Message-ID: <32FA69C3.D89@yale.edu>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 18:31:15 -0500
From: DJR <daniel.ryan@yale.edu>
Reply-To: daniel.ryan@yale.edu
Organization: Yale University
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: Super-Bowl
References: <199702061932.OAA12848@sable.cc.vt.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Perhaps sleeping dogs ought to be left alone, but sometimes you gotta
pipe in.  A few 
questions in re: the previous post (ignore if they re-hash discussion
that took place
during a week or two when i wasn't paying attention) ...

> There 
> is no significance in a comparison of the two groups unless it is assumed 
> that they are inherently different. This assumption is based not on fact, 
> but on the symbolic imagery of the two groups as it is perpetuated in 
> popular culture.  

Are there any facts?  Is there anything but symbolic imagery?  Could we
imagine
a (non-utopian) social world in which discourse is based on facts?  What
would
it be like?

>The final line of the post is especially rude:
>  "The posts were flying back and forth on that with subject lines
>   like 'heyyy... who are you calling a homo...?' ".
>The homophobia in this comment is blatant; obviously, "homo" is used
>as a term of disparagement.

a) It looks to me like a paraphrase of what actual people were writing
   so I hope you mean to characterize the original statements, not
   the poster's statement reporting wbat he observed.  Yes?  Or is it
   rude to quote a rude remark?  Should we rule certain words or 
   phrases out, even of verbatim or semi-verbatim reporting?  Seven
words...?

b) Can a comment or phrase can be homophobic?  As opposed
   to the maker of the comment?  Where does the meaning get added? 
"Obviously" 
   suggests that the reader adds the meaning since it needs to be
obvious to someone.

c) Does it work to want just facts on the one hand, and obvious
interpretations on the other?

d) If I recall the original source of the "comparison" some years ago it
was not between
   two "groups".   The author was suggesting underlying meaning in a
particular social
   ritual.  It's not the same thing as comparing two groups.
     

DJR