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!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxm!sftig!sftri!mom
From: mom@sftri.UUCP (Mark Modig)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Re: Re: \"Why not send the men home?\"
Message-ID: <440@sftri.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 19-May-85 00:24:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: sftri.440
Posted: Sun May 19 00:24:03 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 19-May-85 08:44:20 EDT
References: <1848@decwrl.UUCP> <423@sftri.UUCP> <1467@reed.UUCP> <431@sftri.UUCP> <134@lzwi.UUCP> <437@sftri.UUCP> <617@mnetor.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Summit N.J.
Lines: 183

> = Sophie Quigley
>> = me

> > > 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
> 
> Methinks that people who are disheartened or offended when they hear
> the truth about the behaviour of men as a group towards women as a
> group, are very easily disheartened, and very easily offendable.

I still resist the assertion that the behaviors being discussed here
can be applied to all men as a group.  I would appreciate some
numbers to back up such a claim-- it is quite possible I am wrong,
since I have not really had much luck finding anything close to
reliable that would support either your claim or my feelings.
Also, what I was most concerned about was the seriousness of the
suggestion.

> Why are YOU angry?

I thot I covered this sufficiently.  OK, one more time.  I was upset
because everyone appeared to be taking the proposal seriously, at
face value.  Since then, several people have come forward and said
that they were indeed serious, while others have said they didn't
take it seriously.  I am still troubled that anyone should take such
a suggestion seriously, as opposed to saying yeah, I'd really like
to put one over on them for a change, but seriously that's not an
option--you know, like if a driver cuts you off you think you would
like them to wrap their car around the next tree, but when you cool
off you aren't in such a nasty mood. (Hmmm.. I hope that was clear;
I don't know how to make my point any clearer)

> if anybody should be angry, it is us.  We are the ones
> who have the most to fear and the most to loose from the current
> situation.  We are the ones who should be disheartened because it looks
> as though there is so little hope for improvement, and there has been
> so little improvement.  If YOU give up so easily when YOU have so
> little to lose, how can you expect us not to, and how can you expect
> any change to happen?

As I have said elsewhere, the anger is a normal reaction, and to be
expected (in fact, I would think it rather odd if you weren't
angry).  AS for giving up, disheartened and giving up are two
different things.  I NEVER give up... well, hardly ever.  If I was
interested in giving up I'd hardly be taking the trouble to try to answer
your articles on the net, now would I?

[...]
> > > 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.
> 
> Change includes getting some power.  Power is not a dirty word.  What we
> want is not ALL the power, but a fair share of it.

You are right.  My response in this case was somewhat of a cheap
shot.  I apologize.

> > > 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.
> 
> Why shouldn't you?
> Nobody is proposing to make victims out of anybody.  The suggestion was
> an interesting one in that it hopefully helped some men understand a
> little better what women have to go through daily.  Talking about a
> curfew for men is NOT the same as imposing one.  What I really don't
> understand about this whole affair is that you know very well that
> nobody ever took this suggestion seriously.  Why are you reacting so
> violently?  Pardon the unappropriateness of the term for your case, but
> you are being hysterical about this.

Ah, but I DON'T know that nobody ever took the suggestion seriously.
And no I don't think that talking about a curfew is the same as
imposing one, nor is such an idea likely to be imposed in the near
future.  But when people say they take the proposal seriously, I
take them at their word.
> 
> > by our forefathers.  What is the point of all these useless proposals?
> > 
> The point that was mentioned time and time again is that it is a useful
> exercise to put oneself in other people's shoes once in a while.  Maybe
> you are so enlightened about the way women feel that you don't need it.

Well I know about some of the problems my wife has experienced, but
really on the contrary, I'm probably as big an ignoramus as they come.  But
at least I KNOW I'm an ignoramus.

> Good for you. [Thank you. -MOM]  Since there is still so much
> violence around, there are
> obviously some people who need to do this more often.  Hopefully this
> exercise has been of some help.
> 
> > > >... an apparently serious discussion on the net proposing
> > > > that women who are raped are "asking for it"??
> > > 
> > > 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.
> > 
> (girls, should I tell him?)  (<- flame bait!)
> No, you were right.  It isn't a real idea, but as the poster above
> mentioned it has a certain poetic justice to it, and it makes us laugh
> and feel better about the whole thing.

If that's all you're interested in as far as the proposal is
concerned,  I certainly have no cause for alarm.

> > > 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...

> What "real experts"?  the "real experts" have probably read less on the
> topic than you, but unfortunately for them, lived it more.  That's the
> whole point of this whole exercise, to make you realise that you
> cannot gain a deep understanding of other people's suffering at a
> distance by doing simple things like reading about it (although reading
> about it is a start).  You have to experience it  too.   What you were
> subjected to on the net is very mild compared to what we are subjected
> to.  

I didn't learn more about all this by reading first and then
"experiencing" it; it was more the other way round.  My wife works
in New York City; she has to take the trains and subways to get to
work.  You can guess what kind of stories she has to tell about the
infrequent but still no less disturbing incidents that happen during
the morning and evening commutes.  That's what really has
accelerated my interests in this area. (including an occasional reading)

> > that prove?  People are really out for themselves; we're still
> > self-indulgent savages with just a (very) thin layer of civility on top.
> 
> Rape is self-indulgence, eh?  that's an interesting concept.  And war
> is peace and freedom is slavery and all those good things too, I bet.

Uh, wait a minute.  Is this my stop, or did I miss it?  My guess is
you're upset because you thought I was trying to sneakily assert
that rape is something other than a crime of violence and dominance.
Sorry if I misled you.  My point is really that people are
self-indulgent in their actions, and all too often are unconcerned with the
feelings and rights of others.  So in a sense I guess you could
argue that rape is self-indulgence:  a rapist chooses to indulge his
desires for expressing dominance over women and for doing violence
to them without considering the rights and feelings of his victims.

> You know, Mark, your message was ok before that.

Just ok???? Not even OK??? Boy, now I'm RRREEAALLLY angry!! :-)

Mark Modig
ihnp4!sftri!mom