic partner and
_being unable to survive without one_ (though, frankly, plenty of Western
women seem a little confused on this).

>So, if Molly Weasley is so great, why do I think JKR's portrayal of
>women could be better?  Well, because there's only one of her.  Of
>course, there's Hermione, who is also a strong female character.  But
>that's about it for interesting, substantive female characters, in
>1500-plus pages.

I like Molly, but I actually find Minerva McGonagall far more compelling as
a character. She has an element of mystery; we know very little about her
past, but what we do know is very interesting. What was *her* role in the
last WWar? Did she fight? Did she do any spying in her kitty form or
otherwise? What's her relationship with Dumbledore and the other teachers
really like when there are no students around? (We've had tantalizing
glimpses: I think Dumbledore was once her mentor - I think she has a
more-or-less friendly rivalry with Snape - I think she is contemptuous of
Trelawney in the exact same way that Hermione is contemptuous of the
melodramatic girly-girls of her own generation). Was she ever in love? Did
she have children? Was there a Tragedy? Is she happy with her place in
life, did she once have other ambitions? Will she be Headmistress? Has she
done important Transfiguration research? Has she published in professional
journals? Has she invented techniques? I wanna KNOW, dammit! (If JKR won't
tell us, there's always fanfic!)

See, I was born without the "maternal instinct" gene. Never felt it as a
child (never had or wanted any baby or child dolls), have never felt it
since, and at 33, I think if it was ever going to kick in, it would have
started by now. I'm part of a small but significant minority that way--not
all women *should* be mothers, trust me!--and I think if the Strong Mother
archetype is seen as the *only* or *most important* archetype for girls,
how is that any kind of improvement over that Victorian "angel in the
kitchen" bill of goods?

None of this is to imply that Molly isn't a great *character* (and mind
you, a great character in the _literary_ sense is NOT the same thing as a
"good role model," _not at all_, nope!, not even close) but her archetype
is not a rare or, to me, a terribly compelling one. I'm glad she's there,
but I also want to see some kickass female Aurors (future-tense Hermione?)
and some bloodthirsty female Death Eaters (Mrs. LeStrange?) as well as
female Quidditch stars (Hooch? Was she ever pro?) and female
magical-scientists and researchers and writers (McGonagall? Sprout? Vector?
Sinistra?). Because how else do girls like *me* feel valuable and capable?
;)

>Now, consider the Quidditch World Cup.  <snip>But, if JKR wants to use her
>books as a way to
>raise girls' self-esteem, or motivate them to go out and make a
>difference in the world, throwing in a couple of female Quidditch
>players will at best have no effect.

See, I disagree. I think the co-ed World Cup Quidditch games might make
some kids (boys, even - gasp!) who hadn't really thought about it before
wonder *why* the real-world equivalent is men-only, when clearly it doesn't
*have* to be.

I think it's significant that JKR invented a sport in which quick reflexes,
balance, eye-hand coordination, and strategy are the key points, because
the physical differences between men and women aren't really an issue:
indeed, the fact that the Seeker should be small and light would tend to
*favor* women in that role (and indeed, we have a female Seeker in Cho
Chang, who seems to do the job quite well). Even the speed factor doesn't
involve running, so longer legs aren't an issue. There's really no excuse
for Quidditch not being co-ed, and so the fact that the Slytherin team
isn't stands out - it's seen as an abberation, a typical prejudiced nasty
Slytherin eccentricity. (I realize the Celluloid Thing "corrected" this - I
think maybe it shouldn't've.)

Quoting a lot of Cindy's post here, cause I think she said this so well:

>You know what I think might be going on here?  It seems that your
>argument is focusing quite a bit on achieving equality and
>fundamental fairness *between groups.*  In other words, it sounds
>like you're saying that policies should be evaluated based on how
>they positively or negatively impact women *as a group* instead of
>women *as individuals.*  Or in the case of race, how policies affect
>a minority group *as a group* instead of minorities as individuals.
>
>If I'm reading your remarks correctly, I think this focus on group
>advancement could be where we have a difference of opinion.  If all
>women are directed to law and all men are directed to medicine, and
>the career prospects in these fields are identical, I would see a
>*big* problem there, whereas I gather that you would not.  IMHO,
>whether women *as a group* and men *as a group* wind up equally well-
>off is *not* the issue.  Restrictions like the one I just outlined
>violate *individual* liberties.  That is what causes them to be so
>offensive.

<snip>
>Second, I am using a different definition of "women's status" than
>you are, I think.  When I say I hope that women's status will equal
>men's, I mean that both genders will have a choice of all careers
>unencumbered by societal expectations or arbitrary restrictions.  I
>actually think there is plenty of room for improvement in this
>area.

YES!

<snip>
>Whoa!  "If we want equal respect for women, we need respect for
>childbearing"?  I don't get this at all.  Many women do not have
>children.  How is their lot in life improved if there is increased
>respect for childbearing?

I've seen  this argument around a lot, and I don't get it either, Cindy. I
think there *is* respect for childbearing and always has been. It's respect
for the *woman herself*, independent of the children she may or may not
bear, that's the issue.

>I do know some women who are the primary breadwinners in their
>families.  Some have stay-at-home husbands.  And I feel quite
>certain that the thing that has made this possible is the removal of
>arbitrary barriers to the women's career choices.  <snip> It is simple
>economics -- economics made possible by
>the reduction in arbitrary gender divisions of labor in the
>workplace.

Hear hear! Like I said, I know a few "househusbands" too. They all seem to
love it and be happy and do as good a job as any woman. Many of them also
work at home in various ways: I know a musician and two photographers who
have taken this path. And again, why is it possible? Because their wives
can afford it! Inevitably this delves into class and pay issues that aren't
strictly gender-based too - I also know some women who would love to be
stay-at-home moms for a while, but their husbands just don't make enough.
*Somebody* has to be able to make an income that can support the family,
and among many of my acquaintances, this is the far bigger concern than
*who* should be the one to do it.

Judy:
Since many girls identify strongly with the
>>maternal role, and with their own mothers, I think reading about Molly
>>Weasley helps girls to see themselves in a positive light.

Jennifer B.R.(boggles):
>
>Lovely.  What about those women and girls who are reading the books
>who are infertile, such as myself?  To establish the entire worth of
>a female character in her childbearing and nurturing abilities is
>hardly encouraging to us!  And no woman spends her entire lifetime as
>a childbearer, even if she remains a mother; we all become crones
>sooner or later.  We need our Minerva McGonagalls in there, in
>support of non-maternal roles, as well.  Otherwise, we could end up
>modelling a society that cherishes women as long as they're fertile -
>and discards tehm the moment they're not.

Hear hear! And never gives those of us who are physically or
psychologically "infertile" the time of day at all! I don't think it's
demeaning to motherhood to say that we are also capable of SO MANY other
things as well or in some cases instead, and some of us find our power in
other ways.
>
>>Thinking of oneself
>>as valuable and capable is more important than seeing particular
>>careers as appropriate for women.
>
>Except that you are associating Molly with a career, or at least a
>lifeswork - you're positioning her as a career mother and caregiver.
>That simply isn't a lifeswork open to all women.  It is a
>traditionally female role, yes - and when it was pretty much the only
>one open to women, those of us who were not suited to it suffered
>even more than the average woman.  I would not want us to return to
>that.

Exactly. Thank you.


>You have very carefully omitted McGonagall, Sprout, Hooch, and the
>other female teachers.  Of those, one (Trelawney) is portrayed as
>unappealing, and the others are - well - there.  In our culture,
>teacher is a traditionally female role, as well - one that happens to
>be open to those of us who cannot or should not bear children.  Is
>there a reason you are choosing to devalue that role?

I'd also point out that what Hooch teaches is not a traditional "female"
subject, nor is McGonagall's (I wouldn't think - hard to know about
Transfiguration, right? But it was also Dumbledore's subject.)

I would also point out that not only were two of the four Founders female,
but also two of the four current Heads of House are female (and not the
same as the Founders' breakdown). Because Gryffindor and Slytherin are the
two most "active" houses from the point of view of the HP narrative, those
are the two more well-developed House Heads *as characters* - and sure,
enough, we get one of each. And as Deputy Headmistress and the one with
obvious seniority, McGonagall outranks Snape. He gets more attention
fanwise and Harry's-eyes-wise because he's *a nasty piece of work*, and
negatives are always more memorable. Say you go to a party, and almost
everyone you talk to is perfectly pleasant. Who do you remember most? You
remember the one who said something nasty, regardless of gender....(Well,
Snape's a special case cause he's arguably Dead Sexy too - but then so is
McGonagall, dammit, in her way!). Of the "less-relevants" I wouldn't say
Sprout is developed any less than Flitwick. JKR's not as bad at the
boy/girl/boy/girl seating thing as some folks seem to think.

>In fact, Arthur Weasley is depicted as rather hopeless as a
>disciplinarian.  Do you see that as reinforcing Molly's power in the
>household, or as Arthur abdicating his responsibility towards his
>children?  I'll admit, I saw it as the latter.

A bit of both. Sure, it gives Molly more power in her little queendom, but
it also sticks her with more work, which is the last thing she needs.

AV





From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Jul 21 22:46:44 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 23:46:44 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
References: <ahfcs7+5nft@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3B39D4.000003.44649@monica>


I wish DC and Marvel would stop giving their superheroes new identities, it
gets so damn confusing sometimes.

And thanks for the Robin stuff, I was a big fan of Dick Grayson but I haven
t read much about the other two. My comics reading tends to be by way of
compilation books rather than the monthly comics because I am far too
disorganized to cope. I have got 'The Death of Robin' and whichever book it
is that has Tim earning his Robin outfit after Bats told him he wasn't ready
for it, but nameswise I get Jason and tim confused.

I get the feeling your the type of fan who's main reaction to the X-Men film
was to complain about them making Bobby drake a kid. And I probably shouldn
t even mention George Clooney and Batman in the same breath (actually I
shouldn't do that anyway because I might end up ranting <g>)

K


-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 21 July 2002 23:33:47
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they
listened to Muggle music)

Kathryn,

Tempest was originally the character Aqualad, aka Prince Garth of the 
Idyllists. A while back (6 years ago for us, 2 years ago DC Universe 
Time), he discovered, thanks to Aquaman's father, that he had been 
lied to most of his life. His purple eyes were not a sign of 
weakness; rather, they were a sign of mysticism. So, he was taken 
into another dimension, where he was trained in the ways of the 
supernatural. While only 6 months went by in our world, nearly 3 1/2 
years went by for him. When he returned, he had the scars, various 
supernatural powers, and "hydrokinetic" abilities.

And by the way, the Robins are as follows: 

1). Dick Grayson is now Nightwing, and lives in Bludhaven (Gotham's 
evil twin).
2). Jason Todd was Robin for a while, and got slaughtered by the 
Joker.
3). Tim Drake is currently Robin.

And let's not forget Carrie Kelly, the Robin from the classic Frank 
Miller mini-series _The Dark Knight Returns_.

Anyway, I hope this helps you out some.

Jack



From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 22 00:48:46 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 00:48:46 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <3D3B39D4.000003.44649@monica>
Message-ID: <ahfkpe+sob4@eGroups.com>

Kathryn,

Actually, that part I didn't mind.  It was the fact that they (the 
general public) have the belief of "We've gotta have Wolverine.  
Without Wolverine, X-Men can't exist.  The entire space-time 
continuum relies on Logan being in X-Men."  They should've just stuck 
with the original five (of which Logan was _NOT_ a part): Cyclops, 
Beast (who wasn't always a blue-furred gorilla), Iceman, Archangel, 
Phoenix (Jean Grey).

My biggest complaints:

Wolverine and Sabretooth being about the same height.  I have the 
trading cards; Sabretooth is 6'7", Wolverine is 5'4".

Storm getting her butt kicked by the Toad.  A second-stringer, for 
frag's sake!

The Toad having green hair and yellow skin.  That's the DC Comic 
character the Creeper (who I always think of when I hear that laugh 
at the beginning of "Wipeout").  You may have seen the character on 
that Batman animated series that was on the WB for a while.

Anyway, I'm done ranting for now.

Jack

-----------
"'Cause I'm as free as a bird now, and this bird you'll never 
change." - Lynyrd Skynyrd




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Jul 22 00:53:48 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 00:53:48 -0000
Subject: No maternal instinct (was: Sexism, division of labor
In-Reply-To: <l0313030fb960cd0e5ac5@[65.57.12.205]>
Message-ID: <ahfl2s+14fj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "A. Vulgarweed" <fluxed at e...> wrote:

> See, I was born without the "maternal instinct" gene. Never felt
> it as a child (never had or wanted any baby or child dolls), have 
> never felt it since, and at 33, I think if it was ever going to
> kick in, it would have started by now. 

Me too! (And I'm 44 and in menopause, altho' my friends tell me it's 
too early, so it had better not kick in now.) My brother was born 
three days before my 2nd birthday. My mother told me (I don't 
remember this myself) that she gave me a fancy wets-itself-and-cries 
baby doll so I wouldn't be jealous of my new sibling, but I refused 
to play with it and kept throwing it aside. I played only with my 
teddy bear (whom I don't remember) and my teddy tigers (whom I 
remember as having lost their eyes from too much play and being 
generally ragged but greatly beloved).




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Jul 22 01:06:15 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 02:06:15 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
References: <ahfkpe+sob4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3B5A87.00000B.44649@monica>

Kathryn,

Actually, that part I didn't mind. It was the fact that they (the 
general public) have the belief of "We've gotta have Wolverine. 
Without Wolverine, X-Men can't exist. The entire space-time 
continuum relies on Logan being in X-Men." They should've just stuck 
with the original five (of which Logan was _NOT_ a part): Cyclops, 
Beast (who wasn't always a blue-furred gorilla), Iceman, Archangel, 
Phoenix (Jean Grey).

My biggest complaints:

Wolverine and Sabretooth being about the same height. I have the 
trading cards; Sabretooth is 6'7", Wolverine is 5'4".

Storm getting her butt kicked by the Toad. A second-stringer, for 
frag's sake!

The Toad having green hair and yellow skin. That's the DC Comic 
character the Creeper (who I always think of when I hear that laugh 
at the beginning of "Wipeout"). You may have seen the character on 
that Batman animated series that was on the WB for a while.

Anyway, I'm done ranting for now.

Jack

-----------

I was disappointed with how they treated Sabretooth. The guy was totally
inept, every single task he was given he screwed up somehow. He's supposed
to be a match for Wolverine but every time you see him in the film you have
to wonder how it is that Wolverine couldn't deal with him with both hands
tied behind his back. Wolvie is one of my favourite characters so I'm glad
he was in the film. I missed Beast and Archangel but there are so many X-men
that I understand why they just picked a few - most cinamagoers would have
been confused as hell if they'd dumped the whole lot on us in one go. It
didn't bother me that they made Bobby a kid as much as I didn't get *why*
they did it - they could have easily found another character to use without
having to de-age Bobby. Having said that they made up for it with the
offhand reference to blue and yellow spandex (I would probably have killed
to see Hugh Jackman in a skintight costume like that but I liked what they
picked.) Liked Kitty Pryde too.

However, was I the only one who spent most of the film battling the urge to
whack Cyclops round the head with something? I mean yes Scott Summers is the
pin-up boy for all-american heroes but honestly the movie version was so
uptight, straightlaced and goody-goody that I couldn't stand him. However it
wasn't a bad attempt at bringing them to the screen, certainly beats George
(I-don
t-think-people-want-to-hear-Batman-going-on-about-some-incident-in-his-childh
od) Clooney

K



From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Jul 22 01:08:26 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 01:08:26 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <aheig4+jb3h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahflua+d471@eGroups.com>

You know, I think we're really getting down to it, and there's a 
fair chance that there isn't much disagreement among the 
participants of this thread after all.  

Let's find out, shall we?  ;-)

Judy:

>But, I'd also love some
> meaty, in-depth female characters in non-maternal roles.  It's the
> token "Helga Hufflepuff" types who tick me off. 

<snip> 

>And, perhaps no one on this list
> was saying that JKR's token references were what girls needed, but
> that is definitely how I interpreted some of the comments on the 
main
> list. So, I was saying why I don't agree with the view that token
> characters help. 

OK, then.  We all want to see thoroughly developed female characters 
in a variety of roles.  I suspect everyone would object to having 
*all* of the female characters be throw-away, unimportant 
characters.  That's progress, that's progress.

That leaves the question of whether "token" female characters (that 
is, female characters who are just there, not doing anything 
notable -- placeholders, if you will) are harmful or helpful in a 
work that already has thoroughly developed female characters.  The 
Helga Hugglepuffs, the Mafalda Hopkirks, the Madame Maximes, I 
guess.  

You know, my feeling is that I do not have a problem with "token" 
female characters under these circumstances, and their presence 
doesn't tick me off.  The reason is that books have major characters 
and minor characters.  If the major characters already consist of 
reasonable and satisfying characterizations of a reasonable number 
of women, then it can't *possibly* be harmful for some of the minor 
characters to be women.  Wouldn't it be rather strange to say that 
only men can occupy the role of minor characters?

That suggests to me that the problem with HP so far is *not* the 
presence of token women characters.  It is the lack of thoroughly 
developed and important female characters, IMHO.  

> Hmm, I'm not convinced that girls necessarily view the maternal 
>role positively.  I certainly didn't while I was growing up. 

It does seem reasonable that some girls may not view the maternal 
role positively.  As you say, this can vary depending on a girl's 
own family situation.  Fair enough.

What I don't understand is what JKR is supposed to do about this.  I 
really don't follow you here at all.  If a girl has a father who is 
hostile to the women in the girl's life, I fail to see how dozens of 
Molly Weasley characters will change the girl's perception of the 
maternal role at all.  In fact, I would imagine that such a girl 
would be comforted by the fact that she is not constrained to 
fulfilling the maternal role herself if she chooses not to, and she 
might well identify with and take some small measure of comfort in 
female fictional characters who fulfill non-traditional roles.

I wrote:

>I guess I can't get behind the idea that depicting a strong 
>homemaker is likely to encourage girls to see themselves as 
>exerting influence and enjoying success in some other domain that 
>is not the home -- such as in the business world. Similarly, I 
>can't see how depicting an especially competent black basketball 
>player is likely to help black children envision themselves as 
>chemists. 


Judy replied:
 
> I'm saying it would only help if the Black child had a parent (of 
>the same gender) who was a basketball player. The idea here is that 
>kids identify with their parents (particularly the parent of the 
>same gender, and particularly for girls.) My claim is that whether 
>society views the same sex parent's occupation in a positive or a 
>negative light will affect how the child sees herself. The claim 
>you seem to be making, Cindy, is that kids identify with all 
>characters that have the same gender or race as themselves. I think 
>that may be true to some extent, but I think they identify more 
>with a character that is
> similar to their same-sex parent. 

No, I was driving at something else there.  If a girl identifies 
with her mother, and if she is presented with a fictional character 
who is a strong and capable mother, this might encourage the girl to 
believe that she could emmulate her own mother's success in that 
area.  This doesn't strike me as particularly controversial.

My objection, however, was to the idea that a strong fictional 
mother will encourage a young girl to think she can "change the 
world" or that she can enjoy success in a traditionally male role.  
I think strong fictional mothers might suggest to girls that they 
can be strong mothers, not strong doctors, lawyers, plumbers, etc.

The point of tossing black basketball players into the equation was 
to make that point -- that you won't encourage a child to become a 
chemist by innundating him or her with images of basketball players, 
regardless of the occupations of the child's parents or how strongly 
the child identifies with his or her parents.

Judy:

>Not many kids have a
> mother who is the head of a government, and none that I know of 
>have a mother who is a star world-cup soccer player.  So, I think 
>most girls  would identify Molly Weasley (at least partially) with 
>their own mother, but far fewer would identify a female Minster of 
>Magic with their mother. 

I certainly agree that if our goal is to encourage young girls to 
follow in the footsteps of their own mothers and occupy 
traditionally female roles, then you are quite correct.  If our goal 
is to bolster the self-esteem of young girls so that they will take 
pride in becoming mothers, then you do have a point.

I just don't think that should be our goal.  Many generations of 
women have been raised to believe that they ought to aspire to 
becoming first-rate homemakers and mothers.  I really don't see that 
we need to push young girls further in that direction.  It has 
already been done.

I think it is far more important to encourage young girls to "think 
outside the box" -- to imagine themselves as influential in 
government, influential in business, or accomplished in whatever 
field they choose.  It is precisely because girls may well *not* 
have women in their lives who have entered male-dominated 
professions or enjoyed career success that it becomes important to 
make them aware that these things *are* possible.  Granted, 
fictional characters aren't the only influence or even the strongest 
influence to help girls recognize that these male-dominated roles 
might be for them, but it is surely better than nothing.

>Therefore, a positive portrayal of a mother might have
> more impact on a girl's opinion of herself than would a positive
> portrayal of a female head of government, even if both portrayals 
were
> equally fleshed-out. 

If the goal is bolster a girl's comfort level with the idea of 
devoting herself to having and raising a family, then you are 
correct.  

But here's a very serious question:  Why do you believe that women 
need a self-esteem boost in this direction?  Maybe this sounds a bit 
harsh, but if a woman lacks the self-confidence and self-esteem to 
have and raise a family absent societal efforts to convince her of 
the value of these choices, I'd have to wonder if she has the 
maturity to embark on this path at all.  Maybe she should wait to 
pursue motherhood until she is feeling more secure about things.

<Cindy pauses to consider just how controversial that last statement 
might be, but leaves it in anyway, figuring she can always retract 
it and slink away if it doesn't go over very well  ;-)>

>And, I think the role of mother
> should be held in higher regard in our society than it currently 
is. 

I'm just not sure about this.  I think women should become mothers 
for one reason only:  because they deeply and genuinely wish to have 
children.  I don't see how society or women are better off by 
additional efforts to hold motherhood in higher regard than it 
already is.  

Maybe I just don't have a clear idea of what you mean by "higher 
regard" for the role of mother.  I mean, we already have 
discrimination laws on the books to protect women from 
discrimination while pregnant, and we have federal laws like the 
Family and Medical Leave Act to provide child care leave.  I could 
list several other laws and measures to assist mothers (child 
support laws, for instance).  Can you provide some examples of what 
you are advocating that you think would enhance society's regard for 
motherhood?  

I'm having trouble understanding the argument, I think.  Maybe the 
problem is that I really don't see why a mother is entitled 
to "higher regard" in society than a woman who chooses not to have 
children or cannot have children.  Or a man who chooses to be a 
father, for that matter.  I just don't get it.

Cindy




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 22 01:43:13 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 01:43:13 -0000
Subject: No maternal instinct (was: Sexism, division of labor
In-Reply-To: <ahfl2s+14fj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahfnvh+7pml@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "catlady_de_los_angeles" <catlady at w...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "A. Vulgarweed" <fluxed at e...> wrote:
> 
> > See, I was born without the "maternal instinct" gene. Never felt
> > it as a child (never had or wanted any baby or child dolls), have 
> > never felt it since, and at 33, I think if it was ever going to
> > kick in, it would have started by now. 
> 
> Me too! (And I'm 44 and in menopause, altho' my friends tell me 
it's 
> too early, so it had better not kick in now.) My brother was born 
> three days before my 2nd birthday. My mother told me (I don't 
> remember this myself) that she gave me a fancy wets-itself-and-
cries 
> baby doll so I wouldn't be jealous of my new sibling, but I refused 
> to play with it and kept throwing it aside. I played only with my 
> teddy bear (whom I don't remember) and my teddy tigers (whom I 
> remember as having lost their eyes from too much play and being 
> generally ragged but greatly beloved).


Yeah. For me it was animals too. Stuffed animals, tons of them. 
Dinosaurs. I was also a huge Star Wars geek (it came out when the 
summer I turned 8) so I was obsessed with all that stuff too. 
Sometimes I'd make up these weird little worlds involving all of them 
together.

I don't know if I ever had a _negative_ image of motherhood so much 
as it just never struck me as something I wanted to do - even as a 
child I didn't think I'd ever do it. I wanted to be a paleontologist! 
I wanted to go out in the desert and discover dinosaur bones all day. 
A few years later I wanted to be a heavy metal guitarist. Ya 
know? "Mommy" just wasn't on the horizon. And it never did get there. 
But I didn't have a bad childhood, and no one in my immediate family 
really put down or devalued anyone else. It's just that different 
people develop different interests, for who knows what reason. I 
fundamentally don't understand why a decision not to be a mother, for 
someone who's not very interested in kids, is any more controversial 
or emotionally-loaded than someone who's not good at math deciding 
they probably don't have a bright future in nuclear physics. But I 
know that culturally, it is. (Division of labor, I think it is! :))

AV






From fluxed at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 22 01:48:59 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 01:48:59 -0000
Subject: Fanfic  sites for a 9 year old
In-Reply-To: <20020721095525.1917.qmail@web9503.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ahfoab+csgr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., heidi tandy <heidit at n...> wrote:
> 
> --- alchemillalady <alchemillalady at a...> wrote:
> > Real-To:  "alchemillalady" <alchemillalady at a...>
> > 
> > My nine-year-old daughter (a committed HP fan) found
> > me reading some 
> > fanfic, and wants to read (perhaps contribute) her
> > own.  Can anyone 
> 
> There really aren't any that many, simply because in
> the US, there's a law that says that you can't take
> personally identifying information from kids under 13
> - in other words, they can't be registered users of
> your site, which means that you can't accept fics from
> them. So I'd recommend that a 9 year old should not
> poke around FictionAlley, but if you want
> recommendations of individual stories, you could
> certainly ask in our Help! I'm Looking For... section
> here:
> 
http://www.fictionalley.org/fictionalleypark/forums/forumdisplay.php?
&forumid=19
> 
> Jenna's site has a lot of young users, but not much
> fanfic as of yet:
> http://www.harrypotterfans.net/fanfic/index.html
> 

The Sugar Quill is fairly kid-friendly too (although, again, she 
won't be allowed to register or post on the message boards or post 
stories of her own until she's 13). www.sugarquill.net

AV




From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Jul 22 02:10:13 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 02:10:13 -0000
Subject: Moms (was: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahflua+d471@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahfpi5+il9u@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "cindysphynx" <cindysphynx at c...> wrote:

> Maybe I just don't have a clear idea of what you mean by "higher 
> regard" for the role of mother. (snip)
> I'm having trouble understanding the argument, I think.  Maybe the 
> problem is that I really don't see why a mother is entitled 
> to "higher regard" in society than a woman who chooses not to have 
> children or cannot have children.  Or a man who chooses to be a 
> father, for that matter.  I just don't get it.

Cindy, my recollection is that you posted about this yourself less 
than a month ago. IIRC you complained of men who patronised you for 
being 'just a mom' and employed women who asked you what on earth you 
found to do all day. That's a social attitude, and it's hard to 
think of laws that could change it. Maybe a law not allowing people, 
even biological legal parents, to be waking time caretakers of 
children without a license that requires passing a difficult exam. As 
long as raising children is viewed as work suitable for illiterate 
and non-English-speaking illegal immigrants who work for half of 
minimum wage, how *could* full-time moms be held in high regard? 
They're doing work that is (according to the free market) almost 
worthless (value-less). 

Maybe a law that all people have to give the woman who was their 
childhood caretaker one-third (before taxes) of all their income for 
the rest of her life. That would give it money value.

I do not believe that the free market (whose unfreedom is a whole 
'nother rant) is the truest possible judge of values, and I am 
troubled that the children of the college-educated class (ooh, the 
classism can of worms!) are being raised by people who tell them that 
evolution is a lie and 3.01 is bigger than 3.1 because it has more 
digits and Botticelli's Birth of Venus is disgusting pornography 
because it's a nude ... and that only fags and lesbos study for 
school or read for pleasure ... but I am worse than troubled, I am 
empathically agonized, at the thought of intelligent, talented women 
(or even men) spending eighteen-plus *years* imprisoned, caged up 
with children (who are horrible by definition)! Even merely having to 
spend nights and weekends in that prison is more suffering than *I* 
could ever endure.




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Jul 22 02:20:59 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:20:59 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: No maternal instinct (was: Sexism, division of labor
References: <ahfl2s+14fj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005001c23126$6c085980$729fcdd1@istu757>


> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "A. Vulgarweed" <fluxed at e...> wrote:
>
> > See, I was born without the "maternal instinct" gene. Never felt
> > it as a child (never had or wanted any baby or child dolls), have
> > never felt it since, and at 33, I think if it was ever going to
> > kick in, it would have started by now.

Now I am the complete opposite.  I have always liked baby dolls, didn't get
into Barbies until I was much older.  Even now I collect Lee Middleton
dolls, which are known for their life like appearance and feel.  I am 25,
almost 26, and my REAL maternal instinct kicked in big time about 2 years
ago.  Which explains why I sniffled my way through Harry's entire recount of
the graveyard events, and eventually burst into tears when good old Mrs.
Weasley finally gave him the hug I'd been dying to give him myself!

Richelle




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Mon Jul 22 02:28:25 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 02:28:25 -0000
Subject: Moms (was: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahfpi5+il9u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahfqk9+afqv@eGroups.com>

I wrote:

 
> > Maybe I just don't have a clear idea of what you mean by "higher 
> > regard" for the role of mother. (snip)
> > I'm having trouble understanding the argument, I think.  Maybe 
the 
> > problem is that I really don't see why a mother is entitled 
> > to "higher regard" in society than a woman who chooses not to 
have 
> > children or cannot have children.  Or a man who chooses to be a 
> > father, for that matter.  I just don't get it.

Catlady replied:

 
> Cindy, my recollection is that you posted about this yourself less 
> than a month ago. IIRC you complained of men who patronised you 
for 
> being 'just a mom' and employed women who asked you what on earth 
you 
> found to do all day. That's a social attitude, and it's hard to 
> think of laws that could change it. 


I recall that exchange, actually.  My beef is not that others don't 
laud my choice to stay home.  My beef is that they can't seem to 
keep their snotty little opinions to themselves.  

Really, now.  I don't rush out to the curb and ask the trash 
collector how he can *stand* to do that work because I would find it 
so *boring.*  That would be just plain rude, and the people who ask 
me why I'm not bored are also rude.  And I certainly never said that 
I ought to be held in higher regard than a father or a childless 
woman.

I really don't require that anyone admire me for my choice.  I ask 
that they not belittle me.  

Yes, people who think stay at home moms are lazy, stupid or wasting 
their time do exist.  One could even say that these people don't 
hold mothers in high regard.  I just think it is folly to decide we 
as a society will try to convince *them* to the contrary.  I'd much 
prefer that someone pass a law so that stay-at-home mothers could 
buy some disability insurance if they decide they want to do so.  

After all, being concerned about whether society holds you and your 
life's work in "high regard" sounds quite similar to being concerned 
with what "other people think."  So if someone's decision to have 
children is influenced by whether they will be held in high regard 
by others, I think they might be having children for all the wrong 
reasons.


> I do not believe that the free market (whose unfreedom is a whole 
> 'nother rant) is the truest possible judge of values, and I am 
> troubled that the children of the college-educated class (ooh, the 
> classism can of worms!) are being raised by people who tell them 
that 
> evolution is a lie and 3.01 is bigger than 3.1 because it has more 
> digits and Botticelli's Birth of Venus is disgusting pornography 
> because it's a nude ... and that only fags and lesbos study for 
> school or read for pleasure ... but I am worse than troubled, I am 
> empathically agonized, at the thought of intelligent, talented 
women 
> (or even men) spending eighteen-plus *years* imprisoned, caged up 
> with children (who are horrible by definition)! Even merely having 
to 
> spend nights and weekends in that prison is more suffering than 
*I* 
> could ever endure.

Er, I'm not following you here at all.  Are you saying that 
intelligent people shouldn't raise kids for 18 years?  I admit to 
being totally lost by your remarks.  

Suffice it to say that I'll leave it to the judgment parents to 
decide the best way to get their children raised.  

Cindy




From boggles at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 22 02:41:50 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:41:50 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Sexism, division of labor
In-Reply-To: <l0313030fb960cd0e5ac5@[65.57.12.205]>
References: <l0313030fb960cd0e5ac5@[65.57.12.205]>
Message-ID: <p05010400b9610e8e15fe@[199.174.12.231]>

At 7:02 PM -0500 7/21/02, A. Vulgarweed wrote:
>
>I like Molly, but I actually find Minerva McGonagall far more compelling as
>a character.

Ditto.  I wish we got to see more of her, and in particular, more of 
her mentorship relationship with Hermione.  How many hoops did she 
have to jump through to get her the Time-Turner?  I don't see her as 
a weak or two-dimensional character (which apparently makes us 
unusual around here); I just wish we saw more of her, as I don't 
think she's as well fleshed out as, say, Severus and Sirius.  (I also 
wish we saw more of Sprout, and anything at all of Professor Vector.)

>Was she ever in love? Did
>she have children? Was there a Tragedy? Is she happy with her place in
>life, did she once have other ambitions? Will she be Headmistress? Has she
>done important Transfiguration research? Has she published in professional
>journals? Has she invented techniques? I wanna KNOW, dammit! (If JKR won't
>tell us, there's always fanfic!)

So Mote It Be, sister!  ;)  I would want to add "What's her 
sexuality?" to the list of questions, but I have no illusions that 
_that_ would ever be part of canon.  Molly's sexuality, on the other 
hand, is pretty clear; unless she and Arthur have a Fillfeather's 
Fabulous Marital Assistants catalog and a box of goodies hidden 
discreetly under their bed, she's clearly het and vanilla.  We can 
make no such assumptions about Minerva!  And I'm afraid I'm the sort 
of feminist who is just as concerned that women have access to their 
authentic sexual selves as I am that they have equal access with men 
to economic and political power.  (Yes, I do see their right to 
freedom from gender-related violence as more important, but I also 
see all three as intimately related, so I see no point in ignoring 
the first two in exclusive favor of the latter.)

>See, I was born without the "maternal instinct" gene. Never felt it as a
>child (never had or wanted any baby or child dolls), have never felt it
>since, and at 33, I think if it was ever going to kick in, it would have
>started by now. I'm part of a small but significant minority that way--not
>all women *should* be mothers, trust me!--and I think if the Strong Mother
>archetype is seen as the *only* or *most important* archetype for girls,
>how is that any kind of improvement over that Victorian "angel in the
>kitchen" bill of goods?

I wholly agree, although I _was_ born with a functioning "mama" gene 
and further socialized into the role by two late siblings whom I 
cared quite a bit for.  Not all women can be or should be mothers, so 
empowering the Mother archetype is at best going to help a majority 
of women, not all women.  Similarly, not all women survive to reach 
the Crone age.  If we want to empower women _as women_, the role that 
we need to empower, must instill respect for, is that of Daughter. 
*Every* woman is someone's daughter, and can symbolically become 
daughters to others.  Moreover, one can be a father's daughter or a 
mother's daughter or both; the role allows one to be in relationship 
to either gender equally, which (for example) "wife" does not.  After 
all, the role of sonship is already a major player in male 
inheritance and at least one world religion; surely daughters deserve 
the same respect.


>See, I disagree. I think the co-ed World Cup Quidditch games might make
>some kids (boys, even - gasp!) who hadn't really thought about it before
>wonder *why* the real-world equivalent is men-only, when clearly it doesn't
>*have* to be.

Again, I agree - since the HP books are, at their core, the story of 
a boy, their role ought to be (IMHO) less one of building up girls 
with good role models (although I think Hermione is adequate for an 
"in" for girl readers to identify with, if they need one; most girls 
by the age they're reading them have adjusted to identifying with 
male heroes when they need to) and more one of presenting powerful, 
respectable women for young *male* readers to accept and respect.  In 
that, I think both Molly and Minerva succeed decently.  I hope that 
the female Quidditch stars fall in that category - a boy who reads 
about a gripping sports match in which female players are critical 
and then goes back to his all-male soccer team may, just may, wonder 
why there are no kick-ass girls on his team.  I really do believe 
that half of feminism is educating men - and better start when 
they're young!

>There's really no excuse
>for Quidditch not being co-ed, and so the fact that the Slytherin team
>isn't stands out - it's seen as an abberation, a typical prejudiced nasty
>Slytherin eccentricity. (I realize the Celluloid Thing "corrected" this - I
>think maybe it shouldn't've.)

FWIW, the comment about there being no girls on the Slytherin team is 
made in CoS, unless my memory is failing me.  The shots from the CoS 
trailer with Draco in the Quidditch robes don't show any females on 
the Slytherin team, so I think they got it right in the Second 
Celluloid Thing.


>I've seen  this argument around a lot, and I don't get it either, Cindy. I
>think there *is* respect for childbearing and always has been. It's respect
>for the *woman herself*, independent of the children she may or may not
>bear, that's the issue.

There are a number of people who don't respect childbearing, and I 
have no objection to raising the cultural level of respect for 
childbearing and (more importantly IMHO) childrearing.  A lack of 
respect for mothers certainly can translate into a lack of respect 
for women.  I just don't think that that should be our sole, or even 
primary, focus.  A lack of respect for women who have sex, for 
instance, is just as culturally widespread, if not more so, and just 
as damaging to women, IMHO.


>I'd also point out that what Hooch teaches is not a traditional "female"
>subject, nor is McGonagall's (I wouldn't think - hard to know about
>Transfiguration, right? But it was also Dumbledore's subject.)

And, I would suggest, Potions is the sort of subject that in the 
common culture seems to be a "witchy" subject more than a "wizardly" 
one.  Snape doesn't seem to feel his masculinity is threatened by 
stirring a cauldron all day . . .


-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From coriolan at worldnet.att.net  Mon Jul 22 03:07:55 2002
From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc2001)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 03:07:55 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <ahebvb+hclp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahfsub+l8uh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "darkstar_2814" <darkstar_2814 at y...> 
wrote:
> First of all, my goal is not to try to deliberately say what JKR 
> should write in future books.  My goal is to waste time.
> 
> According to Dumbledore's trading card, he enjoys chamber music.  
> So I got to thinking about other characters and here's what I came 
up 
> with (feel free to contradict me if necessary):

SNAPE: Wanting to prove himself superior to the groundlings, Snape 
would be heavily invested in the Second Viennese School (Berg, 'Berg, 
and 'Bern), as well as the post-Webern school.  The purpose of such 
music is to intellectually intimidate, not to entertain or amuse.

DUMBLEDORE: That "obsolete dingbat"  - to quote Rita Skeeter that 
epigone of secular (i.e., Truth Beyond Question) media would no doubt 
favor the obsolete values of clarity, structure, and beauty, thus 
aligning himself with such classical-era composers as Mozart, Haydn & 
CPE Bach.

VOLDEMORT: The interval of the tritone is also known as the "Diabolus 
in musica" (the devil in music), and Voldy would no doubt look for 
composers who exploited this tonal instabilty. Voldy would gravitate 
towards those composers who, like Blake's Milton, were "of the 
Devil's party without knowing it": Berlioz (with his "highway to 
Hell" sequence in The Damnation of Faust, climaxed by a "chorus in an 
unknown tongue"), or Liszt (the four Mephisto Waltzes, each more 
harmonically unstable than the next). Being British, Voldy might also 
enjoy The Demons' Chorus in Elgar's The Dream of Gerontius, despite 
the fact that these demons are under a lock and key far more 
restrictive than the one imposed upon Harry at Privet Drive.

HERMIONE: Herm would swear by that most logical of composers JS Bach, 
though she might also feel some attraction toward the post-Webern 
school of total organization. She would definitely like Boulez, and 
might also be into Glass & Reich.

HARRY:  An exposure to Beethoven might expand his vision of heroism. 
And if he were to reflect on Beethoven's Coriolan Overture, he might 
draw certain conclusions on the nature of treason and whether or not 
people like Pete Pettigrew could be redeemed. 

BLACK & LIUPIN: These are two characters who live at an operatic 
pitch, so they find great consolation in the hyper-political musical 
dramas of Verdi and Wagner.  Music-loving wizards would also praise 
Busoni's Dr. Faustus, for its near-documentary insights into the 
wizard way of life.

DRACO & THE SLYTHERINS: They are most into whatever is currently No. 
#1 at the boxoffice. Their ambition promotes whatever will help 
Slytherin right now. Slytherin's inability to pick the most 
successful companies has resulted in considerable internal criticism.

HAGRID: He favors organ music, which can be inflated to heroic and 
superhuman porportions. Hagrid most favors Buxtehude, JS Bach, and 
Handel.

DOBBY & WINKY: They would favor spirituals, the international anthems 
of the oppressed and poor in spirit.

  - CMC


















From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 22 07:22:39 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 07:22:39 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahflua+d471@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahgbs0+mvlr@eGroups.com>

Lots of very interesting comments on this thread!  I don't know if I
will have time to respond to everything, so I decided to respond to
Cindy first, since she asked some very good questions.

Cindy said:
> there's a fair chance that there isn't much disagreement among the 
> participants of this thread after all.   
> Let's find out, shall we?  ;-) ...
> OK, then.  We all want to see thoroughly developed female
characters 
> in a variety of roles.  I suspect everyone would object to having 
> *all* of the female characters be throw-away, unimportant 
> characters.  That's progress, that's progress.

Yep!

> That leaves the question of whether "token" female characters (that 
> is, female characters who are just there, not doing anything 
> notable -- placeholders, if you will) are harmful or helpful in a 
> work that already has thoroughly developed female characters.  The 
> Helga Hugglepuffs, the Mafalda Hopkirks, the Madame Maximes, I 
> guess.  
> 
> You know, my feeling is that I do not have a problem with "token" 
> female characters under these circumstances, and their presence 
> doesn't tick me off.  The reason is that books have major
characters 
> and minor characters. 

Yes, a few "token" characters would be fine with me, if there were a
variety of well-developed female characters as well. 

> That suggests to me that the problem with HP so far is *not* the 
> presence of token women characters.  It is the lack of thoroughly 
> developed and important female characters, IMHO.  

Well, yes and no.  Yes, I feel that the lack of thoroughly developed,
important female characters is the main problem. However, *given* that
there is a lack of fully developed female characters in
non-traditional roles, I think it might be better not to have those
token female characters at all. Having token female characters might
send the message that even when women are allowed to occupy any social
role, they still are unimportant. Admittedly, I really don't know of
any data on this issue, it's just a gut feeling.


Ok, now on to all those maternal issues things. 

Cindy said:
> If our goal is to bolster the self-esteem of young girls so that
they > will take pride in becoming mothers, then  you do have a point.
> I just don't think that should be our goal.  Many generations of 
> women have been raised to believe that they ought to aspire to 
> becoming first-rate homemakers and mothers.  I really don't see
that 
> we need to push young girls further in that direction.  It has 
> already been done.
>
> I think it is far more important to encourage young girls to "think 
> outside the box" -- to imagine themselves as influential in 
> government, influential in business, or accomplished in whatever 
> field they choose.  

Ah, I think I see what the disagreement here is. I'm envisioning a
two-step (or multi-step) process, where children develop some general
ideas early in life -- their feelings towards themselves, their view
of their parents -- and then don't choose a career path until later in
life.  Since the Harry Potter series is fantasy, I'm assuming it
doesn't really have much influence on the actual college and career
decisions adolescents make as they approach adulthood. I think that by
age 14 or 15, kids are more influenced in their career choices by
actual people they see (in real life, or on the news, say), than they
are by witches and wizards in a fantasy book. 

So, I see the Harry Potter books as mostly influencing younger
children's overall views of men and women, not as influencing older
kids' actual career choices. My idea is that if a young (age 11, say)
girl develops a positive view of women in general and of herself in
particular, she will be more confident in her ability to follow a
challenging career, should she see an inspiring real-life example of
one later on. I think the particular jobs she sees women doing don't
have much of an influence at this stage, as long as they lead her to
view women in general, and herself, positively. (This two-stage model
may fit better in the US than in England, because it seems adolescents
choose career paths much earlier in England than they do in the US.) 

Also, I don't see Molly Weasley as influencing girls *not* to have
careers. True, Molly appears to be a "stay at home mom."  However, I
think her "momness" is a lot more salient than her "stay at homeness."
 (In fact, I'm not even 100% certain she *is* a full-time mom.  Maybe
she's writing a novel or something.) In other words, I think Molly
Weasley sends a good message about motherhood, but I'm not convinced
she sends a bad message about women who work. If she went around
ranting and raving about how awful it is for women to work, it might
be a different story. 


I said:
> > Hmm, I'm not convinced that girls necessarily view the maternal 
> >role positively.  I certainly didn't while I was growing up. 
 
And Cindy said:
> It does seem reasonable that some girls may not view the maternal 
> role positively.  As you say, this can vary depending on a girl's 
> own family situation.  Fair enough.
> What I don't understand is what JKR is supposed to do about this. 
I 
> really don't follow you here at all.  If a girl has a father who is 
> hostile to the women in the girl's life, I fail to see how dozens
of 
> Molly Weasley characters will change the girl's perception of the 
> maternal role at all.

It would tell the girl, "Hey, not all men beat their wives and treat
them like dirt. Some mothers actually get a say in how their
households are run." Now, this message would presumably be a lot less
powerful than what the girl was seeing in her own life, but that would
be true no matter what the JKR books (or any books) said.  And, I
wouldn't underestimate the power of a positive example of family life.
 I remember hearing one of the US Presidents - it was probably Gerald
Ford - saying how when he was growing up, his father twice took him
out to the woodshed and hit him with a belt. This was a real
eye-opener for me. It was the first piece of information I had that
other fathers didn't hit their kids with belts as a regular habit. (It
would have had even more of an influence if Pres. Ford had said that
his father never hit him with objects, but that isn't what he said.) 


I said:
> > And, I think the role of mother should be held in higher regard in
our society than it currently is. < <

Cindy said:
> Maybe I just don't have a clear idea of what you mean by "higher 
> regard" for the role of mother.  I mean, we already have 
> discrimination laws on the books to protect women from 
> discrimination while pregnant, and we have federal laws like the 
> Family and Medical Leave Act to provide child care leave.  I could 
> list several other laws and measures to assist mothers (child 
> support laws, for instance).  Can you provide some examples of what 
> you are advocating that you think would enhance society's regard
for 
> motherhood?  
> 
> I'm having trouble understanding the argument, I think.  Maybe the 
> problem is that I really don't see why a mother is entitled 
> to "higher regard" in society than a woman who chooses not to have 
> children or cannot have children.  Or a man who chooses to be a 
> father, for that matter.  I just don't get it.

Oh no, I'm not saying that mothers should be held in higher regard
than men, or than women with no children. (I think a wide variety of
roles are useful to society, and there should be respect for all sorts
of contributions people make.) I'm saying mothers should be held in
higher regard *than they are now*. 

What are my reasons for thinking that motherhood is held in low
regard?  More than anything else, I think the debate over welfare
reform has convinced me that motherhood is not respected. The whole
premise of the debate seemed to be that children are a burden, and
that the goal should be to reduce the number of children born. The
idea that having and raising children is a positive contribution to
society seemed to be largely left out of the debate. I remember one
Congressman being asked what would happen to little kids if their
mothers had to work. He said maybe a neighbor could look in once in a
while and check up on them! (As if raising a kid was as easy as taking
care of a dog.) I also remember a particular quote by Newt Gingrich.
(Hey, there's someone we can probably all agree on!) He said that
mothers receiving assistance (even if it was just food stamps) were
free-loaders who "should get out of the wagon and push."  There seemed
to be general agreement in Congress that flipping burgers was a more
productive use of a mother's time than caring for her kids, and that
taking moms from their kids and having them work in minimum wage jobs
was "progress." 

Now, I know the debate on welfare didn't *just* have to do with
motherhood. It had a lot to do with race, and also with negative views
of the poor. But, if motherhood were respected, I don't think
politicians could have gotten away with saying the things that they
did.  

Cindy, you seem to be saying that society expects girls to grow up to
be mothers, that there is a certain amount of societal pressure on
women to be mothers. And I agree completely -- there is pressure on
women to be mothers. However, that doesn't mean the maternal role is
respected; it is unfortunately quite possible for a group to be
pressured into a role that commands little respect.  So, I see
pressuring women to be mothers as largely separate from fostering
respect for motherhood.  

I think if we want to make women feel OK about *not* being mothers,
then what we need are positive models of women who are not mothers. I
think the JKR books aren't particularly helpful for women who aren't
mothers, but the problem isn't Molly Weasley.  The problem is a lack
of good adult female characters without children.

I think there may be a big difference in how people read McGonagall,
and some of the other adult female characters. I see McGonagall, and
also Madame Pince, as being strict and uptight. So, to me, they
actually seem to conform to a negative stereotype of unmarried or
childless women: the rigid, dried-up spinster. This may be why I just
don't see them as positive role models of women without children.  I
want to be clear, I'm not saying JKR *shouldn't* have positive
examples of women with no children, I'm just saying that she *doesn't*
have positive examples of women with no children, at least not well
developed ones.

Other people may be interpreting these characters differently, which
may be why some people see the Harry Potter books as providing good
role models of women in non-traditional roles when I don't. Certainly,
Madame Hooch was interpreted in a vibrant and positive way in the
movie, while I didn't get much of a feeling from her at all in the
books. 

Ok, out of the Harry Potter books, and back into real life -- 

Cindy said:
> I mean, we already have discrimination laws on the books to protect
women from discrimination while pregnant, and we have federal laws
like the Family and Medical Leave Act to provide child care leave. I
could list several other laws and measures to assist mothers (child
support laws, for instance). Can you provide some examples of what you
are advocating that you think would enhance society's regard for
motherhood?<

To some extent, I am concerned with attitudes instead of policy, which
is why I like things such as positive portrayals of motherhood in the
media.  (OK, so I am back to Molly Weasley again!) 

There are some policy changes I'd definitely like, though. I talked
about welfare "reform" as something I particularly objected to. To be
clear, I agree that the previous welfare policies had some bad side
effects. What I'd like to see is across-the-board government support
for children, such as many European countries have. Changing the
"Earned Income Tax Credit" to just a credit for children, regardless
of whether the child had a working parent, would be good.

I'd like a lot more support for college education.  That's a huge
burden that I think parents bear too much of.  

I actually think there could be a lot of improvement in child support
laws. Currently, many states put priority on enforcing cases where the
father owes the state money (usually as welfare reimbursement.) 
Often, there is not enough staff left over to enforce cases where the
money is going directly to the children and custodial parent.  The
result is that a lot of child support enforcement only benefits the
states financially, not children or mothers. I think cases where the
support goes to the family should be given at least equal priority. 

I have a particular problem with the way the child neglect laws are
enforced.  As far as I can tell, non-custodial parents are almost
never charged with neglect if a something bad happens to a child.  I
remember one case in Detroit where a family's heat was turned off due
to lack of payment. The mother (there was no father in the home) tried
to keep her baby warm with a space heater. Unfortunately, the baby's
blanket caught fire and the baby was hurt. The mother grabbed the baby
and ran to the emergency room, leaving her other children behind.  She
was charged with abuse for the burn to her baby, and neglect for
leaving the other children behind. The father wasn't charged with
anything. In effect, the mother was punished for staying with the
children instead of abandoning them like the father did. (I don't know
if the mother was convicted, but even being charged with abuse is a
form of punishment.) In this particular case, I think no one should
have been charged with neglect, and the heat shouldn't have been
turned off in the first place.  In some other cases, though, I think
the non-custodial parent should bear more responsibility if the
children are neglected. 


Anyway, maybe this gives some idea of what I'd like changed regarding
society's treatment of mothers. I'd like to ask a parallel question,
concerning the goal of giving women access to traditionally male jobs.
I do not feel that this battle has been won, contrary to the
impression I might have given. I actually feel that there is still
substantial sex segregation in the workplace.  However, I feel women's
gains in the workplace have mostly leveled off.  Given that equal
opportunity legislation has been around since the 1960's, and is
enforced reasonably well (AFAIK), I'm not sure what else can be done
about desegregating the workplace. This is one of the reasons why I
think feminists should focus on other areas.  

So, let me ask anyone who wants to give women equal access to
traditionally male jobs, are there additional policies that you feel
would help this goal?  Or, do you think it's more a question of
providing positive role models for girls?  (Or something else?)


Ok, the rest of this isn't related to the questions Cindy just asked,
but I had already written it, so I might as well post it.  

I said: 
>I've certainly gotten the message that other women here believe that
division of labor is the key to problems facing women....<
And said I wanted to talk about: 
> whether division of labor is the cause of problems such as violence
against women, and whether, as a result, feminists should focus on
division of labor as their main issue.

Amy said:
> I haven't heard anyone on here suggesting either of these things.< 
AV said:
> Well, I think you're oversimplifying some other peoples' positions
here. I certainly do not believe division of labor is *the* key. I
think there are many keys, and that is one of them.<

I *thought* some of the other participants here (Naama, maybe?) were
saying that division of labor is the key.  Looks like I misunderstood
at least some people's views; sorry.  It can be really hard to figure
out exactly what's people's positions are, using this medium. 


I said: 
> > What David describes - a profession losing respect because women
joined it, resulting in men abandoning that field - is in fact well
documented. << 

Amy gave a lot of extremely interesting details about how this was
avoided in her field, Unitarian Universalist Ministry.  (Did I get the
name right, Amy?)   AV said this hadn't happened in her field
(editing, I think?) Cindy said it hadn't happened in her field of law,
and questioned whether this had really happened in pharmacy.

This is a complicated issue.  I had previously considered saying more
to try to make my beliefs clearer, but I figured I had gone on long
enough.  I don't think *all* fields will suffer a loss of prestige and
salary if women join.  For example, I think politics will always be
prestigious, in the sense of being high status and relatively well
paid.  It's an intrinsically powerful job, so it will appeal to people
of both genders no matter how many women are in the field.  (At least,
I expect it will work that way.  We'll see how things go in Iceland.)
 Law may be another field that will always attract people of both
genders, because it confers power.  Medicine is another possibility -
it may not confer a lot of *political* power, but doctors have a lot
of power over people's health.  It's possible that ministry fits into
this category, too - ministers have a lot of influence - but it's also
seems possible to me that Amy's church is somewhat unusual in its
commitment to paying both genders equally.  From what I know of the UU
Church (correct me if I'm wrong Amy), its adherents tend to be pretty
liberal (or progressive) politically. 

Actually, I think it's very good for women to try to get into these
sorts of influential jobs - politics, law, ministry, journalism, etc.
  What I feel is less useful is for feminists to put a lot of effort
into getting women into traditionally male-dominated jobs that don't
confer much influence or power, such as truck driver, carpenter,
garbage collector, coal miner, assembly line worker, lumberjack, etc.
 Now, before I get truck drivers (etc.) mad at me, I'm not saying
there's anything wrong with these jobs.  And, I'm sure some of them
would be very satisfying (I think I know people who would *pay* to do
carpentry) and therefore it might be a big loss personally for a woman
who was excluded from these jobs. But, suppose one has the goal, as I
do, of changing the world in ways that help women - for example, by
making rape and domestic violence less acceptable, or getting more
help for single mothers.  If that is the goal, I think a focus on
getting women into jobs such as coal miner, truck driver, etc. is
mostly (or even totally) a waste of effort.

Or, to put it another way, suppose I could wave a magic wand and put
more women into traditionally male jobs.  But, suppose I could do only
*one* of the following two things.  I could give one million women
jobs without political power (such as truck driver, coal miner, etc.)
*or* I could give the US presidency, plus 50 seats in the US Senate
and 200 in the US House of Representatives, to women.  I'd go with the
251 political positions, not the one million non-political jobs, even
though the one million non-political jobs would go much further,
numerically, towards equalizing the division of labor.  This is what I
meant when I said that I think division of labor isn't all that
important.  (Yeah, I know it would be undemocratic to reserve
political positions for women, and I'll vote for a pro-feminist man
over an anti-feminist woman any day.  It's just a hypothetical.) 

Cindy had previously said:
>You know what I think might be going on here? It seems that your
argument is focusing quite a bit on achieving equality and fundamental
fairness *between groups.*< 

Yep, that's exactly what I'm interested in.  I feel that in many
societies, men "gang up" on women, and set up policies that advantage
men as a group, while disadvantaging women as a group. The Taleban
was, of course, an extreme example of this.  Fortunately, nothing that
extreme has happened in the US.  However, it's still the case that
most people making policy in this country are men, and I think a lot
of the policies made give men an advantage over women.  An example I
gave in an earlier post was divorce law, which I feel is (probably
unintentionally) designed to reflect men's interests. That's the sort
of thing I want to change. 

I want to make it clear that I do care about individuals.  For
example, I'm on a pro-Tibetan mailing list, where there are a lot of
claims that China is engaging in "cultural genocide" against Tibetans.
 I actually think China is being completely unsuccessful at
suppressing Tibetan culture, due at least partly to the fact that the
Chinese can't decide whether they want to suppress Tibetan culture, or
celebrate it and encourage it.  However, even if the Chinese were
successfully suppressing Tibetan culture, I would still see that as
much less bad than killing Tibetan people. (Fortunately, there isn't
much of that in the past decade or so, either.) I care about what
happens to the human beings, and not much about what happens to the
culture.  Either way, though, the conflict between Chinese and
Tibetans is fundamentally a group conflict, and can only be understood
(and perhaps fixed) by analyzing it on a group level. It isn't just a
collection of individual conflicts between people who happen to be
Chinese or Tibetan; it's a conflict between groups. 

I'd say much of this conversation applies to women as a group.  The
original question - "Does JKR do a good job of portraying women?" -
focuses on women as a group.  Several people have seem to be saying
that women are less powerful than men are because women have less
money; those claims clearly focus on women as a group. 

I think a lot of our other disagreements here follow from the
difference in individual versus group focus. For example, when I said,
"If we want equal respect for women, we need respect for
childbearing," I meant equal respect for women as a group, not
necessarily the respect Margaret Thatcher or any other particular
woman receives. 

Cindy continued
> If I'm reading your remarks correctly, I think this focus on group
advancement could be where we have a difference of opinion. If all
women are directed to law and all men are directed to medicine, and
the career prospects in these fields are identical, I would see a
*big* problem there, whereas I gather that you would not. <

Well, I would see it as a problem, but it wouldn't be high on the list
of problems that I feel I should be personally working towards
solving.   Mostly, this is because I feel only a small fraction of the
human race gets to pick their careers in the first place, and for many
people, work is not the most important part of their life anyway. So,
I don't think that getting rid of gender barriers in the workplace
would provide meaningful work for all that many people.  

Cindy continued:
> I fail to see why we should ignore the problems of the professional
woman if we are not convinced that addressing her problems will
improve the lot of all women as a group.<

It's fine it someone wants to focus on this problem; it's just not
what I want to do.  There are lots of serious problems that I'm not
working on. I'm not doing anything to find a cure for AIDS, even
though I realize that AIDS is an extremely serious problem. 

But more generally, focusing on improving the lot of women as a group
is what I want *feminists* to do.  If a problem doesn't specifically
affect women as a group, then what makes it a feminist issue?  

When I was in grad school, I spent a fair amount of time on feminist
issues. (Gee, what a surprise!) I had a friend, Greg, who was very
concerned about nuclear war and wanted me to put my time into nuclear
disarmament instead.  He'd argue that nuclear disarmament *was* a
feminist issue, because if there were a nuclear war, a lot of women
would be killed.  I was not in the slightest convinced by this
argument.  Besides the fact that I thought his approach to avoiding
nuclear war was extremely na?ve, there was a more general issue --
he
seemed to think problems that specifically affected women shouldn't be
addressed until *all* problems that affect humanity in general were
fixed.  With this approach, I don't see how anyone would ever get
around to addressing women's issues. 

Cindy said:
>just speaking for myself, I would be *much* more interested in
policies and programs that made being a stay-at-home mom *easier* than
those that tried to make others respect that choice.<

Oh, me, too, absolutely.  I?m interested in what policies you and
others here think would be helpful

Cindy continued:
>Stay-at-home moms have no income, so I was refused a [disability
insurance] policy outright. This is the sort of pointless restriction
that discourages people from staying home with their kids.<

I think the problem here is that insurers find it relatively easy to
tell if someone has stopped working at paid employment, but find it
difficult or impossible to tell if a homemaker has stopped cooking,
cleaning, and caring for children. In other words, I suspect insurers
don?t want to cover any non-paid work because they have no way to
guard against fraud. Also, insurers are very wary of any health or
disability policy that is underwritten on an individual, rather than
an employee group, basis. They are concerned that people seeking these
policies may already be ill. Denial of insurance is a big problem for
many groups of people. I tend to see the solution here as extending
Social Security benefits to disabled full-time caretakers.


On the topic of what term to use for mistreatment of women, I said I'd
like to use the term "sexism" for that, and asked:
>> If there is no term that specifically refers to mistreatment of
women, then won't that problem become invisible? <<

and Jennifer Boggess Ramon replied::
>No. It's certainly not invisible to women, and never has been. The
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is not that strong! But it's moot, as there is
a word with that specific meaning; as Athena has already pointed out,
it's "misogyny".<

I don't think misogyny is the term I want. Misogyny is defined as the
hatred of women, not just as any situation that leads to women being
disadvantaged as a group.  At the very least, misogyny refers to
deliberate mistreatment of women. I want a word that refers to
anything that has the effect of making women as a group worse off than
men, whether it's deliberate or not.  The term "misogyny" also assumes
a certain cause (hostility on the part of men), when I want a word
that makes no assumptions as to cause.

As for the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis - for those who don't know, this is
the theory that people have a hard time thinking about something
unless they have a word for it.  My claim was that if there is no word
for mistreatment (or oppression or whatever) of women as a group, then
women (and men) will tend not to recognize situations where women as a
group are mistreated. Jennifer is (if I understand her right) saying
that women *will* notice mistreatment of women as a group, even if
there is no word for it.  This is an empirical question - that is, it
should be possible to answer it via research.  I think there is
specific research on this issue, but I don't remember it offhand.  I
can say that in general, most women don't have a strong identification
with women as a group - that is, they think of themselves primarily as
Republicans or Americans or Baptists, rather than primarily as women.
 Men are even less likely to identify with men a group.  This would
suggest that mistreatment due to gender is not that easily noticed.

Prolix!Judy 




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul 22 09:12:24 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:12:24 -0000
Subject: Sexism -- is division of labor the key?
In-Reply-To: <ahch6s+ampg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahgi9o+prra@eGroups.com>

Cindy wrote:

>> You know what I think might be going on here?  It seems that your 
> argument is focusing quite a bit on achieving equality and 
> fundamental fairness *between groups.*  In other words, it sounds 
> like you're saying that policies should be evaluated based on how 
> they positively or negatively impact women *as a group* instead of 
> women *as individuals.*  Or in the case of race, how policies 
affect 
> a minority group *as a group* instead of minorities as individuals.
> 
> If I'm reading your remarks correctly, I think this focus on group 
> advancement could be where we have a difference of opinion. 

I may be a bit behind here, but I'd like to briefly comment.

There is another important difference between Judy and Cindy, IMO, 
which is that Judy is a pessimist and Cindy an optimist, based I 
suspect on their respective experiences.

The danger for the individualist of ignoring the group aspect is that 
choice may be more theoretical than real:  If opening up opportunity 
for women in an area results in a decline in pay and conditions for 
that area, freedom of choice for women who need decent pay to survive 
has *not* been achieved.

The danger for the pessimist is that if an advance only achieves a 
small proportion of the result it was intended to, they may dismiss 
the advance as not worth having and thus lose the even the partial 
benefit.  This is crucial if partial results are springboards to 
further advances, less so if they are being presented as final.

The pessimist in me believes that it is one of the fundamental 
mechanisms of human behaviour that those who are in a position to do 
so, whatever their sex, race or whatever, will seek ways to identify, 
contain and exploit an underclass of cheap, or, better still, free 
labour to 1) maintain them in the style they would like and 2) ensure 
their self-esteem by having somebody to look down on as inferior.

Part 2) is important because it means that mere technological 
developments in labour saving machinery are not enough to solve the 
problem.

While gender, race and other solidarities are often very useful 
vehicles for this purpose, they are not absolutely necessary, so if 
members of oppressed groups have to be co-opted to maintain the 
overall system of helotry, they will be.

David, goodness me, I sound almost *Marxist*




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul 22 10:19:07 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:19:07 -0000
Subject: Character Identification (was Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?)
In-Reply-To: <ahetk2+liog@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahgm6r+ojoq@eGroups.com>

Pippin wrote:

> If a girl, or a woman, can't identify 
> with Hermione, she isn't likely to enjoy the series in the first 
> place, and she'll find something else to read.

It is rare indeed for me to disagree with anything Pippin says, but 
is this really true?  Perhaps we should have a poll (men would have 
to agree not to participate for it to be accurate).

My own experience is that I identify with the POV character first and 
foremost in any book.  It doesn't matter if they are Bertie Wooster, 
or Michael Innes' contemptible Routh (Operation Pax), or Elizabeth 
Bennett.

I would expect girls to identify with Harry.   Some might go on to 
identify with Hermione or Lupin or whoever, and gender might then 
play a part.  Do people identify with one character, or many?  Do 
they identify only partially: 'I share Ron's dislike of work but not 
his knee-jerk reactions'.

The reasons for identification always interest me.  If Book 5 
introduces an American character, will American listies desert their 
previous indentificatees (is there such a word?) in droves, or just 
add the person to their list, or do nothing?  Would it make any 
difference if that person were female, a child, or, say, a Death 
Eater?  In short, what aspect of similarity is it that causes us to 
latch on to a character and identify?

David




From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 22 11:41:14 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 11:41:14 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <3D3B5A87.00000B.44649@monica>
Message-ID: <ahgr0q+gurs@eGroups.com>

Actually, Captain America's the bigger boy scout.  For some future 
movies, here's what I would suggest:

- Colossus: Roland Kickanger (I hope I spelled that right)
- Cable: Kurt Russell
- Forge: Benjamin Bratt
- Archangel: Chris Masterson or Julian Sands
- Beast: Kelsey Grammer (just 'cause of the voice)
- Bishop: Booker T

Even though I'm pretty much anti-Marvel (wouldn't read 'em even if 
tattooed on Leila Arcieri's body), these suggestions would work.  
I'll just be happy as long as they don't do a Wonder Twins movie.  
Snoogans!

Jack




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul 22 12:48:31 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 12:48:31 -0000
Subject: Graphic novel characters (was Music preferences)
In-Reply-To: <ahf7ir+1g99@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahguuv+qbiq@eGroups.com>

Jack wrote:

> Well, well, well.  Once again, we've gotten completely off-topic.

Well, that is what this list is for, after all.  As long as you don't 
discuss an actual *topic*, it's OK what you say.
  
> Actually, if you think about it, several characters could be the 
> equivalent of comic characters.  Some examples:
> 
> Harry: Could be like Tempest.  Black hair, just beginning to learn 
> the full extent of his abilities, the scar.

I think we have discussed this here before, but IMO Spiderman is 
currently capitalising on his Potteresque characteristics: bullied, 
overlooked, but with special powers; powers which bring 
responsibility and pain as well as the obvious benefits.  Not to 
mention the glasses which are every superhero's birthright.

Of course Spidey had all this and was popular because of it long 
before that train ride to Manchester - but he has had a makeover with 
floppier hair relatively recently.

Another analogue for Harry would be Rogue, what with his parseltongue 
and all.

Wizards generally are the Potterverse's X-men, down to the academy 
and the persecution, though Dumbledore's hair loss is off-schedule.

David, who wouldn't have heard of Stan Lee if not for his nine-year 
old son, or Harry Potter if not for his 13 year old one, or the post-
Webern school if not for HPFGU.




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 22 12:59:07 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 12:59:07 -0000
Subject: Character Identification (was Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?)
In-Reply-To: <ahgm6r+ojoq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahgvir+rs60@eGroups.com>

Pippin wrote:

> > If a girl, or a woman, can't identify 
> > with Hermione, she isn't likely to enjoy the series in the first 
> > place, and she'll find something else to read.

David:

demurred.  

I question it based on something I noticed when I first 
sought out an adult HP group: girls (as distinct from women) who 
love the books frequently *despise* Hermione. "She's so bossy! 
She's such a know-it-all!" This is purely anecdotal (would love to 
see that poll done) but it did jump out at me as a trend, if not an 
overwhelming one, among girls. I recall wondering whether a 
disproportionate number of adult women HP lovers were, like JKR, a 
bit Hermionelike in their youth and look upon that honest but 
affectionate portrayal with gratitude. However, I can't jump to that 
conclusion without contradicting the one implied by the Hermione-
hating girls: female readers can love the books while disliking 
Hermione. Perhaps adults are just more sophisticated readers, able 
to see beyond "ugh, she's like that know-it-all who sits in the front 
row of my English class." (We on this list never, ever develop 
illogical biases for or against a particular character just because 
his/her portrayal hits close to home. Pardon me, this coughing fit 
is just terrible. I need a glass of water.) I'll come back to this.

David wrote:

> My own experience is that I identify with the POV character first 
and 
> foremost in any book. It doesn't matter if they are Bertie 
Wooster, 
> or Michael Innes' contemptible Routh (Operation Pax), or Elizabeth 
> Bennett.
> 
> I would expect girls to identify with Harry.

That's my experience too. However, it is dogma among publishers and 
other promoters of books to children, in this country anyway, that 
boys will not relate well to a book where the central character is a 
girl--that Elizabeth Bennet will *not* draw them into a story. It 
has come up on this list, when people assume (perhaps correctly) that 
the well-publicized male reading frenzy generated by Harry Potter 
would never have occurred if it were Harriet Potter. (And it isn't 
just boys and books: that spate of Jane Austen movies a few years 
back was a blossoming of "chick flicks," suggesting that men skipped 
them. This could be more about the perception that men don't like 
costume pieces, or talky movies, or dramas that are principally about 
intimate relationships, but I wonder if it's also that the central 
characters are Emma and Elizabeth and Emma again.)

I hope more boys share your approach, David, because it made me sad 
to hear it when a mother of boys I know said she skipped to Farmer 
Boy to draw them into Laura Ingalls Wilder (her books, 
autobiographical but written in 3rd person, are all from Laura's POV 
with the exception of Farmer Boy, which is about her husband's 
childhood and is from his POV). Maybe it worked, in which case all 
is well, but did they really find it that hard to get drawn into 
Little House in the Big Woods (the first in the series)? The thought 
that boys are robbed of this experience by--what? their own 
diminished capacity for empathy? weak imagination by boys? or unfair 
assumptions by the adults around them?--makes me think of what my 
childhood would have been like without Howard Pease (testosterone-
loaded seafaring mysteries), Booth Tarkington's Penrod books, Tom 
Sawyer, the Chronicles of Prydain, The Horse and His Boy . . . 
<shudder>. Part of the joy of reading is being drawn into characters 
who are not like oneself. There has to be something one can relate 
to or they just stay flat on the page; but that familiar 
characteristic draws one into other possibilities because it's mixed 
with unfamiliar ones, e.g. I relate to lots about Harry, which makes 
it possible for me to contemplate what it would be like to be 
orphaned or famous or magical, none of which I am.

> The reasons for identification always interest me. If Book 5 
> introduces an American character

Which heaven forbid. ;-)

> will American listies desert their 
> previous indentificatees (is there such a word?) in droves, or just 
> add the person to their list, or do nothing? 

Maybe again there is some maturity at work here. Fanfiction.net is 
clogged with apparently teen-girl-authored works summarized as "A 
pretty American transfer student comes to Hogwarts . . . " Romantic 
fantasies, no doubt (wonder how many of the P.A.T.S. are kissed by 
Harry by chapter 4), but why do American teenage girls need an 
American teenage girl in the story in order to play out their 
romantic fantasies? Because they're very immersed in their own world 
and still-forming identity. This is understandable in an adolescent, 
but I have hopes that adults outgrow that need to see their precise 
experience mirrored in fiction. Can we have the same hope for pre-
adolescent children--that they are able to relate to characters 
regardless of gender? I think they do it better than adolescents--
for one thing, *really* young children don't have a very firm grasp 
on these categories (e.g., four-year-old girls may think that they 
can grow up to be boys and vice versa. Transgender warriors 
notwithstanding, they haven't sorted it all out yet).

Back to gender balance, though: I still would be appalled if the 
universe of children's fiction were overwhelmingly centered upon male 
characters, or if the girls and women portrayed were overwhelmingly 
portrayed in a straitjacket-tight range of nurse, mother, and 
teacher. Children do need to see people like them doing a variety of 
things, being good and bad, etc. Amanda wrote on the main list that 
she just related to the neat characters in whatever book--this was my 
experience growing up, too, but I don't think it would have been very 
good for either one of us if *all* of the neat characters had been 
boys. Children get the message, except they get it a bit wrong: 
instead of thinking "geez, all these authors seem to think girls are 
boring and incompetent," they think, "geez, girls are so boring and 
incompetent."

Whoopi Goldberg wanted to be on Star Trek (and got her wish, the 
lucky duck) because when she was eight years old she saw Nichelle 
Nichols on the bridge of the Enterprise and went running through the 
house screaming about how there was a black woman on TV who wasn't a 
maid. It changed her life. We all need to be able to relate to 
characters who don't share our gender, race, etc., but let's not 
underestimate the importance to children of seeing people who look 
like them being powerful, competent, and essential.

And back to the Hermione question: I've certainly read and enjoyed 
books that were almost devoid of admirable female characters. Again 
I point toward the bizarrely female-free world of Tolkien, where 
there are a whopping three female characters and one of them exists 
solely as Aragorn's love interest (Arwen doesn't rescue Frodo in the 
book of Fellowship of the Ring, movie fans. Some boring male elf 
named Glorfindel does. Those of us who think Liv Tyler can't act her 
way out of an Aerosmith concert may wish Peter Jackson had stuck with 
that version, but I digress). Girls and women will tolerate, and 
enjoy, books where every female character is a depressing 
stereotype. But I think we love HP partly because Hermione isn't. I 
wonder whether even the 9-year-olds who think she's an insufferable 
swot are picking up on JKR's (and of course Harry's) tremendous 
affection for her--that some still-barely-developed part of them 
perceives that there's more to her than what has met their eye.

Amy Z





From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 22 13:17:02 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 13:17:02 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <ahgvir+rs60@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahh0ke+rtaq@eGroups.com>

I wrote:

>Again 
> I point toward the bizarrely female-free world of Tolkien, where 
> there are a whopping three female characters and one of them exists 
> solely as Aragorn's love interest

Whoops, that's in LOTR/The Hobbit.  The Silmarillion is a different 
matter.  (But I can't get into it except as a soporific--it's been 
helping me get to sleep for months now.)

Carry on,
Amy Z




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Jul 22 17:38:33 2002
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 17:38:33 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <ahh0ke+rtaq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahhfup+3441@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "lupinesque" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:
Amy Z wrote
> 
> Again 
> I point toward the bizarrely female-free world of Tolkien, where 
> there are a whopping three female characters and one of them 
> exists solely as Aragorn's love interest

> And replied to herself:

> Whoops, that's in LOTR/The Hobbit.  The Silmarillion is a different 
> matter.  (But I can't get into it except as a soporific--it's been 
> helping me get to sleep for months now.)
> 

I don't think the lack of female characters ever bothered me in 
either The Hobbit or LOTR - I identified with Bilbo in the Hobbit, 
and Sam Gamgee/Eowyn in LOTR. The two major female characters in LOTR 
especially were SO major, I just didn't notice the relative lack of 
minor females.

LOTR especially, was a 'going off to war' story, and I just happily 
assumed that in the times it was set in, women didn't 'go off to 
war'. Which is why I liked Eowyn so much, I thought Tolkein was 
actually very good at portraying a warrior by nature who'd been born 
a girl. 

And I remember I saw her decision to not be a sheild maiden anymore 
as a maturing - she'd fought in a battle, won a victory that was 
beyond the ability of any man, and could now concentrate on giving 
life, not dealing out death.

Pip




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Mon Jul 22 18:01:42 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 18:01:42 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <ahhfup+3441@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahhha6+pspr@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "lupinesque" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:
> Amy Z wrote
> I don't think the lack of female characters ever bothered me in 
> either The Hobbit or LOTR - I identified with Bilbo in the Hobbit, 
> and Sam Gamgee/Eowyn in LOTR. The two major female characters in 
LOTR 
> especially were SO major, I just didn't notice the relative lack of 
> minor females.
> 
> LOTR especially, was a 'going off to war' story, and I just happily 
> assumed that in the times it was set in, women didn't 'go off to 
> war'. Which is why I liked Eowyn so much, I thought Tolkein was 
> actually very good at portraying a warrior by nature who'd been 
born 
> a girl. 
> 
> And I remember I saw her decision to not be a sheild maiden anymore 
> as a maturing - she'd fought in a battle, won a victory that was 
> beyond the ability of any man, and could now concentrate on giving 
> life, not dealing out death.

I kind of saw it as a bit implausible, myself. But then it's a good 
thing she did, since there weren't any more wars for her to fight!

Aren't we leaving out some admittedly minor female characters who 
nevertheless have memorable moments? Rosie Cotton gets probably the 
funniest line in the whole trilogy (admittedly unintentionally so), 
and the image of crotchety old Lobelia Sackville-Baggins whaling on 
Saruman's henchmen with her umbrella is utterly indelible.

AV
(who, even at 12, didn't give beans about Aragorn and Arwen, 
recognizing instantly that the *real* love story was Frodo and Sam.)




From saitaina at wizzards.net  Mon Jul 22 18:03:35 2002
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 11:03:35 -0700
Subject: college update again
References: <ahhfup+3441@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001d01c231aa$1a53dc20$564e28d1@oemcomputer>

Alright, I was sitting on this for a while because the outcome was so depressing I just haven't had the energy to put it in writing.  

We (my mother and myself) went to the appeals board regarding my teacher flunking me from phlebotomy and low and behold...they took the teachers side before we even stepped in there.  They claimed I had horrid bedside manner and Susan was within her rights to flunk me and several other things I care not to remember.  All of it lies but as they wouldn't listen to a word I said, oh well.  The two most poignant lies though I would like to point out here just to show what I was dealing with.  

They said, and I quote "We had gone back and asked your patients what they thought of you" now while I could accept this if they were just talking about the hospital (although how they knew which patients were mine when we kept no records I would like to know) but the VA had people running in and out constantly as it was an outpatient facility.  If I couldn't find one of my patients five seconds after his test I doubt they could find him two months.  Plus, I'm sorry but even those with the best of memory don't remember who exactly drew their blood two months after the fact and if they do, it was a horrendous experience and they would have complained THEN.  *sigh*

Lie number two came just as we were leaving when my mother informed them that Susan had never graded the finals before passing everyone.  The head of nursing (why she was there I don't know) got all huffy and said that all the finals were graded.  Well as I had the final in my hand, un graded, un marked, I know that was a bold faced lie.  Susan had even told my mother when she went in there to talk with her that none of the finals were graded.

So basically, I'm not allowed to be a phelobotomist.  My mother is currently in talks with disability services in regards to action against the college due to the fact that they failed me because of my social disabilities, something I can't help, something I can't just get over as my teacher so elegantly put it.

Saitaina
****
Do not regret growing older. It is a privilege denied to many. 
Common sense is the most uncommon thing in the world. 
Eat right, exercise regularly, die anyway. 
It is never tommorrow. 

Okay when the bad guys have more morals then you do...that's a bad sign, isn't it?
-Anita, "A Night to Remember" (Anita fic)

"What if I told you a giant spider was rampaging downtown St. Lois."

"You're either smoking something or you've read too many of Caleb's Harry Potter books, now let me sleep."
-Micah/Anita, "A Night to Remember" (Anita fic)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com  Mon Jul 22 20:25:32 2002
From: speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com (frankielee242)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:25:32 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <ahebvb+hclp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahhpns+enom@eGroups.com>

This is something I think about myself. Hurray, wasting time!!

Jack wrote:
> First of all, my goal is not to try to deliberately say what JKR 
> should write in future books.  My goal is to waste time.
> 
> According to Dumbledore's trading card, he enjoys chamber music.  
> So I got to thinking about other characters and here's what I cameup 
> with (feel free to contradict me if necessary):
> 
> BILL WEASLEY: Based on his roadie-for-AC/DC appearance, I'd figure 
> him to be into Led Zeppelin, the Ramones, Van Halen (not Van Hagaror 
> Van Cherone), etc.

Bang on, I think. The crazy, fun metal. Charlie too-- maybe more Poi
Dog Pondering, the Police and Sugar Cubes for him, though.

 
> FRED AND GEORGE: "Weird Al" Yankovic (since they're a couple of 
> clowns).  And by the way, it's pronounced yank-oh-vik, not vich.  
> (Sorry, it's just almost everybody I talk to pronounce it "vich").

And possibly a good bit of the Dead Milkmen and whatever Bill and
Charlie left lying around. Percy, on the other hand, would probably
listen to Rush or anything that Mrs. Weasley didn't object to. Like
the Eddi Brochel and the New Bohemians genre (spelling... can you tell
I'm not into EB & tNB?)


> GINNY: I hate to say it, but probably groups like N-Stync or 
> Britney Spears.  Sorry, but she almost fits the stereotype.

Ouch. Then again, I'd have to agree.

RON: Would have grown up with his brothers' music and have branched
out into grunge. He is unsatisfied with being the last Weasely boy,
after all. Also, keep in mind the books are more or less set in the
early/mid nineties.

HARRY: Stuck listening to the top 40 garbage Dudley and gang probably
enjoy, Ron's musical tastes would be a welcome change.


> HAGRID: Being a bit of a woodsman, he'd probably enjoy Creedence 
> Clearwater Revival.

What about Van Morrison, the Chieftains and other folk? I can see him
sitting in with the band down at the Three Broomsticks-- playing
pipes, drum, whatever. Same goes for Professor Sprout.


> HERMIONE: She'd probably enjoy classical music, such as Gershwin or 
> Mozart.

I don't really see Hermione as being interested in youth pop culture
either. Since both of her parents are dentists, she'd think of music
as a background noise. I bet she'd be into J.S. Bach as she would have
undoubtedly read somewhere that it was good "brain" music. Maybe she'd
be into Cole Porter and Ella Fitzgerald, too.

MINERVA: Definitely into J.S. Bach. and other baroque composers.
Possibly a closet swing or big-band fan... =)

SIBYL: Ambient crap like Deep Breakfast. Or maybe eastern music, which
would actually be pretty cool of her.


Last, but oh-so-far from least--

> SNAPE: With his black robes and long hair, Severus Snape could 
> probably enjoy various heavy metal groups like Slayer.

I'm going to have to disagree a little. Maybe he took the Black
Sabbath to Slayer route, but I think he would have started out with
mid-seventies punk (thinking of "God Save the Queen" by the Sex
Pistols), then moved into goth (Skinny Puppy, Coil and Nine Inch
Nails) in the eighties and then into the most twisted, aggressive, and
dissonant music on the market in the nineties (thinking of Godflesh). 


Frankie 
(who wouldn't say no to grinding on that boy at a warehouse party. =P)




From lilac_bearry at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 22 20:52:53 2002
From: lilac_bearry at yahoo.com (Lilac)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 13:52:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Draco and Hermione?(From HPFGU)
Message-ID: <20020722205253.54261.qmail@web40301.mail.yahoo.com>

I have to respond to this in OT  I said in my post on the main hpfgu list:

"Whenever I read something about a H/D ship, I get the awful picture of 
that really evil Nazi guy from Schindler's List, who is attracted to 
his Jewish maid.  Not your most healthy relationship, but I think a very 
true parallel to a possible H/D ship.  IMO, Draco can like Hermione all 
he wants, he would just have to make some major 180 degree changes for 
her to ever consider that she might possibly like him.  Also imo, Draco 
has some emotional baggage that would rival Snape's anyday.  Imagine 
the kind of home-life Draco must have. <shudders at the thought>"

Jenny replied:

"A couple of quick comments here.  First of all, I am quite confused by 
what you wrote.  Are you implying that Hermione is in any way a 
subordinate of Draco's?  Even though Draco may at times (and I don't 
think he feels this way all the time) feel he is superior to a 
muggle-born such as Hermione, there is no evidence anywhere in any of 
the books that Draco sees Hermione as someone who serves him or should 
serve him."  

Me:

No, I was not implying that she is inferior and should serve Draco like a maid, but I can understand why you inferred that.  The parallel my mind came up with was in the movie version (haven't read the book yet, obviously), Ralph Fiennes' character couldn't afford to have a "relationship" with a Jew (parallel to a Mudblood), so he berated and beat her so she wouldn't even be a temptation, like Kathy said of Draco:

"And remembering back to my school days - the boys 
were always attacking girls they liked..so Hermione just may be 
someone that Draco admires, only being of such low birth (according 
to his own heritage)he cannot afford to like her...so he calls her 
names so she won't even be a temptation."


Jenny:

"Your comments also made it seem like Draco has a 
sadomasochistic (did I spell that correctly even partially?) 
attraction to Hermione.  I see nothing even hinted at in his 
relationship with his parents to show me that physical discipline is a 
part of his life... or his parents' sexual lives, which might account 
for a strange attraction like the one you set up."

Me:

I wasn't very clear on that point, so it's no wonder that you thought this. I don't think he's witnessed any s&m from his parents sexual lives.  But I do think Draco's family is very dysfuntional (show me a family who *doesn't* have some level of dysfuntion) in the way Draco acts towards others.  I think that Draco is probably verbally abused, being raised by an evil man who, like his idol Lord Voldemort, uses put-downs and threats to force his underlings and Draco to do his bidding.  IMO, Draco hasn't fallen far from the tree, and this verbal assault is his "modus operandi" (sp?) just like dear old dad's.  I've heard a saying once:  "See how a man treats his inferiors and that will show you his true character".  No, Hermione is definitely *not* an inferior of  Draco's, but he obviously percieves that she is because of all his cutting remarks towards her.

Jenny:

"Second, the scene in the film version of Schindler's List where Ralph 
Fiennes seems to be attracted to his maid is a fictionalized account 
of what really happened.  In reality, he beat her all the time and 
starved her as well.  He never looked at her sexually.  I am happy to 
explain more about this offlist or on OTC if anyone is interested."

Me:

I am definitely interested in knowing more facts than the fictionalized accounts from the movie, which I only watched once, so maybe I'm not even remembering it correctly.  Truth be told, I couldn't even watch Schindler's List until about 2 years ago.  I knew it would be heart wrenchingly graphic, and I had to be in the mood to cry a lot.   And boy, did I cry...that was one good bawling session.  And a very long one at that.  Even when watching it, I did so with one eye shut  (I used to be able to watch all kinds of violence, but now that I'm older, I don't have the stomach for it anymore.  I probably only saw about 20 minutes of "Saving Private Ryan", as I blocked my eyes for most of it). 

Like I said, I've only seen Sch. List that one time and I don't know if I could have even read the book.  That might take another few years before I'm ready for that. So, maybe you can inform me of what really happened, keeping in mind that I get queasy with graphic violence   


Jenny:
"I don't know if my response makes much sense here; I am just baffled 
by your comments and wanted to address them."


Me:

Thank-you for bringing your comments to my attention.  It gave me a chance to (hopefully) clarify some things.  In summary, I believe that Draco and the evil Nazi from the movie had to separate themselves from the Mudblood/Jew, using what came naturally to them:  Draco- verbal abuse.  Nazi- verbal and physical abuse.  I believe that Draco is the way he is because he has a father who is verbally abusive.

Here's a question for you, Jenny.  Was that Nazi abused as a child?  Or is his violent streak more from his association with the Nazi regime?

Lilac =)

(who loves and admires Hermione very much)



 

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

"Tut, tut --- hardly any of you remembered that my favorite color is *lilac*. I say so in Year with the Yeti." 

--Gilderoy Lockhart, COS



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better


 

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

"Tut, tut --- hardly any of you remembered that my favorite color is *lilac*. I say so in Year with the Yeti." 

--Gilderoy Lockhart, COS



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From temporary_blue at yahoo.ca  Mon Jul 22 22:09:14 2002
From: temporary_blue at yahoo.ca (temporary_blue at yahoo.ca)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 18:09:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: JKR and "Open Book"
Message-ID: <20020722220914.25978.qmail@web14305.mail.yahoo.com>

For the Canadians out there:

"The dozen books featured on Open Book are a jumble of
genres and styles--she'll [Mary Walsh] feature Joan
Didion one week, V.S. Naipaul another, and J.K.
Rowling after that."

Sundays, 11-11:30 PM on CBC.

Ann

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From foxmoth at qnet.com  Tue Jul 23 00:44:44 2002
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 00:44:44 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahgbs0+mvlr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahi8ts+7tq5@eGroups.com>

Judy said:
>>On the topic of what term to use for mistreatment of women, I 
said I'dlike to use the term "sexism" for that, and asked:
>> If there is no term that specifically refers to mistreatment of
women, then won't that problem become invisible? <<

How about "anti-feminism"?  Judy's position, if I understand it,  is 
that JKR's writing might be anti-feminist, ie it works to the 
detriment of  women as a group,  because we don't see any 
witches kicking Dark Side butt. 

Judy feels, if I understand her, that this might lead girls to think 
that it's not their part in life to challenge evil, and this in turn
will make them accepting of  mistreatment and discrimination. 

It's interesting that this does not happen in the Potterverse itself. 
There doesn't seem to be any  discrimination against witches 
with the  exception of the Slytherin Quidditch team, but then 
again, discrimination is the Slytherin way. Witches have been 
Ministers of Magic and Hogwarts Headmistresses, and probably 
will be again.  No one seems to think they are magically weaker 
than wizards, or inferior in any way,  despite the fact that they 
seem to be disadvantaged in magical combat. They do find ways 
to change the world without fighting, such as founding schools.

It would be fun if JKR gave us a warrior princess. 
But even witches can't both die to protect their children and live to 
nurture them.  As  the ultimate power over evil is depicted as the 
sacrifice of one's own life, it is a power denied to those who 
choose to be nurturers, or follow the instincts of nurturers. Is it 
anti-feminist to point that out?

The problem is not in the Potterverse but in ourselves, if we  
think that the nurturers are less worthy than the warriors. It's a 
difficult question, for what have we to offer those who die in our 
defense, except honor?

Pippin





From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Jul 23 02:33:08 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 03:33:08 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
References: <ahi8ts+7tq5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3CC064.000001.75721@monica>

OK this might actually not be an OT message - but i trust you guys to drag
it waaay OT again almost immediately so I'll continue posting here :)

Several people have mentioned that the Slytherins dicriminate against women
and that the Slytherin Quidditch team is sexist - is there any reall
evidence for this in the books because I don't actually remember any offhand
 Could it just be that the seven best Quidditch players in Slytherin house
happen to be male?

K

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From boggles at earthlink.net  Tue Jul 23 03:48:51 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:48:51 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Character Identification (was Does JKR's
 portrayal of woment combat sexism?)
In-Reply-To: <ahgm6r+ojoq@eGroups.com>
References: <ahgm6r+ojoq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010400b9627f56b120@[66.32.49.101]>

At 10:19 AM +0000 7/22/02, davewitley wrote:
>Pippin wrote:
>
>>  If a girl, or a woman, can't identify
>>  with Hermione, she isn't likely to enjoy the series in the first
>>  place, and she'll find something else to read.
>
>It is rare indeed for me to disagree with anything Pippin says, but
>is this really true?  Perhaps we should have a poll (men would have
>to agree not to participate for it to be accurate).

Speaking out of my personal experience and two child development 
courses, girls who enjoy reading (as opposed to casual readers, who 
*might* be turned off by not having someone "just like them" in the 
story) are perfectly capable of identifying with male heroes.  Boys 
have a much harder time identifying with a female hera (sic; yes, I 
know the etymology is wrong, but I dislike "heroine").  They 
generally can't manage it until their late teens, although there are 
exceptions.

Back when we used to play "Star Wars" as kids, lots of girls wanted 
to be Princess Leia.  But lots of girls wanted to be Luke Skywalker, 
too.  A few of us wanted to be Chewie or R2-D2.  Almost none of us 
wanted to be Han, or Obi-Wan.  Most boys wanted to be Luke or Han; I 
don't remember many takers for Obi-Wan for them, either.  Nobody 
wanted to be Mon Mothma, sadly enough . . .
-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From judyshapiro at earthlink.net  Tue Jul 23 07:15:24 2002
From: judyshapiro at earthlink.net (judyserenity)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 07:15:24 -0000
Subject: Does JKR's portrayal of woment combat sexism?
In-Reply-To: <ahi8ts+7tq5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahivqc+aktj@eGroups.com>

Pippin said:
> Judy's position, if I understand it, is 
> that JKR's writing might be anti-feminist, ie it works to the 
> detriment of  women as a group,  because we don't see any 
> witches kicking Dark Side butt. 

No, no, we have a misunderstanding here.  I don't see the Harry Potter
books as sexist, or anti-feminist, or whatever we're calling it.

My feeling is: 

1) The Harry Potter series would have been a great opportunity to
combat sexism (of either the "mistreatment of women" or the "unequal
division of labor" type), given that the story is so involving, has so
many fans, etc.  

2) It appears, possible, or even likely, that JKR was hoping to combat
sexism.  She made half the founders of Hogwarts female, half the
current Heads of Houses female, and half of the rest of the Hogwart's
staff female. (She says in an interview that the staff is exactly
50/50.  See
http://radio.cbc.ca/programs/thismorning/sites/boo
ks/rowling_001023.html
)  She also threw in a few female Ministers of Magic in the past, and
a couple of female QWC players, etc.

Given that JKR could have combated sexism, and perhaps wanted to do
so, I find it unfortunate that the books don't do a better job of
combating sexism. But I don't see them as *causing* sexism, or as
being sexist. I mean, if someone wrote an essay on global warming, and
didn't mention women at all, that wouldn't combat sexism.  But it
wouldn't cause it, either.  I don't subscribe to the idea that "if
you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."  I don't
see the Harry Potter books as part of the problem of sexism at all. I
just don't think they are very effective at being part of the
solution.

****Additional Explanation****

Maybe the confusion is this: I've said a lot (a *whole* lot) on this
topic. Perhaps that makes me appear to have strong feelings about
sexism, or lack thereof, in the Harry Potter books. I actually *don't*
see the portrayal of women as a big issue, either way, for the Harry
Potter books.  Yeah, it would have been nice if the books did all the
things I think are important in combating sexism, but not everything
can combat sexism. It's OK if the books just encourage children to
read, or are just plain fun without also fixing society's problems.  

So, if I don't care all that much whether the Harry Potter books
combat sexism or not, then why I am writing so much on this topic?
Basically, because I have a strong interest in sexism, including the
issue of gender role socialization. So, the general question "What
sort of fictional portrayals of women are effective at combating
sexism?" is *very* interesting to me.  My interest on this topic
concerns combating sexism in general, rather than sexism (or lack of
it) in the JKR books.

**** End Additional Explanation**** 



So, Pippin, I don't think we disagree on the question of "Are JKR's
books sexist?"  I don't see them as sexist (and I take it that you
don't either.) 

We might disagree about what sort of portrayals are best for combating
sexism.  I feel that it isn't enough to just have a passing mention of
a woman in a particular role (say, Minister of Magic.) In order for a
character to have much of an impact on attitudes or behavior, the
reader must think deeply about the character, and preferably identify
with the character. Now, in theory, it is possible to think deeply
about a character even if that character isn't emphasized in the book
(think of the Avery discussion on the main list), but as a practical
matter, most readers focus on the major characters, and don't spend
much time thinking about the minor characters. (Otherwise, they
wouldn't need a book at all; they could make up their own characters.)

So, if JKR wanted to inspire girls to run for political office, she
would need a well-developed female politician as a character, not just
a passing mention of one. If JKR wanted to encourage readers (male or
female) to think more positively of women, the best thing would be to
have lots of well-developed, sympathetic female characters. I feel
that she has only two (Hermione and Molly Weasley), which is far less
than she could have had.
    

Amy said, on the topic of fictional portrayals of women:
> Whoopi Goldberg wanted to be on Star Trek (and got her wish, the
lucky duck) because when she was eight years old she saw Nichelle
Nichols on the bridge of the Enterprise and went running through the
house screaming about how there was a black woman on TV who wasn't a
maid. It changed her life. <

I can definitely see that happening; thanks, Amy for the example. (By
the way, it's interesting that Whoopi became an actress, not an
astronaut. So, she emulated the real-life woman that she was watching,
not the fictional role that the woman was playing.)  

Observant Star Trek fans may point out that Lt. Uhura (Nichols'
character) was a lot less well-developed than, say, Spock.  (Although
she was much better developed than, say Mafalda Hopkirk.)  So, if
Uhura wasn't all that well developed a character, and Nichols wasn't
on the screen all that much, why did she have such an influence on
Whoopi Goldberg?

I think the key thing is that this was the very *first* time Whoopi
had seen a Black woman in such a role. Even if the character is minor,
I think seeing a Black woman (or whomever) in a role for the first
time can have an effect. It expands one's horizons of what is possible
for that group in general, even if it doesn't necessarily change one's
view of oneself. (Presumably, young Whoopi was already looking for
something she could do other than be a maid.) 

So, if the Harry Potter books had been written in, say, 1950, then I
think passing mentions of women as Ministers of Magic might have had
an effect.  But they weren't; they were written in the 1990's. Girls
have already heard mention of women in a wide variety of roles. In
JKR's own country, the most powerful Prime Minister in decades was a
woman, not to mention that the monarch for the past 50 years has been
a woman.  So, what will a passing mention of a female Minister of
Magic do to convince girls that women can be leaders, that the
real-life examples of Margaret Thatcher and the Queen don't do? 
(Yeah, I realize that *American* girls may have never heard of the
Iron Lady, but I'm not sure they think of "Minister" as meaning the
head of a government, either.) 

Of course, one might say that this is a nit-picky point -- JKR's books
would have been useful in combating sexism if they had been written 50
years ago, but don't have much effect now.  And, when it comes to
critiquing the books, this *is* a minor point.  But, for someone like
me who cares a lot about sexism, "What's the best way to combat sexism
right now?" is a major question. 


Pippin said:
> The problem is not in the Potterverse but in ourselves, if we  
> think that the nurturers are less worthy than the warriors.

Well, I'm not sure if this point was supposed to apply to me or not. 
But if it was, I'd like to note that just a few responses up on this
thread, I was being accused of *only* seeing nurturers as worthy. (See
post 11378.)
 

David said that in addition to a difference in group versus individual
focus: 
> There is another important difference between Judy and Cindy, IMO,
which is that Judy is a pessimist and Cindy an optimist<

I think that is probably true.  But, it's not *just* that I fear
salaries will fall once women enter certain fields, leaving the women
no better off financially than before. It's also that I worry that
problems such as violence against women are very prevalent, so I put a
much higher priority on these issues than on, say, having satisfying
work. 

I'm not sure if people here are familiar with Abraham Maslow's
hierarchy of needs. Basically, Maslow said that people must satisfy
basic needs (food, shelter, safety) before they become concerned with
"higher order" needs such as companionship or prestige. Maslow put
having a fulfilling occupation (self-actualization) as the pinnacle of
his pyramid of needs, which means he saw it as the one that got filled
*last*.  One can quibble with the exact order in which he placed the
various needs, but I think his basic principle holds. People who are
worried about filling basic needs such as food or safety won't worry
whether the work they do is satisfying or not. My belief is that a lot
of women *don't* have their basic needs filled, so I worry much more
about violence against women than I do about women having fulfilling
work. Perhaps my view of the number of women still struggling to meet
their basic needs is more pessimistic that Cindy's or Amy's views. 

Ok, one more quick point about Pippin's post:
Piipin suggested the term "anti-feminist" for mistreatment of women. 
The problem with this term is that it already has a specific meaning,
referring to activists (especially female ones) who oppose the
feminist movement. So, if people who want sexism to mean "gender
discrimination in the workplace" won't relinquish their claim on the
term "sexism", I guess I'll have to share it with them.  ;-)

 

Since I've written a ton, I will now give the
***Reader's Digest Condensed Version**** 
of my beliefs.

I don't think the JKR books are sexist.  But I don't think they combat
sexism much, either.

I think JKR did a great job with portraying a mother positively (Molly
Weasley), but her other adult characters lack detail. 

I think having women in positions of power is useful for preventing
mistreatment of women. I don't think having women in male-dominated,
non-political positions such as plumber or truck driver is
particularly helpful for preventing mistreatment of women. This is
partly because I fear salaries in these fields will decline following
the entrance of women into these fields.

Adolescents can be influenced in their career choices by portrayals
that they read, however, the portrayal must be substantial, enough for
the reader to actually care about the character. A passing mention
won't do. Also, I suspect the more realistic the occupation, the more
likely it is to have an influence on actual career choice.  Even an
unrealistic occupation might influence self-image, however. 

I think positive portrayals of women helps prevent mistreatment of
women, both by encouraging people in general to see women as valuable,
and by encouraging women to stand up for themselves. Again, the
portrayal must be substantial, not just a passing mention. For young
girls, positive portrayals of mothers may be particularly important. I
don't think positive portrayals of mothers pressure girls (or women)
to be mothers, nor do I think positive portrayals influence them to
avoid having a career.


Ok, I am now going camping until Sunday. That means I will finally
stop posting on this topic for a while.  Have a nice week, everybody!

-- Judy 




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Tue Jul 23 11:49:58 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 06:49:58 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Character Identification (was Does JKR'sportrayal of woment combat sexism?)
References: <ahgm6r+ojoq@eGroups.com> <p05010400b9627f56b120@[66.32.49.101]>
Message-ID: <001801c2323f$1273c2a0$d2a1cdd1@istu757>


> 
> Back when we used to play "Star Wars" as kids, lots of girls wanted 
> to be Princess Leia.  But lots of girls wanted to be Luke Skywalker, 
> too.  A few of us wanted to be Chewie or R2-D2.  Almost none of us 
> wanted to be Han, or Obi-Wan.  Most boys wanted to be Luke or Han; I 
> don't remember many takers for Obi-Wan for them, either.  Nobody 
> wanted to be Mon Mothma, sadly enough . . .


Hey, watch it now.  I always wanted to be Han Solo! :)

Richelle




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Tue Jul 23 12:54:04 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:54:04 -0000
Subject: Star Wars Characters
In-Reply-To: <p05010400b9627f56b120@[66.32.49.101]>
Message-ID: <ahjjlc+d2tu@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., Jennifer Boggess Ramon <boggles at e...> 

> Back when we used to play "Star Wars" as kids, lots of girls wanted 
> to be Princess Leia.  But lots of girls wanted to be Luke 
Skywalker, 
> too.  A few of us wanted to be Chewie or R2-D2.  Almost none of us 
> wanted to be Han, or Obi-Wan.  Most boys wanted to be Luke or Han; 
I 
> don't remember many takers for Obi-Wan for them, either.  Nobody 
> wanted to be Mon Mothma, sadly enough . . .

*Dons helmet, breathes heavily*  By omitting the only person of note, 
you have seriously underestimated the power of the Force.  Do not 
disappoint me a second time.

Dave Thrard




From bray.262 at osu.edu  Tue Jul 23 09:32:31 2002
From: bray.262 at osu.edu (Rachel Bray)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 09:32:31 +0000 (EST5EDT)
Subject: in defense of Han
Message-ID: <BC1DC842DE@lincoln.treasurer.ohio-state.edu>

> Back when we used to play "Star Wars" as kids, lots of 
girls wanted 
> to be Princess Leia. But lots of girls wanted to be Luke 
Skywalker,> too. A few of us wanted to be Chewie or R2-D2. 
Almost none of us > wanted to be Han, or Obi-Wan. Most boys 
wanted to be Luke or Han; I > don't remember many takers 
for Obi-Wan for them, either. Nobody  wanted to be Mon 
Mothma, sadly enough .



I was always Han because he not only had the Falcon (which 
is now hanging from my bedroom ceiling with an X-Wing), but 
he also had the best lines!  :-)
Besides, in my neighborhood playgroup, there were more 
girls than boys.  The three guys in my gang were Luke, Ben 
and C3PO, alternating parts as Storm Troopers and the 
Emperor.

Strange...now that I think about it....we never had a Darth 
Vader, either.  Odd.



Rachel Bray
The Ohio State University
Fees, Deposits and Disbursements

LORD OF THE SNITCH
Three men form the chaser-squad under the sky 
Seven are the teammates on their brooms of wood
Two are Bludger balls charmed to fly
One is the dork Ref all on his own
On the field of Quidditch where the Quaffles lie.
One Snitch flits over all, one grab will win it
One game may take three months, or may take but a minute
On the field of Quidditch where the Quaffles lie.

http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm



From chetah27 at hotmail.com  Tue Jul 23 15:33:45 2002
From: chetah27 at hotmail.com (aldrea279)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 15:33:45 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <ahh0ke+rtaq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahjt0p+7tou@eGroups.com>

Amy Z:
>Again 
> I point toward the bizarrely female-free world of Tolkien, where 
> there are a whopping three female characters and one of them exists 
> solely as Aragorn's love interest

Well, as AV already pointed out, there weren't *just* three female 
characters total.  There were other minor ones in there as well.  
But, like Pip, the lack of female roles in comparison to the many 
many many male roles didn't bother me that much.  I appreciate the 
females that are there, as they do have rather large positions of 
power.  Galadriel runs things more than Celeborn, and infact is older 
than him, IIRC.  She also came from the Blessed Relm, and made the 
long haul across that icy bridge, just to get to a land where her 
kind would slowly die out.  I like her role just the way it is, and 
I'm rather annoyed with the movies that have her and her grandaughter 
in very blown-up roles(they're *both* in TTT...grr). Arwen didn't do 
quite as much, except giving up immortal life with her kind to die 
with Aragorn...  And then Eowyn and her whole defeat of the Nazgul 
King...    There was enough of the female touch to keep me happy.

Amy Z:
> Whoops, that's in LOTR/The Hobbit. The Silmarillion is a different 
> matter. (But I can't get into it except as a soporific--it's been 
> helping me get to sleep for months now.)

The Silmarilion really has some great stories in it, if only it 
hadn't been written in such a Dictionary-boring style. =P

~Aldrea




From speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com  Tue Jul 23 15:54:43 2002
From: speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com (frankielee242)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 15:54:43 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <ahjt0p+7tou@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahju83+3kem@eGroups.com>


Amy Z wrote:
> > Whoops, that's in LOTR/The Hobbit. The Silmarillion is a different 
> > matter. (But I can't get into it except as a soporific--it's been 
> > helping me get to sleep for months now.)

Then Aldrea wrote:
> The Silmarilion really has some great stories in it, if only it 
> hadn't been written in such a Dictionary-boring style. =P


Technically, the Silmarillion was published posthumously. It really
was JRT's dictionary rather than an actual *story* for mass consumption.

It's helped me get to sleep on occasion, too.


Frankie




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Jul 23 16:00:20 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:00:20 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Tolkien testosterone
References: <ahju83+3kem@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3D7D94.000001.79039@monica>



-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 23 July 2002 16:54:48
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Tolkien testosterone


Amy Z wrote:
> > Whoops, that's in LOTR/The Hobbit. The Silmarillion is a different 
> > matter. (But I can't get into it except as a soporific--it's been 
> > helping me get to sleep for months now.)

Then Aldrea wrote:
> The Silmarilion really has some great stories in it, if only it 
> hadn't been written in such a Dictionary-boring style. =P


Technically, the Silmarillion was published posthumously. It really
was JRT's dictionary rather than an actual *story* for mass consumption.

It's helped me get to sleep on occasion, too.


Frankie


Mmmm, I have an audio book version read by martin Shaw. I have no idea what
it'a about because it's so damn boring, combine that with Maritn's gorgeous
voice and it's a great way to cure insomnia :)

K

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From chetah27 at hotmail.com  Tue Jul 23 19:28:49 2002
From: chetah27 at hotmail.com (aldrea279)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 19:28:49 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <3D3D7D94.000001.79039@monica>
Message-ID: <ahkaph+ei5j@eGroups.com>

Frankie:
> Technically, the Silmarillion was published posthumously. It really 
> was JRT's dictionary rather than an actual *story* for mass        
> consumption.

Well, I know it wasn't published in actual story style.  But I never 
thought it was JRRT's dictionary(The Appendixes in RotK seemed more 
like a dictionary).  I figured(and didn't the foreward in the 
beginning say this?) it was his actual notes on the story of the 
elves that Christopher Tolkien had gathered and put together.  And I 
guess the notes were just the basic story, no real Bang or flavor to 
be found in them- which is why the thing is just so darned boring 
half the time.  But it still has some good stories. =P

~Aldrea, who wishes she had some Martin Shaw tapes like Kathryn to 
cure her insomnia...




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Jul 23 20:23:52 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:23:52 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Tolkien testosterone
References: <ahkaph+ei5j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3DBB58.000001.95315@monica>



-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 23 July 2002 20:28:53
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Tolkien testosterone

~Aldrea, who wishes she had some Martin Shaw tapes like Kathryn to 
cure her insomnia...

Well I ordered mine from Amazon, although it was four years ago.

K

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Tue Jul 23 21:11:39 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:11:39 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <ahkaph+ei5j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahkgqb+2gvf@eGroups.com>

> 
> Well, I know it wasn't published in actual story style.  But I 
never 
> thought it was JRRT's dictionary(The Appendixes in RotK seemed more 
> like a dictionary).  I figured(and didn't the foreward in the 
> beginning say this?) it was his actual notes on the story of the 
> elves that Christopher Tolkien had gathered and put together.  And 
I 
> guess the notes were just the basic story, no real Bang or flavor 
to 
> be found in them- which is why the thing is just so darned boring 
> half the time.  But it still has some good stories. =P
> 
> ~Aldrea, who wishes she had some Martin Shaw tapes like Kathryn to 
> cure her insomnia...

I'm actually really enjoying The Silmarillion for the first time - I 
think I'll finish it this time. I think the first times I tried to 
read it, I hadn't read enough actual epics in my lifetime and was not 
inured to the nodoff factor. Now that I've gotten around to really 
reading more than my teenage self ever dream of Beowulf, the Epic of 
Gilgamesh, the Bible, the Kalevala, etc., the style makes more sense 
to me. I still wish it was broken up with a little more novelistic 
stuff, but it's OK. Morgoth is still sufficiently riveting. :)

Lots of badass women, too, like Haldeth and, yes, Galadriel. And 
Luthien was no cream puff.

AV






From fluxed at earthlink.net  Tue Jul 23 21:20:12 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:20:12 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <ahhpns+enom@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahkhac+oeqn@eGroups.com>

> And possibly a good bit of the Dead Milkmen and whatever Bill and
> Charlie left lying around. Percy, on the other hand, would probably
> listen to Rush or anything that Mrs. Weasley didn't object to. Like
> the Eddi Brochel and the New Bohemians genre (spelling... can you 
tell
> I'm not into EB & tNB?)


Rush. Hee. I can see that. Maybe Dream Theater too.
> 
> > HAGRID: Being a bit of a woodsman, he'd probably enjoy Creedence 
> > Clearwater Revival.
> 
> What about Van Morrison, the Chieftains and other folk? I can see 
him
> sitting in with the band down at the Three Broomsticks-- playing
> pipes, drum, whatever. Same goes for Professor Sprout.

But in Hagrid's case, it would come out sounding more like the 
Pogues. Or *very* drunk early Fairport Convention.
> 
> 
> Last, but oh-so-far from least--
> 
> > SNAPE: With his black robes and long hair, Severus Snape could 
> > probably enjoy various heavy metal groups like Slayer.
> 
> I'm going to have to disagree a little. Maybe he took the Black
> Sabbath to Slayer route, but I think he would have started out with
> mid-seventies punk (thinking of "God Save the Queen" by the Sex
> Pistols), then moved into goth (Skinny Puppy, Coil and Nine Inch
> Nails) in the eighties and then into the most twisted, aggressive, 
and
> dissonant music on the market in the nineties (thinking of 
Godflesh). 


At least you're off the 20th-century Vienna stuff. I'm very fond of 
that, and not at all Snapish, nope, not me.....*uh oh.* I think 
Skinny Puppy and NIne Inch Nails are *far* too teenybopper-goth for 
him, and I can't imagine him keeping up with Muggle trends that much. 
Pistols and Damned, if he was young and in London circa '76-77, 
definitely. Joy Division for sure. I could see Throbbing Gristle, 
early Einsturzende Neubauten, and Swans for sure - that's early/mid-
80s stuff. THough by now at nearly 40, he probably would have gone on 
to really sophisticated, scary stuff. Not so much Schoenberg - he's a 
bit mellow - as Stockhausen and Xenakis.

(sigh....maybe I am.)


Frankie 
> (who wouldn't say no to grinding on that boy at a warehouse party. 
=P)


heeee.
AV




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Tue Jul 23 21:21:38 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:21:38 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <ahkhac+oeqn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahkhd2+pr1m@eGroups.com>

Oh, and Snape's *guilty* pleasures, that he listens to when no one 
can overhear it?

Scandinavian black metal.

And Wagner.




From speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com  Tue Jul 23 21:49:29 2002
From: speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com (frankielee242)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:49:29 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <ahkaph+ei5j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahkj19+ejjs@eGroups.com>


Aldrea wrote:

> Well, I know it wasn't published in actual story style.  But I never 
> thought it was JRRT's dictionary(The Appendixes in RotK seemed more 
> like a dictionary).  I figured(and didn't the foreward in the 
> beginning say this?) it was his actual notes on the story of the 
> elves that Christopher Tolkien had gathered and put together.  And I 
> guess the notes were just the basic story, no real Bang or flavor to 
> be found in them- which is why the thing is just so darned boring 
> half the time.  But it still has some good stories. =P

You're bang-on right. I ment "dictionary" as in JRRT's personal
encyclopedia of reference materials-- background notes, assorted
characters, universe/planet/deity history, etc. Guess I should have
said middle earth bible. It certainly reads like one! =P

Good fun anyway. 


Frankie




From speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com  Tue Jul 23 21:58:14 2002
From: speedygonzo242 at hotmail.com (frankielee242)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:58:14 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <ahkhd2+pr1m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahkjhm+3o0r@eGroups.com>

AV wrote: 
> Oh, and Snape's *guilty* pleasures, that he listens to when no one 
> can overhear it?
> 
> Scandinavian black metal.

LOL!! Definately scandinavian black metal!!


> And Wagner.

Suddenly I have a scene from The Simpsons in my head. Mr. Burns is
seated in a tank about to roll through Homer Simpson's front door. He
pops "Ride of the Valkeries" into the tape deck. Suddenly, it switches
into Abba's "Waterloo"...

I'm still going to stand by the assertion that Snape's into Godflesh.
Bizarre, dark and scary stuff... was originally trying to work out a
logical progression from the Sex Pistols, but why not make a complete
musical tastes leap?


Frankie, still giggling




From fluxed at earthlink.net  Tue Jul 23 22:02:15 2002
From: fluxed at earthlink.net (vulgarweed)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 22:02:15 -0000
Subject: Music preferences in the HP world (if they listened to Muggle music)
In-Reply-To: <ahkjhm+3o0r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahkjp7+n4oc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "frankielee242" <speedygonzo242 at h...> 
wrote:
> AV wrote: 
> > Oh, and Snape's *guilty* pleasures, that he listens to when no 
one 
> > can overhear it?
> > 
> > Scandinavian black metal.
> 
> LOL!! Definately scandinavian black metal!!
> 
> 
> > And Wagner.
> 
> Suddenly I have a scene from The Simpsons in my head. Mr. Burns is
> seated in a tank about to roll through Homer Simpson's front door. 
He
> pops "Ride of the Valkeries" into the tape deck. Suddenly, it 
switches
> into Abba's "Waterloo"...
> 
> I'm still going to stand by the assertion that Snape's into 
Godflesh.
> Bizarre, dark and scary stuff... was originally trying to work out a
> logical progression from the Sex Pistols, but why not make a 
complete
> musical tastes leap?

OK. Godflesh I will definitely give you.

Seems like a logical progression to me, if you run it through the 
Birthday Party and Bauhaus. :)

AV 
*laughing at Simpsons scene, reaching for Burzum CD*




From anise_leinen at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 24 00:31:54 2002
From: anise_leinen at yahoo.com (Catherine Danielson)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:31:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Tolkien sexism
In-Reply-To: <1027429746.509.32147.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020724003154.26172.qmail@web21409.mail.yahoo.com>

Amy Z wrote
> I don't think the lack of female characters ever
bothered me in 
> either The Hobbit or LOTR - I identified with Bilbo
in the Hobbit, 
> and Sam Gamgee/Eowyn in LOTR. The two major female
characters in 
LOTR 
> especially were SO major, I just didn't notice the
relative lack of 
> minor females.
> 
> LOTR especially, was a 'going off to war' story, and
I just happily 
> assumed that in the times it was set in, women
didn't 'go off to 
> war'. Which is why I liked Eowyn so much, I thought
Tolkein was 
> actually very good at portraying a warrior by nature
who'd been 
born 
> a girl. 


I have to admit, that always did bother me. Eowyn
wimped out and started fluttering her eyelashes at
Faramir, undoubtedly leading to scads o'kids and a
rather boring life. Now (hee hee, really opening the
can of worms) I honestly have to say that I believe
that in his private life, Tolkien was a sexist human
being. Yes, the time and place he was immersed in,
blah blah. Nevertheless, it is a fact. Evidence? He
couldn't stand C.S. Lewis's wife Joy because she was
so outspoken, and was furious at Lewis for marrying
her. Never really forgave him, even after she died. > 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com



From boggles at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 24 01:28:32 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:28:32 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Character Identification (was Does
 JKR'sportrayal of woment combat sexism?)
In-Reply-To: <001801c2323f$1273c2a0$d2a1cdd1@istu757>
References: <ahgm6r+ojoq@eGroups.com>
 <p05010400b9627f56b120@[66.32.49.101]>
 <001801c2323f$1273c2a0$d2a1cdd1@istu757>
Message-ID: <p05010400b963b2f86dd3@[66.32.48.186]>

At 6:49 AM -0500 7/23/02, Richelle Votaw wrote:
>  >
>>  Back when we used to play "Star Wars" as kids, lots of girls wanted
>>  to be Princess Leia.  But lots of girls wanted to be Luke Skywalker,
>>  too.  A few of us wanted to be Chewie or R2-D2.  Almost none of us
>>  wanted to be Han, or Obi-Wan.  Most boys wanted to be Luke or Han; I
>>  don't remember many takers for Obi-Wan for them, either.  Nobody
>>  wanted to be Mon Mothma, sadly enough . . .
>
>Hey, watch it now.  I always wanted to be Han Solo! :)

You were probably older than we were at the time.  None of us had 
gotten to a hot-rodding phase yet - I suspect there'd've been more 
girls bidding for the han role if they had.  ;)

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Jul 24 01:33:57 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:33:57 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Character Identification (was DoesJKR'sportrayal of woment combat sexism?)
References: <ahgm6r+ojoq@eGroups.com><p05010400b9627f56b120@[66.32.49.101]><001801c2323f$1273c2a0$d2a1cdd1@istu757> <p05010400b963b2f86dd3@[66.32.48.186]>
Message-ID: <000c01c232b2$2e8c2860$099fcdd1@istu757>

> >
> >Hey, watch it now.  I always wanted to be Han Solo! :)
> 
> You were probably older than we were at the time.  None of us had 
> gotten to a hot-rodding phase yet - I suspect there'd've been more 
> girls bidding for the han role if they had.  ;)
> 
> -- 
>   - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon boggles at earthlink.net

Well, I think I was all of 8, if that's old. :)

Richelle




From boggles at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 24 01:31:14 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:31:14 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Star Wars Characters
In-Reply-To: <ahjjlc+d2tu@eGroups.com>
References: <ahjjlc+d2tu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010401b963b34c8190@[66.32.48.73]>

At 12:54 PM +0000 7/23/02, davewitley wrote:
>
>*Dons helmet, breathes heavily*  By omitting the only person of note,
>you have seriously underestimated the power of the Force.  Do not
>disappoint me a second time.

FWIW, I don't remember any girls wanting to be Vader.  Or anyone on 
the Imperial side.  I think we _were_ all observant enough to notice, 
even back in kindergarten, that there were _no_ women in the Empire 
at all.  Not one.  Against that, the Rebellion looks a lot better . . 
. it only has two of note, but boy, do they kick butt . . .



-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From boggles at earthlink.net  Wed Jul 24 01:38:21 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:38:21 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Character Identification (was
 DoesJKR'sportrayal of woment combat sexism?)
In-Reply-To: <000c01c232b2$2e8c2860$099fcdd1@istu757>
References:  <ahgm6r+ojoq@eGroups.com><p05010400b9627f56b120@[66.32.49.101]><001801c232
 3f$1273c2a0$d2a1cdd1@istu757> <p05010400b963b2f86dd3@[66.32.48.186]>
 <000c01c232b2$2e8c2860$099fcdd1@istu757>
Message-ID: <p05010402b963b526f0eb@[66.32.48.73]>

At 8:33 PM -0500 7/23/02, Richelle Votaw wrote:
>  > >
>>  >Hey, watch it now.  I always wanted to be Han Solo! :)
>>
>>  You were probably older than we were at the time.  None of us had
>>  gotten to a hot-rodding phase yet - I suspect there'd've been more
>>  girls bidding for the han role if they had.  ;)
>>
>>  --
>>    - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon boggles at earthlink.net
>
>Well, I think I was all of 8, if that's old. :)

Given that we were 4 and 5, world of difference at the time.  Very 
few of the girls were into vehicles at that age WICF; we hadn't eve 
gotten into horses yet!  :)

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From jenw74 at hotmail.com  Wed Jul 24 01:35:50 2002
From: jenw74 at hotmail.com (jenw118)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 01:35:50 -0000
Subject: Hi
Message-ID: <ahl09m+6elg@eGroups.com>

Hi everyone. I am of course a newbie over here. My name is Jennifer, 
and I am a 21 year old Potter-a-holic. 

I have enjoyed the books since Thanksgiving of 2001 when I was 
glued 
 to "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone". Just after Christmas, 
I 
 finished the other three books, as my younger sisters got the 
books 
 for Christmas.
 
 I joined because I want to talk to other adult fans about the 
series, 
 maybe make some friends, and have a friendly debate or two.
 
 I am also from Texas, would love to visit UK though.
 
 Jennifer 





From catlady at wicca.net  Wed Jul 24 04:26:50 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 04:26:50 -0000
Subject: college update again
In-Reply-To: <001d01c231aa$1a53dc20$564e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <ahlaaa+j4r8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Saitaina" <saitaina at w...> wrote:
> Alright, I was sitting on this for a while because the outcome was
> so depressing I just haven't had the energy to put it in writing.  

Oh, dear. Poor Saitaina *schnoogles Sait*. Is there somewhere else 
you could go to school to be a phlebotomist?
> 
> So basically, I'm not allowed to be a phelobotomist.  My mother is 
> currently in talks with disability services in regards to action 
> against the college due to the fact that they failed me because of
> my social disabilities, something I can't help, something I can't
> just get over as my teacher so elegantly put it.

Social disabilities?





From saitaina at wizzards.net  Wed Jul 24 06:00:07 2002
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 23:00:07 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: college update again (social disibilities)
References: <ahlaaa+j4r8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005001c232d7$5d9b2000$264e28d1@oemcomputer>

Catlady wrote:

<Oh, dear. Poor Saitaina *schnoogles Sait*. Is there somewhere else 
you could go to school to be a phlebotomist?>

Nope, only school in town.  Decided to go a different way though and do something computer related.

Catlady then wrote:

<Social disabilities?>

I have borderline agoraphobia and an extreme fear of rejection and judgement(caused by years of being isolated from others my age) so talking to stranger is hard.  I can't call up stores and the sort, I can't talk to salesclerks without prepping myself for ten minutes, I have difficulties going to unfamiliar places such as different stores, classes (It took me an hour to get ready for my first phlebotomy class, trying to talk myself out of it), and that sort.  When I do force myself to do things that are hard for me I usually get horribly sick as most people do with phobias and/or have a panic attack.  I'm getting better at it (I actually walked into a store with the purpose of asking a question of the sales staff and did it, not backing out as I usually do) but it's still very hard for me to do things and function as a normal person would in the situation.  When confronted with embarrassment for example I usually flee instead of laughing it off as another would.   

I also still have traces of ADDH (Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity) that I had as a child and will get bouncy and giggly and makes me look all of fourteen.  Medication cannot control this as it's such a small effect, but it still impacts my relations with others.

These disabilities all come into effect with my Phlebotomy work as I'm encountering strangers at every turn and sometimes when I'm close to panicking my ADDH kicks in.  This is also why I get giggly and bouncy in HPfGU Sunday chats, it's the panic of being rejected (even though I know I'm not) kicking in.



Saitaina
****
Do not regret growing older. It is a privilege denied to many. 
Common sense is the most uncommon thing in the world. 
Eat right, exercise regularly, die anyway. 
It is never tommorrow. 

Okay when the bad guys have more morals then you do...that's a bad sign, isn't it?
-Anita, "A Night to Remember" (Anita fic)

"What if I told you a giant spider was rampaging downtown St. Lois."

"You're either smoking something or you've read too many of Caleb's Harry Potter books, now let me sleep."
-Micah/Anita, "A Night to Remember" (Anita fic)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Jul 24 12:24:47 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:24:47 -0000
Subject: Star Wars Characters
In-Reply-To: <p05010401b963b34c8190@[66.32.48.73]>
Message-ID: <ahm6af+qteg@eGroups.com>

Boggles wrote:

> FWIW, I don't remember any girls wanting to be Vader.  Or anyone on 
> the Imperial side.  I think we _were_ all observant enough to 
notice, 
> even back in kindergarten, that there were _no_ women in the Empire 
> at all.  Not one.  Against that, the Rebellion looks a lot 
better . . 
> . it only has two of note, but boy, do they kick butt . . .

...and, suddenly, we have a very interesting answer to my original 
question!

So, you and your (girl) friends were unwilling to identify with Vader 
or other imperials on the grounds that there were no women in the 
Empire - *not* that the character in question is male, *nor* that he 
is evil.

Intriguing

David




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Jul 24 12:54:18 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:54:18 -0000
Subject: Hi
In-Reply-To: <ahl09m+6elg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahm81q+pcgl@eGroups.com>

Jennifer wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am of course a newbie over here. My name is 
Jennifer, 
> and I am a 21 year old Potter-a-holic. 

Welcome, Jennifer!

>  I joined because I want to talk to other adult fans about the 
> series, 
>  maybe make some friends, and have a friendly debate or two.

and, of course, chew the fat about obscure female Tolkien characters, 
who you identify with in Star Wars, and even consider what Snape's 
favourite music is.
>  
>  I am also from Texas, would love to visit UK though.
>  
Any time!

David




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Jul 24 12:54:49 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 12:54:49 -0000
Subject: Hi
In-Reply-To: <ahl09m+6elg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahm82p+3mg6@eGroups.com>

Jennifer wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am of course a newbie over here. My name is 
Jennifer, 
> and I am a 21 year old Potter-a-holic. 

Welcome, Jennifer!

>  I joined because I want to talk to other adult fans about the 
> series, 
>  maybe make some friends, and have a friendly debate or two.

and, of course, chew the fat about obscure female Tolkien characters, 
who you identify with in Star Wars, and even consider what Snape's 
favourite music is.
>  
>  I am also from Texas, would love to visit UK though.
>  
Any time!

David




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Wed Jul 24 15:11:33 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 15:11:33 -0000
Subject: BMI and Celebrity Height and Weight
Message-ID: <ahmg35+83n4@eGroups.com>

I was reading yesterday's Wall Street Journal, and they had an 
article on BMI (Body Mass Index).  This is a formula whereby you 
take weight and height and calculate whether someone is overweight 
or obese.  A BMI over 25 is overweight.  A BMI over 30 is obese.  

But here's the fun part.  The article contained a list of heights 
and weights for some celebrities or sports stars.  The point was to 
show that BMI is bogus, because someone who is in very good shape 
has a lot of muscle and therefore will weigh more.  As a result, BMI 
may label perfectly healthy people as overweight or obese.

Here are the stats.  

I'll do the men first:

Sylvester Stallone -- 5'9", 228, 34 BMI
Arnold Schwarzenegger -- 6'2", 257, 33 BMI 
Sammy Sosa -- 6'0", 220, 30 BMI 
Harrison Ford -- 6'1", 218, 29 BMI 
George Clooney -- 5'11", 211, 29 BMI
Bruce Willis -- 6'0", 211 29 BMI
Mike Piazza -- 6'3", 215, 27 BMI
Brad Pitt -- 6'0", 203, 27 BMI
Michael Jordan -- 6'6", 216, 25 BMI

Now the women:

Rebecca Lobo -- 6'4", 185, 22 BMI
Venus Williams -- 6'1", 169, 22 BMI
Demi Moore -- 5'5", 130, 22 BMI
Lisa Leslie -- 6'5", 170, 20 BMI
Julia Roberts -- 5'9", 121, 18 BMI
Hilary Swank -- 5'7", 118, 18 BMI
Nicole Kidman -- 5'10", 120, 17 BMI
Madonna -- 5'4", 101, 17 BMI
Gwyneth Paltrow -- 5'10", 111, 16 BMI

What observations can we make? 

Women in Hollywood have to be much skinnier than their male 
counterparts.  And the baggage of having a last name causes people 
to be heavier, as Madonna is apparently one of the skinniest people 
in Hollywood.  ;-)

Cindy -- who prepared bacon this morning and cheerfully ate Gwyneth 
Paltrow's serving because she probably wouldn't eat it anyway





From editor at texas.net  Wed Jul 24 15:07:28 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 10:07:28 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Hi
References: <ahl09m+6elg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003001c23323$d4bca540$337763d1@texas.net>


> Hi everyone. I am of course a newbie over here. My name is Jennifer,
> and I am a 21 year old Potter-a-holic.

<chorus> Hi, Jennifer!

> I joined because I want to talk to other adult fans about the
> series,
> maybe make some friends, and have a friendly debate or two.

This would be the place. The adults aren't always mature, and the mature
ones aren't always the oldest, but it does stay down to a dull
roar.....seriously, this list (this set of lists?) has the highest quality
of discussion I've seen, and a good level of self-control. Plus good
moderation.

> I am also from Texas, would love to visit UK though.

And why would anyone from Texas *not* want to visit the UK? Anyone in Texas
who doesn't want to go somewhere else has some issues....  ;P

There's a Texas list, it's not real active, but you might want to get on
just to liven things up or scan the archives to see who's in your area:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Texas/

Welcome!

--Amanda, Primageist, premier Snapologist, and native-and-still-here Texan
herself




From editor at texas.net  Wed Jul 24 15:28:42 2002
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 10:28:42 -0500
Subject: Curse engine
Message-ID: <000701c23326$cc013440$337763d1@texas.net>

Someone on my SCA heralds' list has just thrown us the URL for the most
wonderful toy: a Gaelic curse engine. Ooooh, but I'm having fun with this.
Even if it's not the most accurate translation. You don't want to *know*
what I've cursed my brothers with.....

Enjoy! And

English: May the malevolent hedgehogs gnaw at your underwear.
Irish: Go gcreime na grinneoga cealgrnacha do chuid fo-adaigh.

(I love that they have *hedgehogs*!)

http://hermes.lincolnu.edu/~focal/scripts/mallacht.htm

--Amanda




From jdumas at kingwoodcable.com  Wed Jul 24 15:45:58 2002
From: jdumas at kingwoodcable.com (Katze)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 10:45:58 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] BMI and Celebrity Height and Weight
References: <ahmg35+83n4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3ECBB6.10006@kingwoodcable.com>

cindysphynx wrote:
> I was reading yesterday's Wall Street Journal, and they had an 
> article on BMI (Body Mass Index).  This is a formula whereby you 
> take weight and height and calculate whether someone is overweight 
> or obese.  A BMI over 25 is overweight.  A BMI over 30 is obese.  
> 
> But here's the fun part.  The article contained a list of heights 
> and weights for some celebrities or sports stars.  The point was to 
> show that BMI is bogus, because someone who is in very good shape 
> has a lot of muscle and therefore will weigh more.  As a result, BMI 
> may label perfectly healthy people as overweight or obese.

Humans are always on the hunt of the perfect 'size', aren't they?

> Here are the stats.  
> 
> I'll do the men first:
> 
> Sylvester Stallone -- 5'9", 228, 34 BMI
> Arnold Schwarzenegger -- 6'2", 257, 33 BMI 
> Sammy Sosa -- 6'0", 220, 30 BMI 
> Harrison Ford -- 6'1", 218, 29 BMI 
> George Clooney -- 5'11", 211, 29 BMI
> Bruce Willis -- 6'0", 211 29 BMI
> Mike Piazza -- 6'3", 215, 27 BMI
> Brad Pitt -- 6'0", 203, 27 BMI
> Michael Jordan -- 6'6", 216, 25 BMI

Don't forget that Tom Cruise is also overweight. I'm not sure of his actual BMI, 
but it's over 25 from what I understand.

> 
> Now the women:
> 
> Rebecca Lobo -- 6'4", 185, 22 BMI
> Venus Williams -- 6'1", 169, 22 BMI
> Demi Moore -- 5'5", 130, 22 BMI
> Lisa Leslie -- 6'5", 170, 20 BMI
> Julia Roberts -- 5'9", 121, 18 BMI
> Hilary Swank -- 5'7", 118, 18 BMI
> Nicole Kidman -- 5'10", 120, 17 BMI
> Madonna -- 5'4", 101, 17 BMI
> Gwyneth Paltrow -- 5'10", 111, 16 BMI

We need to mention that the BMI scale also says that a BMI under 20 is also 
unhealtily thin. So 5 of these women are too skinny according to BMI. I'd add 
Courtney Cox and our frined Gwyneth to that under 20 list as well (but this is 
based purely on how they look to me).

> 
> What observations can we make? 
> 
> Women in Hollywood have to be much skinnier than their male 
> counterparts.  And the baggage of having a last name causes people 
> to be heavier, as Madonna is apparently one of the skinniest people 
> in Hollywood.  ;-)

Where would Penelope Clearwater fall on this list? Her names a mouthfull!

> 
> Cindy -- who prepared bacon this morning and cheerfully ate Gwyneth 
> Paltrow's serving because she probably wouldn't eat it anyway

I'll tak her Waffles if there are any!

Katze





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Wed Jul 24 17:05:12 2002
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 17:05:12 -0000
Subject: Tolkien Testosterone was Re: Star Wars Characters
In-Reply-To: <p05010401b963b34c8190@[66.32.48.73]>
Message-ID: <ahmmo8+b77l@eGroups.com>

Boggles wrote:

> FWIW, I don't remember any girls wanting to be Vader.  Or 
anyone on the Imperial side.  I think we _were_ all observant 
enough to notice,  even back in kindergarten, that there were 
_no_ women in the Empire at all.  Not one.  Against that, the 
Rebellion looks a lot better . . . it only has two of note, but boy,
do 
they kick butt . . .<

I am too old to have played Star Wars, but we did play LOTR. 
Nobody wanted to be Shelob, but the lack of female baddies 
inspired us to make up our own. (She owed a lot to Achren of 
Prydain, and Terry and the Pirates' s Dragon Lady).  We enjoyed 
this very much.  

Girls who really love the Potterverse don't seem to have any 
trouble making up additional female characters either, judging 
by the stories on ffnet, or thinking of things for them to do. The 
great thing about fantasy stories is that you don't have to accept 
them as given. Children recognize this, I think. It's only us grown 
ups that obsess over canon.


Pippin




From chetah27 at hotmail.com  Wed Jul 24 18:54:13 2002
From: chetah27 at hotmail.com (aldrea279)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 18:54:13 -0000
Subject: Tolkien testosterone
In-Reply-To: <ahkj19+ejjs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahmt4l+ojff@eGroups.com>

AV: 
>>I'm actually really enjoying The Silmarillion for the first time - 
I 
think I'll finish it this time.  I think the first times I tried to 
read it, I hadn't read enough actual epics in my lifetime and was not 
inured to the nodoff factor. Now that I've gotten around to really 
reading more than my teenage self ever dream of Beowulf, the Epic of 
Gilgamesh, the Bible, the Kalevala, etc., the style makes more sense 
to me.>>

I can never do that, just put down a book once I've actually started 
it.  Maybe that's how I was even able to get through The Silmarillion 
the first time I read it... =P Out of the books you've mentioned, the 
only one I've heard of is Beowolf(well, besides the Bible...), and 
that's only because it was on my reading list for school this year.  
Hmm, I think I need to start reading more books, instead of just re-
reading Harry Potter and LotR over and over again. =P

AV:
>>I still wish it was broken up with a little more novelistic 
stuff, but it's OK. Morgoth is still sufficiently riveting. :)>>

I agree.  It was a good book, and I do wish Tolkien had been able to 
take those stories and write them the way he wanted to, but I enjoyed 
reading it all the same.  It took me ahwile to get through it, 
though.  Sometimes it would hold my attentions rather well, and other 
times...well, the nodoff factor played a big part during those times. 
=P  Another posthumous book of Tolkien's is The Book of Lost Tales, 
which I'm reading right now.  Or trying to, anyways.  It keeps making 
references back to The Silmarillion, which I don't have... plus, 
there's the fact that it's boring like The Silmarillion was boring.  
Which isn't a bad sort of boring, but still...

Frankie:
>>You're bang-on right. I ment "dictionary" as in JRRT's personal
encyclopedia of reference materials-- background notes, assorted
characters, universe/planet/deity history, etc. Guess I should have
said middle earth bible. It certainly reads like one! =P>>

Heh, while I was typing up my reply, I thought of that same thing, 
but ran out of time before I could add it.  That's exactly how I 
thought of The Silmarillion, sort of a bible on the Eldar and 
Etain...and a little bit on the Dwarves, also.  It's a very nifty 
book if you're re-reading LotR.  I checked my copy out from the 
library, and I wished I still had it while re-reading the trilogy.

~Aldrea, who now wants to read The Silmarillion again after talking 
about it...




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Jul 24 20:08:44 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:08:44 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Tolkien testosterone
References: <ahmt4l+ojff@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3F094C.000001.39255@monica>



-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 24 July 2002 19:54:16 
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Tolkien testosterone 

AV: 
>>I'm actually really enjoying The Silmarillion for the first time - 
I 
think I'll finish it this time.  I think the first times I tried to 
read it, I hadn't read enough actual epics in my lifetime and was not 
inured to the nodoff factor. Now that I've gotten around to really 
reading more than my teenage self ever dream of Beowulf, the Epic of 
Gilgamesh, the Bible, the Kalevala, etc., the style makes more sense 
to me.>>

I can never do that, just put down a book once I've actually started 
it.  Maybe that's how I was even able to get through The Silmarillion 
the first time I read it... =P Out of the books you've mentioned, the 
only one I've heard of is Beowolf(well, besides the Bible...), and 
that's only because it was on my reading list for school this year.  
Hmm, I think I need to start reading more books, instead of just re-
reading Harry Potter and LotR over and over again. =P
Beowulf is fantastic, especially the recent translation that won a prize -
by someone who's name I forget, ted Hughes maybe? You should read Gilgamesh,
it's fantastic. 

K

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dawbin99 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 24 19:34:16 2002
From: dawbin99 at yahoo.com (dawbin99)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 19:34:16 -0000
Subject: saying hello
Message-ID: <ahmvfo+fhcq@eGroups.com>

Hi everyone!
After reading messages for a week and enjoying all the chatter, I 
thought I would post just to introduce myself.
My name is Dawn and I am a 26 year old Harry Potter fanatic!  I 
really do think I am driving my folks and friends crazy with 'harry 
this and harry that' Which is why I decided to join!
I have also joined the book and movie discussion groups and must say 
you guys, in the words of Ron, (who I adore) "are bloody brilliant."
Thanks for letting me introduce myself and hope to hear from some of 
you soon!
Dawn
PS, I too would love to come to England!





From jenP_97 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 24 21:41:39 2002
From: jenP_97 at yahoo.com (jenP_97)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:41:39 -0000
Subject: Just a little announcement...
Message-ID: <ahn6uj+ivl0@eGroups.com>

Well, Allison decided she didn't want to wait an extra 5 
days for my c-section, so she made her debut at 10:29 pm 
on July 21st.  We'd just put in her car seat on Saturday, 
and then that morning, I'd finally succeeded in taking off 
my ring (as per my doctor's instructions), and finished a 
blanket I'd been knitting for her.  Then I'd cleaned out 
the bathtub (my neice is coming for a visit - arriving 
today, actually), and while I was in there, I started 
having contractions - and though at first I thought they 
were stoppable, my doctor suggested coming in anyway.  
Turns out I was in labor, so my doctor set me up for a 
c-section at 10 that night - a mere hour after we got to 
the hospital.  It was a big rush, and it seemed even more 
so since we hadn't gotten everything ready yet.  I mean, 
we had another 5 whole days!! ;)  Good thing she came when 
she did - she was 9lbs, 13.5oz (Ginger was 6lbs, 10oz) and 
21.5 inches long.  Another 5 days and she would have been 
a 10 pounder!

So I probably will be pretty busy over the next few weeks - 
just wanted to let you all know that she's here, she's 
safe and healthy, and that I'm recovering fairly well 
considering I had major surgery and can't just sleep it 
off. :)

JenP, now mommy to two...

vitals in a nutshell:

Allison Sadie "P" ;)
9 pounds, 13.5 ounces
21.5 inches long
Born 10:29pm Pacific time,
July 21, 2002




From kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Jul 24 21:48:54 2002
From: kcawte at kcawte.freeserve.co.uk (Kathryn)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 22:48:54 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Just a little announcement...
References: <ahn6uj+ivl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D3F20C6.000001.39255@monica>

Congratulations :)

K

-------Original Message-------

From: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Date: 24 July 2002 22:41:44
To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Just a little announcement...

JenP, now mommy to two...

vitals in a nutshell:

Allison Sadie "P" ;)
9 pounds, 13.5 ounces
21.5 inches long
Born 10:29pm Pacific time,
July 21, 2002

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From heidit at netbox.com  Wed Jul 24 22:27:25 2002
From: heidit at netbox.com (heidit at netbox.com)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 18:27:25 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Just a little announcement...
In-Reply-To: 3c
Message-ID: <16600080.1730070916@imcingular.com>

Jen- congratulations! That's wondeful - best wishes to you and your expanded family!

----Original Message----

From: "jenP_97" <jenP_97 at yahoo.com>
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Just a little announcement...
Real-To:  "jenP_97" <jenP_97 at yahoo.com>

Well, Allison decided she didn't want to wait an extra 5
days for my c-section, so she made her debut at 10:29 pm
on July 21st.  We'd just put in her car seat on Saturday,
and then that morning, I'd finally succeeded in taking off
my ring (as per my doctor's instructions), and finished a
blanket I'd been knitting for her.  Then I'd cleaned out
the bathtub (my neice is coming for a visit - arriving
today, actually), and while I was in there, I started
having contractions - and though at first I thought they
were stoppable, my doctor suggested coming in anyway.
Turns out I was in labor, so my doctor set me up for a
c-section at 10 that night - a mere hour after we got to
the hospital.  It was a big rush, and it seemed even more
so since we hadn't gotten everything ready yet.  I mean,
we had another 5 whole days!! ;)  Good thing she came when
she did - she was 9lbs, 13.5oz (Ginger was 6lbs, 10oz) and
21.5 inches long.  Another 5 days and she would have been
a 10 pounder!

So I probably will be pretty busy over the next few weeks -
just wanted to let you all know that she's here, she's
safe and healthy, and that I'm recovering fairly well
considering I had major surgery and can't just sleep it
off. :)

JenP, now mommy to two...

vitals in a nutshell:

Allison Sadie "P" ;)
9 pounds, 13.5 ounces
21.5 inches long
Born 10:29pm Pacific time,
July 21, 2002



________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

Is your message...
An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
____________________________________________________________

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





From saitaina at wizzards.net  Wed Jul 24 22:25:04 2002
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 15:25:04 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Just a little announcement...
References: <16600080.1730070916@imcingular.com>
Message-ID: <004201c23360$f6515ec0$624e28d1@oemcomputer>

I want a baby!!!!!  Okay, that said, congratulations Jen!  Here's hoping you and the baby get lots of sleep!

Saitaina
****
Do not regret growing older. It is a privilege denied to many. 
Common sense is the most uncommon thing in the world. 
Eat right, exercise regularly, die anyway. 
It is never tommorrow. 

Okay when the bad guys have more morals then you do...that's a bad sign, isn't it?
-Anita, "A Night to Remember" (Anita fic)

"What if I told you a giant spider was rampaging downtown St. Lois."

"You're either smoking something or you've read too many of Caleb's Harry Potter books, now let me sleep."
-Micah/Anita, "A Night to Remember" (Anita fic)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul 25 01:36:35 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 18:36:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Just a little announcement...
In-Reply-To: <ahn6uj+ivl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020725013635.46549.qmail@web13705.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  jenP_97 <jenP_97 at yahoo.com> wrote: 
Well, Allison decided she didn't want to wait an extra 5 
days for my c-section, so she made her debut at 10:29 pm 
on July 21st. 

Jen, this is great news! So, all is going fine and well with your family! Happy and relieved you are doing great MOM! You all will have fun growing togethre and making all those new discoveries with the baby! Love the name Allison! May all of you keep moving in such a happy atmosphere with tons of love! Happy Baby Day!

Schnoogles, Love and Hugs,

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Very Merry Band of Muggles 100%


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Thu Jul 25 02:22:31 2002
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 22:22:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Heather!
Message-ID: <20020725022231.72266.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>

*trundles out very, very box of decorations and
proceeds to pretty up this room a bit with balloons,
birthday banners, streamers....*

Today is Heather's birthday and we're having a party!

Birthday owls can be sent care of this list or
directly to Heather at: hettick.1 at osu.edu

I hope your day was filled with magic and fun.

Happy Birthday, Heather

Sheryll

P.S. Don't put the decorations away when you're done,
there's more partying tomorrow :-)

=====
"We need to be united and strong. We'll have losses and scares, sure. And you'll be there for each other, helping each other through the bad times."
 blpurdom - Harry Potter and the Psychic Serpent, Chapter 26

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From miss_megan at bigpond.com  Thu Jul 25 03:08:31 2002
From: miss_megan at bigpond.com (snuffles_macgoo)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 03:08:31 -0000
Subject: college update again (social disibilities)
In-Reply-To: <005001c232d7$5d9b2000$264e28d1@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <ahnq3f+nuao@eGroups.com>

Saitana wrote> 
> <Social disabilities?>
> 
> I have borderline agoraphobia and an extreme fear of rejection and 
judgement(caused by years of being isolated from others my age) so 
talking to stranger is hard.  I can't call up stores and the sort, I 
can't talk to salesclerks without prepping myself for ten minutes, I 
have difficulties going to unfamiliar places such as different 
stores, classes (It took me an hour to get ready for my first 
phlebotomy class, trying to talk myself out of it), and that sort.  
When I do force myself to do things that are hard for me I usually 
get horribly sick as most people do with phobias and/or have a panic 
attack.  I'm getting better at it (I actually walked into a store 
with the purpose of asking a question of the sales staff and did it, 
not backing out as I usually do) but it's still very hard for me to 
do things and function as a normal person would in the situation.  
When confronted with embarrassment for example I usually flee instead 
of laughing it off as another would.   
> 
<cut>

Hi Everyone, long time, long lurk, I did a social phobia treatment 
course (ha! torture!) of which the worst excersise was standing up on 
public tranport and providing an unasked for tour guide commentary to 
the other, unsuspecting, passengers.

<shudders> good luck with the computer thing. If that doesn't fly for 
you you might like to think about phone complaints work. They(the 
ppl) are at a distance, they need something from you so mostly aren't 
too aweful and every now and again you get to do something nice for 
someone.

storm






From saitaina at wizzards.net  Thu Jul 25 03:08:00 2002
From: saitaina at wizzards.net (Saitaina)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 20:08:00 -0700
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: college update again (social disibilities)
References: <ahnq3f+nuao@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <014601c23388$7cc2b860$6e4e28d1@oemcomputer>

storm wrote:

<<shudders> good luck with the computer thing. If that doesn't fly for 
you you might like to think about phone complaints work. They(the 
ppl) are at a distance, they need something from you so mostly aren't 
too aweful and every now and again you get to do something nice for 
someone.>

I'm actually thinking about that.  Dell Computers is moving their pacific coast 'trouble shooting and orders' offices to an area two blocks from my house.  They pay well and the benifits are good so I'm thinking of getting training in that.  I'm pretty good on the phone when people want something from me, not the other way around so I think I can handle that plus it's fun to solve computer problems.

Saitaina
****
Do not regret growing older. It is a privilege denied to many. 
Common sense is the most uncommon thing in the world. 
Eat right, exercise regularly, die anyway. 
It is never tommorrow. 

Okay when the bad guys have more morals then you do...that's a bad sign, isn't it?
-Anita, "A Night to Remember" (Anita fic)

"What if I told you a giant spider was rampaging downtown St. Lois."

"You're either smoking something or you've read too many of Caleb's Harry Potter books, now let me sleep."
-Micah/Anita, "A Night to Remember" (Anita fic)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul 25 04:15:03 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:15:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday, Heather!
In-Reply-To: <20020725022231.72266.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20020725041503.85947.qmail@web13706.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  Sheryll Townsend <s_ings at yahoo.com> wrote: 
Today is Heather's birthday and we're having a party!
I hope your day was filled with magic and fun.

Happy Birthday, Heather

Sheryll

Hey Heather, HAPPY BIRTHDAY! Along with all the fun stuff from Sheryll to toss around, we want to add our fun filled Balloons and wish for tons of fun stuff too! May you get your Birthday Wishes! Have fun and eat lots of fun cake and other goodies! Happy Birthday!

Wanda the Witch of Revere, Massachusetts and Her Band of Very Merry Muggles 100% 

 

 


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jenw74 at hotmail.com  Thu Jul 25 04:27:26 2002
From: jenw74 at hotmail.com (Jennifer R. Wilson)
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 23:27:26 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday, Heather!
References: <20020725041503.85947.qmail@web13706.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3D3F7E2E.000001.17995@oemcomputer>

Happy Birthday, Heather!

I hope your day is filled with warmth and happiness.

Jennifer

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From crabtree at ktc.com  Thu Jul 25 04:47:07 2002
From: crabtree at ktc.com (professorphlash)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 04:47:07 -0000
Subject: Hi
In-Reply-To: <ahl09m+6elg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahnvsb+r4el@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "jenw118" <jenw74 at h...> wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am of course a newbie over here. My name is Jennifer, 
> and I am a 21 year old Potter-a-holic. 
> 

>  I am also from Texas, would love to visit UK though.
>  
>  Jennifer

I just had to come out of Lurkdom to welcome a fellow Texan to the 
group.  I hope you enjoy the lively discussions as much as I do.  I 
don't post often; usually by the time I think of what I want to say 
someone else has taken the words out of my mouth (or is that off of my 
fingers?).  

Professor Phlash

GO SWEETWATER ALL-STARS!!!
(Just wish I didn't have to fly so far to watch them play Quidditch!)





From boggles at earthlink.net  Thu Jul 25 07:24:02 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 02:24:02 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Star Wars Characters
In-Reply-To: <ahm6af+qteg@eGroups.com>
References: <ahm6af+qteg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010401b96557a6f332@[199.174.15.39]>

At 12:24 PM +0000 7/24/02, davewitley wrote:
>
>So, you and your (girl) friends were unwilling to identify with Vader
>or other imperials on the grounds that there were no women in the
>Empire - *not* that the character in question is male, *nor* that he
>is evil.
>
>Intriguing

That was my rationale, and that of my best friend at the time.  I 
can't speak for anyone else in our group, as I don't remember 
discussing it with them, and I don't even live in the same state 
anymore, so I can't ask!  :)

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From macloudt at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Jul 25 08:56:37 2002
From: macloudt at yahoo.co.uk (macloudt)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 08:56:37 -0000
Subject: Just a little announcement...
In-Reply-To: <ahn6uj+ivl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahoeg5+i768@eGroups.com>

Mom-of-2 Jen wrote:

> Well, Allison decided she didn't want to wait an extra 5 
> days for my c-section, so she made her debut at 10:29 pm 
> on July 21st.

Yay, another cyberniece!  Congratulations!

> Good thing she came when 
> she did - she was 9lbs, 13.5oz (Ginger was 6lbs, 10oz) and 
> 21.5 inches long.  Another 5 days and she would have been 
> a 10 pounder!

My eyes are watering...thank heavens for C-sections, eh?
 
> So I probably will be pretty busy over the next few weeks - 
> just wanted to let you all know that she's here, she's 
> safe and healthy, and that I'm recovering fairly well 
> considering I had major surgery and can't just sleep it 
> off. :)

Try your best to sleep when you can, and congratulations again!

Auntie!Mary Ann :)




From tabouli at unite.com.au  Thu Jul 25 09:39:20 2002
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:39:20 +1000
Subject: Sexism, the media and Robert Pirsig
Message-ID: <007f01c233bf$4743f000$e35332d2@price>

Well well well.

Ah, you OT listmembers.  I thought I could just stagger home from the airport, dump my suitcases by the coffee table and sleep for a few days, but NO!  You're discussing Interesting Things!  I mean, how could even post-voyage fatigue keep me away from raging discussions about sexism and Tolkien's female characters and musical tastes among HP characters?

Sigh.

As for the trip, most interesting, though I just calculated that I caught a total of 18 aeroplanes in the last six weeks.  This does very odd things to one.  Settling into my seat for the Honolulu to Sydney flight, I had the oddest feeling of settling into my own lounge room.  The interior of an aeroplane was almost like a familiar room!  Then there's the mysterious disappearance of the 19th of July.  And the meeting of many, many HPFGU members (evil chuckle with brief glint of sinister gold tooth).  All worthy of further comment, but I can't face that just yet.  Let's look at the Great Sexism Debate instead.

Jenny:
> Many men are raised to believe they are invincible, while many women
are raised to believe that they are worthless without a husband.  My
students truly believe that it's okay for men to be promiscuous but
women who are promiscuous are whores.  Women shouldn't cheat on their
partners, but they should expect and allow their male partners to
cheat on them.  Where is this being learned?  It is being learned at
home, and in the media (which is pretty damned powerful in the US).

Popular women's magazines are the scariest.  Such words of wisdom as they espouse!  (a) Get your face and body looking as close to the media ideal as possible (Get into shape for summer!), and thereby (b) attract men (The secrets of sexy women revealed!), from whence you can (c) pick a "good one" and manipulate him into marrying you (10 ways to get your guy to commit!), then, glory hallelujah, (d) you have achieved success and happiness!

I ranted on the subject of the Meat Market Index of female attractiveness before, long ago, but on my travels a rereading of Robert Pirsig's 'Lila' gave me some fresh musings to add.  Now, the first time I read this book, maybe 6 years ago, it irritated me greatly for various reasons (one of which was that I found it sexist, actually, but that's another story).  On my second reading, I actually concentrated properly when reading the philosophical passages, and found an interesting framework in which to look at my MMI muttering, and, indeed, a lot of the debate on sexism.

Let me attempt a sketchy summary here.  Pirsig proposes four ascending levels of "quality": inorganic, biological, social and intellectual (and also distinguishes static and dynamic quality, but let's not complicate things too much).  Each succeeding level is both dependent on and controls the level below it.

To illustrate, take a human body.  At the inorganic level, lots of chemical reactions are occurring inside it.  However, the biological level of organisation is controlling these reactions, promoting some, preventing others, consuming food and seeking to reproduce, to prevent its cells from returning to an inorganic state (i.e. dying).  If the body were managed by biology alone, people's behaviour would reflect those drives alone.  However, overlaying the biological level is the higher social level, which constrains their expression to fit what is acceptable in the society in which the person lives, to ensure 'social' survival.  If the person were managed by social quality alone, everything a person did would be motivated by a drive to obtain a high position in the society, as measured by the society (e.g. being rich and famous and admired).  However, overlaying the social level is the intellectual level, (which he argued is still in conflict with the social level in human societies today), where ideas like altruism and justice and equality and so on may interfere with people's quest for social status, leading them to donate money to the poor, set up welfare, fight against people being imprisoned because they were thought to threaten the social status quo, etc.etc.

Each succeeding level needs the level below it for its existence, but nonetheless to a large degree the levels are independent and in competition with each other.

(don't know how clearly or accurately I've put that, but anyway)

So.  To look at the relationship issue using this ideology, (specifically the heterosexual woman seeking heterosexual man relationship as portrayed in women's magazines issue), the constrainment within social and biological frames of reference is striking.  Men are, according to Cosmo and co, primarily biological creatures, and therefore intrinsically faithless commitment-phobics who need to be reeled in by tailoring your appearance to appeal to his biological drives and then coerced into a socially defined relationship ideal (monogamous, permanent, publicly proclaimed via marriage), which will give you, the woman, status.  The better you manage to approximate the physical ideal, the better your chances of securing the sort of man who will increase your social position (by being wealthy, having a high status job, being famous, etc.).

Notions like pursuing a job for its intrinsic value rather than its ability to increase your wealth and social standing, or defining attractiveness by a way other than the way society defines it, or selecting a partner because you share compatible ways of looking at the world, etc. are, I'd guess, "intellectual" as defined by Pirsig.  And notable by their rarity in said magazines (except in the "love your body the way it is" article which is inevitably contradicted by everything else in the magazine).  Men are considered to pursue one social pattern, women another.  People are constrained completely by established social patterns.

Interesting way of looking at it, I thought.  Still thinking about how much salt to add, but interesting.  And a philosophy which *does* argue for intellect, and art, and the ability to question as "higher", as raised by Pip:

> Do we see someone with 'intellectual ambitions' (or artistic
ambitions) as superior to someone without? Is there a bias
towards 'education makes you superior'?<

But then, of course, there's the fact that the vast majority of people, however intellectual, *do* want a partner and *do* want an agreeable and reasonably secure position in the society to which they belong (social and biological issues).  It's the ol' Maslow hierarchy of needs (IIRC: Judy?).  When you're starving to death ideological priorities take a back seat.

Ach.  It's all too much for a newly returned salad to think about at the moment.  Any thoughts?

Tabouli.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Thu Jul 25 11:43:40 2002
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 07:43:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Kristin and Meg!
Message-ID: <20020725114340.43015.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>

*wanders in and stares in dismay at the remnants of
yesterday's party*

Come on folks, help me clean up the mess from the
party last night. We have two more birthdays to
celebrate today and we don't want people coming in to
a messy room, do we? 

You, over there. Yes, you. Help me with this cake,
it's heavy. Careful, it won't do to cake splattered on
the floor.

We have two birthdays honourees today, Meg and
Kristin. Birthday owls can be sent care of this list
or directly to the Meg at mdemeran at hotmail.com and
Kristin at alyeskakc at aol.com

May the day be magical for both of you.

Happy Birthday, Kristin!
Happy Birthday, Meg!

Sheryll

=====
"We need to be united and strong. We'll have losses and scares, sure. And you'll be there for each other, helping each other through the bad times."
 blpurdom - Harry Potter and the Psychic Serpent, Chapter 26

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From jenw74 at hotmail.com  Thu Jul 25 17:15:57 2002
From: jenw74 at hotmail.com (Jennifer R. Wilson)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 12:15:57 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Just a little announcement...
References: <ahoeg5+i768@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D40324D.000001.14505@oemcomputer>

Mom-of-2 Jen wrote:

> Well, Allison decided she didn't want to wait an extra 5 
> days for my c-section, so she made her debut at 10:29 pm 
> on July 21st.

Cogratulations on her birth!

> Good thing she came when 
> she did - she was 9lbs, 13.5oz (Ginger was 6lbs, 10oz) and 
> 21.5 inches long.  Another 5 days and she would have been 
> a 10 pounder!

Oh wow, you have a big healthy baby there, wonderful!

> So I probably will be pretty busy over the next few weeks - 
> just wanted to let you all know that she's here, she's 
> safe and healthy, and that I'm recovering fairly well 
> considering I had major surgery and can't just sleep it 
> off. :)

As previously said before, sleep when Allison sleeps (I love the name, by
the way.) And if you and your husband can manage it, take shifts at night,
as for when you get up to care for her.  My sister does this and it helps
them tremendously with her daughter. 

Congrats again,

Jennifer

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul 25 18:17:38 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:17:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday, Kristin and Meg!
In-Reply-To: <20020725114340.43015.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20020725181738.80716.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  Sheryll Townsend <s_ings at yahoo.com> wrote: 
You, over there. Yes, you. Help me with this cake,
it's heavy. Careful, it won't do to cake splattered on
the floor.
May the day be magical for both of you.

Happy Birthday, Kristin!
Happy Birthday, Meg!

Sheryll

=====
All right! More party time! More fun, cake and Birthday wishes! May you both have a great time at your Birthday parties! Fun, fun, and more fun!

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO KRISTIN!

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO MEG!

Enjoy your special day you Birthday buddies!

Schnoogles,

Wanda the Witch of Revere,Massachusetts and Her Very Merry Band of Muggles 100%


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From rhiannon333 at hotmail.com  Thu Jul 25 21:42:18 2002
From: rhiannon333 at hotmail.com (rhiannon333au)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 21:42:18 -0000
Subject: Just a little announcement...
In-Reply-To: <ahn6uj+ivl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahprbq+p2e4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "jenP_97" <jenP_97 at y...> wrote:
> Well, Allison decided she didn't want to wait an extra 5 
> days for my c-section, so she made her debut at 10:29 pm 
> on July 21st.  

Congratulations to all of you!  I hope you can take it a bit easy for 
a while to recover from the surgery, I know it will not be easy. All 
the best and hope Allison decides to be co-operative about 
feeding and sleeping.

Megan




From boggles at earthlink.net  Thu Jul 25 21:57:31 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 16:57:31 -0500
Subject: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <ahdci8+59un@eGroups.com>
References: <ahdci8+59un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010400b96621ecbafe@[199.174.15.39]>

Huzzah!  I'm down to six days behind on the main list!  I might even 
be down to the correct day before school starts and I get behind 
again!  ;)

This seems to have popped up a couple of times on the main list, 
especially with respect to Neville:


At 4:16 AM +0000 7/21/02, darrin_burnett wrote:
>
>The tried-and-true way of dealing with a bully is to slap the bully
>back. Perhaps it's not 100 percent effective, but the majority of the
>time, it works.


This is certainly a common theme in fiction (it shows up in lots of 
teensploitation films, for example, especially those starring Michael 
J. Fox), and may be the case for Neville, within the framework of the 
books.  However, the author of this post seems to be advocating it in 
the Real World as well, and as a teacher who has had to deal with the 
question of bullying on both a personal and professional level, I 
feel obligated to (pedantically, I'm afraid) point out that this is 
not at all true in the real world.  At best, it encourages the bully 
in question to pick another victim, but it's often unsuccessful; at 
worst, it marks the current victim for far worse treatment.  There is 
*no* research indicating that it cures the bully - quite often, it 
reinforces their violent worldview.  It's also the first step in the 
classic progression of the victim who becomes a bully himself (or, 
more rarely, herself).

For a fairly comprehensive look at the problem of bullying in the US 
school system, SuEllen and Paula Fried's book _Bullies and Victims_ 
is a solid overview and only slightly out of date.

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Fri Jul 26 00:14:07 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 10:14:07 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Bullying
In-Reply-To: <p05010400b96621ecbafe@[199.174.15.39]>
References: <ahdci8+59un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D4120EF.6063.416F26@localhost>

On 25 Jul 2002 at 16:57, Jennifer Boggess Ramon wrote:

> This is certainly a common theme in fiction (it shows up in lots of 
> teensploitation films, for example, especially those starring Michael 
> J. Fox), and may be the case for Neville, within the framework of the 
> books.  However, the author of this post seems to be advocating it in 
> the Real World as well, and as a teacher who has had to deal with the 
> question of bullying on both a personal and professional level, I 
> feel obligated to (pedantically, I'm afraid) point out that this is 
> not at all true in the real world.  At best, it encourages the bully 
> in question to pick another victim, but it's often unsuccessful; at 
> worst, it marks the current victim for far worse treatment.  There is 
> *no* research indicating that it cures the bully - quite often, it 
> reinforces their violent worldview.  It's also the first step in the 
> classic progression of the victim who becomes a bully himself (or, 
> more rarely, herself).
> 
> For a fairly comprehensive look at the problem of bullying in the US 
> school system, SuEllen and Paula Fried's book _Bullies and Victims_ 
> is a solid overview and only slightly out of date.

Yeah, I saw that as well - and I have to say I largely agree with Jennifer here. I was 
a *serious* victim of bullying at school, and was constantly being told this by various 
people - 'hit them and they'll stop.' Well, I rarely did that - but when I did, it very 
rarely worked. Generally, it just made things far far worse.

I do think it can work in some cases, though - it depends on the particular bully. 
Another piece of erroneous information I kept being given was that 'all bullies are 
cowards'. Well, they're not. Some are - some are anything but. With the cowards, 
it's possible that they will back off if they are hit - there's a reasonable chance in my 
opinion. But that's only one case - one group - and even there, it's not universal.

But for this reason, I think with Neville in HP, it might have some real value. Draco 
is a coward in many ways.

There were only two things that really stopped me being bullied - the bullies actually 
growing out of it (most did, but not all), and... well, the other one isn't at all PC, but 
eventually I wound up at a school where bullies got caned. That worked as well - 
well, it made me feel better (-8

(Seriously, it didn't work in isolation - it wasn't that that school had the cane - it was 
more that it had a whole range of methods of dealing with bullies and it used all of 
them - counseling, mediation, isolation - basically they took it seriously and they 
kept looking for solutions in the hope they'd find one that worked).

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From meboriqua at aol.com  Fri Jul 26 02:32:42 2002
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 02:32:42 -0000
Subject: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <p05010400b96621ecbafe@[199.174.15.39]>
Message-ID: <ahqcca+ms4c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., Jennifer Boggess Ramon <boggles at e...> 
wrote:

> as a teacher who has had to deal with the question of bullying on 
both a personal and professional level, I feel obligated to 
(pedantically, I'm afraid) point out that this is not at all true in 
the real world.  At best, it encourages the bully in question to pick 
another victim, but it's often unsuccessful; at worst, it marks the 
current victim for far worse treatment.>

I have to disagree with you here.  I also am a teacher; I believe we 
actually teach the same kinds of kids.  Most of my students must learn 
to defend themselves or accept being subjected to endless bouts of 
being bullied.  Not long ago, my boyfriend's younger brother was 
having a problem being bullied at his school.  My boyfriend encouraged 
his brother to fight it out.  I am not saying I agree with this, but 
my boyfriend's brother not only beat up the other kid, but they then 
became good friends.  

Bullies get away with bullying kids who they see as weaker.  I have 
yet to see a bully go after someone bigger OR after someone who has 
smacked them back, hard.  I have other stories to share about students 
of mine who defended themselves, but they're all the same: in the end, 
the bully backed off.

--jenny from ravenclaw, too tired to keep writing now 
***************************************************




From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul 26 02:50:46 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 02:50:46 -0000
Subject: HP Characters/Comic-book equivalents
Message-ID: <ahqde6+lmgp@eGroups.com>

Some possibilities:

- Harry: Spider-Man (skinny, glasses, unsure of his abilities).
- Ron: The modern Flash (just 'cause of the red hair).
- Hermione: Beast (intelligent, tendency towards know-it-allism [and 
I know that's not a real word], but without the blue skin and fur).
- Dumbledore: Professor Xavier (self-explanatory).
- Hagrid: Colossus (the gentle giant, even though Colossus is only 
7'5", 500 lbs. armored).
- Flitwick: Puck from Alpha Flight (just 'cause they're both 
Munchkins).

Any others?

Jack

-----------
"You are absolutely, the most pathetic, appalingest excuse for an 
anthromorphic personification on this or any other plane!" - Death, 
to her brother Dream, _Sandman_




From boggles at earthlink.net  Fri Jul 26 03:07:32 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 22:07:32 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <ahqcca+ms4c@eGroups.com>
References: <ahqcca+ms4c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010401b9666b53f9bd@[199.174.14.165]>

At 2:32 AM +0000 7/26/02, jenny_ravenclaw wrote:
>
>I have to disagree with you here.  I also am a teacher; I believe we
>actually teach the same kinds of kids.  Most of my students must learn
>to defend themselves or accept being subjected to endless bouts of
>being bullied.  Not long ago, my boyfriend's younger brother was
>having a problem being bullied at his school.  My boyfriend encouraged
>his brother to fight it out.  I am not saying I agree with this, but
>my boyfriend's brother not only beat up the other kid, but they then
>became good friends.

How odd.  Why would one *want* to be friends with a bully?  Did they 
gang up on other kids together?  :(

>Bullies get away with bullying kids who they see as weaker.  I have
>yet to see a bully go after someone bigger OR after someone who has
>smacked them back, hard.  I have other stories to share about students
>of mine who defended themselves, but they're all the same: in the end,
>the bully backed off.

Perhaps there's a difference between New York and Texas going on 
here, but in almost every case I know of personally, fighting back 
merely caused the bully to escalate their tactics - bringing more 
people next time, going from fists to knives, changing from physical 
to social bullying, and so on.  It will also earn the victim an 
automatic three-day suspension in the Texas school system, which is 
likely to cause problems in its own right.

Solutions I have seen work include peer mediation (early in the 
process), making friends with people who are larger/stronger than the 
bully, moving in groups when the bully is around, and (in the case of 
bullies who have escalated to knives) pressing charges.  I've seen 
fighting back work perhaps one time in three, which I don't consider 
good odds, considering that if it doesn't work things tend to get 
much worse.

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Fri Jul 26 03:50:08 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 13:50:08 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <ahqcca+ms4c@eGroups.com>
References: <p05010400b96621ecbafe@[199.174.15.39]>
Message-ID: <3D415390.15718.B5DCEA@localhost>

On 26 Jul 2002 at 2:32, jenny_ravenclaw wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., Jennifer Boggess Ramon <boggles at e...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > as a teacher who has had to deal with the question of bullying on 
> both a personal and professional level, I feel obligated to 
> (pedantically, I'm afraid) point out that this is not at all true in 
> the real world.  At best, it encourages the bully in question to pick 
> another victim, but it's often unsuccessful; at worst, it marks the 
> current victim for far worse treatment.>
> 
> I have to disagree with you here.  I also am a teacher; I believe we 
> actually teach the same kinds of kids.  Most of my students must learn 
> to defend themselves or accept being subjected to endless bouts of 
> being bullied.  Not long ago, my boyfriend's younger brother was 
> having a problem being bullied at his school.  My boyfriend encouraged 
> his brother to fight it out.  I am not saying I agree with this, but 
> my boyfriend's brother not only beat up the other kid, but they then 
> became good friends.  
> 
> Bullies get away with bullying kids who they see as weaker.  I have 
> yet to see a bully go after someone bigger OR after someone who has 
> smacked them back, hard.  I have other stories to share about students 
> of mine who defended themselves, but they're all the same: in the end, 
> the bully backed off.

The thing is, Jenny, we have a case here where you are reporting what you've seen 
- fair enough. But my experiences, and it seems Jennifer's as well, are quite 
different. I was a victim of serious bullying. I required hospital treatment, 
ambulances had to be called, I have permanent injuries - thankfully not too serious - 
based on attacks at school when I was 12. I had to put up with a lot of it, I had to 
deal with it. And I tried all the methods that supposedly worked. I did fight back - 
and I did so very successfully on occasion. But it rarely had any impact on stopping 
the bullying. Maybe in 1 case out of 10, fighting back stopped the bullying - in the 
vast majority of cases it just made it worse - to the extent on two occasions it placed 
my life in danger.

Now - my case is hardly typical either - at least I hope not. I'm just raising it because 
I think it's important that people realise there isn't any simple solution that always 
works. Too often kids are told there is - maybe because they are told that by people 
who, like you, haven't seen those methods fail. They can fail. They can be 
disastrous.

People need to realise that there are rarely simple universal solutions. Especially 
teachers. I am *not* saying you're not aware of that - that would be reading more 
into your post than is actually there. But, yeesh, no kid should have to go through 
what I went through - problems that were made worse because the advice I was 
given, no matter how well intended was wrong *in my case*.

For reference, I am considered to be a fair authority on bullying in schools. I have 
three articles published on the subject (under an assumed name due to the content 
of one of them), and I serve on state government committees relating to schoolyard 
victimisation. I've seen a lot of bullying, and the responses that work.

Teaching kids self defence is good - it will stop a lot of bullies. But not all. In my 
case, part of the reason it didn't work for me was because people knew I could 
defend myself - so the cowardly bullies deterred by physical means, generally didn't 
try. The ones who went after me were more subtle for the most part. They used 
physical violence on occasion - but used other less obvious methods at other times.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From catlady at wicca.net  Fri Jul 26 05:09:27 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 05:09:27 -0000
Subject: Birthdays / BMI / social disabilities / bullying 
Message-ID: <ahqli7+9v41@eGroups.com>

Birthday Greetings, belatedly, to Allison and Heather. Sorry I'm late!

Happy Allison's birthday, Jen! As she was so determined about when to 
be born, you might want to check her horoscope and that for the day 
you had planned and see what difference it made...

Happy Birthday, Meg Demeranville the soon to be medical student!

Happy Birthday, Kristin with the good taste to appreciate our Remus!

Cindy wrote:

<< BMI is bogus, because someone who is in very good shape has a lot 
of muscle and therefore will weigh more. As a result, BMI may label 
perfectly healthy people as overweight or obese. >>

Yes. More than a decade ago, the airlines were forced to change from 
their rule that stewardesses may not be fat to a rule that flight 
attendents must fit into a specified height/weight table for their 
gender. Less (IIRC) than a decade ago, a male flight attendent who 
was a bodybuilder was surprised to be fired for being overweight. He 
sued and lost.

Saitana wrote:

<< I have borderline agoraphobia and an extreme fear of rejection and 
judgement (caused by years of being isolated from others my age) so 
talking to strangers is hard. I can't call up stores and the sort, 
I can't talk to salesclerks without prepping myself for ten minutes, 
I have difficulties going to unfamiliar places such as different 
stores, classes >>

Me, too! That's why the division of labor in MY household specifies 
that TIM has to make all the phone calls and talk to all the 
strangers and accompany me to new stores. 

I differ in a few details. I don't think I have any ADHD but I do 
have a serious phobia of driving a car, bad enough that I never got a 
driver's license, and I attribute my Social Phobia problems more to 
having associated in youth with others my own age than to having been 
isolated from them.

Quite a few years ago, I saw an ad in the newspaper: do you have 
the following symptoms? If so, you might have Social Phobia! Its 
questions were an exact portrait of me, so I clipped it out and kept 
it in my desk to this day. It's quite yellow now:

"NERVOUS AOUND PEOPLE?
1. Are you afraid of social situations?
2. Are you fearful of being looked at?
3. Are you afraid of making a mistake, looking foolish, or feeling 
embarrassed in front of others?
4. Are you overly concerned with what other people think of you?
5. Do you feel shy or anxious around other people?"

I'd like to excuse myself by believing that I telepathically 
empathically am impacted by their unspoken disapproval of me.

Storm Snuffles Magoo wrote:

<< Hi Everyone, long time, long lurk, I did a social phobia treatment 
course (ha! torture!) of which the worst excersise was standing up on 
public tranport and providing an unasked for tour guide commentary to 
the other, unsuspecting, passengers. >>

How did you survive?  

Tabouli (Hi, Tabouli! Say "hi" to your home from me!) wrote:

<< And a philosophy which *does* argue for intellect, and art, and 
the ability to question as "higher", as raised by Pip: << Do we see 
someone with 'intellectual ambitions' (or artistic ambitions) as 
superior to someone without? Is there a bias towards 'education makes 
you superior'? >>

But intellect and art and the ability to question are not limited to 
the 'intellectual ambitions' and 'artistic ambitions' referred to in 
that question. It's like the rude statements that someone on list 
(Elkins?) was complaining of a while ago: Why do you waste your time 
discussing Harry Potter on an e-mail-list when you could be writing 
a book or earning a graduate degree instead? Why do you waste your 
time painting murals on the walls of all the rooms in your house 
and making home-made birthday cards for your friends when you could 
be selling your paintings in a gallery or at least working for a 
greeting card company? Why do you waste your talent playing music by 
yourself at home when you could be putting enough into getting club 
gigs so as to get heard by people who could offer you a recording 
contract?

Jenny from Ravenclaw wrote:

<< Most of my students must learn to defend themselves or accept 
being subjected to endless bouts of being bullied. Not long ago, my 
boyfriend's younger brother was having a problem being bullied at his 
school. My boyfriend encouraged his brother to fight it out. I am not 
saying I agree with this, but my boyfriend's brother not only beat up 
the other kid, but they then became good friends. >>

and Jennifer Boggles replied:

<< How odd. Why would one *want* to be friends with a bully? Did they 
gang up on other kids together? :( >>

It is possible that what Ravenclaw Jenny's students usually go 
through is not bullying (maybe Shaun can give a definition of 
bullying; I believe it includes that only unpopular people are 
victims) but rather the establishment of a 'pecking order'. I'm 
familiar with this among my cats.




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Fri Jul 26 06:35:25 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 16:35:25 +1000
Subject: bullying
In-Reply-To: <ahqli7+9v41@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D417A4D.5971.20D18B@localhost>

On 26 Jul 2002 at 5:09, catlady_de_los_angeles wrote:

> It is possible that what Ravenclaw Jenny's students usually go 
> through is not bullying (maybe Shaun can give a definition of 
> bullying; I believe it includes that only unpopular people are 
> victims) but rather the establishment of a 'pecking order'. I'm 
> familiar with this among my cats.

There's a whole range of definitions which is hardly surprising.

The single one that appears most commonly used is the Olweus definition (named 
after the guy who came up with it):

"A student is being bullied or victimised when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and 
over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other students."

The one we tend to use in my committee work is:

"Deliberate psychological, emotional and/or physical harassment of one student by 
another, or a group, occurring at school or in transit between school and home. It 
may include exclusion from peer group, intimidation, extortion and violence, but is 
not necessarily limited to these practices."

Generally speaking, isolated incidents, while still a problem, aren't regarded as 
bullying.

I'm not saying any of these definitions are right - they are just a couple of samples - 
there are a lot around.



Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Fri Jul 26 12:56:06 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 12:56:06 -0000
Subject: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <ahqcca+ms4c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ahrgt6+o90c@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "jenny_ravenclaw" <meboriqua at a...> wrote:
> Not long ago, my boyfriend's younger brother was 
> having a problem being bullied at his school.  My boyfriend 
encouraged 
> his brother to fight it out.  I am not saying I agree with this, 
but 
> my boyfriend's brother not only beat up the other kid, but they 
then 
> became good friends.  

Is there a distinction here between bullying where the bully needs a 
supply of victims who remain docile, and a culture of violence where 
a fight is a necessary preliminary to any other social intercourse?

David, who knows very little about all this




From meboriqua at aol.com  Fri Jul 26 12:58:05 2002
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 12:58:05 -0000
Subject: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <p05010401b9666b53f9bd@[199.174.14.165]>
Message-ID: <ahrh0u+i80g@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., Jennifer Boggess Ramon <boggles at e...> 
wrote:
 
> How odd.  Why would one *want* to be friends with a bully?  Did they 
> gang up on other kids together?  :(>

Is that supposed to be funny?  Neither my boyfriend nor his brother 
are now or ever were bullies.  That comment was pretty inappropriate.
 
> Perhaps there's a difference between New York and Texas going on 
> here, but in almost every case I know of personally, fighting back 
> merely caused the bully to escalate their tactics - bringing more 
> people next time, going from fists to knives, changing from physical 
> to social bullying, and so on.  It will also earn the victim an 
> automatic three-day suspension in the Texas school system, which is 
> likely to cause problems in its own right.>

Maybe things are different here in NYC.  All I know is that my 
students have told me countless stories of how they learned to fight.  
They truly believe it solves problems.  Unfortunately, it often does. 
Growing up in the tough neighborhoods where they live, kids must learn 
how to physically defend themselves, or they will always be targets.  
It is interesting to me that you keep referring to schools, because 
for my students, bullying can take place anywhere: on their block, the 
corner where everyone hangs out, the local playground, the pools in 
the summer, and school.  

My school is also unusual in that students who fight are expelled on 
the spot.  Many other schools in the city claim that students who 
fight will get supsended, but it doesn't always happen, so kids can 
get away with quite a lot.      
 
> Solutions I have seen work include peer mediation (early in the 
> process)>

I agree with you there.  Communication is not big with my students.  
Most of them would rather use their fists or, when in class, talk 
louder so they can be heard.  I think mediation, conflict resolution 
and anger management should be a part of all school curricula (is that 
the plural?) from elementary school on.  

I think one of the biggest problems with bullying is that the bullies 
simply get away with it.  I've heard too many stories of teachers who 
turn their heads the other way and parents who say "my child would 
never do that!".  I had a student in a previous school who was a 
member of the Bloods and his mother denied it vehemently until he 
finally admitted it to her - after he had written his tag all over the 
walls of the school.  

Kids who are bullied are often afraid to tell their own parents 
because they think their parents will not do anything or will make the 
situation even worse.  Then we've all heard the parents, teachers or 
administrators who say the infuriating "boys will be boys/kids will be 
kids".

One last story: my boyfriend was also a constant target for bullies 
when he was a kid and he remembers being teased mercilessly.  A few 
years ago he saw someone in a club who had been one of the ringleaders 
of the bullies when they were both in school.  Now Raul is much 
bigger, stronger, faster (and better looking) than he was in school.  
Raul approached the other guy and when he realized who Raul was, he 
was terrified, as Raul was so much bigger.  Raul was nice and shook 
his hand, but boy, did he feel good!

--jenny from ravenclaw ***********




From Alyeskakc at aol.com  Fri Jul 26 16:27:08 2002
From: Alyeskakc at aol.com (alyeskakc)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 16:27:08 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Kristin and Meg!
In-Reply-To: <20020725114340.43015.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ahrt8s+nk8p@eGroups.com>

Thanks everyone for the warm birthday wishes yesterday. Happy 
Birthday Meg! Hope it was a good one.


And here's to all the July babies, Hope you all have(or had) a very 
Happy birthday and magical birthday. 


Kristin


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., Sheryll Townsend <s_ings at y...> wrote:
> 
> We have two birthdays honourees today, Meg and
> Kristin. Birthday owls can be sent care of this list
> or directly to the Meg at mdemeran at h... and
> Kristin at alyeskakc at a...
> 
> May the day be magical for both of you.
> 
> Happy Birthday, Kristin!
> Happy Birthday, Meg!
>




From tabouli at unite.com.au  Fri Jul 26 16:23:24 2002
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 02:23:24 +1000
Subject: Bully for OT!
Message-ID: <004201c234c5$e3bcd440$302432d2@price>

Well well, good ol' OT has now raised bullying for my perusal!  Very thoughtful of you all.  Yes, well, I'm not short of first hand experience here either, sadly.

I might have well have tattooed "victim" across my forehead in primary school.  I was a terribly timid, desperate to please, self-conscious and uptight little kid, which was a bad start.  Worse, I did well at school, and a lower middle class Australian primary school in the 70s and early 80s at that.  Such things are not to be tolerated.  Worse still, I was useless at ball games (though not bad at athletics, and I now suspect my uselessness at ball games may have its origin in self-fulfilling prophecy: I was a goody-goody loser, and therefore by definition bad at sport).  Worst of all, and this was the clincher, I was, undeniably, Not Australian.  I don't mean in the eyes of the Australian government, oh no.  I was born and raised in Australia, both my parents were citizens at the time (my mother duel with Malaysia).  I mean in the eyes of my peers.  I did not look white and of British or at least Northern European stock and had an undeniably Chinese looking mother waiting at the gate when I started school.

Not a good recipe.  Especially when I was also one of the smallest, meekest children there.

What *can* be done about bullying?  The sort of advice I've heard myself and heard given to kids makes me cringe.  "Hit them back twice as hard so they don't dare bully you again" isn't really an option when they're twice your size and sometimes also number.  And hardly works for psychological bullying (few victimised children have the self-esteem left to stand up for themselves verbally), which can be devastating, and in some ways *more* damaging than physical bullying because people are apt to take physical bullying seriously, at least when visible damage has been done, whereas psychological bullying is easily dismissed as child's play or something the child is told to "just ignore" (yeah right).

"Stay away from them" places the blame squarely on the victim, and isn't a realistic option either... I mean, who are these people kidding?  Have they forgotten you are *locked up* in school all day with these people?  Outside class they are free to go where they like!  If they want to bully you, what's to stop them tracking you down?

Telling people in authority so the bullies can be punished or Spoken To might work on some occasions but can backfire disastrously.  Not only are you a pathetic creature who deserves to be bullied, you are a dobbing informer who got them punished!  Next time I catch you, I'll bash your head in for that.  Ahh, just what every kid needs to hear.

Trying to educate kids about the evils of bullying and what to do about it before it happens to pre-empt the problem.  Haven't read about whether this works or not.  Maybe.  Anyone know about this?

I escaped the worst of the bullying I experienced when I finally got out of that ghastly primary school and into a secondary school with a lot of Asian students and a very academic focus, but the bulliability is still there, I just hide it better.  Learned that if you adopt a confident, assertive, don't-mess-with-me persona, people usually don't try to bully you (and thereby discover you're really about as personally assertive as a marshmallow).  And, after a particularly nasty episode in my early twenties, took up karate.  Which really did help.

Sure, a lot of the "build your confidence" stuff is just martial arts promotional hype, but actually, it did.  After a couple of years of having large, strong men physically trying to kick and hit me in combat practice (and sometimes succeeding, ow) and managing to defend myself successfully most of the time, it took the edge off bullying a little.  Once I knew I had ways of dealing with bullying if it reached a physical level, it made bullying in general a bit less threatening somehow.  And standing up for myself a bit less scary.

I occasionally wonder if it would have helped if I'd done karate in primary school.  I think it would have depended on the bully.  The ones who were in it for the fun of distressing me would probably have given up, because it's not much fun pushing someone around if they aren't intimidated and are skilled at fighting back.  It might well have increased my social status a bit, being an interesting sport which would probably have been seen to increase the attractiveness of staying on my good side.  It's the ones with real malice I would worry about.  Who'd sneer and then gang up eight kids to beat me up and thereby prove karate didn't make me as tough as I thought I was.

Catlady:
> It is possible that what Ravenclaw Jenny's students usually go 
> through is not bullying (...) but rather the establishment of a 'pecking order'.

I'd say cultural and demographic factors have a lot to do with why and how people bully others.  If you live in an environment where you win respect by proving yourself in physically, like Jenny's students presumably, the best way to respond to bullying will differ considerably from those who live in an environment where you win respect through non-physical means, like in the corporate world.

Catlady (quoting sneering people in response to my Pirsigian musings):
> Why do you waste your time discussing Harry Potter on an e-mail-list when you could be writing 
a book or earning a graduate degree instead?<

Actually, I think this sort of thing is *exactly* what I was talking about.  It's social value (extrinsic motivations, wealth, status in society) versus intellectual value (intrinsic motivations).  But anyway.  (My home says hi back to the Catlady!)

Tabouli.

P.S. Many, many thanks to all the members who housed and entertained me so generously during my overseas trip!  I'm slowly getting around to writing my thanks to you individually, bear with me...


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pbarhug at earthlink.net  Fri Jul 26 17:22:09 2002
From: pbarhug at earthlink.net (Pam Hugonnet)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 10:22:09 -0700
Subject: Congratulations
Message-ID: <Springmail.0994.1027704129.0.65655200@webmail.pas.earthlink.net>

JenP, now mommy to two... wrote:

vitals in a nutshell:

Allison Sadie "P" [;)]
9 pounds, 13.5 ounces
21.5 inches long
Born 10:29pm Pacific time,
July 21, 2002

Congratulations, Jen!  See, weren't going to be pregnant forever [;)]

At nearly 10 lbs., she must look like a 3 month old.   Hope Ginger is doing
well with the new one.
Remember to sit down and put your feet up for a few weeks.

I never got around to posting to the group, but we had our new guy on June 2. 

Thomas Henry, known as Harry  to all who know and love him.

drpam






From foxmoth at qnet.com  Fri Jul 26 21:49:54 2002
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 21:49:54 -0000
Subject: A Harry Potter math trick from the WSJ
Message-ID: <ahsg62+m7od@eGroups.com>

This from Sharon Begley's column in today's  Wall Street 
Journal:

Prove to your kids that you've memorized the first world of every 
page in the current Harry Potter:
   Ask them to pick any three digit number except a triplet like 444.
Then reverse the digits. Subtract the smaller from the larger. Tell 
them the first word of that page (you do have to memorize the 
first word of a few pages.) 

It works because the difference between any two three-digit 
numbers XYZ and ZYX is a multiple of ninety-nine. 

Pippin
whose house also waves to Tabouli's






From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk  Fri Jul 26 23:17:06 2002
From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 23:17:06 -0000
Subject: Bully for OT!
In-Reply-To: <004201c234c5$e3bcd440$302432d2@price>
Message-ID: <ahsl9i+9ifs@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Tabouli" <tabouli at u...> wrote:
> Well well, good ol' OT has now raised bullying for my perusal!  
Very thoughtful of you all.  Yes, well, I'm not short of first hand 
experience here either, sadly.
> 
> I might have well have tattooed "victim" across my forehead in 
primary school.  I was a terribly timid, desperate to please, self-
conscious and uptight little kid, which was a bad start.  Worse, I 
did well at school, and a lower middle class Australian primary 
school in the 70s and early 80s at that.  Such things are not to be 
tolerated.  Worse still, I was useless at ball games (though not bad 
at athletics, and I now suspect my uselessness at ball games may have 
its origin in self-fulfilling prophecy: I was a goody-goody loser, 
and therefore by definition bad at sport).  Worst of all, and this 
was the clincher, I was, undeniably, Not Australian.  I don't mean in 
the eyes of the Australian government, oh no.  I was born and raised 
in Australia, both my parents were citizens at the time (my mother 
duel with Malaysia).  I mean in the eyes of my peers.  I did not look 
white and of British or at least Northern European stock and had an 
undeniably Chinese looking mother waiting at the gate when I started 
school.
have been removed]

This is all so me, apart from the Australian part - but I also, 
undeniably didn't fit in at school.  During Primary school, I 
remember when I was 6 years old, being held up against a wall by two 
11 year olds, while their ringleader kicked me.  This happened 
regularly until my parents removed me from the school.  Unlike 
Tabouli, I made a very bad decision about my secondary school - The 
next primary school made me throw up my place at the Grammar school - 
I got 3rd place in my county for 11+ and refused to go, because 
someone else I knew who was going to the Grammar school had bullied 
me mercilessly.  Ironically, she became a very timid, introverted 
personality and wouldn't really have given me any trouble.  

Secondary school...useless at PE, top of my class in every subject, 
spoke differently from everyone else ... it was horrible.  To make 
things worse, my father taught in the same school, which made me even 
more susceptible to the bullies - on one occasion I was pushed down 
the tower block stairs.  Not pleasant.

One thing I learnt during this time was that fighting back didn't 
work.  If I did, I was so feeble physically, that everyone would just 
laugh at me - the same if I tried to talk back to them.  I eventually 
stopped being unpopular at school by helping people with their 
homework.  Very sad, I know, but at least it gave me some allies who 
managed to keep the bullying at bay.

There have been a lot of programmes on television lately about the 
effect of bullying on later life - and how it has had very negative 
consequences on the victims.  Not so in my case - I've never put up 
with any such behaviour since my school days, to the extent that I've 
seen bullying in the work place and managed to do something about 
it.  

To be honest, I also take comfort in where I am now, and where my 
bullies are now.  In every case I know about, I am better off.  I am 
happy with my life now and I know full well that many of the people 
who made my life hell as a child and a teenager are not happy with 
their adult lives.  This doesn't make me feel happy, but it does make 
me think that going through hell as a child is worth it if your adult 
life is going to be much happier - I would much rather that than vice 
versa.

Catherine




From boggles at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 27 00:22:57 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 19:22:57 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <ahrh0u+i80g@eGroups.com>
References: <ahrh0u+i80g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05010401b9678eb7fe2b@[66.32.49.116]>

At 12:58 PM +0000 7/26/02, jenny_ravenclaw wrote:
>--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., Jennifer Boggess Ramon <boggles at e...>
>wrote:
>
>>  How odd.  Why would one *want* to be friends with a bully?  Did they
>>  gang up on other kids together?  :(>
>
>Is that supposed to be funny?

Not in the least; it was an honest question.

>Neither my boyfriend nor his brother
>are now or ever were bullies.

So why would one of them want to become _friends_ with one?  That 
leads me to suspect something else was going on - the "pecking order" 
culture, or something like it - rather than bullying.

>That comment was pretty inappropriate.

I'm sorry; I meant no offense.  I was just *shocked* that anyone who 
had actually been peer-abused would (a) want and (b) be able to form 
a real friendship with the abuser.  On a personal level, I could 
never have become friends with any of the bullies who bothered me, my 
brother, or the other "easy targets" - I could never have respected 
them.

>It is interesting to me that you keep referring to schools, because
>for my students, bullying can take place anywhere: on their block, the
>corner where everyone hangs out, the local playground, the pools in
>the summer, and school.

Most of the literature, and most of my experience, is school-centered 
- bullying at school, on the grounds, on the bus, waiting for the 
bus, or on the way home from the bus.  That's not to say it doesn't 
or can't happen elsewhere - obviously and unfortunately, it does - 
but that's where most of it has happened in my experience, and where 
all the studies about it I've read have focused.

>My school is also unusual in that students who fight are expelled on
>the spot.

Wouldn't that, then, be a major strike _against_ the "punch him back" option?

>I think mediation, conflict resolution
>and anger management should be a part of all school curricula (is that
>the plural?) from elementary school on.

That's actually one of the major strategies that the Frieds 
recommend.  Our school district has a volunteer peer-mediation 
program, but the way it's set up, it strikes me as a case of too 
little, too late.

>I've heard too many stories of teachers who
>turn their heads the other way

This surprises me every time I see it in my colleagues; one would 
think they'd intervene, if not for the victim's sake, at least so 
they don't get sued later!

>and parents who say "my child would
>never do that!".

Yes, NMKS (Not My Kid Syndrome) is a big problem here, too - when we 
can get hold of the parents at all . . .

>Then we've all heard the parents, teachers or
>administrators who say the infuriating "boys will be boys/kids will be
>kids".

I haven't heard this as much, but that may be because the majority of 
the cases I've been personally involved with have been all-girl or 
mixed-gender.  I agree that it's a deeply unintelligent attitude, 
especially for an administrator.

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Jul 27 01:47:38 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 11:47:38 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Bully for OT!
In-Reply-To: <004201c234c5$e3bcd440$302432d2@price>
Message-ID: <3D42885A.24164.3B0C8F@localhost>

On 27 Jul 2002 at 2:23, Tabouli wrote:
 
> I might have well have tattooed "victim" across my forehead in primary school.  I 
> was a terribly timid, desperate to please, self-conscious and uptight little kid, 
> which was a bad start.  Worse, I did well at school, and a lower middle class 
> Australian primary school in the 70s and early 80s at that.  Such things are not to 
> be tolerated.  Worse still, I was useless at ball games (though not bad at athletics, 
> and I now suspect my uselessness at ball games may have its origin in self-
> fulfilling prophecy: I was a goody-goody loser, and therefore by definition bad at 
> sport).  Worst of all, and this was the clincher, I was, undeniably, Not Australian.  I 
> don't mean in the eyes of the Australian government, oh no.  I was born and 
> raised in Australia, both my parents were citizens at the time (my mother duel with 
> Malaysia).  I mean in the eyes of my peers.  I did not look white and of British or 
> at least Northern European stock and had an undeniably Chinese looking mother 
> waiting at the gate when I started school.

This is interesting - because of my own experiences.

I was bullied a lot - but there was one year in my schooling which was *hideously* 
bad. I had the misfortune to wind up in a school where bullying was rampant and 
where there was no real effort to stop it - indeed, the *victims* of bullying were 
routinely punished for not making an effort to fit in. I had the misfortune to be the 
'favourite' target - partly because of my academic abilities, partly because I didn't 
have much interest in sport, etc - but there was a lot of bullying, and a lot of victims.

*But* interestingly, there was one group who tended to avoid being bullied - and that 
was the students of Asian appearance. Why? Because bullying them would have 
been racist - and that was the one big no-no at this school. It gave them a level of 
protection that the rest of us didn't have. It actually made me *very* angry - not 
because they had that protection - they were fully entitled to it, nobody should be 
victimised on the grounds of race. Trouble was, nobody should have been 
victimised on any other grounds either.

The thing is, it left me with a clear impression. The best way to limit bullying in 
schools is to make it clear it's not going to be tolerated, and to make protecting the 
victims a priority. I left that school at the end of the year (fortunately - I'd have killed 
myself to avoid going back) and wound up at a school which didn't tolerate bullying 
and did try to protect the victims. It confirmed my theory, to my mind. There was 
still bullying - I don't think it can ever be totally eliminated, and I was still a victim. 
But five or six incidents in a year, was a lot better than unremitting torture, day after 
day after day. And when it happened - if they got caught - they were dealt with, and 
I knew they were dealt with. That made things much easier. Unfortunately, that 
school only went to the year level I entered it - so after a year I was out of such a 
safe environment - where I went afterwards was still far, far better than the year of 
hell - but it was a long way from perfect.

Tabouli:
> What *can* be done about bullying?  The sort of advice I've heard myself and 
> heard given to kids makes me cringe.  "Hit them back twice as hard so they don't > dare bully you again" isn't really an option when they're twice your size and 
> sometimes also number.  And hardly works for psychological bullying (few 
> victimised children have the self-esteem left to stand up for themselves verbally), 
> which can be devastating, and in some ways *more* damaging than physical 
> bullying because people are apt to take physical bullying seriously, at least when 
> visible damage has been done, whereas psychological bullying is easily dismissed 
> as child's play or something the child is told to "just ignore" (yeah right).

My opinion - there's no single thing that can be done about bullying - and part of the 
problem is that all too often, only single solutions are tried.

'Hit them back and they will stop' is generally intended as good advice - it's well 
meant. And it *can* work. Trouble is, some people assume that because they have 
seen it work, that it must always work. They don't see the fact that it doesn't always 
work, and they don't see the cases where it simply creates problems. It's all too easy 
to assume that our experiences are universal.

If I based my opinions on how to stop bullying, on my own experiences, what I saw 
work, then my solution would be that bullies should be punished severely and that 
stops them. That's what I saw work - severe punishment (in my case, physical 
punishment). The thing is - once again, it would be *very* wrong to assume that just 
because I saw it work, that it would always work. And, once again, it can also create 
problems instead of solving them.

If schools want to stop bullying, then they need a *range* of methods. They can't 
limit themselves to only one. Sometimes - quite a lot of the time - counseling, peer 
mediation, etc, works wonders. Sometimes the bully needs to be helped with self 
esteem issues. Sometimes the problem is the exact opposite - they have superiority 
issues. Some bullies are undisciplined louts who believe they can do what they like - 
others are so stifled and controlled, they act out in a rebellion. Some need 
compassion, some need to be deterred through some sort of sanction. Some need 
to be isolated so they can't hurt others. Some need to be taught better methods of 
interaction.

But - in my opinion - the number one issue has to be protecting the victims. The 
number one priority should be to ensure that those who are being bullied are as safe 
as possible - the bullying has to be stopped as quickly as possible. I've seen too 
many cases, where so much emphasis is put on helping the bully (and that can be 
important - they can be children with real problems and they need to be helped) that 
the victim is ignored. That's what happened in my year of hell - bullying, at that 
school, was seen as a 'cry for help', a sign that the bully needed to be helped. 
Maybe so - but it might have been nice if they'd tried to help the victims.

Actually, I think that may be where my fundamental problem with the idea of 'hitting 
back' comes from - when a child is told to hit the bully, to fight back, that child is 
being told that dealing with the bullying, dealing with the victimisation is *their* 
responsibility. It shouldn't be their responsibility - there is a duty to protect them 
from it, not to expect them to protect themselves. That doesn't mean that equipping 
them to protect themselves is a bad idea - but schools and teachers should 
acknowledge that if a child is placed in a position where they are forced to protect 
themselves, it's because they school environment failed to do so. That can happen - 
even if real efforts are made to try and prevent it - so if a school is trying, there's no 
sense in beating themselves up over the occasional failure - but they should 
acknowledge that it didn't work - and try and figure out how to prevent that again.

It also means there is a difference depending on *who* tells the child to defend 
themselves, IMHO. For a friend to tell a kid to hit back, it might be the only advice 
they can give - because they don't have any power over the problem. But teachers 
and schools *should* have power to at least try other methods.

Teach a kid to defend themselves by all means, let them know that if all else fails, 
that may be the only course left. But then you try to make sure that the last resort 
never needs to be in play.
 
Tabouli:
> "Stay away from them" places the blame squarely on the victim, and isn't a 
> realistic option either... I mean, who are these people kidding?  Have they 
> forgotten you are *locked up* in school all day with these people?  Outside class 
> they are free to go where they like!  If they want to bully you, what's to stop them 
> tracking you down?

Yeah - part of the reason my year of hell was so bad was that I couldn't avoid the 
bullies. There were limited areas we were allowed to be in, limited places for me to 
go. Two lunchtimes a week, I was safe in the library - but due to overcrowding, they 
had a system by which girls could use the library Mondays, Wednesdays, and 
Fridays, and boys on Tuesdays and Thursdays. I had nowhere to go three days a 
week.

After I was finally left unconscious on the toilet floors and the police and an 
ambulance were called, they came up with a solution - I was on permanent 
lunchtime detention for the rest of the year. Sure, it kept me safe from some 
physical attacks - but it really wasn't very fair.

You often *can't* avoid the people. The following year, at the school where bullying 
was taken seriously, they did try to ensure that potential bullies found it hard to get 
their victims alone - but the single worst incident I experienced that year happened 
in the showers after a hockey match. I was bundled into a corner of the showers and 
I was... well, to put it as politely as I can, they urinated all over me. You can always 
find a place where you can't be seen.

Besides - often the victim doesn't even have to be present for some acts of bullying. 
My homework used to be stolen from my bag so I'd get into trouble in class. One 
guy did a photo essay for a photography club on me that he knew would hurt me - 
but was subtle enough that the teacher in charge didn't realise what was going on. 
When I was 15, I produced a detailed experiment for a schools science competition, 
which was placed on display in the school library before it was to be sent to the 
national competition - it was destroyed - I had had a good chance of winning as well.

People knew my academic grades were important to me - so they spread rumours 
that I was failing subjects (I became known as '3D' based on my supposed letter 
grades). The school computer network displayed a message telling everyone I had 
AIDS.

'Keeping away' only solves some of the problems - even when it is possible. 
 
Tabouli:
> Telling people in authority so the bullies can be punished or Spoken To might 
> work on some occasions but can backfire disastrously.  Not only are you a 
> pathetic creature who deserves to be bullied, you are a dobbing informer who got > them punished!  Next time I catch you, I'll bash your head in for that.  Ahh, just
> what every kid needs to hear.

This is one of the things which can work - but as you say, it can backfire. A lot 
depends on the culture of the school, and this goes along with the next point you 
raise: 

Tabouli:
> Trying to educate kids about the evils of bullying and what to do about it before it 
> happens to pre-empt the problem.  Haven't read about whether this works or not.  
> Maybe.  Anyone know about this?

If done well, this can work wonders. It doesn't eliminate bullying by any means - but 
it can in some cases, change the school environment enough that bullying becomes 
less common. In a few cases, I've even seen it work to an extent where it does 
allow the victims - or others - to report bullying, and have it dealt with effectively. 
Because you can wind up with an environment where the students are so anti-bully, 
that *they* will protect each others rights to be safe from it, and to report it. It doesn't 
always work, by any means - but it's one of the many things that should be in the 
arsenal of dealing with it.

Rather suprisingly, to me at any rate, there are actually some bullies who don't 
realise what they are doing is actually genuinely hurtful - they think it's a joke, and 
they don't realise it hurts the other person. In some of these cases, they are 
genuinely *horrified* if and when they are convinced of how much they've hurt the 
other person. In these cases, education can work wonders. But it has to be 
remembered, that there are other bullies out there who know very well what they are 
doing - and want to hurt others, so it certainly doesn't always work.

Tabouli:
> I escaped the worst of the bullying I experienced when I finally got out of that 
> ghastly primary school and into a secondary school with a lot of Asian students 
> and a very academic focus, but the bulliability is still there, I just hide it better.  
> Learned that if you adopt a confident, assertive, don't-mess-with-me persona, 
> people usually don't try to bully you (and thereby discover you're really about as 
> personally assertive as a marshmallow).  And, after a particularly nasty episode in 
> my early twenties, took up karate.  Which really did help.

Assertiveness, etc, can work. *But* there's a problem with hiding your 'bulliability' 
and it's one I see with the gifted kids I work with. I've encountered a number of kids 
over the years who've been bullied because they are smart. And to try and avoid the 
bullies, they've chosen to hide that fact. Maybe it gives them some protection - but it 
also means they have to hide who they are. They have to be a different person to 
who they want to be.

And I've seen teachers *encourage* that. I actually had a science teacher in Year 9, 
who suggested I *deliberately* get questions wrong on tests in order to reduce the 
amount of teasing I received for being a science geek (I would have preferred if he 
had abandoned his practice of reading our marks out aloud...) Great. 

Tabouli:
> Sure, a lot of the "build your confidence" stuff is just martial arts promotional 
> hype, but actually, it did.  After a couple of years of having large, strong men 
> physically trying to kick and hit me in combat practice (and sometimes 
> succeeding, ow) and managing to defend myself successfully most of the time, it 
> took the edge off bullying a little.  Once I knew I had ways of dealing with bullying 
> if it reached a physical level, it made bullying in general a bit less threatening 
> somehow.  And standing up for myself a bit less scary.

And that is great - and I think it's worthwhile for all kids - I did zen do kai, and it did 
help me. But what it did was give me a back up - the knowledge I could defend 
myself as a last resort - I still think schools have a duty to ensure that last resort 
doesn't become necessarily.
 
Tabouli:
> I occasionally wonder if it would have helped if I'd done karate in primary school.   > I think it would have depended on the bully.  The ones who were in it for the fun of 
> distressing me would probably have given up, because it's not much fun pushing 
> someone around if they aren't intimidated and are skilled at fighting back.  It might 
> well have increased my social status a bit, being an interesting sport which would 
> probably have been seen to increase the attractiveness of staying on my good 
> side.  It's the ones with real malice I would worry about.  Who'd sneer and then 
> gang up eight kids to beat me up and thereby prove karate didn't make me as 
> tough as I thought I was.

'the ones with real malice' - I think you have it right. Most bullies aren't that bad - 
most aren't that malicious. That can leave people with the impression that *all* 
bullies are like that.

The moderate ones, the ones who aren't full of malice and viciousness, aren't that 
hard to deal with. But there are others.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Sat Jul 27 02:00:23 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 02:00:23 -0000
Subject: Who hates Full House and Scrappy-Doo?
Message-ID: <ahsurn+kblc@eGroups.com>

If so, then congratulations.  You're my friends.

Jack

-----------
"Fudge, Packer?" - James Humphries, _Cannibal: The Musical_




From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Jul 27 04:49:04 2002
From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 04:49:04 -0000
Subject: FB / Congrats, Pam / Bullying / Intrinsic-Extrinsic
Message-ID: <aht8o0+2f80@eGroups.com>

In case I forget to ask on the main list, my friend asked: "Does the 
British edition of FANTASTIC BEASTS give their sizes in cm (or inches 
the way the USan one does)?"
--------------
Pam, hurray for Thomas Henry "Harry" Hugonnet!
--------------
Shaun: "I was a victim of serious bullying. I required hospital 
treatment, ambulances had to be called, I have permanent injuries - 
thankfully not too serious - based on attacks at school when I was 
12." "They used physical violence on occasion - but used other less 
obvious methods at other times."

Tabouli: "I might have well have tattooed "victim" across my forehead 
in primary school. I was a terribly timid, desperate to please, 
self-conscious and uptight little kid, which was a bad start. Worse, 
I did well at school,"

Catherine: "During Primary school, I remember when I was 6 years old, 
being held up against a wall by two 11 year olds, while their 
ringleader kicked me." "Secondary school...useless at PE, top of my 
class in every subject, spoke differently from everyone else ... "

Oh, dear, so many people who were bullied worse than I was! (And 
*they* didn't come down with Social Phobia because of it...)

I understand why being small or weak or fat or easily moved to tears 
makes a person a target for bullying, and I suppose that being 
'weird' (i.e. socially inept) is offensive to the innate human 
instinct of conformism, but I *don't* understand *why* being 
intelligent/bookish and/or getting good marks make a person widely 
hated. 

------------
Jenny: "I've heard too many stories of teachers who turn their heads 
the other way and parents who say "my child would never do that!"." 
"Kids who are bullied are often afraid to tell their own parents 
because they think their parents will not do anything or will make 
the situation even worse"

Shaun: "indeed, the *victims* of bullying were routinely punished for 
not making an effort to fit in." "When a child is told to hit the 
bully, to fight back, that child is being told that dealing with the 
bullying, dealing with the victimisation is *their*  responsibility. 
It shouldn't be their responsibility - there is a duty to protect 
them from it, not to expect them to protect themselves."

Well, OF COURSE it's the child's responsibility to protect 
him/herself. Of course the school will punish a child who fails this 
responsibility, and so will parents if the child lets them find out. 
Self-reliance is the highest value of the American Way, right? And 
the best way to arrange life is as an endless competition, right? 
I'm sure there are parents who encourage their children to beat up 
other children, reward and praise them for it, and instead of "my kid 
would never be a bully", don't they ever honestly say: "I'm proud of 
him being strong and aggressive. I'm proud that other children are 
terrified of him. Your weakling deserves to be beaten up."?

Shaun said something about learning to act in a way that doesn't 
provoke the bullies (especially pretending to be stupid in order to 
fit in) means learning to act not like oneself. Go through life with 
one's real self concealed as a shameful secret and one's presented 
self an impersonation. Yes, it is an unpleasant experience; I don't 
like doing it; I don't like that good people must imitate jocks and 
brutes ... but it is necessary. Without the right social skills, you 
can't pass any job interview but the most desperate. And the 
obsolescence of non-temp jobs means that salesmanship (marketting 
oneself) is THE most important job skill for EVERYONE. 

------------
Tabouli: "<< Why do you waste your time discussing Harry Potter on an 
e-mail-list when you could be writing a book or earning a graduate 
degree instead? >>
Actually, I think this sort of thing is *exactly* what I was talking 
about. It's social value (extrinsic motivations, wealth, status in 
society) versus intellectual value (intrinsic motivations)."

The thread started in the main list discussion of social class. A 
food-service witch with a "common" accent who is growing herbs and 
experimenting with them in order to write a book of herbology is 
considered to be in the process of "bettering" herself; if she were 
'merely' growing and experimenting with herbs and discussing them on 
a newsgroup, she'd be considered an eccentric, perhaps an amusing or 
charming eccentric, but still infinitely lower than a person from the 
'educated classes'. The intrinsic motivation gets a person at best 
patronized, at worst beaten into a pulp (thus linking this topic to 
the previous one).  




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Jul 27 05:41:43 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 15:41:43 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] re: FB / Congrats, Pam / Bullying / Intrinsic-Extrinsic
In-Reply-To: <aht8o0+2f80@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3D42BF37.13192.111670D@localhost>

On 27 Jul 2002 at 4:49, catlady_de_los_angeles wrote:

> Oh, dear, so many people who were bullied worse than I was! (And 
> *they* didn't come down with Social Phobia because of it...)

Some of us did, I'm afraid. Through six years of intensive therapy, I've managed to 
get it under control, but it's still there in the background.
 
> I understand why being small or weak or fat or easily moved to tears 
> makes a person a target for bullying, and I suppose that being 
> 'weird' (i.e. socially inept) is offensive to the innate human 
> instinct of conformism, but I *don't* understand *why* being 
> intelligent/bookish and/or getting good marks make a person widely 
> hated. 

It doesn't always - but it can. Some of it comes down to jealousy. Some of it comes 
down to a perception that the person feels 'superior', and needs to be taken down 
because of it. 

People can be perceived as showing off (whether they are or not). It's even in Haryr 
Potter - from PS/SS:

"Ron, at the next table, wasn't having much more luck.

"Wingardium Leviosa!" he shouted, waving his long arms like a windmill.

"You're saying it wrong," Harry heard Hermione snap. "It's Wing-gar-dium Levi-o-sa, 
make the 'gar' nice and long."

"You do it, then, if you're so clever," Ron snarled.

Hermione rolled up the sleeves of her gown, flicked her wand, and said, 
"Wingardium Leviosa!"

Their feather rose off the desk and hovered about four feet above their heads.

"Oh, well done!" cried Professor Flitwick, clapping. "Everyone see here, Miss 
Granger's done it!"

Ron was in a very bad mood by the end of the class. "It's no wonder no one can 
stand her," he said to Harry as they pushed their way into the crowded corridor, 
"she's a nightmare, honestly. "

Someone knocked into Harry as they hurried past him. It was Hermione. Harry 
caught a glimpse of her face -- and was startled to see that she was in tears.

"I think she heard you."

"So?" said Ron, but he looked a bit uncomfortable. "She must've noticed she's got 
no friends.""

In PA:

""That is the second time you have spoken out of turn, Miss Granger," said Snape 
coolly. "Five more points from Gryffindor for being an insufferable know-it-all."

Hermione went very red, put down her hand, and stared at the floor with her eyes 
full of tears. It was a mark of how much the class loathed Snape that they were all 
glaring at him, because every one of them had called Hermione a know-it-all at 
least once, and Ron, who told Hermione she was a know-it-all at least twice a week, 
said loudly, "You asked us a question and she knows the answer! Why ask if you 
don't want to be told?""

catlady:
> Shaun said something about learning to act in a way that doesn't 
> provoke the bullies (especially pretending to be stupid in order to 
> fit in) means learning to act not like oneself. Go through life with 
> one's real self concealed as a shameful secret and one's presented 
> self an impersonation. Yes, it is an unpleasant experience; I don't 
> like doing it; I don't like that good people must imitate jocks and 
> brutes ... but it is necessary. Without the right social skills, you 
> can't pass any job interview but the most desperate. And the 
> obsolescence of non-temp jobs means that salesmanship (marketting 
> oneself) is THE most important job skill for EVERYONE. 

The thing is, some 'protective camouflage', some 'hiding' of who you are is often 
necessary. And provided it's fairly limited, it isn't that bad.

But when it's expected every single day. Everywhere you are. That's when it really 
starts to hurt. 

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From macloudt at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Jul 27 10:04:01 2002
From: macloudt at yahoo.co.uk (macloudt)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 10:04:01 -0000
Subject: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <p05010401b9678eb7fe2b@[66.32.49.116]>
Message-ID: <ahtr6h+e9j3@eGroups.com>

Jennifer wrote:

> >>  How odd.  Why would one *want* to be friends with a bully?  Did 
they
> >>  gang up on other kids together?  :(>

Jenny from Ravenclaw replied:

> >Neither my boyfriend nor his brother
> >are now or ever were bullies.

To which Jennifer pondered:
 
> So why would one of them want to become _friends_ with one?  That 
> leads me to suspect something else was going on - the "pecking 
order" 
> culture, or something like it - rather than bullying.
> 
<snip>
> 
> I'm sorry; I meant no offense.  I was just *shocked* that anyone 
who 
> had actually been peer-abused would (a) want and (b) be able to 
form 
> a real friendship with the abuser.  On a personal level, I could 
> never have become friends with any of the bullies who bothered me, 
my 
> brother, or the other "easy targets" - I could never have respected 
> them.

I just wanted to point out that a good friend of mine is in the same 
situation.  He was bullied by a bigger kid at school, but when Matt 
(my friend) got older and discovered he was bigger than the bully, 
Matt took the opportunity to beat the crap out of him.  Now the ex-
bully is one of his best friends.  I don't know much more behind the 
story, but from what I gather the ex-bully *respected* Matt for 
standing up to himself.  Also, Matt's very easy-going and thick-
skinned, so I assume that he doesn't hold a grudge and therefore has 
no long-term negative feelings about the situation.  Also these men 
grew up in a not-desirable (to put it mildly) neighbourhood in 
Bristol, so the same rules for respect that Jenny from Ravenclaw's 
students follow probably applied (pure speculation on my part, mind).

On the opposite social scale, I attended a public school in a posh-
knob Toronto neighbourhood for two years where I was mentally bullied 
to the point that I changed high schools.  If I'd had then the self-
confidence I have now I could have easily shot the little jerk down 
with just a couple of comments and he would have moved on to someone 
else (or stopped altogether, who knows?), but I was far too 
withdrawn.  To my knowledge there was no physical bullying, but 
several of us were victims of mental and emotional bullying.  Unlike 
Catherine, I did well by changing high schools.  I met my dearest 
friend there and had a fabulous 2 years.  My self-confidence shot up 
and had far too much fun to do homework or attend classes.

As an aside, two years after I left my bullying high school I heard 
through the grape vine that my ex-bully was horribly addicted to 
cocaine.  And I have to admit that a little voice in the back of my 
mind whispered "serves you right".  Not mature, but there you have it.

It seems to me that there is more physical bullying now than there 
was 20-odd years ago.  When I went back to my last old high school a 
few years after graduating the school secretary told me that it was 
far worse than before, so she confirmed my suspicions in one case.  
How about everyone else?  Is my old school the exception, or *does* 
physical bullying seem to be on the rise?  Shaun, what do your 
statistics say?

Mary Ann
(who's going to be late for work if she doesn't sign off) 





From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Jul 27 11:26:13 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 21:26:13 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <ahtr6h+e9j3@eGroups.com>
References: <p05010401b9678eb7fe2b@[66.32.49.116]>
Message-ID: <3D430FF5.31348.24CD9C7@localhost>

On 27 Jul 2002 at 10:04, macloudt wrote:

> It seems to me that there is more physical bullying now than there 
> was 20-odd years ago.  When I went back to my last old high school a 
> few years after graduating the school secretary told me that it was 
> far worse than before, so she confirmed my suspicions in one case.  
> How about everyone else?  Is my old school the exception, or *does* 
> physical bullying seem to be on the rise?  Shaun, what do your 
> statistics say?

That's the $64,000 question.

It's very hard to answer, with certainty, if bullying is increasing. For a start, it might 
depend on when you are - it is possible it could be increasing in Australia, and 
decreasing in Canada, etc.

Also, it depends on how you measure it - it's generally done by surveys, which can 
introduce all sorts of problems - do kids today have the same viewpoint about what 
constitutes bullying, as kids 10 years ago. Are they more likely to report it. Or if you 
survey teachers - if 10 years ago, only 10% of teachers reported seeing bullying, 
and now it's 20% does that mean the rate has doubled - or does it mean the 
teachers are trying harder to detect it? Etc.

Having said that as a caution, the general consensus is that in most western 
countries, bullying in schools is on the increase. The most detailed studies I've seen 
have been done in the UK where 33% of school students, aged between 11 and 16, 
report being seriously bullied in the previous year (up from around 20% in the mid 
1980s). Other evidence (such as the incidence of injury in schools, etc) seems to 
support the idea of a real increase.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From heidit at netbox.com  Sat Jul 27 13:02:12 2002
From: heidit at netbox.com (heidit at netbox.com)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 09:02:12 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Bullying
In-Reply-To: 933abf00
Message-ID: <16600080.1253134524@imcingular.com>

Jennifer Boggess wrote:
**I could
never have become friends with any of the bullies who bothered me, my
brother, or the other "easy targets" - I could never have respected
them.**

What about now? If someone who'd bullied you 20 years ago apologized now, could you allow yourself to become friends?

When I went to camp the summer I was eleven,my cabinmates tried to drown me, tied yarn all around my bed so I couldn't get out, set my alarm clock after I went to sleep so it would go off at 2am and everyone would hate me, put nair in my conditioner, ruined some - but not all - of my books, and made me miserable. I changed bunks after 5 weeks and the last 3 weeks were fine - b ut it was a miserable thing while it lasted. And I've blocked out a lot of the memroies, I know.

Imagine my surprise on the first day of my son's preschool last fall, when one of his classmates' mums introduced hetself as Karen, one of my bunkmates from that terrible summer. Midyear, she took me out and apologized profusely, gave me some explanations of the "why" - things I never knew - and we cried together. And we're friends now - motivated by our kids being friends- but how can I remain angry at a 32 year old psychologist for what she did at 12?

Heidi Tandy
Follow me to FictionAlley - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes and ships - 7 sickles an ounce
http://www.FictionAlley.org



From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Jul 27 13:50:44 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 23:50:44 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <16600080.1253134524@imcingular.com>
References: 933abf00
Message-ID: <3D4331D4.1479.5ACEF@localhost>

On 27 Jul 2002 at 9:02, Heidi Tandy wrote:

> What about now? If someone who'd bullied you 20 years ago apologized now, 
> could you allow yourself to become friends?

Just to give my perspective. I do know some of the people who bullied me. I don't 
think I could ever have a close friendship with any of them. I get along well with a 
couple of them, I don't hate being in their presence (-8 But genuine friendship - not 
an option. 

Heidi:
> When I went to camp the summer I was eleven,my cabinmates tried to drown me, 
> tied yarn all around my bed so I couldn't get out, set my alarm clock after I went to 
> sleep so it would go off at 2am and everyone would hate me, put nair in my 
> conditioner, ruined some - but not all - of my books, and made me miserable. I 
> changed bunks after 5 weeks and the last 3 weeks were fine - but it was a 
> miserable thing while it lasted. And I've blocked out a lot of the memroies, I know.

I don't want to diminish what you experienced in any way - because any bullying 
activity can really hurt people - but what you describe here is *nothing* like as bad 
as it can be - except possibly the trying to drown you, that does sound pretty drastic. 
Whether you can be friends may well depend on what you experienced. I find it hard 
to even admit to a lot of what was done to me at school - suffice to say, if an adult 
did it to another adult, they'd be looking at decades of potential prison time. It also 
depends, I think, on the age when it happened - it's a lot easier to forgive something 
done to you by an 11 year old, than something done by a 16 year old - because the 
16 year old is more likely to be closer to the person they are today.

> Imagine my surprise on the first day of my son's preschool last fall, when one of 
> his classmates' mums introduced hetself as Karen, one of my bunkmates from 
> that terrible summer. Midyear, she took me out and apologized profusely, gave 
> me some explanations of the "why" - things I never knew - and we cried together. 
> And we're friends now - motivated by our kids being friends- but how can I remain 
> angry at a 32 year old psychologist for what she did at 12?

It's not necessarily a matter of being angry. I don't feel anger at the people who 
bullied me anymore. Those who I've met since, I've been more than happy to 
forgive. But friendship with them?

It's not an option for me. I can be polite, I can talk to them, I can drink with them, 
joke with them, I can make every effort in my power to avoid resenting what they 
did to me, and I can get along. But to be friends... I can forgive. But I can never 
forget.

If a person can do that, if they can make friends with those people - well, that's 
great. But you're a better person than I am. I have to live with the memories - and I 
can't be a friend to a person who makes me remember everytime I see their face. 
Maybe they're not the same person who bullied me - but a lot of me is still the same 
person they hurt.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From anise_leinen at yahoo.com  Sat Jul 27 18:27:35 2002
From: anise_leinen at yahoo.com (Catherine Danielson)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 11:27:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: FB / Congrats, Pam / Bullying / Intrinsic-Extrinsic
In-Reply-To: <1027763179.523.83219.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020727182735.97403.qmail@web21407.mail.yahoo.com>

That subject line is simply getting too long. :)

Something to add about bullying...
I think a LOT of it depends on what we're really
talking about. Several different types of behavior get
shoved under the rubric of "bullying" or "teasing." 
Take what happened to me in 6th grade. Please. (Hmm, I
don't think that's possible...)
First, you have to know that all the women in my
family share a weird genetic trait. At the age of 11,
we suddenly look like completely mature adults.
Happened to my mother, grandmother, great-grandmother,
etc. So there I was on the first day of sixth grade,
mistaken for the teacher constantly, hit on by adult
men in situations where my age wasn't known, etc.
Unfortunately, there happened to be a boy in my class
who had his own set of psychological problems, also
was very mature-appearing for his age,  and was  a
ringleader. The rest of the year was a nightmare of
sexual harassment that was laughingly called
"teasing." I'm still angry about it and always will
be. Teachers and administrators did not want to see
what was really going on even though it was happening
right under their noses and couldn't have been
clearer. Maybe they didn't want to deal with it
because we were all "kids." (Please don't make me go
into details. Fill them in yourself.) This was
extreme, but I saw it happen to other people. Schools
still don't want to deal with it. 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com



From boggles at earthlink.net  Sat Jul 27 23:05:43 2002
From: boggles at earthlink.net (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 18:05:43 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <16600080.1253134524@imcingular.com>
References: <16600080.1253134524@imcingular.com>
Message-ID: <p05010401b968d4756a77@[66.32.49.116]>

At 9:02 AM -0400 7/27/02, Heidi Tandy wrote:
>Jennifer Boggess wrote:
>**I could
>never have become friends with any of the bullies who bothered me, my
>brother, or the other "easy targets" - I could never have respected
>them.**
>
>What about now? If someone who'd bullied you 20 years ago apologized 
>now, could you allow yourself to become friends?

There's not much I can say beyond "I agree with Shaun's response." 
It's not a matter of "allowing."

>When I went to camp the summer I was eleven,my cabinmates tried to 
>drown me, tied yarn all around my bed so I couldn't get out, set my 
>alarm clock after I went to sleep so it would go off at 2am and 
>everyone would hate me, put nair in my conditioner, ruined some - 
>but not all - of my books, and made me miserable. I changed bunks 
>after 5 weeks and the last 3 weeks were fine - b ut it was a 
>miserable thing while it lasted. And I've blocked out a lot of the 
>memroies, I know.

I'm afraid someone who only managed to make eight weeks of my life 
miserable would be a blip on the bully screen for me.  About half of 
what you list above I probably would have mentally categorized as 
deeply unfunny practical jokes rather than bullying per se, and tried 
to laugh them off - something I never attempted to do with a bully. 
The drowning sounds serious, and about like what I remember happening 
at camp.

>Imagine my surprise on the first day of my son's preschool last 
>fall, when one of his classmates' mums introduced hetself as Karen, 
>one of my bunkmates from that terrible summer. Midyear, she took me 
>out and apologized profusely, gave me some explanations of the "why" 
>- things I never knew - and we cried together. And we're friends now 
>- motivated by our kids being friends- but how can I remain angry at 
>a 32 year old psychologist for what she did at 12?

Oh, I'm not angry with most of my old bullies.  Mostly, I feel sorry 
for them, and wonder where they are now, and whether they ever 
mastered any other social skills.  If one of the followers - the 
Crabbes and Goyles, as it were - showed up now and apologized, I's 
certainly accept the apology.  I could be friendly acquaintances with 
them, if I thought the apology was sincere.  But I could never be 
friends with them, never offer them any real intimacy.  There are 
consequences to their behavior, and that is one of them; I'm not 
going to go out of my way to mollify those consequences.

Now, there are two bozos who routinely beat up my brother, broke his 
glasses, and destroyed his artwork for the three years I wasn't on 
the bus to protect him to whom I wouldn't even attempt to be civil if 
I ever met them again, even if they groveled on the floor in apology. 
Fortunately, I don't live in the same state, and my brother 
eventually learned that the tongue is sharper than the fist.

-- 
  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles at earthlink.net
=== Personal Growth Geek Code v0.4 ===
GG++ !T A-- M++s--- g+ B- C- P++++ a- b- h+ her++ E+ N n++ i f+
c++ S%++++&&># D R++ xc++ xm+ xi+ yd++ ys++(-) rt+ ro+ rp++++ rjk<+
ow+++ ofn+ oft++ op++ esk-- ey+ ek+++ pl++ pf++ pe++ U!



From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 28 04:07:31 2002
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 04:07:31 -0000
Subject: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday!
Message-ID: <ahvqm3+o2e2@eGroups.com>

Ok,

So in one minute it will be my son's 12th birthday (july 28).

*************HAPPY BIRTHDAY DAVID!!!***********************


I thought I'd throw out a bit of fluff/trivia tonite:

He asked me to make him a cake the same color as Harry's cake in the 
movie.  Anyone have any guesses??
(the color of the icing is actually listed in SS. 
--------------NO  CHEATING!!!---------------------

the winner gets a piece of cake sent to them!! (yes, I'm kidding!)

Good luck!!

Anna . . . 
(who can recall two days of being induced and finally ending  up with 
a c-section on day three like it was yesterday!!)






From macloudt at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Jul 28 11:48:10 2002
From: macloudt at yahoo.co.uk (macloudt)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 11:48:10 -0000
Subject: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday!
In-Reply-To: <ahvqm3+o2e2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai0llq+eoda@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "dradamsapple" wrote:
> Ok,
> 
> So in one minute it will be my son's 12th birthday (july 28).
> 
> *************HAPPY BIRTHDAY DAVID!!!***********************
>

Oh, this is *seriously* cool, because it's *my* son David's birthday 
as well!  Awesome, except that my little man's only 2 :)
 
> I thought I'd throw out a bit of fluff/trivia tonite:
> 
> He asked me to make him a cake the same color as Harry's cake in 
the 
> movie.  Anyone have any guesses??
> (the color of the icing is actually listed in SS. 
> --------------NO  CHEATING!!!---------------------
> 
> the winner gets a piece of cake sent to them!! (yes, I'm kidding!)
>

Well I've not checked my book so can't give an answer to your trivia 
question.  In fact, David's not getting a cake today :::::ducks 
flying objects:::::  We celebrated his birthday last weekend with a 
huge garden party when I made *3* cakes, and I'm afraid I'm all baked 
out now.  Never mind, he doesn't even know it's his birthday anyway.

I hope your David has a lovely day and enjoys his cake, whatever 
colour it is!

Mary Ann
(also induced, but once the meds started working had 1 hour and 43 
minutes of labour...sorry!)




From pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no  Sun Jul 28 12:37:39 2002
From: pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no (pengolodh_sc)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 12:37:39 -0000
Subject: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday!
In-Reply-To: <ahvqm3+o2e2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai0oij+ugar@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter, "dradamsapple" wrote:
> Ok,
> 
> So in one minute it will be my son's 12th birthday (july 28).
> 
> *************HAPPY BIRTHDAY DAVID!!!***********************
> 
> 
> I thought I'd throw out a bit of fluff/trivia tonite:
> 
> He asked me to make him a cake the same color as Harry's cake
> in the movie.  Anyone have any guesses??
> (the color of the icing is actually listed in SS. 
> --------------NO  CHEATING!!!---------------------


As I recall, the only colour mentioned in my copy of PS was the 
colour of the words "Happy birthday, Harry", which were written with 
green icing.  The movie showed the base icing as being pink, although 
I always thought of the base icing as being regular chocolate icing.

Best regards
Christian Stub?




From tabouli at unite.com.au  Sun Jul 28 14:11:17 2002
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 00:11:17 +1000
Subject: The salad plays Cupid's ally!
Message-ID: <003501c23640$a4778ba0$532032d2@price>

Just got off the phone to a friend of mine who had most cheering news.  For the three years I've known her, she has been in an on-off relationship which was making her thoroughly miserable, with a man she loved but with whom having a child (which she dearly wants to the point of seriously contemplating single motherhood: she's now 37) was not an option as he is 52, already has 4 and wants No More Ever.  To my delight she has just started what sounds like a very happy new relationship with just one major catch... he lives in England, from where she has just got back after three blissful weeks with him.  And while she has an English passport as well as an Australian one, she talked as if leaving her job to test the water somewhere in the UK was not an option.

This, to my mind, is taking the work ethic too far.  If the argument was it would be investing too much in a fledgeling relationship to contemplate going overseas, that I would see (and perhaps it *is* that really, and the job is the excuse).  However, being not overburdened with a work ethic myself (I quit my job with no great qualms and haven't looked back), I took up the quiver for Cupid.  I don't know that much about her field (she's an English as a Second Language specialist with a Masters in international student education and 15+ years' teaching experience with students at secondary and tertiary level, extremely hard-working and intelligent) but it does overlap with mine enough for me to be convinced she would be highly employable, certainly in Autralia and probably in the UK as well.  And Australian employers, especially those in the international student area, *like* overseas experience!  A year working in England would probably make her *more* employable, not less.

I put Cupid's case emphatically, suggesting that a good job is easier to find than a good relationship and she should at least *look into* the possibility, see what job opportunities there might be in England (not necessarily in the same town as him, just in the same country so they could actually see each other enough to figure out whether the relationship has staying power), raise the possibility with him the next time she sees him in person (Christmas time), etc.etc.

I don't know what came over me.

She didn't mind, though.  Said I'd actually voiced all the things she'd carefully avoided thinking about.  Even softened her "oh, but I could never leave my job, it seems so irresponsible" stance slightly.  Because, you know, she *could* do it, couldn't she?  She could at *least* look at her options.  (I would.  But then, my romantic soul has got me into trouble before...)

Any thoughts from British listmembers?  Any websites for this sort of thing?  I've heard rumours that Australians are actually considered to be good employees by British employers (contrary to stereotypes!), and the UK, like the US and Australia, must have hordes of international students who need language assistance and study skills training and the like.  And she's not a university student with a six week ESL certificate looking for holiday work, she's actually a qualified specialist with lots of experience...

Tabouli (twanging her harp hopefully and reaching for the heart shaped pink confetti)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 28 17:58:42 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 17:58:42 -0000
Subject: The salad plays Cupid's ally!
In-Reply-To: <003501c23640$a4778ba0$532032d2@price>
Message-ID: <ai1bci+9474@eGroups.com>

I don't know the first thing about getting a visa or whatever you 
have to do to teach in the UK, but I heartily endorse this--

> a good job is easier to find than a good relationship 

--and think Cupid can entrust his quiver to you whenever he needs to 
rest his wings and sip lemonade on a quiet loverless beach somewhere.

Amy
suddenly reminded that she has got to get cracking on that European 
citizenship paperwork before the EU tightens up the rules






From macloudt at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Jul 28 18:34:46 2002
From: macloudt at yahoo.co.uk (macloudt)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 18:34:46 -0000
Subject: The salad plays Cupid's ally!
In-Reply-To: <ai1bci+9474@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai1dg6+bpkd@eGroups.com>

Just a quickie...the UK is *gasping* for any teachers, never mind 
good ones.  If she looks into British teaching websites (I'm assuming 
such things exist) she's sure to be headhunted.

Let that fluffy pink arrow fly!

Mary Ann
(who immigrated to England to be with her husband, too)




From darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 28 23:10:56 2002
From: darkstar_2814 at yahoo.com (darkstar_2814)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 23:10:56 -0000
Subject: Has anybody here ever read...
Message-ID: <ai1tm0+l5dn@eGroups.com>

The Dark Knight Returns, by Frank Miller
Watchmen, by Alan Moore
Kingdom Come, by Mark Waid
Any of Neil Gaiman's _Sandman_ comic series


Jack
-----------
"They call me Yellow-Skinned Wackyman!!  But I'm the Creeper." - 
Creeper




From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 29 01:58:04 2002
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 01:58:04 -0000
Subject: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday! //And the winner is . . .
In-Reply-To: <ai0oij+ugar@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai27fc+31bo@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "pengolodh_sc" <pengolodh_sc at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter, "dradamsapple" wrote:
> > Ok,
> > 
> > So in one minute it will be my son's 12th birthday (july 28).
> > 
> > *************HAPPY BIRTHDAY DAVID!!!***********************
> > 
> > 
> > I thought I'd throw out a bit of fluff/trivia tonite:
> > 
> > He asked me to make him a cake the same color as Harry's cake
> > in the movie.  Anyone have any guesses??
> > (the color of the icing is actually listed in SS. 
> > --------------NO  CHEATING!!!---------------------
> 
> 
> As I recall, the only colour mentioned in my copy of PS was the 
> colour of the words "Happy birthday, Harry", which were written 
with 
> green icing.  The movie showed the base icing as being pink, 
although 
> I always thought of the base icing as being regular chocolate icing.
> 
> Best regards
> Christian Stub?


 Yeah Christian!!!
 Congratulations!! 
 You have won a piece of my son's birthday cake, made up of chocolate
 cake, fudge filling and yes, PINK frosting with GREEN lettering!!!  
**applause**applause** ;-) (er, the
fudge filling was my 
idea; the rest came from HP)

As soon as I figure out how to post my picture on here, you all can 
enjoy it too!!! Well, what's left of it anyway.

Here's to a Happy Harry Potter birthday week!!
(Dan Radcliffe, July 23; My son, *naturally, an HP fanatic*, July 28; 
 J.K Rowling, July 31; and of course our Harry, also July 31)!!

 Ok, let's make a wish and blow out the candles!!

Here's also to wishing J.K. the best of luck with book number 5!!

Anna . . .







From heidit at netbox.com  Mon Jul 29 02:04:35 2002
From: heidit at netbox.com (heidit at netbox.com)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 22:04:35 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday! //And the winner is . . .
In-Reply-To: aab
Message-ID: <16600080.2099747222@imcingular.com>

**
Here's to a Happy Harry Potter birthday week!!
(Dan Radcliffe, July 23; My son, *naturally, an HP fanatic*, July 28;=20
 J.K Rowling, July 31; and of course our Harry, also July 31)!!**

And my Harry, who'll be 3 on August 2. Yes, I did go into labor on the 31st (although it stopped) and yes, his name is semi-from the books. His full name is Harrison but we call him harry - and he's having an HP cake for his birthday.





From morrigan at byz.org  Mon Jul 29 02:27:22 2002
From: morrigan at byz.org (Vicki)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 21:27:22 -0500
Subject: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday! 
In-Reply-To: <16600080.2099747222@imcingular.com>
Message-ID: <OCEOIOOCLDBFPDHBBCEMIEAACIAA.morrigan@byz.org>

>Here's to a Happy Harry Potter birthday week!!
>(Dan Radcliffe, July 23; My son, *naturally, an HP fanatic*, July 28;=20
>J.K Rowling, July 31; and of course our Harry, also July 31)!!**

I had to jump in - and also on July 31st, my niece Lauren, who had the great
taste to be born on Harry's birthday, will be 1.  *beams like the proud
auntie she is*

Vicki
www.byz.org/~morrigan
www.livejournal.com/users/morrigan_veela




From gypsycaine at neo.rr.com  Mon Jul 29 02:36:15 2002
From: gypsycaine at neo.rr.com (Dee R)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 22:36:15 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] RE: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday!
References: <OCEOIOOCLDBFPDHBBCEMIEAACIAA.morrigan@byz.org>
Message-ID: <017901c236a8$b6763140$1f38d118@neo.rr.com>

Grins.  And our family tends to August and the beginning of the American school-term as our birthday of choice!  

Smiles.  At least this year I don't have to wait until then to read GOF!  (Big big thank you again to all who were soooo patient with me back when we were a club)

I'd like to wish ALL a Happy Birthday!  

Have fun!

Dee

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Vicki 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 10:27 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] RE: PS/SS trivia: Happy Birthday!


  >Here's to a Happy Harry Potter birthday week!!
  >(Dan Radcliffe, July 23; My son, *naturally, an HP fanatic*, July 28;=20
  >J.K Rowling, July 31; and of course our Harry, also July 31)!!**

  I had to jump in - and also on July 31st, my niece Lauren, who had the great
  taste to be born on Harry's birthday, will be 1.  *beams like the proud
  auntie she is*

  Vicki
  www.byz.org/~morrigan
  www.livejournal.com/users/morrigan_veela


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Is your message...
  An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
  Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
  Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
  None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
  Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

  Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________ 

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Jul 29 03:28:26 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 22:28:26 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] RE: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday!
References: <OCEOIOOCLDBFPDHBBCEMIEAACIAA.morrigan@byz.org> <017901c236a8$b6763140$1f38d118@neo.rr.com>
Message-ID: <004e01c236b0$011b3720$c29dcdd1@istu757>

Well, my birthday may not be in July, but it is August 31st, which is
exactly one month to the day after Harry Potter.  Surely that counts for
something.  I'm giving myself a birthday party with my students (1st grade)
and still debating between making cupcakes with Harry Potter decorations or
buying a Harry Potter cake from Wal-Mart.  I think it depends on whether my
local Wal-Mart gets in the new stuff for the Chamber of Secret cakes.  I saw
them at one Wal-Mart, but too far away to buy my cake from.  Decisions,
decisions.

Richelle

> Grins.  And our family tends to August and the beginning of the American
school-term as our birthday of choice!
>
> Smiles.  At least this year I don't have to wait until then to read GOF!
(Big big thank you again to all who were soooo patient with me back when we
were a club)
>
> I'd like to wish ALL a Happy Birthday!
>
> Have fun!
>
> Dee
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Vicki
>   To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 10:27 PM
>   Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] RE: PS/SS trivia: Happy Birthday!
>
>
>   >Here's to a Happy Harry Potter birthday week!!
>   >(Dan Radcliffe, July 23; My son, *naturally, an HP fanatic*, July
28;=20
>   >J.K Rowling, July 31; and of course our Harry, also July 31)!!**
>
>   I had to jump in - and also on July 31st, my niece Lauren, who had the
great
>   taste to be born on Harry's birthday, will be 1.  *beams like the proud
>   auntie she is*
>
>   Vicki
>   www.byz.org/~morrigan
>   www.livejournal.com/users/morrigan_veela
>
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>   ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
>   Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
>   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
>
>   Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary
material from posts to which you're replying!
>
>   Is your message...
>   An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to
HPFGU-Announcements.
>   Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
>   Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
>   None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
>   Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
>
>   Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>   ____________________________________________________________
>
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Is your message...
> An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
> Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
> Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
> None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
> Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
>
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 29 03:46:46 2002
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 03:46:46 -0000
Subject: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday!
In-Reply-To: <004e01c236b0$011b3720$c29dcdd1@istu757>
Message-ID: <ai2dr6+ej3s@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Richelle Votaw" <rvotaw at i...> wrote:
> Well, my birthday may not be in July, but it is August 31st, which 
is
> exactly one month to the day after Harry Potter.  Surely that 
counts for
> something.  I'm giving myself a birthday party with my students 
(1st grade)
> and still debating between making cupcakes with Harry Potter 
decorations or
> buying a Harry Potter cake from Wal-Mart.
  Decisions,
> decisions.
> 
> Richelle
> 
> 
Wow!

Richelle, you're a first grade teacher and you are actually 
contemplating a CAKE?  Any time I've brougt in "cake" for my older 
two, the teachers practically order me to bring in cupcakes (cake is 
too messy they tell me) Good luck!!
Either way I'm sure they will love you for it!! (and probably think 
you're the coolest teacher in school!!) None of my teachers ever did 
that!  But then, I'm old; we didn't have cake back then . . . 8-)

Happy *future* birthday!!

Anna . . .




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Jul 29 10:33:26 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 10:33:26 -0000
Subject: The salad plays Cupid's ally!
In-Reply-To: <003501c23640$a4778ba0$532032d2@price>
Message-ID: <ai35lm+cjot@eGroups.com>

Tabouli wrote:

> Any thoughts from British listmembers?  Any websites for this sort 
of thing?  I've heard rumours that Australians are actually 
considered to be good employees by British employers (contrary to 
stereotypes!), and the UK, like the US and Australia, must have 
hordes of international students who need language assistance and 
study skills training and the like.  And she's not a university 
student with a six week ESL certificate looking for holiday work, 
she's actually a qualified specialist with lots of experience...

There is certainly a shortage of teachers in ordinary schools - I'm 
not sure about international students, though.  The pay and 
conditions aren't brilliant.  Successive governments have played on 
the public perception that teachers work from 9 to 4 for 40 weeks in 
the year to jack up their workload, mostly with tests for pupils at 
every level.  (Since the tests are used to evaluate the schools they 
are becoming more and more useless to evaluate the pupils as schools 
compete to work the system.)

As for websites, the Department for Education and Science is at

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/index.htm

That led to:

http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/Useful_Sites/

Anyway, some questions your friend might want to ask herself:

 - would he do the same for her (I don't know about the 
practicalities of working in Aus long term if you are British)?

 - what does she think of living in Britain as such: the people, 
shopping, leisure, the people, climate, transport, the people, etc.? 
Would it matter what part of Britain?

 - (I was suggested to ask this one, with genders transposed, before 
getting married) would she be happy for this man to bring up her 
children?

 - is his family important to him, and, if so, what does she know 
about them, will they be a problem?

 - cost of living: if she gets a job in the SE, and doesn't have a 
sizeable wad of cash from Australia, forget independently buying a 
property bigger than a garage: reckon nearly ?100k per bedroom, 
roughly speaking.  Reputable lenders will offer up to 3x salary to 
buy, but she needs to watch that she may stop earning before the 
typical 25 year term is up.  Lenders are flexible so shorter term not 
a problem, but need to do sums on repayments to ensure she can cope 
if e.g. she has a child but no longer a man.  It's not so bad in the 
N and W.  Renting isn't cheap either.

 - if it didn't work out but only after a baby came, where would she 
want to raise it?  Would the child be allowed back into Aus?

(I assume she has done the basic stuff like has he asked for money, 
has he cancelled dates at the last moment etc indicating a con man)

David




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Mon Jul 29 13:25:49 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 08:25:49 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday!
References: <ai2dr6+ej3s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000801c23703$74efd720$f2a1cdd1@istu757>

> Wow!
>
> Richelle, you're a first grade teacher and you are actually
> contemplating a CAKE?  Any time I've brougt in "cake" for my older
> two, the teachers practically order me to bring in cupcakes (cake is
> too messy they tell me) Good luck!!
> Either way I'm sure they will love you for it!! (and probably think
> you're the coolest teacher in school!!) None of my teachers ever did
> that!  But then, I'm old; we didn't have cake back then . . . 8-)
>
> Happy *future* birthday!!

Thanks Anna!  My kids manage to make a mess even with cupcakes, so I just
make sure there's time to scrub down afterwards!  I bought a cake last year
and there were no large disasters. ;)

Richelle




From tabouli at unite.com.au  Mon Jul 29 14:12:52 2002
From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 00:12:52 +1000
Subject: The twisted flight of Cupid's arrow
Message-ID: <004f01c2370a$07a5c420$cfd932d2@price>

David:
> There is certainly a shortage of teachers in ordinary schools - I'm not sure about international students, though. The pay and conditions aren't brilliant. <

She isn't keen on being a secondary school teacher again: for the last 8 years or so she's worked at a tertiary level.  From what I saw from a cursory look on university job search engine this morning, there seem no shortage of international student language support jobs in the UK, though I don't know what's considered "good" pay.  Assuming dollar for pound equivalence in buying power, the salaries looked low to me, but I wouldn't really know.

David:
> - would he do the same for her (I don't know about the 
practicalities of working in Aus long term if you are British)?<

He's not in a position to.  He loves Australia (where they met), but he's a lawyer of some sort, and law isn't transportable, unlike ESL teaching.  Besides which, I doubt that Australia would let him in on anything other than a tourist or student visa unless he had an employer here lined up.  She on the other hand, is a British born duel British/Australian citizen who could work there with no visa problems, loves Britain, goes there regularly, and has lived there before for several years and travelled widely there, many British friends and relatives, etc. Don't know about the part of Britain, but she waxes lyrical about Cornwall and Edinburgh.  He lives in York.

She knows the cost of living in the UK all too well: she'd definitely be renting, with view to moving in with him if all went well.  She has a thoroughly mortagaged property in inner Melbourne, but it's in a prime position and would probably command enough rent to let the tenants pay it off for her in her absence.  He already has his own house as well.

David:
> - if it didn't work out but only after a baby came, where would she 
want to raise it? Would the child be allowed back into Aus?<

I imagine she'd prefer to raise it in Australia, where she has a larger support network and a two bedroom house.  (Hey, I'd babysit for her!)  If the child has one Australian parent, I don't think there's a problem visa wise, though personally it would of course be grim on several counts.  Mind you, she was actually talking about having a baby on her own anyway, and that knowing more than most would-be single mothers, as she shared her house with a single mother and newborn for three years and, as she told me, knows just how hard that would be.

Still.  I don't think there's much chance of her being corrupted by my irresponsible cupidity against her better judgment.  She's a very cautious, conscientious, honourable sort of person.  I just thought *someone* should wave the fluffy pink flag of True Love...

Tabouli.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 29 15:53:54 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 08:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: PS/SS  trivia: Happy Birthday! //And the winner is . . .
In-Reply-To: <16600080.2099747222@imcingular.com>
Message-ID: <20020729155354.51174.qmail@web13702.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  heidit at netbox.com wrote: 
**
Here's to a Happy Harry Potter birthday week!!
(Dan Radcliffe, July 23; My son, *naturally, an HP fanatic*, July 28;=20
J.K Rowling, July 31; and of course our Harry, also July 31)!!**

And my Harry, who'll be 3 on August 2. Yes, I did go into labor on the 31st (although it stopped) and yes, his name is semi-from the books. His full name is Harrison but we call him harry - and he's having an HP cake for his birthday.

 

Well, I certainly want to get in on this post! Happy Birthday to all of you! Can't forget Daniel's Birthday! That is our Wedding Anniversary! Roy and I have been together for 19 years going a 100! But this awesome with all these Birthdays! Heidi, your son is a great age! HAPPY BIRTHDAY EVERYBODY! ESPECIALLY THE KIDS! JKR, her day is special anyway!

Schnoogles.

Wanda the Witch of Revere,Massachusetts and Her Very Merry Band of Muggles 100%


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no  Mon Jul 29 20:56:10 2002
From: pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no (pengolodh_sc)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 20:56:10 -0000
Subject: While on the topic of birthdays
Message-ID: <ai4a5b+2cu1@eGroups.com>

Have any others here seen this story (link at end of message - 
otherwise that banner will hide part of it)- an American family on 
holiday in North Wueensland, Australia, spent more than AU$ 20 000 
(around US$10 000, I think) on their son's 13th birthday, making it a 
Harry Potter recreation?  The whole thing included flying letters, 
letter-delivering owls, steam-trains, actors playing Hagrid, Ron, 
Hermione, Professor Dumbledore, and there was a recreated Great 
Hall.  Apparently the event ended with a pyrotechnic display of some 
battle between Harry and Voldemort. The story was linked from the-
leaky-cauldron.org today.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,4744864%255E2,00.html




From mdemeran at hotmail.com  Mon Jul 29 21:55:22 2002
From: mdemeran at hotmail.com (demeranville)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 21:55:22 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Kristin and Meg!
In-Reply-To: <ahrt8s+nk8p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai4dka+uaeg@eGroups.com>

Many thanks to everyone for the birthday wishes. Since I was on 
vacation, I am just getting back to see the emails. Happy Birthday 
Kristin! Hope yours was as interesting as mine proved to be :-)! 
Happy birthday to all those July babies out there.

Meg 


--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "alyeskakc" <Alyeskakc at a...> wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the warm birthday wishes yesterday. Happy 
> Birthday Meg! Hope it was a good one.
> 
> 
> And here's to all the July babies, Hope you all have(or had) a very 
> Happy birthday and magical birthday. 
> 
> 
> Kristin
> 
> 
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., Sheryll Townsend <s_ings at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > We have two birthdays honourees today, Meg and
> > Kristin. Birthday owls can be sent care of this list
> > or directly to the Meg at mdemeran at h... and
> > Kristin at alyeskakc at a...
> > 
> > May the day be magical for both of you.
> > 
> > Happy Birthday, Kristin!
> > Happy Birthday, Meg!
> >




From jenw74 at hotmail.com  Mon Jul 29 22:42:09 2002
From: jenw74 at hotmail.com (jenw74 at hotmail.com)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 17:42:09 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] While on the topic of birthdays
References: <ai4a5b+2cu1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <LAW2-OE33Dxf9qWncjh000000b5@hotmail.com>

Wow thanks for letting us in on that story!  That is one spoiled kid!  I can hardly believe the extent they went for to make that birthday party so big.

I could never do that for my child.  I do think it is a neat idea for something like Make-A-Wish to do for a terminally ill Harry Potter fan.  

Otherwise, that is entirely too much money to spend on a three to five hour party!

Jennifer




  Have any others here seen this story (link at end of message - 
  otherwise that banner will hide part of it)- an American family on 
  holiday in North Wueensland, Australia, spent more than AU$ 20 000 
  (around US$10 000, I think) on their son's 13th birthday, making it a 
  Harry Potter recreation?  The whole thing included flying letters, 
  letter-delivering owls, steam-trains, actors playing Hagrid, Ron, 
  Hermione, Professor Dumbledore, and there was a recreated Great 
  Hall.  Apparently the event ended with a pyrotechnic display of some 
  battle between Harry and Voldemort. The story was linked from the-
  leaky-cauldron.org today.

  http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,4744864%255E2,00.html




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 00:01:07 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 00:01:07 -0000
Subject: While on the topic of birthdays
In-Reply-To: <LAW2-OE33Dxf9qWncjh000000b5@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <ai4l03+6qv5@eGroups.com>

Jennifer wrote:

> Wow thanks for letting us in on that story!  That is one spoiled 
kid!  I can hardly believe the extent they went for to make that 
birthday party so big.
> 
> I could never do that for my child.  I do think it is a neat idea 
for something like Make-A-Wish to do for a terminally ill Harry Potter 
fan.  
> 
> Otherwise, that is entirely too much money to spend on a three to 
five hour party!

And the most outrageous part of all:  they didn't invite us!

They could've defrayed the cost of the party (and future psychotherapy 
which this child will no doubt require) by charging $1 admission to 
the general public.

Amy Z




From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 04:03:38 2002
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 04:03:38 -0000
Subject: While on the topic of birthdays
In-Reply-To: <ai4a5b+2cu1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai536q+ec1d@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "pengolodh_sc" <pengolodh_sc at y...> wrote:
> Have any others here seen this story (link at end of message - 
> otherwise that banner will hide part of it)- an American family on 
> holiday in North Wueensland, Australia, spent more than AU$ 20 000 
> (around US$10 000, I think) on their son's 13th birthday, making it 
a 
> Harry Potter recreation?  


Ok,

Since I started this whole thread, let me tell you what my TWELVE 
year old just got for his birthday (from everyone):  A digital camera 
and case (total cost, about $60.00; a game for his nintendo (which as 
some of you may know, are IMPOSSIBLE to find nowadays, cost about 
$40.00, by the way, the game is used, bought at a "already used" 
gaming store; Jimmy Neutron on DVD at $19.99' a game for his Gameboy, 
with a new carrying case and light so when we go camping he can use 
it at dusk/dark light, costing about $55.00 for the game and case and 
light; quite a bit of cash (about $70.00) and a new leather wallet to 
carry all that cash.  And a whole lot of love from his family. 
(not to say that that 13year old wasn't loved, but REALLY NOW!!!)

I think my son's birthday presents were better.

Anna . . .




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 12:48:04 2002
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 08:48:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Happy Birthday, Christian!
Message-ID: <20020730124804.93892.qmail@web14612.mail.yahoo.com>

*Wheels in very large cake and a huge box of
decorations. Places cake on side table and proceeds to
hang streamers*

Yes, another birthday. You, over there, help me blow
up these balloons before anyone gets here.

Today is Christian's birthday and owls may be sent
care of this list or directly to him at:
pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no

I hope your day is filled with magic, fun and many
chocolate frogs.

Happy Birthday, Christian!

Sheryll

P.S. Don't leave the room in too much of a mess, I
understand some guy named Harry has a birthday
tomorrow. :)

=====
"We need to be united and strong. We'll have losses and scares, sure. And you'll be there for each other, helping each other through the bad times."
 blpurdom - Harry Potter and the Psychic Serpent, Chapter 26

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 12:53:22 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 05:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday, Christian!
In-Reply-To: <20020730124804.93892.qmail@web14612.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20020730125322.95005.qmail@web13704.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  Sheryll Townsend <s_ings at yahoo.com> wrote: 

Yes, another birthday. Today is Christian's birthday 
I hope your day is filled with magic, fun and many
chocolate frogs.

Happy Birthday, Christian!

Sheryll

P.S. Don't leave the room in too much of a mess, I
understand some guy named Harry has a birthday
tomorrow. :)

=====
All right more party fun! HAPPY BIRTHDAY CHRISTIAN! Have fun today and hope you get lots of HP goodies! Don't worry about the mess, we all are going to chip in and help make it a fun mess and help clean up for HP's Birthday tomorrow!

Schnoogles,

Wanda the Witch of Revere,Massachusetts and Her Very Merry Band of Muggles 100%


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 15:02:06 2002
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden faile)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 08:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday, Christian!
In-Reply-To: <20020730124804.93892.qmail@web14612.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20020730150206.31745.qmail@web14601.mail.yahoo.com>


Happy Birthday Christian!!! Hope it's as wonderful as
you are. You deserve the best.

Laila

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com



From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 15:20:14 2002
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden faile)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 08:20:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: While on the topic of birthdays
In-Reply-To: <ai536q+ec1d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020730152014.45702.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>


--- dradamsapple <dradamsapple at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "pengolodh_sc"
> <pengolodh_sc at y...> wrote:
> > Have any others here seen this story an
> American family on holiday in North Wueensland,
Australia, spent more than AU$ 20 000 (around US$10
000, I think) on their son's 13th birthday, making it 
> a Harry Potter recreation?  
> 
> 
> Yes I have and I'd like to say that his kid is
spoiled, but well... I really don't know him after
all. Who knows what kind of money these people have
and what that kid is used to? Even if they have money,
this might be a one time thing. How many of us would
like to see our dreams come true? I think it's kind of
neat that they could do that for him. It's something
he'll always remember and it's great to get a little
magic in this otherwise mundane, very muggle, life.
Now can anyone help me come up with a realistic
Hogwarts letter before Sept.?

Laila


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com



From draco382 at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 15:38:15 2002
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 15:38:15 -0000
Subject: Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
Message-ID: <ai6bt7+b6fh@eGroups.com>

Hi,
Seeing as tomorrow is the big day, I thought I might buy myself a bag 
of Bertie Botts Every flavor beans, but I've search high and low in 
just about every grocery store we have around here with no luck.  Can 
anyone tell me which stores carry this item?  Is it even available in 
the states?  
I don't think I can take much more of this...every time I hear 
about "dirt flavored" beans, my mouth starts watering, you see...

Thanks for the help!!

~draco382





From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 16:25:12 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 16:25:12 -0000
Subject: Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
In-Reply-To: <ai6bt7+b6fh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai6el8+jntj@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:
> Hi,
> Seeing as tomorrow is the big day, I thought I might buy myself a 
bag 
> of Bertie Botts Every flavor beans, but I've search high and low in 
> just about every grocery store we have around here with no luck.  
Can 
> anyone tell me which stores carry this item?  Is it even available 
in 
> the states?  


Hi, Draco--

I've seen them in Borders as recently as late May.  Good luck!

Amy




From golden_faile at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 17:47:28 2002
From: golden_faile at yahoo.com (golden faile)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 10:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
In-Reply-To: <ai6bt7+b6fh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20020730174728.23716.qmail@web14608.mail.yahoo.com>


--- draco382 <draco382 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Seeing as tomorrow is the big day, I thought I might
> buy myself a bag 
> of Bertie Botts Every flavor beans, but I've search
> high and low in 
> just about every grocery store we have around here
> with no luck.  Can 
> anyone tell me which stores carry this item?  Is it
> even available in 
> the states?  

I have found them in Target, Barnes and Nobles,
K-mart, Toys'r'us. Call around to a couple of places
that have HP merchandise and you should be able to
find them.Hope I've been helpful.

Laila


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com



From jenw74 at hotmail.com  Tue Jul 30 18:19:53 2002
From: jenw74 at hotmail.com (jenw74 at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 13:19:53 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
References: <ai6bt7+b6fh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <LAW2-OE15trUVYKkpLT00000577@hotmail.com>

Try Wal-Mart! My sisters and I got ours there. STAY far away from pepper, sardine and booger flavors!

Jennifer

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: draco382 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:38 AM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?


  Hi,
  Seeing as tomorrow is the big day, I thought I might buy myself a bag 
  of Bertie Botts Every flavor beans, but I've search high and low in 
  just about every grocery store we have around here with no luck.  Can 
  anyone tell me which stores carry this item?  Is it even available in 
  the states?  
  I don't think I can take much more of this...every time I hear 
  about "dirt flavored" beans, my mouth starts watering, you see...

  Thanks for the help!!

  ~draco382



        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Is your message...
  An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
  Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
  Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
  None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
  Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

  Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________ 

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From macloudt at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Jul 30 19:04:53 2002
From: macloudt at yahoo.co.uk (macloudt)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 19:04:53 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday, Christian!
In-Reply-To: <20020730124804.93892.qmail@web14612.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ai6o0l+9qed@eGroups.com>

Sheryll wrote:

> Today is Christian's birthday and owls may be sent
> care of this list or directly to him at:
> pengolodh_sc at y...

Ooh, another reason to break out the butterbeer!  Christian, I hope 
you have a great day and that the HP fairies are good to you.

Mary Ann :)




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 30 23:47:13 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 16:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Congradulations to mods!
Message-ID: <20020730234713.4999.qmail@web13701.mail.yahoo.com>


Congradulations to all of you! Hope I don't get into any MOD trouble with my posts! But hay, I'm only human and sometimes my fingers go faster than my brain or the other way around! Usually the other way around! Again, CONGRADULATIONS!

Wanda the Witch of Revere,Massachusetts and Her Very Merry Band of Muggles 100%


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Wed Jul 31 01:03:49 2002
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 11:03:49 +1000
Subject: Bullying
In-Reply-To: <20020730234713.4999.qmail@web13701.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3D47C415.1736.982E3E@localhost>

I just received a packet of information relating to my bullying committee work, and 
given the recent discussion here, thought that one part of it might be interesting. 
Moves are afoot to use the HP novels in a formalised way to help address bullying 
in schools.

The plan is to use passages and the like from the books (and possibly scenes from 
the film(s)) to provoke discussion on bullying, and try to make more kids understand 
why teasing/bullying effects others, and appropriate behaviour. How things that 
seem funny to you, can really hurt another (talking about the 'prank' involving 
Snape). If it gets done properly, it'll be quite detailed - not just looking at obvious 
cases like Neville, and Hermione, but dealing with characters like Myrtle as well.

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately |webpage: http://www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       |email: drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in
common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter
the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen
to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who:
The Face of Evil | Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 31 02:08:26 2002
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 02:08:26 -0000
Subject: Where can I Find Bertie Botts? - Found them!
In-Reply-To: <LAW2-OE15trUVYKkpLT00000577@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <ai7gqq+qtjb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., <jenw74 at h...> wrote:
> Try Wal-Mart! My sisters and I got ours there. STAY far away from 
pepper, sardine and booger flavors!
> 
> Jennifer
> 

Thank you to everyone who gave me ideas on where to find BB Every 
Flavor beans...I ended up finding them in a Toys R Us.  And yes, 
I've already tried the pepper and sardines...yeah..that sardine 
flavor takes a while to get down, huh?  Unfortunately (or 
fortunatly) I haven't found booger or vomit yet...but i'm sure i'll 
come across them when taking a bite out of what i think is "peach."

thanks guys!

~draco382






From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Jul 31 02:31:56 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 21:31:56 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
References: <ai6bt7+b6fh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007101c2383a$711a41c0$689dcdd1@istu757>

The only place I have found them is in Toys R Us.  They haven't got the new
ones in yet around here, just the ones in the red bag.  Sorry, no dirt
flavor there.  Will grass do? :)

Richelle

> Hi,
> Seeing as tomorrow is the big day, I thought I might buy myself a bag
> of Bertie Botts Every flavor beans, but I've search high and low in
> just about every grocery store we have around here with no luck.  Can
> anyone tell me which stores carry this item?  Is it even available in
> the states?
> I don't think I can take much more of this...every time I hear
> about "dirt flavored" beans, my mouth starts watering, you see...
>
> Thanks for the help!!
>
> ~draco382
>
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Is your message...
> An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
> Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
> Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
> None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
> Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
>
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




From rvotaw at i-55.com  Wed Jul 31 02:36:18 2002
From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 21:36:18 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
References: <ai6bt7+b6fh@eGroups.com> <LAW2-OE15trUVYKkpLT00000577@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <00b601c2383b$0d337fe0$689dcdd1@istu757>

Hey, I actually like the pepper one!  I haven't gotten up the courage to try
the booger one yet, though.  I did taste the sardine--gross.  The
horseradish is gross too!  Grass is not too bad.

Richelle

> Try Wal-Mart! My sisters and I got ours there. STAY far away from pepper,
sardine and booger flavors!
>
> Jennifer
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: draco382
>   To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:38 AM
>   Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
>
>
>   Hi,
>   Seeing as tomorrow is the big day, I thought I might buy myself a bag
>   of Bertie Botts Every flavor beans, but I've search high and low in
>   just about every grocery store we have around here with no luck.  Can
>   anyone tell me which stores carry this item?  Is it even available in
>   the states?
>   I don't think I can take much more of this...every time I hear
>   about "dirt flavored" beans, my mouth starts watering, you see...
>
>   Thanks for the help!!
>
>   ~draco382
>
>
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>   ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
>   Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
>   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
>
>   Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary
material from posts to which you're replying!
>
>   Is your message...
>   An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to
HPFGU-Announcements.
>   Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
>   Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
>   None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
>   Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
>
>   Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>   ____________________________________________________________
>
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
>
> Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
>
> Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
from posts to which you're replying!
>
> Is your message...
> An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
> Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
> Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
> None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
> Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
>
> Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> ____________________________________________________________
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




From gypsycaine at neo.rr.com  Wed Jul 31 02:33:36 2002
From: gypsycaine at neo.rr.com (Dee R)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 22:33:36 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
References: <ai6bt7+b6fh@eGroups.com> <LAW2-OE15trUVYKkpLT00000577@hotmail.com> <00b601c2383b$0d337fe0$689dcdd1@istu757>
Message-ID: <043301c2383a$bc0814a0$1f38d118@neo.rr.com>

Boogie isn't too bad.  Not the best in the pack (that's chocolate!) but it's not as bad as sardine.    

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Richelle Votaw 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:36 PM
  Subject: Re: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?


  Hey, I actually like the pepper one!  I haven't gotten up the courage to try
  the booger one yet, though.  I did taste the sardine--gross.  The
  horseradish is gross too!  Grass is not too bad.

  Richelle

  > Try Wal-Mart! My sisters and I got ours there. STAY far away from pepper,
  sardine and booger flavors!
  >
  > Jennifer
  >
  >   ----- Original Message -----
  >   From: draco382
  >   To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com
  >   Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:38 AM
  >   Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
  >
  >
  >   Hi,
  >   Seeing as tomorrow is the big day, I thought I might buy myself a bag
  >   of Bertie Botts Every flavor beans, but I've search high and low in
  >   just about every grocery store we have around here with no luck.  Can
  >   anyone tell me which stores carry this item?  Is it even available in
  >   the states?
  >   I don't think I can take much more of this...every time I hear
  >   about "dirt flavored" beans, my mouth starts watering, you see...
  >
  >   Thanks for the help!!
  >
  >   ~draco382
  >
  >
  >
  >         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
  >               ADVERTISEMENT
  >
  >
  >
  >   ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
  >
  >   Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
  >   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
  >
  >   Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary
  material from posts to which you're replying!
  >
  >   Is your message...
  >   An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to
  HPFGU-Announcements.
  >   Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
  >   Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
  >   None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
  >   Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
  MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
  >
  >   Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  >   ____________________________________________________________
  >
  >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  >
  >
  >
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >
  >
  >
  > ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________
  >
  > Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/
  >
  > Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material
  from posts to which you're replying!
  >
  > Is your message...
  > An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
  > Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
  > Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
  > None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
  > Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods --
  MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com
  >
  > Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  > ____________________________________________________________
  >
  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  >
  >


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Is your message...
  An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
  Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
  Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
  None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
  Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

  Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________ 

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dradamsapple at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 31 03:32:30 2002
From: dradamsapple at yahoo.com (dradamsapple)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 03:32:30 -0000
Subject: Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
In-Reply-To: <ai6bt7+b6fh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai7loe+uusm@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "draco382" <draco382 at y...> wrote:
> Hi,
> Seeing as tomorrow is the big day, I thought I might buy myself a 
bag 
> of Bertie Botts Every flavor beans, but I've search high and low in 
> just about every grocery store we have around here with no luck.  
Can 
> anyone tell me which stores carry this item?  Is it even available 
in 
> the states?  
> 
> ~draco382


Hey Draco,

(well, I never thought I'd be actually calling someone by that name!!)

Any candy store that sells Jelly Belly jelly beans will no doubt also 
carry Bertie Botts, as it is the Jelly Belly company that makes 
Bertie's beans.  We have a candy store in the local outlet mall 
called "Fuzziwiggs", that sells loose Jelly Belly beans, so you can 
just by a half pound of strawberry shortcake beans if that is your 
flavor.  The Bertie Botts tend to be a little more expensive in the 
candy stores than at Target or Walmart, etc., (the beans are 
sometimes found in the toy section, or at the checkout).
Good luck and have a pear flavored one for me.

Anna . . .




From lilac_bearry at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 31 04:22:05 2002
From: lilac_bearry at yahoo.com (Lilac)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 21:22:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Halloween Scare
Message-ID: <20020731042205.96876.qmail@web40303.mail.yahoo.com>


Hi, everyone!

I'm Lilac, and new to the OT chatter,  but not-so-new to HGFGU.  There were some messages about Halloween and birthdays.  I've got a bit of a Halloween/Birthday story for you...

My husband's due date was October 31st, but he was born 3 MONTHS EARLY on July 28th, 1968.  So, he likes to say "I was supposed to be a spook on Halloween, but I ended up spooking the hell out of everyone!" 

He was born outside the hospital with my mother-in-law catching him before he hit the sidewalk.  She tells it better than I do (she was there, of course.  I wasn't even born yet...).  Anyway, I'm sure glad he's here and he's a miracle to me!  

Lilac =)



 

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

"Tut, tut --- hardly any of you remembered that my favorite color is *lilac*. I say so in Year with the Yeti." 

--Gilderoy Lockhart, COS



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 31 04:52:31 2002
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 04:52:31 -0000
Subject: Where can I Find Bertie Botts?
In-Reply-To: <ai7loe+uusm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai7qef+e3dv@eGroups.com>

I believe I found a "booger".  Well, i'd say that the best one so 
far has definetly been "pear" followed by "butter popcorn."  Pepper 
and grass were...well...realistic.  i really wonder how much time 
they spent researching the gross flavors.  Someone (maybe on a 
different list) mentioned that they could see a group of 12-year-old 
boys in lab coats testing to see if a bean was boogery enough.  I 
laughed then, but now I'm beginning to see a lot of truth in it...

Thanks again for the help!

~draco382 
(hehe...just had to be the "Draco" of a HP list)

Anna wrote: 
> Hey Draco,
> 
> (well, I never thought I'd be actually calling someone by that 
name!!)
> 
> Any candy store that sells Jelly Belly jelly beans will no doubt 
also 
> carry Bertie Botts, as it is the Jelly Belly company that makes 
> Bertie's beans.  We have a candy store in the local outlet mall 
> called "Fuzziwiggs", that sells loose Jelly Belly beans, so you 
can 
> just by a half pound of strawberry shortcake beans if that is your 
> flavor.  The Bertie Botts tend to be a little more expensive in 
the 
> candy stores than at Target or Walmart, etc., (the beans are 
> sometimes found in the toy section, or at the checkout).
> Good luck and have a pear flavored one for me.
> 
> Anna . . 





From active at myoffice.net.au  Wed Jul 31 10:11:38 2002
From: active at myoffice.net.au (tx031)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 10:11:38 -0000
Subject: Happy Birthday
Message-ID: <ai8d4q+befp@eGroups.com>

To Harry, St. Ignatius, my daughter Caroline aged 8 & James Renwick 
in Melbourne aged nearly 40 - what an eclectic bunch 




From s_ings at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 31 12:06:51 2002
From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:06:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Birthday celebration in progress!
Message-ID: <20020731120651.52588.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>

Come on in everyone, join the party. The streamers
have been hung, the balloons are blown up, the cake is
waiting and there's a huge side table loaded with
food.

You all know why we've celebrating today. Harry Potter
and J.K. Rowling are having birthdays! Without them,
we likely wouldn't have found each other or shared the
joy and fun that these lists and others have brought
us. I've been around HPFGU for two years and have seen
it grow and blossom, all thanks to our shared
appreciation JKR and the world she's created. The fact
that so many of us have come together from such
diverse backgrounds and managed to keep this list
growing is a true reason to celebrate. 

Help yourself to the food and join the celebration!

Happy Birthday, Harry!
Happy Birthday, Ms. Rowling - may your muse be kind to
you!

Sheryll

=====
"We need to be united and strong. We'll have losses and scares, sure. And you'll be there for each other, helping each other through the bad times."
 blpurdom - Harry Potter and the Psychic Serpent, Chapter 26

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 31 12:11:20 2002
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (lupinesque)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:11:20 -0000
Subject: TBAY--well, to be honest, blatant fanfic.  So sue me.
Message-ID: <ai8k58+t8h0@eGroups.com>

The Even Worse than the Worst Birthday

Harry woke with a start, his left earlobe throbbing.  "It only does 
that on one day of the year," he thought.  He rolled over, put his 
glasses on upside down, and squinted at the luminous face of his 
alarm clock.  His stomach would have given a funny jolt, but tired of 
being responsible for all of Harry's emotional reactions, it had left 
for a week in Majorca.  It was ten minutes after midnight: his 
birthday.

He got up and stretched.  Suddenly he heard a swoosh as if a thousand 
Nike-footed Michael Jordans were outside his window and he dived 
under the bed just in time to avoid being decapitated by dozens of 
outstretched wings.  Owls were landing everywhere--on the bed, on the 
desk, inside the wardrobe.  One was trying to pry up the loose 
floorboard where he usually hid his Jelly Slugs from Dudley, and 
another, which appeared to be carrying leaflets and wearing a sweater 
emblazoned with "Post-Owls Unite for Freedom!", was picking at the 
lock of Hedwig's cage with its beak.  Harry swatted ineffectually at 
the latter and informed the former, "There's nothing in there but 
Charms homework."  Then he surveyed the scene.

Most of the owls, which now stood staring at him with their 
unblinking eyes, had letters or packages tied to their legs.  He 
began untying them.  "Ron Weasley . . . Hermione Granger . . . 
Parvati Patil . . . Daedalus Diggle . . . Vincent Crabbe?"  It seemed 
as if everyone he knew had sent him something for his birthday.  
Harry tore open wrapping after wrapping, peered at one card after 
another, growing more and more frantic.  Surely, in all these piles 
of gifts, there had to be . . .

But no.  What he really wanted for his birthday wasn't there.  Not 
one package contained the telltale heft of a hardbound book; not one 
card bore the three magical initials that would mean he could return 
for his longed-for fifth year of school.

"Come on, Jo," he whispered miserably into his pillow.  "Let me go 
back to Hogwarts.  I'm twenty-two years old!"

Amy Z




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Wed Jul 31 13:39:22 2002
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 13:39:22 -0000
Subject: TBAY--well, to be honest, blatant fanfic.  So sue me.
In-Reply-To: <ai8k58+t8h0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai8paa+djcv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "lupinesque" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:
> The Even Worse than the Worst Birthday

LOL! A star is born

David




From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 31 15:48:30 2002
From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda the Witch)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:48:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Birthday celebration in progress!
In-Reply-To: <20020731120651.52588.qmail@web14602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20020731154830.20454.qmail@web13701.mail.yahoo.com>


 
  Sheryll Townsend <s_ings at yahoo.com> wrote: 
Come on in everyone, join the party. 
You all know why we've celebrating today. Harry Potter
and J.K. Rowling are having birthdays! Without them,
we likely wouldn't have found each other or shared the
joy and fun that these lists and others have brought
us. 

HAPPY BIRTHDAY HARRY POTTER AND JKROWLING! Absolutely today is a very special day! All of us in the Mallett household are very happy about today! As part of there summer reading homework, Hp book one was a required reading selection by the kids! So, we started all over again! This list is our favorite for learning so much more about the books and others theories and so much more! Happy Day for everybody! New friends and old friends lets party harty!

Schnoogles,

Wanda the Witch of Revere,Massachusetts and Her Very Merry Band of Muggles 100%


"When you come to the edge of all the light you know, and
are about to step off into the darkness of the unknown, faith is knowing one of two things
will happen; There will be something solid to stand on, or you will be
taught how to fly."......Unknown.




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jmmears at comcast.net  Wed Jul 31 16:21:57 2002
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 16:21:57 -0000
Subject: TBAY--well, to be honest, blatant fanfic.  So sue me.
In-Reply-To: <ai8k58+t8h0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai92r5+s195@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "lupinesque" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:
> The Even Worse than the Worst Birthday
> 
> Harry woke with a start, his left earlobe throbbing.  "It only 
does 
> that on one day of the year," he thought.  He rolled over, put his 
> glasses on upside down, and squinted at the luminous face of his 
> alarm clock.  His stomach would have given a funny jolt, but tired 
of 
> being responsible for all of Harry's emotional reactions, it had 
left 
> for a week in Majorca.  It was ten minutes after midnight: his 
> birthday.
> 
> He got up and stretched.  Suddenly he heard a swoosh as if a 
thousand 
> Nike-footed Michael Jordans were outside his window and he dived 
> under the bed just in time to avoid being decapitated by dozens of 
> outstretched wings.  Owls were landing everywhere--on the bed, on 
the 
> desk, inside the wardrobe.  One was trying to pry up the loose 
> floorboard where he usually hid his Jelly Slugs from Dudley, and 
> another, which appeared to be carrying leaflets and wearing a 
sweater 
> emblazoned with "Post-Owls Unite for Freedom!", was picking at the 
> lock of Hedwig's cage with its beak.  Harry swatted ineffectually 
at 
> the latter and informed the former, "There's nothing in there but 
> Charms homework."  Then he surveyed the scene.
> 
> Most of the owls, which now stood staring at him with their 
> unblinking eyes, had letters or packages tied to their legs.  He 
> began untying them.  "Ron Weasley . . . Hermione Granger . . . 
> Parvati Patil . . . Daedalus Diggle . . . Vincent Crabbe?"  It 
seemed 
> as if everyone he knew had sent him something for his birthday.  
> Harry tore open wrapping after wrapping, peered at one card after 
> another, growing more and more frantic.  Surely, in all these 
piles 
> of gifts, there had to be . . .
> 
> But no.  What he really wanted for his birthday wasn't there.  Not 
> one package contained the telltale heft of a hardbound book; not 
one 
> card bore the three magical initials that would mean he could 
return 
> for his longed-for fifth year of school.
> 
> "Come on, Jo," he whispered miserably into his pillow.  "Let me go 
> back to Hogwarts.  I'm twenty-two years old!"
> 

Congratulations Amy!  Finally a fanfic even I can enjoy. I 
particularly enjoy the bit about Harry's overworked stomach taking 
off for Majorca for what I'm sure is a much needed rest.
Now, if only JKR could read this.....

Jo Serenadust




From jenw74 at hotmail.com  Wed Jul 31 16:43:55 2002
From: jenw74 at hotmail.com (jenw74 at hotmail.com)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 11:43:55 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Halloween Scare
References: <20020731042205.96876.qmail@web40303.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <LAW2-OE39WQTHL2bti200000a66@hotmail.com>

First of all, Happy Belated Birthday to your husband!
How in the world did he make it, coming out at only 28 weeks in 1960?!  Wow, he really is your miracle!
LOL at how your husband sees his early arrival,

Jennifer

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lilac 
  To: ot chatter 
  Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 11:22 PM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Halloween Scare



  Hi, everyone!

  I'm Lilac, and new to the OT chatter,  but not-so-new to HGFGU.  There were some messages about Halloween and birthdays.  I've got a bit of a Halloween/Birthday story for you...

  My husband's due date was October 31st, but he was born 3 MONTHS EARLY on July 28th, 1968.  So, he likes to say "I was supposed to be a spook on Halloween, but I ended up spooking the hell out of everyone!" 

  He was born outside the hospital with my mother-in-law catching him before he hit the sidewalk.  She tells it better than I do (she was there, of course.  I wasn't even born yet...).  Anyway, I'm sure glad he's here and he's a miracle to me!  

  Lilac =)





  ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

  "Tut, tut --- hardly any of you remembered that my favorite color is *lilac*. I say so in Year with the Yeti." 

  --Gilderoy Lockhart, COS



  ---------------------------------
  Do You Yahoo!?
  Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
         
        Click here to find your contact lenses! 

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Is your message...
  An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
  Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
  Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
  None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
  Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

  Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________ 

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jenw74 at hotmail.com  Wed Jul 31 17:03:54 2002
From: jenw74 at hotmail.com (jenw74 at hotmail.com)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:03:54 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday
References: <ai8d4q+befp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <LAW2-OE23wLHI1VHt8f00000a45@hotmail.com>

You forgot JK Rowling...

Happy birthday to everyone who celebrates a birthday today, on and off list :)

Jennifer
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: tx031 
  To: HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 5:11 AM
  Subject: [HPFGU-OTChatter] Happy Birthday


  To Harry, St. Ignatius, my daughter Caroline aged 8 & James Renwick 
  in Melbourne aged nearly 40 - what an eclectic bunch 


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       

  ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________

  Before posting to any HPFGU list, you MUST read the group's Admin Files!
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

  Remember to use accurate subject headings and to snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying!

  Is your message...
  An announcement of merchandise, news etc.? Send it to HPFGU-Announcements.
  Movie-related? Send it to HPFGU-Movie.
  Referencing *only* the books? Send it to HPforGrownups.
  None of the above? OT? Send it to HPFGU-OTChatter.
  Unsure? Other questions? Ask your personal List Elf or the Mods -- MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com

  Unsubscribing? Email HPFGU-OTChatter-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
  ____________________________________________________________ 

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From rhiannon333 at hotmail.com  Wed Jul 31 17:49:31 2002
From: rhiannon333 at hotmail.com (rhiannon333au)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:49:31 -0000
Subject: Amy's Blatant fanfic. 
In-Reply-To: <ai8k58+t8h0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai97vb+bosl@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "lupinesque" <lupinesque at y...> 
wrote a wonderful piece of fanfic in honour of The Big Birthday - 
superb!  *applauds*  I agree, if only we could get JKR to read 
and take heed! Thank you!

Megan

PS: The lawyer's letter was delayed by the lack of available owls 
today, so it may reach you tomorrow.




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Wed Jul 31 22:28:54 2002
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (cindysphynx)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 22:28:54 -0000
Subject: TBAY--well, to be honest, blatant fanfic.  So sue me.
In-Reply-To: <ai8k58+t8h0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <ai9ob6+s1fs@eGroups.com>

<snip Most Excellent TBAY-ish post> 


Well, well, well.  Amy has a *gift!*  She's a fanfic writer her own 
self, and a darn good one!

Oh, oh, can I make a request?  Can you CARP a love scene between Mad-
Eye and Hermione on *her* 18th birthday?  

Come on.  You know you *want* to.

Cindy -- offering to be Amy's agent