Subject: Re: Sexism?
From: prender@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu (S Prendergast)
Date: 1991-01-22, 12:33
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <1991Jan22.171237.7815@watserv1.waterloo.edu>, alternat@watserv1.waterloo.edu (Ann Hodgins) writes:
[...]
>> >>Dennis/Denise?
> >  
> > Especially Dennis because he needs to dress up in order to feel able
> > to be a bit different. I admire his guts in that it is clearly very
> > hard for him to break his sex role training, but that the fact that he
> > can't 'relax' in pants and a shirt shows that he is not role-free.
> >
Maybe the fact that YOU can't accept the fact that he CHOOSES not to 'relax' in
[male-clothes] shows that YOU are not role-free... Maybe the fact is that he
can step OUTSIDE the roles and CHOOSE which role he DESIRES to 'wear' in full
knowledge that such IS a 'role' and consequently is not to be taken TOO 
seriously (cf his net-discussed 'campiness', etc...)... After all, one need not
BELIEVE that _HAMLET_ is REALITY (with a capital R) to play the lead, or even
to buy a ticket for the show.  Ascribing to a role is not necessarily LOCKING
one's self INTO that role, nor is it a tacit acknowledgement that one thinks
that role is the be-all and end-all of life...

[I'm NOT flaming you (really! :-) but hopefully giving us all some food for
thought...]

SWP