Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihlpa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie
From: zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: re: last night
Message-ID: <321@ihlpa.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Jun-85 14:06:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihlpa.321
Posted: Wed Jun 12 14:06:53 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 13-Jun-85 02:46:50 EDT
References: <566@usl.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 70

> removed from the potential assailent).  My point  is the difference in
> attitude toward the same situation between a  male and  a female.  The
> male  attitude,  as demonstrated  by both Jeff  and myself,  is one of
> amusement.  The female attitude  as  illustrated by Ellen's  incident,
> is one of fear and anger.  I realize that the fear  of  rape in almost
> any encounter  with  a male,  engendered by  incidents  such  as those
> recounted   recently in this  newsgroup,   can make such a difference.
> But isn't  the ideal  such that there  would BE NO  DIFFERENCE  in the
> male and  female attitude to such  an incident?  It  seems to  me that
> Ellen's  attitude   exacerbates    the  difference  by   assuming  the
> negative,  pessimistic posture regarding  the situation  when  it  was
> really an insignificant thing.


INSIGNIFICANT!!!!
	You Blithering fool. Maybe you just cant think let alone read.
The primary reason that it was NOT insignificant is the simple fact that
women have been 2nd class people for so long that you simply cant imagine
what the difference is!!!

> 
> Here's what I  mean: Assuming that the  ideal  is in fact that  a male
> and a  female (of equivalent moral positions)  would respond with  the
> same  attitude, would it  be better for  them to both  be  fearful and
> angry, or to both  find the encounter amusing?  Personally,  I opt for
> the latter.

That orientation is expectable from men  because if the polarities were
not so divergent the ability to understand would be universal.


> 
> I have one other thing to say regarding MY attitude to this  incident,
> which is that I have several  friends who live  in the French  Quarter
> of New Orleans where such incidents as Ellens happen  not infrequently
> (both male and female) and so I admit that my attitude  may be  biased
> towards  the  lighter  side.   But   really,  I'd  rather  laugh about
> something than be upset about it.
> 
we all would but there is nothing laughable about it.

> I imagine I may now seem more unsympathetic than  ever, but that's not
> so.  I sympathize with Ellen's  anger and if she were  a friend I'd do
> my best to comfort her, but I cannot *empathize* with  her  position as I
> do not really understand it.
> -- 
> 				    Joe Arceneaux
> 

No, Joe, you are not unsympathetic - just pathetic.

If Ellen were your friend I would expect that you would be ready and desirous
of much more than comforting here.
You posting clearly indicates that not only do you not understand the
situation and its implications for women  it also indicates 
that you don't give a damn either. That is the real pity of the
whole damn mess. 
To many men are in you position and holding your attitudes about women.
This is the primary reason that sexual bias still exists at all.


jeanette l. zobjeck
ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie



================================================================================
handle at your own risk!!.
someone might think you actually share my opinions.
================================================================================