Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!decwrl!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!ucivax!gateway
From: flaps@dgp.toronto.EDU (Alan J Rosenthal)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: What kinda folks 've we got 'ere?
Message-ID: <90Jul30.183941edt.1200@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Date: 31 Jul 90 16:03:41 GMT
References: <19929.26ab3a4a@oregon.uoregon.edu>
Lines: 49
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: zola.ics.uci.edu

davidw@oregon.uoregon.edu writes:
>I believe that women should have an equal place with men in the
>business world and politically, but ...

Ah, there's always a "but".  I think it's only fair to say that this
contradicts the first half of the sentence.

>In hiring a male, one does not have to worry that he will get pregnant and
>have to leave work.

In hiring a woman, one also does not HAVE to worry about this.  (Of
course, some people will worry about everything.)  She may leave for
any number of reasons.  Getting pregnant is just one.  A man may leave
a job because his lover or wife gets pregnant!  People don't worry
about this because this is rarely the real reason people are
concerned.  This pregnancy thing is just an excuse not to hire women.

>I don't think that this should have ANY bearing on who gets hired, but

here we go again with the "but"s...

>many women feel that their employer should pay for their time off while
>they're taking care of their child.

FORTUNATELY, in my country there is social assistance for people who
are temporarily out of work, for many possible reasons, including
pregnancy.  And, I also think that MY employer should pay for some of
MY time off while I'm taking care of my child!  What do you think
about that!

>I also think it is ludicrous to suggest that a female can do equally well in a
>job which requires strength.  Granted, there are female body-builders who are
>much stronger than myself (by QUITE a bit), but ...

Look, so then those "body-builders" could do better than you in a job
which requires strength.  These are individual people we're talking
about.  If a job requires strength, test strength, not genitalia.

>Men and women are DIFFERENT.  EQUALITY implies that there are no differences,
>which is absurd.

Equality implies that there are no differences relevant to the topic
at hand.  No two people are alike, but the word equality is not
unusable.  Sometimes women and men are treated equally in non-sexual
situations.  We should work for more of this.

>(uh, how do I use the editor on this thing?

indeed.