Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!aero-c!nadel From: uunet!infmx!robert@ncar.UCAR.EDU (robert coleman) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: Uproar over challenge to campus date-rape study Message-ID: Date: 10 Jun 91 18:56:37 GMT References: <1991May31.195050.12567@netcom.COM> <1991Jun4.095137.1@dev8b.mdcbbs.com> <1991Jun6.055523.12257@morrow.stanford.edu> Sender: uunet!infmx!news@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Usenet News) Organization: Informix Software, Inc. Lines: 47 Approved: nadel@aerospace.aero.org Status: R Originator: nadel@aerospace.aero.org gwyn@pangea.stanford.edu (Gwyneth Williams) writes: >In article <1991Jun4.095137.1@dev8b.mdcbbs.com> rivero@dev8b.mdcbbs.com writes: -> Galileo's conviction did not change the reality that the Earth moves ->around the Sun. Likewise, all the political rhetoric will not ->change the reality that the majority of men are NOT lust crazed ->date-rapists, but average decent men who want a good family life. -I think I must agree with your last statement, but have to suppress -a knee-jerk reaction to disagree. -Perhaps this is because when I hear "the majority of men want a good family -life", partly I wonder what martians I have found in my personal life. -IMHO this statement trivializes date rape and the variety of -oppressions which women must undergo. Saying "those type of men are only -a minority" suggests to me "they are erratic cases, exceptions, and -therefore negligible and don't count". Of course, this is stretching the -point, but it seems the underlying attitude is there. -After all, a dictator may only be 0.000001% of the population, but that -doesn't mean he's negligible. :^) Absolutely. However, when attempting to blame someone, one wouldn't accuse, say, everyone who had a tic of being a dictator because this dictator had a tic. He only represents .000001% of the population, not everyone who shares some physical characteristic. There is a strong tendency to say "men do X" when the majority of men don't. It's an attempt to expand the behavior of a minority to encompass a majority, and it is often subsequently used to justify actions against the majority that should only be taken against the minority. That's why I object to such statements. I don't believe those exceptions "don't count". I believe they need to be dealt with harshly, in accordance with the damage they do. I just don't believe in treating all men harshly because a minority of them are bad. Here's a way to prove to yourself that what is being objected to is the generalization. Avoid making the generalization. Then, see how many people defend, say, date rapists. I think you'll find that the objections are to the unwarranted generalizations. Robert C. -- ---------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: My company has not yet seen fit to elect me as spokesperson. Hmmpf.