Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Emotions and choice
Message-ID: <1393@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-Aug-85 15:34:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1393
Posted: Fri Aug  2 15:34:15 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 3-Aug-85 10:37:45 EDT
References: <1308@pyuxd.UUCP> <375@oliven.UUCP> <1345@pyuxd.UUCP> <291@tove.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 62

>>So far, I've gotten three assertions that amount to just "Yes, it does" with
>>no substantiation.  Is this a trend?  A movement?  A religion?  :-?

> C'mon Rich, give them a break!  If someone in that situation doesn't
> have a choice, then obviously the only option is to get out of the
> marriage without violence.  After all, Julie was in that situation,
> and since someone in that situation doesn't have a choice, the only
> possibility was obviously what she did. [BRUCE]

What about "choosing" to STAY in the situation?  Have you any idea how
many women "choose" to do just that, because 1) they've been indoctrinated
(by church and family and country music records) that it's the morally
correct thing to "stand by your man" and 2) they cannot envision any other
possible choice because of the success of this indoctrination.  Is it a
choice when you know NO OTHER WAY?????

> The statement that people in that situation have a choice has been
> proven by example, i.e. Julie made one choice (to get out of the
> marriage without violence), and there are women who are still in that
> situation because they are too scared of being alone (i.e. they made
> another choice).  Now don't get the impression that I am saying "Well,
> women in that situation, you made your bed; now sleep in it." because
> I'm not saying that at all.  I cry inside when I hear of people in
> situations like that.  But nothing can be done about it until THEY
> decide to do something about it.  Look at all the situations you read
> about where the police arrested a man for wife-beating but the woman
> refused to press charges.

You got it!!!  How is the woman "responsible" for the "choice" if she
knows of no other choice.  Decision making can only take place when you
are informed about or enlightened enough to see and choose from possible
options.  If the women have been successfully indoctrinated in that being
the ONLY way, if they were taught that leaving or even SUGGESTING leaving
her husband is "sinful" or worse, what "choice" is available?  Eventually,
the experience may become so awful that she is convinced that even some
horrible alternative (like the "sinful" one above), but that's the
experience affecting HER.  If she had learned about the baloneyous
beliefs she held regarding what she "should" endure as a "good" wife, she'd
know how to get out.  If she didn't, it may take more horrible experiences
to get her to do so, if she does it at all.

> These women do have choices.  Not that they shouldn't be helped just
> because they have choices; Not that they should be blamed for the
> choices that they've made; Just that they do have choices in that
> situation, and the more women that actually realize that, the fewer
> women who will remain in situations like that.

Until YOU (or someone) shows them the possibility of choice (they may
have been convinced of just the opposite by their upbringing), they
very likely will not get the chance to "choose".  You can't choose an
option you don't know about, nor are you likely to choose an option that
you have negative associations about ("I can't leave him, that would
be 'wrong'.")

> Rich, if its your contention that they don't have choices, and you are
> so insistent on substantiation for statements, how do you substantiate
> your claim?

I just did (at least I thought I did...)
-- 
"Meanwhile, I was still thinking..."
				Rich Rosen  ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr