Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdcsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!dmcanzi
From: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Twist, twist, distort, distort
Message-ID: <1446@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 1-Jun-85 03:02:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.1446
Posted: Sat Jun  1 03:02:32 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 04:07:09 EDT
References: <256@spar.UUCP> <5354@tekecs.UUCP> <264@spar.UUCP>
Reply-To: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 61
Summary: 

In article <264@spar.UUCP> ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis) writes:
>
>    Would net.{unix, lang.c, auto, religion.christian, motss} allow
>    those who hate {unix, C, cars, christianity, gays} to overwhelm
>    their bandwidth with the kind of antithetical sentiments 
>    corresponding to those below:
>
>       *Provocative clothing is a major factor in rape.

Nobody, as far as I know has been saying that provocative clothing is
a *major* factor in rape.  Some people have been suggesting that it
may be a factor.  The word "major" here appears to be entirely the
product of your own imagination.  It is an exaggeration of what people
have actually been saying.  So, for that matter, is the word "is"
when it replaces "may be".

>       *Women have no business being proud when other women overcome the
>	historical male prejudice in our society.

Once again, briefly.  I have been suggesting that it doesn't make sense
for men/women/blacks to go around being proud/ashamed of the deeds/misdeeds
of other members of their sex/race.  A special case of this is that it
makes no sense for women to be proud, etc...  By quoting this special
case out of the context of the generality, you can create a false
impression of what was being said.

>       *Quotas to improve women's chances of employment in traditionally
>	male dominated fields are harmful because they make men feel guilty.

Feh!  What has been said was that the arguments for quotas are often
based on making people feel guilty for the actions of other people of
the same race or sex.  Your version has sort of a distant resemblance
to what was really said.

>       *Today's high incidence of rape is a fact of life that women should
>	fatalistically learn to live with.
>
>       *The proposed nonsexist language is a waste of time, is ambiguous,
>	will remove useful distinctions from the language...

I haven't been able to keep up with the volume of postings, so I'm
unable to comment on these.  (I hear a collective sigh of relief.)

>       *Women use too much toilet paper.

Maybe they do.

Twist, twist, distort, distort, Mr. Ellis.  Why is it that you can't
bring yourself to oppose what some people are really saying without
exaggerating it beyond all recognition?  Is it impossible for you to
work up quite the right level of righteous rage if the statements
are left as is?  Do you feel, perhaps, that in order to prove that
the angels are on your side, you have to portray your opponents as
having horns and tails?

-- 
	David Canzi

A dollar is better than nothing.
Nothing is better than the love of God.
Therefore, a dollar is better than the love of God.