I think this thread is heading in the WRONG direction.  I cannot believe
that there has been so much discussion on this.  There cannot be more social
deviants in archaeology than in other fields of work.  I would suggest that
those who wish to hire high quality and capable staff, not impose their
social mores upon their new hires.  If their new archaeologists are
incapable of doing the job as has been described, then let them go.
However, if they manage successfully to do the job, and still are able to
enjoy life (whether morally or to your standards immorally) then, I suppose
you will have to make the decision whether or not they are fulfilling
whatever function it is that you have hired them to do.  Be careful about
throwing stones at glass houses.  I am betting there are very few employers
that are innocent and pure!

If you want to discuss social deviants, I suggest you direct the thread
toward politicians or lawyers.  Then you really will have something to
discuss.  However, that, like most of this prior discussion really has
nothing to do with historical archaeology, does it?

The opinions expressed are mine only and do not necessarily reflect those of
my employer.


-----Original Message-----
From:   [log in to unmask] [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Wednesday, March 01, 2000 5:51 PM
To:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        Re: HISTARCH deviants

In a message dated 3/1/2000 2:42:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<<
 Dungarees? Dungarees, Ned?? How many years has it been since anyone wore
 "dungarees?" Hmmm...how about deviant middle aged guys with beer bellies
 in Land Rovers <G>

 --
 Dan Mouer
 http://saturn.vcu.edu/~dmouer/homepage.htm

  >>

Yet Dan shows his age by failing to comment on "Bobbed Hair"!  Carl Steen