Received: from emout12.mail.aol.com (emout12.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.38]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3/CNS-4.0p) with ESMTP id SAA17517 for <socgrad@csf.colorado.edu>; Mon, 23 Jun 1997 18:11:36 -0600 (MDT)
From: Ologygrad@aol.com
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout12.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id UAA14929 for socgrad@csf.colorado.edu;
	  Mon, 23 Jun 1997 20:11:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 20:11:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <970623201131_590440729@emout12.mail.aol.com>
To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu
Subject: Re: tracking
Rod wrote:
<< Others have taken different approaches, but all lead 
to the same station--gender=female.   Perhaps a more 
useful approach would be to recognize that gender is a 
much broader field.  View gender in only feminist terms 
is extremely limiting. >>

Point taken -- however, your last sentence implicates you with the rest of
us.  Viewing gender in *feminist* terms is not the same as focusing only on
women.

Since I'm being picky about terminology, I'll also point out that "female"
and "male" are terms that denote the study of sex (aka, biology).  When one
studies gender sociologically, one studies "men" and "women."

Ivy Kennelly
U Georgia