Don't Go Away Mad
Wed Oct 22 12:05:16 CDT 1997
At 11:57 AM 10/22/97 -0400, Michael Bear Bryant wrote:
You through denigrating every other type of debate? Or do you want to throw
some more tetesterone around?
What does testosterone have to do with this thread. Can womyn NOT have pride
in their favorite organization? Was it also testosterone that made Cori
Dauber jump into the football thread and talk smack with the other schools?
This is a case of chauvenism, not male hormones.
Korcok was wrong and you are, too.
I disagree. Both Zack and Mike are right, for their perspective and beliefs.
Just as Kristina was right for her perspective.
I have known and judged Zack since he was a rookie debater in high school.
This includes his time spent debating in Northern California (once the bane
of all that is good about debate) and also during his years at SIU. In ALL
of these cases, Zack cared both about what debate meant to him, and what it
meant to others. Zack DID pour his blood, sweat, and tears into the activity
to make it and himself better. I am not surprised that he took offense when
someone threw a sucker punch and ran away (I suppoose I too will be accused
of too much testosterone for using a pugilistic analogy).
The point is that Zack and Mike (as well as countless others) have worked
damned hard over the years to make this activity something that they can be
proud of. They know that the activity is not perfect, but they continue to
work to make it better. How do you expect someone to react when an activity
that has been a tremendous investment of their life's blood is said to have:
"DEVOLVED into--a game which EXCLUDES ALL those who stand to benefit from
the wealth of its resources from understanding or participation; an activity
which *relinquishes* communication, EDUCATION, TRUTH and applicability in
the obsessive pursuit of the ballot; an ELITE concentration of students,
coaches, research and funding which *benefits* NO ONE outside the circuit;
in short, an event that has sacrificed its potential for SELFISH ends."
(capitalization and asterisks added by me).
My opinion is that if Kristina hadn't wanted to take a jab at the activity,
she wouldn't have posted this on the L. So, if someone who has spent very
little time in the activity can take a jab at it, then those who have
invested lifetimes in the activity can certainly take a few jabs back. I
think we've earned the right.
Of course, all of this should NOT be interpreted as people refusing to hear
the complaints of others...... we do. I also think that the activity is a
dynamic and is always changing to meet certain needs (even those that are
chauvenistic propose changes for the betterment of the activity). I simply
want you to see this from the perspective of someone who HAS worked to
improve the activity (for 25+ years in my case), and took exception to the
way in which our activity was described.
If you come to my house for a visit and start bad mouthing my housekeeping,
cooking, wife, or kids, expect to be shown the door.......... without sympathy.
"Putting out fires, and damn good debaters!!!"
More information about the Mailman