Vera answers coop-USC RR

Thu Aug 31 10:22:20 CDT 2000

I think that is USC is going to have this short of RR that its should be
open to all people regardless of gender but the whole "celebration" of women
should be like a add on advantage...

For example why cant USC just host a round table discussion about gender
differences?  And then perhaps they could add how gender issues effect women
of color.  Since i am a woman of color myself I do sense a lack of any
recruitment from this group.

For example i remember when at the Pepperdine invitational this same issue
came up.  But instead of making a exclusionary issue of it...it was opened
up as a round table discussion.

Just a question,
veronica
(aka: for all the california debaters Vera)
California state university Bakersfield

FYI: Your squad is not the only all women of color squad.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.

>From  Thu Aug 31 11:49:29 2000
Message-Id: <THU.31.AUG.2000.114929.EDT.>
Received: from LIST.UVM.EDU by LIST.UVM.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with
 spool id 48580 for EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:50:30
 -0400
Precedence: bulk
Received: from imo-r14.mx.aol.com (imo-r14.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.68]) by
 list.uvm.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA23178 for
 <EDEBATE at list.uvm.edu>; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:50:14 -0400
Received: from CoopDB8 at aol.com by imo-r14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.15.) id
 n.db.90fa3ec (4340); Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:49:30 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 120
Message-ID: <db.90fa3ec.26dfd889 at aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:49:29 EDT
Reply-To: CoopDB8 at AOL.COM
To: Team Topic Debating in America <EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: The Coop <CoopDB8 at AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Women's RR - ans. Cooooooop
Comments: To: MWBRYANT at aol.com

Bear writes:

<< Damn Coop, you really changed a lot of your positions after it dawned on
you
 that your team and you could be in attendance. As usual, I think you're more
 than a little  wrapped up in yourself. Now you think you're going to judge,
 because of the unique gender role you've personally-assigned to yourself.>>

Bear...I think you've chosen the wrong animal to identify yourself.  When
have I CHANGED any of my positions?  I defy you to find evidence of my taking
a position OTHER than one's gender identity is NOT linked to one's biological
characteristics.  Scan the archives if you have to (that should keep you busy
and out of everyone's hair for at least a COUPLE hours).

 <<If your hopes hold up, S Carolina couldn't really restrict any males from
 attending. They have clearly indicated their desire to do so. How do you
 think it's possible to work through that dilemma? Maybe, if you were willing
 to go in the "Luwanna" drag personality that you sometimes seem to lapse
into when you're trying to make a point about your own right to choose to be
anyone you want?>>

It's LASHWONDA, you numb-nut, and there is no drag involved.  Drag would
imply an illusion, preteding to be of another gender.  I do nothing of the
sort.  My gender identity has always been fluid...it's not something I
DREAMED up to subvert the South Carolina people.

And you still don't seem to get it...South Carolina *CAN* restrict males from
attending.  But WHAT IS A MALE????  What about my argument has got you so
riled up Bear?  Is it that I have found a way to both support and subvert the
event that you just want to bash?  My ability to play both sides of the fence
(no - to obliterate the idea of a fence) is just too cerebral for you??

 <<Sorry, but I don't think it's right for you to
 claim that your uniqueness is license for being less oppressive than other
 males. >>

"OTHER" males??  What are you talking about??  Either I do something
oppressive or I do not.  I have nothing unique by virtue of the fact that
everyone is unique.  We all share our uniqueness.  Do you get that or do I
have to put it in coloring book form?

<<Reading your posts confirms to me that you're clearly
 hyper-competitive. Why is it that your presence won't hamper the unique
 woman-to-woman bonding that everyone is collapsing back down to to justify
 this tournament? And why doesn't your scenario just feed the male exclusion
 bad arguments? Are you suggesting that women and gays be allowed to attend,
 just not heterosexual males? That just increases the link to the exclusion
 arguments and weakens the answer of "it's just that women really need to be
 by themselves" arguments that everyone else is producing to justify this
 exclusionary event.>>

What are you talking about, Bear?  What does sexual affinity have to do with
this?  Listen, it is not ME who is suggesting who can or cannot attend...that
is South Carolina making that move.  What *I* am saying is that the many of
the restrictions that you assume to exist are the product of your own
assumptions about gender identity rather than anything that has been
clarified by South Carolina.  Miami doesn't play that game...but don't YOU go
trivializing anyone's identity choices because you can't seem to crawl out of
the cave of your own engendered assumptions.

Free your mind and maybe your ass will follow.

COOP
U Miami

PS.  Your "wig" comment is offensive on so many levels that it can't possibly
justify a response.

>From  Thu Aug 31 12:48:26 2000
Message-Id: <THU.31.AUG.2000.124826.EDT.>
Received: from LIST.UVM.EDU by LIST.UVM.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with
 spool id 49464 for EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:49:11
 -0400
Precedence: bulk
Received: from imo-d10.mx.aol.com (imo-d10.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.42]) by
 list.uvm.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA11750 for
 <Edebate at list.uvm.edu>; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:49:09 -0400
Received: from MWBRYANT at aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.15.) id
 n.40.542b75 (9819); Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:48:27 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 106
Message-ID: <40.542b75.26dfe65a at aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:48:26 EDT
Reply-To: MWBRYANT at AOL.COM
To: Team Topic Debating in America <EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Michael Bear Bryant <MWBRYANT at AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Women's RR - ans. Cooooooop
Comments: To: CoopDB8 at aol.com

In a message dated 08/31/2000 9:53:33 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
CoopDB8 at AOL.COM writes:

<< PS.  Your "wig" comment is offensive on so many levels that it can't
possibly
 justify a response. >>

Only if you approach it with an engendered assumption, which you claimed to
be free from...

Thanks for proving your own hypocrisy!

Bear,
see, it's not as easy to rip down the fence as Coop seems to think it is....

>From  Thu Aug 31 12:50:33 2000
Message-Id: <THU.31.AUG.2000.125033.EDT.>
Received: from LIST.UVM.EDU by LIST.UVM.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with
 spool id 49562 for EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:51:19
 -0400
Precedence: bulk
Received: from imo-r01.mx.aol.com (imo-r01.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.1]) by
 list.uvm.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08004 for
 <Edebate at list.uvm.edu>; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:51:15 -0400
Received: from MWBRYANT at aol.com by imo-r01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.15.) id
 n.f4.25c70a0 (9819); Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:50:35 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 106
Message-ID: <f4.25c70a0.26dfe6d9 at aol.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 12:50:33 EDT
Reply-To: MWBRYANT at AOL.COM
To: Team Topic Debating in America <EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Michael Bear Bryant <MWBRYANT at AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Women's RR - ans. Cooooooop
Comments: To: CoopDB8 at aol.com

In a message dated 08/31/2000 9:53:33 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
CoopDB8 at AOL.COM writes:

<< Free your mind and maybe your ass will follow.

 COOP >>

My ass is so large it has it's own mind....and for coop to deny that
possibility is to force more engendered assumptions on me.   ;-)

Bear