Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!aero!ms.uky.edu From: randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: A Moral Question Message-ID: <16187@s.ms.uky.edu> Date: 17 Oct 90 04:00:40 GMT References: <16098@s.ms.uky.edu> <26082.2714c3d1@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> Sender: nadel@aerospace.aero.org Reply-To: Randy Appleton Organization: U of Kentucky, Mathematical Sciences Lines: 43 Approved: nadel@aerospace.aero.org Status: R In article <26082.2714c3d1@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> 2flmlife@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: > >This deals with your thought number two. Feminism is not about fighting for >women's rights to become men. I didn't say that! The world has enough men. What I did say was that feminism is the struggle for equality between the genders. I don't mean identity, I mean equal oportunity. >It is an attempt to put an end to oppression. >And if that means addressing our concepts about war, or the environment, or >government, then those things must also come. No, it does not! If I have concerns about the about the envoirment, you are an enviornmentalist. That seems clear. And I believe both the dictionary and common usage agrees with me. In my mind, feminism and environmentalism are like wealth and health. Both are desiarable (necessary!), and there even tends to be a correlation. Sick people tend to have less money (more hospital bills!). BUt I can be healthy and poor, or rich and sick. It is done all the time. >Certainly you are not FOR >nuclear armament. You would have to be pretty sick, or a defense contractor I >suppose, to want that. What we all want is too feel safe, to not be under the >threat of war, or global destruction. Some feel this means we need to arm >ourselves, others feel we need to withdraw from conflict completely. The >middle ground recognise that nuclear weapons are ultimately self destructive, >and want a unilateral disarmament. We need to find in which direction our >freedom lies, our safety. Can we feel safe under the threat of a nuclear >war? I know I cannot, and I worry for my nieces, my friends, this world. Are >we so arrogant to think this is within our right? Yes, it is within your rights. But just as nuclear weapons and racial equality are orthogonal to each other, so are nuclear weapons and feminism. But are you going to tell me I cannot be a feminist unless I have your views on defence policy? Are you willing to say that? -Randy -- ============================================================================= My feelings on George Bush's promises: "You have just exceeded the gulibility threshold!" ============================================Randy@ms.uky.edu==================