Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!caen!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!aero-c!nadel From: gazit@cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: birth control failure? Message-ID: <675716623@lear.cs.duke.edu> Date: 31 May 91 19:03:45 GMT References: <15263.283c1f6f@zeus.unomaha.edu> <675575737@lear.cs.duke.edu> Sender: news@aero.org Organization: The Piranha Club Lines: 34 Approved: nadel@aerospace.aero.org Status: R Originator: nadel@aerospace.aero.org [Gloria Steinem's talk/concern for men] # environment. Of course she talked a lot about pro-choice. $ Did a person who is so "deeply concern" about men has a single word $ to say about choice-for-men in a case of birth control failure? In article muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes: >Why you tossed this irrelevant point in (like, "if you're so concerned >about the environment, what do you have to say about office >air-conditioning?"), I do not know. I asked "if you are so concerned about X then why did not you talk about that, even when you talked about a strongly related issue"? >However, I think I have an answer >for *your* concern. If there is a birth control failure with me and a >man, he is welcome to choose to carry (or otherwise incubate) and raise >the child if he wants to. He can't tell me I have to, though. I have no intention to force you to carry a child you don't want, so please lay down your prepared "choice for *WOMEN*" speech. The question is if you, personally, will support a law the will give a choice for men in a case of birth control failure, and what kind of choice you may be willing to offer to *MEN*. >Muffy Hillel gazit@cs.duke.edu "It's because he's "concerned," George -- which in today's Esalen- Speak means he's going to be a good liberal and show that he is aware, no disgusted, by these things, but he just can't be bothered to do anything about them. Concerned. That's what it means." -- Clay Bond