Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sftri.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!mhuxm!sftig!sftri!mom
From: mom@sftri.UUCP (Mark Modig)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Re: \"Why not send the men home?\"
Message-ID: <437@sftri.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 14-May-85 16:54:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: sftri.437
Posted: Tue May 14 16:54:29 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 15-May-85 02:17:04 EDT
References: <1848@decwrl.UUCP> <423@sftri.UUCP> <1467@reed.UUCP> <431@sftri.UUCP> <134@lzwi.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Summit N.J.
Lines: 125


> I, for one, have IMMENSELY enjoyed seeing the shoe on the other foot.

Well, I'm glad at least someone is getting their jollies from all
this.

> For years, women have been explicitly & implicitly told that
> rape is their fault & that they must never be without male
> "protection" (from other men!). Of course, as the discussion
> above re: domestic violence suggests, the men many women look
> to (or are instructed to look to) are the ones least qualified
> to give it. In terms of violence, there is no getting
> around the fact that men don't treat women very well at all.
> 
Blanket statements like those above completely ignore the changes
taking place in our society, and serve to anger and dishearten
those of us who are interested in helping to change some of the
things that are wrong in our society today through realistic
solutions on the one hand while serving as cold comfort to the
victims on the other.  We've heard this all before; one more time
isn't going to change anyone's mind.  Rather unproductive, wouldn't
you say?

> The woman who submitted her sister's suggestion did so in
> response to a posting that suggested women caused men to
> commit sins (in their own minds, at least) at work.
> He suggested prohibiting women from working with men.
> Many people on the net were a bit smug about the fact that the
> person who wrote the letter was Arabic. But for
> centuries, Western men have been talking about "doing something
> with women" and the "woman question." How could any woman who
> knew her sex's history resist discussing the idea of a male
> curfew seriously & in front of men?

My mistake.  I thought you were really interested in changes and
working towards equality and understanding.  What you really want is
power and the chance to do a little gloating.  Hey, this is a free
country (or so we're told); go right ahead.

> We've had to endure over
> 5000 years of subjugation & here you guys squirm over a little
> discussion on a computer network. Tsk, tsk.
> Aren't we supposed to be the "weaker" sex?

Who says?  Certainly not me (I?).  Again, blanket generations are
dangerous and distorting.

It depends what you define as "strong" and "weak".  If you think
that uncomplaining, unemotional stoicism (a traditionally male trait)
is good and strong, I suppose that one could make a case that women
are the stronger sex.  I'm not willing to concede that such a trait
is a sign of strength, I don't focus on one single trait, and I try
to evaluate people on the basis of their actions, not their sex or
race.

> If we could take it
> for 5000 years, why can't you stand to read about it for a
> month or so?

Why should we?  If a suggestion is unjust to us, why should we have
to put up with it?  I am surprised that a victim of such oppression
has so much trouble recognising it when it is proposed to make
others victims.

You finally begin to see some signs of change,
some signs that progress is being made, and you see nothing wrong
with suggestions that you know full well are going to cause
difficulty with nothing really to show for it?  After all, men are
here to stay (too bad, eh?), and not all of us are necessarily
interested in perpetuating the oppressive agenda handed down to us
by our forefathers.  What is the point of all these useless proposals?

> I think there's a certain sort of poetic justice to the idea
> of not letting men out on the streets. I also don't think it
> would be practical, nor is it, in some absolute sense, just.
> I hope that makes you feel better.

Given what you have said here and elsewhere, I can't really say that
it does.  If you're still into working out your bitterness and anger
(which, mind you, is a perfectly justifiable and understandable reaction),
I'll just have to wait until it blows over, I guess.

> >... an apparently serious discussion on the net proposing
> > that women who are raped are "asking for it"??
> 
> When we can still hear such proclamations from individual
> police officers & society as a whole, why should we have to
> endure one on the net? But where else could YOU (or any other
> man) hear a discussion of male curfews?

Well, as it happens, I have encountered this and similar ideas in
reading through some books and pamphlets, but I always thought it
was just a bit way out and not a real idea. I guess I was wrong.

> Don't tell us to put
> ourselves in your place--if you thought about it, you'd
> realize that we just forced you to put yourself in ours.
> And THAT is a rare occurrence in a country where 33% of
> college freshman would rape a woman if they thought they could
> get away with it & one out of 3 women will be victims of rape
> before they die.

Before any real work can be accomplished by people working together,
it helps to understand one another.  I've talked some of these problems
over with my wife before and I've seen how it has limited
my mother, who is very bright and could probably have done some real
wonderful things with the proper education and opportunities, though
I think she would say, and I agree, that she's done pretty darn well
anyway. I've read a little, though by no means as much as the real
experts.  So I'm no stranger to these problems.  Your attitude does
not encourage me very much-- you "force" me into your shoes, to see
your problems, yet you're not willing to step into mine.  And that's
ok; it was my mistake in the first place to think that there was
wide interest in discussing real solutions to the problems facing us
today.

Mark Modig
ihnp4!sftri!mom

P.S.  And as far as the wonderful numbers concerning the freshmen
are concerned, spare me.  I'm willing to bet that one could get
comparable response rates on just about anything (theft, even
probably murder) if you knew you wouldn't get caught.  What does
that prove?  People are really out for themselves; we're still
self-indulgent savages with just a (very) thin layer of civility on top.