| Nickname - Message |
| <Test> (Mon, February 14,
2000 at 18:12) Testing Logging... |
| <jbaily> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:02) hello |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:09) hello... |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:09) testing the mirc client... |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:09) jbaily, can you see me? |
| <jbaily> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:10) yeah |
| <jbaily> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:10) but i'm on the web |
| <jbaily> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:10) i can't get the mrc thing to work |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:10) call me and I'll walk you through the mirc |
| <jbaily> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:10) number |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:10) 50662 |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:10) getting out now. |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:13) hi |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:47) hi melissa |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:47) trying the web interface |
| <wilbanks> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 11:49) back in on mirc client |
| <games> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 12:10) 4test |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 14:41) Welcome to a live interview with Catharine
MacKinnon! The first few questions will be posed by Prof. Rosenfeld.
Feel free to comment after each question and answer. If you would
like to ask Catharine MacKinnon a question, please email it to mbaily@law.harvard.edu |
| <pgb> (Tue, March 21, 2000
at 14:54) Are there directions anywhere? |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 14:54) Welcome to a live interview with Catharine
MacKinnon! The first few questions will be posed by Prof. Rosenfeld.
Feel free to comment after each question and answer. If you would
like to ask Catharine MacKinnon a question, please email it to mbaily@law.harvard.edu |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 14:55) By way of introduction, Professor Catharine
A. MacKinnon is the foremother of feminist legal theory. Her first
book, The Sexual Harassment of Working Women, was published in 1979.
She made sexual harassment from a legal theory to address a problem
of sex discrimination previously unrecognized--into a legal entitlement
that women now have when we enter the workplace. In all areas of women's
rights, she has been an undaunted, articulate, powerful and controversial
force to be reckoned with. S |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 14:56) and controversial force to be reckoned with.
She has done more for women's rights than any other living person,
in my opinion, and she is , by my lights, the most brilliant person
alive. I am honored |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 14:57) to have her here today. So let's all welcome
Professor MacKinnon! |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 14:57) Thanks Diane, it's a pleasure to be
here. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 14:58) For the first question, how do you think
the web can be used as a tool |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 14:58) educational, instructive and of course,
collaboratively to influence change in the notions of women's equality? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 14:58) The web can break down women's isolation
and make connections possible, which has tremendous organizing potential
for a group that is in many respects so |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 14:59) segregated as well as so huge. There
is no substitute for what happens in face-to-face contact though.
This is more how it can help effectuate equality than change notions
of it. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 14:59) I'd be interested in your thoughts
about what different notion of equality the web might promote -- it
seems to me a very democratic instrument, or potentially so, and democracy |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 14:59) is the old equality idea. I'm pretty
excited about the idea of voting online, and think it might well boost
women's participation even more than men's, given the restrictions
on women's |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:00) lives. Whatever voting can do, that
would help. If women ever got, in real life, to the edge of existing
notions of equality, we'd be in good shape to create new ones. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:00) If you would like to comment, please do
so after each question and answer. If you would like to ask Prof.
MacKinnon a question, please email it to mbaily@law.harvard.edu |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:02) You're right, the internet does have enormous
potential for creating |
| <JoanH> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 15:02) Hi, we are here in New Brunswick, Canada |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:03) Please refrain from chatting until we are
done with the interview. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:03) If you have a question for Professor MacKinnon,
please email it to mbaily@law.harvard.edu |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:04) democratic fora and for connecting people.
This cybercourse has been a good example of that--at the end of it,
we'll all have over 300 other |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:04) contacts around the world of people who
care about stopping violence against women. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:05) Question : Should Internet regulations focus
on intimidating or threatening behavior in general or is there something |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:05) special about the threat of a man against
a woman? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:05) Should the internet regulate all intimidating
speech? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:05) where should we draw the line? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:05) I don't see how the net raises any
different questions about threats or intimidation than any other medium
does. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:06) Threats by men against women are realistic
in any medium. Nothing about the net much changes it, does it? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:06) Do you think existing law on these
subjects is inadequate to the net, or that it should be exempted from
them? If existing law were taken as "the line," |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:06) we could talk further about where
it falls short, or overreaches, in your view and mine, on or offline. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:08) I think that the difference in threats over
the internet |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:08) has to do with the annonymous identity |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:08) that people assume and that people can assume |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:08) over the internet |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:08) it's quite different from having the face
to face contact |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:08) as you referred to above |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:08) when you go into a movie store and rent
some violent pornography |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:09) We can talk about that later |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:09) What is your response to Vicki Schultz's
argument |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:09) calling for a change in the paradigm of
sexual harassment law |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:09) so as not to focus on the sexual advances
of the man to the woman, |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:10) but concentrating instead on the interference
with a woman's ability to succeed in the workplace? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:10) In what ways does this obscure the importance
of the sanctity of a woman's inner sexual privacy -- or does that
idea in turn objectify women and put us back into the white virgin
cages of past centuries? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:11) From its inception, and throughout
its development, sexual harassment law has addressed eliminating this
barrier |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:11) to women's success at work. Since
there is a major body of case law that targets gender-specific barriers
to women's |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:11) workplace advancement, including through
gender harassment whether or not sexual, the question is whether the |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:12) problem Vicki Schultz addresses in
fact exists. I'm not sure I see what you're getting at in the second
sentence. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:12) Are you suggesting that Vicki Schultz's
work ignores the injury to "the sanctity of a woman's inner sexual
privacy" |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:12) but that trying to protect that is
regressive? I wouldn't call the right not to be raped at work either
about |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:13) reinstituting a "white virgin cage"
or respecting "woman's inner sexual privacy." I'd call it not having
to be |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:13) sexually violated to make a living.
The opposite of that is a hostile environment, and by the way, this
example is |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:13) Mechelle Vinson's case, the one that
established that cause of action, and she is African American. |
| <JoanH> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 15:15) Hi, I rejoined |
| <Chark> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 15:15) hi...did I do this right? lol |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:15) Please refrain from chatting until the interview
is completed |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:15) In the best possible world, |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:16) how would you regulate pornography on the
internet? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:16) Can we confine ourselves to the world
we're in? Pornography on the internet is |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:17) no different from pornography anywhere
else, it just has a particular trajectory of access, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:17) as they all do. The civil rights law
Andrea Dworkin and I wrote, which would permit anyone |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:17) who can prove they are hurt in a number
of specific ways through pornography, would address |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:18) the real harms of pornography on the
internet, and everywhere else. It can and should be |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:18) passed in this world, which is neither
the best nor the only possible world. |
| <DenaSacco> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:18) 1,1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,10,10,13,14,14,14,15,15,15,15 |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:18) Does the internet pose special challenges |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:19) to people trying to fight against violence
against women? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:19) Where should we concentrate our efforts? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:20) The internet poses some interesting
but small and solveable problems of who can be |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:20) held responsible for violations through
it as a medium. They are no different in kind |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:20) from tracking down the pimps' shell
corporations, through which they shuffle to make |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:20) Please send any questions you have for Professor
MacKinnon to mbaily@law.harvard.edu |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:21) their millions in the regular pornography
business and the other forms in which they |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:21) traffic in women and children. They
are just specific to this medium. I think we should |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:22) concentrate our efforts on stopping
pimps wherever anyone has access to the means to stop them. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:22) People should concentrate their efforts
ANYWHERE. At the moment, there are almost no |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:22) efforts, concentrated or otherwise,
and people do not intend to make them. In other |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:22) words, for me, this is not an academic
question. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:23) Interesting points. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:24) The way you phrase it makes it seem like
the internet could actually be |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:24) a really powerful |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:24) tool to find pornographers and pimps and
prosecute them |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:25) . The net makes great paper trails. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:25) And, people seem to get sufficiently outraged
when people use |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:25) their work computers to load child pornography,
etc. Last year, the |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:25) Dean of the Harvard Divinity School was
dismissed (or resigned gracefully) after it was |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:26) found that he had downloaded pornography
from the internet. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:27) For the next question, |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:27) What do you think of the Department of Justice's |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:27) declination to take the Jake Baker case
up to the Supreme Court? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:27) Would a bad ruling on this case be worse
than the 6th Circuit decision standing? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:28) Do you think the Supreme Court would have
perceived it as a threat? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:28) I think the Department of Justice
was very wrong not to petition for cert. in Jake Baker. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:28) There seems to be a notion that what
goes on in pornography is, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:28) by definition, fantasy, even when
the threat is real and realistic, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:29) and, if it was anything but sexual,
would clearly fall within the law prohibition threats. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:29) In fact, the Baker pornography is
a lot more clearly criminal |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:29) under existing federal standards |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:29) than a lot of other things that HAVE
been found by courts to be illegally |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:29) threatening. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:30) This notion that pornography is a
law unto itself, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:30) an exception to every law we have
for everything else, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:30) is specially protected, violates women's
right to equal protection of the laws. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:31) I think it highly likely that the
Supreme Court |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:31) would have found that what Jake Baker
did had no First Amendment protection. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:31) In its flight from the First Amendment, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:31) and ruling instead on equally baseless
statutory grounds, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:32) the 6th Circuit tacitly admitted as
much. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:32) The interesting question is why the
Department of Justice caved. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:32) Their prosecutors brought the case; |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:32) their prosecutors appealed it. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:32) Why did what was a threat then, cease
to be a threat, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:32) when they had to hang their faces
out in front of a position |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:32) that took seriously what the materials
did to women |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:33) in front of the really big boys? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:33) Of course, a bad ruling by the Supreme
Court, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:33) would be worse than the Sixth Circuit
decision standing, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:33) but not by much, since no one will
bring a case like this |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:33) ever again probably now, and I also
don't think |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:34) that it would have lost. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:34) Somehow it's encouraging to hear you say
you think we would have won. You did tremendous work |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:35) on the case on behalf of the plaintiff,
Jane Doe. For those of you who |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:35) don't know, Professor MacKinnon represented
the plaintiff, the young woman |
| <anonymous> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:35) Is there sound with this? I'm not sure what
case you're discussing |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:36) who was named in the violent pornographic
story by Baker. She wrote the |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:36) amicus (friend of the court) brief on behalf
of the National Coalition |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:36) Again, I remind you that we are doing an
interview...please send questions via email to mbaily@law.harvard.edu |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:37) Against Sexual Assault. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:37) You can read it online at www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/Porn/Baker/sc.html |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:38) I agree with you that it was inconsistent
for the feds to consider |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:38) the criminal acts to constitute a threat
at the trial court and the appeals court, but not want to go |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:39) all the way on it. My review of the threat
law found no case |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:39) even close to as threatening as the Baker |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:39) case. It was absolutely terrifying to any
woman who read it, |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:39) not to mention how traumatizing it must
have been to the victim. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:40) The case also would have been a good one
in which to |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:40) illustrate the harms of violent pornography.
It was an extreme |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:41) example--I'm still shocked that it got thrown
out by the circuit and appeals |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:41) courts. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:42) I wonder if the case was brought now if
the result would have been different |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:42) now that the internet proliferates our lives. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:43) Here's a question from a student - what
are you currently working on for publication? For court? For fun? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:43) For publication, my project of the
last 20 years, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:43) almost exclusively for the next 4
years, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:43) I mean the LAST 4 years, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:44) is my legal casebook, Sex Equality. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:44) It's theoretical and practical. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:44) It is also comparative and international. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:44) But it centers on U.S. law on the
status and relations of women and men. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:45) It will be about 1500 pages of small
type, most of it writing by me, also tightly edited case excerpts
and commentaries. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:45) I'm working on the chapter on Trafficking
in Women now, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:46) with two sections, the first Prostitution,
the second Pornography. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:46) That's the end! |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:46) Other articles about to come out are
on |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:46) postmodernism in the Chicago-Kent
Symposium called "Unfinished Feminist Business," an irresistible tite |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:46) (I mean, what feminist business is
finished?); |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:47) one on the problems of class litigation
in human rights cases drawn from my work with Bosnian women, in Nova
Law Review; |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:47) and an opinion in Brown v. Board of
Education (merely 45 years too late!) |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:48) for a book edited by Jack Balkin called
What Brown Should Have Said (he picks nine justices, we write our
opinions, it was a trip). |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:48) I'm also writing something short on
privacy that is really about jurisdiction, that will be published
in French. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:49) Longer term, I'm putting together
a 20 year collection of published and unpublished work for Harvard
University Press |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:49) called Women's Lives, Men's Laws, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:49) finishing a collection of essays on
sexual harassment from a conference at Yale a while back, and writing
about the pornography of murder. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:50) Court activities include my Bosnian
litigation in New York, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:50) some confidential things I wish I
could talk about with you, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:50) some legislation in the same category, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:51) and some potential litigation not
yet filed in other countries as well as here, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:51) same confidentiality; |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:51) and endless advice to women litigants
who are being ignored or messed over by the legal system. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:51) Sorry I can't tell you more. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:51) The problem is not only confidentiality
but stigma as well as security. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:52) Since the pornography work, I draw
flies. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:52) For fun, I'm imagining what life without
this casebook might be like. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:52) Really, I'm so buried under it, all
I can do is shovel away in the salt mines 14 hours a day. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:53) I look out of the window periodically.
A really big break is taking a shower. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:53) When it's done, everything will be
fun. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 15:53) Thanks for asking! |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:53) Oh my! You're completely amazing! |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:53) And for those of you out there, I can attest
personally that |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:54) the textbook will be fantastic- a real breakthrough. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:54) I'm looking forward to using it as my teaching
materials for whatever I teach next. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:56) I think the idea of Unfinished Feminist
Business is an interesting one. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:56) I think we've made so much progress, but
then I sometimes question |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:56) how much of it is real. For example, orders
of protection given to dome |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:56) stic violence victims |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:57) are engrained now in our legal system and
our expectations of how |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:57) the system might help batttered women. But
we know that these orders |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:58) don't do a lot to protect battered women,
so we clearly have |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:58) We will be extending the chat for another
15 minutes or so |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:58) So feel free to email more questions to |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:58) mbaily@law.harvard.edu |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:58) unfinished business in this regard. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:59) Bear with us, as we sift through the questions |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 15:59) you have sent! Thanks for all of your interesting
and thought- |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:00) provoking questions and comments! |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:01) After Professor MacKinnon answers a few
more questions, we |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:01) can stay on line here and chat with you
all. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:01) So think of discussion questions! |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:02) Question from a student: |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:02) What do you say to young people who are
not convinced that either |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:02) sexual harassment or sexual assault should
concern them? |
| <William> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:02) where do we go - Law or Change the culture? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:02) These young people also seem to be unwilling
to seriously comptemplate |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:02) the social constructive aspect of |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:03) gender in relationship to these issues? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:03) I'm afraid that all we really have
to do is wait. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:03) If they haven't been sexually abused
yet, they will be, most of them. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:03) If that has happened to them, and
they are not convinced they should be concerned about it, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:04) the problem with them is no different
than it has always been with women. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:04) Which is, taking their own oppression
seriously. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:04) Which is one part believing you are
worth not being treated as you have been, and one part believing that
you can stop it. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:04) So really there are two answers to
your question. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:05) 1. to those who haven't had this happen,
either what happens to other women matters to them or it doesn't, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:05) and if this hasn't happened, the horrible
truth is, it very likely will. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:05) and 2. to those who have had this
happen, you ARE worth more than what has been done to you, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:06) no matter how it feels, and we CAN
stop this. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:06) We really don't have much choice but
to try. |
| <Chark> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:06) how |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:06) To your question about social construction, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:07) most people aren't willing to look
at why they think what they think. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:07) Only when they have a problem they
can't solve, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:07) or are unusually curious or self-reflective,
do they. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:07) Gender gives a lot of people, boys
as well as girls, a lot of pain. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:07) Including sexually. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:08) So they are motivated to find out
why it has to be so narrow, rigid, punitive, vicious, and violent. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:08) Finding themselves at odds with society
without an explanation is being up the creek without a paddle. |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:08) www |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:08) Seeing how society sets up this setup
is a very big paddle. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:09) Here is another student question: |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:09) The United States, while professing to be
a pro-feminist nation, in actuality |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:09) violates the standard set by the international
human rights community for the treatment of women. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:09) More specifically, it is my belief that
while many other countries |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:10) may continue to harbor practices detrimental
to women |
| <William> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:10) Obvioulsy one can start with educating the young;
but how do you convince evnough women and men to start this happening
even on a small scale? Do you have to wait until it "happens" to them
before they will get sufficiently motivated? |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:10) (FGM, etc), many positive steps have at
least been taken by the |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:10) international legal community to address
these practices. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:11) Quite the opposite, the US continues to
rest on a |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:11) reputation of being pro-women rights, |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:11) yet we continue to possess archaic laws |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:11) that do not allow for the prosecution of
rape, DV, etc. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:12) PLEASE REMEMBER THAT IF YOU WANT TO ASK
A QUESTION, YOU CAN EMAIL ME AT MBAILY@LAW.HARVARD.EDU |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:12) This is totally right and perceptive. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:12) Pornography, for example, is a traditional
cultural practice that mutilates at least as many women in the US |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:13) as other practices that we profess
to find shocking, shocking elsewhere. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:13) And it's a constitutional right. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:13) Also, the US floods the world with
pornography, a major form of cultural imperialism, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:13) into the open arms of men in other
countries, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:13) violating women there in ways that
violate their human rights. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:14) And all the cultural relativsits defend
it. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:14) The United States doesn't even adopt
most of the international conventions that would make it possible
to have the US live up to international standards HERE, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:14) while posturing virtuously over everyone
else. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:15) Here is another question from one of our
teaching fellows. This will be the last question that Professor MacKinnon
will answer on line. |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:15) is pornography a constitutionally sanctioned
right, or has it just been protected by men using the constitution
as a cloak? |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:15) I have heard as a criticism of the legislation
against porn |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:16) written by you and Dworkin that it is dangerous |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:16) because it would probably be most successfully
used |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:16) against feminist writings |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:16) (they would be the first to be attacked) |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:16) and because we would be joining forces with
and |
| <Jackie> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:16) please take more question... |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:17) adding power to the religious right, |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:17) who would also like to get rid of porn,
although for different reasons. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:17) What do you think? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:17) Joanna: This is a PR canard spread
by the pornographers to scare liberals |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:17) and people who don't know how law
works. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:18) The religious right has never suppoerted
the law Andrea Dworkin and I wrote. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:18) It is a sex equality law. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:18) Sex equality is not high on their
agenda. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:18) You may have noticed; they have noticed;
the lemmings who publish what PR firms give them seem not to have
noticed. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:19) I suspect that the ACLU would make
sure that feminist writings like In Harm's Way, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:19) the Pornography Civil Rights Hearings
with very explicit testimony about abuse through pornography, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:20) edited by Andrea Dworkin and me and
published by the Harvard University Press |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:20) (after 15 years of suppression by
publishers), |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:20) were sued immediately under our law. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:20) They would have to make that prophesy
come true. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:21) But the fact is, that material doesn't
get anyone raped, it doesn't subordinate anyone, so it is not covered
by the law. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:21) It would be a nuisance suit. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:21) The definition of pornography requires
that the materials actually SUBORDINATE women (or whoever) to be actionable. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:22) They could not prove that these feminist
materials do that. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:22) That doesn't mean that materials can't
be pornography and also purport to be feminist, but that's another
subject. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:22) The pimps spent over a million dollars
one year to get everyone to think what you asked about. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:23) Also, the religious right, I don't
think actually wants to get rid of pornography. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:23) They have a lot of power. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:23) They could, if they wanted to. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:23) I think that they, indistinguishably
from other male-dominated groups, use it, want it, and like it. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:23) Unlike other male-dominated groups,
they just want to SAY how much they hate it in public. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:23) It's all posturing. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:24) I'm going to take one more student
question and then respond to one more question from Diane. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:24) Here is the final student question: |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:24) Has anyone considered the Baker case to
fall |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:25) in teh category of 'Hate Crimes against
Women"? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:25) I think it does. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:25) Pornography is misogynst to the core. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:26) It's hard to make it clear to people
that what they think of as being love is actually hatred, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:26) but hostility to one's human status
is hateful. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:26) AMEN! It's been such a battle to get people |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:27) to understand gender based violence as having
to do with hate |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:27) when it seems to be so deeply engrained
in |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:27) "intimate " partner relationships. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:28) Now, one more question from teaching fellow
Claire Prestel, |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:28) Here is the question: |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:28) Professor MacKinnon, do you worry about
the quality of |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:28) support systems and networks on the internet? |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:28) I found when doing research for this course
that there are really a lot |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:29) of sub-par materials out there on the web, |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:29) things that might contribute to the dearth
of quality woman-focused media |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:29) The article in the NY Times magazine, Wasteland
of One's Own, |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:29) talks about some of the problems with mass-market |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:30) woman-directed media. It's all about lipstick,
etc. |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:30) and even when it's not, I feel a lot of
the web sites I looked at |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:30) encourage stereotypes about women as the
only caring sensitive ones; |
| <MelissaBaily> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:31) women care about each other and about people
but men don't/can't, etc. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:31) Claire: Sure there's a lot of junk
on the net, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:31) but the amazing thing about it is
that it's unedited. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:31) I think the dearth of quality in woman-focused
media is about underestimating the audience |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:32) and requiring that power by sucked
up to before money is laid out. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:32) The net doesn't need to be run by
money, and doesn't have to underestimate the audience either. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:32) I recommend the websites set up by
the activist Nikki |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:33) Craft under various acronyms including
Always Causing Legal Unrest (ACLU), |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:33) which are very high quality. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:33) The net is a place where we CAN do
alternative speech, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:33) unlike all the other places controlled
by power where more speech is fallacy and a palliative. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:34) Okay, here's my last question... |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:34) What do you think about the term "postfeminism" |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:34) Didoes it annoy you as much as it does me? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:35) We went from prefeminist to postfeminist
so fast it makes my head swim. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:35) This is just a gambit to locate things
in time in such a way that we never get change. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:35) It used to be what we wanted was unprecedented
and so far ahead of the curve that no one could understand it. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:35) Now it's passe. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:36) WHEN was the time when these same
people were FOR it? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:36) When we GOT what we're supposed to
be past? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:36) I'll be postfeminist in postpatriarchy. |
| <Chark> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:36) clapping :) |
| <pgb> (Tue, March 21, 2000
at 16:36) APPLAUSE |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:37) okay, a couple very quick oness |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:37) Here's a follow up question: |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:37) Given what Prof. MacKinnon has just said
about all the work she's doing |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:37) and how daunting it can seem, |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:37) how does she keep going? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:38) especially when everyone else seems to think
all feminist business really is 'finished.' |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:38) It's hard sometimes to always feel like
your fighting an irresistable tide@ |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:38) how does she do it so well and tirelessly! |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:38) I don't know if anyone honestly knows
the answer to this question |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:38) about themselves, but I do know some
things that make a difference for me. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:38) Hearing from women that the work matters
in their lives gives me back something |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:38) that makes it possible to keep going. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:39) Also, working with survivors, people
who don't lie about what was done to them and what it took from them, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:39) make it impossible to stop. I think
people put a lot of energy into stopping feelings that are unpleasant
and uncomfortable for them |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:39) I don't. |
| <Chark> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:39) :) |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:39) I feel them. I learn. Then I do something
about it. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:40) Denial is exhausting. Not doing it
gives one a tremendous amount of energy. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:40) I recommend it. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:40) Again, you are an absolute inspiration to
this world. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:40) The last question, really, though we could
go on, |
| <Jackie> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:41) Keep up the WONDERFUL work! |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:41) is speaking of the Supreme court, what are
your comments on the Brzonkala case? Specifically, |
| <pgb> (Tue, March 21, 2000
at 16:41) get a web site |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:41) waht political action would you recommend
if the civil right to be |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:41) free from gender motivated violence is stricken
down? |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:42) Brzonkala is our civil war. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:42) It |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:42) 's where we fight over our place in
the union, |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:42) and our status in civil society. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:42) If we lose, we have to think seriously
about what to do. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:42) I think we are going to win. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:43) Thank you so much for your time. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:43) We so appreciate your efforts and your insights |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:43) are, as always, |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:44) inspirational. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:44) Thanks to all of the student and teaching
fellow participants. |
| <SRyan> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:44) This was great! Thanks |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:45) Without your comments, questions and feedback,
this would not have been possible. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:45) We hope that you got a lot out of this educational
experience |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:45) I greatly appreciate the quality of
the exchange. |
| <CatharineMacKinnon> (Tue,
March 21, 2000 at 16:45) And I look forward to continuing it
in other ways. |
| <DawnMarron> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:45) applause, applause (while standing) |
| <Chark> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:45) standing clapping :) |
| <SRyan> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:46) clapping loudly standin |
| <Jackie> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:46) standing, whistling, and stomping feet! Thanks
again |
| <Chark> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:46) LOL |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:46) Encore!!! |
| <Sky> (Tue, March 21, 2000
at 16:46) whistlin loudly |
| <Chark> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:46) Encore is right :) |
| <pgb> (Tue, March 21, 2000
at 16:46) Clappnig while rushing to leave to pick up child
... and thanks also to Prof. Rosenfeld and teaching fellows. |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:46) You (C.K.) have to copyright "Postfeminist
in PostPatriarchy"- it says so much about where our focus is and where
it should be. |
| <Jackie> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:47) Yes... thank you! |
| <Chark> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:47) Thank you all for this wonderful experience
, the first of its kind :) |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:47) Thanks!!! This has been so much fun! |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:47) The transcript of this session will be posted
and available through our course site. |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:47) Also, some answers to other questions will
be answered and posted. |
| <SRyan> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:47) Oh, that's great, I missed the first part. Thank
you |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:48) You're welcome, Shawn! |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:48) See you later! |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:48) When? |
| <RebeccaHulse> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:48) Thank you !!! |
| <SRyan> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:48) Is Jack Diane's brother? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:49) yes! |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:49) Yes!!! Hi Shawn!! |
| <SRyan> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:49) I met him a long time ago at your office. Hi
Jack, how are you? |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:49) I'm great. This made my day. |
| <SRyan> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:49) Your sister is doing cool things as usual. |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:50) She always did. Did I ever tell you about
the time..... |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:50) How are you Shawn? |
| <SRyan> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:50) Great, I'm enjoying this class very much. |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:51) Are you in Chicago? Doing? |
| <DianeRosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:51) Sorry to end this party, but we should all
sign off now. thanks, |
| <jackrosenfeld> (Tue, March
21, 2000 at 16:51) OK. bye, thanks. |
| <SRyan> (Tue, March 21,
2000 at 16:51) Bye, thanks again |
| |
|