I hate women writers and a man could never be a hygienist
Oh dear,
Here we have two extreme opinions that were dancing through the Canadian news waves the past few weeks.
Let's start with David Gilmour. Here's the controversy. Mr Gilmour who teaches a literature course at the University of Toronto, says he doesn't put women writers on his syllabus as they don't really interest him, and he doesn't have a passion for teaching them. See the story here: Gilmour's comments. It's not surprising that those closest to me would think that I too (like many of the public) would be outraged, appalled and would deem him sexist. But I don't feel any of those things towards Mr. Gilmour. I think he has a right to teach what he wants and if it fits within the course description, then go to it. It would be different if his class was a study of the contemporary Canadian short story- then, yea, you might want to include a more diverse reading list, with men and women of different ethinicities as that would be reflective of the genre.
But Gilmour has a point when he says "I say I don’t love women writers enough to teach them, if you want women writers go down the hall. What I’m good at is guys.” Good on you Mr. Gilmour for recognizing your weaknesses and sure that makes you a close-minded fool when it comes to the totally fantastic offerings that come from women or Chinese or "different" writers, but it's your class. I would suggest that anyone who has a problem with Gilmour, refrain from taking his course. We can't start censoring people's opinions on literature as that is just as confining as censoring literature itself.
In other news Margaret Wente, that crazy Globe columnist, had put up yet another shocking opinion piece (which, let's be clear, really isn't shocking since it's coming from her). Wente gets huge publicity for her stubborn, narrow-minded discourses and the following is no exception.
"As for education, it won’t do much good for people who aren’t motivated or disciplined enough to acquire it. These people are mainly men."
Intrigued? read her piece here : How to Succeed in the 21st Century
A male then approached me with his outrage on her piece and how it's completely a double standard because if a man were to write that he would be fired from the paper. This launched us into a fiery debate, as a) I don't think a "commentary" piece of any kind is grounds for dismissal b) there HAVE been pieces written by men about women and other derogatory discourses by women about men. So Wente's piece is not a double standard
c) ....maybe her opinion is right?
Can't man and woman just get along? I wonder if Gilmour read Wente's piece on him, probably not she's a woman writer.
Thoughts?
Here we have two extreme opinions that were dancing through the Canadian news waves the past few weeks.
Let's start with David Gilmour. Here's the controversy. Mr Gilmour who teaches a literature course at the University of Toronto, says he doesn't put women writers on his syllabus as they don't really interest him, and he doesn't have a passion for teaching them. See the story here: Gilmour's comments. It's not surprising that those closest to me would think that I too (like many of the public) would be outraged, appalled and would deem him sexist. But I don't feel any of those things towards Mr. Gilmour. I think he has a right to teach what he wants and if it fits within the course description, then go to it. It would be different if his class was a study of the contemporary Canadian short story- then, yea, you might want to include a more diverse reading list, with men and women of different ethinicities as that would be reflective of the genre.
But Gilmour has a point when he says "I say I don’t love women writers enough to teach them, if you want women writers go down the hall. What I’m good at is guys.” Good on you Mr. Gilmour for recognizing your weaknesses and sure that makes you a close-minded fool when it comes to the totally fantastic offerings that come from women or Chinese or "different" writers, but it's your class. I would suggest that anyone who has a problem with Gilmour, refrain from taking his course. We can't start censoring people's opinions on literature as that is just as confining as censoring literature itself.
In other news Margaret Wente, that crazy Globe columnist, had put up yet another shocking opinion piece (which, let's be clear, really isn't shocking since it's coming from her). Wente gets huge publicity for her stubborn, narrow-minded discourses and the following is no exception.
"As for education, it won’t do much good for people who aren’t motivated or disciplined enough to acquire it. These people are mainly men."
Intrigued? read her piece here : How to Succeed in the 21st Century
A male then approached me with his outrage on her piece and how it's completely a double standard because if a man were to write that he would be fired from the paper. This launched us into a fiery debate, as a) I don't think a "commentary" piece of any kind is grounds for dismissal b) there HAVE been pieces written by men about women and other derogatory discourses by women about men. So Wente's piece is not a double standard
c) ....maybe her opinion is right?
Thoughts?
Gilmour has the right to teach whatever he wants and choose his writers-those that disagree just do not take his class. Same goes if it was a female teacher wanting to not include male authors-again if you disagree then just do not take the class-I think it is pretty simple
ReplyDeleteI agree with you and there was some speculation that Gilmour had some very convenient timing with this controversy as his book was a contender for the Giller prize this year
DeleteCompare the hoofara over Gilmour vs Wente. Applying double standards to redress previous double standards isn't equality
ReplyDelete