Dear Sir,
 
IT has come to my attention that you are comparing the recent discourse on
BEE-L to a USENETNEWS group linguistic-style.
 
I feel it only reelevant to ponint out that Ms. Freeman's Colorful (snicker)
New mail on node VIRGO from IN%"[log in to unmask]"  "ARCANA D
iscussion List for the Study of the Occult" (11:10:55)
I feel it only relevant to point out that Ms. Freeman's Colorful (snicker) use
of the English language is frighteningly symptomatic of what Christopher
Norris in _Uncritical Theory: Postmodernism, Intellectuals, and the Gulf War_
U Mass Press, 1992:
 
        "the liberal ironist ... who has followed Rorty in abandoning all
         those delusive truth-claims that were once thought to distinguish
         'philosophy' (or 'theory') from other, less demanding, fields of
         thought."
 
If you are not ready in the field of bee anatomy and the discussion thereof
to allow for non-delusive linguistic representations of reality such as my
cousin, Ms. Freeman/Madman, perhaps you should rethink bee anatomy in light
of the new scholarly paradigm which allows for such terms as "wymyn" and
"f***ing".
 
To compare her comments, a meta-commentary on the complexities of anatomy,
at it's most sociopsychologically basic frontier, to the USENET discourse
of an fictional alt.bizzare (or what-have-you) shows the same lack of dis-
crimination of an individual who would say USENET discourse is in some way
comparable to the Internet Relay Chat (or IRC), and this wild weilding of
Occam's razor, sir, most certainly misses the most scholarly and expressionist
values of Ms. Freeman's commentary (as outlined above).
 
Let us hope you are not so quick to dismiss the possibility of scientific
empathy for the object under study when you are dissecting the Apoidea
Hymenoptera.
 
Sincerely,
B. Clark Palmer
deconstucting the hive
[log in to unmask]