tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post113925486515244157..comments2024-03-10T20:46:19.274-04:00Comments on In the Middle: InexclusionCord J. Whitakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06224143153295429986noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21165575.post-1139328540334643652006-02-07T11:09:00.000-05:002006-02-07T11:09:00.000-05:00Ahhah--thanks! You've helped me hone my paper's p...Ahhah--thanks! You've helped me hone my paper's point: a cow who ravishes a man is monstrous. a man who ravishes a cow is monstrous. and a man who ravishes a woman is ??? Or, to use one of my sources: a woman who uses a cow to ravish a man who tried to ravish a girl is ??? <BR/><BR/>I like Mike's category-- monsters who have been evacuated of their monstrous-ness. Clearly, I've got to go read your monster theory book. (My ultimate goal in this paper is to explore how these tales of animal ravishment help elucidate the contours of ravishment. It's such an oblique historical term. The real trick will be finding a way to use what you term as inexclusion as a clear path to... inclusion?) thanks, jjc. --anon.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com