[lit-ideas] Masculinity Studies -- and Herbert Paul Grice
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 14:38:38 EDT
-- or the inconceivability of a FEMALE "Herbert Paul Grice".
McEvoy: writing between the lines
I must say I missed McEvoy's commentary. I mean, I did receive his post
about the jejune jesuit (the remark that literarily resembles the email
'address' of one jejune jesuit.
---
But I thought that he had written just THAT line -- about the jejune
jesuit. On having received Geary's later commentary, I noticed that McEvoy had
written more than that.
So, what I would suggest is that McEvoy turns his things into plain text.
Otherwise, the bulk of his post came out as coming directly from Geary. Of
course strictly it didn't, because McEvoy is careful about quotes, quotation
marks, etc.
Anyway, here my commentary on McEvoy on Geary then:
In a message dated 5/24/2010 6:46:37 A.M., donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx
writes:
Come now. This is more "jejune" than "jesuit".
"Surely there are often competing authorities and therefore, in choosing
between them, we cannot - logically - be deciding which to submit to "simply
because it is 'authority'." Second, resistance to authority is a strong
human tendency, often stronger than any tendency to blind obedience."
Plus, auctoritas, as Popper would forget, just means 'do'. Augere was Roman
for "do". The auctor is the doer. The auctoritas is an otiose
nominalisation of the type that Grice hated ("female nominalisation confuses
the
metaphysician").
"Hard to discern where these figures come from or how they must be
interpreted given the distinction between "willing" and "able", and given
social
and cultural constraints on women expressing violence as well as constraints
on men avoiding its expression, and that the effects of male violence are
likely more 'visible' than female violence. Etc."
---- "males avoiding its expression" is the topic of my most recent pet,
"Masculinity Studies". "Masculinity Studies" is a reactionary thing against
Gay and Lesbian Studies. I LOVE masculinity studies. I always get A+ at
their seminars. I can IMPRESS a masculine.
---- (Ah, Judy Evans will like that masculinity studies arose as reaction
to post-feminist anti-studies!).
In a way, this is back to Geary's Warrior World. I started to study
masculinity studies to understand the Greeks! Of course masculinity students
(i.e. theoreticians) do not know the first thing about the Greek world, but
they
can always theorise!
----
McEvoy:
"Even if we accept there are differences between the genders in their
propensity and expression of violence, the capacity for violence clearly
crosses
the gender divide [as evolution would suggest it would, like the nipple]."
This is back to the amoeba dimorphism. ("Lack of nipple hardening in
amoeba's sexual behaviour"). Herber Spencer speaks of the nipple ("The survival
of the fittest") as an atavism (in males -- "In females, the nipple is NOT
atavic -- the clitoris is").
McEvoy:
"And there are constraints on male violence that do not apply to female
violence: for example, there are reasons, connected with the greater risks of
death and serious injury, why men would be more wary of male-male violence
than a woman need be wary of female-female: this is even reflected in
sentencing policy in England, as violence between females very rarely results
in
death or grievous injury [aside from being rarer] the need for a
deterrent sentence is less."
I wish you could see again Rupert Everett in "Dance with a stranger"! What
a film! What a score! What charming English countryside!
"Hold on. Jesus was a misogynic fascist? That's not the Jesuits talking, is
it?"
Only I would spell it 'mysoginist'. The problem was his 'mother'
(metaphorical here, since she never BORE him -- or if she did, she remained a
virgin). Not that Freud empahsised the 'passive agressive' tendency of Mary
and
the lack of the father figure in Jesus that had him socialising with
prostitutes ("Mary Magdalene"). (He never married, plus).
"25% is not many? We may as well say not many women were either. For an
authoritive source:
_http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_burn.htm_
(http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_burn.htm) "
---- 'wicc' is neuter in Old English. "Wicked witch of the West", is NOT
Margaret Thatcher.
"When last looked at, there were only two reported English cases where
persons sentenced to imprisonment for 'street fighting' had the sentence
reduced on appeal:- one involved a Navy submariner who, beered up, attacked a
"hey, keep it quiet you" Pc in Leicester Sq [an ex-Services Appellate judge
headed the decision which was not, as is often the way in such cases, very
clearly explained in terms of jurisprudential niceties but which might be
guessed to have come down to these practicalities: if prison sentence were
upheld, the Navy would lose a good fighting man since dismissal is automatic
on a prison sentence; working on a sub half the year is comparable in its
restrictions to imprisonment; so fine him half a year's salary instead so he
serves his 'time' while serving his country] and may be taken as confined
to its facts. The other was a vicious drunken fight between girl groups in
the Liverpool area that involved punching and kicking others when they were
on the ground _but where, nevertheless, no one was that seriously hurt_;
the increase in such girl fights may have led to a harsher "deterrent" policy
since, but it is clear the more likely serious consequences of
male-on-male violence argues for a greater "deterrent" element in sentencing
than with
female-on-female violence]."
Again, dance with a stranger!
From wiki:
"On Monday, 20 June 1955, Ellis appeared in the Number One Court at the Old
Bailey, London, before Mr. Justice Havers. She was dressed in a black suit
and white silk blouse with freshly bleached and coiffured blonde hair. Her
lawyers had wanted her to play down her appearance, but she was determined
to have her moment. To many in the courthouse, her fixation with being the
brassy blonde was at least partially responsible for the poor impression
she made when giving evidence.
“ It's obvious when I shot him I intended to kill him.[9]
Ruth Ellis, in the witness box at the Old Bailey, 20 June 1955. ”
This was her answer to the only question put to her by Christmas Humphreys,
counsel for the Prosecution, who asked, "When you fired the revolver at
close range into the body of David Blakely, what did you intend to do?"[9]
The defending counsel, Aubrey Melford Stevenson supported by Sebag Shaw and
Peter Rawlinson, would have advised Ellis of this before the trial began,
because it is standard legal practice to do so. Her reply to Humphreys'
question in open court guaranteed a guilty verdict and therefore the mandatory
death sentence which followed. The jury took 14 minutes to convict her.[9]
She received the sentence, and was taken to the condemned cell at Holloway.
In a 2010 television interview Mr Justice Havers’s grandson, actor Nigel
Havers, said his grandfather had written to the Home Secretary recommending a
reprieve as he regarded it as a crime passionelle, but received a curt
refusal, which was still held by the family. It has been suggested that the
final nail in her coffin was that an innocent passer-by had been injured.
Reluctantly, at midday on 12 July 1955, the day before her execution,
Ellis, having dismissed Bickford, the solicitor chosen for her by her friend
Desmond Cussen, made a statement to her original solicitor Victor Mishcon and
his clerk, Leon Simmons. She revealed more evidence about the shooting and
said that the gun had been provided by Cussen, and that he had driven her
to the murder scene. Following their 90-minute interview in the condemned
cell, Mishcon and Simmons went to the Home Office, where they spoke to a
senior civil servant about Ellis's revelations. The authorities made no effort
to follow this up and there was no reprieve.
In a final letter to David Blakely's parents from her prison cell, she
wrote,
“ "I have always loved your son, and I shall die still loving him".[10] ”
Ever since Edith Thompson's execution in 1923, condemned female prisoners
had been required to wear thick padded calico knickers, so just prior to the
allotted time, Warder Evelyn Galilee, who had guarded Ellis for the
previous three weeks, took her to the lavatory. Warder Galilee said, “I’m
sorry
Ruth but I’ve got to do this.” They had tapes back and front to pull. Ruth
said “Is that all right?” and “Would you pull these tapes Evelyn, I’ll
pull the others,” On re-entering the condemned cell, she took off her
glasses, placed them on the table and said "I won't be needing these
anymore."[11]
Thirty seconds before 9am on Wednesday 13 July, the official hangman,
Albert Pierrepoint and his assistant, Royston Rickard, entered the condemned
cell and escorted Ruth to the execution room next door.[12] Her autopsy
report, by the pathologist Dr. Keith Simpson, was made public.[13]
The Bishop of Stepney, Joost de Blank, visited Ellis just before her death,
and she told him: "It is quite clear to me that I was not the person who
shot him. When I saw myself with the revolver I knew I was another person."
These comments were made in a London evening paper of the time The Star."
J. L. Speranza, Bordighera
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
